Simplicius Research Environment

Type of Media

Author

Dates

BY DATE
BY TITLE

Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Categories 1–4’, 2003
By: Chase, Michael (Ed.), Simplicius

Title	Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Categories 1–4’
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2003
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Series	Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Simplicius
Editor(s)	Chase, Michael
Translator(s)	Chase, Michael(Chase, Michael ) ,

Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories is the most comprehensive philosophical critique of the work ever written, representing 600 years of criticism. In his Categories, Aristotle divides what exists in the sensible world into ten categories of Substance, Quantity, Relative, Quality and so on. Simplicius starts with a survey of previous commentators, and an introductory set of questions about Aristotle's philosophy and about the Categories in particular. The commentator, he says, needs to present Plato and Aristotle as in harmony on most things. Why are precisely ten categories named, given that Plato did with fewer distinctions? We have a survey of views on this. And where in the scheme of categories would one fit a quality that defines a substance - under substance or under quality? In his own commentary, Porphyry suggested classifying a defining quality as something distinct, a substantial quality, but others objected that this would constitute an eleventh. The most persistent question dealt with here is whether the categories classify words, concepts, or things. [offical abstract]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/NXa0soQv5dbZ0Jy

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"118","_score":null,"_source":{"id":118,"authors_free":[{"id":140,"entry_id":118,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":25,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Chase, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Chase","norm_person":{"id":25,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Chase","full_name":"Chase, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031917152","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2271,"entry_id":118,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":25,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Chase, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Chase","norm_person":{"id":25,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Chase","full_name":"Chase, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031917152","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2322,"entry_id":118,"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, On Aristotle \u2018Categories 1\u20134\u2019","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Categories 1\u20134\u2019"},"abstract":"Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories is the most comprehensive philosophical critique of the work ever written, representing 600 years of criticism. In his Categories, Aristotle divides what exists in the sensible world into ten categories of Substance, Quantity, Relative, Quality and so on. Simplicius starts with a survey of previous commentators, and an introductory set of questions about Aristotle's philosophy and about the Categories in particular. The commentator, he says, needs to present Plato and Aristotle as in harmony on most things. Why are precisely ten categories named, given that Plato did with fewer distinctions? We have a survey of views on this. And where in the scheme of categories would one fit a quality that defines a substance - under substance or under quality? In his own commentary, Porphyry suggested classifying a defining quality as something distinct, a substantial quality, but others objected that this would constitute an eleventh. The most persistent question dealt with here is whether the categories classify words, concepts, or things. [offical abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2003","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NXa0soQv5dbZ0Jy","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":25,"full_name":"Chase, Michael ","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":25,"full_name":"Chase, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":118,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2003]}

Simplicius, On Epictetus’ Handbook 1–26, 2002
By: Brennan, Tad (Ed.), Brittain, Charles (Ed.), Simplicius

Title	Simplicius, On Epictetus’ Handbook 1–26
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2002
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Series	Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Simplicius
Editor(s)	Brennan, Tad , Brittain, Charles
Translator(s)	Brennan, Tad(Brennan, Tad) , Brittain, Charles(Brittain, Charles) ,

[Simplicius'] moral interpretation of Epictetus is preserved in the library of nations, as a classic book, most excellently adapted to direct the will, to purify the heart, and to confirm the understanding, by a just confidence in the nature both of God and man.' Edward Gibbon 'This book, written by a "pagan" philosopher, makes the most Christian impression conceivable. The betrayal of all reality through morality is here present in its fullest splendour - pitiful psychology, the philosopher is reduced to a country parson. And Plato is to blame for all of it! He remains Europe's greatest misfortune!' Fredrich Nietzsche Of these two rival reactions the favourable one was most common. Epictetus' Handbook on ethics was used in Christian monasteries, and Simplicius' commentary on it was widely available up to the nineteenth century. The commentary gives us a fascinating chance to see how a pagan Neoplatonist transformed Stoic ideas, adding Neoplatonist accounts of theology, theodicy, providence, free will and the problem of evil. This translation of the Commentary on the Handbook is published in two volumes. This is the first, covering chapters 1-26; the second covers chapters 27-53. [offical abstact]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/cMwWGgd4gyrQGsd

