power and goodness. Wonder, therefore, precedes, because in us, also, this is the beginning of the knowledge of wholes. But in divine natures, it conjoins that which wonders with the object of wonder, Hence, likewise, those who are wise in divine concerns celebrate 7hawnas, (whose name is derived from = thawna, wonder,] as one of the greatest of the Gods, who through wonder inclines secon- dary to primary natures. But ardent request follows, rendering that which ought to partake of more perfect goods, adapted to the participation of them.
«That afterwards, one of the priests said :—Nothing of envy, Ὁ Solon, prevents us from complying with your request. But tor your sake and that of your city, I will relate the whole; and especially on account of the Goddess.”
Solon being an Athenian, has a resemblance to the Tutelar Goddess Minerva, so faras he adheres to more perfect intellectual pereeptions. And the priest re- sembles one speaking, as 1 were, from a certain adytam, For he teaches what Was committed to writing in the temples 5 and) presents to us an Imitation of the middle orders of the junior fabrication, and of the whole paternal cause 5 which orders transmitting the gifts of a more elevated to a subordinate cause, fill from that as froma certain fountain the divine order. All things, likewise, are clegantly effected by the speaker. For Solon is perfected, the city is praised, and the Goddess is celebrated. Phe ascent also is from Solon to the Goddess through the city as a medium; imitating the convertive power of the Goddess, And. this, likewise, is indeed beneticent; viz. to energize for the sake of the
perfection of secondary natures: for it imitates ‘ providence, and the super- plenary power of divine beings. But it is in a still greater degree beneficent, to energize for the sake of the city: for the energy is more ample, and embraces a greater power. Besides this, it is stl more divine to extend all the nar- ration to the Goddess, and to terminate the whole energy in her; all) which, the unenvying communication of the priest genuinely represents to us, not only indicating the privation of envy, but the divine and prompt generation of good.
Again, however, we must not be ignorantly disturbed, if now indeed the priest as being the dispensator of the narration, is said to adumbrate a greater and more divine cause; bat at another time, the Athenians being the ancestors of Solon,
πληρωσιν in this place, it is necessary to read ra de rpwra δια δυναμεων agOorwr, καὶ ayabornros, κ. ἃ.
* For ποίρίγαι here, it is necessary to read pupecrac,
nook 1. TIMEUS OF PLATO. 113
are more ancient than the inhabitants of Sais; the Athenians being arranged ac- cording to the mundane causes of the whole contrariety of things. For so far as pertains to the narration, they have this order; but so far as pertains to physical progression, they bring with them an image of certain more elevated and divine orders, And if you are willing so to speak, since all fabrication, and the mun- dane contraricty, are antecedently comprehended in the father of wholes, together with adorning causes, and things which are adorned, you may there also assume according to analogy, the paradigmatic cause of the Athenians in intellectual lives, For again, the veil (of Minerva] is the last image of the whole contrariety of things. But in the universe, the true works of the Gods have a precedency, and likewise in the productive and primary causes of them; where also it is said, Minerva became apparent, invested with armour. Or rather, the veil is the last work of the weaving art, containing in itself an image of the mundane war, and of the demiurgic order proceeding from the Goddess into the universe; which veil she wove in conjunction with her father. A better image however of this, is that which in the narration of Plato, and in enigmas, represents to us the whole contrariety of things, and of the works of Minerva; which narration contributes to the whole (deseriptive) fabrication of the world, in the same manner as the veil to the splendid precession of the Goddess, and the whole of the solemnity. Fur the Panathenaa is aninage of the Minerval fabrication in the universe. The veil, however, is superior to both these, which is woven in the universe, in the intellec- tual dight of Minerva. For contrariety is spread under the one life of the world, and the war is apart of the fabrication of things, which the ruling art of Minerva arranges in a becoming manner. And prior to all these, is the veil, Which is pre-established in paradigmatic causes and the intelligible, and is com- prehended in the one intellectual perception of Minerva, — For,
In weaving, all th’ immortals she excels,
says Orpheus, Hence, the weaving art is there primarily, and the vetl of the essence of this Goddess, which essence is all things intellectually, that the uni-
_ Verse is according to a mundane eharacteristic. For in ruling over the war of the
universe, she does not look any where else than into herself.
That we may however recur to the thing proposed to be considered, ‘the Egyp- lian priest directly imitates the unenvying providence of the Demiurgus, about which Plato a litde farther on says, “ FHe was good, but envy never subsists in him who ts good, about any thing.” For the orders which exist proximately with him,
Tim. Plat. νοις 1, ᾿
114 PROCLUS ON THE [poox τ.
have from him, and on account of him, an unenvying participation of good. And through this privation of envy, the priest fills indeed the mind of Solon, but praises the city, and celebrates the tutelar Goddess ; conjoining partial and total’ natures, uniting things contained to the things that contain them, and sus- pending all things from the Goddess, according to one bond and one series.
“Who is allotted the guardianship both of your city and ours, and by whom they have been nourished and educated.”
