« AnteriorContinuar »
be made, to the governor of the province to which the embassy has access. He sends it to Peking, to Li-fan-youan (the college of foreign affairs), which never fails to give an answer. But there is no instance wherein the Chinese bave treated with an ambassador, unless he commanded an army. The Mandchoux bave, indeed, made some concessions to Russia, because at the time they feared them, and because they foresaw that the commerce at the frontier of Siberia, and the Russian caravans which jourveyed to Peking, would be of service to the Kalka Mongols, ruined by long wars with the Galdan of the Euleuts. In other circunıstances, and in other times, the court of Peking would not probably have shown itself so tractable,
The most useless thing then that can be done, is, to send embassies to China, since they will invariably terminate without a result, and only serve to place European governments in a bumiliating situation. Let the ambassadors perform, or omit to perform, the ceremonies prescribed by the regulations of the celestial empire, it is of no consequence. The evil that we would avoid, in refusing to submit to the nine genuflections before the Emperor, or before his throne, is already performed by the arrival of the mission.
J. G. JACKSON. Sceaux, March, 1824.
Observations on the Excerpta from the SCHOLIA of
PROCLUS on the CRATYLUS OF PLATO, published by PROFESSOR BOISSONADE ; Lipsiæ, , 1820.
PART I. The students of the mythology and theology of the Greeks will doubtless be much gratified by the perusal of these Scholia, edited from Mss. by a man so eminently learned as Professor Boissonade; and originally written by a philosopher, who, for his transcendent genius, was deservedly considered by his contemporaries, and by all those that followed him, to be the coryphæus of the Platonists.
In order, however, to render these remains of the mystic lore of antiquity still more valuable, I shall present the reader with emendations of the Professor's text, derived from a Ms. of this work, in the possession of Mr. Heber of Oxford, of which I have a transcript, and which is so rare, that I have not been able to find that there is any other original manuscript of it in Great Britain. I shall only premise farther, that my observations will be confined to, those passages, the reading of which in the abovementioned Ms. is to be preferred to that of the Professor's copies, neglecting to notice those which are faulty in the former, or less accurate than those in the latter; occasionally at the same time adding emendations from my own conjecture.
In the first place, in p. 6, Proclus observes, that Pythagoras being asked what was the wisest of things, answered, number; and in answer to the question what was the next in wisdom to this, said, it was that which gave names to things, by which he signited soul. Ηινιττετο δε δια μεν του αριθμου τον νοητον διακοσμον τον περιεχοντα το πληθος των νοερων ειδων εκει γαρ ο πρωτος και κυριως αριθμος μετα το εν υπεστη το περιουσιον. Here, for the last word περιουσιον, my Ms. has, rightly, υπερουσιον, which reading the Professor also found in the Ms. B. V.; and very properly observes, “quam prætuli lectionem.". For it is a well-known dogma of Plato, and the best of his disciples, that the one, or the great first principle of things, is superessential.
P. 22. 1. 20. επει και ο ολος δημιουργος κατ' αυτον (i. e. Tιμαιον) πρωτιστος εστιν ονοματουργος αυτος ουν εστιν, ως ο Τιμαίος λεγει, ο την μεν των περιφορων αυτου, την δε θατερου προσαγορευσας. Here, for αυτου my Ms. has rightly ταυτου. For Proclus here alludes to what is said in the Timæus of Plato, about the circle of the same, and the circle of the different, the former being in soul the dianoëtic, or ratiocinative power, and the latter the dorastic power, or that which is characterised by opinion.
P. 27. 1. 15. Αι γαρ ουρανιοι περιοδοι αλλοις αλλα αποπληρoυσι, και αλλοτε αλλα παραγoυσι, και εν το εκ παντων λεγμα συντελουν προς την του παντος συμπληρωσιν απεργάζονται. In this passage, for λεγμα, which my Ms. also has, I conceive it to be perfectly necessary to read theyja. In p. 31, Proclus speaks of the twofold circulations in the universe, mentioned by Plato in his Politicus, one of which is anagogic, or elevating, and is Saturnian; but the other is providential, and suspended from Jupiter. Διο καν τα παντι διτται ανακυκλησεις, η μεν αναγωγος και Κρονια, η δε προνοητικη και του Διος εξηρτημενη. He
'This Ms. was lent to ine thirty years ago, by a gentleman of the name of Mason, with permission to transcribe it, and at his death it came into the possession of Mr. Heber.
