A community-maintained tertiary reference on Neoplatonism, directly examined. Its strength is naming theurgy as a specific ritual mechanism rather than a vague mysticism and dating its last major hymnist, Proclus; its limit is a Wikipedia community article rather than a Neoplatonism studies monograph, which is why it sits at reliability tier three. This description is adapted from Wikipedia contributors under CC BY-SA 4.0; changes were made. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier3
Bare Wikipedia community article, tier 3, matching this corpus's settled precedent for this source class. NotesWikipedia's article on Neoplatonism, consulted 2026-08-13. Useful here for its description of theurgy, literally divine-working, as the rites the embodied soul performs to return to divinity, and its statement that the world is peopled by a crowd of superhuman beings, accessible to prayers and offerings, and for Proclus Lycaeus's dates, February 8, 412 to April 17, 485.
Citation
AuthorWikipedia contributors
PublisherWikipedia
Publication Year2026
URLhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplatonism
Source Typereference
Connections
Associated With
This source names Neoplatonism directly: "tertiary reference on Neoplatonism, directly examined."
Source Wikipedia, "Neoplatonism"Wikipedia contributors
This source names Proclus directly: "and dating its last major hymnist, Proclus; its limit is a Wikipedia community article rather than a Neoplatonism studies monograph, which is why it sits at reliability tier three."
Source Wikipedia, "Neoplatonism"Wikipedia contributors
Claims Backed By This Source (16 claims)
This source backs 16 claims across the atlas. As facts: 11 well-attested. As cited relationships: 3 holds. Plus 2 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 10 claims: 8 well-attested, 2 holds.
- Prayers, 5 claims: 3 well-attested, 2 general references.
- Historical Figures, 1 claims: 1 holds.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.