| Title | Simplicius |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2020 |
| Published in | The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Helmig, Christoph |
| Editor(s) | Zalta, Edward N. |
| Translator(s) |
| Simplicius of Cilicia (ca. 480–560 CE), roughly a contemporary of John Philoponus, is without doubt the most important Neoplatonic commentator on Aristotle and one of the two most influential exegetes within the Aristotelian tradition, along with Alexander of Aphrodisias (around 200 CE). Simplicius’ works are an unmatched source for the intellectual traditions that preceded him: Presocratic, Platonic, and especially the Peripatetic tradition. He is also an independent thinker in his own right, with a coherent philosophical agenda. Best known for his tendency to harmonise Plato and Aristotle, he nevertheless criticised Aristotle on several occasions and considered himself a loyal follower of Plato. Writing in an age when Christianity was the dominant religious and political view, Simplicius aimed to show that the Hellenic tradition is not only much older, but also more venerable and more coherent than the Christian tradition. Unimpressed by charges of alleged contradictions among Greek philosophers, Simplicius repeatedly proclaimed that “the ancient wisdom (palaia philosophia) remains unrefuted” (In Phys. 77.11). It is also noteworthy that, like Proclus and other Neoplatonists, Simplicius presents himself as a thinker for whom philosophy and theology form a complete unity. As has frequently been observed, Simplicius’ works, despite their scholarly outlook, have an important spiritual dimension (see §5). Simplicius’ commentaries have only recently been studied with an eye to his own philosophical views. He was long considered a mere source for Greek philosophy, and, as noted by Baltussen (2010: 714), Simplicius’ importance as a source for ancient Greek philosophy and science has long overshadowed his contributions as an independent thinker. Nineteenth-century Quellenforschung was especially interested in his Commentary on the Physics, which was edited in two volumes (Simplicii in Aristotelis Physicorum libros quattuor priores/quattuor posteriores, comprising almost 1500 pages) by Hermann Diels; this commentary served as the basis for Diels’ edition of the Doxographi Graeci (Greek Doxographers), which includes the main doctrines on natural philosophy according to ancient doxographical compendia. One of the aims of this entry is to emphasise that Simplicius’ writings have much more to offer than a mere doxography of his predecessors—but always bearing in mind that it is only possible to appreciate how Simplicius arranges and interprets the material at his disposal by duly attending to his Neoplatonic agenda. |
| Online Resources | https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/simplicius/ |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1468","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1468,"authors_free":[{"id":2541,"entry_id":1468,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":146,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Helmig, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"Helmig","norm_person":{"id":146,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Helmig","full_name":"Helmig, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1107028760","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2542,"entry_id":1468,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":185,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","free_first_name":"Edward N.","free_last_name":"Zalta","norm_person":{"id":185,"first_name":"Edward N.","last_name":"Zalta","full_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/132645920","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius"},"abstract":"Simplicius of Cilicia (ca. 480\u2013560 CE), roughly a contemporary of John Philoponus, is without doubt the most important Neoplatonic commentator on Aristotle and one of the two most influential exegetes within the Aristotelian tradition, along with Alexander of Aphrodisias (around 200 CE). Simplicius\u2019 works are an unmatched source for the intellectual traditions that preceded him: Presocratic, Platonic, and especially the Peripatetic tradition. He is also an independent thinker in his own right, with a coherent philosophical agenda. Best known for his tendency to harmonise Plato and Aristotle, he nevertheless criticised Aristotle on several occasions and considered himself a loyal follower of Plato. Writing in an age when Christianity was the dominant religious and political view, Simplicius aimed to show that the Hellenic tradition is not only much older, but also more venerable and more coherent than the Christian tradition. Unimpressed by charges of alleged contradictions among Greek philosophers, Simplicius repeatedly proclaimed that \u201cthe ancient wisdom (palaia philosophia) remains unrefuted\u201d (In Phys. 77.11). It is also noteworthy that, like Proclus and other Neoplatonists, Simplicius presents himself as a thinker for whom philosophy and theology form a complete unity. As has frequently been observed, Simplicius\u2019 works, despite their scholarly outlook, have an important spiritual dimension (see \u00a75).\r\n\r\nSimplicius\u2019 commentaries have only recently been studied with an eye to his own philosophical views. He was long considered a mere source for Greek philosophy, and, as noted by Baltussen (2010: 714),\r\n\r\n Simplicius\u2019 importance as a source for ancient Greek philosophy and science has long overshadowed his contributions as an independent thinker.