John Philoponus’ Commentary on the Third Book of Aristotle’s De Anima, Wrongly Attributed to Stephanus, 2016
By: Golitsis, Pantelis, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title John Philoponus’ Commentary on the Third Book of Aristotle’s De Anima, Wrongly Attributed to Stephanus
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 393-412
Categories no categories
Author(s) Golitsis, Pantelis
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1418","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1418,"authors_free":[{"id":2219,"entry_id":1418,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":129,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","free_first_name":"Pantelis","free_last_name":"Golitsis","norm_person":{"id":129,"first_name":"Pantelis","last_name":"Golitsis","full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2221,"entry_id":1418,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"John Philoponus\u2019 Commentary on the Third Book of Aristotle\u2019s De Anima, Wrongly Attributed to Stephanus","main_title":{"title":"John Philoponus\u2019 Commentary on the Third Book of Aristotle\u2019s De Anima, Wrongly Attributed to Stephanus"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Vy4B1dMECLAYwez","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":129,"full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1418,"section_of":1419,"pages":"393-412","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":"","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":{"id":1419,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Bloomsbury Academic","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2016]}

The Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BCE: Andronicus’ Canon, 2016
By: Hatzimichali, Myrto, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title The Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BCE: Andronicus’ Canon
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 81-102
Categories no categories
Author(s) Hatzimichali, Myrto
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1537","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1537,"authors_free":[{"id":2681,"entry_id":1537,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hatzimichali, Myrto","free_first_name":"Myrto","free_last_name":"Hatzimichali","norm_person":null},{"id":2682,"entry_id":1537,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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 Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BCE: Andronicus\u2019 Canon","main_title":{"title":"The Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BCE: Andronicus\u2019 Canon"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/mXgg2AF0PRUCu3k","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1537,"section_of":1419,"pages":"81-102","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]}

Smoothing over the Differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato’s Cratylus and Aristotle’s De Interpretatione, 2016
By: van den Berg, Robbert Maarten , Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Smoothing over the Differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato’s Cratylus and Aristotle’s De Interpretatione
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 353-366
Categories no categories
Author(s) van den Berg, Robbert Maarten
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
Robbert van den Berg in Chapter 13 below fi nds a rather cursory attempt by Ammonius to restore harmony between himself and Proclus on whether Aristotle recognises any names as natural, aft er having said in the fi rst two chapters of On Interpretation that spoken sounds are symbols and signs which signify by convention what is in our minds. Proclus had given an elaborate theological theory of a divine name- giver providing natural names which matched Ideas, not in their sound but in their meaning, and of expert human name- givers possessing only principles ( logoi ) derived from Ideas and projecting the logoi into their imaginations to get a natural representation. In the case of naming the gods, the result could be like the statues which accurately represent gods and (in a theory of statues closer to Iamblichus than to Porphyry as described above) receive divine illumination. Ammonius does the minimum to support his teacher’s divergence from Aristotle. He connects belief in the effi cacy of divine names only with an obscure Egyptian priest, Dousareios, and he qualifies Aristotle’s insistence on the conventionality of meaning only to the extent of pointing out that some names have a meaning that is naturally appropriate. Thus Archelaos, etymologically ‘leader of the people’ is naturally appropriate for a kingly person (but apparently laos , ‘people’ is not naturally appropriate for people). [introduction]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1532","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1532,"authors_free":[{"id":2669,"entry_id":1532,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"van den Berg, Robbert Maarten ","free_first_name":"Robbert Maarten ","free_last_name":"van den Berg","norm_person":null},{"id":2670,"entry_id":1532,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Smoothing over the Differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato\u2019s Cratylus and Aristotle\u2019s De Interpretatione","main_title":{"title":"Smoothing over the Differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato\u2019s Cratylus and Aristotle\u2019s De Interpretatione"},"abstract":"Robbert van den Berg in Chapter 13 below fi nds a rather cursory attempt by Ammonius to restore harmony between himself and Proclus on whether Aristotle recognises any names as natural, aft er having said in the fi rst two chapters of On Interpretation that spoken sounds are symbols and signs which signify by convention what is in our minds. Proclus had given an elaborate theological theory of a divine name- giver providing natural names which matched Ideas, not in their sound but in their meaning, and of expert human name- givers possessing only principles ( logoi ) derived from Ideas and projecting the logoi into their imaginations to get a natural representation. In the case of naming the gods, the result could be like the statues which accurately represent gods and (in a theory of statues closer to Iamblichus than to Porphyry as described above) receive divine illumination. Ammonius does the minimum to support his teacher\u2019s divergence from Aristotle. He connects belief in the effi cacy of divine names only with an obscure Egyptian priest, Dousareios, and he qualifies Aristotle\u2019s insistence on the conventionality of meaning only to the extent of pointing out that some names have a meaning that is naturally appropriate. Thus Archelaos, etymologically \u2018leader of the people\u2019 is naturally appropriate for a kingly person (but apparently laos , \u2018people\u2019 is not naturally appropriate for people). [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/uahIaUKhOSkmoD1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1532,"section_of":1419,"pages":"353-366","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]}

Mixture in Philoponus: An Encounter with a Third Kind of Potentiality, 2016
By: de Haas, Frans A. J., Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Mixture in Philoponus: An Encounter with a Third Kind of Potentiality
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 413-436
Categories no categories
Author(s) de Haas, Frans A. J.
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
In charting the commentary tradition on Aristotle’s work from Late Antiquity through Arabic, Latin Medieval, and Renaissance authors it is tempting to assume we are dealing with a single line of tradition. However, it is still far from clear which ancient commentaries were available (in Greek or in Arabic, Syrian, or Latin translation) at what date. But even if this can be established we cannot be sure that a particular commentator actually used his predecessors’ commentaries, even when he refers to them by name: perhaps he merely copied a reference from another commentary. In this way Zabarella’s mistake may have arisen. More importantly, every commentator who analyses the problem of the potentiality of the ingredients in a mixture as it is presented in Aristotle’s texts in On Generation and Corruption is faced with a limited number of possible solutions. Every commentator, then, is perfectly capable of reinventing the wheel. However, the application of the third kind of potentiality in the context of mixture seems to have been invented for the first time by John Philoponus. [conclusion]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1528","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1528,"authors_free":[{"id":2661,"entry_id":1528,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"de Haas","norm_person":null},{"id":2662,"entry_id":1528,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Mixture in Philoponus: An Encounter with a Third Kind of Potentiality","main_title":{"title":"Mixture in Philoponus: An Encounter with a Third Kind of Potentiality"},"abstract":"In charting the commentary tradition on Aristotle\u2019s work from Late Antiquity through Arabic, Latin Medieval, and Renaissance authors it is tempting to assume we are dealing with a single line of tradition. However, it is still far from clear which ancient commentaries were available (in Greek or in Arabic, Syrian, or Latin translation) at what date. But even if this can be established we cannot be sure that a particular commentator actually used his predecessors\u2019 commentaries, even when he refers to them by name: perhaps he merely copied a reference from another commentary. In this way Zabarella\u2019s mistake may have arisen. More importantly, every commentator who analyses the problem of the potentiality of the ingredients in a mixture as it is presented in Aristotle\u2019s texts in On Generation and Corruption is faced with a limited number of possible solutions. Every commentator, then, is perfectly capable of reinventing the wheel. However, the application of the third kind of potentiality in the context of mixture seems to have been invented for the first time by John Philoponus. [conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/62fMh9J2unVSTb7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1528,"section_of":1419,"pages":"413-436","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]}

