- •Preface
- •Acknowledgments
- •Abbreviations
- •I The Divine Homer and the Background of Neoplatonic Allegory a. Homer's Pretensions
- •B. Interpretation, Allegory, and the Critics of Homer
- •C. Homer as Theologos
- •D. The Pythagoreans
- •II Middle Platonism and the Interaction of Interpretive Traditions a. Philo of Alexandria
- •B. Numenius The Uses of Literature
- •Sources
- •Conclusion
- •C. Clement and Origen
- •III Plotinian Neoplatonism a. Plotinus Language and Literature
- •B. Porphyry Porphyry and Homer
- •The Cave of the Nymphs
- •C. Julian and Sallustius
- •IV The Interaction of Allegorical Interpretation and Deliberate Allegory
- •V Proclus a. Introduction
- •B. Language as a System of Meaning
- •C. Myths or Texts?
- •D. The Major Exegesis of Homer in the Commentary on the Republic Proclus's Motives
- •Conceptual Framework
- •E. The Meaning of the Iliad and Odyssey
- •The Iliad
- •The Odyssey
- •VI The Transmission of the Neoplatonists' Homer to the Latin Middle Ages a. The Paths of Transmission
- •B. The Arabic Tradition
- •C. The Greek East
- •D. The Latin Tradition
- •E. The Late Middle Ages and Dante
- •Afterword Preconception and Understanding: The Allegorists in Modern Perspective
- •Appendix I An Interpretation of the Modest Chariclea from the Lips of Philip the Philosopher
- •Appendix II Proclus's Commentary on the Timaeus of Plato, 1.341.25-343.15
- •Appendix III a Sampling of Proclus's Use of Homer
- •Appendix IV The History of the Allegory of the Cave of the Nymphs
- •Works Cited Ancient and Medieval Authors
- •Modern Authors
- •Ancient and Medieval Passages Cited
- •Index of Greek Terms
- •General Index
E. The Meaning of the Iliad and Odyssey
There is an extraordinary continuity in the Neoplatonic exegesis of Homer. The same myths would seem to have been explained again and again in essentially the same manner, over a period of centuries.[136] Porphyry reminds us often that the interpretations he is presenting are not his own, but those of Numenius and Cronius, a century before his time. Proclus likewise refers frequently to his master Syrianus (diadochos from 432 to 437 or perhaps later)[137] as the source of the doctrines he is
[134] In Rep . 1.76-77
[135] In Rep . 1.79.5-18.
[136] See Friedl, Homer-Interpretationen des Neuplatonikers Proklos , pp. 59-65, for a excellent discussion of the problem of sources in Neoplatonic allegory from the perspective of Proclus.
[137] On the problem of Syrianus's dates, see Karl Praechter, "Syrianos," cols. 1728-29. Praechter's date of 450 for his death is rather arbitrary, and with Sheppard (Studies , p. 38) I am convinced by the arguments for 437 put forward by Saffrey and Westerink (Proclus, Théologie platonicienne [Budé], vol. 1, pp. xv-xvii). On the dependence of Proclus's discussion of Homer on Syrianus, see Sheppard, Studies , ch. 2. Her analysis of Proclus's sources is far more meticulous than that of Friedl and shows us in detail how Proclus "is fitting Syrianus' comments on Homer, from a variety of sources, into a framework of his own" (Studies , p. 85). She attributes a substantial individual contribution to Syrianus in the development of Neoplatonist metaphysical allegory (Studies , pp. 48, 79), though since we know very little of the nature of Syrianus's sources, it would perhaps be more judicious to grant him priority over Proclus without passing judgment on his own originality.
― 198 ―
using in his defense of Homer, though at some points he does give us what is explicitly his own analysis.[138] Olympiodorus makes no distinction in his commentary on the Phaedo between the teachings of Proclus and those of Syrianus,[139] and in general it is possible to distinguish a very large element in Proclus's thought that goes back to that of his master. Proclus mentions a work of Syrianus's entitled "Solutions to Homeric Questions,"[140] which must have been a major source for the interpretations found in his own defense of Homer.
A. J. Friedl distinguished two separate strata of sources in Proclus's essay: Syrianus for the specifically Neoplatonic material and another collection of allegories from various sources.[141] The latter may have been the Homeric Questions of Porphyry, of which we have only the first book intact. Interpretations of this class are often preserved by the scholiasts as well. Proclus's major accomplishment in this context would seem to lie in his presentation of the theoretical analysis of the meaning of myth discussed above. His interpretations themselves are largely received ones, and his own contribution on this level is difficult to assess, though the sheer bulk of material he passes down to us makes him the most important of our ancient sources and the one that comes closest to presenting a comprehensive account of the Homeric epics as the Neoplatonists read them. Only Eustathius preserves a greater bulk of exegetical material on Homer in a single work.
In an attempt to reconstruct as much as possible of this comprehensive picture, I have ignored the structure of Proclus's essay (which is organized around his responses to the various Socratic criticisms) and rearranged the major interpretations in the sequence of the events and
[138] In Rep . 1.116.24-117.21 on Agamemnon's dream.
[139] Proclus had a contemporary and fellow student under Syrianus by this name, with whom he studied Aristotle (Mar. Vit. Pr . 9), but Wallis (Neoplatonism , p. 140, n. 1) cautions against identifying this Olympiodorus with the Alexandrian Neoplatonist.
[140]
[141] Friedl, Homer-Interpretationen des Neuplatonikers Proklos , pp. 63-65, 69.
― 199 ―
references within the poems themselves.[142] Many of Proclus's minor references, involving little or no interpretation on his part, have not been mentioned.
There are, of course, abundant references to Homer in the other works of Proclus as well, and occasionally interpretations cited below have been drawn from those sources to supplement the comprehensive picture offered in the Republic commentary. A sampling of the citations of Homer in the other works, however, indicates that the heart of what Proclus had to say about Homer is here, and the other works have relatively little to add.[143]