Again, therefore, Plato placing in the one demiurgus the cause of the triad, exempts him, who abides as it were in himself, from production according to parts; but attributes to the triad a division according to the demiurgus. For Timæus also, by placing in him a paternal cause, a generative power, and a royal intellect, theologizes the same things about him as the Athenian guest. The paternal, indeed, is every where principal; but power belongs to the middle; and intellect closes the end of the triad. For power, according to the Oracle, is with them; [i.e. with father and intellect], but intellect is from him, [i.e. from the father]. Hence, of the natures which have proceeded, one is the father of the whole triad, but another the intellect of it. And one indeed is allotted the beginning of total fabrication; but another, gives completion to the middle of the generation of wholes; and another, bounds the end of it. Nor must we here omit to observe the accuracy of Plato, but survey[17] how the Athenian guest magnificently celebrates the extremities of the three demiurgi, by more singular names, calling one the _beginning_, and the other the _end_, but that which is between the extremes even in causes, he manifests through multitude. For he denominates it _middles_; since power also, as being co-ordinate with the infinite, or rather being a certain infinity, is the cause of multitude and division to wholes. Hence also, of the three demiurgi, one indeed, is the cause to mundane natures of a stable[18] collocation; but another, of generation proceeding to all things; and another, of the circulation of things to the principle of their progression.