This chapter examines the reception of Plato’s take on cosmology and religion in the works of the Early Academy. It argues that the Academics continued to develop the theology of Ouranos, who remained the primary cosmic god in their cosmological systems. They also moved towards a tighter union of the traditional and cosmic gods. Philip of Opus used the identities of the traditional gods to uncover the divinity in planets and stars, while Xenocrates extended the procedure of religious naming to all ontological and cosmological principles, thus fully assimilating the traditional gods with the philosophical gods. Finally, their moral systems adopted a strongly intellectualist version of the ideal of godlikeness, according to which only the cosmological beings can be the ethical role models.

In the seventh and last chapter of De mundo, the author discusses the many names of God, which reflect the various effects God produces in the world (401a12–27). In line with the predominantly Aristotelian background of the author, it is claimed that these effects are not caused by God directly, but by his power (dunamis). This approach helps explain various traditional names, epithets and functions assigned to Zeus in Greek religion and mythology, including names which refer to meteorological phenomena and epithets related to cosmology, but also, perhaps more surprisingly, to human affairs. In this respect, as a detailed comparison shows, the chapter is clearly inspired by various Stoic authors. The central place of the chapter is occupied by the famous Orphic hymn to Zeus. A detailed interpretation of the hymn shows that it is in many ways compatible with the philosophical outlook of De mundo. However, the hymn also features parallels with the Orphic theogony commented upon in the Derveni Papyrus and its later version, which was quoted by late Neoplatonists. The comparison reveals various similarities and differences between these three texts and supports a hypothesis according to which the author of De mundo omitted some parts of the original Orphic theogony. Traces of the missing verses, however, can be seen in the subsequent section (401b8–29), where Fate is discussed. This interconnection helps us to better understand both De mundo and the Derveni Papyrus.