Hermias of Alexandria (c. 410–450 ad) was a pupil of Syrianus in Athens around 430. After the end of his studies, he returned to teach philosophy in Alexandria, while Proclus (c. 412–485), his classmate in Syrianus’ lectures, became the head of the Athenian school. Hermias was the father of Ammonius (c. 435/445–517/526), who was a distinguished commentator of Aristotle in the school of Alexandria. Hermias’ commentary on Plato's Phaedrus is the only Neoplatonic commentary that survives in its entirety on this Platonic dialogue. It is composed of a series of notes (scholia) taken from Syrianus’ lectures on the Phaedrus. The present volume offers the first complete English translation of Hermias’ scholia by Baltzly and Share. H. Bernard's German translation of Hermias’ commentary (1997) was the first in a modern language. The volume belongs to the influential series Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, the leading scholarly project on late-antique philosophical commentaries, edited by R. Sorabji and M. Griffin. Baltzly's and Share's translation follows closely the text of C.M. Lucarini and C. Moreschini (Teubner 2012). Departures from Lucarini’s and Moreschini's text are listed in a separate section that precedes the translation. The volume is also accompanied by an English–Greek glossary, a subject index, as well as a Greek–English index of transliterated terms.

The book is the first of the volumes that are going to cover the translation of Hermias’ commentary. This first volume contains Hermias’ scholia up to Phaedrus 245e2, which mainly expose Socrates’ argument for the immortality of the soul based on its self-motion. It is announced by the translators that the second volume will cover more of Hermias’ text but with a shorter introduction. In the present volume the introduction is indeed long but well structured and informative. It gives the opportunity to the average reader and the non-expert to understand both the historical and the philosophical background of Hermias’ commentary. The translation is precise and properly follows the Greek text; it reads smoothly as the language is clear and provides the correct English version of the Greek terminology particularly in the context of Neoplatonic philosophy. The endnotes are detailed and explanatory both in terms of the philosophical literature and the theoretical framework of the text. In general, the edition shows mastery of the primary and secondary sources of Neoplatonic literature.

In the introductory section, Baltzly and Share underline the inherent problem of impact and adaptation of Syrianus’ lectures to Hermias’ commentary. Modern scholarship takes divergent views on this issue and the translators suggest that the relation between Hermias’ scholia and Syrianus’ lectures should remain inconclusive due to lack of sufficient evidence. However, as is correctly mentioned, Hermias’ scholia should not be regarded as mere notes of Syrianus’ lectures, but they should be considered as a philosophical commentary: ‘a work which comments systematically on lines or lemmata from Plato's text’ (p. 10). Throughout the translation, Hermias’ originality of the work is properly taken into account and considered in relation to the philosophy of Syrianus as well as Proclus’ thought.

The volume is a valuable resource for the reconsideration of the place of Plato's Phaedrus in late-antique philosophy and Neoplatonism. For instance, Plotinus’ use of the myth in Phaedrus (245a–56b) to emphasise the intelligibility of the heavenly sphere and the undescended higher intelligible part of the soul shows the re-evaluation of the previously neglected philosophical purpose of the dialogue. Furthermore, P. Henry and H.-R. Schwyzer's more than 130 allusions and references to Plato's Phaedrus in the Enneads (Index Fontium, pp. 352–4) justify the importance of the Platonic dialogue in Plotinus’ work and the demand for further research of the reception of the Phaedrus in the Neoplatonic tradition. It is also evident that eminent Neoplatonic philosophers, such as Iamblichus, Proclus and Damascius, wrote a philosophical commentary on the Phaedrus. Neoplatonic commentaries on Plato's dialogues were not used merely as an ‘academic exercise’, but, as Baltzly and Share note, they formed the educational programme of the students so they could achieve philosophical purification in noetic ascent, with the ultimate goal for the student to achieve a virtuous philosophic life, i.e. to realise Plato's exhortation in the Theaetetus 176a–b: ‘to become as like God as possible’ (pp. 1–2). Towards this aim, in Iamblichus’ canon – a curriculum of twelve of Plato's dialogues that constitute students’ progressive initiation to the Platonic teaching – Plato's Phaedrus is the eighth dialogue in the list, and it is credited with a theological skopos, i.e. to introduce the Platonic student to the contemplative virtues and to intelligible beauty at every level of being. Baltzly and Share suggest that the inclusion of the Phaedrus in the Iamblichean curriculum readdressed the importance of the dialogue in Neoplatonic philosophy and education.

Moreover, Baltzly and Share mention four points in relation to which Hermias’ commentary enlightens contemporary scholarship of Plato's dialogues and particularly modern philosophical discussion of the Phaedrus (pp. 21–33): (a) the unity and skopos of the Platonic dialogue; (b) the discussion on the characterisation and setting of the Phaedrus; (c) Socrates’ eroticism and his philosophical persona presented in the dialogue; (d) the prospect of a philosophical rhetoric in the Phaedrus, especially with reference to the system of education and the art of rhetoric in Late Antiquity. The above points underline the philosophical significance of the text and offer a necessary preliminary discussion of Hermias’ scholia in the volume.

In this context, Baltzly and Share suggest reading Hermias’ commentary on the Phaedrus not merely as a work aiming to inform the audience about Plato's philosophy but as a ‘psychagogic study’ that elevates and purifies the soul through Plato's teaching. Hence, one intention of the translation, as they note, is to encourage new questions about the purpose and meaning of Hermias’ work in terms of the rhetorical effects of the scholia along with its philosophical validity: ‘to ask these questions is not to ask whether Hermias accurately reports the intended meaning of Plato's dialogue or to ask whether Hermias’ arguments for theses characteristic of the Neoplatonic system are sound. It is rather to inquire into the potential for psychological transformation that is afforded by the performance of Platonic literacy in front of the audience of students’ (p. 35). This philosophical perspective of Hermias’ scholia opens a new interpretative horizon in the understanding of the purpose of Neoplatonic commentaries and the reception of Plato's teaching in Late Antiquity. A philosophical reading of the scholia shifts the emphasis to Hermias’ thought and reconsiders his value as a Neoplatonic thinker.

The present volume, with its scholarly quality and originality, worthily continues the editorial heritage of the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle project. It offers more than a precise and accurate translation of Hermias’ scholia on Plato's Phaedrus. It revisits with critical yet fresh and enthused eyes the importance of Hermias’ commentary in the Neoplatonic tradition and the history of philosophy. Hermias’ scholia receive the deserved scholarly attention in light of his philosophical contribution to Neoplatonic literature not merely as a pupil and follower of Syrianus’ teaching but as a significant thinker who was familiar with the legacy of the Platonic tradition and its fundamental philosophical principles.