| Title | Antisthenes Fg. 50B (Caizzi): A Possible Section of περί τῆς ’Αληθείας |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1973 |
| Journal | L'Antiquité Classique |
| Volume | 42 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 178-180 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Rankin, Herbert David |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| A Note on ANTISTHENES FG. 50 |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/gQgSMArASTgKBgE |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"861","_score":null,"_source":{"id":861,"authors_free":[{"id":1265,"entry_id":861,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":296,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Rankin, Herbert David","free_first_name":"Herbert David","free_last_name":"Rankin","norm_person":{"id":296,"first_name":"Herbert David","last_name":"Rankin","full_name":"Rankin, Herbert David","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1058155474","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Antisthenes Fg. 50B (Caizzi): A Possible Section of \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u2019\u0391\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2","main_title":{"title":"Antisthenes Fg. 50B (Caizzi): A Possible Section of \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u2019\u0391\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2"},"abstract":"A Note on ANTISTHENES FG. 50","btype":3,"date":"1973","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/gQgSMArASTgKBgE","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":296,"full_name":"Rankin, Herbert David","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":861,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"L'Antiquit\u00e9 Classique","volume":"42","issue":"1","pages":"178-180"}},"sort":[1973]}
| Title | The Nature of Zeno's Argument against Plurality in DK 29 B 1 |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1972 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 40-52 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Abraham, William E. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Simplicius has preserved (Phys. 140, 34) a Zenonian argument pur- porting to show that if an object of positive magnitude has parts from which it derives its size, then any such object must be at once of infinite magnitude and zero magnitude. This surprising consequence is based upon a construction which Zeno makes, but his argument is widely thought to be grossly fallacious. Most often he is supposed to have misunderstood the arithmetic of his own construction. Evidently, any such charge must be premised on some view of the particular nature of the sequence to which Zeno's construction gives rise. I seek to develop a view that Zeno's argument is in fact free from fallacy, and offer reason to fear that his real argument has usually been missed. [p. 40] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/FhZoz65GQwXjhsL |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"780","_score":null,"_source":{"id":780,"authors_free":[{"id":1145,"entry_id":780,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":3,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Abraham, William E.","free_first_name":"William E.","free_last_name":"Abraham","norm_person":{"id":3,"first_name":"William E.","last_name":"Abraham","full_name":"Abraham, William E.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1120967007","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Nature of Zeno's Argument against Plurality in DK 29 B 1","main_title":{"title":"The Nature of Zeno's Argument against Plurality in DK 29 B 1"},"abstract":"Simplicius has preserved (Phys. 140, 34) a Zenonian argument pur- \r\nporting to show that if an object of positive magnitude has parts from \r\nwhich it derives its size, then any such object must be at once of \r\ninfinite magnitude and zero magnitude. This surprising consequence \r\nis based upon a construction which Zeno makes, but his argument is \r\nwidely thought to be grossly fallacious. Most often he is supposed to \r\nhave misunderstood the arithmetic of his own construction. Evidently, \r\nany such charge must be premised on some view of the particular \r\nnature of the sequence to which Zeno's construction gives rise. I seek \r\nto develop a view that Zeno's argument is in fact free from fallacy, \r\nand offer reason to fear that his real argument has usually been missed. [p. 40]","btype":3,"date":"1972","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FhZoz65GQwXjhsL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":3,"full_name":"Abraham, William E.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":780,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"17","issue":"1","pages":"40-52"}},"sort":[1972]}
| Title | Poion and Poiotes in Stoic Philosophy |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1972 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 279-285 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Reesor, Margaret E. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The quality or principal cause exists in its sub- stratum by fate. "Virtue benefits," therefore, is a necessary proposition because the predicate is derived from the principal cause inherent by fate in the subject. In order that I may show more easily the relation- ship among the various terms in this diaeresis, I would like to substitute for "Virtue benefits" a necessary proposition related to the term "lives." [p. 280] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Hk61NJLPYwSqT37 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"859","_score":null,"_source":{"id":859,"authors_free":[{"id":1263,"entry_id":859,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":302,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Reesor, Margaret E.","free_first_name":"Margaret E.","free_last_name":"Reesor","norm_person":{"id":302,"first_name":"Margaret E.","last_name":"Reesor","full_name":"Reesor, Margaret E.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Poion and Poiotes in Stoic Philosophy","main_title":{"title":"Poion and Poiotes in Stoic Philosophy"},"abstract":"The quality or principal cause exists in its sub- \r\nstratum by fate. \"Virtue benefits,\" therefore, is a necessary proposition \r\nbecause the predicate is derived from the principal cause inherent by \r\nfate in the subject. In order that I may show more easily the relation- \r\nship among the various terms in this diaeresis, I would like to substitute \r\nfor \"Virtue benefits\" a necessary proposition related to the term \r\n\"lives.\" [p. 280]","btype":3,"date":"1972","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Hk61NJLPYwSqT37","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":302,"full_name":"Reesor, Margaret E.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":859,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"17","issue":"3","pages":"279-285"}},"sort":[1972]}