\r\n\r\nNineteenth-century Quellenforschung was especially interested in his Commentary on the Physics, which was edited in two volumes (Simplicii in Aristotelis Physicorum libros quattuor priores\/quattuor posteriores, comprising almost 1500 pages) by Hermann Diels; this commentary served as the basis for Diels\u2019 edition of the Doxographi Graeci (Greek Doxographers), which includes the main doctrines on natural philosophy according to ancient doxographical compendia.\r\n\r\nOne of the aims of this entry is to emphasise that Simplicius\u2019 writings have much more to offer than a mere doxography of his predecessors\u2014but always bearing in mind that it is only possible to appreciate how Simplicius arranges and interprets the material at his disposal by duly attending to his Neoplatonic agenda.","btype":2,"date":"2020","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/plato.stanford.edu\/archives\/sum2020\/entries\/simplicius\/","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":146,"full_name":"Helmig, Christoph","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":185,"full_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1468,"section_of":1350,"pages":"","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1350,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":null}},"article":null},"sort":[2020]}
| Title | A Philosophical Portrait of Stephanus the Philosopher |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Published in | Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators |
| Pages | 541-564 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Roueché, Mossman |
| Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
| Translator(s) |
| The role played by Stephanus the Philosopher in the history of philosophy in the sixth century has been poorly studied. Th e clearest indication of this is the absence of any entry for Stephanus in either the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy or the recent Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity. He is universally acknowledged to be the author of an extant commentary on Aristotle’s De Interpretatione but beyond that, there has been considerable uncertainty concerning the identity, the date and the works attributed to someone who has been called ‘a very shadowy figure’. From the time of Hermann Usener’s classic dissertation, De Stephano Alexandrino, interest in Stephanus as a philosopher has been over- shadowed by interest in his non- philosophical activities. These include his supposed appointment as an ‘ecumenical teacher’ in Constantinople during the reign of Heraclius and his authorship of certain astrological, astronomical, alchemical and medical works that are attributed to ‘Stephanus’ in some manuscripts. It has recently been shown that the arguments for ascribing to him these non- philosophical activities are based on anachronistic evidence and that the conclusions are no longer valid. The removal of this‘evidence’ and the conclusions drawn from it provides a timely opportunity to examine afresh the genuine evidence that we have for his life and works as a philosopher and to draw some important conclusions regarding his influence. Far from being a shadowy figure, Stephanus was an important philosopher in sixth century Alexandria. He was a student of John Philoponus and, as one of the Christian successors of Olympiodorus, he continued the Christianisation of the introductory philosophical curriculum. His lectures covered the entire Organon and became the source of a philosophical vocabulary widely used by Christian theologians, including Maximus the Confessor and John Damascene, during the seventh and eighth centuries. Through translations into Syriac and Arabic, his commentaries continued to influence Syrian and Arabic philosophers well into the mediaeval period. [introduction] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/pWmf1HP2ooQ3TFJ |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1527","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1527,"authors_free":[{"id":2659,"entry_id":1527,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Rouech\u00e9, Mossman","free_first_name":"Mossman","free_last_name":"Rouech\u00e9","norm_person":null},{"id":2660,"entry_id":1527,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"A Philosophical Portrait of Stephanus the Philosopher","main_title":{"title":"A Philosophical Portrait of Stephanus the Philosopher"},"abstract":"The role played by Stephanus the Philosopher in the history of philosophy in the sixth century has been poorly studied. Th e clearest indication of this is the absence of any entry for Stephanus in either the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy or the recent Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity. He is universally acknowledged to be the author of an extant commentary on Aristotle\u2019s De Interpretatione but beyond that, there has been considerable uncertainty concerning the identity, the date and the works attributed to someone who has been called \u2018a very shadowy figure\u2019. From the time of Hermann Usener\u2019s classic dissertation, De Stephano Alexandrino, interest in Stephanus as a philosopher has been over- shadowed by interest in his non- philosophical activities. These include his supposed appointment as an \u2018ecumenical teacher\u2019 in Constantinople during the reign of Heraclius and his authorship of certain astrological, astronomical, alchemical and medical works that are attributed to \u2018Stephanus\u2019 