First I argue that Arcesilaus was a natural choice as scholarch. If Crates had intended to groom Socratides for this role, he had too short a time. However, Arcesilaus was already one of four principal Academics when Crantor was alive, in some sense inheriting the role of Crantor (perhaps ‘possessor of the books'); The scholarchs themselves engaged less with Platonic literature than expected. Arcesilaus as scholarch did not directly promote Platonic doctrine or writings, but that was not the scholarch's role. Second I want to argue that the Academy of Polemon was already Socratic in two respects, in concentrating upon ethics and in adopting some kind of ideal of Socratic love. I think it is clear that the Alcibiades I, assuming it was not a product of Polemon's (and Crantor's) Academy, was at least an important influence at that time. (Harold Tarrant, University of Newcastle, Australia)