| Title | Necessity, Chance, and Freedom in the Early Atomists |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1972 |
| Journal | Phoenix |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 342-357 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Edmunds, Lowell |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Fortune, which Democritus so disparaged, had the last laugh on the laughing philosopher when through the fragmentation of his work it obscured a cardinal principle of the atomist system, necessity. Or would Democritus have called this the fatum libellorum? At any rate, the obscurity of this principle is immediately apparent, both in the ancient doxographical tradition and in modern scholarship. Without endorsing any of the views which variously identify necessity with some one characteristic of the atoms, their weight or aboriginal motion, or with the void they move in,x one can yet attempt to undo the identification of necessity with the famous "whirl" of the atoms2 and to see necessity as a single concept of which the causal operation in the system is uniform. Even Zeus was subject to necessity, and one might think of Democritus as refining and systematizing an ancient belief, in the same way that in making r6 'povev physical he subscribed, says Theophrastus, to a "most antique opinion," to which all the poets and sages adhered... [p. 342] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2OUib0xfSoDLMrh |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"753","_score":null,"_source":{"id":753,"authors_free":[{"id":1118,"entry_id":753,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":80,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Edmunds, Lowell","free_first_name":"Lowell","free_last_name":"Edmunds","norm_person":{"id":80,"first_name":"Lowell","last_name":"Edmunds","full_name":"Edmunds, Lowell","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/116147319X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Necessity, Chance, and Freedom in the Early Atomists","main_title":{"title":"Necessity, Chance, and Freedom in the Early Atomists"},"abstract":"Fortune, which Democritus so disparaged, had the last laugh on the \r\nlaughing philosopher when through the fragmentation of his work it \r\nobscured a cardinal principle of the atomist system, necessity. Or would \r\nDemocritus have called this the fatum libellorum? At any rate, the \r\nobscurity of this principle is immediately apparent, both in the ancient \r\ndoxographical tradition and in modern scholarship. Without endorsing \r\nany of the views which variously identify necessity with some one \r\ncharacteristic of the atoms, their weight or aboriginal motion, or with the \r\nvoid they move in,x one can yet attempt to undo the identification of \r\nnecessity with the famous \"whirl\" of the atoms2 and to see necessity as a \r\nsingle concept of which the causal operation in the system is uniform. \r\nEven Zeus was subject to necessity, and one might think of Democritus as \r\nrefining and systematizing an ancient belief, in the same way that in \r\nmaking r6 'povev physical he subscribed, says Theophrastus, to a \"most \r\nantique opinion,\" to which all the poets and sages adhered... [p. 342]","btype":3,"date":"1972","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2OUib0xfSoDLMrh","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":80,"full_name":"Edmunds, Lowell","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":753,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phoenix","volume":"26","issue":"4","pages":"342-357"}},"sort":[1972]}
| Title | Priscianus Lydus en de "In De Anima" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Dutch |
| Date | 1972 |
| Journal | Tijdschrift voor Filosofie |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 761-822 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Bossier, Fernand , Steel, Carlos |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| What I want to do in this paper is to look at how Aristotle’s successors treated some points in his discussions of reason, and in particular the discussion in the De anima. about their handling of relevant parts of the Nichomachaean Ethics we know very little, for unlike the De anima that treatise was not a major subject of study in the philosophical lectures and seminars of late antiquity. Though a commentary on some of it had been written by Aspasius, and notes by other, probably pre -Neoplatonic, hands survive, exposition of the Nicomachean Ethics seems to have been one of the gaps that the group of Aristotelians around Anna Comnena in twelfth-century Constantinople felt that they needed to fill. [pp. 104 f.] Source: https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/MADsskDf9a78Egx • Bossier, Fernand and Carlos Steel, 1972, “Priscianus Lydus en de ‘In de Anima’ van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius”, Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie, 34(4): 761–822. Abstract: Dans cet article, nous avons essayé d'examiner la valeur de l'attribution traditionnelle du commentaire In De Anima à Simplicius. En comparant ce traité aux grands commentaires de Simplicius (sur les Catégories, la Physique et le De Caelo d'Aristote), nous avons été en effet frappés par les divergences de style et de langue, ainsi que par la manière différente de commenter. Dans la première partie, nous démontrons que l'auteur du In De Anima a écrit également la Metaphrasis in Theophrastum, qui nous a été transmise sous le nom de Priscien le Lydien. Dans le In De Anima, l'auteur renvoie à une de ses œuvres, qu'il appelle "Epitomé de la Physique de Théophraste". En réalité, cette référence se rapporte à un passage de la Metaphrase de Priscien, où la même problématique