Simplicius Research Environment

Author

BY DATE
BY TITLE

Simplicius: On Aristotle ‘On the Soul 3.1–5’, 2000
By: Simplicius , Blumenthal, Henry J. (Ed.)

Title	Simplicius: On Aristotle ‘On the Soul 3.1–5’
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2000
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Series	Ancient commentators on Aristotle
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Simplicius
Editor(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Translator(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J. (Blumenthal, Henry J.) ,

In On the Soul 3.1-5, Aristotle goes beyond the five sense to the general functions of sense perception, the imagination and the so-called active intellect, the of which was still a matter of controversy in the time of Thomas Aquinas. In his commentary on Aristotle's text, 'Simplicius' insists that the intellect in question is not something transcendental but the human rational soul. He denies both Plotinus' view that a part of the soul has never descended from uninterrupted contemplation of the Platonic Forms, and Proclus' view that the soul cannot be changed in its substance through embodiment. He also denies that imagination sees things as true or false, which requires awareness of one's own cognitions. He thinks that imagination works by projecting imprints. In the case of mathematics, it can make the imprints more like shapes taken on during sense perception or more like concepts, which calls for lines without breadth. He acknowledges that Aristotle would not agree to reify these concepts as substances, but thinks of mathematical entities as mere abstractions. Addressing the vexed question of authorship, H. J. Blumenthal concludes that the commentary was written neither by Simplicius nor Priscian. In a novel interpretation, he suggests that if Priscian had any hand in this commentary, it might have been as editor of notes from Simplicius' lectures. [offical abstract]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Ic4w7j2wFv2xfas

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"122","_score":null,"_source":{"id":122,"authors_free":[{"id":148,"entry_id":122,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J. ","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2269,"entry_id":122,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius ","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":62,"first_name":"Cilicius","last_name":"Simplicius ","full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118642421","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2270,"entry_id":122,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J. ","free_first_name":"Henry J. ","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius: On Aristotle \u2018On the Soul 3.1\u20135\u2019","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius: On Aristotle \u2018On the Soul 3.1\u20135\u2019"},"abstract":"In On the Soul 3.1-5, Aristotle goes beyond the five sense to the general functions of sense perception, the imagination and the so-called active intellect, the of which was still a matter of controversy in the time of Thomas Aquinas.\r\nIn his commentary on Aristotle's text, 'Simplicius' insists that the intellect in question is not something transcendental but the human rational soul. He denies both Plotinus' view that a part of the soul has never descended from uninterrupted contemplation of the Platonic Forms, and Proclus' view that the soul cannot be changed in its substance through embodiment.\r\nHe also denies that imagination sees things as true or false, which requires awareness of one's own cognitions. He thinks that imagination works by projecting imprints. In the case of mathematics, it can make the imprints more like shapes taken on during sense perception or more like concepts, which calls for lines without breadth. He acknowledges that Aristotle would not agree to reify these concepts as substances, but thinks of mathematical entities as mere abstractions.\r\nAddressing the vexed question of authorship, H. J. Blumenthal concludes that the commentary was written neither by Simplicius nor Priscian. In a novel interpretation, he suggests that if Priscian had any hand in this commentary, it might have been as editor of notes from Simplicius' lectures. [offical abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2000","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Ic4w7j2wFv2xfas","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":122,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"Ancient commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2000]}

Some Notes on the Text of Pseudo-Simplicius' Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima , III. 1-5, 1997
By: Blumenthal, Henry J., Joyal, Mark (Ed.)

Title	Some Notes on the Text of Pseudo-Simplicius' Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima , III. 1-5
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	1997
Published in	Studies in Plato and the Platonic Tradition. Essays Presented to John Whittaker
Pages	213-228
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)	Joyal, Mark
Translator(s)

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/qcoAf1qJJEw8sNW

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1469","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1469,"authors_free":[{"id":2543,"entry_id":1469,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2544,"entry_id":1469,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":540,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Joyal, Mark","free_first_name":"Mark","free_last_name":"Joyal","norm_person":{"id":540,"first_name":"Mark","last_name":"Joyal","full_name":"Joyal, Mark","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1162514582","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Some Notes on the Text of Pseudo-Simplicius' Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima , III. 1-5","main_title":{"title":"Some Notes on the Text of Pseudo-Simplicius' Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima , III. 1-5"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1997","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/qcoAf1qJJEw8sNW","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":540,"full_name":"Joyal, Mark","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1469,"section_of":1470,"pages":"213-228","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1470,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Studies in Plato and the Platonic Tradition. Essays Presented to John Whittaker","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1997","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This book, which honours the career of a distinguished scholar, contains essays dealing with important problems in Plato, the Platonic tradition, and the texts and transmission of Plato and later Platonic writers. It ranges from the discussion of issues in individual Platonic dialogues to the examination of Platonism in the Middle Ages. The essays are written by leading scholars in the field and reflect the current state of knowledge on the various problems under discussion. The collection as a whole testifies to the importance of the Platonic writings for the history of ideas, and to the vitality that the study of these writings continues to possess.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/xCDhlMW8VGTAIuZ","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1470,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Routledge (2017)","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1997]}

Were Aristotle's Intentions in writing the De Anima Forgotten in Late Antiquity?, 1997
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Were Aristotle's Intentions in writing the De Anima Forgotten in Late Antiquity?
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	1997
Journal	Documenti e Studi sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale
Volume	8
Pages	143–157
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

In general we have to conclude that while the whole "Philoponus” commentary may include a number of explicit references to the biological writings, and while the real Philoponus may often refer to medical and scientific issues, there is no systematic bias towards explaining the contents of the De anima in terms of them. There is, however, just as in the Ps-Simplicius commentary, enough said about such matters, and enough reference made to other parts of the biological corpus, to show that the commentators were still aware of the original intentions of the work — or, at the very least, behaved as if they were — even if they did not always feel bound by them. That awareness was to survive into the Middle Ages as well. [Conclusion, p. 157]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/qhZRe3zhqqbPUeO

