Title | The text of Simplicius’s Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics and the question of supralinear omicron in Greek manuscripts |
Type | Article |
Language | English |
Date | 2014 |
Journal | Revue d’histoire des textes |
Volume | 9 |
Pages | 351-358 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
This paper tries to establish that supralinear omicron is not, as most elementary introductions to Greek paleography have it, a simple abbreviation for the ending omicron-sigma. Rather, it was originally a symbol for suspension that later medieval scribes used also for other subordinated purposes which are impossible to classify. Some examples will be given in what follows. For a long time this interpretation had seemed so obvious to me that during a 1985 colloquium on Simplicius in Paris, it surprised me that some members of the audience objected that supralinear omicron is simply an abbreviation for omicron-sigma. As this occurred during my discussion of a passage of Simplicius’s Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics, and as several of my examples come from that work, it is convenient to give a list of the manuscripts used by Diels and also of additional prim ary witnesses either rejected by, or not known to him. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/euNEGjD514bsBaT |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1456","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1456,"authors_free":[{"id":2476,"entry_id":1456,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The text of Simplicius\u2019s Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics and the question of supralinear omicron in Greek manuscripts","main_title":{"title":"The text of Simplicius\u2019s Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics and the question of supralinear omicron in Greek manuscripts"},"abstract":"This paper tries to establish that supralinear omicron is not, as most elementary introductions to Greek paleography have it, a simple abbreviation for the ending omicron-sigma. Rather, it was originally a symbol for suspension that later medieval scribes used also for other subordinated purposes which are impossible to classify. Some examples will be given in what follows. For a long time this interpretation had seemed so obvious to me that during a 1985 colloquium on Simplicius in Paris, it surprised me that some members of the audience objected that supralinear omicron is simply an abbreviation for omicron-sigma. As this occurred during my discussion of a passage of Simplicius\u2019s Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics, and as several of my examples come from that work, it is convenient to give a list of the manuscripts used by Diels and also of additional prim ary witnesses either rejected by, or not known to him. [introduction]","btype":3,"date":"2014","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/euNEGjD514bsBaT","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1456,"pubplace":"","publisher":"","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1456,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Revue d\u2019histoire des textes ","volume":"9","issue":"","pages":"351-358 "}},"sort":[2014]}
Title | The Text of Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 246-266 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
My main purpose here is to offer reasons why a new and truly critical edition of Simplicius' commentary is necessary. To do so, in what follows, I shall have to point out some of the shortcomings to be found in Diels' edition of this work. [p. 246] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wSJkdX2PYdHh3n2 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"726","_score":null,"_source":{"id":726,"authors_free":[{"id":1085,"entry_id":726,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1086,"entry_id":726,"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}}],"entry_title":"The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics","main_title":{"title":"The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics"},"abstract":"My main purpose here is to offer reasons why a new and truly critical edition of Simplicius' commentary is necessary. To do so, in what follows, I shall have to point out some of the shortcomings to be found in Diels' edition of this work. [p. 246]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wSJkdX2PYdHh3n2","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":726,"section_of":171,"pages":"246-266","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander’s Commentary on Metaph. E-N |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 215-232 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
The main conclusions of this study are two: (a) Neither Ps.-Alexander nor Syrianus had access to Alexander’s lost commentary on Metaphysics E-N. (b) For his commentary on books M-N, Syrianus made use of Ps.-Alexander’s commentary, which he mistook for the work of Alexander himself. [conclusion p. 231] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/TQhCHWKXBejvsjI |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"797","_score":null,"_source":{"id":797,"authors_free":[{"id":1176,"entry_id":797,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1177,"entry_id":797,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N","main_title":{"title":"Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N"},"abstract":"The main conclusions of this study are two: (a) Neither Ps.-Alexander nor Syrianus had access to Alexander\u2019s lost commentary on Metaphysics E-N. (b) For his commentary on books M-N, Syrianus made use of Ps.-Alexander\u2019s commentary, which he mistook for the work of Alexander himself. [conclusion p. 231]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TQhCHWKXBejvsjI","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":797,"section_of":189,"pages":"215-232","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Speusippus and Aristotle on Homonymy and Synonymy |
Type | Article |
Language | English |
Date | 1978 |
Journal | Hermes |
Volume | 106 |
Issue | 1 |