in some manuscripts. It has recently been shown that the arguments for ascribing to him these non- philosophical activities are based on anachronistic evidence and that the conclusions are no longer valid. The removal of this\u2018evidence\u2019 and the conclusions drawn from it provides a timely opportunity to examine afresh the genuine evidence that we have for his life and works as a philosopher and to draw some important conclusions regarding his influence. Far from being a shadowy figure, Stephanus was an important philosopher in sixth century Alexandria. He was a student of John Philoponus and, as one of the Christian successors of Olympiodorus, he continued the Christianisation of the introductory philosophical curriculum. His lectures covered the entire Organon and became the source of a philosophical vocabulary widely used by Christian theologians, including Maximus the Confessor and John Damascene, during the seventh and eighth centuries. Through translations into Syriac and Arabic, his commentaries continued to influence Syrian and Arabic philosophers well into the mediaeval period. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/pWmf1HP2ooQ3TFJ","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1527,"section_of":1419,"pages":"541-564","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1419,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2016","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This volume presents collected essays \u2013 some brand new, some republished, and others newly translated \u2013 on the ancient commentators on Aristotle and showcases the leading research of the last three decades. Through the work and scholarship inspired by Richard Sorabji in his series of translations of the commentators started in the 1980s, these ancient texts have become a key field within ancient philosophy. Building on the strength of the series, which has been hailed as \u2018a scholarly marvel\u2019, \u2018a truly breath-taking achievement\u2019 and \u2018one of the great scholarly achievements of our time\u2019 and on the widely praised edited volume brought out in 1990 (Aristotle Transformed) this new book brings together critical new scholarship that is a must-read for any scholar in the field.\r\n\r\nWith a wide range of contributors from across the globe, the articles look at the commentators themselves, discussing problems of analysis and interpretation that have arisen through close study of the texts. Richard Sorabji introduces the volume and himself contributes two new papers. A key recent area of research has been into the Arabic, Latin and Hebrew versions of texts, and several important essays look in depth at these. With all text translated and transliterated, the volume is accessible to readers without specialist knowledge of Greek or other languages, and should reach a wide audience across the disciplines of Philosophy, Classics and the study of ancient texts. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/thdAvlIvWl4EdKB","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1419,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Bloomsbury Academic","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Commentators on Aristotle |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2005 |
| Published in | The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Falcon, Andrea |
| Editor(s) | Zalta, Edward N. |
| Translator(s) |
| The philosophical commentary emerged as an important mode of expression towards the end of the Hellenistic period and into Late Antiquity, as Plato and Aristotle were regarded as philosophical authorities and their works were subject to intense study. This entry provides a concise account of how the revival of interest in the philosophy of Aristotle developed into the commentary tradition, with special emphasis on the study of the Categories. The commentary format was not only used to expound the works of Aristotle, but also as a vehicle for original philosophical theorizing. The commentators shared the practice of reading and commenting on Aristotle's texts, but there was no philosophy of the commentators in the sense of a definite set of doctrines that all the ancient commentators on Aristotle shared. The exegetical tradition was diverse, and different commentators developed different lines of interpretations in the light of the different concerns that motivated their exegesis. [introduction/conclusion] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/nCytKi34b5xumf1 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1306","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1306,"authors_free":[{"id":1930,"entry_id":1306,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":95,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Falcon, Andrea","free_first_name":"Andrea","free_last_name":"Falcon","norm_person":{"id":95,"first_name":"Andrea","last_name":"Falcon","full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1138844241","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2097,"entry_id":1306,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":185,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","free_first_name":"Edward N.","free_last_name":"Zalta","norm_person":{"id":185,"first_name":"Edward N.","last_name":"Zalta","full_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/132645920","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Commentators on Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Commentators on Aristotle"},"abstract":"The philosophical commentary emerged as