Simplicius Research Environment

Author

BY DATE
BY TITLE

Simplicius in Thirteenth-Century Paris: A Question, 2015
By: Bowen, Alan C., Holmes, Brooke (Ed.), Fischer, Klaus-Dietrich (Ed.)

Title	Simplicius in Thirteenth-Century Paris: A Question
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	2015
Published in	The Frontiers of Ancient Science: Essays in Honor of Heinrich von Staden
Pages	67-73
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C.
Editor(s)	Holmes, Brooke , Fischer, Klaus-Dietrich
Translator(s)

The debate in the sixth century between the Christian philosopher JohnPhiloponus and the Platonist philosopher Simplicius about whether the cosmos was created or eternal was of momentous importance not only to their understanding of the world and of the means to salvation from its trials but also to their views of what astronomical science was and how it should proceed in making its arguments. This brief chapter outlines this debate and then explores the main lines of attack to be taken in determining how Thomas Aquinas, who was supplied by William of Moerbeke with a translation of the text in which Simplicius responds to Philoponus, dealt with Simplicius’ reading of Aristotle in advancing a vigorous polemic against his Christian faith.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/yTLgl6JYIoqOgE6

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1482","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1482,"authors_free":[{"id":2564,"entry_id":1482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":16,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bowen, Alan C.","free_first_name":"Alan C.","free_last_name":"Bowen","norm_person":{"id":16,"first_name":"Bowen C.","last_name":"Bowen","full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140052720","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2567,"entry_id":1482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":549,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Holmes, Brooke","free_first_name":"Brooke","free_last_name":"Holmes","norm_person":{"id":549,"first_name":"Brooke","last_name":"Holmes","full_name":"Holmes, Brooke","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1017511543","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2568,"entry_id":1482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":550,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fischer, Klaus-Dietrich ","free_first_name":"Klaus-Dietrich ","free_last_name":"Fischer","norm_person":{"id":550,"first_name":"Klaus-Dietrich ","last_name":"Fischer","full_name":"Fischer, Klaus-Dietrich ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/13237076X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius in Thirteenth-Century Paris: A Question","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius in Thirteenth-Century Paris: A Question"},"abstract":"The debate in the sixth century between the Christian philosopher JohnPhiloponus and the Platonist philosopher Simplicius about whether the cosmos was created or eternal was of momentous importance not only to their understanding of the world and of the means to salvation from its trials but also to their views of what astronomical science was and how it should proceed in making its arguments. This brief chapter outlines this debate and then explores the main lines of attack to be taken in determining how Thomas Aquinas, who was supplied by William of Moerbeke with a translation of the text in which Simplicius responds to Philoponus, dealt with Simplicius\u2019 reading of Aristotle in advancing a vigorous polemic against his Christian faith.","btype":2,"date":"2015","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/yTLgl6JYIoqOgE6","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":16,"full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":549,"full_name":"Holmes, Brooke","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":550,"full_name":"Fischer, Klaus-Dietrich ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1482,"section_of":1483,"pages":"67-73","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1483,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"The Frontiers of Ancient Science: Essays in Honor of Heinrich von Staden","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Holmes-Fisher_2015","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2015","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"Our understanding of science, mathematics, and medicine today can be deeply enriched by studying the historical roots of these areas of inquiry in the ancient Near East and Mediterranean. The present volume brings together contributions from more than thirty of the most important scholars working in these fields in the United States and Europe in honor of the eminent historian of ancient science and medicine Heinrich von Staden. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Gq9gFanQtC9OclL","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1483,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"De Gruyter ","series":"Beitr\u00e4ge zur Altertumskunde","volume":"338","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2015]}

Simplicius on the Planets and their Motions: In Defense of a Heresy, 2013
By: Bowen, Alan C.