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"893","_score":null,"_source":{"id":893,"authors_free":[{"id":1316,"entry_id":893,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Were Aristotle's Intentions in writing the De Anima Forgotten in Late Antiquity?","main_title":{"title":"Were Aristotle's Intentions in writing the De Anima Forgotten in Late Antiquity?"},"abstract":"In general we have to conclude that while the whole \"Philoponus\u201d commentary may include a number of explicit references to the biological writings, and while the real Philoponus may often refer to medical and scientific issues, there is no systematic bias towards explaining the contents of the De anima in terms of them. There is, however, just as in the Ps-Simplicius commentary, enough said about such matters, and \r\nenough reference made to other parts of the biological corpus, to show that the commentators were still aware of the original intentions of the work \u2014 or, at the very least, behaved as if they were \u2014 even if they did not always feel bound by them. That awareness was to survive into the Middle Ages as well. [Conclusion, p. 157]","btype":3,"date":"1997","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/qhZRe3zhqqbPUeO","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":893,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Documenti e Studi sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale","volume":"8","issue":"","pages":"143\u2013157"}},"sort":[1997]}

Iamblichus as a Commentator, 1997
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Iamblichus as a Commentator
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	1997
Journal	Syllecta Classica
Volume	8
Pages	1–13
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

Twenty two years ago, when tiiat growtii in interest in Neoplatonism which is a s??a?t??? of this conference was only just getting under way, two large booksappeared which will be famUiar to all who are interested in Iamblichus. I am referring,of course, to JM. Dillon's collection of die fragmentary remains of Iamblichus'commentaries on Plato's dialogues, supplied with an ample commentary to boot,1 andB. Dalsgaard Larsen's Jamblique de Chalets. Exégète et Philosophe, of which some240 pages are devoted to his role as exégète: a collection of exegetical fragmentsappeared as a 130 page appendix.2 Larsen's book covered the interpretation of bothPlato and Aristode, and pre-empted a second volume of Dillon's which was to dealwith Aristode. I mention these books because we are, inter alia, taking stock, and it isremarkable that not much attention has been paid since dien to Iamblichus' role as acommentator. Perhaps tiiey have had die same effect on die study of this aspect ofIamblichus as Proclus' work had on the interpretation of Plato at Alexandria.Be that as it may, I intend to look, not very originally, at Iamblichus' activitiesas a commentator on philosophical works— and so I shall say notiring about dietwenty-eight books or more of his lost commentary on die Chaldaean Oracles*— andalso to say sometiring, in die manner of core samples, about how his expositionscompare with those of the later commentators. Though the process can be traced back in part to Porphyry,4 I drink it is safe to say tiiat Iamblichus was the firstNeoplatonist, at least of those about whom we are reasonably well informed, to set outin a systematic way to write commentaries on the major works of both Plato and—inIamblichus' case to a lesser extent—Aristotle too. [pp. 1 ff.]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/uYBsFlDm7T54N7r

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"895","_score":null,"_source":{"id":895,"authors_free":[{"id":1321,"entry_id":895,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Iamblichus as a Commentator","main_title":{"title":"Iamblichus as a Commentator"},"abstract":"Twenty two years ago, when tiiat growtii in interest in Neoplatonism which is a\r\ns??a?t??? of this conference was only just getting under way, two large booksappeared which will be famUiar to all who are interested in Iamblichus. I am referring,of course, to JM. Dillon's collection of die fragmentary remains of Iamblichus'commentaries on Plato's dialogues, supplied with an ample commentary to boot,1 andB. Dalsgaard Larsen's Jamblique de Chalets. Ex\u00e9g\u00e8te et Philosophe, of which some240 pages are devoted to his role as ex\u00e9g\u00e8te: a collection of exegetical fragmentsappeared as a 130 page appendix.2 Larsen's book covered the interpretation of bothPlato and Aristode, and pre-empted a second volume of Dillon's which was to dealwith Aristode. I mention these books because we are, inter alia, taking stock, and it isremarkable that not much attention has been paid since dien to Iamblichus' role as acommentator. Perhaps tiiey have had die same effect on die study of this aspect ofIamblichus as Proclus' work had on the interpretation of Plato at Alexandria.Be that as it may, I intend to look, not very originally, at Iamblichus' activitiesas a commentator on philosophical works\u2014 and so I shall say notiring about dietwenty-eight books or more of his lost commentary on die Chaldaean Oracles*\u2014 andalso to say sometiring, in die manner of core samples, about how his expositionscompare with those of the later commentators. Though the process can be traced back in part to Porphyry,4 I drink it is safe to say tiiat Iamblichus was the firstNeoplatonist, at least of those about whom we are reasonably well informed, to set outin a systematic way to write commentaries on the major works of both Plato and\u2014inIamblichus' case to a lesser extent\u2014Aristotle too. [pp. 1 ff.]","btype":3,"date":"1997","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/uYBsFlDm7T54N7r","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":895,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Syllecta \tClassica","volume":"8","issue":"","pages":"1\u201313"}},"sort":[1997]}

The commentators: their identity and their background, 1996
By: Blumenthal, Henry J., Blumenthal, Henry J. (Ed.)

Title	The commentators: their identity and their background
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	1996
Published in	Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the "De Anima"
Pages	35-51
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Translator(s)

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/I0dc7d4a4K5xGSg

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1449","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1449,"authors_free":[{"id":2431,"entry_id":1449,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2444,"entry_id":1449,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The commentators: their identity and their background","main_title":{"title":"The commentators: their identity and their background"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1996","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/I0dc7d4a4K5xGSg","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1449,"section_of":213,"pages":"35-51","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":213,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the \"De Anima\"","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Blumenthal1996a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1996","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1996","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fixlFMqtKju8xdW","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":213,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1996]}

Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the "De Anima", 1996
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the "De Anima"
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	1996
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

Steven Strange, Emory UniversityScholars have traditionally used the Aristotelian commentators as sources for lost philosophical works and occasionally also as aids to understanding Aristotle. In H. J. Blumenthal's view, however, the commentators often assumed that there was a Platonist philosophy to which not only they but Aristotle himself subscribed. Their expository writing usually expressed their versions of Neoplatonist philosophy. Blumenthal here places the commentators in their intellectual and historical contexts, identifies their philosophical views, and demonstrates their tendency to read Aristotle as if he were a member of their philosophical circle.This book focuses on the commentators' exposition of Aristotle's treatise De anima (On the Soul), because it is relatively well documented and because the concept of soul was so important in all Neoplatonic systems. Blumenthal explains how the Neoplatonizing of Aristotle's thought, as well as the widespread use of the commentators' works, influenced the understanding of Aristotle in both the Islamic and Judaeo-Christian traditions.H. J. Blumenthal is the author or coeditor of six previous books and is currently preparing a two-volume translation, with introduction and commentary, of Simplicius' Commentary on "De anima" for publication in Cornell's series Ancient Commentators on Aristotle.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/fixlFMqtKju8xdW