an important mode of expression towards the end of the Hellenistic period and into Late Antiquity, as Plato and Aristotle were regarded as philosophical authorities and their works were subject to intense study. This entry provides a concise account of how the revival of interest in the philosophy of Aristotle developed into the commentary tradition, with special emphasis on the study of the Categories. The commentary format was not only used to expound the works of Aristotle, but also as a vehicle for original philosophical theorizing. The commentators shared the practice of reading and commenting on Aristotle's texts, but there was no philosophy of the commentators in the sense of a definite set of doctrines that all the ancient commentators on Aristotle shared. The exegetical tradition was diverse, and different commentators developed different lines of interpretations in the light of the different concerns that motivated their exegesis. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/nCytKi34b5xumf1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":95,"full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":185,"full_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1306,"section_of":1350,"pages":"","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1350,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":6,"language":"en","title":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"Welcome to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP), which as of March 2018, has nearly 1600 entries online. From its inception, the SEP was designed so that each entry is maintained and kept up-to-date by an expert or group of experts in the field. All entries and substantive updates are refereed by the members of a distinguished Editorial Board before they are made public. Consequently, our dynamic reference work maintains academic standards while evolving and adapting in response to new research. You can cite fixed editions that are created on a quarterly basis and stored in our Archives (every entry contains a link to its complete archival history, identifying the fixed edition the reader should cite). The Table of Contents lists entries that are published or assigned. The Projected Table of Contents also lists entries which are currently unassigned but nevertheless projected. [author's description]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/plato.stanford.edu\/index.html","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":null}},"article":{"id":1306,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ","volume":"","issue":"","pages":""}},"sort":[2005]}
| Title | A Philosophical Portrait of Stephanus the Philosopher |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Published in | Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators |
| Pages | 541-564 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Roueché, Mossman |
| Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
| Translator(s) |
The role played by Stephanus the Philosopher in the history of philosophy in the sixth century has been poorly studied. Th e clearest indication of this is the absence of any entry for Stephanus in either the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy or the recent Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity. He is universally acknowledged to be the author of an extant commentary on Aristotle’s De Interpretatione but beyond that, there has been considerable uncertainty concerning the identity, the date and the works attributed to someone who has been called ‘a very shadowy figure’. From the time of Hermann Usener’s classic dissertation, De Stephano Alexandrino, interest in Stephanus as a philosopher has been over- shadowed by interest in his non- philosophical activities. These include his supposed appointment as an ‘ecumenical teacher’ in Constantinople during the reign of Heraclius and his authorship of certain astrological, astronomical, alchemical and medical works that are attributed to ‘Stephanus’ in some manuscripts. It has recently been shown that the arguments for ascribing to him these non- philosophical activities are based on anachronistic evidence and that the conclusions are no longer valid. The removal of this‘evidence’ and the conclusions drawn from it provides a timely opportunity to examine afresh the genuine evidence that we have for his life and works as a philosopher and to draw some important conclusions regarding his influence. Far from being a shadowy figure, Stephanus was an important philosopher in sixth century Alexandria. He was a student of John Philoponus and, as one of the Christian successors of Olympiodorus, he continued the Christianisation of the introductory philosophical curriculum. His lectures covered the entire Organon and became the source of a philosophical vocabulary widely used by Christian theologians, including Maximus the Confessor and John Damascene, during the seventh and eighth centuries. Through translations into Syriac and Arabic, his commentaries continued to influence Syrian and Arabic philosophers well into the mediaeval period. [introduction] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/pWmf1HP2ooQ3TFJ |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1527","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1527,"authors_free":[{"id":2659,"entry_id":1527,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Rouech\u00e9, Mossman","free_first_name":"Mossman","free_last_name":"Rouech\u00e9","norm_person":null},{"id":2660,"entry_id":1527,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"A