Title	Simplicius on the Planets and their Motions: In Defense of a Heresy
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2013
Publication Place	Leiden
Publisher	Brill
Series	Philosophia Antiqua
Volume	133
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

Though the digression closing Simplicius’ commentary on Aristotle’s De caelo 2.12 has long been misread as a history of early Greek planetary theory, it is in fact a creative reading of Aristotle to maintain the authority of the De caelo as a sacred text in Late Platonism and to refute the polemic mounted by the Christian, John Philoponus. This book shows that the critical question forced on Simplicius was whether his school’s acceptance of Ptolemy’s planetary hypotheses entailed a rejection of Aristotle’s argument that the heavens are made of a special matter that moves by nature in a circle about the center of the cosmos and, thus, a repudiation of the thesis that the cosmos is uncreated and everlasting.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/x8pS07PCJvC1pg0

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"237","_score":null,"_source":{"id":237,"authors_free":[{"id":303,"entry_id":237,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":16,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bowen, Alan C.","free_first_name":"Alan C.","free_last_name":"Bowen","norm_person":{"id":16,"first_name":"Bowen C.","last_name":"Bowen","full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140052720","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius on the Planets and their Motions: In Defense of a Heresy","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius on the Planets and their Motions: In Defense of a Heresy"},"abstract":"Though the digression closing Simplicius\u2019 commentary on Aristotle\u2019s De caelo 2.12 has long been misread as a history of early Greek planetary theory, it is in fact a creative reading of Aristotle to maintain the authority of the De caelo as a sacred text in Late Platonism and to refute the polemic mounted by the Christian, John Philoponus. This book shows that the critical question forced on Simplicius was whether his school\u2019s acceptance of Ptolemy\u2019s planetary hypotheses entailed a rejection of Aristotle\u2019s argument that the heavens are made of a special matter that moves by nature in a circle about the center of the cosmos and, thus, a repudiation of the thesis that the cosmos is uncreated and everlasting.","btype":1,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/x8pS07PCJvC1pg0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":16,"full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":237,"pubplace":"Leiden","publisher":"Brill","series":"Philosophia Antiqua","volume":"133","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2013]}

Heraclides on the Rotation of the Earth: Texts, Contexts and Continuities, 2009
By: Fortenbaugh, William W. (Ed.), Pender, Elizabeth E. (Ed.), Todd, Robert B., Bowen, Alan C.

Title	Heraclides on the Rotation of the Earth: Texts, Contexts and Continuities
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	2009
Published in	Heraclides of Pontus: Discussion
Pages	155-183
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Todd, Robert B. , Bowen, Alan C.
Editor(s)	Fortenbaugh, William W. , Pender, Elizabeth E.
Translator(s)

This chapter1will present annotated translations of the texts and contexts that constitute the evidence for Heraclides’ most celebrated legacy—the theory that the Earth rotates daily on its axis from west to east. Its movement was inferred from the observable motions of the fixed stars, with these being explained as the apparent motions of an immobile celestial sphere. (Evidence for Heraclides’ special theories of the motions of Mercury and Venus will be discussed in the next two chapters: first by Alan C. Bowen and Robert B. Todd, and then by Paul Keyser.) The passages translated here (T1–6) go well beyond the brief reports found in the relevant “fragments” of modern editions (65C, 66–9, and 71 in volume XIV = 104–8 and 110 W). These fragments, drawn from secondary reports, consist only of the immediate context of passages in which Heraclides is named, in line with a practice prob-ably best known from Edelstein’s and Kidd’s edition of Posidonius’ fragments. But such limited parcels of evidence (enclosed in our translations by //…//) cannot indicate why Heraclides was mentioned within larger expositions. To be sure, such collections of source material are useful, but they have to be selective for pragmatic reasons and therefore also need to be complemented by the sort of project undertaken here, particularly where the focus is on one of antiquity’s most famous anticipations of modern cosmology, and where the contexts for the earliest references to it reveal the historical and theoretical framework within which it was received. To the authors in question Heraclides may have been just a footnote, but the texts to which his theory was attached amply repay careful study. [introduction]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/zGxZWvLcNrX8dHj

Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 2, 2008
By: Bowen, Alan C., Simplicius

Title	Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 2
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	2008
Journal	SCIAMVS: Sources and Commentaries in Exact Sciences
Volume	9
Pages	25-131
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C. , Simplicius
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

This completes my translation of the narrowly astronomical sections of Simplicius’ com- mentary on Aristotle’s De caelo that first appeared in SCIAMVS 4 (2003) 23–58. Its aim, as before, is to supply the reader with a suitably annotated rendering of Simplicius’ text that will facilitate addressing the critical questions of the nature, construction, and historical value of Simplicius’ commentary, especially as it bears on the history of earlier Greek astronomical theorizing. [introduction]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2UHM1mtpgYGOwNe