Dating of Philoponus’ Commentaries on Aristotle and of his Divergence from his Teacher Ammonius, 2016
By: Sorabji, Richard, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Dating of Philoponus’ Commentaries on Aristotle and of his Divergence from his Teacher Ammonius
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 367-392
Categories no categories
Author(s) Sorabji, Richard
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1531","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1531,"authors_free":[{"id":2667,"entry_id":1531,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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}},{"id":2668,"entry_id":1531,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Dating of Philoponus\u2019 Commentaries on Aristotle and of his Divergence from his Teacher Ammonius","main_title":{"title":"Dating of Philoponus\u2019 Commentaries on Aristotle and of his Divergence from his Teacher Ammonius"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/YIwSunD124lti2h","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1531,"section_of":1419,"pages":"367-392","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]}

A Philosophical Portrait of Stephanus the Philosopher, 2016
By: Roueché, Mossman, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
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]

{"_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]}

Rediscovered Categories Commentary: Porphyry(?) with Fragments of Boethus, 2016
By: Chiaradonna, Riccardo, Rashed, Marwan, Sedley, David N., Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Rediscovered Categories Commentary: Porphyry(?) with Fragments of Boethus
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 231-262
Categories no categories
Author(s) Chiaradonna, Riccardo , Rashed, Marwan , Sedley, David N.
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
Riccardo Chiaradonna has studied Boethus’ downgrading also of universals, again by reference to the Categories ’ defi nition of substance. On this ground, universals are not even a something (a Stoic category, lower than substance). Simplicius tells us: ‘Boethus says fi rst that the universal does not even exist in reality ( einai en hupostasei ), according to Aristotle, and even if it did have any reality, it would not be a something . Aristotle rather said it was in something’. Chiaradonna concludes from a discussion of a number of passages that Boethus thought of a universal as nothing but a collection of particulars. Th e recently recovered fragments of Porphyry’s lost commentary on the Categories in Chapter 8 below, speaking of animal, similarly say ‘none of these generic items is a subject’. The text of Porphyry translated and analysed in this chapter includes among others a further new fragment on Boethus’ treatment of division by differentia at 14,4–15. Rashed has drawn attention to yet another way in which Boethus downgrades something of Aristotle’s: the priority of Aristotle’s fi rst fi gure of syllogism. Or at least he puts Aristotle’s figures all on the same level. The figures are Aristotle’s patterns of valid argument concerning all, some, or none of a class of things, and Aristotle thought that certain arguments in the second and third figures had to be proved equivalent to certain arguments in the fi rst, before they could be seen as valid. I shall discuss below the resumption of the debate in the fourth century by the commentator Themistius. Rashed has translated Th emistius’ text from the superior of two Arabic manuscripts into French. It is to be hoped that Chiaradonna and Rashed, two of the translators of the fragment in Chapter 8, will carry out their plan of compiling the fi rst collection of fragments of Boethus, of which Michael Griffin has already noticed around fifty. [introduction]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1535","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1535,"authors_free":[{"id":2675,"entry_id":1535,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":49,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Chiaradonna, Riccardo","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":49,"first_name":"Riccardo ","last_name":"Chiaradonna","full_name":"Chiaradonna, Riccardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1142403548","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2676,"entry_id":1535,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":194,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Rashed, Marwan","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":194,"first_name":"Marwan","last_name":"Rashed","full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1054568634","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2677,"entry_id":1535,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":298,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sedley, David N.","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":298,"first_name":"David N.","last_name":"Sedley","full_name":"Sedley, David N.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/12143141X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2678,"entry_id":1535,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Rediscovered Categories Commentary: Porphyry(?) with Fragments of Boethus","main_title":{"title":"Rediscovered Categories Commentary: Porphyry(?) with Fragments of Boethus"},"abstract":"Riccardo Chiaradonna has studied Boethus\u2019 downgrading also of universals, again by reference to the Categories \u2019 defi nition of substance. On this ground, universals are not even a something (a Stoic category, lower than substance). Simplicius tells us: \u2018Boethus says fi rst that the universal does not even exist in reality ( einai en hupostasei ), according to Aristotle, and even if it did have any reality, it would not be a something . Aristotle rather said it was in something\u2019. Chiaradonna concludes from a discussion of a number of passages that Boethus thought of a universal as nothing but a collection of particulars. Th e recently recovered fragments of Porphyry\u2019s lost commentary on the Categories in Chapter 8 below, speaking of animal, similarly say \u2018none of these generic items is a subject\u2019. The text of Porphyry translated and analysed in this chapter includes among others a further new fragment on Boethus\u2019 treatment of division by differentia at 14,4\u201315. Rashed has drawn attention to yet another way in which Boethus downgrades something of Aristotle\u2019s: the priority of Aristotle\u2019s fi rst fi gure of syllogism. Or at least he puts Aristotle\u2019s figures all on the same level. The figures are Aristotle\u2019s patterns of valid argument concerning all, some, or none of a class of things, and Aristotle thought that certain arguments in the second and third figures had to be proved equivalent to certain arguments in the fi rst, before they could be seen as valid. I shall discuss below the resumption of the debate in the fourth century by the commentator Themistius. Rashed has translated Th emistius\u2019 text from the superior of two Arabic manuscripts into French. It is to be hoped that Chiaradonna and Rashed, two of the translators of the fragment in Chapter 8, will carry out their plan of compiling the fi rst collection of fragments of Boethus, of which Michael Griffin has already noticed around fifty. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/C9jwqBVxxrkxDUs","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":49,"full_name":"Chiaradonna, Riccardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":194,"full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":298,"full_name":"Sedley, David N.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1535,"section_of":1419,"pages":"231-262","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]}

