The Prolegomena begin by pointing out the present lack of detailed, critical work on Plotinus., Then, after a resumé of the events of Plotinus' life, the problem of the date of composition of V 1, and its title, are discussed. Space is devoted to discussion of the purpose of the treatise, which, despite its title, is protreptic, to lead the soul to the Intelligible World and beyond by reminding it of its high status. The methodology of the Commentary is outlined, and a list of passages is given in which textual readings have been proposed which differ from those in the text of Henry and Schwyzer. The Prolegomena conclude with a detailed analysis of the contents of the treatise, included in order to show that the treatise is not a mere random collection of thoughts. There follows a translation which aims not so much to be stylish - for Plotinus was no stylist - but to give an accurate idea of what Plotinus actually wrote. The bulk of the thesis is taken up with the Commentary. The Commentary is exegetical, discussing difficulties in the treatise line by line. Since by the time Plotinus wrote his philosophical ideas were already formulated, it contains as many cross-references as possible to other treatises in the Plotinian corpus. Each chapter begins with a short introduction, and,in the body of the work, textual difficulties and the readings of previous editors, as well as difficulties of philosophical interpretation, are fully discussed. The translations of Ficino, Bréhier, Harder, Cilento and MacKenna are taken into account. Among the longer notes might be mentioned the note on 3,8 on the meaning of logos, that on the relationship between the reasoning and the undescending soul (on 3,13) 9 and the treatment of the difficult passages 6,17-19 and 7,11-17. The thesis concludes with a full bibliography.

Proclus is part of a long exegetical tradition that understands Plato and Homer to be in agreement. The Sixth Essay of his Commentary on Plato’s Republic particularly significant because it is the only extant ancient text that attempts to prove the concord of Plato and Homer philosophically. Yet, despite his uniquely reasoned approach, this endeavour suffers from charges of irrationalism. The necessity that drives him to seek this conciliation is thought to come from the pious attachment he has to Homer as an authority rather than the properly philosophical demands of his rational system. The aim of this thesis is to show that Proclus’ need to show Plato and Homer’s agreement is not an irrational adjunct to an otherwise rational outlook, but that it follows from the central doctrines of his philosophy. This will be accomplished through a detailed consideration of Proclus’ doctrine of the poetic ????????. In looking at how Proclus’ reading of Plato in the Sixth Essay is informed by his understanding of ????????, we will see how Homer becomes the means, both of taking the traditional criticisms of Plato’s apparent self-contradiction seriously and also of defending him against them. In looking in turn at how the soul actually experiences the ??????? of Homer’s inspired poetry, it shall become apparent that Homer does not just save the coherence of rational thought in this exterior way, but that his poetry operates as both the possibility and perfection of the rational soul’s various powers.