Simplicius, On Epictetus’ Handbook 27–53, 2002
By: Brennan, Tad (Ed.), Brittain, Charles (Ed.), Simplicius

Title	Simplicius, On Epictetus’ Handbook 27–53
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2002
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Series	Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Simplicius
Editor(s)	Brennan, Tad , Brittain, Charles
Translator(s)	Brennan, Tad(Brennan, Tad) , Brittain, Charles(Brittain, Charles) ,

The Enchiridion or Handbook of the first-century Ad Stoic Epictetus was used as an ethical treatise both in Christian monasteries and by the sixth-century pagan Neoplatonist Simplicius. Simplicius chose it for beginners, rather than Aristotle's Ethics, because it presupposed no knowledge of logic. We thus get a fascinating chance to see how a pagan Neoplatonist transformed Stoic ideas. The text was relevant to Simplicius because he too, like Epictetus, was teaching beginners how to take the first steps towards eradicating emotion, although he is unlike Epictetus in thinking that they should give up public life rather than acquiesce, if public office is denied them. Simplicius starts from a Platonic definition of the person as rational soul, not body, ignoring Epictetus' further whittling down of himself to just his will or policy decisions. He selects certain topics for special attention in chapters 1, 8, 27 and 31. Things are up to us, despite Fate. Our sufferings are not evil, but providential attempts to turn us from the body. Evil is found only in the human soul. But evil is parasitic (Proclus' term) on good. The gods exist, are provident, and cannot be bought off.With nearly all of this the Stoics would agree, but for quite different reasons, and their own distinctions and definitions are to a large extent ignored. This translation of the Handbook is published in two volumes. This is the second volume, covering chapters 27-53; the first covers chapters 1-26. [offical abstact]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/vFlDcSCC76vW4hX

Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Physics 8.6–10’, 2001
By: Simplicius , McKirahan, Richard D. (Ed.)

Title	Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Physics 8.6–10’
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2001
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Series	Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Simplicius
Editor(s)	McKirahan, Richard D.
Translator(s)	McKirahan, Richard D.(McKirahan, Richard D.) ,

Aristotle's Physics is about the causes of motion and culminates in a proof that God is needed as the ultimate cause of motion. Aristotle argues that things in motion need to be moved by something other than themselves - he rejects Plato's self-movers. On pain of regress, there must be an unmoved mover. If this unmoved mover is to cause motion eternally, it needs infinite power. It cannot, then, be a body, since bodies, being of finite size, cannot house infinite power. The unmoved mover is therefore an incorporeal God. Simplicius reveals that his teacher, Ammonius, harmonised Aristotle with Plato to counter Christian charges of pagan disagreement, by making Aristotle's God a cause of beginningless movement, but of beginningless existence of the universe. Eternal existence, not less than eternal motion, calls for an infinite, and hence incorporeal, force. By an irony, this anti-Christian interpretation turned Aristotle's God from a thinker into a certain kind of Creator, and so helped to make Aristotle's God acceptable to St Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century. This text provides a translation of Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's work. [offical abstract]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/vKHydlnZ35cKEEg

