Dominic j. O'Meara

'A great haven': so Michael Psellus described the enormous collection of Proclus' works from which he could so often distil his own philosophical writings. Psellus' interest is no doubt responsible in part for the preservation of so much of this collection. But presumably it had imposed itself in such a way as to supplant the works of others long before, in the days of Proclus' disciples and successors at Athens. ¹ 

¹ Cf. Saffrey and Westerink, in Proclus, Theol. Plat. I clii; Segonds (1985-6), liv ff.

The thousands of pages of Proclus that have survived represent, however, but a small fraction of the original corpus. Yet there is more than enough to provide information on questions that remain unanswered in the scarce remains of the works of Iamblichus and Syrianus. This makes it possible not only to approach Proclus' work from the point of view of Iamblichus' programme to revive Pythagoreanism, but also to fill some gaps in this programme, at least as it was understood and adapted by Proclus. For this reason our discussion of Proclus can be much fuller than is possible in the case of Syrianus. Given, however, our limited purposes in Part II, a selective rather than a comprehensive treatment of Proclus will be appropriate.

Proclus produced his works during a long lifetime of great and regular industriousness. It seems then reasonable to suppose that his ideas might have developed or changed in the course of this long activity. However, few of his works can be assigned to specific periods of his life. ² 

² On this question cf. Saffrey and Westerink, in Proclus, Theol. Plat. I xxiii-xxiv; Sheppard (1980), 34-8; Segonds (1985-6), xli ff.

His pupil Marinus tells us (Vita Procli, ch. 13) that the Commentary on the Timaeus was written when Proclus was a young man, still very much under the influence (one could assume) of Syrianus. The work On Providence was written when Proclus was no longer young (§ 45, 5-11). The Platonic Theology is certainly later than the Commentary on the Parmenides. ³ 

³ Cf. Saffrey and Westerink, loc. cit.

However an attempt to argue that the Elements of Physics is a very early work has not been successful. ⁴ 

⁴ Cf. Dodds, in Proclus, El. theol. xviii, 201, 250.

It has been suggested that the Elements of Theology might also be early, in view of

end p.142

the relative simplicity of its structure of reality as compared with that of the Platonic Theology. ⁵ 

⁵ Cf. Dodds, op. cit. xvi-xvii; but cf. Trouillard's comments (1965), 45.

Yet allowance must be made for the particular pedagogic purposes and restraints characteristic of the Elements of Theology (see below, Chapter 9). On the other hand the Platonic Theology has been thought to show, in its style, signs of senility, ⁶ 

⁶ Cf. Dodds, op. cit, xv.

a suggestion that would be difficult to prove. The cross-references in Proclus' works tend to show that he could also revise his works at later stages. ⁷ 

⁷ Cf. Dodds, loc. cit.

It has been convincingly argued on the basis of differences in doctrine that the essays constituting the Commentary on the Republic were written at different periods of Proclus' life. ⁸ 

⁸ Sheppard (1980), 15-21, 34-8.

However doctrinal comparisons between works or parts of works can in some cases yield only tentative results. ⁹ 

⁹ Cf. Blumenthal (1975).

In general then one has little choice but to approach Proclus on a systematic rather than chronological basis. However, the precaution can be taken of considering each work individually, in so far as this is possible, so as to allow what doctrinal differences there might be between the works to emerge.

1. The Rivalry With the Mathematician Dominus of Larissa

Proculus' fellow-pupil and colleague Hermias left Athens at some point after his studies with Syrianus and went to Alexandria where he, and more especially his son Ammonius, would train an important group of Neoplatonic philosophers. The relations between the two ex-pupils of Syrianus appear to have been good: Hermias married a relative of Syrianus, and their son Ammonius went to Athens to receive his philosophical education from Proclus before returning to Alexandria to become himself a very influential teacher.

Syrianus had, however, another pupil in the final years of his life, Domninus of Larissa, whose relations with Proclus became far from friendly. ¹⁰ 

¹⁰ Proclus' reference to 'my colleague Domninus' in In Tim. I 109, 30-110, I (cf. 122, 18-20; the report of Domninus' views may extend to 123, 10) is not unfriendly and is probably an echo from the period of their common study of Plato's Timaeus under Syrianus.

Marinus, Proclus' biographer, or rather encomiast (and successor), reports in his Life of Proclus:

end p.143

proposed to interpret for him and for the philosopher and successor, the Syrian Domninus, either the poems of Orpheus or the <'Chaldaean> Oracles', and he asked them to choose. But since they did not agree, each making a different choice, preferring Orpheus and our the 'Oracles', Syrianus, who also had not long to live, was prevented . ¹¹ 

¹¹ Vita Procli, ch. 26.

This report is disturbing not only on account of its portrayal of an unseemly disharmony between Syrianus' pupils in the last days of their master's life. More disconcerting is the suggestion that the successor of Syrianus was not the young and brilliant Proclus, but Domninus. However, it is possible that the phrase 'the philosopher and successor' in Marinus is in fact a marginal gloss explaining the word 'him' in the text, a gloss which, as frequently happens, was later incorporated in the body of the text. ¹² 

¹² Hultsch (1905), 1522; Saffrey and Westerink, in Proclus, Theol. Plat. I, xvii-xix.

Since this is the only piece of evidence in favour of Domninus' succession to Syrianus, and since, in one interpretation, it can be set aside, it does not provide a strong enough basis for claiming that Domninus, not Proclus, succeeded Syrianus. ¹³ 

¹³ Proclus' succession to Syrianus is attested elsewhere in Marinus' Vita Procli (chs. 12, 36); cf. Saffrey and Westerink, loc. cit.

However the disagreement between Proclus and Domninus was clear, and it went further. Proclus wrote a special treatise directed against Domninus, in which he 'purified' Plato's doctrines. ¹⁴ 

¹⁴ Damascius, Vita Isidori 191, 2 ff.

Thus Domninus was regarded as a 'heretic' who corrupted the Platonic heritage, which therefore required, as it had in Numenius' time, purification. We are not told of the nature of the corruption for which Domninus was allegedly responsible. Damascius, pupil of Ammonius and of Marinus, allows Domninus mathematical skill but finds him a superficial philosopher. ¹⁵ 

¹⁵ Damascius, loc. cit.

An example of Domninus' inadequacy as a philosopher is given: the oracle of Asclepius at Athens prescribed to Domninus and to Plutarch, Syrianus' teacher, the eating of pork to cure them of an illness. Domninus duly carried out the prescription although it violated the law of his land (so Damascius), whereas Plutarch got the oracle to come up with a prescription more compatible with religious beliefs. ¹⁶ 

¹⁶ Vita Isidori 183, 8 ff.; cf. the Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, 11.

The story not only dissociates Domninus

end p.144

from the orthodox tradition running from Plutarch through Syrianus to Proclus, but also points to a heretical trait in Domninus which Iamblichus had found before in Porphyry: a failure to take religious practices seriously and to reconcile them with other sources of divine revelation. It is thus against Iamblichean criteria for the true philosopher that Domninus was found wanting.

Considering the purge which Domninus suffered at the hands of Proclus, it is remarkable that some of his work, albeit little, has survived. It is no doubt due to its pedagogical excellence that Domninus' short Manual of Introductory Arithmetic was preserved in company with other mathematical introductions such as Nicomachus' Introduction to Arithmetic, Nicomachus' Manual of Harmonics, and Euclid's Elements. ¹⁷