Boethus’ Aristotelian Ontology, 2016
By: Rashed, Marwan, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Boethus’ Aristotelian Ontology
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 103-124
Categories no categories
Author(s) Rashed, Marwan
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
Boethus of Sidon is crucial for the tradition of commentary on Aristotle, in that he is said to have recommended the remarkable project of writing a word by word commentary on Aristotle’s Categories (exegoumenos kat’ hekasten lexin), and he did write such a commentary on Aristotle’s Categories . Th is was eventually to have a momentous infl uence on the commentary tradition, although the earliest surviving commentaries aft er him are not as thorough. In addition, Boethus, in defending Aristotle’s system, seems to have downgraded his key terms, interpreting them as belonging to the lowest available level. Th is is true of Aristotle’s form, of diff erentia, of universal, and of his fi rst fi gure of syllogism. In Chapter 2, Marwan Rashed takes up Boethus’ downgrading of form as non- substance on the basis of Aristotle’s requirement in Categories 2a11–13; 3a7–9, that a substance is a subject of predicates, and not a predicate, so not in a subject. From this, Simplicius tells us, 21 Boethus concluded that, although a compound of matter and form, like Socrates, can be a substance, and so can matter, for example the fl esh and bones of Socrates, this is not possible for the form of Socrates, his soul. His form cannot be a substance, because form, though not mentioned in Aristotle’s Categories , is said in his Physics 4.3, to be present in matter. Th is exclusion of form was to prove unacceptable more than two hundred years later to Aristotle’s greatest defender, Alexander of Aphrodisias, discussed below in Chapters 3 and 4, because in works other than the Categories, Aristotle treats soul as substance, even though it is in body as a subject (Aristotle, De Anima ( DA ) or On the Soul 2.1). Aristotle’s Metaphysics Book 7 also treats form as a good candidate for being substance, and Metaphysics 8 speaks as if a different criterion for substancehood had already been implied in Book 7 (see 7.17): the cause of a thing’s being. 22 Alexander himself corrected Boethus by holding that form is a part of the compound substance, and a part of a substance is a substance. Rashed in Chapter 2 below cites a treatise in Arabic On Diff erence , existing in two versions, which he argues come from a lost Q uestion about diff erentiae by Alexander. It insists that the diff erentia of a genus, for example rational as diff erentiating a species of animal, is substance because it is a part of a substance, apparently because the differentia (rational) is form and form is part of the genus (animal). Th e Question also criticises someone who denies this by again relying on one of the criteria in Aristotle’s Categories for substancehood (just as Boethus relied on another one in his disqualification of form from substancehood), and this is one of Rashed’s reasons for thinking that Alexander’s opponent is Boethus. Th is time, the unsatisfi ed criterion is that substances receive contrary characteristics. Alexander in the Arabic version replies that it is not diff erentiae but individual substances that have to receive contraries. [introduction]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1536","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1536,"authors_free":[{"id":2679,"entry_id":1536,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":194,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Rashed, Marwan","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":194,"first_name":"Marwan","last_name":"Rashed","full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1054568634","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2680,"entry_id":1536,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Boethus\u2019 Aristotelian Ontology","main_title":{"title":"Boethus\u2019 Aristotelian Ontology"},"abstract":"Boethus of Sidon is crucial for the tradition of commentary on Aristotle, in that he is said to have recommended the remarkable project of writing a word by word commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Categories (exegoumenos kat\u2019 hekasten lexin), and he did write such a commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Categories . Th is was eventually to have a momentous infl uence on the commentary tradition, although the earliest surviving commentaries aft er him are not as thorough. In addition, Boethus, in defending Aristotle\u2019s system, seems to have downgraded his key terms, interpreting them as belonging to the lowest available level. Th is is true of Aristotle\u2019s form, of diff erentia, of universal, and of his fi rst fi gure of syllogism. In Chapter 2, Marwan Rashed takes up Boethus\u2019 downgrading of form as non- substance on the basis of Aristotle\u2019s requirement in Categories 2a11\u201313; 3a7\u20139, that a substance is a subject of predicates, and not a predicate, so not in a subject. From this, Simplicius tells us, 21 Boethus concluded that, although a compound of matter and form, like Socrates, can be a substance, and so can matter, for example the fl esh and bones of Socrates, this is not possible for the form of Socrates, his soul. His form cannot be a substance, because form, though not mentioned in Aristotle\u2019s Categories , is said in his Physics 4.3, to be present in matter. Th is exclusion of form was to prove unacceptable more than two hundred years later to Aristotle\u2019s greatest defender, Alexander of Aphrodisias, discussed below in Chapters 3 and 4, because in works other than the Categories, Aristotle treats soul as substance, even though it is in body as a subject (Aristotle, De Anima ( DA ) or On the Soul 2.1). Aristotle\u2019s Metaphysics Book 7 also treats form as a good candidate for being substance, and Metaphysics 8 speaks as if a different criterion for substancehood had already been implied in Book 7 (see 7.17): the cause of a thing\u2019s being. 22 Alexander himself corrected Boethus by holding that form is a part of the compound substance, and a part of a substance is a substance. Rashed in Chapter 2 below cites a treatise in Arabic On Diff erence , existing in two versions, which he argues come from a lost Q uestion about diff erentiae by Alexander. It insists that the diff erentia of a genus, for example rational as diff erentiating a species of animal, is substance because it is a part of a substance, apparently because the differentia (rational) is form and form is part of the genus (animal). Th e Question also criticises someone who denies this by again relying on one of the criteria in Aristotle\u2019s Categories for substancehood (just as Boethus relied on another one in his disqualification of form from substancehood), and this is one of Rashed\u2019s reasons for thinking that Alexander\u2019s opponent is Boethus. Th is time, the unsatisfi ed criterion is that substances receive contrary characteristics. Alexander in the Arabic version replies that it is not diff erentiae but individual substances that have to receive contraries. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TD2RfQpCG4DFyG1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":194,"full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1536,"section_of":1419,"pages":"103-124","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]}

