Nepythagoreanism, and its focus on Pythagoras came onto the scene chiefly through the efforts of several influential men. Appolonius of Tyana was perhaps initially responsible for the renewed interest in Pythagoreanism, but many others soon took up the flag as well. Neopythagoreans were chiefly interested in the Pythagorean way of life expounded by its cultic practices and religious rules. They focused on:

     -The Pythagorean rules for life and religious conduct
     -The practice of metaphysics
     -The number
     -The life of Pythagoras

The Neopythagoreans viewed Pythagoras as a magician, and looked to him as a divine or semi-divine figure. His life was held up as the ideal, and they focused on his thought. Neopythagoreanism did not have any scholastic tradition of its own as such, but instead relied upon the teachings of the original Pythagoreans. This tradition was oral, and varied greatly from place to place. As such, the Neopythagoreans had differing views of the Pythagorean ideal, and thus the movement took many different forms. The major figures in Neopythagoreanism focused on different aspects of the Pythagorean tradition, and so their thought and teaching are different. Still, the easiest way to identify the Neopythagorean movement is by looking at the thought of its major figures due to the varied nature of the movement and its lack of a scholastic tradition of its own. 

As the Neopythagorean movement was rapidly spread by the forces of Hellinization, and it quickly became known far from its point of origin. From Rome to Syria to Egypt the movement spread, and as it moved, it was accepted into already existing religious and philosophical doctrines. This cause the movement to be different things in different places, and again makes it hard to define a cohesive Neopythagorean movement. This morphing caused by contact with different cultures, combined with the lack of a scholastic  center, makes it very difficult to define this movement narrowly, or to identify any specific teachings.

To confuse matters further, due to the widespread use of Pythagorean though by Plato, Neopythagoreanism gradually became an extension of the Neoplatonist movement. In many ways the two movements are indistinguishable. Neoplatonism embodies many Pythagorean ideas, and the two movements share many of the same thinkers. Iamblicus is chiefly known as the founder of a Syrian school of Neoplatonism, but he considered himself a Pythagorean thinker. There are many other instances of this crossover, as well, both in terms of thinkers and thought. 

Because of this meshing of the two movements, it is almost impossible to determine thy system of belief of the Neopythagoreans independently of the Neoplatonists. To compound matters, the Neopythagorean tradition never developed a scholastic tradition of its own, while Neoplatonism did. This means that there is no way to look at the structure of the Neoplythagorean tradition separate from the Neoplatonic. 

So, as you can see, determining the stucture and independent thought of the Neopythagorean tradition is virtually impossible. Because of this, the easiest way to look at Neopythagorean thought is by examining the movements Key Figures. Although these thinkers also at times cross over into Neoplatonism (Iamblicus) and other philosophical and religious schools, it is through them and their writings that we can get the clearest view of the Neopythagorean movement.