Philosophical Portrait of Stephanus the Philosopher","main_title":{"title":"A Philosophical Portrait of Stephanus the Philosopher"},"abstract":"The role played by Stephanus the Philosopher in the history of philosophy in the sixth century has been poorly studied. Th e clearest indication of this is the absence of any entry for Stephanus in either the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy or the recent Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity. He is universally acknowledged to be the author of an extant commentary on Aristotle\u2019s De Interpretatione but beyond that, there has been considerable uncertainty concerning the identity, the date and the works attributed to someone who has been called \u2018a very shadowy figure\u2019. From the time of Hermann Usener\u2019s classic dissertation, De Stephano Alexandrino, interest in Stephanus as a philosopher has been over- shadowed by interest in his non- philosophical activities. These include his supposed appointment as an \u2018ecumenical teacher\u2019 in Constantinople during the reign of Heraclius and his authorship of certain astrological, astronomical, alchemical and medical works that are attributed to \u2018Stephanus\u2019 in some manuscripts. It has recently been shown that the arguments for ascribing to him these non- philosophical activities are based on anachronistic evidence and that the conclusions are no longer valid. The removal of this\u2018evidence\u2019 and the conclusions drawn from it provides a timely opportunity to examine afresh the genuine evidence that we have for his life and works as a philosopher and to draw some important conclusions regarding his influence. Far from being a shadowy figure, Stephanus was an important philosopher in sixth century Alexandria. He was a student of John Philoponus and, as one of the Christian successors of Olympiodorus, he continued the Christianisation of the introductory philosophical curriculum. His lectures covered the entire Organon and became the source of a philosophical vocabulary widely used by Christian theologians, including Maximus the Confessor and John Damascene, during the seventh and eighth centuries. Through translations into Syriac and Arabic, his commentaries continued to influence Syrian and Arabic philosophers well into the mediaeval period. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/pWmf1HP2ooQ3TFJ","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1527,"section_of":1419,"pages":"541-564","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1419,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2016","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This volume presents collected essays \u2013 some brand new, some republished, and others newly translated \u2013 on the ancient commentators on Aristotle and showcases the leading research of the last three decades. Through the work and scholarship inspired by Richard Sorabji in his series of translations of the commentators started in the 1980s, these ancient texts have become a key field within ancient philosophy. Building on the strength of the series, which has been hailed as \u2018a scholarly marvel\u2019, \u2018a truly breath-taking achievement\u2019 and \u2018one of the great scholarly achievements of our time\u2019 and on the widely praised edited volume brought out in 1990 (Aristotle Transformed) this new book brings together critical new scholarship that is a must-read for any scholar in the field.\r\n\r\nWith a wide range of contributors from across the globe, the articles look at the commentators themselves, discussing problems of analysis and interpretation that have arisen through close study of the texts. Richard Sorabji introduces the volume and himself contributes two new papers. A key recent area of research has been into the Arabic, Latin and Hebrew versions of texts, and several important essays look in depth at these. With all text translated and transliterated, the volume is accessible to readers without specialist knowledge of Greek or other languages, and should reach a wide audience across the disciplines of Philosophy, Classics and the study of ancient texts. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/thdAvlIvWl4EdKB","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1419,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Bloomsbury Academic","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["A Philosophical Portrait of Stephanus the Philosopher"]}
| Title | Commentators on Aristotle |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2005 |
| Published in | The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Falcon, Andrea |
| Editor(s) | Zalta, Edward N. |
| Translator(s) |
The philosophical commentary emerged as an important mode of expression towards the end of the Hellenistic period and into Late Antiquity, as Plato and Aristotle were regarded as philosophical authorities and their works were subject to intense study. This entry provides a concise account of how the revival of interest in the philosophy of Aristotle developed into the commentary tradition, with special emphasis on the study of the Categories. The commentary format was not only used to expound the works of Aristotle, but also as a vehicle for original philosophical theorizing. The commentators shared the practice of reading and commenting on Aristotle's texts, but there was no philosophy of the commentators in the sense of a definite set of doctrines that all the ancient commentators on Aristotle shared. The exegetical tradition was diverse, and