What do you think?
Rate this book
Proclus: Commentary on Plato's Republic #1
Proclus: Commentary on Plato's Republic: Volume 1
The commentary on Plato's Republic by Proclus (d. 485 CE), which takes the form of a series of essays, is the only sustained treatment of the dialogue to survive from antiquity. This three-volume edition presents the first complete English translation of Proclus' text, together with a general introduction that argues for the unity of Proclus' Commentary and orients the reader to the use that the Neoplatonists made of Plato's Republic in their educational program. Each volume is completed by a Greek word index and an English-Greek glossary that will help non-specialists to track the occurrence of key terms throughout the translated text. The first volume of the edition presents Proclus' essays on the point and purpose of Plato's dialogue, the arguments against Thrasymachus in Book I, the rules for correct poetic depictions of the divine, a series of problems about the status of poetry across all Plato's works, and finally an essay arguing for the fundamental agreement of Plato's philosophy with the divine wisdom of Homer which is, in Proclus' view, allegorically communicated through his poems.
444 pages, Paperback
Published September 17, 2020
26 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
January 24, 2020
I'm reading Proclus' essays on the Republic concurrently with the Republic, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading this, especially the wealth of information in Essay 6 about the interpretation of myths with surface-value unjust acts in them. It was very useful and has really assisted with reading the Republic proper.
The detailed introductions gave me — a non-specialist (librarian, BG in astronomy and English lit) — a good feel for the context in which Proclus was writing. However, some of their comments seemed a bit biased. They are very dismissive of polytheism/paganism in the way they're writing (possibly due to Christian cultural bias even if they're secular?), and I don't think that Proclus is saying what they think he's saying (in their Intro to Essay 4 comments) because they bring up henotheism. Nothing Proclus says in the actual passage is henotheistic or getting uneasily close to monotheism. It looks like Proclus is talking about the Gods, stability-in-power, and a multiplicity of nodes/stable points/potential wells in a given system — admittedly difficult to visualize, but elegant and solid. Things like this didn't happen often in their intros, but it happened enough to be frustrating. I'm not docking any stars because the actual translation is very engaging, and I'm definitely not in their intended audience.
It was sweet of them to wish that reader reach one's telos, though.
The detailed introductions gave me — a non-specialist (librarian, BG in astronomy and English lit) — a good feel for the context in which Proclus was writing. However, some of their comments seemed a bit biased. They are very dismissive of polytheism/paganism in the way they're writing (possibly due to Christian cultural bias even if they're secular?), and I don't think that Proclus is saying what they think he's saying (in their Intro to Essay 4 comments) because they bring up henotheism. Nothing Proclus says in the actual passage is henotheistic or getting uneasily close to monotheism. It looks like Proclus is talking about the Gods, stability-in-power, and a multiplicity of nodes/stable points/potential wells in a given system — admittedly difficult to visualize, but elegant and solid. Things like this didn't happen often in their intros, but it happened enough to be frustrating. I'm not docking any stars because the actual translation is very engaging, and I'm definitely not in their intended audience.
It was sweet of them to wish that reader reach one's telos, though.
Displaying 1 of 1 review