words it may be beheld in motion, engaged in warlike actions, and contending with others, And it appears, says he, from hence, to be manifest that Plato does not admit that the habit of virtue by itself, but. when energizing, is sufficient to felicity. It may, however, be said, in answer to Porphyry, that if the end was military, it would be requisite to assert that war gives perfection to the polity. But ifthe end of it is peace, what occasion is there to solve Platonic doubts by introducing Peripatetic explanations? Or though the end is not military, νοὶ war exhibits the magnitude of virtue in a greater degree than peace, just as mighty waves and a tempest, show in a stronger light the skill of the pilots art. And in short, this is eflected by circumstances, as the Stoies also are accustomed to say, “ Give circumstances, and take the man.” For that which is not subdued by things which enslave others, manitests a life in every respect worthy, — Perhaps, however, it is absurd to refer the cause to these things alone, though they have a political reason, and not to look to the whole scope of Plato, according to which the God who adorns the polity in the heavens, Is ling also that generation should be governed by the celestial Gods, and that the war of forms in matter should always subsist ; in order that the cirele of generation may adambrate the celestial circulation. Aud this itis to see the eity excited to war, to see genera- tion co-arranged with the celestial regions, and the whole of it governed from thence. Ttappears likewise, that this 15 analogous to what is shortly after said by the Demiurgus of the universe, © That when the generating futher understood that ths wencrated resemblance [the workd| of the eternal Gods moved and lived, he was delizhtd with his work.” In asimilar manner, therefore, Socraies wished to see his city moving and energizing 5 just as the God who comprehends the celestial polity wished to behold: the natures whieh it contains energizing, and adorning the contrariety produced by generation, Such an analogy, thetefore, as this, takes phice in the present instince,
If, however, we arranged before, the lower city as analoyous lo ceneration, but now as analogous to war, you must not wonder, Por the same things may be safely arranged among diflerent things according to different analogies. Por generation also, according to the lives in it which are inseparable from matter, resembles the lower city; but according to its contrarieties and material tumult, it is similar to war, and warlike dissensions, That we may, however, co-adapt every thing to the theory of mundane wholes, prior to the consideration of every particular, let us direct our attention to the second thing said by Socrates, and see how it accords with this theory. For since Socrates is analogous to the first
BOOK t.] TIM.EUS OF PLATO. 49
of the three fathers who adorn the first of things, he says he is not sufficient to fashion what follows. For the divinity who gives subsistence to all things, is different from him who constitutes toings of a middle nature ; and this God again is different from him who is the cause of things that rank as the third. But the third particular is, that neither are the poets sufficient for this purpose. Nor, in the fourth place, the sophists. The former, indeed, because they imitate the things in which they have been nourished ; but the latter, because they are wanderers, and not at one and the same tine, philosophers and politicians.
Again, therefore, let us see how these things are conformable to what has been before said. For it is necessary that the powers that are to preside over genera- tion should not be separable’ from material natures, but conversant with them, For these powers are analogous to poets who invent fables, and to imitators. For these are employed about images, alone praise material and partible natures which they only know, and are unable to ascend from matter. Nor is it fit that these powers should be inseparable,’ and very mutable, at diflerent times ascend- ing or descending to different orders, such as are partial souls, who are assimi- lated to sophists ; because they also possess all-beautifal productive powers, but at different times wander to different parts of the world. [lence it is necessary that the powers that connectedly contain generation, which is governed by the heavens, should at one and the same time be philosophical and political; in order that through the philosophic characteristic, they may be separate from the subjects of their government, but may energize providentially through the political peculiarity, performing the duties pertaining to their allotments according te intellect. For that which is physical, being productive, is inseparable from matter, but the form of partial souls: being sophistical, is abundantly wandering. Its necessary, however, prior to things which are moved, that there should be the invariable and perpetually-permanent providence of the Gods, and immutable prior to mutable allotments. In the Ἐπ place, therefore, Socrates delivers to us who those are, that are able to effect this. For these things are to be transferred from words to deeds ; because the Demiurgus of the universe, and the rest of the fathers, fabricate totally and exemptly ; the second of which fathers zives subsist- ence to middle, but the third to last natures. And to these Timeus, Critias, and
* For axwpiorous here, it is necessary to read ywporovs, and to supply adda, 50 as instead of cure axwpiorovs aurwy εἰναι dei, και εν avrais orpegoueras, to read oure ywprorovs avrwy εἰναι det, ἀλλα και κ΄ A.
* Hence for χωριστας in this place, it is necessary to read axwporas.
