| Title | Review of Hadot, I.: Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'Épictète, Tome I |
| Type | Article |
| Language | French |
| Date | 2002 |
| Journal | The Classical Review, New Series |
| Volume | 52 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 377-378 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Sheppard, Anne D. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| In 1996, Ilsetraut Hadot published the first-ever full critical edition of the Greek text of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' Encheiridion (I. Hadot, Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'Epictète [Leiden, New York, and Cologne, 1996]). The volume reviewed here is the first half of an editio minor of that text. It also contains a largely new introduction, written for a more general audience than the detailed scholarly introduction of the editio maior, and a translation equipped with notes. These notes follow the format of recent Budé editions of Neoplatonic texts, offering much helpful explanation with useful references to parallel passages in other Neoplatonic authors but inconveniently divided between the bottom of the page and the end of the volume. All Neoplatonic commentaries are discursive, and those of Simplicius are among the most discursive. It takes 130 pages of this volume for Simplicius to reach Chapter 20 of Epictetus' short work. However, as with many Neoplatonic commentaries, the interest of this one does not lie in what it tells us about Epictetus—whose philosophy Simplicius misunderstood in some important respects, as Hadot points out in her introduction (pp. ci–cxvii). Rather, it is worth reading for what it tells us about Simplicius' own philosophical views. It is unusual among Neoplatonic commentaries in dealing with an ethical text, and the discussions of τὰ Ἐφ' ἡμῖν (what is within our power) and the spiritual exercises recommended by Epictetus are of considerable interest. Hadot's introduction offers an updated version of her views on Simplicius' life, work, and philosophical system; a chapter on the Commentary's place in Neoplatonic teaching; an account of Simplicius' reception of Stoic doctrines; and a short history of the text. Finally, there is an appendix on Fate, Providence, and human freedom in Neoplatonism, which covers Porphyry, Iamblichus, Hierocles, and Proclus, as well as Simplicius. Of these, the account of Simplicius' reception of Stoic doctrines and the appendix are entirely new, while the chapter on the Commentary's place in Neoplatonic teaching is an updated and lightly revised version of a chapter from her book, Le problème du néoplatonisme alexandrin. Hiéroclès et Simplicius (Paris, 1978). The first two chapters of the introduction repeat, in a clear and accessible form, views she has already published elsewhere and is well known for. She reiterates her now largely accepted demonstration that Simplicius' philosophical system is essentially the same as that of Damascius—not, as Praechter thought, a simplified Alexandrian system—and, more controversially, continues to maintain, with Tardieu, that his commentaries were written in Harran after 532. The chapter on the history of the text abbreviates the longer account in the editio maior and explains the principles of the editio minor, acknowledging the help of Concetta Luna in simplifying the apparatus. A small number of readings that differ from those of the editio maior are indicated in a footnote on p. cxxvi. Hadot's translation is divided into sections with helpful headings and subheadings, and, together with her full notes, provides a great deal of assistance in understanding Simplicius' text. This volume deserves a warm welcome as a further installment in the enormous contribution Hadot has made to the understanding of Simplicius over many years. It is to be hoped that it will not be too long before the second volume appears to complement it. [the entire review] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/lwxAqvhdfMDm8ss |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1020","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1020,"authors_free":[{"id":1536,"entry_id":1020,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":43,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sheppard, Anne D.","free_first_name":"Anne D.","free_last_name":"Sheppard","norm_person":{"id":43,"first_name":"Anne D.","last_name":"Sheppard","full_name":"Sheppard, Anne D.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1158024592","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Review of Hadot, I.: Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te, Tome I","main_title":{"title":"Review of Hadot, I.: Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te, Tome I"},"abstract":"In 1996, Ilsetraut Hadot published the first-ever full critical edition of the Greek text of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' Encheiridion (I. Hadot, Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'Epict\u00e8te [Leiden, New York, and Cologne, 1996]). The volume reviewed here is the first half of an editio minor of that text. It also contains a largely new introduction, written for a more general audience than the detailed scholarly introduction of the editio maior, and a translation equipped with notes. These notes follow the format of recent Bud\u00e9 editions of Neoplatonic texts, offering much helpful explanation with useful references to parallel passages in other Neoplatonic authors but inconveniently divided between the bottom of the page and the end of the volume.