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

The remembrance, however, of such transactions, contributes indeed to political virtue, and also contributes to the theory of the mundane

* For &weovew ἀπολογον in this place, I read σωδσυσιν avadoyor.

p. 84

periods, which Solon being desirous to know, and interrogating for this purpose the priests, found that he was perfectly deficient in knowledge of this kind. These things, likewise, are symbols of divine concerns. For a certain fabrication or workmanship, is called by theologists recent. But this 15. particularly honoured [as being suspended): from the father of wholes, and from the intelligible Gods, with whom there are intellectual perceptions exempt from other things, and which have more eternal natures for their objects. But those intellectual perceptions are more partial and less excellent, which are in secondary natures. And farther still, there is such a difference in demiurgic principles, that some of them are comprehensive of more total, but others of more partial forms. And some of them precede in dignity and power, but others are recent as with reference to them, and possess a subordinate power.

“* Hence, when he once desired to excite them to the relation of pristine transactions, he for this purpose began to discourse about those most ancient events which formerly happened among us. 1 mean the traditions concerning the first Phoroneus and Niobe ; and after the deluge, of Deucalion and Pyrrha (as described by the mythologists), together with their posterity ; at the same time paying a proper attention to the different ages in which these events are said to have taken place.”

Ofsuch a nature as this are all divine causes : for they call forth more divine powers, and through this evocation, are filled from them with more divine and total intellections ; such as is now also effected by Solon. For extending to the Egyptian priests the most ancient transactions of the Greeks, he ina certain respect leads them to the narration of their antiyuities ; of which the Egyptians participate in a remarkable degree, as they survey without impediment the celestial bodies, through the purity of the air, and preserve ancient memorials, in consequcnce of not being destroyed ether by water or fire. But the Assyrians, says Iamblichus, have not only preserved the memorials of seven and twenty myriads of years, as LHipparchus says they have, but likexcise of the whole apocatastases and periods of the seven rulers of the world, So that this being admitted, there is stll less reason to compare with these memorials the much-celebrated archwology of the Greeks > from which

" The words ws εξηρτημενὴ appear to me to be wanting in this place in the original.

ἢ Ἷ I Ϊp. 85 likewise it is evident, that the present narration does not look to that which is small, but to the whole and the universe. :

ἢ Ἷ I Ϊp. 85 likewise it is evident, that the present narration does not look to that which is small, but to the whole and the universe. :

Farther still, the archwology of the Greeks is different with different [Grecian cities}. For with the Athenians it proceeds as far as to Erichthonius, who was a native of Athens: but with the Argives, as far as to Phoroneus and Niobe. For these two are with the Greeks the most ancient. For Argos descended from Niobe; but from him Tasos and Pelasgos, from whom Argos was denominated Pelasgic. The particulars, however, respecting Denecalion and Pyrrha, that a deluge taking place, they were preserved in Parnassus, and how migrating from thence, they restored the human race, are manifest, and also that antiquity with the Thessalians is as far as to these. But according to some, the Argolie race begins from Inachus, but that of the Athenians from Cecrops, each of whom was prior to Deucalion. Solon, therefore, relating these and such-like particulars, causes the Egyptian priests to narrate their antiquities. We shall however see, what one of the ancient priests said respecting the narration of Solon. And these things, indeed, will be evident through what follows. Solon, however, met at Sais with a priest called Pateneit ; but at Heliopolis, witha priest called Ochlapi ; and at Sebennytus, with one whose name was Ethimon, as we learn from the histories of the Egyptians. And perhaps it was the priest of Sais, who says as follows to Solon :

“ But upon this, one of those more ancient priests exclaimed, O Solon, Solon, you Grecks are always children, nor is there an aged Greck among you.”

The Egyptian priest is ancient, in order that while he reproves he may not be intolerable, and may have a probable reason for teaching about archeology. But he employs a repetition of the name of Solon, not only as striving beyond measure in what he is about to say, but also for the purpose of indicating the circulation of things from the same to the same, which the more total causes of things cenerated in the universe, comprehend stably and intellectually, through indelible knowledge ; to which causes the priest is analogous. IIe accuses, however, the Greeks as being always children, because they have not acquired the all-various wisdom of the Egyptians, but bear servile hairs in their soul. Juvenility, therefore, indicates their want of wisdom. © Or this privation of wisdom arises from the frequent destructions of them, so that before they become truly ancient, they

p. 80

Juvenility, there-

fore, indicates their want of wisdom. © Or this privation of wisdom arises from the frequent destructions of them, so that before they become truly ancient, theyp. 80 become again juvenile through destruction. Or it is because ancient deeds are not preserved by them ; but their knowledge ts always confined to present events, and such as sense apprehends. But with the Egyptians, past transactions are always present through memory, as if they were recent. And the remembrance is through history. But the history is fiom pillars, in which things paradoxical and worthy of admiration, whether in actions or inventions, are inscribed. Why, however, it may be said, does this priest accuse the Greeks with such sey erity ? For what is there admirable in his narration, since, asthe noble Heraclitus says, avery learned knowledge of past transactions does not produce intellect? But if that which Eudoxus says is true, that the Egyptians calla month a year, the enumeration of many of these vears, will not be attended with any thing wonderful. Tt was idle, therefore, in the Egyptian priest to think highly of himself for the knowledge of transactions in these. Or, though, as Aristotle Says, it ts IMposstble that memory and sense should be effective of science, yet at the same time it must be admitted, that they contribute to the reminiscence of wholes. Por by relating in many things many similar ciretinstances, we produce one form of them, and finding frequently from history concordant apocatastases of many things, we recur to the one cause of them. Por thus the observations of the aflections of the air were framed by Calippus, and the Knowledge from astrology of the celestial motions. And thus much inanswer to the doubt.

Again, however, let us recur to the theory of wholes, and there survey the junior Sobrication, held together by Minerva, and titled fiom more ancient and primogenial causes. For from: thence this fabrication possessing stability. proceeds,’ on account of an exempt cause, and contributes to the mundane contrariety. Por every thing in the demiureie progression which is distributed inte parts and maltiphied, proceeds on account of that principle, As, therefore, there are causes in the world, some of which are eflective of the regencration of things, bat others are guardians of the coherence of productive powers, the priest, indeed, must be assumed as analogous to these latter causes, but: Solon to the former, Tlence, the one exhibits a transcendent remembrance of antiquity, but the other is said to have related various mutations, eencrations, and corruptions. It hKewise appears to me, that the arrangement of the elder prior to the younger person, is assumed ina way adapted to the orderly distribution of the universe. For in the fabrication of Jupiter, they have this order with reference to each other ; Just as the