Pages | 73-99 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Modern scholarship since the middle of the last century has generally accepted it as an established fact that Speusippus made an exhaustive classification of words or names (onomata) in relation to the concepts they express and that he gave definitions of homonyma and synonyma only in reference to words and their meanings. That is to say, for him, homonyma and synonyma are properties of linguistic terms and not of things, whereas for Aristotle, especially in the first chapter of the Categories, they are properties of things. In 1904, E. Hambruch attempted to show that sometimes Aristotle himself uses synonyma in the Speusippean sense just outlined and that in so doing, he was influenced by Speusippus. This thesis of Hambruch has been accepted by several scholars, including Lang, Stenzel, and Cherniss. Although some doubts about its soundness were expressed from different perspectives, it was only in 1971 that Mr. Jonathan Barnes made a systematic assault on it. Barnes contends, first, that Speusippus’s conception of homonyma and synonyma is essentially the same as that of Aristotle, with the slight differences between their respective definitions being trivial, and second, that even though Aristotle occasionally uses homonyma and synonyma as properties of linguistic terms, this is because Aristotle's use of these words is not as rigid as the Categories might suggest. Barnes argues that Aristotle could not have been influenced by Speusippus, because Speusippus conceived homonymy and synonymy as properties of things, and, in any case, if influence were assumed, it could as well have been Aristotle influencing Speusippus. Though I believe Barnes’ two main contentions are mistaken, I am here mainly concerned with the first part of his thesis. If he were right in believing that, for Speusippus, homonyma and synonyma are properties of things and not of names or linguistic terms, then Hambruch’s notion that Speusippus influenced Aristotle when the latter uses synonymon as a property of names would be wrong, even if Barnes were mistaken in his analysis of the Aristotelian passages he reviews in the second part of his paper. On the other hand, if Speusippus's classification is truly of onomata, then, since Barnes himself admits that Aristotle sometimes uses homonyma and synonyma as properties of names, the influence of Speusippus on Aristotle is at least possible. It becomes plausible and probable—regardless of the relative chronology of their respective works—when it is seen, as I shall try to show, that in some cases, Aristotle is in fact attacking doctrines that presuppose a use of homonyma and synonyma such as can be ascribed to Speusippus or is using synonymon in the Speusippean sense, different from Aristotle's own notion of synonymous words. [introduction p. 73-75] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/DXL3umbA2JfHxYC |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"843","_score":null,"_source":{"id":843,"authors_free":[{"id":1247,"entry_id":843,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Speusippus and Aristotle on Homonymy and Synonymy","main_title":{"title":"Speusippus and Aristotle on Homonymy and Synonymy"},"abstract":"Modern scholarship since the middle of the last century has generally accepted it as an established fact that Speusippus made an exhaustive classification of words or names (onomata) in relation to the concepts they express and that he gave definitions of homonyma and synonyma only in reference to words and their meanings. That is to say, for him, homonyma and synonyma are properties of linguistic terms and not of things, whereas for Aristotle, especially in the first chapter of the Categories, they are properties of things.\r\n\r\nIn 1904, E. Hambruch attempted to show that sometimes Aristotle himself uses synonyma in the Speusippean sense just outlined and that in so doing, he was influenced by Speusippus. This thesis of Hambruch has been accepted by several scholars, including Lang, Stenzel, and Cherniss. Although some doubts about its soundness were expressed from different perspectives, it was only in 1971 that Mr. Jonathan Barnes made a systematic assault on it. Barnes contends, first, that Speusippus\u2019s conception of homonyma and synonyma is essentially the same as that of Aristotle, with the slight differences between their respective definitions being trivial, and second, that even though Aristotle occasionally uses homonyma and synonyma as properties of linguistic terms, this is because Aristotle's use of these words is not as rigid as the Categories might suggest. Barnes argues that Aristotle could not have been influenced by Speusippus, because Speusippus conceived homonymy and synonymy as properties of things, and, in any case, if influence were assumed, it could as well have been Aristotle influencing Speusippus.\r\n\r\nThough I believe Barnes\u2019 two main contentions are mistaken, I am here mainly concerned with the first part of his thesis. If he were right in believing that, for Speusippus, homonyma and synonyma are properties of things and not of names or linguistic terms, then Hambruch\u2019s notion that Speusippus influenced Aristotle when the latter uses synonymon as a property of names would be wrong, even if Barnes were mistaken in his analysis of the Aristotelian passages he reviews in the second part of his paper.\r\n\r\nOn the other hand, if Speusippus's classification is truly of onomata, then, since Barnes himself admits that Aristotle sometimes uses homonyma and synonyma as properties of names, the influence of Speusippus on Aristotle is at least possible. It becomes plausible and probable\u2014regardless of the relative chronology of their respective works\u2014when it is seen, as I shall try to show, that in some cases, Aristotle is in fact attacking doctrines that presuppose a use of homonyma and synonyma such as can be ascribed to Speusippus or is using synonymon in the Speusippean sense, different from Aristotle's own notion of synonymous words. [introduction p. 73-75]","btype":3,"date":"1978","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/DXL3umbA2JfHxYC","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":843,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"106","issue":"1","pages":"73-99"}},"sort":[1978]}
Title | Speusippus and Aristotle on Homonymy and Synonymy |
Type | Article |
Language | English |
Date | 1978 |
Journal | Hermes |