\r\n\r\nAll Neoplatonic commentaries are discursive, and those of Simplicius are among the most discursive. It takes 130 pages of this volume for Simplicius to reach Chapter 20 of Epictetus' short work. However, as with many Neoplatonic commentaries, the interest of this one does not lie in what it tells us about Epictetus\u2014whose philosophy Simplicius misunderstood in some important respects, as Hadot points out in her introduction (pp. ci\u2013cxvii). Rather, it is worth reading for what it tells us about Simplicius' own philosophical views. It is unusual among Neoplatonic commentaries in dealing with an ethical text, and the discussions of \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f18\u03c6' \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd (what is within our power) and the spiritual exercises recommended by Epictetus are of considerable interest.\r\n\r\nHadot's introduction offers an updated version of her views on Simplicius' life, work, and philosophical system; a chapter on the Commentary's place in Neoplatonic teaching; an account of Simplicius' reception of Stoic doctrines; and a short history of the text. Finally, there is an appendix on Fate, Providence, and human freedom in Neoplatonism, which covers Porphyry, Iamblichus, Hierocles, and Proclus, as well as Simplicius. Of these, the account of Simplicius' reception of Stoic doctrines and the appendix are entirely new, while the chapter on the Commentary's place in Neoplatonic teaching is an updated and lightly revised version of a chapter from her book, Le probl\u00e8me du n\u00e9oplatonisme alexandrin. Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s et Simplicius (Paris, 1978).\r\n\r\nThe first two chapters of the introduction repeat, in a clear and accessible form, views she has already published elsewhere and is well known for. She reiterates her now largely accepted demonstration that Simplicius' philosophical system is essentially the same as that of Damascius\u2014not, as Praechter thought, a simplified Alexandrian system\u2014and, more controversially, continues to maintain, with Tardieu, that his commentaries were written in Harran after 532. The chapter on the history of the text abbreviates the longer account in the editio maior and explains the principles of the editio minor, acknowledging the help of Concetta Luna in simplifying the apparatus. A small number of readings that differ from those of the editio maior are indicated in a footnote on p. cxxvi.\r\n\r\nHadot's translation is divided into sections with helpful headings and subheadings, and, together with her full notes, provides a great deal of assistance in understanding Simplicius' text. This volume deserves a warm welcome as a further installment in the enormous contribution Hadot has made to the understanding of Simplicius over many years. It is to be hoped that it will not be too long before the second volume appears to complement it. [the entire review]","btype":3,"date":"2002","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lwxAqvhdfMDm8ss","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":43,"full_name":"Sheppard, Anne D.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1020,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Classical Review, New Series","volume":"52","issue":"2","pages":"377-378"}},"sort":[2002]}
| Title | Review of Hadot, I.: Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'Épictète, Tome I |
| Type | Article |
| Language | French |
| Date | 2002 |
| Journal | The Classical Review, New Series |
| Volume | 52 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 377-378 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Sheppard, Anne D. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
In 1996, Ilsetraut Hadot published the first-ever full critical edition of the Greek text of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' Encheiridion (I. Hadot, Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'Epictète [Leiden, New York, and Cologne, 1996]). The volume reviewed here is the first half of an editio minor of that text. It also contains a largely new introduction, written for a more general audience than the detailed scholarly introduction of the editio maior, and a translation equipped with notes. These notes follow the format of recent Budé editions of Neoplatonic texts, offering much helpful explanation with useful references to parallel passages in other Neoplatonic authors but inconveniently divided between the bottom of the page and the end of the volume. All Neoplatonic commentaries are discursive, and those of Simplicius are among the most discursive. It takes 130 pages of this volume for Simplicius to reach Chapter 20 of Epictetus' short work. However, as with many Neoplatonic commentaries, the interest of this one does not lie in what it tells us about Epictetus—whose philosophy Simplicius misunderstood in some important respects, as Hadot points out in her introduction (pp. ci–cxvii). Rather, it is worth reading for what it tells us about Simplicius' own philosophical views. It is unusual among Neoplatonic commentaries in dealing with an ethical text, and the discussions of τὰ Ἐφ' ἡμῖν (what is within our power) and the spiritual exercises recommended by Epictetus are of considerable interest. Hadot's introduction offers an updated version of her views on Simplicius' life, work, and philosophical system; a chapter on the Commentary's place in Neoplatonic teaching; an account of Simplicius' reception of Stoic doctrines; and a short history of the text. Finally, there is an appendix on Fate, Providence, and human freedom in Neoplatonism, which covers Porphyry, Iamblichus, Hierocles, and Proclus, as well as Simplicius. Of these, the account of Simplicius' reception of Stoic doctrines and the appendix are entirely new, while the chapter on the Commentary's place in Neoplatonic teaching is an updated and lightly revised version of a chapter from her book, Le problème du néoplatonisme alexandrin. Hiéroclès et Simplicius (Paris, 1978). The first two chapters of the introduction repeat, in a clear and accessible form, views she has already published elsewhere and is well known for. She reiterates her now largely accepted demonstration that Simplicius' philosophical system is essentially the same as that of Damascius—not, as Praechter thought, a simplified Alexandrian system—and, more