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"102","_score":null,"_source":{"id":102,"authors_free":[{"id":119,"entry_id":102,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":253,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"McKirahan, Richard D.","free_first_name":"Richard D.","free_last_name":"McKirahan","norm_person":{"id":253,"first_name":"Richard D.","last_name":"McKirahan","full_name":"McKirahan, Richard D.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/131702254","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2300,"entry_id":102,"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":2301,"entry_id":102,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":253,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"McKirahan, Richard D.","free_first_name":"Richard D.","free_last_name":"McKirahan","norm_person":{"id":253,"first_name":"Richard D.","last_name":"McKirahan","full_name":"McKirahan, Richard D.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/131702254","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Physics 8.6\u201310\u2019","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Physics 8.6\u201310\u2019"},"abstract":"Aristotle's Physics is about the causes of motion and culminates in a proof that God is needed as the ultimate cause of motion. Aristotle argues that things in motion need to be moved by something other than themselves - he rejects Plato's self-movers. On pain of regress, there must be an unmoved mover. If this unmoved mover is to cause motion eternally, it needs infinite power. It cannot, then, be a body, since bodies, being of finite size, cannot house infinite power. The unmoved mover is therefore an incorporeal God. Simplicius reveals that his teacher, Ammonius, harmonised Aristotle with Plato to counter Christian charges of pagan disagreement, by making Aristotle's God a cause of beginningless movement, but of beginningless existence of the universe. Eternal existence, not less than eternal motion, calls for an infinite, and hence incorporeal, force. By an irony, this anti-Christian interpretation turned Aristotle's God from a thinker into a certain kind of Creator, and so helped to make Aristotle's God acceptable to St Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century. This text provides a translation of Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's work. [offical abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2001","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vKHydlnZ35cKEEg","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":253,"full_name":"McKirahan, Richard D.","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":253,"full_name":"McKirahan, Richard D.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":102,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2001]}

Simplicius, Commentaire sur le Manuel d’Epictète. I : Chapitres I–XXIX, 2001
By: Hadot, Ilsetraut (Ed.), Simplicius

Title	Simplicius, Commentaire sur le Manuel d’Epictète. I : Chapitres I–XXIX
Type	Monograph
Language	French
Date	2001
Publication Place	Paris
Publisher	Les Belles Lettres
Series	Collection des universités de France: Série grecque
Volume	411
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Simplicius
Editor(s)	Hadot, Ilsetraut
Translator(s)

Le philosophe néoplatonicien Simplicius a vécu au VIe siècle de notre ère. Originaire de Cilicie en Asie Mineure, il se rendit en Perse accompagné de six autres philosophes, probablement à la suite d'un décret de Justinien leur interdisant d'enseigner et de percevoir un salaire public. Il rentra dans son pays suite au traité de paix conclu en 532 entre le roi Perse Chosroès et Justinien, et s'installa à Harrân, ville de l'Empire Byzantin proche de la frontière perse. C'est là qu'il composa les cinq commentaires qui nous sont parvenus sous son nom. Parmi ces commentaires, celui traitant du Manuel d'Epictète est le seul qui ne soit pas consacré à un traité aristotélicien. Comment expliquer le fait que Simplicius, philosophe platonicien, ait commenté les maximes éthiques d'un stoïcien ? Les néoplatoniciens, depuis Porphyres, avaient défini un canon de quatre degrés de vertus : les vertus civiles ou politiques, les vertus cathartiques, les vertus théorétiques et les vertus paradigmatiques. Lorsqu'on parvenait au degré le plus élevé des vertus, la séparation de l'âme et du corps était totalement accomplie. Néanmoins, avant de parvenir à cet état d'apathéia, une instruction éthique préparatoire était nécessaire pour atteindre le premier degré des vertus. Ainsi, pour Simplicius, le Manuel d'Epictète représentait une propédeutique à la pratique morale visant au premier degré des vertus, les vertus civiles ou politiques. Par la lecture des sentences du philosophe stoïcien, le disciple pouvait parvenir à la domination des passions par la raison avant de s'élever vers la contemplation de l'Intellect, qui représente pour les platoniciens le niveau d'être le plus élevé. Le premier volume du Commentaire sur le Manuel d'Epictète dans la Collection des Universités de France comprend le texte de Simplicius accompagné de la traduction d'Ilsetraut Hadot. Le traité est précédé d'une introduction dans laquelle sont présentés la vie et l'oeuvre du philosophe, les enjeux philosophiques du Commentaire, ainsi que l'histoire du texte. [offical abstract]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/NQYfG67UZpkl1W7