est exposée dans des termes identiques. - 2° Une comparaison détaillée, qui porte sur l'ensemble des deux œuvres, nous révèle une telle ressemblance de style et de pensée - il y a même des phrases à peu près identiques - qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer que par l'hypothèse de l'identité de l'auteur. Dans la deuxième partie, nous essayons d'identifier l'auteur de ces deux œuvres qui nous ont pourtant été transmises sous deux noms différents. L'étude de la tradition directe et indirecte n'apporte guère de solution, puisque l'attribution des deux textes, l'un à Simplicius, l'autre à Priscien, y paraît très solide. Ce n'est donc que par une critique interne du In De Anima, notamment par la confrontation avec les commentaires de Simplicius, dont l'attribution est certaine, que la question pourra être tranchée. Dans le In De Anima, l'auteur renvoie trois fois à son commentaire sur la Physique. Pourtant, il est bien difficile de retrouver dans le grand commentaire de Simplicius trois passages dont le contenu et surtout le vocabulaire prouvent que l'auteur s'y réfère. - 2° Dans le In De Anima, on ne retrouve pas les traits caractéristiques de la méthode de commenter de Simplicius, ni l'approche du texte par la documentation historique, ni les longues discussions avec les exégètes antérieurs, ni l'exposé prolixe et bien structuré ; d'autre part, aucun des commentaires de Simplicius ne témoigne de la phraséologie tortueuse de notre œuvre, ni de ses formules stéréotypées. - 3° La différence doctrinale est encore plus importante. Nulle part chez Simplicius n'apparaît la théorie de l'âme comme "émanation", qui est si fondamentale dans le In De Anima ("émanation" y est un concept-clé). Les rares digressions du In De Anima à propos de questions physiques et logiques ne correspondent pas aux exposés de Simplicius sur les mêmes problèmes. Ainsi, nous avons confronté la doctrine de la "physis", de l'âme et de son "automotion", et enfin le rapport entre le "genre" et les différences "constitutives" et "diérétiques". De tout cela se dégage une telle divergence entre le In De Anima et les autres commentaires qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer par une évolution chez Simplicius lui-même. Le In De Anima lui est donc faussement attribué ; et puisque nous avons établi que ce commentaire est du même auteur que la Metaphrase, nous pouvons conclure qu'il a été vraisemblablement écrit par Priscien le Lydien, un philosophe néoplatonicien dont nous savons seulement qu'il a accompagné Damascius et Simplicius en exil en Perse. [author's abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ufNuMRxWJbAzWRP |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1077","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1077,"authors_free":[{"id":1632,"entry_id":1077,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":12,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bossier, Fernand","free_first_name":"Fernand","free_last_name":"Bossier","norm_person":{"id":12,"first_name":"Fernand ","last_name":"Bossier","full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1017981663","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1633,"entry_id":1077,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Priscianus Lydus en de \"In De Anima\" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Priscianus Lydus en de \"In De Anima\" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius"},"abstract":"What I want to do in this paper is to look at how Aristotle\u2019s successors treated some points in his discussions of reason, and in particular the discussion in the De anima. about their handling of relevant parts of the Nichomachaean Ethics we know very little, for unlike the De anima that treatise was not a major subject of study in the philosophical lectures and seminars of late antiquity. Though a commentary on some of it had been written by Aspasius, and notes by other, probably pre -Neoplatonic, hands survive, exposition of the Nicomachean Ethics seems to have been one of the gaps that the group of Aristotelians around Anna Comnena in twelfth-century Constantinople felt that they needed to fill. [pp. 104 f.]\r\nSource: https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/MADsskDf9a78Egx\r\n\u2022\tBossier, Fernand and Carlos Steel, 1972, \u201cPriscianus Lydus en de \u2018In de Anima\u2019 van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius\u201d, Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie, 34(4): 761\u2013822.\r\nAbstract: Dans cet article, nous avons essay\u00e9 d'examiner la valeur de l'attribution traditionnelle du commentaire In De Anima \u00e0 Simplicius. En comparant ce trait\u00e9 aux grands commentaires de Simplicius (sur les Cat\u00e9gories, la Physique et le De Caelo d'Aristote), nous avons \u00e9t\u00e9 en effet frapp\u00e9s par les divergences de style et de langue, ainsi que par la mani\u00e8re diff\u00e9rente de commenter. \r\nDans la premi\u00e8re partie, nous d\u00e9montrons que l'auteur du In De Anima a \u00e9crit \u00e9galement la Metaphrasis in Theophrastum, qui nous a \u00e9t\u00e9 transmise sous le nom de Priscien le Lydien. Dans le In De Anima, l'auteur renvoie \u00e0 une de ses \u0153uvres, qu'il appelle \"Epitom\u00e9 de la Physique de Th\u00e9ophraste\". En r\u00e9alit\u00e9, cette r\u00e9f\u00e9rence se rapporte \u00e0 un passage de la Metaphrase de Priscien, o\u00f9 la m\u00eame probl\u00e9matique est expos\u00e9e dans des termes identiques. - 2\u00b0 Une comparaison d\u00e9taill\u00e9e, qui porte sur l'ensemble des deux \u0153uvres, nous r\u00e9v\u00e8le une telle ressemblance de style et de pens\u00e9e - il y a m\u00eame des phrases \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s identiques - qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer que par l'hypoth\u00e8se de l'identit\u00e9 de l'auteur.\r\nDans la deuxi\u00e8me partie, nous essayons d'identifier l'auteur de ces deux \u0153uvres qui nous ont pourtant \u00e9t\u00e9 transmises sous deux noms diff\u00e9rents. L'\u00e9tude de la tradition directe et indirecte n'apporte gu\u00e8re de solution, puisque l'attribution des deux textes, l'un \u00e0 Simplicius, l'autre \u00e0 Priscien, y para\u00eet tr\u00e8s solide. Ce n'est donc que par une critique interne du In De Anima, notamment par la confrontation avec les commentaires de Simplicius, dont l'attribution est certaine, que la question pourra \u00eatre tranch\u00e9e.