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1480","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1480,"authors_free":[{"id":2561,"entry_id":1480,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":16,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bowen, Alan C.","free_first_name":"Alan C.","free_last_name":"Bowen","norm_person":{"id":16,"first_name":"Bowen C.","last_name":"Bowen","full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140052720","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2600,"entry_id":1480,"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}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 2","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 2"},"abstract":"This completes my translation of the narrowly astronomical sections of Simplicius\u2019 com-\r\nmentary on Aristotle\u2019s De caelo that first appeared in SCIAMVS 4 (2003) 23\u201358. Its\r\naim, as before, is to supply the reader with a suitably annotated rendering of Simplicius\u2019\r\ntext that will facilitate addressing the critical questions of the nature, construction, and\r\nhistorical value of Simplicius\u2019 commentary, especially as it bears on the history of earlier\r\nGreek astronomical theorizing. [introduction]","btype":3,"date":"2008","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2UHM1mtpgYGOwNe","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":16,"full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1480,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"SCIAMVS: Sources and Commentaries in Exact Sciences","volume":"9","issue":"","pages":"25-131"}},"sort":[2008]}

Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 1, 2003
By: Bowen, Alan C., Simplicius

Title	Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 1
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	2003
Journal	SCIAMVS: Sources and Commentaries in Exact Sciences
Volume	4
Pages	23-58
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C. , Simplicius
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

If there is a single text that has proven to be the bedrock for the modern understanding of early Greek astronomy, it is Simplicius’ commentary on book 2 chapter 12 of Aristotle’s treatise, De caelo. Simplicius’ remarks, which are effectively an elaboration of what he supposes Aristotle to mean in Meta. Λ 8, are almost always accepted as gospel in their broad outlines. I have written at length elsewhere that Simplicius’ comments on De caelo 2.12 do not constitute an account of what Aristotle meant in Meta. Λ 8 that we should accept today as properly historical. That scholars today persist in reading Meta. Λ 8 and other early texts as indicating knowledge of the planetary stations and retrogradations is a puzzle. One only wishes, when these scholars have elaborated their interpretations of Meta. Λ 8 and of the other related texts written before the late second century that concern the planetary motions, that they not stop here as if their work as historians were done. Obviously, it will not be enough if they simply adduce relevant testimonia by later ancient writers. Not only are these testimonia few in number and date to a time after the characteristic planetary motions were duly understood, they typically prove on critical examination to be either ambiguous or anachronistic in the same way as Simplicius’ account is. Consequently, any appeal to such testimonia without critical argument in defense of their historical validity is pointless. Indeed, the burden must fall on these scholars to demonstrate that Meta. Λ 8 and the other early texts must be read in this way. For, absent such proof, all one has is the fallacy of imputing to a writer the perceived consequences of what he writes. Given the exigencies of publication, this annotated translation will come in two parts. The first, presented here, is devoted to Simplicius’ commentary on De caelo 2.10–11. These chapters in the De caelo raise stock issues in astronomy; and it is valuable, I think, for readers interested in Simplicius’ account of planetary theory in 2.12 to see and assess just how he deals with them. Indeed, not only does Simplicius’ commentary on 2.10–11 show him drawing on a tradition of technical writing for novices and philosophers that goes back to Geminus and Cleomedes, it also shows him going astray on fundamental points in elementary mathematics. And this is surely important for our interpretation of his commentary on 2.12. The annotation itself is, as I have said, intended to assist the reader with information that may be needed to make sense of the text. My main aim is to allow access to Simplicius that is as little encumbered by my interpretative intrusion as is feasible, since my hope in this publication is that the reader will confront Simplicius for himself by himself, so far as this is possible in a translation. [introduction]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Cxa6aZwE2WNkdBB