controversially, continues to maintain, with Tardieu, that his commentaries were written in Harran after 532. The chapter on the history of the text abbreviates the longer account in the editio maior and explains the principles of the editio minor, acknowledging the help of Concetta Luna in simplifying the apparatus. A small number of readings that differ from those of the editio maior are indicated in a footnote on p. cxxvi. Hadot's translation is divided into sections with helpful headings and subheadings, and, together with her full notes, provides a great deal of assistance in understanding Simplicius' text. This volume deserves a warm welcome as a further installment in the enormous contribution Hadot has made to the understanding of Simplicius over many years. It is to be hoped that it will not be too long before the second volume appears to complement it. [the entire review] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/lwxAqvhdfMDm8ss |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1020","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1020,"authors_free":[{"id":1536,"entry_id":1020,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":43,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sheppard, Anne D.","free_first_name":"Anne D.","free_last_name":"Sheppard","norm_person":{"id":43,"first_name":"Anne D.","last_name":"Sheppard","full_name":"Sheppard, Anne D.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1158024592","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Review of Hadot, I.: Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te, Tome I","main_title":{"title":"Review of Hadot, I.: Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te, Tome I"},"abstract":"In 1996, Ilsetraut Hadot published the first-ever full critical edition of the Greek text of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' Encheiridion (I. Hadot, Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'Epict\u00e8te [Leiden, New York, and Cologne, 1996]). The volume reviewed here is the first half of an editio minor of that text. It also contains a largely new introduction, written for a more general audience than the detailed scholarly introduction of the editio maior, and a translation equipped with notes. These notes follow the format of recent Bud\u00e9 editions of Neoplatonic texts, offering much helpful explanation with useful references to parallel passages in other Neoplatonic authors but inconveniently divided between the bottom of the page and the end of the volume.\r\n\r\nAll Neoplatonic commentaries are discursive, and those of Simplicius are among the most discursive. It takes 130 pages of this volume for Simplicius to reach Chapter 20 of Epictetus' short work. However, as with many Neoplatonic commentaries, the interest of this one does not lie in what it tells us about Epictetus\u2014whose philosophy Simplicius misunderstood in some important respects, as Hadot points out in her introduction (pp. ci\u2013cxvii). Rather, it is worth reading for what it tells us about Simplicius' own philosophical views. It is unusual among Neoplatonic commentaries in dealing with an ethical text, and the discussions of \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f18\u03c6' \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd (what is within our power) and the spiritual exercises recommended by Epictetus are of considerable interest.\r\n\r\nHadot's introduction offers an updated version of her views on Simplicius' life, work, and philosophical system; a chapter on the Commentary's place in Neoplatonic teaching; an account of Simplicius' reception of Stoic doctrines; and a short history of the text. Finally, there is an appendix on Fate, Providence, and human freedom in Neoplatonism, which covers Porphyry, Iamblichus, Hierocles, and Proclus, as well as Simplicius. Of these, the account of Simplicius' reception of Stoic doctrines and the appendix are entirely new, while the chapter on the Commentary's place in Neoplatonic teaching is an updated and lightly revised version of a chapter from her book, Le probl\u00e8me du n\u00e9oplatonisme alexandrin. Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s et Simplicius (Paris, 1978).\r\n\r\nThe first two chapters of the introduction repeat, in a clear and accessible form, views she has already published elsewhere and is well known for. She reiterates her now largely accepted demonstration that Simplicius' philosophical system is essentially the same as that of Damascius\u2014not, as Praechter thought, a simplified Alexandrian system\u2014and, more controversially, continues to maintain, with Tardieu, that his commentaries were written in Harran after 532. The chapter on the history of the text abbreviates the longer account in the editio maior and explains the principles of the editio minor, acknowledging the help of Concetta Luna in simplifying the apparatus. A small number of readings that differ from those of the editio maior are indicated in a footnote on p. cxxvi.\r\n\r\nHadot's translation is divided into sections with helpful headings and subheadings, and, together with her full notes, provides a great deal of assistance in understanding Simplicius' text. This volume deserves a warm welcome as a further installment in the enormous contribution Hadot has made to the understanding of Simplicius over many years. It is to be hoped that it will not be too long before the second volume appears to complement it. [the entire review]","btype":3,"date":"2002","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lwxAqvhdfMDm8ss","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":43,"full_name":"Sheppard, Anne D.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1020,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Classical Review, New Series","volume":"52","issue":"2","pages":"377-378"}},"sort":["Review of Hadot, I.: Simplicius. Commentaire sur le Manuel d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te, Tome I"]}