\r\nDans le In De Anima, l'auteur renvoie trois fois \u00e0 son commentaire sur la Physique. Pourtant, il est bien difficile de retrouver dans le grand commentaire de Simplicius trois passages dont le contenu et surtout le vocabulaire prouvent que l'auteur s'y r\u00e9f\u00e8re. - 2\u00b0 Dans le In De Anima, on ne retrouve pas les traits caract\u00e9ristiques de la m\u00e9thode de commenter de Simplicius, ni l'approche du texte par la documentation historique, ni les longues discussions avec les ex\u00e9g\u00e8tes ant\u00e9rieurs, ni l'expos\u00e9 prolixe et bien structur\u00e9 ; d'autre part, aucun des commentaires de Simplicius ne t\u00e9moigne de la phras\u00e9ologie tortueuse de notre \u0153uvre, ni de ses formules st\u00e9r\u00e9otyp\u00e9es. - 3\u00b0 La diff\u00e9rence doctrinale est encore plus importante. Nulle part chez Simplicius n'appara\u00eet la th\u00e9orie de l'\u00e2me comme \"\u00e9manation\", qui est si fondamentale dans le In De Anima (\"\u00e9manation\" y est un concept-cl\u00e9). Les rares digressions du In De Anima \u00e0 propos de questions physiques et logiques ne correspondent pas aux expos\u00e9s de Simplicius sur les m\u00eames probl\u00e8mes. Ainsi, nous avons confront\u00e9 la doctrine de la \"physis\", de l'\u00e2me et de son \"automotion\", et enfin le rapport entre le \"genre\" et les diff\u00e9rences \"constitutives\" et \"di\u00e9r\u00e9tiques\". De tout cela se d\u00e9gage une telle divergence entre le In De Anima et les autres commentaires qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer par une \u00e9volution chez Simplicius lui-m\u00eame. Le In De Anima lui est donc faussement attribu\u00e9 ; et puisque nous avons \u00e9tabli que ce commentaire est du m\u00eame auteur que la Metaphrase, nous pouvons conclure qu'il a \u00e9t\u00e9 vraisemblablement \u00e9crit par Priscien le Lydien, un philosophe n\u00e9oplatonicien dont nous savons seulement qu'il a accompagn\u00e9 Damascius et Simplicius en exil en Perse.\r\n[author's abstract]","btype":3,"date":"1972","language":"Dutch","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ufNuMRxWJbAzWRP","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":12,"full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1077,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Tijdschrift voor Filosofie","volume":"34","issue":"4","pages":"761-822"}},"sort":[1972]}
| Title | 'Planets' in Simplicius De caelo 471.1 ff. |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1971 |
| Journal | The Journal of Hellenic Studies |
| Volume | 91 |
| Pages | 138-139 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hall, J.J |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Thus all that Simplicius is saying, on Eudemus’ authority, is that Anaximander ‘was the first to discuss’ the sizes and distances of ‘planets’, using the latter term to include sun and moon; and this agrees with what the doxographers tell us: Anaximander had views about the distances of sun and moon, and the size of the sun.11 A sceptic, like Dicks, may question this whole tradition; but it should not be claimed that what Simplicius says of Anaximander and planômena in 471.2-6 is inconsistent with our other authorities. [conclusion, p. 139] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ZmTTpk12fUJCyWj |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1342","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1342,"authors_free":[{"id":2000,"entry_id":1342,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":165,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hall, J.J","free_first_name":"J.J.","free_last_name":"Hall","norm_person":{"id":165,"first_name":"J.J","last_name":"Hall","full_name":"Hall, J. J","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"'Planets' in Simplicius De caelo 471.1 ff.","main_title":{"title":"'Planets' in Simplicius De caelo 471.1 ff."},"abstract":"Thus all that Simplicius is saying, on Eudemus\u2019 \r\nauthority, is that Anaximander \u2018was the first to \r\ndiscuss\u2019 the sizes and distances of \u2018planets\u2019, using the latter term to include sun and moon; and this agrees with what the doxographers tell us: Anaximander had views about the distances of sun and moon, and the size of the sun.11 A sceptic, like Dicks, may question this whole tradition; but it should not be claimed that what Simplicius says of Anaximander and plan\u00f4mena in 471.2-6 is incon\u00adsistent with our other authorities. [conclusion, p. 139]","btype":3,"date":"1971","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ZmTTpk12fUJCyWj","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":165,"full_name":"Hall, J. J","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1342,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Journal of Hellenic Studies","volume":"91","issue":"","pages":"138-139"}},"sort":[1971]}
| Title | ΟΜΟΥ ΧΡΗΜΑΤΑ ΠΑΝΤΑ ΗΝ |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1971 |
| Journal | Hermes |
| Volume | 99 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 246-248 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Rösler, Wolfgang |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Wie alle umfangreicheren Fragmente der Abhandlung Περί φύσεως des Anaxagoras ist auch Fr. 1 (VS 59 B 1) durch den Kommentar des Simphkios zur Aristotelischen Physik überliefert. Simplikios hatte die Möglichkeit, ein Exemplar der Schrift des ionischen Philosophen zu benutzen. In seiner ganzen Länge erscheint das Fragment, dessen Stellung am Anfang des Buches aus drücklich bezeugt ist, nur einmal {155, 26) ; daneben gibt es weitere Passagen, in denen lediglich der einleitende Satz bzw. dessen Beginn zitiert wird. Ein Überblick zeigt, daß zwischen den einzelnen Zitaten Unterschiede in der Wort stellung bestehen. Deshalb soll im folgenden der Versuch unternommen werden, die ursprüngliche Anordnung in der Textvorlage des Simphkios zu rekonstru ieren. [p. 246] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/9n12ZGIEEzHXfpF |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"774","_score":null,"_source":{"id":774,"authors_free":[{"id":1138,"entry_id":774,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":383,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"R\u00f6sler, Wolfgang","free_first_name":"Wolfgang","free_last_name":"R\u00f6sler","norm_person":{"id":383,"first_name":"Wolfgang","last_name":"R\u00f6sler","full_name":"R\u00f6sler, Wolfgang","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/133199266","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"\u039f\u039c\u039f\u03a5 \u03a7\u03a1\u0397\u039c\u0391\u03a4\u0391 \u03a0\u0391\u039d\u03a4\u0391 \u0397\u039d","main_title":{"title":"\u039f\u039c\u039f\u03a5 \u03a7\u03a1\u0397\u039c\u0391\u03a4\u0391 \u03a0\u0391\u039d\u03a4\u0391 \u0397\u039d"},"abstract":"Wie alle umfangreicheren Fragmente der Abhandlung \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 des \r\nAnaxagoras ist auch Fr. 1 (VS 59 B 1) durch den Kommentar des Simphkios \r\nzur Aristotelischen Physik \u00fcberliefert. Simplikios hatte die M\u00f6glichkeit, ein \r\nExemplar der Schrift des ionischen Philosophen zu benutzen. In seiner ganzen \r\nL\u00e4nge erscheint das Fragment, dessen Stellung am Anfang des Buches aus\u00ad\r\ndr\u00fccklich bezeugt ist, nur einmal {155, 26) ; daneben gibt es weitere Passagen, \r\nin denen lediglich der einleitende Satz bzw. dessen Beginn zitiert wird. Ein \r\n\u00dcberblick zeigt, da\u00df zwischen den einzelnen Zitaten Unterschiede in der Wort\u00ad\r\nstellung bestehen. Deshalb soll im folgenden der Versuch unternommen werden, \r\ndie urspr\u00fcngliche Anordnung in der Textvorlage des Simphkios zu rekonstru\u00ad\r\nieren. [p. 246]","btype":3,"date":"1971","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/9n12ZGIEEzHXfpF","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":383,"full_name":"R\u00f6sler, Wolfgang","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":774,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"99","issue":"2","pages":"246-248"}},"sort":[1971]}
| Title | The Tradition about Zeno of Elea Re-Examined |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1971 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 116-141 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Solmsen, Friedrich |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| This paper makes no attempt to compete with the brilliant studies through which in the last thirty years several scholars have ad- vanced our understanding of the evidence for Zeno of Elea and in particular of the verbatim preserved fragments. In fact my in- tention is not to replace theories by other theories but to create doubt about matters that for some time have been taken for granted and to change confident assumptions into hypotheses that would tolerate others besides them. [p. 116] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/x10aAvObhnTaTON |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1016","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1016,"authors_free":[{"id":1532,"entry_id":1016,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":316,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Solmsen, Friedrich","free_first_name":"Friedrich","free_last_name":"Solmsen","norm_person":{"id":316,"first_name":"Friedrich","last_name":"Solmsen","full_name":"Solmsen, Friedrich","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117754641","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Tradition about Zeno of Elea Re-Examined","main_title":{"title":"The Tradition about Zeno of Elea Re-Examined"},"abstract":"This paper makes no attempt to compete with the brilliant studies \r\nthrough which in the last thirty years several scholars have ad- \r\nvanced our understanding of the evidence for Zeno of Elea and \r\nin particular of the verbatim preserved fragments. In fact my in- \r\ntention is not to replace theories by other theories but to create \r\ndoubt about matters that for some time have been taken for granted \r\nand to change confident assumptions into hypotheses that would \r\ntolerate others besides them. [p. 116]","btype":3,"date":"1971","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/x10aAvObhnTaTON","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":316,"full_name":"Solmsen, Friedrich","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1016,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"16","issue":"2","pages":"116-141"}},"sort":[1971]}
| Title | The Nature of Zeno's Argument against Plurality in DK 29 B 1 |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1972 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 40-52 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Abraham, William E. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Simplicius has preserved (Phys. 140, 34) a Zenonian argument pur- porting to show that if an object of positive magnitude has parts from which it derives its size, then any such object must be at once of infinite magnitude and zero magnitude. This surprising consequence is based upon a construction which Zeno makes, but his argument is widely thought to be grossly fallacious. Most often he is supposed to have misunderstood the arithmetic of his own construction. Evidently, any such charge must be premised on some view of the particular nature of the sequence to which Zeno's construction gives rise. I seek to develop a view that Zeno's argument is in fact free from fallacy, and offer reason to fear that his real argument has usually been missed. [p. 40] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/FhZoz65GQwXjhsL |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"780","_score":null,"_source":{"id":780,"authors_free":[{"id":1145,"entry_id":780,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":3,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Abraham, William E.","free_first_name":"William E.","free_last_name":"Abraham","norm_person":{"id":3,"first_name":"William E.","last_name":"Abraham","full_name":"Abraham, William E.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1120967007","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Nature of Zeno's Argument against Plurality in DK 29 B 1","main_title":{"title":"The Nature of Zeno's Argument against Plurality in DK 29 B 1"},"abstract":"Simplicius has preserved (Phys. 140, 34) a Zenonian argument pur- \r\nporting to show that if an object of positive magnitude has parts from \r\nwhich it derives its size, then any such object must be at once of \r\ninfinite magnitude and zero magnitude. This surprising consequence \r\nis based upon a construction which Zeno makes, but his argument is \r\nwidely thought to be grossly fallacious. Most often he is supposed to \r\nhave misunderstood the arithmetic of his own construction. Evidently, \r\nany such charge must be premised on some view of the particular \r\nnature of the sequence to which Zeno's construction gives rise. I seek \r\nto develop a view that Zeno's argument is in fact free from fallacy, \r\nand offer reason to fear that his real argument has usually been missed. [p. 40]","btype":3,"date":"1972","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FhZoz65GQwXjhsL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":3,"full_name":"Abraham, William E.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":780,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"17","issue":"1","pages":"40-52"}},"sort":["The Nature of Zeno's Argument against Plurality in DK 29 B 1"]}
