In the history of imperial Platonism (Middle and Neoplatonism) there is a debate about the position of a fragmentary Anonymous Commentary on Parmenides in the history of ideas. Some interpret it as postplotinian due to the use that it makes of the second part of platonic Parmenides; other commentators propose its middle-platonic collocation due to the presence of preplotinian contents. Middleplatonic placement of the text would lead to rethink the classical boundary between middle- and neo-Platonism. This article, after a brief analysis of the arguments of the supporters of high dating, focuses its attention on the theological gnoseology of the text: it is a non-negligible factor that makes it difficult to read the text as Middle-Platonic.