different commentators developed different lines of interpretations in the light of the different concerns that motivated their exegesis. [introduction/conclusion] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/nCytKi34b5xumf1 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1306","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1306,"authors_free":[{"id":1930,"entry_id":1306,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":95,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Falcon, Andrea","free_first_name":"Andrea","free_last_name":"Falcon","norm_person":{"id":95,"first_name":"Andrea","last_name":"Falcon","full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1138844241","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2097,"entry_id":1306,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":185,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","free_first_name":"Edward N.","free_last_name":"Zalta","norm_person":{"id":185,"first_name":"Edward N.","last_name":"Zalta","full_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/132645920","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Commentators on Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Commentators on Aristotle"},"abstract":"The philosophical commentary emerged as an important mode of expression towards the end of the Hellenistic period and into Late Antiquity, as Plato and Aristotle were regarded as philosophical authorities and their works were subject to intense study. This entry provides a concise account of how the revival of interest in the philosophy of Aristotle developed into the commentary tradition, with special emphasis on the study of the Categories. The commentary format was not only used to expound the works of Aristotle, but also as a vehicle for original philosophical theorizing. The commentators shared the practice of reading and commenting on Aristotle's texts, but there was no philosophy of the commentators in the sense of a definite set of doctrines that all the ancient commentators on Aristotle shared. The exegetical tradition was diverse, and different commentators developed different lines of interpretations in the light of the different concerns that motivated their exegesis. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/nCytKi34b5xumf1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":95,"full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":185,"full_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1306,"section_of":1350,"pages":"","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1350,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":6,"language":"en","title":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"Welcome to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP), which as of March 2018, has nearly 1600 entries online. From its inception, the SEP was designed so that each entry is maintained and kept up-to-date by an expert or group of experts in the field. All entries and substantive updates are refereed by the members of a distinguished Editorial Board before they are made public. Consequently, our dynamic reference work maintains academic standards while evolving and adapting in response to new research. You can cite fixed editions that are created on a quarterly basis and stored in our Archives (every entry contains a link to its complete archival history, identifying the fixed edition the reader should cite). The Table of Contents lists entries that are published or assigned. The Projected Table of Contents also lists entries which are currently unassigned but nevertheless projected. [author's description]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/plato.stanford.edu\/index.html","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":null}},"article":{"id":1306,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ","volume":"","issue":"","pages":""}},"sort":["Commentators on Aristotle"]}
| Title | Simplicius |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2020 |
| Published in | The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Helmig, Christoph |
| Editor(s) | Zalta, Edward N. |
| Translator(s) |
Simplicius of Cilicia (ca. 480–560 CE), roughly a contemporary of John Philoponus, is without doubt the most important Neoplatonic commentator on Aristotle and one of the two most influential exegetes within the Aristotelian tradition, along with Alexander of Aphrodisias (around 200 CE). Simplicius’ works are an unmatched source for the intellectual traditions that preceded him: Presocratic, Platonic, and especially the Peripatetic tradition. He is also an independent thinker in his own right, with a coherent philosophical agenda. Best known for his tendency to harmonise Plato and Aristotle, he nevertheless criticised Aristotle on several occasions and considered himself a loyal follower of Plato. Writing in an age when Christianity was the dominant religious and political view, Simplicius aimed to show that the Hellenic tradition is not only much older, but also more venerable and more coherent than the Christian tradition. Unimpressed by charges of alleged contradictions among Greek philosophers, Simplicius repeatedly proclaimed that “the ancient wisdom (palaia philosophia) remains unrefuted” (In Phys. 77.11). It is also noteworthy that, like Proclus and other Neoplatonists, Simplicius presents himself as a thinker for whom philosophy and theology form a complete unity. As has frequently been observed, Simplicius’ works, despite their scholarly outlook, have an important spiritual dimension (see §5).