Iamblichus’ Noera Theôria of Aristotle’s Categories, 2016
By: Dillon, John, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Iamblichus’ Noera Theôria of Aristotle’s Categories
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 313-326
Categories no categories
Author(s) Dillon, John
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1533","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1533,"authors_free":[{"id":2671,"entry_id":1533,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":97,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Dillon, John","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":97,"first_name":"John","last_name":"Dillon","full_name":"Dillon, John","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/123498058","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2672,"entry_id":1533,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Iamblichus\u2019 Noera The\u00f4ria of Aristotle\u2019s Categories","main_title":{"title":"Iamblichus\u2019 Noera The\u00f4ria of Aristotle\u2019s Categories"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NIu2KEzjMmU3e8J","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":97,"full_name":"Dillon, John","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1533,"section_of":1419,"pages":"313-326","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]}

Universals Transformed in the Commentators on Aristotle, 2016
By: Sorabji, Richard, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Universals Transformed in the Commentators on Aristotle
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 291-312
Categories no categories
Author(s) Sorabji, Richard
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
This paper revises my Introduction to the translation of Philoponus, in Cat. by Riin Sirkel, Martin Tweedale, and John Harris (London: Bloomsbury, 2015), which in turn superseded my ‘Universals Transformed: The First Th ousand Years aft er Plato ’, in P. F. Strawson and Arindam Chakrabarti, eds, Universals, Concepts and Qualities (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006), pp. 105–25. Aristotle regarded Plato’s supreme substances, his Ideas or Forms, as being universals, as opposed to particulars, whereas he himself treated universals as only secondary substances, or as not deserving the title of substances at all. I shall start with his treatment of Plato’s Ideas. He says that Plato’s postulation of Ideas grew out of Socrates’ search for defi nitions which provided not mere instances of some kind of thing, but a formula which applied universally to every instance of the kind. He added that Platonists made Plato’s Ideas universal (katholou). One of his objections to Plato’s Ideas was that they were meant to explain the coming into being of things. But to explain coming into being, you need a trigger (to kinêson), whereas Ideas were meant to be unchanging, so as to serve as objects of definition, and so are not suitable as triggers. Let me survey what transformations we have noticed in the idea of universals in the tradition of ancient commentary on Aristotle. Boethus downgraded them. Alexander multiplied grades, going beyond Aristotle by including as a grade on the same scale conceptual universals, but ameliorated the low status of both grades by giving the non-conceptual ones certain explanatory roles. He also innovated in discussing Aristotle’s rejection of Plato’s Ideas by saying that even if Ideas and particulars were synonymous, sharing both name and definition, yet the definition might not be properly shared by the particular. Porphyry followed Alexander by accepting multigrade universals, but Ammonius influenced posterity by associating Porphyry with the idea that only concepts are universals. Proclus and Simplicius drew from Aristotle’s concepts in Alexander when they gave reasons why Aristotle was wrong on both counts about Plato’s Ideas: Ideas were not universals, except in a qualified sense, but they were causes. Proclus accepted three levels of reality: Ideas before the many particulars and two grades of universal, one in the many particulars and a conceptual one modelled after the many particulars. His pupil Ammonius accepted three levels, but transformed the highest one into non-universal concepts in the mind of Plato’s Creator God. This was the first of two steps in presenting Aristotle as agreeing with Plato, contrary to the complaints of Proclus, because Aristotle’s God was a thinker who entertained concepts in his mind. Ammonius’ harmonisation of Aristotle with Plato was completed by rejecting the claim of Proclus, and of Proclus’ teacher Syrianus, that Aristotle did not recognise his own arguments as implying that God was a Creator, just as Plato thought. Philoponus diverged from Ammonius, and from Ammonius’ anonymous editor, by giving to concepts the role of being what we define and predicate. But only in his theological work did he reach the final transformation of making concepts into the only universals, thus concluding that the Christian Trinity consisted of three godheads having no unity except as a universal Godhead existing only in our minds. [introduction/conclusion]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1534","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1534,"authors_free":[{"id":2673,"entry_id":1534,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":null},{"id":2674,"entry_id":1534,"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":"Universals Transformed in the Commentators on Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Universals Transformed in the Commentators on Aristotle"},"abstract":"This paper revises my Introduction to the translation of Philoponus, in Cat. by Riin Sirkel, Martin Tweedale, and John Harris (London: Bloomsbury, 2015), which in turn superseded my \u2018Universals Transformed: The First Th ousand Years aft er Plato \u2019, in P. F. Strawson and Arindam Chakrabarti, eds, Universals, Concepts and Qualities (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006), pp. 105\u201325. Aristotle regarded Plato\u2019s supreme substances, his Ideas or Forms, as being universals, as opposed to particulars, whereas he himself treated universals as only secondary substances, or as not deserving the title of substances at all. I shall start with his treatment of Plato\u2019s Ideas. He says that Plato\u2019s postulation of Ideas grew out of Socrates\u2019 search for defi nitions which provided not mere instances of some kind of thing, but a formula which applied universally to every instance of the kind. He added that Platonists made Plato\u2019s Ideas universal (katholou). One of his objections to Plato\u2019s Ideas was that they were meant to explain the coming into being of things. But to explain coming into being, you need a trigger (to kin\u00eason), whereas Ideas were meant to be unchanging, so as to serve as objects of definition, and so are not suitable as triggers. \r\nLet me survey what transformations we have noticed in the idea of universals in the tradition of ancient commentary on Aristotle. Boethus downgraded them. Alexander multiplied grades, going beyond Aristotle by including as a grade on the same scale conceptual universals, but ameliorated the low status of both grades by giving the non-conceptual ones certain explanatory roles. He also innovated in discussing Aristotle\u2019s rejection of Plato\u2019s Ideas by saying that even if Ideas and particulars were synonymous, sharing both name and definition, yet the definition might not be properly shared by the particular. Porphyry followed Alexander by accepting multigrade universals, but Ammonius influenced posterity by associating Porphyry with the idea that only concepts are universals. Proclus and Simplicius drew from Aristotle\u2019s concepts in Alexander when they gave reasons why Aristotle was wrong on both counts about Plato\u2019s Ideas: Ideas were not universals, except in a qualified sense, but they were causes. Proclus accepted three levels of reality: Ideas before the many particulars and two grades of universal, one in the many particulars and a conceptual one modelled after the many particulars. His pupil Ammonius accepted three levels, but transformed the highest one into non-universal concepts in the mind of Plato\u2019s Creator God. This was the first of two steps in presenting Aristotle as agreeing with Plato, contrary to the complaints of Proclus, because Aristotle\u2019s God was a thinker who entertained concepts in his mind. Ammonius\u2019 harmonisation of Aristotle with Plato was completed by rejecting the claim of Proclus, and of Proclus\u2019 teacher Syrianus, that Aristotle did not recognise his own arguments as implying that God was a Creator, just as Plato thought. Philoponus diverged from Ammonius, and from Ammonius\u2019 anonymous editor, by giving to concepts the role of being what we define and predicate. But only in his theological work did he reach the final transformation of making concepts into the only universals, thus concluding that the Christian Trinity consisted of three godheads having no unity except as a universal Godhead existing only in our minds.\r\n[introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/4eYShYTAQsr6FeG","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1534,"section_of":1419,"pages":"291-312","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]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 2
A Philosophical Portrait of Stephanus the Philosopher, 2016
By: Roueché, Mossman, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
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]