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"213","_score":null,"_source":{"id":213,"authors_free":[{"id":272,"entry_id":213,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the \"De Anima\"","main_title":{"title":"Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the \"De Anima\""},"abstract":"Steven Strange, Emory UniversityScholars have traditionally used the Aristotelian commentators as sources for lost philosophical works and occasionally also as aids to understanding Aristotle. In H. J. Blumenthal's view, however, the commentators often assumed that there was a Platonist philosophy to which not only they but Aristotle himself subscribed. Their expository writing usually expressed their versions of Neoplatonist philosophy. Blumenthal here places the commentators in their intellectual and historical contexts, identifies their philosophical views, and demonstrates their tendency to read Aristotle as if he were a member of their philosophical circle.This book focuses on the commentators' exposition of Aristotle's treatise De anima (On the Soul), because it is relatively well documented and because the concept of soul was so important in all Neoplatonic systems. Blumenthal explains how the Neoplatonizing of Aristotle's thought, as well as the widespread use of the commentators' works, influenced the understanding of Aristotle in both the Islamic and Judaeo-Christian traditions.H. J. Blumenthal is the author or coeditor of six previous books and is currently preparing a two-volume translation, with introduction and commentary, of Simplicius' Commentary on \"De anima\" for publication in Cornell's series Ancient Commentators on Aristotle.","btype":1,"date":"1996","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fixlFMqtKju8xdW","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":213,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[1996]}

Dunamis in "Simplicius", 1996
By: Blumenthal, Henry J., Cardullo, R. Loredana (Ed.), Romano, Francesco (Ed.)

Title	Dunamis in "Simplicius"
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	1996
Published in	Dunamis nel Neoplatonismo: atti del II Colloquio internazionale del Centro di Ricerca sul Neoplatonismo, Università degli studi di Catania, 6-8 ottobre 1994
Pages	149-172
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)	Cardullo, R. Loredana , Romano, Francesco
Translator(s)

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dll7tlbqvtMDGiU

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1495","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1495,"authors_free":[{"id":2593,"entry_id":1495,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2594,"entry_id":1495,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":24,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Cardullo, R. Loredana","free_first_name":"R. Loredana","free_last_name":"Cardullo","norm_person":{"id":24,"first_name":"R. Loredana ","last_name":"Cardullo","full_name":"Cardullo, R. Loredana ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139800220","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2595,"entry_id":1495,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":305,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Romano, Francesco","free_first_name":"Francesco","free_last_name":"Romano","norm_person":{"id":305,"first_name":"Francesco","last_name":"Romano","full_name":"Romano, Francesco","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1028249454","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Dunamis in \"Simplicius\"","main_title":{"title":"Dunamis in \"Simplicius\""},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1996","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dll7tlbqvtMDGiU","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":24,"full_name":"Cardullo, R. Loredana ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":305,"full_name":"Romano, Francesco","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1495,"section_of":1494,"pages":"149-172","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1494,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Dunamis nel Neoplatonismo: atti del II Colloquio internazionale del Centro di Ricerca sul Neoplatonismo, Universit\u00e0 degli studi di Catania, 6-8 ottobre 1994","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1996","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/JGDBA3rjLagrQKr","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1494,"pubplace":"Firenze","publisher":"La nuova Italia","series":"Symbolon. Studi e testi di filosofia antica e medievale","volume":"16","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1996]}

The writings of the De anima commentators, 1996
By: Blumenthal, Henry J., Blumenthal, Henry J. (Ed.)

Title	The writings of the De anima commentators
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	1996
Published in	Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the "De Anima"
Pages	53-71
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Translator(s)

So far we have discussed the work of our commentators as if it was simply scholarship and philosophical exposition, whether of their own philosophy or that of Aristotle which most of them held to be fundamen tally the same. There is, however, another aspect of the commentaries which, while not prominent, should not be forgotten. That is the way in which doing such work was an integral part of a life aimed at the greatest possible degree of return to that higher reality from which the commenta tors saw human life as a decline and separation. It is becoming increasingly better understood that for the great majority of Greek philo sophers, philosophy was not only a way of thinking but a way of life.70 The late Neoplatonists seem to have gone even further, and regarded the production of commentaries as a kind of service to the divine, much as a Christian monk who engaged in scholarship would have seen it in that light So we find at the end of Simplicius’ commentary on the De caelo what can only be described as a prayer: ‘Oh lord and artificer of the universe and the simple bodies in it, to you and all that has been brought into being by you I offer this work as a hymn, being eager to see as a revelation the magnitude of your works and to proclaim it to those who are worthy, so that thinking no mean or mortal thoughts about you we may make obeisance to you in accordance with the high place you occupy in respect of all that is produced by you’ (731.25-9). Those who think that ancient philosophy ceased to be of interest some three and a half centuries before these words were written and who may from time to time consult Sim plicius for an opinion on the meaning of an Aristotelian text, are unlikely ever to see these words, or those that come at the end of the commentary on the Enckeiridion (138.22-3). Without them they cannot fully under stand the nature of works beyond whose surface they never penetrate, works whose very composition could be seen as an act of reverence to the gods of paganism. [Conclusion, p. 71]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/1xXItSZspUfzEIR