likewise observes : Αλλα και αυτος ο Πλατων τους επι Κρονου ευδαιμονως ζωντας και του θεου τροφιμους, κατα την διαλεκτικην φησιν. ενεργειν αλληλοις·- τους δε τον ιδιον βιον ανακυκλουντας της νομοθετικης δεδεησθαι, κ. τ. λ. In the latter part of this extract, for såsov, my Ms. has dirov, and very properly. For it is the Jovian life which is here alluded to. Ρ. 33. 1. 20. Παντα γαρ υφιστανοντες οι πατερες των ολων συνθηματα και ιχνη πασιν ενεσπειραν της εαυτων τριαδικης υποστασεως. Εκει και η φυσις τους σωμασιν εντιθησιν της οικείας ιδιοτητος εναυσμα, δι ου και κινει τα σωματα, κ. τ.
Here, for Eκει, my Ms. has Επει, and rightly. For what Proclus says, is in English as follows: "For the fathers of wholes,' in giving subsistence to all things, disseminated in all things impressions and vestiges of their own triadic hypostasis; since nature also inserts in bodies latent igneous seeds, through which she is the cause of motion to bodies.' Ρ. 36. 1. 3. Εστι δ' ου παν το των θεων γενος ονομαστον. ο μεν γαρ επεκεινα των ολων οτι αρρητος, και ο Παρμενιδης ημας υπεμνησεν ουτε γαρ ονοματα αυτου, φυσιν, ουτε λογος εστιν ουδεις. In this passage, for φυσιν, mmy Ms. has φησιν, which is the true reading; for Proclus here cites the very words of Plato in the Parmenides, respecting to ev, the one, or the supreme principle of all things. For Plato says, at the conclusion of the first hypothesis of that dialogue : Ουδ' αρα ονομα εστι αυτω, ουδε λογος, ουδε τις επιστημη, ουδε αισθησις, ουδε δοξα.
Ρ. 50. 1. 12. Και γαρ αι ψυχαι, δια της προς τους αδικους συνταξεως μετοχοι γινονται της αδικιας, και τα σωματα αυτων απο σπερματων υπεστη πονηρων, και τα εκτος εξημαρτημενων ελαβε την αρχην. Here, for εξημαρτημενων, which is also the reading of my Ms., it appears to me to be necessary to read εξ ημαρτημενων. . For then the meaning of Proclus will be, “that souls, through a co-arrangement with the unjust, become partakers of injustice, their bodies consist of depraved seed, and their external affairs receive their origin from crimes.” Ρ. 52. 3. 14. Τριχως αρα πατηρ ο Ζευς, θεων, ψυχων, μερικων ψυχων, νοερον και διϊον ελομενων Brov. In this passage, the punctuation being erroneous, alters its real meaning; but in my Ms. the punctuation is correct, and is as follows: Τριχως αρα πατηρ ο Ζευς, θεων, ψυχων μερικων,
Among these fathers, according to the Platonic, which is the same with the Orphic theology, Jupiter ranks; who is therefore called by Plato, δημιουργος των ολων, because he produces the universe so far as it is à whole, and likewise all the wholes it contains, by his own inmediate energy, other subordinate powers co-operating with him in the production of parts. Hence, he produces the universe totally, and at once.
ψυχων νοερον και διϊον ελομενων βιον; i. e. « Jupiter is father in a threefold respect; for he is the father of gods, of partial souls, and of souls that voluntarily embrace an intellectual and Jovian life.” But by partial souls, Proclus means souls of a hunian characteristic. And Jupiter, according to the Grecian theology, is not only the father of gods, but also of human souls, and particularly of those that are of an intellectual and Jovian nature. Perhaps, therefore, after the words fuxwe pepixwy, the words xal e Engnuerws are wanting, in order to render the meaning of Proclus more complete. P. 57. 1. 9. Proclus, speaking of Jupiter, says, και γαρ διττους υφιστησι διακοσμους, τον τε ουρανιον, XAI TOV UTOUPaviy. But here, for utoupaviov, my Ms. has, rightly, Utepoupaviov, as is evident from what immediately follows: odev αυτου και το σκηπτρον ειναι φησιν ο θεολογος
πισύρων και είκοσι μέτρων, ως διττων αρχοντος δυοδεκαδων. For it is largely shown by Proclus, in the 6th book of his treatise, “ On the Theology of Plato," that Jupiter, or the Demiurgus, rules over and gives subsistence to a twofold dodecad, the supermundane, and the mundane; the supermundane dodecad, which is sometimes called by the Platonic writers, supercelestial, consisting of four triads, the first of which is Jupiter, Neptune, Pluto; the second of Diana, Proserpine, Minerva; the third of the three Corybantes, who, as Proclus informs us, are analogous to the Curetes in the intellectual order; and the fourth of Mercury, Venus, Apollo. But the mundane dodecad consists of the four following triads: Jupiter, Neptune, Vulcan; Vesta, Minerva, Mars; Ceres, Juno, Diana ; Mercury, Venus, Apollo. And concerning this latter dodecad, Sallust, in his treatise “ De Diis et Mundo,” inforins us, that the first triad fabricates; the second guards; the third vivifies; and the fourth harmonises the world.
