the form of a polity, tis form being celestial. Here, therefore, as in one all-per- fect 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 nar- rated 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 con- verted 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 indi- cation' 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 simili- tudes 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 BeoXo- yias. 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
25 PROCLUS ON THE [Boox ft.
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 phy- siologic character pervades through the whole of the dialogue ; but differently in different places, according to the different modes of the doctrine which is deli- vered. 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 sei- ence 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 ‘Ti- meus says, that the * world is known and js friendly to itself through virtue. Far- ther 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 deli- vered here contractedly, where it is proposed to survey the whole Demiurgus, gene- raung 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 So- crates. But in these, there is mach contention among the interpreters, who op- pose 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 dis- poses 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 par- ticular.
* By an unaccountable mistake the original has Σωκρατὴν instead of coopoy in this place, which lat-
tcr is evidently the teue reading.
noox 11] ΤΙΜ ΖΚ OF PLATO. .7
Longinus however and Origen contend with each other from another principle, about what kind of polity Socrates speaks, in these words; whether about the first, orthe middle polity. For in the latter, the polity is seen living physically, politi- cally, and intellectually. Longinus therefore thinks, that what is here said per- tains to the middle polity, because Socrates calls the assistants guardians, and says that the guardians are warriors. But Origen is of opinion that what is said respects the first polity. For in this Soerates delivers disciplines to the guar- dians. We however say in answer to such-like assertions, that it is not proper to divulse the one polity ; nor to separate the continuity of life from itself. For the polity is one, perfecting itself, and co-augmenting itself by more perfect additions. But the whole polity possesses the physical in the mercenaries, the warlike in the ausiliaries, and the intellectual in the guardians. So that the discussion is about the whole polity. And itis not proper to contend about these things, but rather to consider this, how the polity may very properly be said to be both subordinate to, and superior to physiology." For so faras it has for its matter human con- cerns, and is desirous of adorning these, it has an order secondary to, and more partial than physiology. But so far as it subsists in universal reasonings, and is arranged incorporeally, and immatenally, it is superior to, and more total than physiology. The world also is a certain polity, and a partial polity [with reference to the imelligible world], because every body is partial. In short, the polity pre- exists indeed in the intelligible, but exists in the heavens, and subsists in the Jast place in human lives. So that if it is superior to physical fabrication, it was very properly discussed prior to the Timieus; but ifit is inferior to it, because it is an ethical world, but the other is mundane and all-perfect, we are very properly re- quired to recur from things subordinate to such as are of a more venerable nature. Aud both are true, through the above-mentioned causes. Since, however, as we have said, the form of the polity is universal, and is impressed in a partial matter, hence also Socrates employs the words what kind for the sake of the form, but the words of what sort of men on account of the matter.
— ©Try. And what was said, Socrates, was in the opinion of all of us very conformable to intellect.”
A narration conformable to intellect, but neither conformable to pleasure, nor
* Here also the original has erroneously θεολογίας instead of φυσιολογιαι.
28 PROCLUS ON THE [ROOK 1.
the decision of the vulgar, indicates the admirable perfection and intellectual na- ture of the discussion [contained in it), And prior to this, it obscurely signifies the concordant congress of all secondary causes about one intellect, and one united fabrication. The word very too, which is added, unfolds the transcendent union, through which all demiurgic causes converge as to one centre, and one
paternal cause of all things.
“Soc. Did we not then, in the first place, separate husbandmen and other artificers from the belligerent genus?”
The discourse about a polity, and the conglomerated and concise repetition, in asummary Way, of the genera contained in it, contributes to the whole narration of the mundane fabrication, For itis possible from these as images to recur to wholes. This very thing also was ina remarkable degree adopted by the Pytha- roreans, Who investigated the similitades of beings from analogies, and betook themsclves from images to paradigms ; which likewise is now in a prefatory man- ner eflected by Plato, who points out to us, and gives us to survey in human lives those things which take place in the universe. Por the polities of worthy men are assimilated to the celestial order. Ttis necessary, therefore, that we also should refer the images which are now mentioned (to their paradigms), and in the first place, what is said about the division of the genera. For this section of genera, imitates the demiurgic division in the world, according to which incorporeal nas tures are not able to pass into the nature of bodies, nor mortal bodies to leave their own essence, and migrate into an incorporeal hypostasis. According to which, also, mortal natures remain mortal; immortal natures eternally continue τὸ. be never-failing ; and the diferent orders of them have paradigmatic causes pre-sub- sisting in wholes. For if you are willing to arrange the whole city analogous to the whole world ; since itmust not be said that man is ἃ microcosin, and a city not; and to divide it into two parts, the upper city and the lower, and to assimilate the former to the heavens, and the latter to generation, vou will find that the ana- logy is perfectly appropriate. Likewise, according to a division of it into three parts, you may assume in the city, the mercenary, the military, and the guardian : butin the soul, the epithymetic part, which procures the necessities of the body ; the irascible part, whose office is to expel whatever is injurious to the animal, and is also ministrant to our ruling power; and the rational part, which os essentially philosophic and has a regal authority over the whole of our life. In every multi-
ὩΣ τοι Oe PRI πὰς Ὁ κ
SEER OE 9 Be τον
pooK 1] TIMGEUS OF PLATO. 29
tude of souls, however, there are, that whieh performs the partof a mercenary about generation, that whoech is ministrant to the mundane providence of the Gods, and that which is elevated to the intelligible. But in all mundane natures,
‘ and the order of
there are, in short, the tribe of mortals, the tribe of damons, the celestial Gods ς for they are truly the guardians and saviours of the whole of
things. And again, damons precede as in asolemn procession the fabrication
of the celestial Gods, and suppress all the confusion and disorder in the world.
There ts likewise a certain physical providence of mortal natures, which gene- rates and comprehends them contormably to a divine intellect.
Farther sal, according to another division, the agricultural tribe of the city is analogous to the Moon, which comprehends the sacred laws of nature, the cause of generation. But the inspective guardian of the common marriages, is analo- sous to Venus, who is the cause of all harmony, and of the union of the male with the female, and of form with matter, That which providentially attends to clegant allotinents, is analocous to Termes, on account of the lots of which the God is the guardian, and also on account of the fraud which they contain, But that which is disciplinative and judicial in the city, is analogous to the Sun, with whom, according to theologists, the mundane Dice, the elevator and the seven-fold reside, And that whieh is belligerent, is analogous to the order proceeding from Mars,* which governs all the coutraricuics of the world, and the diversity of the mniverse. That which is royal, is analogous to Jupiter, who is the supplier of ruling prudence, and of the practical and adorning intellect. But that which is philosophic, is analogous to Saturn, so far as he is an intellectual God, and ascends as far as to the first cause. These things, therefore, may thus be
cassumed through analogies. Plato, however, appears to have divided the city