Commentary on Plato's Timaeus, Vol. 1: On the Socratic State and Atlantis

Proclus: Commentary on Plato's Timaeus

by Proclus, Harold Tarrant (Translator)

Proclus' Commentary on Plato's dialogue Timaeus is arguably the most important commentary on a text of Plato, offering unparalleled insights into eight centuries of Platonic interpretation. This edition offers the first new English translation of the work for nearly two centuries, building on significant recent advances in scholarship on Neoplatonic commentators. It provides an invaluable record of early interpretations of Plato's dialogue, while also presenting Proclus' own views on the meaning and significance of Platonic philosophy. The present volume, the first in the edition, deals with what may be seen as the prefatory material of the Timaeus. In it Socrates gives a summary of the political arrangements favoured in the Republic, and Critias tells the story of how news of the defeat of Atlantis by ancient Athens had been brought back to Greece from Egypt by the poet and politician Solon.

Genres: Philosophy

360 pages, Hardcover

First published April 1, 1993

About the author

Proclus Lycaeus (/ˈprɒkləs ˌlaɪˈsiːəs/; 8 February 412 – 17 April 485 AD), called the Successor (Greek Πρόκλος ὁ Διάδοχος, Próklos ho Diádokhos), was a Greek Neoplatonist philosopher, one of the last major Classical philosophers (see Damascius). He set forth one of the most elaborate and fully developed systems of Neoplatonism. He stands near the end of the classical development of philosophy, and was very influential on Western medieval philosophy (Greek and Latin).

Reviews

[Kaye · Rating 5 out of 5]

The introduction was very useful, except for one section that was just poorly done. I appreciated the efforts of the translators to make this text predictable (because Proclus isn't ever going to be easy) via the standardization of terms in parentheses, and the structuring made it easy to check things against Taylor and the Greek version (even though I lack Greek language skills) when I wanted to look up specific words. I really enjoy reading Proclus.

However, on Page 4 of the General Introduction, Platonists like Proclus are likened to the reactionary conservative movements of the 1980s and 1990s. This analogy was way overboard, even considering that the introduction was written in the 2000s before people became a bit more mindful of language. (I doubt anyone would write that way today.) Based on what I have read about Late Antiquity, the cultural losses and efforts of intellectuals and other pagans to retain their cultural heritage (including religion) bear more resemblances to indigenous peoples resisting European colonialist expansion, either historically or what is going on to this day with Christianization in Africa and South, Southeast, and East Asia destroying indigenous cultures. These things are no laughing matter and are a gross violation of human rights that have yet to be addressed by international bodies like the UN in any satisfactory way.

To a 2020 reader, the specific comparison to the reactionary conservative movements of the 1980s/1990s is also offputting because we know that those movements have led to authoritarian nationalism in many countries, including the United States. The first thing that came to my mind when the removal of Asklepios from a temple was discussed (so the temple could be converted into a church) was the removal of confederate monuments from modern American cities. Christianity is being likened to social justice and equity, and the polytheism of people like Proclus is being equated to modern overt racism and far-right religious fanaticism. Even with this response being an effect of reading that page over a decade after its publication, this shows another reason why the analogy didn't age well, especially in a translation where so much effort has been made to ensure that the translation is accessible to nonspecialists.