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"134","_score":null,"_source":{"id":134,"authors_free":[{"id":166,"entry_id":134,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","free_first_name":"Ilsetraut","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":4,"first_name":"Ilsetraut","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/107415011","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2257,"entry_id":134,"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, Commentaire sur le Manuel d\u2019Epict\u00e8te. I : Chapitres I\u2013XXIX","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius, Commentaire sur le Manuel d\u2019Epict\u00e8te. I : Chapitres I\u2013XXIX"},"abstract":"Le philosophe n\u00e9oplatonicien Simplicius a v\u00e9cu au VIe si\u00e8cle de notre \u00e8re. Originaire de Cilicie en Asie Mineure, il se rendit en Perse accompagn\u00e9 de six autres philosophes, probablement \u00e0 la suite d'un d\u00e9cret de Justinien leur interdisant d'enseigner et de percevoir un salaire public. Il rentra dans son pays suite au trait\u00e9 de paix conclu en 532 entre le roi Perse Chosro\u00e8s et Justinien, et s'installa \u00e0 Harr\u00e2n, ville de l'Empire Byzantin proche de la fronti\u00e8re perse. C'est l\u00e0 qu'il composa les cinq commentaires qui nous sont parvenus sous son nom. Parmi ces commentaires, celui traitant du Manuel d'Epict\u00e8te est le seul qui ne soit pas consacr\u00e9 \u00e0 un trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien. Comment expliquer le fait que Simplicius, philosophe platonicien, ait comment\u00e9 les maximes \u00e9thiques d'un sto\u00efcien ? Les n\u00e9oplatoniciens, depuis Porphyres, avaient d\u00e9fini un canon de quatre degr\u00e9s de vertus : les vertus civiles ou politiques, les vertus cathartiques, les vertus th\u00e9or\u00e9tiques et les vertus paradigmatiques. Lorsqu'on parvenait au degr\u00e9 le plus \u00e9lev\u00e9 des vertus, la s\u00e9paration de l'\u00e2me et du corps \u00e9tait totalement accomplie. N\u00e9anmoins, avant de parvenir \u00e0 cet \u00e9tat d'apath\u00e9ia, une instruction \u00e9thique pr\u00e9paratoire \u00e9tait n\u00e9cessaire pour atteindre le premier degr\u00e9 des vertus. Ainsi, pour Simplicius, le Manuel d'Epict\u00e8te repr\u00e9sentait une prop\u00e9deutique \u00e0 la pratique morale visant au premier degr\u00e9 des vertus, les vertus civiles ou politiques. Par la lecture des sentences du philosophe sto\u00efcien, le disciple pouvait parvenir \u00e0 la domination des passions par la raison avant de s'\u00e9lever vers la contemplation de l'Intellect, qui repr\u00e9sente pour les platoniciens le niveau d'\u00eatre le plus \u00e9lev\u00e9. Le premier volume du Commentaire sur le Manuel d'Epict\u00e8te dans la Collection des Universit\u00e9s de France comprend le texte de Simplicius accompagn\u00e9 de la traduction d'Ilsetraut Hadot. Le trait\u00e9 est pr\u00e9c\u00e9d\u00e9 d'une introduction dans laquelle sont pr\u00e9sent\u00e9s la vie et l'oeuvre du philosophe, les enjeux philosophiques du Commentaire, ainsi que l'histoire du texte. [offical abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2001","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NQYfG67UZpkl1W7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":134,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Les Belles Lettres","series":"Collection des universit\u00e9s de France: S\u00e9rie grecque","volume":"411","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2001]}

PAGE 3 OF 3

Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Physics 3’, 2013
By: Simplicius, Cilicius

Title	Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Physics 3’
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2013
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Bloomsbury
Series	Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	, Simplicius, Cilicius
Editor(s)
Translator(s)	Urmson, J. O.(Urmson, James O.) , Lautner, P.(Lautner, Peter) ,