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1479","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1479,"authors_free":[{"id":2560,"entry_id":1479,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":16,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bowen, Alan C.","free_first_name":"Alan C.","free_last_name":"Bowen","norm_person":{"id":16,"first_name":"Bowen C.","last_name":"Bowen","full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140052720","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2601,"entry_id":1479,"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}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 1","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 1"},"abstract":"If there is a single text that has proven to be the bedrock for the modern understanding of early Greek astronomy, it is Simplicius\u2019 commentary on book 2 chapter 12 of Aristotle\u2019s treatise, De caelo. Simplicius\u2019 remarks, which are effectively an elaboration of what he supposes Aristotle to mean in Meta. \u039b 8, are almost always accepted as gospel in their broad outlines. I have written at length elsewhere that Simplicius\u2019 comments on De caelo 2.12\r\ndo not constitute an account of what Aristotle meant in Meta. \u039b 8 that we should accept today as properly historical. That scholars today persist in reading Meta. \u039b 8 and other early texts as indicating knowledge of the planetary stations and retrogradations is a puzzle. One only wishes, when these scholars have elaborated their interpretations of Meta. \u039b 8 and of the other related texts written before the late second century that concern the planetary motions, that they not stop here as if their work as historians were done. Obviously, it will not be enough if they simply adduce relevant testimonia by later ancient writers. Not only are these testimonia few in number and date to a time after the characteristic planetary motions were duly understood, they typically prove on critical examination to be either ambiguous or anachronistic in the same way as Simplicius\u2019 account is. Consequently, any appeal to such testimonia without critical argument in defense of their historical validity is pointless. Indeed, the burden must fall on these scholars to demonstrate that Meta. \u039b 8 and the other early texts must be read in this way. For, absent such proof, all one has is the fallacy of imputing to a writer the perceived consequences of what he writes.\r\nGiven the exigencies of publication, this annotated translation will come in two parts. The first, presented here, is devoted to Simplicius\u2019 commentary on De caelo 2.10\u201311. These chapters in the De caelo raise stock issues in astronomy; and it is valuable, I think, for readers interested in Simplicius\u2019 account of planetary theory in 2.12 to see and assess just how he deals with them. Indeed, not only does Simplicius\u2019 commentary on 2.10\u201311 show him drawing on a tradition of technical writing for novices and philosophers that goes back to Geminus and Cleomedes, it also shows him going astray on fundamental points in elementary mathematics. And this is surely important for our interpretation of his commentary on 2.12.\r\nThe annotation itself is, as I have said, intended to assist the reader with information that may be needed to make sense of the text. My main aim is to allow access to Simplicius that is as little encumbered by my interpretative intrusion as is feasible, since my hope in this publication is that the reader will confront Simplicius for himself by himself, so far as this is possible in a translation. \r\n[introduction]","btype":3,"date":"2003","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Cxa6aZwE2WNkdBB","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":16,"full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1479,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"SCIAMVS: Sources and Commentaries in Exact Sciences","volume":"4","issue":"","pages":"23-58"}},"sort":[2003]}

Simplicius and the Early History of Greek Planetary Theory , 2002
By: Bowen, Alan C.

Title	Simplicius and the Early History of Greek Planetary Theory
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	2002
Journal	Perspectives on Science
Volume	10
Issue	2
Pages	155–167
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

n earlier work, Bernard R. Goldstein and the present author have intro- duced a procedural rule for historical inquiry, which requires that one take pains to establish the credibility of any citation of ancient thought by later writers in antiquity through a process of veriªcation. In this paper, I shall apply what I call the Rule of Ancient Citations to Simplicius’ interpretation of Aristotle’s remarks in Meta . 8, which is the primary point of departure for the modern understanding of Greek planetary theory. I ªrst sketch several lines of argument that lead me to conclude that Simplicius’ interpretation should not be accepted because it assumes a concern with planetary phenomena unknown to the Greeks before the late 2nd and early 1st centuries bc. Then, after showing that there is a fairly well deªned range of readings of Aris- totle’s remarks more in keeping with what we actually know of astronomy in the 5th and 4th centuries bc, I conclude that neither Aristotle’s report about the Eudoxan and Callippan accounts of the celestial motions nor Simplicius’ interpretation of this report is a good starting point for our understanding of early Greek planetary theory. [author's abstract]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/lJ4EoQlGmsAbp75