{"_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"]}

Boethus’ Aristotelian Ontology, 2016
By: Rashed, Marwan, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Boethus’ Aristotelian Ontology
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 103-124
Categories no categories
Author(s) Rashed, Marwan
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
Boethus of Sidon is crucial for the tradition of commentary on Aristotle, in that he is said to have recommended the remarkable project of writing a word by word commentary on Aristotle’s Categories (exegoumenos kat’ hekasten lexin), and he did write such a commentary on Aristotle’s Categories . Th is was eventually to have a momentous infl uence on the commentary tradition, although the earliest surviving commentaries aft er him are not as thorough. In addition, Boethus, in defending Aristotle’s system, seems to have downgraded his key terms, interpreting them as belonging to the lowest available level. Th is is true of Aristotle’s form, of diff erentia, of universal, and of his fi rst fi gure of syllogism. In Chapter 2, Marwan Rashed takes up Boethus’ downgrading of form as non- substance on the basis of Aristotle’s requirement in Categories 2a11–13; 3a7–9, that a substance is a subject of predicates, and not a predicate, so not in a subject. From this, Simplicius tells us, 21 Boethus concluded that, although a compound of matter and form, like Socrates, can be a substance, and so can matter, for example the fl esh and bones of Socrates, this is not possible for the form of Socrates, his soul. His form cannot be a substance, because form, though not mentioned in Aristotle’s Categories , is said in his Physics 4.3, to be present in matter. Th is exclusion of form was to prove unacceptable more than two hundred years later to Aristotle’s greatest defender, Alexander of Aphrodisias, discussed below in Chapters 3 and 4, because in works other than the Categories, Aristotle treats soul as substance, even though it is in body as a subject (Aristotle, De Anima ( DA ) or On the Soul 2.1). Aristotle’s Metaphysics Book 7 also treats form as a good candidate for being substance, and Metaphysics 8 speaks as if a different criterion for substancehood had already been implied in Book 7 (see 7.17): the cause of a thing’s being. 22 Alexander himself corrected Boethus by holding that form is a part of the compound substance, and a part of a substance is a substance. Rashed in Chapter 2 below cites a treatise in Arabic On Diff erence , existing in two versions, which he argues come from a lost Q uestion about diff erentiae by Alexander. It insists that the diff erentia of a genus, for example rational as diff erentiating a species of animal, is substance because it is a part of a substance, apparently because the differentia (rational) is form and form is part of the genus (animal). Th e Question also criticises someone who denies this by again relying on one of the criteria in Aristotle’s Categories for substancehood (just as Boethus relied on another one in his disqualification of form from substancehood), and this is one of Rashed’s reasons for thinking that Alexander’s opponent is Boethus. Th is time, the unsatisfi ed criterion is that substances receive contrary characteristics. Alexander in the Arabic version replies that it is not diff erentiae but individual substances that have to receive contraries. [introduction]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1536","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1536,"authors_free":[{"id":2679,"entry_id":1536,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":194,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Rashed, Marwan","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":194,"first_name":"Marwan","last_name":"Rashed","full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1054568634","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2680,"entry_id":1536,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Boethus\u2019 Aristotelian Ontology","main_title":{"title":"Boethus\u2019 Aristotelian Ontology"},"abstract":"Boethus of Sidon is crucial for the tradition of commentary on Aristotle, in that he is said to have recommended the remarkable project of writing a word by word commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Categories (exegoumenos kat\u2019 hekasten lexin), and he did write such a commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Categories . Th is was eventually to have a momentous infl uence on the commentary tradition, although the earliest surviving commentaries aft er him are not as thorough. In addition, Boethus, in defending Aristotle\u2019s system, seems to have downgraded his key terms, interpreting them as belonging to the lowest available level. Th is is true of Aristotle\u2019s form, of diff erentia, of universal, and of his fi rst fi gure of syllogism. In Chapter 2, Marwan Rashed takes up Boethus\u2019 downgrading of form as non- substance on the basis of Aristotle\u2019s requirement in Categories 2a11\u201313; 3a7\u20139, that a substance is a subject of predicates, and not a predicate, so not in a subject. From this, Simplicius tells us, 21 Boethus concluded that, although a compound of matter and form, like Socrates, can be a substance, and so can matter, for example the fl esh and bones of Socrates, this is not possible for the form of Socrates, his soul. His form cannot be a substance, because form, though not mentioned in Aristotle\u2019s Categories , is said in his Physics 4.3, to be present in matter. Th is exclusion of form was to prove unacceptable more than two hundred years later to Aristotle\u2019s greatest defender, Alexander of Aphrodisias, discussed below in Chapters 3 and 4, because in works other than the Categories, Aristotle treats soul as substance, even though it is in body as a subject (Aristotle, De Anima ( DA ) or On the Soul 2.1). Aristotle\u2019s Metaphysics Book 7 also treats form as a good candidate for being substance, and Metaphysics 8 speaks as if a different criterion for substancehood had already been implied in Book 7 (see 7.17): the cause of a thing\u2019s being. 22 Alexander himself corrected Boethus by holding that form is a part of the compound substance, and a part of a substance is a substance. Rashed in Chapter 2 below cites a treatise in Arabic On Diff erence , existing in two versions, which he argues come from a lost Q uestion about diff erentiae by Alexander. It insists that the diff erentia of a genus, for example rational as diff erentiating a species of animal, is substance because it is a part of a substance, apparently because the differentia (rational) is form and form is part of the genus (animal). Th e Question also criticises someone who denies this by again relying on one of the criteria in Aristotle\u2019s Categories for substancehood (just as Boethus relied on another one in his disqualification of form from substancehood), and this is one of Rashed\u2019s reasons for thinking that Alexander\u2019s opponent is Boethus. Th is time, the unsatisfi ed criterion is that substances receive contrary characteristics. Alexander in the Arabic version replies that it is not diff erentiae but individual substances that have to receive contraries. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TD2RfQpCG4DFyG1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":194,"full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1536,"section_of":1419,"pages":"103-124","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":["Boethus\u2019 Aristotelian Ontology"]}