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"927","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":927,"authors_free":[{"id":1371,"entry_id":927,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2527,"entry_id":927,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The writings of the De anima commentators","main_title":{"title":"The writings of the De anima commentators"},"abstract":"So far we have discussed the work of our commentators as if it was \r\nsimply scholarship and philosophical exposition, whether of their own \r\nphilosophy or that of Aristotle which most of them held to be fundamen\u00ad\r\ntally the same. There is, however, another aspect of the commentaries \r\nwhich, while not prominent, should not be forgotten. That is the way in \r\nwhich doing such work was an integral part of a life aimed at the greatest \r\npossible degree of return to that higher reality from which the commenta\u00ad\r\ntors saw human life as a decline and separation. It is becoming \r\nincreasingly better understood that for the great majority of Greek philo\u00ad\r\nsophers, philosophy was not only a way of thinking but a way of life.70 The \r\nlate Neoplatonists seem to have gone even further, and regarded the \r\nproduction of commentaries as a kind of service to the divine, much as a \r\nChristian monk who engaged in scholarship would have seen it in that \r\nlight So we find at the end of Simplicius\u2019 commentary on the De caelo what \r\ncan only be described as a prayer: \u2018Oh lord and artificer of the universe \r\nand the simple bodies in it, to you and all that has been brought into being \r\nby you I offer this work as a hymn, being eager to see as a revelation the \r\nmagnitude of your works and to proclaim it to those who are worthy, so \r\nthat thinking no mean or mortal thoughts about you we may make \r\nobeisance to you in accordance with the high place you occupy in respect \r\nof all that is produced by you\u2019 (731.25-9). Those who think that ancient \r\nphilosophy ceased to be of interest some three and a half centuries before \r\nthese words were written and who may from time to time consult Sim\u00ad\r\nplicius for an opinion on the meaning of an Aristotelian text, are unlikely \r\never to see these words, or those that come at the end of the commentary \r\non the Enckeiridion (138.22-3). Without them they cannot fully under\u00ad\r\nstand the nature of works beyond whose surface they never penetrate, \r\nworks whose very composition could be seen as an act of reverence to the \r\ngods of paganism. [Conclusion, p. 71]","btype":2,"date":"1996","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/1xXItSZspUfzEIR","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":927,"section_of":213,"pages":"53-71","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":213,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the \"De Anima\"","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Blumenthal1996a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1996","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1996","abstract":"Steven Strange, Emory UniversityScholars have traditionally used the Aristotelian commentators as sources for lost philosophical works and occasionally also as aids to understanding Aristotle. In H. J. Blumenthal's view, however, the commentators often assumed that there was a Platonist philosophy to which not only they but Aristotle himself subscribed. Their expository writing usually expressed their versions of Neoplatonist philosophy. Blumenthal here places the commentators in their intellectual and historical contexts, identifies their philosophical views, and demonstrates their tendency to read Aristotle as if he were a member of their philosophical circle.This book focuses on the commentators' exposition of Aristotle's treatise De anima (On the Soul), because it is relatively well documented and because the concept of soul was so important in all Neoplatonic systems. Blumenthal explains how the Neoplatonizing of Aristotle's thought, as well as the widespread use of the commentators' works, influenced the understanding of Aristotle in both the Islamic and Judaeo-Christian traditions.H. J. Blumenthal is the author or coeditor of six previous books and is currently preparing a two-volume translation, with introduction and commentary, of Simplicius' Commentary on \"De anima\" for publication in Cornell's series Ancient Commentators on Aristotle.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fixlFMqtKju8xdW","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":213,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1996]}

Soul and intellect: Studies in Plotinus and later Neoplatonism, 1993
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Soul and intellect: Studies in Plotinus and later Neoplatonism
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	1993
Publication Place	Aldershot (Hampshire)
Publisher	Variorum
Series	Variorum collected studies series
Volume	426
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

This book presents a series of Dr. Blumenthal’s studies on the history of Neoplatonism, from its founder Plotinus to the end of Classical Antiquity, relating especially to the Neoplatonists’ doctrines about the soul. The work falls into two parts. The first deals with Plotinus and considers the soul both as part of the structure of the universe and in its capacity as the basis of the individual’s vital and cognitive functions. The second part is concerned with the later history of Neoplatonism, including its end. Its main focus is the investigation of how Neoplatonic psychology was modified and developed by later philosophers, in particular the commentators on Aristotle, and used as the starting point for their Platonizing interpretations of his philosophy.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/o9PFSmbWfnXTRz5

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"214","_score":null,"_source":{"id":214,"authors_free":[{"id":273,"entry_id":214,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Soul and intellect: Studies in Plotinus and later Neoplatonism","main_title":{"title":"Soul and intellect: Studies in Plotinus and later Neoplatonism"},"abstract":"This book presents a series of Dr. Blumenthal\u2019s studies on the history of Neoplatonism, from its founder Plotinus to the end of Classical Antiquity, relating especially to the Neoplatonists\u2019 doctrines about the soul. The work falls into two parts. The first deals with Plotinus and considers the soul both as part of the structure of the universe and in its capacity as the basis of the individual\u2019s vital and cognitive functions. The second part is concerned with the later history of Neoplatonism, including its end. Its main focus is the investigation of how Neoplatonic psychology was modified and developed by later philosophers, in particular the commentators on Aristotle, and used as the starting point for their Platonizing interpretations of his philosophy.","btype":1,"date":"1993","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/o9PFSmbWfnXTRz5","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":214,"pubplace":"Aldershot (Hampshire)","publisher":"Variorum","series":"Variorum collected studies series","volume":"426","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[1993]}

Platonism in late antiquity, 1993
By: Blumenthal, Henry J., Blumenthal, Henry J. (Ed.)

Title	Platonism in late antiquity
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	1993
Published in	Soul and intellect: Studies in Plotinus and later Neoplatonism
Pages	1-27
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Translator(s)

What I hope I have done is to show in outline what late antique Platonism looks like now, and some of the ways in which its appearance has changed. I think one can assert with some confidence th at if anyone tries to do the same thing in ten year's time, the picture will have changed again. That is a measure both of the number of unanswered questions and of the rate at which they are now being approached. [Conclusion, pp. 21 f.]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/VxKQKDwsrZWFVna

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1126","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1126,"authors_free":[{"id":1701,"entry_id":1126,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2440,"entry_id":1126,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Platonism in late antiquity","main_title":{"title":"Platonism in late antiquity"},"abstract":"What I hope I have done is to show in outline what late antique Platonism looks like now, and some of the ways in which its appearance has changed. I think one can assert with some confidence th at if anyone tries to do the same thing in ten year's time, the picture will have changed again. That is a measure both of the number of unanswered questions and of the rate at which they are now being approached. [Conclusion, pp. 21 f.]","btype":2,"date":"1993","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/VxKQKDwsrZWFVna","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1126,"section_of":214,"pages":"1-27","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":214,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"en","title":"Soul and intellect: Studies in Plotinus and later Neoplatonism","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Blumenthal1993c","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1993","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1993","abstract":"This book presents a series of Dr. Blumenthal\u2019s studies on the history of Neoplatonism, from its founder Plotinus to the end of Classical Antiquity, relating especially to the Neoplatonists\u2019 doctrines about the soul. The work falls into two parts. The first deals with Plotinus and considers the soul both as part of the structure of the universe and in its capacity as the basis of the individual\u2019s vital and cognitive functions. The second part is concerned with the later history of Neoplatonism, including its end. Its main focus is the investigation of how Neoplatonic psychology was modified and developed by later philosophers, in particular the commentators on Aristotle, and used as the starting point for their Platonizing interpretations of his philosophy.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/o9PFSmbWfnXTRz5","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":214,"pubplace":"Aldershot (Hampshire)","publisher":"Variorum","series":"Variorum collected studies series","volume":"426","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1993]}