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1073","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1073,"authors_free":[{"id":1627,"entry_id":1073,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":16,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","free_first_name":"Alan C. ","free_last_name":"Bowen","norm_person":{"id":16,"first_name":"Bowen C.","last_name":"Bowen","full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140052720","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius and the Early History of Greek Planetary Theory ","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius and the Early History of Greek Planetary Theory "},"abstract":"n earlier work, Bernard R. Goldstein and the present author have intro-\r\nduced a procedural rule for historical inquiry, which requires that one take\r\npains to establish the credibility of any citation of ancient thought by later\r\nwriters in antiquity through a process of veri\u00aacation. In this paper, I shall\r\napply what I call the Rule of Ancient Citations to Simplicius\u2019 interpretation\r\nof Aristotle\u2019s remarks in Meta \u0001. 8, which is the primary point of departure\r\nfor the modern understanding of Greek planetary theory. I \u00aarst sketch several\r\nlines of argument that lead me to conclude that Simplicius\u2019 interpretation\r\nshould not be accepted because it assumes a concern with planetary phenomena\r\nunknown to the Greeks before the late 2nd and early 1st centuries bc. Then,\r\nafter showing that there is a fairly well de\u00aaned range of readings of Aris-\r\ntotle\u2019s remarks more in keeping with what we actually know of astronomy in\r\nthe 5th and 4th centuries bc, I conclude that neither Aristotle\u2019s report about\r\nthe Eudoxan and Callippan accounts of the celestial motions nor Simplicius\u2019\r\ninterpretation of this report is a good starting point for our understanding of\r\nearly Greek planetary theory. [author's abstract]","btype":3,"date":"2002","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lJ4EoQlGmsAbp75","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":16,"full_name":"Bowen, Alan C. ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1073,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Perspectives on Science","volume":"10","issue":"2","pages":"155\u2013167"}},"sort":[2002]}

PAGE 1 OF 1

Heraclides on the Rotation of the Earth: Texts, Contexts and Continuities, 2009
By: Fortenbaugh, William W. (Ed.), Pender, Elizabeth E. (Ed.), Todd, Robert B., Bowen, Alan C.

Title	Heraclides on the Rotation of the Earth: Texts, Contexts and Continuities
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	2009
Published in	Heraclides of Pontus: Discussion
Pages	155-183
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	, Todd, Robert B. , Bowen, Alan C.
Editor(s)	Fortenbaugh, William W. , Pender, Elizabeth E.
Translator(s)

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/zGxZWvLcNrX8dHj

Simplicius and the Early History of Greek Planetary Theory , 2002
By: Bowen, Alan C.

Title	Simplicius and the Early History of Greek Planetary Theory
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	2002
Journal	Perspectives on Science
Volume	10
Issue	2
Pages	155–167
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

n earlier work, Bernard R. Goldstein and the present author have intro-
duced a procedural rule for historical inquiry, which requires that one take
pains to establish the credibility of any citation of ancient thought by later
writers in antiquity through a process of veriªcation. In this paper, I shall
apply what I call the Rule of Ancient Citations to Simplicius’ interpretation
of Aristotle’s remarks in Meta . 8, which is the primary point of departure
for the modern understanding of Greek planetary theory. I ªrst sketch several
lines of argument that lead me to conclude that Simplicius’ interpretation
should not be accepted because it assumes a concern with planetary phenomena
unknown to the Greeks before the late 2nd and early 1st centuries bc. Then,
after showing that there is a fairly well deªned range of readings of Aris-
totle’s remarks more in keeping with what we actually know of astronomy in
the 5th and 4th centuries bc, I conclude that neither Aristotle’s report about
the Eudoxan and Callippan accounts of the celestial motions nor Simplicius’
interpretation of this report is a good starting point for our understanding of
early Greek planetary theory. [author's abstract]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/lJ4EoQlGmsAbp75

Simplicius in Thirteenth-Century Paris: A Question, 2015
By: Bowen, Alan C., Holmes, Brooke (Ed.), Fischer, Klaus-Dietrich (Ed.)

Title	Simplicius in Thirteenth-Century Paris: A Question
Type	Book Section
Language	English
Date	2015
Published in	The Frontiers of Ancient Science: Essays in Honor of Heinrich von Staden
Pages	67-73
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C.
Editor(s)	Holmes, Brooke , Fischer, Klaus-Dietrich
Translator(s)

The debate in the sixth century between the Christian philosopher JohnPhiloponus and the Platonist philosopher Simplicius about whether the cosmos was created or eternal was of momentous importance not only to their understanding of the world and of the means to salvation from its trials but also to their views of what astronomical science was and how it should proceed in making its arguments. This brief chapter outlines this debate and then explores the main lines of attack to be taken in determining how Thomas Aquinas, who was supplied by William of Moerbeke with a translation of the text in which Simplicius responds to Philoponus, dealt with Simplicius’ reading of Aristotle in advancing a vigorous polemic against his Christian faith.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/yTLgl6JYIoqOgE6

Simplicius on the Planets and their Motions: In Defense of a Heresy, 2013
By: Bowen, Alan C.