Simplicius’ commentaries have only recently been studied with an eye to his own philosophical views. He was long considered a mere source for Greek philosophy, and, as noted by Baltussen (2010: 714),
Simplicius’ importance as a source for ancient Greek philosophy and science has long overshadowed his contributions as an independent thinker.
Nineteenth-century Quellenforschung was especially interested in his Commentary on the Physics, which was edited in two volumes (Simplicii in Aristotelis Physicorum libros quattuor priores/quattuor posteriores, comprising almost 1500 pages) by Hermann Diels; this commentary served as the basis for Diels’ edition of the Doxographi Graeci (Greek Doxographers), which includes the main doctrines on natural philosophy according to ancient doxographical compendia.
One of the aims of this entry is to emphasise that Simplicius’ writings have much more to offer than a mere doxography of his predecessors—but always bearing in mind that it is only possible to appreciate how Simplicius arranges and interprets the material at his disposal by duly attending to his Neoplatonic agenda. |
| Online Resources | https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/simplicius/ |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1468","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1468,"authors_free":[{"id":2541,"entry_id":1468,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":146,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Helmig, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"Helmig","norm_person":{"id":146,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Helmig","full_name":"Helmig, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1107028760","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2542,"entry_id":1468,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":185,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","free_first_name":"Edward N.","free_last_name":"Zalta","norm_person":{"id":185,"first_name":"Edward N.","last_name":"Zalta","full_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/132645920","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius"},"abstract":"Simplicius of Cilicia (ca. 480\u2013560 CE), roughly a contemporary of John Philoponus, is without doubt the most important Neoplatonic commentator on Aristotle and one of the two most influential exegetes within the Aristotelian tradition, along with Alexander of Aphrodisias (around 200 CE). Simplicius\u2019 works are an unmatched source for the intellectual traditions that preceded him: Presocratic, Platonic, and especially the Peripatetic tradition. He is also an independent thinker in his own right, with a coherent philosophical agenda. Best known for his tendency to harmonise Plato and Aristotle, he nevertheless criticised Aristotle on several occasions and considered himself a loyal follower of Plato. Writing in an age when Christianity was the dominant religious and political view, Simplicius aimed to show that the Hellenic tradition is not only much older, but also more venerable and more coherent than the Christian tradition. Unimpressed by charges of alleged contradictions among Greek philosophers, Simplicius repeatedly proclaimed that \u201cthe ancient wisdom (palaia philosophia) remains unrefuted\u201d (In Phys. 77.11). It is also noteworthy that, like Proclus and other Neoplatonists, Simplicius presents himself as a thinker for whom philosophy and theology form a complete unity. As has frequently been observed, Simplicius\u2019 works, despite their scholarly outlook, have an important spiritual dimension (see \u00a75).\r\n\r\nSimplicius\u2019 commentaries have only recently been studied with an eye to his own philosophical views. He was long considered a mere source for Greek philosophy, and, as noted by Baltussen (2010: 714),\r\n\r\n Simplicius\u2019 importance as a source for ancient Greek philosophy and science has long overshadowed his contributions as an independent thinker.\r\n\r\nNineteenth-century Quellenforschung was especially interested in his Commentary on the Physics, which was edited in two volumes (Simplicii in Aristotelis Physicorum libros quattuor priores\/quattuor posteriores, comprising almost 1500 pages) by Hermann Diels; this commentary served as the basis for Diels\u2019 edition of the Doxographi Graeci (Greek Doxographers), which includes the main doctrines on natural philosophy according to ancient doxographical compendia.\r\n\r\nOne of the aims of this entry is to emphasise that Simplicius\u2019 writings have much more to offer than a mere doxography of his predecessors\u2014but always bearing in mind that it is only possible to appreciate how Simplicius arranges and interprets the material at his disposal by duly attending to his Neoplatonic agenda.","btype":2,"date":"2020","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/plato.stanford.edu\/archives\/sum2020\/entries\/simplicius\/","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":146,"full_name":"Helmig, Christoph","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":185,"full_name":"Zalta, Edward N.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1468,"section_of":1350,"pages":"","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1350,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":null}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius"]}