| Title | The Presidential Address: Analyses of Matter, Ancient and Modern |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1985 |
| Journal | Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series |
| Volume | 86 |
| Pages | 1-22 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/xfHHbWNjht9hEhn |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"490","_score":null,"_source":{"id":490,"authors_free":[{"id":671,"entry_id":490,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Presidential Address: Analyses of Matter, Ancient and Modern","main_title":{"title":"The Presidential Address: Analyses of Matter, Ancient and Modern"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/xfHHbWNjht9hEhn","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":490,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series","volume":"86","issue":"","pages":"1-22"}},"sort":["The Presidential Address: Analyses of Matter, Ancient and Modern"]}
| Title | The Tradition about Zeno of Elea Re-Examined |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1971 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 116-141 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Solmsen, Friedrich |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
This paper makes no attempt to compete with the brilliant studies through which in the last thirty years several scholars have ad- vanced our understanding of the evidence for Zeno of Elea and in particular of the verbatim preserved fragments. In fact my in- tention is not to replace theories by other theories but to create doubt about matters that for some time have been taken for granted and to change confident assumptions into hypotheses that would tolerate others besides them. [p. 116] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/x10aAvObhnTaTON |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1016","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1016,"authors_free":[{"id":1532,"entry_id":1016,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":316,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Solmsen, Friedrich","free_first_name":"Friedrich","free_last_name":"Solmsen","norm_person":{"id":316,"first_name":"Friedrich","last_name":"Solmsen","full_name":"Solmsen, Friedrich","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117754641","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Tradition about Zeno of Elea Re-Examined","main_title":{"title":"The Tradition about Zeno of Elea Re-Examined"},"abstract":"This paper makes no attempt to compete with the brilliant studies \r\nthrough which in the last thirty years several scholars have ad- \r\nvanced our understanding of the evidence for Zeno of Elea and \r\nin particular of the verbatim preserved fragments. In fact my in- \r\ntention is not to replace theories by other theories but to create \r\ndoubt about matters that for some time have been taken for granted \r\nand to change confident assumptions into hypotheses that would \r\ntolerate others besides them. [p. 116]","btype":3,"date":"1971","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/x10aAvObhnTaTON","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":316,"full_name":"Solmsen, Friedrich","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1016,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"16","issue":"2","pages":"116-141"}},"sort":["The Tradition about Zeno of Elea Re-Examined"]}
| Title | The Trouble with Fragrance |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1990 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 35 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 290-302 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Ellis, John |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
By 'in a subject' I mean what (a) is in something, not as a part, and (b) cannot exist separately from what it is in. (Aristotle, Categories la24-5) These lines have been extensively discussed in recent years. [...] The task I've set for myself in this paper is not to argue for either the weak or the strong interpretation of inherence in Aristotle. That is already a well-tr;odden path. Instead I shall look at what the ancient commentators on Aristotle had to say on the subject. Which interpretation, the strong or the weak, do they support? My strategy is to focus on one of the many problems they consider, that of fragrance, and to see if their treatment of it yields an answer. [pp. 290 f.] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/IaCYIGP7JxpC5ur |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"751","_score":null,"_source":{"id":751,"authors_free":[{"id":1116,"entry_id":751,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":81,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Ellis, John","free_first_name":"John","free_last_name":"Ellis","norm_person":{"id":81,"first_name":"John","last_name":"Ellis","full_name":"Ellis, John","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Trouble with Fragrance","main_title":{"title":"The Trouble with Fragrance"},"abstract":"By 'in a subject' I mean what (a) is in something, not as a part, and (b) cannot \r\nexist separately from what it is in. (Aristotle, Categories la24-5) \r\nThese lines have been extensively discussed in recent years. [...] The task I've set for myself in this paper is not to argue for either the weak \r\nor the strong interpretation of inherence in Aristotle. That is already a \r\nwell-tr;odden path. Instead I shall look at what the ancient commentators on Aristotle had to say on the subject. Which interpretation, the strong or the \r\nweak, do they support? My strategy is to focus on one of the many problems \r\nthey consider, that of fragrance, and to see if their treatment of it yields an \r\nanswer. [pp. 290 f.]","btype":3,"date":"1990","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/IaCYIGP7JxpC5ur","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":81,"full_name":"Ellis, John","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":751,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"35","issue":"3","pages":"290-302"}},"sort":["The Trouble with Fragrance"]}
