[169] It is noteworthy that Plotinos in his old age here finally recognizes Evil in itself, just as Plato in his later work, the Laws (x. p. 897; Cary, 8) adds to the good World-soul, an evil one. This, for Plotinos, was harking back to Numenius's evil world-soul, fr. 16. [170] In his First Alcibiades, p. 122; Cary, 37. [171] See i. 1.12. [172] This means created things, which are contingent and perishable; see ii. 4.5, 6. [173] See ii. 4.10-12. This idea of irradiation is practically emanationism; and besides Plotinos's interest in orientalism (Porphyry Biography, 3), it harks back to Numenius, fr. 26.3; 27a.10. [174] Held by Plato in his Theaetetus, p. 176; Cary, 84, 85; and Republic, ii. 279; Cary, 18, and of Numenius, fr. 16. [175] See i. 2.1. [176] In the Theaetetus, p. 176; Cary, 84, 85. [177] Numenius, fr. 10; Plato, Rep. vi. p. 509b; Cary, 19. [178] As Plato suggested in his Philebus, p. 23; Cary, 35-37. [179] Numenius, fr. 17. [180] Mentioned by Plato in the Timaeus, pp. 28, 30, 38; Cary, 9, 10, 14. [181] From the Timaeus, p. 41; Cary, 16, 17. [182] See i. 2.1; i. 6.8. [183] That is, the relative inferiority of beings which, proceeding from each other, become more and more distant from the good; see ii. 5.5; ii. 9.8, 13; v. 1; Philo, Leg. Alleg. ii. p. 74. [184] See i. 8.1. [185] ii. 4.12. [186] Numenius, fr. 26.3. [187] Diog. Laertes vii. [188] See ii. 6. [189] ii. 4.13. [190] i. 8.15. [191] As thought Plato in his Banquet, p. 211; Cary, 35. [192] As said Plato, Republic, vii. p. 534; Cary, 14. [193] As Plato says in his Phaedrus, p. 246; Cary, 54, 56. [194] As wrote Plato in his Banquet, p. 203; Cary, 28, 29, and see iii. 7.14 and iii. 5.9 as well as iii. 6.14. [195] According to the interpretation of Ficinus. [196] See ii. 4. This is an added confirmation of the chronological order; in the Enneadic order this book is later, not earlier. [197] Again a term discussed by Numenius, fr. ii. 8, 13; and iii; see i. 1.9; iv. 3.3, 30, 31; i. 4.10. [198] We notice how these latter studies of Plotinos do not take up any new problems, chiefly reviewing subjects touched on before. This accounts for Porphyry's attempt to group the Plotinic writings, systematically. This reminds us of the suggestion in the Biography, that except for the objections of Porphyry, Plotinos would have nothing to write. Notice also the system of the last Porphyrian treatises, contrasted with the more literary treatment of the later. All this supports Porphyry's table of chronological arrangement of the studies of Plotinos. This book is closely connected with the preceding studies of Fate and Providence, iii. 1-3; for he is here really opposing not the Gnostics he antagonized when dismissing Amelius, but the Stoic theories on Providence and Fate. [199] See iii. 1.5, 6; iii. 6; iv. 4.30-44. [200] Macrobins. In Somn. Scipionis. [201] Cicero, de Divinatione, i. 39. [202] Julius Firmicus Maternus, Astrol. ii. 23.