DiotimosReading Desk

Diotimos Library · Renaissance Collection · Bilingual Edition

Marsilio Ficino

Marsilio Ficino’s Platonic Theology, Volume II

Books V–VIII · Latin with an independent English translation

Explore the Lexicon
Marsilio Ficino’s Platonic Theology, Volume IIBook VI · Chapter 1 · §§ 4–5

Swipe or use the arrow keys.

Facing Pages · Branch 68 of 191

Book VI · Chapter 1 · §§ 4–5

Book Mode

Latin

p. 130

Aut purius aliquid, veluti punctum aliquod lucidum qualitatis illius in quadam ipsius qualitatis et corpusculi parte potiori, puta corde vel cerebro, assignatum, ibi residens, inde reliqua membra gubernans; ut est apud Chrysippum, Archelaum et Heraclidem Ponticum.

Aut liberius adhuc quiddam, ceu punctum aliquod nulli parti affixum, sed ab omni determinato situ seclusum ac totum parti corporis cuique praesens; sed tale, ut sit ab ipsa corporis natura dependens. Dependens, inquam, duobus modis, scilicet vel quia corporis complexio ipsum genuerit; vel quia, licet complexio ipsum non genuerit, tamen genitor suus, quicumque sit ille, ipsum ex materiae potentia eiusque visceribus eduxerit, id est, ex aliquo semine sive incohatione seu proportione materiae ipsius in lucem eruerit, atque ipsi materiae tamquam naturali gremio prorsus addixerit. Quam sententiam Xenophanes Colophonius, Asclepiades, Aristoxenus, Critolausque sequuntur, apud quos anima est vel vis quaedam corporis agilis ad movendum, vel partium corporalium harmonia.

130

Marsilio Ficino’s Platonic Theology, Volume II: Book VI

p. 131

Or it is something purer: a kind of luminous point belonging to that quality, fixed in some nobler part of the quality and its little body—say, the heart or the brain—residing there and governing the remaining members from that seat. Such is the position found in Chrysippus, Archelaus, and Heraclides of Pontus.

Or it is something freer still: a kind of point attached to no part, excluded from every determinate place, yet wholly present to each part of the body. Even so, it depends upon the body's own nature. I say that it may depend in either of two ways: the body's constitution may have generated it; or, although that constitution did not generate it, its producer, whoever he may be, may have drawn it from the potency and very entrails of matter—that is, brought it into the light from some seed, beginning, or proportion of matter itself—and bound it entirely to matter as to its natural womb. This position is followed by Xenophanes of Colophon, Asclepiades, Aristoxenus, and Critolaus. For them the soul is either an active power of the body for producing motion, or a harmony of bodily parts.

131

About This Reading Edition

Volume II continues Ficino’s inquiry into the immortality of the soul through Books V–VIII. Its arguments consider the rational soul’s self-motion, its relation to the body, sensation, and the powers of the mind. The Latin and independent English translation follow the supplied edition’s facing pages and matching comparison units.

Historical Text and Translation

The Latin reading text is independently established from the Florence 1482 editio princeps (M1482), collated against the Paris 1559 printing (G1559), with the Paris 1641 Opera used only as a late control. Abbreviations are expanded, spelling and punctuation are conservatively normalized, and consequential readings are recorded in the apparatus.

About Diotimos Editions

Diotimos Editions prepared this independent English translation in the voice established in Volume I, preserving Ficino’s argumentative sequence, metaphors, technical distinctions, repetitions, conditions, purposes, and qualifications. Editorial notes and witness variants accompany their passages as numbered notes. The edition and source statement, contents, and reading guidance are also retained. The source locator register remains available in the downloadable edition.

Rights

Ficino’s Latin source work is in the public domain. The 2026 English translation and Diotimos editorial matter are original to this edition and remain © 2026 Diotimos.