Dating of Philoponus’ Commentaries on Aristotle and of his Divergence from his Teacher Ammonius, 2016
By: Sorabji, Richard, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Dating of Philoponus’ Commentaries on Aristotle and of his Divergence from his Teacher Ammonius
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 367-392
Categories no categories
Author(s) Sorabji, Richard
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1531","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1531,"authors_free":[{"id":2667,"entry_id":1531,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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}},{"id":2668,"entry_id":1531,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Dating of Philoponus\u2019 Commentaries on Aristotle and of his Divergence from his Teacher Ammonius","main_title":{"title":"Dating of Philoponus\u2019 Commentaries on Aristotle and of his Divergence from his Teacher Ammonius"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/YIwSunD124lti2h","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1531,"section_of":1419,"pages":"367-392","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":["Dating of Philoponus\u2019 Commentaries on Aristotle and of his Divergence from his Teacher Ammonius"]}

Iamblichus’ Noera Theôria of Aristotle’s Categories, 2016
By: Dillon, John, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Iamblichus’ Noera Theôria of Aristotle’s Categories
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 313-326
Categories no categories
Author(s) Dillon, John
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1533","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1533,"authors_free":[{"id":2671,"entry_id":1533,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":97,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Dillon, John","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":97,"first_name":"John","last_name":"Dillon","full_name":"Dillon, John","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/123498058","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2672,"entry_id":1533,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Iamblichus\u2019 Noera The\u00f4ria of Aristotle\u2019s Categories","main_title":{"title":"Iamblichus\u2019 Noera The\u00f4ria of Aristotle\u2019s Categories"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NIu2KEzjMmU3e8J","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":97,"full_name":"Dillon, John","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1533,"section_of":1419,"pages":"313-326","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":["Iamblichus\u2019 Noera The\u00f4ria of Aristotle\u2019s Categories"]}

John Philoponus’ Commentary on the Third Book of Aristotle’s De Anima, Wrongly Attributed to Stephanus, 2016
By: Golitsis, Pantelis, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title John Philoponus’ Commentary on the Third Book of Aristotle’s De Anima, Wrongly Attributed to Stephanus
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 393-412
Categories no categories
Author(s) Golitsis, Pantelis
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1418","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1418,"authors_free":[{"id":2219,"entry_id":1418,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":129,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","free_first_name":"Pantelis","free_last_name":"Golitsis","norm_person":{"id":129,"first_name":"Pantelis","last_name":"Golitsis","full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2221,"entry_id":1418,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"John Philoponus\u2019 Commentary on the Third Book of Aristotle\u2019s De Anima, Wrongly Attributed to Stephanus","main_title":{"title":"John Philoponus\u2019 Commentary on the Third Book of Aristotle\u2019s De Anima, Wrongly Attributed to Stephanus"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Vy4B1dMECLAYwez","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":129,"full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1418,"section_of":1419,"pages":"393-412","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":"","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":{"id":1419,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Bloomsbury Academic","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["John Philoponus\u2019 Commentary on the Third Book of Aristotle\u2019s De Anima, Wrongly Attributed to Stephanus"]}

Mixture in Philoponus: An Encounter with a Third Kind of Potentiality, 2016
By: de Haas, Frans A. J., Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Mixture in Philoponus: An Encounter with a Third Kind of Potentiality
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 413-436
Categories no categories
Author(s) de Haas, Frans A. J.
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
In charting the commentary tradition on Aristotle’s work from Late Antiquity through Arabic, Latin Medieval, and Renaissance authors it is tempting to assume we are dealing with a single line of tradition. However, it is still far from clear which ancient commentaries were available (in Greek or in Arabic, Syrian, or Latin translation) at what date. But even if this can be established we cannot be sure that a particular commentator actually used his predecessors’ commentaries, even when he refers to them by name: perhaps he merely copied a reference from another commentary. In this way Zabarella’s mistake may have arisen. More importantly, every commentator who analyses the problem of the potentiality of the ingredients in a mixture as it is presented in Aristotle’s texts in On Generation and Corruption is faced with a limited number of possible solutions. Every commentator, then, is perfectly capable of reinventing the wheel. However, the application of the third kind of potentiality in the context of mixture seems to have been invented for the first time by John Philoponus. [conclusion]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1528","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1528,"authors_free":[{"id":2661,"entry_id":1528,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"de Haas","norm_person":null},{"id":2662,"entry_id":1528,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Mixture in Philoponus: An Encounter with a Third Kind of Potentiality","main_title":{"title":"Mixture in Philoponus: An Encounter with a Third Kind of Potentiality"},"abstract":"In charting the commentary tradition on Aristotle\u2019s work from Late Antiquity through Arabic, Latin Medieval, and Renaissance authors it is tempting to assume we are dealing with a single line of tradition. However, it is still far from clear which ancient commentaries were available (in Greek or in Arabic, Syrian, or Latin translation) at what date. But even if this can be established we cannot be sure that a particular commentator actually used his predecessors\u2019 commentaries, even when he refers to them by name: perhaps he merely copied a reference from another commentary. In this way Zabarella\u2019s mistake may have arisen. More importantly, every commentator who analyses the problem of the potentiality of the ingredients in a mixture as it is presented in Aristotle\u2019s texts in On Generation and Corruption is faced with a limited number of possible solutions. Every commentator, then, is perfectly capable of reinventing the wheel. However, the application of the third kind of potentiality in the context of mixture seems to have been invented for the first time by John Philoponus. [conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/62fMh9J2unVSTb7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1528,"section_of":1419,"pages":"413-436","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":["Mixture in Philoponus: An Encounter with a Third Kind of Potentiality"]}

