[D] Μεσότητα μὲν δή φαμεν οὐ τὴν ἐν τοῖς ἐναντίοις θεωρουμένην ἴσον ἀφεστῶσαν τῶν ἄκρων, οἷον ἐπὶ χρωμάτων τὸ ξανθὸν ἢ φαιόν, ἐπὶ δὲ θερμοῦ καὶ ψυχροῦ τὸ χλιαρόν, καὶ ὅσα τοιαῦτα, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἑνωτικὴν καὶ συνάγουσαν τὰ διεστῶτα, ὁποίαν τινά φησιν Ἐμπεδοκλῆς τὴν ἁρμονίαν ἐξορίζων αὐτῆς παντελῶς τὸ νεῖκος. τίνα οὖν ἐστιν, ἃ συνάγει, καὶ τίνων ἐστὶ μέσος; φημὶ δὴ οὖν ὅτι τῶν τε ἐμφανῶν καὶ περικοσμίων θεῶν καὶ τῶν ἀύλων καὶ νοητῶν, [139] οἳ περὶ τἀγαθόν εἰσιν, ὥσπερ πολυπλασιαζομένης ἀπαθῶς καὶ ἄνευ προσθήκης τῆς νοητῆς καὶ θείας οὐσίας. ὡς μὲν οὖν ἐστι μέση τις, οὐκ ἀπὸ τῶν ἄκρων κραθεῖσα, τελεία δὲ καὶ ἀμιγὴς ἀφ᾽ ὅλων τῶν θεῶν ἐμφανῶν τε καὶ ἀφανῶν καὶ αἰσθητῶν καὶ νοητῶν ἡ τοῦ βασιλέως Ἡλίου νοερὰ καὶ πάνκαλος οὐσία, καὶ ὁποίαν τινὰ χρὴ τὴν μεσότητα νομίζειν, εἴρηται. εἰ δὲ δεῖ καὶ τοῖς καθ᾽ ἕκαστον ἐπεξελθεῖν, ἵν᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ κατ᾽ εἴδη τὸ μέσον τῆς οὐσίας, ὅπως ἔχει πρός τε τὰ πρῶτα καὶ τὰ τελευταῖα,(669) [B] τῷ νῷ κατίδωμεν, εἰ καὶ μὴ πάντα διελθεῖν ῥᾴδιον, ἀλλ᾽ οὖν τὰ δυνατὰ φράσαι πειραθῶμεν. (Now “middleness”(670) we define not as that mean which in opposites is seen to be equally remote from the extremes, as, for instance, in colours, tawny or dusky, and warm in the case of hot and cold, and the like, but that which unifies and links together what is separate; for instance the sort of thing that Empedocles(671) means by Harmony when from it he altogether eliminates Strife. And now what does Helios link together, and of what is he the middle? I assert then that he is midway between the visible gods who surround the universe and the immaterial and intelligible gods who surround the Good—for the intelligible and divine substance is as it were multiplied without external influence and without addition. For that the intellectual and wholly beautiful substance of King Helios is middle in the sense of being unmixed with extremes, complete in itself, and distinct from the whole number of the gods, visible and invisible, both those perceptible by sense and those which are intelligible only, I have already declared, and also in what sense we must conceive of his middleness. But if I must also describe these things one by one, in order that we may discern with our intelligence how his intermediary nature, in its various forms, is related both to the highest and the lowest, even though it is not easy to recount it all, yet let me try to say what can be said.)