The Egyptian, after a certain admirable manner, converts all things to the God- dess, and produces them from, and again converts them to her. For recurring froma citizen through the city to the power who presides over it, he makes this con- version. But again proceeding from the Goddess to the natures that primarily, and also to those that secondarily participate of her, he imitates the progression of things from her divinity, Again also asserting that the participants are nourished and disciplined by the Goddess, he likewise converts these to her. How is it possible, therefore, that these particulars should notin an admirable manner imi- tate demiurgic powers, which are established in natures prior to themselves, and generate those posterior to, and convert them to the causes of themselves? And thus much concerning these particulars.
What, however, is the meaning of this allotment? And how are the Gods said to be distributed into the universe? Of allotments therefore, some are those of partial souls, and others, of the undefiled genera. Some are diemoniacal, others angelic, and others, of the Gods themselves. Porat the father of the universe was one alone, and there was only one providence and one law, there would be no need of allotments, nor of divine distribution. Since, however, after the one father there is a triad, after the uniform a multiform providence, and after one law a multitude of fatal laws, it is also necessary that there should be a division of the subjects of government, and another providence and order about other things. Through this cause therefore the universe is divided by demiurgic numbers, viz. by the duad, triad, tetrad, pentad, ebdomad, and dodecad. — For after the one fabrication, the section ofthe universe into two, heaven and generation, constitutes two-fold allot- ments, the celestialand genesinrgic. After this, the triad divides the universe, about which Neptune in [Lomer* says,
‘To me by lot belongs the hoary deep, ‘The spacious heaven to Jove, to Pluto, Hades dark.
* For v\usa here, it is necessary to read oda.
* iad av, vs. 190, δ,
Nook 1. Timmus of Plato. 11
The tetradic distribution follows the tiple order; giving a four-fold) arranzement
to the elements in the universe, as the Pythagoreans say, celestially and ethereatiy,
above the earth, and under the earth. Next to this is the five-fold division. For
the world is one, consists of five parts, and is appropriately divided by celes- ὁ tial, empyreal, aerial, aquatic, and terrestrial figures, and presiding Gods. After
this allotment, the division into seven parts follows. For the heptad beginning
supernally from the inerratic sphere, proceeds through all the elements. And
after all these, is the allotment of the universe defined in the dodecad. From the
divine allotments, however, the allotments of anzels and dimons are suspended
and have more various distributions. For one divine allotment is comprehensive
of many angelical, and of a still greater number of demoniacal allotments. For
every angel rules over a multitude of daemons, and every angelical allotment has
about itself many dawmoniacalallotments. For what a monad is in the Gods, that a
tribe is to each allotmentin daemons. Instead of atriad, therefore, we must assume
three companies, and instead of the tetrad or dodecad, four numbers and twelve
choirs, following their respective leaders. And thus we shall always preserve
the higher allotments. For as in essences, as in powers, as in energies, progres- sions generate multitude, thus also in allotments, those that rank as the first, have a precedency in power, but are diminished in quantity; as being more proxi- inate to the one father, and to the total and one providence. But those that are the second in rank, are allotted a diminished power, and an increased multitude. These things therefore are to be considered in common about allotments.
Since, however, we have divided allotments according to a section into two, into the celestial and sublunary, concerning the former indeed there can be no doubt respecting the nature of them, and whether they always remain invariably the same. But the sublunary allotments are deservedly subjects of admiration, whether they are said to be perpetual, or not. For if they are perpetual, how is this possible? For how, since every thing in generation is mutable and tlowing, ean the energies of the powers that providentially inspect it, be perpetual? For the things that are in generation, are not perpetual. And if these energies are nut perpetual, how ts it that divine inspection subsists diflerently at diflerent times? For an allotment is neither a certain separate energy of the Gods, in order {πα΄ things in generation being changed into another condition, Us energy may remain exempt and immutable; nor is it alone that which is governed, in order that no absurdity may follow from the allotment flowing, and sustaining all-varieus muta- lions; but itis an assigned state, providence, and unrestrained government of
divinity, about these sublunary concerns. And on account indeed of the subject
of government, the definition of perpetuity cannot be applied to it; but on account of its being [always] present, it is destitute of corruption, in order that we may not ascribe to the Gods the passion of partial souls, by assigning them different allot- ments at different times. [ence it remaing for us to show, how allotment is to be explained, so as to preserve the immutable in the Gods, and mutability to. things in weneration.
Perhaps therefore the discussion of this affair will be easy, by having recourse to that theory, which we have frequently elsewhere employed, viz. that every thing in generation, and generation itself, must not be considered as alone con- sisting of mutable and flowing things, but there is also in these something tmmu- table, and naturally adapted to remain always the same. For the interval, which receives all the parts of the world, comprehends them in itself, and is extended through all bodies, is immoveable, lest, if it belonged to things which are moved, it should also itself require another receptacle, and this should be the case ad infinitum. The ethereal vehicles likewise of divine souls, with which these souls are circularly invested, and which imitate the lives in the heavens, have a per- petual essence, and are eternally suspended from divine souls, being full of pro- lific power, and performing acircular motion,’ according to a certain secondary circle of the celestial orbs. And in the third place, the wholeness of the elements remains always the same, though the parts sustain anall-vartous corruption, For itis necessary that each form of the universe should be never-failing, im order that the universe may be perfect, and that being generated from an immoveable cause it may be immoveable according to essence, But ecery wholeness is a form, ov rather it is that which itis said to be, through the participation of oue entire form,