Title	Simplicius on the Planets and their Motions: In Defense of a Heresy
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2013
Publication Place	Leiden
Publisher	Brill
Series	Philosophia Antiqua
Volume	133
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

Though the digression closing Simplicius’ commentary on Aristotle’s De caelo 2.12 has long been misread as a history of early Greek planetary theory, it is in fact a creative reading of Aristotle to maintain the authority of the De caelo as a sacred text in Late Platonism and to refute the polemic mounted by the Christian, John Philoponus. This book shows that the critical question forced on Simplicius was whether his school’s acceptance of Ptolemy’s planetary hypotheses entailed a rejection of Aristotle’s argument that the heavens are made of a special matter that moves by nature in a circle about the center of the cosmos and, thus, a repudiation of the thesis that the cosmos is uncreated and everlasting.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/x8pS07PCJvC1pg0

Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 1, 2003
By: Bowen, Alan C., Simplicius

Title	Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 1
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	2003
Journal	SCIAMVS: Sources and Commentaries in Exact Sciences
Volume	4
Pages	23-58
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C. , Simplicius
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

If there is a single text that has proven to be the bedrock for the modern understanding of early Greek astronomy, it is Simplicius’ commentary on book 2 chapter 12 of Aristotle’s treatise, De caelo. Simplicius’ remarks, which are effectively an elaboration of what he supposes Aristotle to mean in Meta. Λ 8, are almost always accepted as gospel in their broad outlines. I have written at length elsewhere that Simplicius’ comments on De caelo 2.12
do not constitute an account of what Aristotle meant in Meta. Λ 8 that we should accept today as properly historical. That scholars today persist in reading Meta. Λ 8 and other early texts as indicating knowledge of the planetary stations and retrogradations is a puzzle. One only wishes, when these scholars have elaborated their interpretations of Meta. Λ 8 and of the other related texts written before the late second century that concern the planetary motions, that they not stop here as if their work as historians were done. Obviously, it will not be enough if they simply adduce relevant testimonia by later ancient writers. Not only are these testimonia few in number and date to a time after the characteristic planetary motions were duly understood, they typically prove on critical examination to be either ambiguous or anachronistic in the same way as Simplicius’ account is. Consequently, any appeal to such testimonia without critical argument in defense of their historical validity is pointless. Indeed, the burden must fall on these scholars to demonstrate that Meta. Λ 8 and the other early texts must be read in this way. For, absent such proof, all one has is the fallacy of imputing to a writer the perceived consequences of what he writes.
Given the exigencies of publication, this annotated translation will come in two parts. The first, presented here, is devoted to Simplicius’ commentary on De caelo 2.10–11. These chapters in the De caelo raise stock issues in astronomy; and it is valuable, I think, for readers interested in Simplicius’ account of planetary theory in 2.12 to see and assess just how he deals with them. Indeed, not only does Simplicius’ commentary on 2.10–11 show him drawing on a tradition of technical writing for novices and philosophers that goes back to Geminus and Cleomedes, it also shows him going astray on fundamental points in elementary mathematics. And this is surely important for our interpretation of his commentary on 2.12.
The annotation itself is, as I have said, intended to assist the reader with information that may be needed to make sense of the text. My main aim is to allow access to Simplicius that is as little encumbered by my interpretative intrusion as is feasible, since my hope in this publication is that the reader will confront Simplicius for himself by himself, so far as this is possible in a translation.
[introduction]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Cxa6aZwE2WNkdBB

Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 2, 2008
By: Bowen, Alan C., Simplicius

Title	Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle, De Caelo 2.10-12: An Annotated Translation, Part 2
Type	Article
Language	English
Date	2008
Journal	SCIAMVS: Sources and Commentaries in Exact Sciences
Volume	9
Pages	25-131
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Bowen, Alan C. , Simplicius
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

This completes my translation of the narrowly astronomical sections of Simplicius’ com-
mentary on Aristotle’s De caelo that first appeared in SCIAMVS 4 (2003) 23–58. Its
aim, as before, is to supply the reader with a suitably annotated rendering of Simplicius’
text that will facilitate addressing the critical questions of the nature, construction, and
historical value of Simplicius’ commentary, especially as it bears on the history of earlier
Greek astronomical theorizing. [introduction]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2UHM1mtpgYGOwNe

PAGE 1 OF 1