Rediscovered Categories Commentary: Porphyry(?) with Fragments of Boethus, 2016
By: Chiaradonna, Riccardo, Rashed, Marwan, Sedley, David N., Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Rediscovered Categories Commentary: Porphyry(?) with Fragments of Boethus
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 231-262
Categories no categories
Author(s) Chiaradonna, Riccardo , Rashed, Marwan , Sedley, David N.
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
Riccardo Chiaradonna has studied Boethus’ downgrading also of universals, again by reference to the Categories ’ defi nition of substance. On this ground, universals are not even a something (a Stoic category, lower than substance). Simplicius tells us: ‘Boethus says fi rst that the universal does not even exist in reality ( einai en hupostasei ), according to Aristotle, and even if it did have any reality, it would not be a something . Aristotle rather said it was in something’. Chiaradonna concludes from a discussion of a number of passages that Boethus thought of a universal as nothing but a collection of particulars. Th e recently recovered fragments of Porphyry’s lost commentary on the Categories in Chapter 8 below, speaking of animal, similarly say ‘none of these generic items is a subject’. The text of Porphyry translated and analysed in this chapter includes among others a further new fragment on Boethus’ treatment of division by differentia at 14,4–15. Rashed has drawn attention to yet another way in which Boethus downgrades something of Aristotle’s: the priority of Aristotle’s fi rst fi gure of syllogism. Or at least he puts Aristotle’s figures all on the same level. The figures are Aristotle’s patterns of valid argument concerning all, some, or none of a class of things, and Aristotle thought that certain arguments in the second and third figures had to be proved equivalent to certain arguments in the fi rst, before they could be seen as valid. I shall discuss below the resumption of the debate in the fourth century by the commentator Themistius. Rashed has translated Th emistius’ text from the superior of two Arabic manuscripts into French. It is to be hoped that Chiaradonna and Rashed, two of the translators of the fragment in Chapter 8, will carry out their plan of compiling the fi rst collection of fragments of Boethus, of which Michael Griffin has already noticed around fifty.  [introduction]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1535","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1535,"authors_free":[{"id":2675,"entry_id":1535,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":49,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Chiaradonna, Riccardo","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":49,"first_name":"Riccardo ","last_name":"Chiaradonna","full_name":"Chiaradonna, Riccardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1142403548","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2676,"entry_id":1535,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":194,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Rashed, Marwan","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":194,"first_name":"Marwan","last_name":"Rashed","full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1054568634","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2677,"entry_id":1535,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":298,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sedley, David N.","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":298,"first_name":"David N.","last_name":"Sedley","full_name":"Sedley, David N.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/12143141X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2678,"entry_id":1535,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Rediscovered Categories Commentary: Porphyry(?) with Fragments of Boethus","main_title":{"title":"Rediscovered Categories Commentary: Porphyry(?) with Fragments of Boethus"},"abstract":"Riccardo Chiaradonna has studied Boethus\u2019 downgrading also of universals, again by reference to the Categories \u2019 defi nition of substance. On this ground, universals are not even a something (a Stoic category, lower than substance). Simplicius tells us: \u2018Boethus says fi rst that the universal does not even exist in reality ( einai en hupostasei ), according to Aristotle, and even if it did have any reality, it would not be a something . Aristotle rather said it was in something\u2019. Chiaradonna concludes from a discussion of a number of passages that Boethus thought of a universal as nothing but a collection of particulars. Th e recently recovered fragments of Porphyry\u2019s lost commentary on the Categories in Chapter 8 below, speaking of animal, similarly say \u2018none of these generic items is a subject\u2019. The text of Porphyry translated and analysed in this chapter includes among others a further new fragment on Boethus\u2019 treatment of division by differentia at 14,4\u201315. Rashed has drawn attention to yet another way in which Boethus downgrades something of Aristotle\u2019s: the priority of Aristotle\u2019s fi rst fi gure of syllogism. Or at least he puts Aristotle\u2019s figures all on the same level. The figures are Aristotle\u2019s patterns of valid argument concerning all, some, or none of a class of things, and Aristotle thought that certain arguments in the second and third figures had to be proved equivalent to certain arguments in the fi rst, before they could be seen as valid. I shall discuss below the resumption of the debate in the fourth century by the commentator Themistius. Rashed has translated Th emistius\u2019 text from the superior of two Arabic manuscripts into French. It is to be hoped that Chiaradonna and Rashed, two of the translators of the fragment in Chapter 8, will carry out their plan of compiling the fi rst collection of fragments of Boethus, of which Michael Griffin has already noticed around fifty. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/C9jwqBVxxrkxDUs","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":49,"full_name":"Chiaradonna, Riccardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":194,"full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":298,"full_name":"Sedley, David N.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1535,"section_of":1419,"pages":"231-262","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":["Rediscovered Categories Commentary: Porphyry(?) with Fragments of Boethus"]}