PAGE 1 OF 3

529 and its Sequel: What Happened to the Academy?, 1978
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	529 and its Sequel: What Happened to the Academy?
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	1978
Journal	Byzantion
Volume	48
Issue	2
Pages	369–385
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

[Conclusion, pp. 268 f.]: Proclus had once taken a year comparable circumstances (90), so that Damascius and his colleagues -
 whether or not they were the persons named by Agathias - could
 encourage themselves with the knowledge that philosophic activity in
 Athens had once before been resumed after a break. And then, for
 whatever reasons, the hope was not fulfilled. If this is right, then the
 year 529 must be allowed to retain its traditional significance. But not
 all of it. Greek philosophy, if not openly the Platonist kind, continued to
 be taught elsewhere and when, a century later, Heraclius called
 Stephanus to Constantinople to hold an official chair of philosophy (91),
 Neoplatonism was installed in the capital with the blessing of the
 Emperor himself.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/4u8Kej7b86VvpJj

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"876","_score":null,"_source":{"id":876,"authors_free":[{"id":1287,"entry_id":876,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"529 and its Sequel: What Happened to the Academy?","main_title":{"title":"529 and its Sequel: What Happened to the Academy?"},"abstract":"[Conclusion, pp. 268 f.]: Proclus had once taken a year comparable circumstances (90), so that Damascius and his colleagues -\r\n whether or not they were the persons named by Agathias - could\r\n encourage themselves with the knowledge that philosophic activity in\r\n Athens had once before been resumed after a break. And then, for\r\n whatever reasons, the hope was not fulfilled. If this is right, then the\r\n year 529 must be allowed to retain its traditional significance. But not\r\n all of it. Greek philosophy, if not openly the Platonist kind, continued to\r\n be taught elsewhere and when, a century later, Heraclius called\r\n Stephanus to Constantinople to hold an official chair of philosophy (91),\r\n Neoplatonism was installed in the capital with the blessing of the\r\n Emperor himself.","btype":3,"date":"1978","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/4u8Kej7b86VvpJj","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":876,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Byzantion","volume":"48","issue":"2","pages":"369\u2013385"}},"sort":["529 and its Sequel: What Happened to the Academy?"]}

Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle’s De Anima, 1987
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle’s De Anima
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	1987
Published in	Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben
Pages	90-106
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

These  are  a  few  examples  of  how  the  Neoplatonist  commenta
tors  confronted  Alexander  on  matters  where  differences  could 
hardly fail  to  arise. What happens  is  clear enough.  But it would be 
wrong to think that these principles of interpretation are not applied 
at  other  points  in  the  work.  Let  us  take  an  apparently  innocuous 
issue like the section where Aristotle discusses locomotion under the 
stimulus  of the  appetitive  faculty  (433  b  8sqq.). Alexander, giving a 
clearly  Aristotelian  explanation,  said  that  the  faculty  was  moved 
accidentally.  Plutarch  differed,  and  said  that  the  activity  of  the 
appetitive  faculty  is  movement:  this  Simplicius  describes  as  a  Pla
tonic explanation, and prefers it (302,23-30).44 On the other hand, a 
few  pages  below  Simplicius  prefers  Alexander  to  Plutarch  on  the 
question  whether  moving  but  ungenerated  entities  have  sense-per
ception  (320,33-34):  we  have  already  looked  at  his  and  Stephanus’ account  of  this  passage.45  As  we  indicated,  Stephanus  there quotes 
Alexander only to disagree with him, and here we have at least one 
piece  of  evidence  to  show  that  Neoplatonist  commentators  could 
take a different view of the same passage. If we had more examples 
of texts where Alexander’s views of the De anima were discussed by 
more than one of his successors, we should be able to form a clearer 
picture  of  how  far  the  different  commentators  were  prepared  to 
accept them, and thus incidentally of the precise differences between 
these commentators themselves on the points at issue. [pp. 90 f.]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/NaSG1csaeaFnFQD

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"805","_score":null,"_source":{"id":805,"authors_free":[{"id":1191,"entry_id":805,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s De Anima","main_title":{"title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s De Anima"},"abstract":"These are a few examples of how the Neoplatonist commenta\u00ad\r\ntors confronted Alexander on matters where differences could \r\nhardly fail to arise. What happens is clear enough. But it would be \r\nwrong to think that these principles of interpretation are not applied \r\nat other points in the work. Let us take an apparently innocuous \r\nissue like the section where Aristotle discusses locomotion under the \r\nstimulus of the appetitive faculty (433 b 8sqq.). Alexander, giving a \r\nclearly Aristotelian explanation, said that the faculty was moved \r\naccidentally. Plutarch differed, and said that the activity of the \r\nappetitive faculty is movement: this Simplicius describes as a Pla\u00ad\r\ntonic explanation, and prefers it (302,23-30).44 On the other hand, a \r\nfew pages below Simplicius prefers Alexander to Plutarch on the \r\nquestion whether moving but ungenerated entities have sense-per\u00ad\r\nception (320,33-34): we have already looked at his and Stephanus\u2019 account of this passage.45 As we indicated, Stephanus there quotes \r\nAlexander only to disagree with him, and here we have at least one \r\npiece of evidence to show that Neoplatonist commentators could \r\ntake a different view of the same passage. If we had more examples \r\nof texts where Alexander\u2019s views of the De anima were discussed by \r\nmore than one of his successors, we should be able to form a clearer \r\npicture of how far the different commentators were prepared to \r\naccept them, and thus incidentally of the precise differences between \r\nthese commentators themselves on the points at issue. [pp. 90 f.]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NaSG1csaeaFnFQD","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":805,"section_of":189,"pages":"90-106","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner1987a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/9u1939JCTsnoDBo","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s De Anima"]}

Alexandria as a Center of Greek Philosophy in Later Classical Antiquity, 1993
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Alexandria as a Center of Greek Philosophy in Later Classical Antiquity
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	1993
Journal	Illinois Classical Studies
Volume	18
Pages	307-325
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