Volume | 106 |
Issue | 1 |
Pages | 73-99 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Modern scholarship since the middle of the last century has generally accepted it as an established fact that Speusippus made an exhaustive classification of words or names (onomata) in relation to the concepts they express and that he gave definitions of homonyma and synonyma only in reference to words and their meanings. That is to say, for him, homonyma and synonyma are properties of linguistic terms and not of things, whereas for Aristotle, especially in the first chapter of the Categories, they are properties of things. In 1904, E. Hambruch attempted to show that sometimes Aristotle himself uses synonyma in the Speusippean sense just outlined and that in so doing, he was influenced by Speusippus. This thesis of Hambruch has been accepted by several scholars, including Lang, Stenzel, and Cherniss. Although some doubts about its soundness were expressed from different perspectives, it was only in 1971 that Mr. Jonathan Barnes made a systematic assault on it. Barnes contends, first, that Speusippus’s conception of homonyma and synonyma is essentially the same as that of Aristotle, with the slight differences between their respective definitions being trivial, and second, that even though Aristotle occasionally uses homonyma and synonyma as properties of linguistic terms, this is because Aristotle's use of these words is not as rigid as the Categories might suggest. Barnes argues that Aristotle could not have been influenced by Speusippus, because Speusippus conceived homonymy and synonymy as properties of things, and, in any case, if influence were assumed, it could as well have been Aristotle influencing Speusippus. Though I believe Barnes’ two main contentions are mistaken, I am here mainly concerned with the first part of his thesis. If he were right in believing that, for Speusippus, homonyma and synonyma are properties of things and not of names or linguistic terms, then Hambruch’s notion that Speusippus influenced Aristotle when the latter uses synonymon as a property of names would be wrong, even if Barnes were mistaken in his analysis of the Aristotelian passages he reviews in the second part of his paper. On the other hand, if Speusippus's classification is truly of onomata, then, since Barnes himself admits that Aristotle sometimes uses homonyma and synonyma as properties of names, the influence of Speusippus on Aristotle is at least possible. It becomes plausible and probable—regardless of the relative chronology of their respective works—when it is seen, as I shall try to show, that in some cases, Aristotle is in fact attacking doctrines that presuppose a use of homonyma and synonyma such as can be ascribed to Speusippus or is using synonymon in the Speusippean sense, different from Aristotle's own notion of synonymous words. [introduction p. 73-75] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/DXL3umbA2JfHxYC |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"843","_score":null,"_source":{"id":843,"authors_free":[{"id":1247,"entry_id":843,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Speusippus and Aristotle on Homonymy and Synonymy","main_title":{"title":"Speusippus and Aristotle on Homonymy and Synonymy"},"abstract":"Modern scholarship since the middle of the last century has generally accepted it as an established fact that Speusippus made an exhaustive classification of words or names (onomata) in relation to the concepts they express and that he gave definitions of homonyma and synonyma only in reference to words and their meanings. That is to say, for him, homonyma and synonyma are properties of linguistic terms and not of things, whereas for Aristotle, especially in the first chapter of the Categories, they are properties of things.\r\n\r\nIn 1904, E. Hambruch attempted to show that sometimes Aristotle himself uses synonyma in the Speusippean sense just outlined and that in so doing, he was influenced by Speusippus. This thesis of Hambruch has been accepted by several scholars, including Lang, Stenzel, and Cherniss. Although some doubts about its soundness were expressed from different perspectives, it was only in 1971 that Mr. Jonathan Barnes made a systematic assault on it. Barnes contends, first, that Speusippus\u2019s conception of homonyma and synonyma is essentially the same as that of Aristotle, with the slight differences between their respective definitions being trivial, and second, that even though Aristotle occasionally uses homonyma and synonyma as properties of linguistic terms, this is because Aristotle's use of these words is not as rigid as the Categories might suggest. Barnes argues that Aristotle could not have been influenced by Speusippus, because Speusippus conceived homonymy and synonymy as properties of things, and, in any case, if influence were assumed, it could as well have been Aristotle influencing Speusippus.\r\n\r\nThough I believe Barnes\u2019 two main contentions are mistaken, I am here mainly concerned with the first part of his thesis. If he were right in believing that, for Speusippus, homonyma and synonyma are properties of things and not of names or linguistic terms, then Hambruch\u2019s notion that Speusippus influenced Aristotle when the latter uses synonymon as a property of names would be wrong, even if Barnes were mistaken in his analysis of the Aristotelian passages he reviews in the second part of his paper.\r\n\r\nOn the other hand, if Speusippus's classification is truly of onomata, then, since Barnes himself admits that Aristotle sometimes uses homonyma and synonyma as properties of names, the influence of Speusippus on Aristotle is at least possible. It becomes plausible and probable\u2014regardless of the relative chronology of their respective works\u2014when it is seen, as I shall try to show, that in some cases, Aristotle is in fact attacking doctrines that presuppose a use of homonyma and synonyma such as can be ascribed to Speusippus or is using synonymon in the Speusippean sense, different from Aristotle's own notion of synonymous words. [introduction p. 73-75]","btype":3,"date":"1978","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/DXL3umbA2JfHxYC","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":843,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"106","issue":"1","pages":"73-99"}},"sort":["Speusippus and Aristotle on Homonymy and Synonymy"]}