| Title | Theophrast und der Beginn des Archereferats von Simplikios Physikkommentar |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1989 |
| Journal | Hermes |
| Volume | 117 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 288-303 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Simplikios hat das Schema von Phys. 12 zweimal für die Monisten vervollständigt. Bei den Eleaten konnte er dabei Aristoteles' eigener Erweiterung im Verlauf von 12 folgen. Dieses Raster liegt nun auch in Metaph. A 5, 986 b 17 sqq. vor; insofern konnte Simplikios die auf diesen letzteren Passus zurückgehenden, das erweiterte Raster aufweisenden Auskünfte Theophrasts ohne weiteres an seine Gliederung nahtlos anfügen. Für die physikalischen Monisten ist theophrastischer Einfluss auf Simplikios' erweitertes Schema in Phys. 23,21-22 und 24,13 kaum abweisbar, da für alle behandelten Denker von Thaies bis Diogenes von Apollonia eine entsprechende Prädizierung beim Eresier belegt ist oder erschlossen werden kann. [S. 292] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/yYnkG6JpdF2tEJA |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"835","_score":null,"_source":{"id":835,"authors_free":[{"id":1239,"entry_id":835,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"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":"Theophrast und der Beginn des Archereferats von Simplikios Physikkommentar","main_title":{"title":"Theophrast und der Beginn des Archereferats von Simplikios Physikkommentar"},"abstract":"Simplikios hat das Schema von Phys. 12 zweimal f\u00fcr die Monisten vervollst\u00e4ndigt. Bei den Eleaten konnte er dabei Aristoteles' eigener Erweiterung im Verlauf von 12 folgen. Dieses Raster liegt nun auch in Metaph. A 5, 986 b 17 sqq. vor; insofern konnte Simplikios die auf diesen letzteren Passus zur\u00fcckgehenden, das erweiterte Raster aufweisenden Ausk\u00fcnfte Theophrasts ohne weiteres an seine Gliederung nahtlos anf\u00fcgen. F\u00fcr die physikalischen Monisten ist theophrastischer Einfluss auf Simplikios' erweitertes Schema in Phys. 23,21-22 und 24,13 kaum abweisbar, da f\u00fcr alle behandelten Denker von Thaies bis Diogenes von Apollonia eine entsprechende Pr\u00e4dizierung beim Eresier belegt ist oder erschlossen werden kann. [S. 292]","btype":3,"date":"1989","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/yYnkG6JpdF2tEJA","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":835,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"117","issue":"3","pages":"288-303"}},"sort":["Theophrast und der Beginn des Archereferats von Simplikios Physikkommentar"]}
| Title | Zeno on Plurality |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1982 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 223-238 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Makin, Stephen |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
We want to discuss some Eleatic arguments against plurality,2 which are of interest both in themselves and as precursors of Atomist thought. The arguments to be considered are from Zeno. We will have two guides in interpreting the arguments. First, they should be such that Atomist theory provides a plausible response to them; second, they should pose no threat to the Eleatic theory. [p. 223] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/GefIrE7RqZlW4wb |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"730","_score":null,"_source":{"id":730,"authors_free":[{"id":1093,"entry_id":730,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":460,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Makin, Stephen","free_first_name":"Stephen","free_last_name":"Makin","norm_person":{"id":460,"first_name":"Stephen","last_name":"Makin","full_name":"Makin, Stephen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Zeno on Plurality","main_title":{"title":"Zeno on Plurality"},"abstract":" We want to \r\ndiscuss some Eleatic arguments against plurality,2 which are of interest \r\nboth in themselves and as precursors of Atomist thought. The arguments to \r\nbe considered are from Zeno. \r\nWe will have two guides in interpreting the arguments. First, they should \r\nbe such that Atomist theory provides a plausible response to them; second, \r\nthey should pose no threat to the Eleatic theory. [p. 223]","btype":3,"date":"1982","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/GefIrE7RqZlW4wb","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":460,"full_name":"Makin, Stephen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":730,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"27","issue":"3","pages":"223-238"}},"sort":["Zeno on Plurality"]}
| Title | Zur Methodik antiker Exegese |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1974 |
| Journal | Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der Älteren Kirche |
| Volume | 65 |
