The Commentaries on the Timaeus of Plato — trans. Thomas Taylor

Or rather, that this fabrication is such,

* For oens here, it is necessary to read oea.

p. 24

through placing secondary powers over the subjects ofits government. Farther still, the recalling into the memory, brings with it an image of the renovation of the productive principles in the universe. For that which is effluxive in them, is circularly recalled to the same, and the similar. And the order of generation remains never-failing, through the circular motion of the heavens. But this motion subsists always after the same manner through intellect which connectedly contains and adorns all its circulation, by intellectual powers. It is very properly, therefore, Socrates that recalls into the memory the discussions, who is the nar- -rator of the polity, of which the celestial is the paradigm.

“ Orrather, if it be not too much trouble, run over the whole in a cursory manner from the beginning, that it may be more firmly established in our memory.”

The polity [of Socrates] being triple, the first description of it was truly dithcult on account of sophistical contests; the second was easier than that which preceded it; but the third was [perfectly] easy ; containing in itself contractedly every species of a polity. The recapitulation however of it pertains to physical things, through the regeneration which jis in them, and the circular return to the same form; from which also, forms permanently remain in the world, revolution recalling their efllux and their destruction, Through this cause likewise, the heavens are perpetually moved, and evolving many periods, return to the same life. What, however, is the reason that in the [first] narration of a polity, Socrates nelther makes mention of the persons, nor the promises, but here adds both these? It is because in wholes, paradigms indeed comprehend all the productive principles of images, but the things which proceed from them, have not strength sufhicient to comprehend all the power of theircauses, As, therefore, in the second description of a polity, mention is made of the persons that were in the first conference in the Pirsus, thus also in the third, he commemorates those that were passed over in silence in the first. For effects may be surveyed more perfectly in their more superior causes. You may also say theologically, that Timeus, as being established analogous to the total fabrication, comprehends all the persons, the promises, and the discussions themselves. But Socrates in the Republic, heing arranged analogous to the summit' of the triple fabrication, fashions only

* For axAornri here, it is necessary to read ἀκροτητι.

p. 25

But Socrates in the Republic, heing arranged analogous to the summit' of the triple fabrication, fashions only

* For axAornri here, it is necessary to read ἀκροτητι.

p. 25

the form of a polity, tis form being celestial. Here, therefore, as in one all-perfect animal, all things are comprehended, viz. things tirst, middle, and last, and all the evolution of wholes, But how, and through what cause is a polity narrated the third time? Is it because the life also ' of the soul is triple? The first indeed, being that which represses and adorns the irrational * part by justice, and governs it ina becoming manner. But the second being that which is converted to itself, and desires to perceive itself intellectually, in consequence of subsisting according to its own justice. And the third ascending to its causes, and establishing in them its proper energies. To which may be added, thai “to speak “in a cursory manner,” brings with it an image of a life conspiring to one intellect, which comprehends all things through an intelligible essence. The words also “ run over the whole” afford an admirable indication of an elevation to the highest end, of perfection, and if you are willing s0 to speak, of a more eternal intelligence. For this signifies to be more established, and to possess that which is more firm and more eternal about the same things.

“Soc. Let it be so. And to begin: the sum of what was said by me yesterday is this, What kind of polity appeared to me to be the best, and of what sort of men sucha polity ought to consist.”

Some, considering the resumption of a polity ina more ethical point of view, say thatit indicates to us, that those who apply themselves to the theory of wholes, ought to be adorned in their manners. But others think that it is placed before us as an image of the orderly distribution of the universe. And others, as an indication' of the whole of theology. Zor id τοῖς usual with the Pythagoreans, prior to scientific doctrine, to render manifest the proposed objects of enquiry, through similitudes and images ; and after this, to introduce through symbols the arcane indication respecting them. For thus, after the excitation of the intellection of the soul, and the purification of its eye, it is requisite to introduce the whole science of the things which are the subjects of discussion. Here, therefore, the concise narra-

For ac rns ψνχη»ν, it is requisite to read καὶ τὴς Lunes.

> For τὸν Aoyor here, we must read τὸν adoyor.

2 Inthe original oc δὲ αζιουσιν ws εἰκονα τῆς Του παντὸς διακοσμήσεως προκέεισϑθαι THs συμπασης BeoXoyias. But this, in the latter part, is evidently defective. Aficr προκεῖσθαι therefore, it appears to ine to be necessary to add the words, οἱ δὲ ws ἐγξειξιν, agreeably to the above translation.

Tim. Plat. VoL. I. D

p. 25

But this, in the latter part, is evidently defective. Aficr προκεῖσθαι therefore, it appears to ine to be necessary to add the words, οἱ δὲ ws ἐγξειξιν, agreeably to the above translation.

Tim. Plat. VoL. I. D

p. 25

tion of a polity, prior to physiology, iconically places us in the fabrication of the universe ; but the history of the Atlantics accomplishes this symbolically. For it is usual with fables to indicate many things through symbo!s. So that the physiologic character pervades through the whole of the dialogue ; but differently in different places, according to the different modes of the doctrine which is delivered. And thus much concerning the scope of the proposed words.

That in the present discussion, however, the summary repetition of a polity very properly takes place, may be multifariously inferred. For the political seience subsists primarily in the Demiurgus of the universe, as we may learn in the Protagoras. And true virtue shines forth in this sensible world. Hence also ‘Timeus says, that the * world is known and js friendly to itself through virtue. Farther still, the polity of Socrates being triple, and the first being referred to the total fabrication, as we have elsewhere shown, the form of this is very properly delivered here contractedly, where it is proposed to survey the whole Demiurgus, generaung and adorning the universe. These things, therefore, are capable of being still farther discussed. Let us however return to the teat, and the words of Socrates. But in these, there is mach contention among the interpreters, who oppose each other about a certain punctuation, and with reference to this differently explain the scope of the discussion. For some, making a stop at the word polity, define the scope of it to be conformable to the inscription, and adduce Plato as a witness that it is concerning a polity. Others again, making a stop at the words what was said, evince that the scope of itis about justice ; and that Soerates has given a certain summary of what was said about justice, which is concerning a polity. If, however, itis requisite not to trifle in asserting and contradicting, it must be said that both concur with each other, For the discourse concerning Justice, Is a disquisition of the polity whichis within the soul. Por it rightly disposes the communion of the powers that we contain. The discourse, likewise, about a polity, is a discussion of the justice which subsists in multitude. — Both, therefore, pertain to the same thing, And the same thing ts indeed justice in’ the soul, a polity na city, and gracefulness in the world. Nor is it fit to separate from each other, things which are conjoined by nature, And thas much for this particular.

* By an unaccountable mistake the original has Σωκρατὴν instead of coopoy in this place, which lattcr is evidently the teue reading.

noox 11] ΤΙΜ ΖΚ OF PLATO. .7