Tim. Plat. Vou. I. ᾿ G
50 PROCLUS ON THE [nook 1.
Hermocrates, are analogous. But of these, the first is praised in an admirable manner, Socrates also adding, “in my opinion;” but the second, in a middle way, conformably to his order; and the third, in the last degree, te. according to the testimony of others. |
“ For J will illustrate the affair by a similitude. Suppose then that some one, on beholding beautiful animals, whether represented in ἃ picture or really alive, but in ἃ state of rest, should desire to behold them in motion, and engaging in some one of those contests which per-
tain to bodies.
Longinus says, that Plato here decorates and beautifies his diction, through similitudes and the gracefulness of the words. But Longinus says this in answer to certain Platonists, who contend, that this mode of expression is spontaneous, and not the result of art. For Plato, he observes, pays attention to the selection of words, and does not employ them casually. It may, however, be said, that Plato made choice of this form of words from a mode of diction which was at that time common and usual, and that he was very attentive to what was customary. For the atoms of Epicurns would more rapidly by their concurrence produce the world, than nouns and verbs would form a correct sentence by a casual compo- sition. Bat some blame Plato for employing metaphors in’ the use of words 5 though with respect to composition, all admire him, At the same time, however, it may be inferred, not from this cireumstance alone, but from such care and industry as are exhibited in the present words, that he paid great attention to diction. For Socrates does not simply say, that he desires to see this accoms plished by those that were with Pinwus; but he speaks like one decorating his words and alluring the hearer, when he says: ‘Lor 7 will dlustrate the affair by a δἰ μος. Suppose that some one on beholling beautiful animals, whether repres sented ina picture, or really alive,” &e. And thus much for Longinus.
Origen, however, grants indeed, that Plato is attentive to the grace of diction, not as regarding that which is pleasing, as the end of it, but that he employs this. image for the sake of exhibiting the manner in which he was himse!faflected.
' The text of Proclus haus, erroneously, καὶ rot των row σωμάσι δυκουντῶν ἀνήκειν Kara τὴν ἀγωνίαν
αθλενν Tw, instead of καὶ re γὼν τοῖς σωμασι δοκυνντων προσήκειν κατὰ Τὴν αγωγια) αθλονντα.
Rook 1 Timaeus of Plato. δ]
And we say, that this similitnde was written for the sake of the imitation of divine natures; that the grace of the words presents to us an image of the grace im- parted by the Deminurgus to celestial natures; and that the artitice of the diction, Which is mingled with the spontaneous, adumbrates divine production, which has indeed a boundary from itself, and also a progression from being and essence. Tf, likewise, you direct your attention to the image itself, beautiful animals manifest those natures that are resplendent with [divine] beanty ; but those represented in a picture, or really alive, indicate corporal images, and true lives prior to these imitations, For the figures of the Gods are resemblances of the animals that are in them, But those that are ina state of rest exhibit to us the natures that are fall of intellectual arrangement, and of an equable and continued life; those that are in motion such as proceed into another order, and a second fabrication ; and those which engage in some one of the contests pertaining to bodies, are images of those that impart to more imperfect natures their own proper eflluxions and powers, and operate by their own powers on other things. And thus much respecting the image. But the words whcther represented in a picture or really alive, ave rightly asserted in both respects of divine bodies. For they are depicted by the dodecahedron, and they possess eflicacious and demiurgic lives. If, however, you consider the words separately, they will signify that the before- mentioned polity is indeed fashioned in words, and is assimilated to the heavens, but evists, tf not in human, yet in true or demoniacal lives. Farther still, ἐὸ desire ta see the city in motion, is analogous to the words {in another part of this dialogue] “as soon as the father saw the universe moving, he was delighted, and wished to assi- milate it ina still greater degree to its paradigm.” For thus also the adorner of the heavens wished to see them in motion, and through motion governing the war of generation, But the words “engaging in some one of the contests pertaining to bodies,” are employed, because of contests some belong to souls, but others to bodies ; and the latter are such as running, wrestling, and gymnastic.
Ta such a manner am I also affected towards the city which we have discussed. For I should gladly hear any one relating the contests of our city with other cities, when it engages in a becoming manner in war, and acts during such an engagement in a way worthy of its educa- tion and discipline, both with respect to practical. achievements, and verbal negociations.”
52 _PROCLUS ON THE [RooK 1.
We have before shown through what cause, and with reference to what para- digm, Socrates wished to see his republic contending in war. Because cities, however, employ against their enemies both works and words; words indeed in embassies, in compacts, in exhortations to battle, and inevery thing of this kind ; but works in the pitching of camps, in spears, and the hurling of missive weapons; on this account Socrates wishes that a city of this kind should be celebrated according to both these. In words indeed, as prudent, cautions, magnanimous, and strenuous; but in deeds, as brave, vehement, and well exercised. For thus, according to both, it will imitate its paradigm, who, shining with physical and intellectual productions, adorns all the war of generation,
“ For, indeed, O Critias and Hermocrates, I am conscious of my own inability to praise such men and such a city according to their desert.”