| Pages | 121-138 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Dörrie, Heinrich |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Der Artikel behandelt die Exegese antiker Texte und beginnt mit einem Fokus auf die Auslegung Homers. Die homerischen Epen wurden für mehr als 1000 Jahre als Quelle für Bildung und Literatur betrachtet und waren daher von großer Bedeutung für die antike Exegese. Obwohl sich die Sprache, die Werte und die mythologischen Überzeugungen von antiken Texten von der modernen Welt unterscheiden, blieben sie von Bedeutung. Die allegorische Auslegung Homers war ein Schlüsselthema, das später auch auf die christliche Exegese angewendet wurde. Die antike Exegese befasste sich nicht nur mit literarischen Werken, sondern auch mit Orakeln, Sprichwörtern und Riten. Die Methode der antiken Exegese wurde in Alexandrien von den Philologen auf wenige, einfache Fakten reduziert, aber im Allgemeinen blieb sie kontinuierlich und bestätigte das Bildungserbe, auf das sie zurückgriff. Die christliche Exegese wurde stark von der vorausgehenden antiken Exegese beeinflusst, insbesondere von der stoischen Exegese, die Werkzeuge zur Interpretation von Texten bereitstellte. Die Artikel erörtert die Kontinuität der Exegese im Laufe der Jahrhunderte und betont, dass antike Exegese ein Bildungserbe darstellt, das über Jahrhunderte hinweg bewahrt wurde. [introduction/conclusion] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/n1LEt2gjjaymDaT |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1293","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1293,"authors_free":[{"id":1882,"entry_id":1293,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":69,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"D\u00f6rrie, Heinrich","free_first_name":"Heinrich","free_last_name":"D\u00f6rrie","norm_person":{"id":69,"first_name":"Heinrich ","last_name":"D\u00f6rrie","full_name":"D\u00f6rrie, Heinrich ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118526375","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Zur Methodik antiker Exegese","main_title":{"title":"Zur Methodik antiker Exegese"},"abstract":"Der Artikel behandelt die Exegese antiker Texte und beginnt mit einem Fokus auf die Auslegung Homers. Die homerischen Epen wurden f\u00fcr mehr als 1000 Jahre als Quelle f\u00fcr Bildung und Literatur betrachtet und waren daher von gro\u00dfer Bedeutung f\u00fcr die antike Exegese. Obwohl sich die Sprache, die Werte und die mythologischen \u00dcberzeugungen von antiken Texten von der modernen Welt unterscheiden, blieben sie von Bedeutung. Die allegorische Auslegung Homers war ein Schl\u00fcsselthema, das sp\u00e4ter auch auf die christliche Exegese angewendet wurde. Die antike Exegese befasste sich nicht nur mit literarischen Werken, sondern auch mit Orakeln, Sprichw\u00f6rtern und Riten. Die Methode der antiken Exegese wurde in Alexandrien von den Philologen auf wenige, einfache Fakten reduziert, aber im Allgemeinen blieb sie kontinuierlich und best\u00e4tigte das Bildungserbe, auf das sie zur\u00fcckgriff. Die christliche Exegese wurde stark von der vorausgehenden antiken Exegese beeinflusst, insbesondere von der stoischen Exegese, die Werkzeuge zur Interpretation von Texten bereitstellte. Die Artikel er\u00f6rtert die Kontinuit\u00e4t der Exegese im Laufe der Jahrhunderte und betont, dass antike Exegese ein Bildungserbe darstellt, das \u00fcber Jahrhunderte hinweg bewahrt wurde. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":3,"date":"1974","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/n1LEt2gjjaymDaT","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":69,"full_name":"D\u00f6rrie, Heinrich ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1293,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Zeitschrift f\u00fcr die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der \u00c4lteren Kirche","volume":"65","issue":"","pages":"121-138"}},"sort":["Zur Methodik antiker Exegese"]}
| Title | ΟΜΟΥ ΧΡΗΜΑΤΑ ΠΑΝΤΑ ΗΝ |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1971 |
| Journal | Hermes |
| Volume | 99 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 246-248 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Rösler, Wolfgang |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Wie alle umfangreicheren Fragmente der Abhandlung Περί φύσεως des
Anaxagoras ist auch Fr. 1 (VS 59 B 1) durch den Kommentar des Simphkios
zur Aristotelischen Physik überliefert. Simplikios hatte die Möglichkeit, ein
Exemplar der Schrift des ionischen Philosophen zu benutzen. In seiner ganzen
Länge erscheint das Fragment, dessen Stellung am Anfang des Buches aus
drücklich bezeugt ist, nur einmal {155, 26) ; daneben gibt es weitere Passagen,
in denen lediglich der einleitende Satz bzw. dessen Beginn zitiert wird. Ein
Überblick zeigt, daß zwischen den einzelnen Zitaten Unterschiede in der Wort
stellung bestehen. Deshalb soll im folgenden der Versuch unternommen werden,
die ursprüngliche Anordnung in der Textvorlage des Simphkios zu rekonstru
ieren. [p. 246] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/9n12ZGIEEzHXfpF |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"774","_score":null,"_source":{"id":774,"authors_free":[{"id":1138,"entry_id":774,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":383,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"R\u00f6sler, Wolfgang","free_first_name":"Wolfgang","free_last_name":"R\u00f6sler","norm_person":{"id":383,"first_name":"Wolfgang","last_name":"R\u00f6sler","full_name":"R\u00f6sler, Wolfgang","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/133199266","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"\u039f\u039c\u039f\u03a5 \u03a7\u03a1\u0397\u039c\u0391\u03a4\u0391 \u03a0\u0391\u039d\u03a4\u0391 \u0397\u039d","main_title":{"title":"\u039f\u039c\u039f\u03a5 \u03a7\u03a1\u0397\u039c\u0391\u03a4\u0391 \u03a0\u0391\u039d\u03a4\u0391 \u0397\u039d"},"abstract":"Wie alle umfangreicheren Fragmente der Abhandlung \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 des \r\nAnaxagoras ist auch Fr. 1 (VS 59 B 1) durch den Kommentar des Simphkios \r\nzur Aristotelischen Physik \u00fcberliefert. Simplikios hatte die M\u00f6glichkeit, ein \r\nExemplar der Schrift des ionischen Philosophen zu benutzen. In seiner ganzen \r\nL\u00e4nge erscheint das Fragment, dessen Stellung am Anfang des Buches aus\u00ad\r\ndr\u00fccklich bezeugt ist, nur einmal {155, 26) ; daneben gibt es weitere Passagen, \r\nin denen lediglich der einleitende Satz bzw. dessen Beginn zitiert wird. Ein \r\n\u00dcberblick zeigt, da\u00df zwischen den einzelnen Zitaten Unterschiede in der Wort\u00ad\r\nstellung bestehen. Deshalb soll im folgenden der Versuch unternommen werden, \r\ndie urspr\u00fcngliche Anordnung in der Textvorlage des Simphkios zu rekonstru\u00ad\r\nieren. [p. 246]","btype":3,"date":"1971","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/9n12ZGIEEzHXfpF","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":383,"full_name":"R\u00f6sler, Wolfgang","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":774,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"99","issue":"2","pages":"246-248"}},"sort":["\u039f\u039c\u039f\u03a5 \u03a7\u03a1\u0397\u039c\u0391\u03a4\u0391 \u03a0\u0391\u039d\u03a4\u0391 \u0397\u039d"]}