Aristotle's Physics Book 3 covers two subjects: the definition of change and the finitude of the universe. Change enters into the very definition of nature as an internal source of change. Change receives two definitions in chapters 1 and 2, as involving the actualisation of the potential or of the changeable. Alexander of Aphrodisias is reported as thinking that the second version is designed to show that Book 3, like Book 5, means to disqualify change in relations from being genuine change. Aristotle's successor Theophrastus, we are told, and Simplicius himself, prefer to admit relational change. Chapter 3 introduces a general causal principle that the activity of the agent causing change is in the patient undergoing change, and that the causing and undergoing are to be counted as only one activity, however different in definition. Simplicius points out that this paves the way for Aristotle's God who moves the heavens, while admitting no motion in himself. It is also the basis of Aristotle's doctrine, central to Neoplatonism, that intellect is one with the objects it contemplates.In defending Aristotle's claim that the universe is spatially finite, Simplicius has to meet Archytas' question, "What happens at the edge?". He replies that, given Aristotle's definition of place, there is nothing, rather than an empty place, beyond the furthest stars, and one cannot stretch one's hand into nothing, nor be prevented by nothing. But why is Aristotle's beginningless universe not temporally infinite? Simplicius answers that the past years no longer exist, so one never has an infinite collection.

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/YfUTJzt6qIM0sqo

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"92","_score":null,"_source":{"id":92,"authors_free":[{"id":106,"entry_id":92,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":435,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Urmson, J. O.","free_first_name":"J. O.","free_last_name":"Urmson","norm_person":{"id":435,"first_name":"James O.","last_name":"Urmson","full_name":"Urmson, James O.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/12972954X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":107,"entry_id":92,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":236,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Lautner, P.","free_first_name":"P.","free_last_name":"Lautner","norm_person":{"id":236,"first_name":"Peter","last_name":"Lautner","full_name":"Lautner, Peter","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1157740766","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2294,"entry_id":92,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius, Cilicius","free_first_name":"Cilicius","free_last_name":"Simplicius","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, On Aristotle \u2018Physics 3\u2019","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Physics 3\u2019"},"abstract":"Aristotle's Physics Book 3 covers two subjects: the definition of change and the finitude of the universe. Change enters into the very definition of nature as an internal source of change. Change receives two definitions in chapters 1 and 2, as involving the actualisation of the potential or of the changeable. Alexander of Aphrodisias is reported as thinking that the second version is designed to show that Book 3, like Book 5, means to disqualify change in relations from being genuine change. Aristotle's successor Theophrastus, we are told, and Simplicius himself, prefer to admit relational change. Chapter 3 introduces a general causal principle that the activity of the agent causing change is in the patient undergoing change, and that the causing and undergoing are to be counted as only one activity, however different in definition. Simplicius points out that this paves the way for Aristotle's God who moves the heavens, while admitting no motion in himself. It is also the basis of Aristotle's doctrine, central to Neoplatonism, that intellect is one with the objects it contemplates.In defending Aristotle's claim that the universe is spatially finite, Simplicius has to meet Archytas' question, \"What happens at the edge?\". He replies that, given Aristotle's definition of place, there is nothing, rather than an empty place, beyond the furthest stars, and one cannot stretch one's hand into nothing, nor be prevented by nothing. But why is Aristotle's beginningless universe not temporally infinite? Simplicius answers that the past years no longer exist, so one never has an infinite collection.","btype":1,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/YfUTJzt6qIM0sqo","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":435,"full_name":"Urmson, James O.","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":236,"full_name":"Lautner, Peter","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":92,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Bloomsbury","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Physics 3\u2019"]}

Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Physics 8.6–10’, 2001
By: Simplicius , McKirahan, Richard D. (Ed.)