Any  discussion of Greek Alexandria may properly  take  its starting point 
from the work of P. M. Fraser, even if only to dissent from it.  In the preface 
to Ptolemaic Alexandria Fraser observes  that philosophy  was one of the 
“items”  that  “were  not  effectively  transplanted  to  Alexandria.”1  In  his 
chapter  on  philosophy,  talking  of  the  establishment  of  the  main 
philosophical schools at Athens, Fraser writes that it “remained the centre of 
philosophical studies down to the closing of the schools by Justinian in A.D. 
563.”2  The  first of these  statements  is  near enough  the  truth,  since  the 
Alexandria of the Ptolemies was not distinguished in philosophy as ifwas in 
literature or  science,  though  even  then  some important things  happened 
during  that period too.  But the  implication  that  this  situation  continued 
during the Roman and early Byzantine periods is misleading, and by the end 
of the period simply false.3  The purpose of this paper is to examine some 
aspects  of  the  considerable  contribution  that  Alexandria  made  to  the 
philosophical tradition that continued into the Islamic and Christian middle 
ages and beyond, and to show  that it may lay claim  to have been at least 
equal to that of Athens itself. [Introduction, p. 307]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/LDONxIQ4990ZfXQ

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"898","_score":null,"_source":{"id":898,"authors_free":[{"id":1326,"entry_id":898,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Alexandria as a Center of Greek Philosophy in Later Classical Antiquity","main_title":{"title":"Alexandria as a Center of Greek Philosophy in Later Classical Antiquity"},"abstract":"Any discussion of Greek Alexandria may properly take its starting point \r\nfrom the work of P. M. Fraser, even if only to dissent from it. In the preface \r\nto Ptolemaic Alexandria Fraser observes that philosophy was one of the \r\n\u201citems\u201d that \u201cwere not effectively transplanted to Alexandria.\u201d1 In his \r\nchapter on philosophy, talking of the establishment of the main \r\nphilosophical schools at Athens, Fraser writes that it \u201cremained the centre of \r\nphilosophical studies down to the closing of the schools by Justinian in A.D. \r\n563.\u201d2 The first of these statements is near enough the truth, since the \r\nAlexandria of the Ptolemies was not distinguished in philosophy as ifwas in \r\nliterature or science, though even then some important things happened \r\nduring that period too. But the implication that this situation continued \r\nduring the Roman and early Byzantine periods is misleading, and by the end \r\nof the period simply false.3 The purpose of this paper is to examine some \r\naspects of the considerable contribution that Alexandria made to the \r\nphilosophical tradition that continued into the Islamic and Christian middle \r\nages and beyond, and to show that it may lay claim to have been at least \r\nequal to that of Athens itself. [Introduction, p. 307]","btype":3,"date":"1993","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/LDONxIQ4990ZfXQ","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":898,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Illinois Classical Studies","volume":"18","issue":"","pages":"307-325"}},"sort":["Alexandria as a Center of Greek Philosophy in Later Classical Antiquity"]}

Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the "De Anima", 1996
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Aristotle and Neoplatonism in late antiquity: Interpretations of the "De Anima"
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	1996
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

Steven Strange, Emory UniversityScholars have traditionally used the Aristotelian commentators as sources for lost philosophical works and occasionally also as aids to understanding Aristotle. In H. J. Blumenthal's view, however, the commentators often assumed that there was a Platonist philosophy to which not only they but Aristotle himself subscribed. Their expository writing usually expressed their versions of Neoplatonist philosophy. Blumenthal here places the commentators in their intellectual and historical contexts, identifies their philosophical views, and demonstrates their tendency to read Aristotle as if he were a member of their philosophical circle.This book focuses on the commentators' exposition of Aristotle's treatise De anima (On the Soul), because it is relatively well documented and because the concept of soul was so important in all Neoplatonic systems. Blumenthal explains how the Neoplatonizing of Aristotle's thought, as well as the widespread use of the commentators' works, influenced the understanding of Aristotle in both the Islamic and Judaeo-Christian traditions.H. J. Blumenthal is the author or coeditor of six previous books and is currently preparing a two-volume translation, with introduction and commentary, of Simplicius' Commentary on "De anima" for publication in Cornell's series Ancient Commentators on Aristotle.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/fixlFMqtKju8xdW

Aristotle’s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides, 1991
By: Kerferd, George B., Blumenthal, Henry J. (Ed.), Robinson, Howard (Ed.)

Title	Aristotle’s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	1991
Published in	Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary volume: Aristotle and the Later Tradition
Pages	1-7
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Kerferd, George B.
Editor(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J. , Robinson, Howard
Translator(s)

[Conclusion, p. 7]: id  Aristotle  envisage  the  same  criticism  as  this  of Parmenides? 
Some help here may be derived from a consideration of what Aristotle 
says in Metaph. i,986bi8-987a2. Aristotle clearly felt that one of his own 
greatest discoveries was the need for Matter as  a substrate to explain 
how what is one in definition can come to appear or be seen as many in 
experience. It is perhaps with this in mind that he proceeds to speak in 
praise  of Parmenides’  insight and  declares of him that
claiming that besides the existent nothing non-existent exists, he thinks that of 
necessity  one  thing exists, viz.  the  existent  and  nothing else  ...  But  being 
forced to follow the observed facts, and supposing the existence of that which 
is one in definition, but more than one according to our sensations, he now 
posits two causes and two principles calling them hot and cold, i.e. fire and 
earth; of these he ranges the hot with the existent, and the other with the non
existent. (Trans. W. D. Ross)
It  should,  I  suggest,  be  apparent  that  this  fits  perfectly  with  what 
Aristotle  says  in  the  De caelo  and  with  Simplicius’  approach.  It  may 
even in addition be a correct account of what Parmenides was saying, 
though now rephrased  in Aristotle’s own language.  But this is indeed 
another question.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/W835pVoHs7zvZ2Q

