 Pico’s least eccentric work of philosophy is the little treatise On Being and the One: it takes an Aristotelian position against a Neoplatonic distinction between being and the One that made the latter higher than the former in the order of the All. In effect, since Marsilio Ficino had developed just such a position, Pico’s essay was a challenge to the older philosopher, who saw it as such, and objected politely. Pico’s larger purpose was to harmonize Aristotle with Plato, which had also been the goal of many of the ancient commentators on Aristotle, most of whom were Neoplatonists themselves. But Pico was not Platonic enough to suit Ficino, just as he was not Aristotelian enough for doctrinaire Aristotelians. The future was on Pico’s side, however, inasmuch as most of the Aristotelianism of the sixteenth century would be eclectic, though not as concordist as Pico would have liked. Eclectic critics of the Enlightenment, like Jacob Brucker, despised Pico’s concordism and called it “syncretism.”