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

2 In the original ἐνυν, which I conceive to be erroneously transcribed for ev veer. 3 πολλαχὸν is omitted in the text of Proclus.

p. 69

Por by revering what he says, No faulty Jeader he'll obey. Bat Callescrus and Glauco were the sons of Critias: and again the Critias of the present dialogue was the son of Calliescrus. This, however, is evident from Critias in the Charmides, calling the father of Charmides, his uncle. But Charmides and Perictione were the offspring of Glauco: and Perictione was the mother of Plato. So that Glauco was the uncle of Critias, but the father of Charmides. And Charmides was the uncle of Plato, but Solon was the brother of the greatgrandfather of Critias. Such, therefore, is the truth (respecting the race of Solon.} The divine Tamblichus, however, gives a different account of the succession of his race. Vor he immediately makes Glauco to be the son of Dropides. But others, as the Platonic Theon, assert, that Critias and Glauco were the sons of Callwserus; though in the Charmides, Critias says, that “ Charmides ts the son of Glauco our uncle, but is my couzin” Uence Glauco is not the son of Dropides, nor the brother of the younger Critias. To a man, however, who pays attention to things, itis of no consequence in whatever manner these particulars may subsist. Passing on, therefore, to things, you may assume from these particulars as Images, that all the discord of the world, and the twofold co-ordinations that are Init, are suspended from: proximate demiurgie causes, and are referred to other more Intellectual and anetent causes; that the causes of this motion are continuous and united, and suspended from one cause; that the superior causes: are More ancient in intellection ; and that secondary receive the production of primary natures, difler from and yet have a connascent communion with them, [ἢ addition to these things also, you may assume, that a twofold oblivion ix produced in souls of the theory of great and admirable wholes, arising either frem having abandoned for along tinea life of that hind, or through having fallen immodcrately into genetion. Tor ths is for the real man to be truly corrupted. But souls that have been recently perfected, and retain the memory of things ino the intelligible world, in consequence of not falling into matter, easily acquire a reminiscence of the trath. And thus much for these particalars. We must not, however, wonder, if Critias calls Solon simply a λων αν. For we not only call those with whom we associate, but also our kindred, favulars. But by likewise adding, ‘ and an intimate Jricnd,” he indicates, that there was not merely a communion of race, but a sameness and similitude of lite, in the ancestors of Plato. The prior Critias, also, is called an old man, which signilies his possession of prudence and intellect, and his being adapted to many disciplines.

p. 70

The prior Critias, also, is called an old man, which signilies his possession of prudence and intellect, and his being adapted to many disciplines.

p. 70

“Jn particular, he informed me of one undertaking surpassing in magnitude all the rest, which I now think proper to relate to you, both that I may repay my obligations, and that by such a relation I may offer my tribute of praise to the Goddess in the present solemnity, by celebrating her divinity, as it were, with hymns, justly, and in a manner agreeable to truth.”

Longinus doubts what was the intention of Plato in the insertion of this narration, For he does not introduce it either for the purpose of giving respite to the auditors, or as being in want of it. And he dissolves the doubt, as he thinks, by saying, that it is assumed by Plato prior to: physiolozy, in order to allure the reader, and soften the severity of that hind of writing, But Origen says, that the narration is indeed a tietion, and so far he agrees with Numenius and lus followers, but he does not admit: with Loneinus, that it was devised for the sake of pleasure. {0 does not, however, add the cause of the fiction, We, therefore, have frequently said, that it contributes to the whole theory of mature 5 and we likewise sav, that in these words, Plato calls the one and common productive principle of the twofold co-ordinations ino the world, and the one contrariety which pervades through wholes, the greatest and most admirable of works, as containing the other fabrication of things in infrangible bonds, this) fabrication consisting of participations of the contraries, bound and infinity, as Philolaus says, and as Plato also asserts in the Philebus. Por he there says, “ (hat there is much bound and much infinity inthe world, which are things most coutrary tocach other, and give completion to this universe.” Since, however, all things that contribute to the production of the world, are said to recompense the benefits bestowed by total causes, Critias says very properly, that it becomes him to repay fis obligations to Socrates, who excited both the second and third powers. These things, therefore, may be immediately assumed (from the words betore us. |

But will vou not say, that the Minerval solemnity las an indication of demiurgic works?) For the Goddess herself indeed, connectedly contains all the mundane fabrication, and possesses intellectual lives in herself} according to which she weaves together the universe, and unifying powers, according to which she governs all the mundane oppositions, “Phe Minerval solemnity, however, indicates the gift of the Goddess which pervades through all things, and fills all things with herself, and likewise the union which extends through all variety.

p. 71

p. 71

For in solemnities, we especially embrace a common and concordant life. If, however, we have asserted these things rightly, we may from these transfer ourselves to the various and one life of the world, and survey the diflerence between the Parmenides and this dialogue. | Por both have their hypothesis in the Panathenway but the former in the greater, and the latter in the lesser of these solemnities. Por they were celebrated about the same time with the Bendidian festival ; and this very properly. For since the productions of Minerva are twofold, total and partial, sapermundane and mundane, intelligible and sensible ; the former of these solemnities, indeed, pertains to the exempt productions of the Goddess, unfolding into light the intelligible series of the Gods, but the latter to her subordinate productions, interpreting the powers of the Gods about the world. And the Bendidian festival, indeed, appears to manifest the suppression of the contrariety externally acceding to the universe from a = Barbarric tempest, by the Gods who are the inspective guardians of the festival. Hence it is said to have been celebrated in the Pirwus, as being most adapted to the extremities, and material parts of the universe. But the Panathenwan festival, exhibits the established order which proceeds into the world) from intellect, and the unconfused separation of mundane contrarietes, Por this Goddess is at one and the same time, a lover of wisdom, and a loverof war. Another veil, therefore, was referred to the Goddess fin the Bendidian festival.) representing the war in which the pupils of Minerva were victorious; just as the veil in the Panathenwan solemnity, represented the Gants vanquished by the Olympian Gods. The Goddess, however, Is celebrated with hymns, justly and with truth; jast/y, indeed, because it is necessary that every thing which has proceeded, should be converted to its proper principle; but with (ruth, because the hymn is assumed through things and through beings, And because of hymns, some celebrate the essence, but others the providence of the Gods, and others praise the works that proceed from them,'

cand a hymn of this hind is the last form of celebration 5 (for the praise of the divine essence precedes all other panegyrics, as Socrates asserts in the Banquet) —this being the case, the words “ celebrating as it were,” are very properly added. For he wishes to celebrate the Goddess from the deeds performed by the Athenians, But that the Panathenwean followed the Bendidian festivals, is asserted both by the commentators, and by Aristotle the Rhodian. For they say, that the Bendidia were celebrated in’ the Pireus on the

* For ax’ αὐτὸν here, it is necessary to read ax’ avurwr.

p. 72

twentieth day of April; but that the festival sacred to Minerva followed these.