| Title | Alexander on Physics 2.9 |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Journal | Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies |
| Volume | 55 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 19-30 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Sharples, Robert W. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| I want to draw your attention today to a report of Alexander in Simplicius’s Physics commentary which, as far as I can tell, has escaped the notice of everyone, myself included - and I have rather less excuse than most, for, as we shall see, the report connects directly with issues about which I have written in other contexts. That was concerned with On coming-to-be and passing-away [hereafter GC] 2.11, with Philoponus’s commentary thereon, and with Alexander’s discussion in some of the Quaestiones\ the present paper, with Simplicius’s help, extends the discussion to Physics 2.9; Alexander’s GC commentary, and the relevant part of his Physics commentary, are lost. [Introduction, p. 19] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Uk1uUvOIUNKK2lk |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1172","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1172,"authors_free":[{"id":1747,"entry_id":1172,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","free_first_name":"Robert W.","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":42,"first_name":"Robert W.","last_name":"Sharples","full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114269505","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Alexander on Physics 2.9","main_title":{"title":"Alexander on Physics 2.9"},"abstract":"I want to draw your attention today to a report of Alexander in Simplicius\u2019s Physics commentary which, as far as I can tell, has escaped the notice of everyone, myself included - and I have rather less excuse than most, for, as we shall see, the report connects directly with issues about which I have written in other contexts. That was concerned with On coming-to-be and passing-away [hereafter GC] 2.11, with Philoponus\u2019s commentary thereon, and with Alexander\u2019s discussion in some of the Quaestiones\\ the present paper, with Simplicius\u2019s help, extends the discussion to Physics 2.9; Alexander\u2019s GC commentary, \r\nand the relevant part of his Physics commentary, are lost. [Introduction, p. 19]","btype":3,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Uk1uUvOIUNKK2lk","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1172,"section_of":1171,"pages":"19-30","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":{"id":1172,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies","volume":"55","issue":"1","pages":"19-30"}},"sort":[2012]}
| Title | Habent sua fata libelli: Aristotle’s Categories in the First Century BC |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2008 |
| Journal | Acta Antiqua |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue | 1-2 |
| Pages | 273-287 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Sharples, Robert W. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| A rc-cxaminalion of the question why, in the revival of interest, in the first century BC in Aristotle’s esoteric works, as opposed to his doctrines, the work Categories played so large a part. The answers suggested are that the work aroused interest just because it did not easily fit into the standard Hellenistic divisions of philosophy and their usual agendas, and that, inore than Aristotle's other works with the possible exception of the Metaphysics, it revealed aspects of Aristotle’s thought that had become unfamiliar during the Hellenistic period. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/4wH4nwIaSSiZXIi |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1023","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1023,"authors_free":[{"id":1542,"entry_id":1023,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","free_first_name":"Robert W.","free_last_name":"Sharples","norm_person":{"id":42,"first_name":"Robert W.","last_name":"Sharples","full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114269505","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Habent sua fata libelli: Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the First Century BC","main_title":{"title":"Habent sua fata libelli: Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the First Century BC"},"abstract":"A rc-cxaminalion of the question why, in the revival of interest, in the first century BC in Aristotle\u2019s esoteric works, as opposed to his doctrines, the work Categories played so large a part. The answers suggested are that the work aroused interest just because it did not easily fit into the standard Hellenistic divisions of philosophy and their usual agendas, and that, inore than Aristotle's other works with the possible exception of the Metaphysics, it revealed aspects of Aristotle\u2019s thought that had become unfamiliar during the Hellenistic period.","btype":3,"date":"2008","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/4wH4nwIaSSiZXIi","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1023,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Acta Antiqua","volume":"48","issue":"1-2","pages":"273-287"}},"sort":[2008]}
| Title | Alexander on Physics 2.9 |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Journal | Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies |
| Volume | 55 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 19-30 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Sharples, Robert W. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
I want to draw your attention today to a report of Alexander in Simplicius’s Physics commentary which, as far as I can tell, has escaped the notice of everyone, myself included - and I have rather less excuse than most, for, as we shall see, the report connects directly with issues about which I have written in other contexts. That was concerned with On coming-to-be and passing-away [hereafter GC] 2.11, with Philoponus’s commentary thereon, and with Alexander’s discussion in some of the Quaestiones\ the present paper, with Simplicius’s help, extends the discussion to Physics 2.9; Alexander’s GC commentary, and the relevant part of his Physics commentary, are lost. [Introduction, p. 19] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Uk1uUvOIUNKK2lk |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1172","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1172,"authors_free":[{"id":1747,"entry_id":1172,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","free_first_name":"Robert W.","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":42,"first_name":"Robert W.","last_name":"Sharples","full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114269505","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Alexander on Physics 2.9","main_title":{"title":"Alexander on Physics 2.9"},"abstract":"I want to draw your attention today to a report of Alexander in Simplicius\u2019s Physics commentary which, as far as I can tell, has escaped the notice of everyone, myself included - and I have rather less excuse than most, for, as we shall see, the report connects directly with issues about which I have written in other contexts. That was concerned with On coming-to-be and passing-away [hereafter GC] 2.11, with Philoponus\u2019s commentary thereon, and with Alexander\u2019s discussion in some of the Quaestiones\\ the present paper, with Simplicius\u2019s help, extends the discussion to Physics 2.9; Alexander\u2019s GC commentary, \r\nand the relevant part of his Physics commentary, are lost. [Introduction, p. 19]","btype":3,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Uk1uUvOIUNKK2lk","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1172,"section_of":1171,"pages":"19-30","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":{"id":1172,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies","volume":"55","issue":"1","pages":"19-30"}},"sort":["Alexander on Physics 2.9"]}
| Title | Habent sua fata libelli: Aristotle’s Categories in the First Century BC |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2008 |
| Journal | Acta Antiqua |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue | 1-2 |
| Pages | 273-287 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Sharples, Robert W. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
A rc-cxaminalion of the question why, in the revival of interest, in the first century BC in Aristotle’s esoteric works, as opposed to his doctrines, the work Categories played so large a part. The answers suggested are that the work aroused interest just because it did not easily fit into the standard Hellenistic divisions of philosophy and their usual agendas, and that, inore than Aristotle's other works with the possible exception of the Metaphysics, it revealed aspects of Aristotle’s thought that had become unfamiliar during the Hellenistic period. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/4wH4nwIaSSiZXIi |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1023","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1023,"authors_free":[{"id":1542,"entry_id":1023,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","free_first_name":"Robert W.","free_last_name":"Sharples","norm_person":{"id":42,"first_name":"Robert W.","last_name":"Sharples","full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114269505","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Habent sua fata libelli: Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the First Century BC","main_title":{"title":"Habent sua fata libelli: Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the First Century BC"},"abstract":"A rc-cxaminalion of the question why, in the revival of interest, in the first century BC in Aristotle\u2019s esoteric works, as opposed to his doctrines, the work Categories played so large a part. The answers suggested are that the work aroused interest just because it did not easily fit into the standard Hellenistic divisions of philosophy and their usual agendas, and that, inore than Aristotle's other works with the possible exception of the Metaphysics, it revealed aspects of Aristotle\u2019s thought that had become unfamiliar during the Hellenistic period.","btype":3,"date":"2008","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/4wH4nwIaSSiZXIi","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1023,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Acta Antiqua","volume":"48","issue":"1-2","pages":"273-287"}},"sort":["Habent sua fata libelli: Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the First Century BC"]}