Title	Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Physics 8.6–10’
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2001
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Series	Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	, Simplicius
Editor(s)	McKirahan, Richard D.
Translator(s)	McKirahan, Richard D.(McKirahan, Richard D.) ,

Aristotle's Physics is about the causes of motion and culminates in a proof that God is needed as the ultimate cause of motion. Aristotle argues that things in motion need to be moved by something other than themselves - he rejects Plato's self-movers. On pain of regress, there must be an unmoved mover. If this unmoved mover is to cause motion eternally, it needs infinite power. It cannot, then, be a body, since bodies, being of finite size, cannot house infinite power. The unmoved mover is therefore an incorporeal God. Simplicius reveals that his teacher, Ammonius, harmonised Aristotle with Plato to counter Christian charges of pagan disagreement, by making Aristotle's God a cause of beginningless movement, but of beginningless existence of the universe. Eternal existence, not less than eternal motion, calls for an infinite, and hence incorporeal, force. By an irony, this anti-Christian interpretation turned Aristotle's God from a thinker into a certain kind of Creator, and so helped to make Aristotle's God acceptable to St Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century. This text provides a translation of Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's work. [offical abstract]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/vKHydlnZ35cKEEg

Simplicius, On Epictetus’ Handbook 1–26, 2002
By: Brennan, Tad (Ed.), Brittain, Charles (Ed.), Simplicius

Title	Simplicius, On Epictetus’ Handbook 1–26
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2002
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Series	Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	, Simplicius
Editor(s)	Brennan, Tad , Brittain, Charles
Translator(s)	Brennan, Tad(Brennan, Tad) , Brittain, Charles(Brittain, Charles) ,

[Simplicius'] moral interpretation of Epictetus is preserved in the library of nations, as a classic book, most excellently adapted to direct the will, to purify the heart, and to confirm the understanding, by a just confidence in the nature both of God and man.'
Edward Gibbon

'This book, written by a "pagan" philosopher, makes the most Christian impression conceivable. The betrayal of all reality through morality is here present in its fullest splendour - pitiful psychology, the philosopher is reduced to a country parson. And Plato is to blame for all of it! He remains Europe's greatest misfortune!'
Fredrich Nietzsche

Of these two rival reactions the favourable one was most common. Epictetus' Handbook on ethics was used in Christian monasteries, and Simplicius' commentary on it was widely available up to the nineteenth century.
The commentary gives us a fascinating chance to see how a pagan Neoplatonist transformed Stoic ideas, adding Neoplatonist accounts of theology, theodicy, providence, free will and the problem of evil.
This translation of the Commentary on the Handbook is published in two volumes. This is the first, covering chapters 1-26; the second covers chapters 27-53. [offical abstact]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/cMwWGgd4gyrQGsd

Simplicius, On Epictetus’ Handbook 27–53, 2002
By: Brennan, Tad (Ed.), Brittain, Charles (Ed.), Simplicius

Title	Simplicius, On Epictetus’ Handbook 27–53
Type	Monograph
Language	English
Date	2002
Publication Place	London
Publisher	Duckworth
Series	Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	, Simplicius
Editor(s)	Brennan, Tad , Brittain, Charles
Translator(s)	Brennan, Tad(Brennan, Tad) , Brittain, Charles(Brittain, Charles) ,

The Enchiridion or Handbook of the first-century Ad Stoic Epictetus was used as an ethical treatise both in Christian monasteries and by the sixth-century pagan Neoplatonist Simplicius. Simplicius chose it for beginners, rather than Aristotle's Ethics, because it presupposed no knowledge of logic. We thus get a fascinating chance to see how a pagan Neoplatonist transformed Stoic ideas. The text was relevant to Simplicius because he too, like Epictetus, was teaching beginners how to take the first steps towards eradicating emotion, although he is unlike Epictetus in thinking that they should give up public life rather than acquiesce, if public office is denied them. Simplicius starts from a Platonic definition of the person as rational soul, not body, ignoring Epictetus' further whittling down of himself to just his will or policy decisions. He selects certain topics for special attention in chapters 1, 8, 27 and 31. Things are up to us, despite Fate. Our sufferings are not evil, but providential attempts to turn us from the body. Evil is found only in the human soul. But evil is parasitic (Proclus' term) on good. The gods exist, are provident, and cannot be bought off.With nearly all of this the Stoics would agree, but for quite different reasons, and their own distinctions and definitions are to a large extent ignored. This translation of the Handbook is published in two volumes. This is the second volume, covering chapters 27-53; the first covers chapters 1-26. [offical abstact]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/vFlDcSCC76vW4hX