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"889","_score":null,"_source":{"id":889,"authors_free":[{"id":1309,"entry_id":889,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":215,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Kerferd, George B.","free_first_name":"George B.","free_last_name":"Kerferd","norm_person":{"id":215,"first_name":" George B.","last_name":"Kerferd","full_name":"Kerferd, George B.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1158138547","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1310,"entry_id":889,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1311,"entry_id":889,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":139,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Robinson, Howard","free_first_name":"Howard","free_last_name":"Robinson","norm_person":{"id":139,"first_name":"Robinson","last_name":"Howard ","full_name":"Robinson, Howard ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172347122","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotle\u2019s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides","main_title":{"title":"Aristotle\u2019s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides"},"abstract":"[Conclusion, p. 7]: id Aristotle envisage the same criticism as this of Parmenides? \r\nSome help here may be derived from a consideration of what Aristotle \r\nsays in Metaph. i,986bi8-987a2. Aristotle clearly felt that one of his own \r\ngreatest discoveries was the need for Matter as a substrate to explain \r\nhow what is one in definition can come to appear or be seen as many in \r\nexperience. It is perhaps with this in mind that he proceeds to speak in \r\npraise of Parmenides\u2019 insight and declares of him that\r\nclaiming that besides the existent nothing non-existent exists, he thinks that of \r\nnecessity one thing exists, viz. the existent and nothing else ... But being \r\nforced to follow the observed facts, and supposing the existence of that which \r\nis one in definition, but more than one according to our sensations, he now \r\nposits two causes and two principles calling them hot and cold, i.e. fire and \r\nearth; of these he ranges the hot with the existent, and the other with the non\u00ad\r\nexistent. (Trans. W. D. Ross)\r\nIt should, I suggest, be apparent that this fits perfectly with what \r\nAristotle says in the De caelo and with Simplicius\u2019 approach. It may \r\neven in addition be a correct account of what Parmenides was saying, \r\nthough now rephrased in Aristotle\u2019s own language. But this is indeed \r\nanother question.","btype":2,"date":"1991","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/W835pVoHs7zvZ2Q","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":215,"full_name":"Kerferd, George B.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":139,"full_name":"Robinson, Howard ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":889,"section_of":354,"pages":"1-7","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":354,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary volume: Aristotle and the Later Tradition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Blumenthal\/Robinson1991","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1991","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1991","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/anTH9fx9QKBfykf","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":354,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Clarendon Press","series":"Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Aristotle\u2019s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides"]}

Did Iamblichus Write a Commentary on the De Anima?, 1974
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Did Iamblichus Write a Commentary on the De Anima?
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	1974
Journal	Hermes
Volume	102
Issue	4
Pages	540–556
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

Bearing  in  mind  the  reservations  already  made,  what  conclusions  can  we draw?  In the first place, it is fair to say that the evidence from Simplicius does, taken  overall,  suggest  that  Iamblichus did not  write a commentary on  the de Anima. Consideration of  Stephanus'  commentary on de Anima G points in the same  direction,  but  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  that  commentary  contains 
a reference to  Iamblichus'  that  looks  more like  a  quotation from  a de  Anima commentary  than  any  other  that  we  have.  Philoponus  is  less  helpful,  as  are other  members  of  the  Alexandrian  school.  He  certainly  gives  no  positive indication  that  Iamblichus  wrote  a  commentary,  but  for  the  reasons  that  we have given,  the lack  of  such positive  evidence  in  his case does not  amount  to 
anything  like  conclusive  negative  evidence.  We  cannot  entirely  rule  out  the possibility  that  Iamblichus  did  write  a  commentary,  either  on  the  de  Anima as  a whole,  or on some extended part  of  it,  but it seems probably that he  did 
not.  If  he  did  it  would  certainly  be  fair  to  say  that  his  commentary  was probably  of  no  great  importance.  Discussions  of  isolated  texts  of  Aristotle are  another  matter:  they  are  only  to  be  expected  in  the  work  of  any  Neoplatonist. [conclusion, p. 556]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/lVHeUz4fhZTWu9Y

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"569","_score":null,"_source":{"id":569,"authors_free":[{"id":808,"entry_id":569,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Did Iamblichus Write a Commentary on the De Anima?","main_title":{"title":"Did Iamblichus Write a Commentary on the De Anima?"},"abstract":"Bearing in mind the reservations already made, what conclusions can we draw? In the first place, it is fair to say that the evidence from Simplicius does, taken overall, suggest that Iamblichus did not write a commentary on the de Anima. Consideration of Stephanus' commentary on de Anima G points in the same direction, but it must not be forgotten that that commentary contains \r\na reference to Iamblichus' that looks more like a quotation from a de Anima commentary than any other that we have. Philoponus is less helpful, as are other members of the Alexandrian school. He certainly gives no positive indication that Iamblichus wrote a commentary, but for the reasons that we have given, the lack of such positive evidence in his case does not amount to \r\nanything like conclusive negative evidence. We cannot entirely rule out the possibility that Iamblichus did write a commentary, either on the de Anima as a whole, or on some extended part of it, but it seems probably that he did \r\nnot. If he did it would certainly be fair to say that his commentary was probably of no great importance. Discussions of isolated texts of Aristotle are another matter: they are only to be expected in the work of any Neoplatonist. [conclusion, p. 556]","btype":3,"date":"1974","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lVHeUz4fhZTWu9Y","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":569,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"102","issue":"4","pages":"540\u2013556"}},"sort":["Did Iamblichus Write a Commentary on the De Anima?"]}

Dunamis in "Simplicius", 1996
By: Blumenthal, Henry J., Cardullo, R. Loredana (Ed.), Romano, Francesco (Ed.)

Title	Dunamis in "Simplicius"
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	1996
Published in	Dunamis nel Neoplatonismo: atti del II Colloquio internazionale del Centro di Ricerca sul Neoplatonismo, Università degli studi di Catania, 6-8 ottobre 1994
Pages	149-172
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)	Cardullo, R. Loredana , Romano, Francesco
Translator(s)

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dll7tlbqvtMDGiU

Iamblichus as a Commentator, 1997
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Iamblichus as a Commentator
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	1997
Journal	Syllecta Classica
Volume	8
Pages	1–13
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

Twenty two years ago, when tiiat growtii in interest in Neoplatonism which is a
s??a?t??? of this conference was only just getting under way, two large booksappeared which will be famUiar to all who are interested in Iamblichus. I am referring,of course, to JM. Dillon's collection of die fragmentary remains of Iamblichus'commentaries on Plato's dialogues, supplied with an ample commentary to boot,1 andB. Dalsgaard Larsen's Jamblique de Chalets. Exégète et Philosophe, of which some240 pages are devoted to his role as exégète: a collection of exegetical fragmentsappeared as a 130 page appendix.2 Larsen's book covered the interpretation of bothPlato and Aristode, and pre-empted a second volume of Dillon's which was to dealwith Aristode. I mention these books because we are, inter alia, taking stock, and it isremarkable that not much attention has been paid since dien to Iamblichus' role as acommentator. Perhaps tiiey have had die same effect on die study of this aspect ofIamblichus as Proclus' work had on the interpretation of Plato at Alexandria.Be that as it may, I intend to look, not very originally, at Iamblichus' activitiesas a commentator on philosophical works— and so I shall say notiring about dietwenty-eight books or more of his lost commentary on die Chaldaean Oracles*— andalso to say sometiring, in die manner of core samples, about how his expositionscompare with those of the later commentators. Though the process can be traced back in part to Porphyry,4 I drink it is safe to say tiiat Iamblichus was the firstNeoplatonist, at least of those about whom we are reasonably well informed, to set outin a systematic way to write commentaries on the major works of both Plato and—inIamblichus' case to a lesser extent—Aristotle too. [pp. 1 ff.]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/uYBsFlDm7T54N7r