Ρ. 59. 1. 6. Δια τι ουν ει και υβριστικον ην το τοιουτον ονομα, [subintel. του Κρονου] ουκ ευφημως και πρεπoυση θεοις σιγη τουτο παρεδραμεν ; ή οτι της βασιλικής των θεων σειρας αρχόμενης μεν απο Φανητος, καταντωσης δ' εις τον δεσποτην ημων τον Διονυσον, κ. τ. λ. On the word reipas in this passage, there is the following note in my Ms., made, I have no doubt, by the epitomiser of these Scholia ; viz. Φανης, Νυξ, Ουρανος, Κρονος, Ζευς, Διονυσος. And the epitomiser's annotation is perfectly correct, as is evident from what is immediately after added by Proclus. Indeed, that according to the Grecian theology, the royal series of gods consists of the abovementioned six divivities, may be inferred from the testimony of Syrianus, in his commentary on the 14th book of Aristotle's Metaphysics. For he there observes, “ Ancient
theologists assert that Night and Heaven, reigned, and prior to these, the mighty father of Night and Heaven, who distributed the world to gods and mortals, and who first possessed royal authority, the illustrious Ericapæus.
Τοιον ελων διενειμε θεοις, θνητοισι δε κοσμον
Ου πρωτος βασιλευε περικλυτος Ηρικεπαιος.' Night succeeded Ericapæus, in the hands of whom she has a sceptre,
Σκεπτρον εχουσ' εν χερσιν Ηρικεπαιου---To Night, Heaven succeeded, who first reigned over the gods after mother Night. .
Ος πρωτος βασιλευε θεων μετα μητερα Νυκτα. Chaos transcends the habitude of sovereign dominion: and with respect to Jupiter, the oracles given to him by Night, manifestly call him not the first, but the fifth immortal king of the gods. Hence, according to Syrianus, the first of the royal series of divinities is Ericapæus or Phanes, the second is Night, the third is Heaven, and the fifth is Jupiter. But as Saturn is the father of Jupiter, Saturn is the fourth king ; and from the testimony of Orpheus himself, as cited by Proclus in the abovementioned page of these Scholia, Bacchus is the sixth king of the gods. This royal series is likewise enumerated by Proclus in Tim., lib. v. p. 291, and is said by him to be an Orphic tradition.
Ρ. 60. 1. 17. Αλλ' οταν μεν ο Κρονος νους λεγηται, διανοιας επεχει ταξιν ο Ζευς, οταν δ' αυ Κρονος διανοια, παντως που προς αλλον τινα νουν υπερτερον κατ' αναλογιαν φησομεν ουτως καλεεισθαι. Ειτ' ουν τον νοητον και κρυφιον νουν λεγειν εθελοις, ειτε τον εκφαντορικον, ειτε τον συνεκτικον, ειτε τον τελεσιουργον, ειη αν ο Κρονος διανοια προς τουτους απαντας. On the latter of these sentences, my Ms. has the following remark in the margin: νους νοητος ο Φανης, εκφαντορικος νους ο Ουρανος, συνεκτικος νους η Γη, τελεσιουργος δε νους η υπουρανιος αψις. And the truth of this remark is confirmed by what Proclus demonstrates in the 3rd and 4th books of his treatise “ On the Theology of Plato;" and in the 5th book of his Commentary on the Timæus. P. 62. 1. 11. Proclus unfolding what Plato says of Saturn, observes: Ταυτην τοινυν την μεριστην αυτου και αμεθεκτον
· These and the two following lines, which are Orphic, are not inserted by either Gesner or Hermann in their editions of the Orphic Remains, and are not, perhaps, extant in any other writer than Syrianus. The above work of Syrianus is only extant in a barbarous Latin version ; but my copy of it formerly belonged to the celebrated Gale, who has everywhere corrected it from a Greck Ms. in bis possession, and from the same Ms. has given the original of these Orphic lines.