Simplicius. Sur le temps. Commentaire sur la Physique d’Aristote et Corollaire sur le temps, 2021
By: Simplicius ,

Title	Simplicius. Sur le temps. Commentaire sur la Physique d’Aristote et Corollaire sur le temps
Type	Monograph
Language	French
Date	2021
Publication Place	Paris
Publisher	Vrin
Series	Bibliothèque des Textes Philosophiques
Categories	no categories
Author(s)	Simplicius
Editor(s)
Translator(s)	Stevens, Annick(Stevens, Annick)

Comment comprendre la thèse d’Aristote que le temps est un nombre? Est-il une durée ou un ordre de succession, un simple aspect du devenir ou le responsable de sa régularité? Quel est son rapport avec l’espace? Existe-t-il un temps unique pour les divers changements dans l’univers? Des repères comme l’instant, le présent, la simultanéité, ont-ils un sens indépendamment de notre esprit? De toutes ces questions ardemment débattues parmi les commentateurs grecs d’Aristote, Simplicius, le dernier d’entre eux et certainement le plus perspicace, se fait l’écho autant que l’arbitre. Ses propositions, étonnamment modernes, sont autant d’occasions pour nous de repenser ce concept qui défie encore physiciens et philosophes.
Traduit pour la première fois en français, le texte est accompagné d’une présentation détaillée et de notes explicatives qui en facilitent la compréhension.

Traduction, introduction et notes par A. Stevens. [author's abstract]

Online Resources

https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3F7zPZTXtgRBhU7

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1516","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1516,"authors_free":[{"id":2632,"entry_id":1516,"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":2633,"entry_id":1516,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":323,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Stevens, Annick","free_first_name":"Annick","free_last_name":"Stevens","norm_person":{"id":323,"first_name":" Annick","last_name":"Stevens","full_name":"Stevens, Annick","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1195240120","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius. Sur le temps. Commentaire sur la Physique d\u2019Aristote et Corollaire sur le temps","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius. Sur le temps. Commentaire sur la Physique d\u2019Aristote et Corollaire sur le temps"},"abstract":"Comment comprendre la th\u00e8se d\u2019Aristote que le temps est un nombre? Est-il une dur\u00e9e ou un ordre de succession, un simple aspect du devenir ou le responsable de sa r\u00e9gularit\u00e9? Quel est son rapport avec l\u2019espace? Existe-t-il un temps unique pour les divers changements dans l\u2019univers? Des rep\u00e8res comme l\u2019instant, le pr\u00e9sent, la simultan\u00e9it\u00e9, ont-ils un sens ind\u00e9pendamment de notre esprit? De toutes ces questions ardemment d\u00e9battues parmi les commentateurs grecs d\u2019Aristote, Simplicius, le dernier d\u2019entre eux et certainement le plus perspicace, se fait l\u2019\u00e9cho autant que l\u2019arbitre. Ses propositions, \u00e9tonnamment modernes, sont autant d\u2019occasions pour nous de repenser ce concept qui d\u00e9fie encore physiciens et philosophes.\r\nTraduit pour la premi\u00e8re fois en fran\u00e7ais, le texte est accompagn\u00e9 d\u2019une pr\u00e9sentation d\u00e9taill\u00e9e et de notes explicatives qui en facilitent la compr\u00e9hension.\r\n\r\nTraduction, introduction et notes par A. Stevens. [author's abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2021","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3F7zPZTXtgRBhU7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":323,"full_name":"Stevens, Annick","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}}],"book":{"id":1516,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Biblioth\u00e8que des Textes Philosophiques","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius. Sur le temps. Commentaire sur la Physique d\u2019Aristote et Corollaire sur le temps"]}

PAGE 3 OF 3