Abstract

The article refers to a long-standing dispute over the relations between the two orders of study of Plato’s dialogues in the Prologue of Albinus (Ch. V and Ch. VI, respectively). The dominant solu- tions are identified: 1) the acceptance of the first curriculum as «for amateurs» and the second curriculum as «for professional platonists» (J. Freudenthal, O. Nüsser, J. Mansfeld); 2) the treat- ment of the first course as a short introduction to the second (B. Reis). On the grounds of the obvious weaknesses of both positions and the lack of textual evidence, a change of perspective is suggested. The author argues that there was no need to coordinate these curricula, since the second curriculum was the only one that Albinus promoted, and the first, which focused on a non-exist- ent «ideal student», served as a «model». In addition, the author proves that Albinus did not offer for study the entire Plato’s dialogues, but only seven of these dialogues in the 5 stages of the second curriculum.