Simplicius’ Corollary on Place: Method of Philosophising and Doctrines, 2016
By: Hoffmann, Philippe, Golitsis, Pantelis, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Simplicius’ Corollary on Place: Method of Philosophising and Doctrines
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 531–540
Categories no categories
Author(s) Hoffmann, Philippe , Golitsis, Pantelis
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
Simplicius’ Corollary on Place (Corollarium de loco) is not a doxographic text but a strictly Neoplatonic philosophical work, with its own philosophical method. It takes the form of a digression interrupting the continuity of Simplicius’ commentary on Aristotle’s Physics (itself a written work intended for readers, hoi entugkhanontes, hoi enteuxomenoi), and its literary genre is that of a monograph treatise using dialectic and exegesis as its principal methods. The dialectical method consists in discussing the opinions of Simplicius’ predecessors, ancient and modern, mainly Aristotle and Proclus, to pave the way for the exposition of the truth, following the method inaugurated by Aristotle in the Topics and still very much alive. It also proceeds by puzzles and solutions (aporiai kai luseis). Th e exegetic method reappears even within a digression which breaks with the continuous commentary and Simplicius devotes sometimes long passages to quoting and commenting on texts from Aristotle, Theophrastus, Proclus, and Damascius, but also from the Chaldaean Oracles, Iamblichus, or Syrianus. Throughout this piece Simplicius maintains complete control over his material which includes the art of rhetoric, dialectical technique, and his philosophic intention. In it, he replaces the Aristotelian defi nition of place (‘the first unmoved boundary of the surrounding body’ (to tou periekhontos peras akinêton prôton), Phys . 4.4, 212a20–1) with a new defi nition taken from his master Damascius (place is the measure of the intrinsic positioning (metron tês theseôs) of the parts of a body, and of its right position in a greater surrounding whole), and he departs from Aristotle’s thought with a radical innovation which progressively works its way in. [introduction]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1508","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1508,"authors_free":[{"id":2619,"entry_id":1508,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2620,"entry_id":1508,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":129,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","free_first_name":"Pantelis","free_last_name":"Golitsis","norm_person":{"id":129,"first_name":"Pantelis","last_name":"Golitsis","full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2621,"entry_id":1508,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Simplicius\u2019 Corollary on Place: Method of Philosophising and Doctrines","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius\u2019 Corollary on Place: Method of Philosophising and Doctrines"},"abstract":"Simplicius\u2019 Corollary on Place (Corollarium de loco) is not a doxographic text but a strictly Neoplatonic philosophical work, with its own philosophical method. It takes the form of a digression interrupting the continuity of Simplicius\u2019 commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics (itself a written work intended for readers, hoi entugkhanontes, hoi enteuxomenoi), and its literary genre is that of a monograph treatise using dialectic and exegesis as its principal methods. The dialectical method consists in discussing the opinions of Simplicius\u2019 predecessors, ancient and modern, mainly Aristotle and Proclus, to pave the way for the exposition of the truth, following the method inaugurated by Aristotle in the Topics and still very much alive. It also proceeds by puzzles and solutions (aporiai kai luseis). Th e exegetic method reappears even within a digression which breaks with the continuous commentary and Simplicius devotes sometimes long passages to quoting and commenting on texts from Aristotle, Theophrastus, Proclus, and Damascius, but also from the Chaldaean Oracles, Iamblichus, or Syrianus. Throughout this piece Simplicius maintains complete control over his material which includes the art of rhetoric, dialectical technique, and his philosophic intention. In it, he replaces the Aristotelian defi nition of place (\u2018the first unmoved boundary of the surrounding body\u2019 (to tou periekhontos peras akin\u00eaton pr\u00f4ton), Phys . 4.4, 212a20\u20131) with a new defi nition taken from his master Damascius (place is the measure of the intrinsic positioning (metron t\u00eas these\u00f4s) of the parts of a body, and of its right position in a greater surrounding whole), and he departs from Aristotle\u2019s thought with a radical innovation which progressively works its way in. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/bi4wQSMQigT8oIm","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":129,"full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1508,"section_of":1419,"pages":"531\u2013540","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":["Simplicius\u2019 Corollary on Place: Method of Philosophising and Doctrines"]}

Smoothing over the Differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato’s Cratylus and Aristotle’s De Interpretatione, 2016
By: van den Berg, Robbert Maarten , Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title Smoothing over the Differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato’s Cratylus and Aristotle’s De Interpretatione
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 353-366
Categories no categories
Author(s) van den Berg, Robbert Maarten
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
Robbert van den Berg in Chapter 13 below fi nds a rather cursory attempt by Ammonius to restore harmony between himself and Proclus on whether Aristotle recognises any names as natural, aft er having said in the fi rst two chapters of On Interpretation that spoken sounds are symbols and signs which signify by convention what is in our minds. Proclus had given an elaborate theological theory of a divine name- giver providing natural names which matched Ideas, not in their sound but in their meaning, and of expert human name- givers possessing only principles ( logoi ) derived from Ideas and projecting the logoi into their imaginations to get a natural representation. In the case of naming the gods, the result could be like the statues which accurately represent gods and (in a theory of statues closer to Iamblichus than to Porphyry as described above) receive divine illumination. Ammonius does the minimum to support his teacher’s divergence from Aristotle. He connects belief in the effi cacy of divine names only with an obscure Egyptian priest, Dousareios, and he qualifies Aristotle’s insistence on the conventionality of meaning only to the extent of pointing out that some names have a meaning that is naturally appropriate. Thus Archelaos, etymologically ‘leader of the people’ is naturally appropriate for a kingly person (but apparently laos , ‘people’ is not naturally appropriate for people). [introduction]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1532","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1532,"authors_free":[{"id":2669,"entry_id":1532,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"van den Berg, Robbert Maarten ","free_first_name":"Robbert Maarten ","free_last_name":"van den Berg","norm_person":null},{"id":2670,"entry_id":1532,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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":"Smoothing over the Differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato\u2019s Cratylus and Aristotle\u2019s De Interpretatione","main_title":{"title":"Smoothing over the Differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato\u2019s Cratylus and Aristotle\u2019s De Interpretatione"},"abstract":"Robbert van den Berg in Chapter 13 below fi nds a rather cursory attempt by Ammonius to restore harmony between himself and Proclus on whether Aristotle recognises any names as natural, aft er having said in the fi rst two chapters of On Interpretation that spoken sounds are symbols and signs which signify by convention what is in our minds. Proclus had given an elaborate theological theory of a divine name- giver providing natural names which matched Ideas, not in their sound but in their meaning, and of expert human name- givers possessing only principles ( logoi ) derived from Ideas and projecting the logoi into their imaginations to get a natural representation. In the case of naming the gods, the result could be like the statues which accurately represent gods and (in a theory of statues closer to Iamblichus than to Porphyry as described above) receive divine illumination. Ammonius does the minimum to support his teacher\u2019s divergence from Aristotle. He connects belief in the effi cacy of divine names only with an obscure Egyptian priest, Dousareios, and he qualifies Aristotle\u2019s insistence on the conventionality of meaning only to the extent of pointing out that some names have a meaning that is naturally appropriate. Thus Archelaos, etymologically \u2018leader of the people\u2019 is naturally appropriate for a kingly person (but apparently laos , \u2018people\u2019 is not naturally appropriate for people). [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/uahIaUKhOSkmoD1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1532,"section_of":1419,"pages":"353-366","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":["Smoothing over the Differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato\u2019s Cratylus and Aristotle\u2019s De Interpretatione"]}

The Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BCE: Andronicus’ Canon, 2016
By: Hatzimichali, Myrto, Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title The Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BCE: Andronicus’ Canon
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators
Pages 81-102
Categories no categories
Author(s) Hatzimichali, Myrto
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1537","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1537,"authors_free":[{"id":2681,"entry_id":1537,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hatzimichali, Myrto","free_first_name":"Myrto","free_last_name":"Hatzimichali","norm_person":null},{"id":2682,"entry_id":1537,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","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 Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BCE: Andronicus\u2019 Canon","main_title":{"title":"The Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BCE: Andronicus\u2019 Canon"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/mXgg2AF0PRUCu3k","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1537,"section_of":1419,"pages":"81-102","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":["The Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BCE: Andronicus\u2019 Canon"]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 2