John Philoponus: Alexandrian Platonist?, 1986
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	John Philoponus: Alexandrian Platonist?
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	1986
Journal	Hermes
Volume	114
Pages	314–335
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

What, in the end, can we say about Philoponus’ position as a Platonist, bearing in mind that our conclusions must still in some respects be provisional? That he was a Neoplatonist is indisputable. Since, however, few if any, of 
his differences with other Neoplatonists seem to arise from the adoption of a specifically Alexandrian philosophical point of view, we must attribute them to his own philosophical -  and theological -  orientation. It turns out that, in 
his case,  »Alexandrian Platonist« may mean little more than a man whose philosophy  was  Neoplatonic,  and  who  worked  at Alexandria,  though  one might observe that there would not have been a warm welcome at Athens for a 
Christian  Neoplatonist,  however closely his  views  might  conform to those codified by Proclus and developed by Damascius.  One could go on to say 
that,  apart from the concentration on Aristotle, his differences from other Alexandrians were greater than theirs from the Athenians. In this connection 
we should notice Philoponus’ frequent appeals to Plato against Aristotle in the passages Simplicius singles out for complaint, and his relatively frequent reservations about the agreement, symphônia, of Plato and Aristotle, which 
most  others  eagerly  sought  to  demonstrate.  And  since  we  started  with  a critique of P r a e c h t e r ,  who did so much to initiate the serious study of the 
Aristotelian commentators, it might be appropriate to end with his characteri
sation of Philoponus in the De aeternitate mundi: »es ist der gelehrte Platoniker der spricht«. [conclusion, p. 334-335]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Il5meIvwCfrHOJU

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"628","_score":null,"_source":{"id":628,"authors_free":[{"id":888,"entry_id":628,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"John Philoponus: Alexandrian Platonist?","main_title":{"title":"John Philoponus: Alexandrian Platonist?"},"abstract":"What, in the end, can we say about Philoponus\u2019 position as a Platonist, bearing in mind that our conclusions must still in some respects be provision\u00adal? That he was a Neoplatonist is indisputable. Since, however, few if any, of \r\nhis differences with other Neoplatonists seem to arise from the adoption of a specifically Alexandrian philosophical point of view, we must attribute them to his own philosophical - and theological - orientation. It turns out that, in \r\nhis case, \u00bbAlexandrian Platonist\u00ab may mean little more than a man whose philosophy was Neoplatonic, and who worked at Alexandria, though one might observe that there would not have been a warm welcome at Athens for a \r\nChristian Neoplatonist, however closely his views might conform to those codified by Proclus and developed by Damascius. One could go on to say \r\nthat, apart from the concentration on Aristotle, his differences from other Alexandrians were greater than theirs from the Athenians. In this connection \r\nwe should notice Philoponus\u2019 frequent appeals to Plato against Aristotle in the passages Simplicius singles out for complaint, and his relatively frequent reservations about the agreement, symph\u00f4nia, of Plato and Aristotle, which \r\nmost others eagerly sought to demonstrate. And since we started with a critique of P r a e c h t e r , who did so much to initiate the serious study of the \r\nAristotelian commentators, it might be appropriate to end with his characteri\u00ad\r\nsation of Philoponus in the De aeternitate mundi: \u00bbes ist der gelehrte Platoniker der spricht\u00ab. [conclusion, p. 334-335]\r\n","btype":3,"date":"1986","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Il5meIvwCfrHOJU","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":628,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"114","issue":"","pages":"314\u2013335"}},"sort":["John Philoponus: Alexandrian Platonist?"]}

Neoplatonic Elements in the "de Anima" Commentaries, 1976
By: Blumenthal, Henry J.

Title	Neoplatonic Elements in the "de Anima" Commentaries
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	1976
Journal	Phronesis
Volume	21
Issue	1
Pages	64-87
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Blumenthal, Henry J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

Most scholars who refer to the Greek commentators for help in the 
understanding of  difficult  Aristotelian texts  seem  to  expect 
straightforward scholarly treatment  of  their problems.2 Not 
infrequently they are disappointed and complain about the irrelevance 
of the  commentary they  read, or inveigh against the incompetence of 
the  commentators.3 Only  Alexander is  generally exempt  from such 
censure,  and  that  in  itself  is  significant.  For  he  is  the  only  major 
commentator whose work survives in  any  considerable quantity who 
wrote before Neoplatonism. Shortly after Alexander the kind of thought 
that  is  conveniently described by  this label came to  dominate Greek 
philosophy, and nearly all pagan philosophy and philosophical 
scholarship was  pursued  under  its influence,  if not  by  its active 
adherents. It  is the purpose of this paper to argue that  these facts are 
not  trivial  items  of  background interest,  but  are  fundamental to  a 
proper assessment of  the  later  commentators' opinions on  points  of 
Aristotelian scholarship. [p. 64]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/7wpRahl6Ref0nE0

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"612","_score":null,"_source":{"id":612,"authors_free":[{"id":867,"entry_id":612,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Neoplatonic Elements in the \"de Anima\" Commentaries","main_title":{"title":"Neoplatonic Elements in the \"de Anima\" Commentaries"},"abstract":"Most scholars who refer to the Greek commentators for help in the \r\nunderstanding of difficult Aristotelian texts seem to expect \r\nstraightforward scholarly treatment of their problems.2 Not \r\ninfrequently they are disappointed and complain about the irrelevance \r\nof the commentary they read, or inveigh against the incompetence of \r\nthe commentators.3 Only Alexander is generally exempt from such \r\ncensure, and that in itself is significant. For he is the only major \r\ncommentator whose work survives in any considerable quantity who \r\nwrote before Neoplatonism. Shortly after Alexander the kind of thought \r\nthat is conveniently described by this label came to dominate Greek \r\nphilosophy, and nearly all pagan philosophy and philosophical \r\nscholarship was pursued under its influence, if not by its active \r\nadherents. It is the purpose of this paper to argue that these facts are \r\nnot trivial items of background interest, but are fundamental to a \r\nproper assessment of the later commentators' opinions on points of \r\nAristotelian scholarship. [p. 64]","btype":3,"date":"1976","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/7wpRahl6Ref0nE0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":612,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"21","issue":"1","pages":"64-87"}},"sort":["Neoplatonic Elements in the \"de Anima\" Commentaries"]}

PAGE 1 OF 3