Le fragment 43 (des Places) de Numénius : problèmes de présentation, essais d’interprétation

Abstract

The presentation of the fragments and testimonies about Numenius' thought is a real challenge for the editors. The order in which the texts are presented is decisive as far as the image of the philosopher they want to give to the reader is concerned. A simple cut in a testimony can seriously distort the meaning of the words transmitted by the Ancient citator or doxographer. Such a distortion can go so far as to turn Numenius into an advocate of some doctrines he perhaps never supported. The study of fragment 43 as it appears in Édouard des Places’s edition (1973) shows how true it is. There is an omission in the text that is hardly indicated and for a long time it has contributed to reading both parts of the fragment for themselves and out of their context. Consequently, the second part taken for itself has often led scholars to think that Numenius supported a really original doctrine attributing the cause of Evil to some “appendices coming from the outside” — a doctrine which would then have been close to the positions of the Gnostic Basilides. However, when replaced in its context, the passage delivers quite another message. Jamblichus, who is the source of the text, contrasts the philosophers who designate the soul itself as responsible for its incarnation with philosophers such as Numenius, Harpocration, Plotinus and Porphyry who on the contrary think that something exterior to the soul is responsible, namely matter, body, Nature or irrational life. Presented in this way, the thought of Numenius as reflected in this testimony seems rather to integrate into a Platonist framework than to differ from it because of Oriental influences. Through the example of fragment 43, it appears to be necessary to reconsider the principles adopted to present the texts transmitting Numenius' thought. The distinction between fragments and testimonies, or even the introduction of a third category for the paraphrases mixed with short quotations, and the restitution of the context in which these passages are transmitted would contribute efficiently to a presentation befitting the requirements of a well-informed reader. This new method of presentation would indeed offer the means to evaluate what, in the text, is the part due to the doxographical appropriation of Numenius' thought and what really belongs to it.

Keywords

• Numenius
• fragment 43
• Iamblichus
• soul
• evil
• matter