Title | Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander’s Commentary on Metaph. E-N |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 215-232 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
The main conclusions of this study are two: (a) Neither Ps.-Alexander nor Syrianus had access to Alexander’s lost commentary on Metaphysics E-N. (b) For his commentary on books M-N, Syrianus made use of Ps.-Alexander’s commentary, which he mistook for the work of Alexander himself. [conclusion p. 231] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/TQhCHWKXBejvsjI |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"797","_score":null,"_source":{"id":797,"authors_free":[{"id":1176,"entry_id":797,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1177,"entry_id":797,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N","main_title":{"title":"Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N"},"abstract":"The main conclusions of this study are two: (a) Neither Ps.-Alexander nor Syrianus had access to Alexander\u2019s lost commentary on Metaphysics E-N. (b) For his commentary on books M-N, Syrianus made use of Ps.-Alexander\u2019s commentary, which he mistook for the work of Alexander himself. [conclusion p. 231]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TQhCHWKXBejvsjI","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":797,"section_of":189,"pages":"215-232","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N"]}
Title | The Text of Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 246-266 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
My main purpose here is to offer reasons why a new and truly critical edition of Simplicius' commentary is necessary. To do so, in what follows, I shall have to point out some of the shortcomings to be found in Diels' edition of this work. [p. 246] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wSJkdX2PYdHh3n2 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"726","_score":null,"_source":{"id":726,"authors_free":[{"id":1085,"entry_id":726,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1086,"entry_id":726,"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}}],"entry_title":"The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics","main_title":{"title":"The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics"},"abstract":"My main purpose here is to offer reasons why a new and truly critical edition of Simplicius' commentary is necessary. To do so, in what follows, I shall have to point out some of the shortcomings to be found in Diels' edition of this work. [p. 246]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wSJkdX2PYdHh3n2","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":726,"section_of":171,"pages":"246-266","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics"]}
Title | The text of Simplicius’s Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics and the question of supralinear omicron in Greek manuscripts |
Type | Article |
Language | English |
Date | 2014 |
Journal | Revue d’histoire des textes |
Volume | 9 |
Pages | 351-358 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
This paper tries to establish that supralinear omicron is not, as most elementary introductions to Greek paleography have it, a simple abbreviation for the ending omicron-sigma. Rather, it was originally a symbol for suspension that later medieval scribes used also for other subordinated purposes which are impossible to classify. Some examples will be given in what follows. For a long time this interpretation had seemed so obvious to me that during a 1985 colloquium on Simplicius in Paris, it surprised me that some members of the audience objected that supralinear omicron is simply an abbreviation for omicron-sigma. As this occurred during my discussion of a passage of Simplicius’s Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics, and as several of my examples come from that work, it is convenient to give a list of the manuscripts used by Diels and also of additional prim ary witnesses either rejected by, or not known to him. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/euNEGjD514bsBaT |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1456","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1456,"authors_free":[{"id":2476,"entry_id":1456,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The text of Simplicius\u2019s Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics and the question of supralinear omicron in Greek manuscripts","main_title":{"title":"The text of Simplicius\u2019s Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics and the question of supralinear omicron in Greek manuscripts"},"abstract":"This paper tries to establish that supralinear omicron is not, as most elementary introductions to Greek paleography have it, a simple abbreviation for the ending omicron-sigma. Rather, it was originally a symbol for suspension that later medieval scribes used also for other subordinated purposes which are impossible to classify. Some examples will be given in what follows. For a long time this interpretation had seemed so obvious to me that during a 1985 colloquium on Simplicius in Paris, it surprised me that some members of the audience objected that supralinear omicron is simply an abbreviation for omicron-sigma. As this occurred during my discussion of a passage of Simplicius\u2019s Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics, and as several of my examples come from that work, it is convenient to give a list of the manuscripts used by Diels and also of additional prim ary witnesses either rejected by, or not known to him. [introduction]","btype":3,"date":"2014","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/euNEGjD514bsBaT","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1456,"pubplace":"","publisher":"","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1456,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Revue d\u2019histoire des textes ","volume":"9","issue":"","pages":"351-358 "}},"sort":["The text of Simplicius\u2019s Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics and the question of supralinear omicron in Greek manuscripts"]}