Author 552
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]}

An Intellective Perspective on Aristotle: Iamblichus the Divine, 2016
By: Opsomer, Jan, Falcon, Andrea (Ed.)
Title An Intellective Perspective on Aristotle: Iamblichus the Divine
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Brill’ Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity
Pages 341-357
Categories no categories
Author(s) Opsomer, Jan
Editor(s) Falcon, Andrea
Translator(s)
Iamblichus (ccl 245-320) is sometimes called the second founder of Neoplatonism.1 His innovations were essential to late Neoplatonic philosophy as it developed in the schools of Athens in particular» but also Alexandria. These innovations do not just pertain to philosophical tenets» but also to philosophi­ cal method and style. Iamblichus defined stricter exegetical rules and new metaphysical laws. He also created an alliance between philosophy and theurgy and insisted on the philosophical value of various religious traditions and reli­ gious-philosophical texts like the Chaldaean oracles. Iamblichus was» more­ over, decisive in shaping the school curriculum and, more generally, the canon of texts that, whether philosophical or religious, carried authority for philo­ sophical research. He, for instance, systematically included texts belonging to a Pythagorean tradition— a tradition which to some extent was of his own construal. His selection of philosophically important texts was in line with cer­ tain earlier developments, but it was Iamblichus who established a real canon. Indeed, after Iamblichus the canon remained more or less stable.If we look at the importance assigned to Aristotle and the Peripatetic tra­ dition, it is clear that the difference between Iamblichus and his arch-rival Porphyry does not reside in which texts were held to be worthy of profound study. Hie difference is situated rather in the role and status attributed to them within the Platonic philosophical system. From the early Imperial era onward, Aristotle was seen by most Platonists as an ally, unlike the Stoics and Epicureans, who were regarded as opponents. Yet the extent to which Aristotelian ideas were incorporated varied greatly. Different parts of Aristotle's thought attracted different Platonists and the strategies used for integrating and assimilating them diverged. Here Iamblichus made his mark, as will become clear below. [Introduction, p. 341]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"935","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":935,"authors_free":[{"id":1387,"entry_id":935,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":211,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Opsomer, Jan","free_first_name":"Jan","free_last_name":"Opsomer","norm_person":{"id":211,"first_name":"Jan","last_name":"Opsomer","full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1120966310","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1388,"entry_id":935,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":95,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Falcon, Andrea","free_first_name":"Andrea","free_last_name":"Falcon","norm_person":{"id":95,"first_name":"Andrea","last_name":"Falcon","full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1138844241","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"An Intellective Perspective on Aristotle: Iamblichus the Divine","main_title":{"title":"An Intellective Perspective on Aristotle: Iamblichus the Divine"},"abstract":"Iamblichus (ccl 245-320) is sometimes called the second founder of \r\nNeoplatonism.1 His innovations were essential to late Neoplatonic philosophy \r\nas it developed in the schools of Athens in particular\u00bb but also Alexandria. These \r\ninnovations do not just pertain to philosophical tenets\u00bb but also to philosophi\u00ad\r\ncal method and style. Iamblichus defined stricter exegetical rules and new \r\nmetaphysical laws. He also created an alliance between philosophy and theurgy \r\nand insisted on the philosophical value of various religious traditions and reli\u00ad\r\ngious-philosophical texts like the Chaldaean oracles. Iamblichus was\u00bb more\u00ad\r\nover, decisive in shaping the school curriculum and, more generally, the canon \r\nof texts that, whether philosophical or religious, carried authority for philo\u00ad\r\nsophical research. He, for instance, systematically included texts belonging \r\nto a Pythagorean tradition\u2014 a tradition which to some extent was of his own \r\nconstrual. His selection of philosophically important texts was in line with cer\u00ad\r\ntain earlier developments, but it was Iamblichus who established a real canon. \r\nIndeed, after Iamblichus the canon remained more or less stable.If we look at the importance assigned to Aristotle and the Peripatetic tra\u00ad\r\ndition, it is clear that the difference between Iamblichus and his arch-rival \r\nPorphyry does not reside in which texts were held to be worthy of profound \r\nstudy. Hie difference is situated rather in the role and status attributed to them \r\nwithin the Platonic philosophical system. From the early Imperial era onward, \r\nAristotle was seen by most Platonists as an ally, unlike the Stoics and Epicureans, \r\nwho were regarded as opponents. Yet the extent to which Aristotelian ideas \r\nwere incorporated varied greatly. Different parts of Aristotle's thought attracted \r\ndifferent Platonists and the strategies used for integrating and assimilating \r\nthem diverged. Here Iamblichus made his mark, as will become clear below. [Introduction, p. 341]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/9PbBFU6HhLHSXvY","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":211,"full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":95,"full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":935,"section_of":304,"pages":"341-357","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":304,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Brill\u2019 Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Falcon2016","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2016","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2016","abstract":"Brill\u2019s Companion to the Reception of Aristotle provides a systematic yet accessible account of the reception of Aristotle\u2019s philosophy in Antiquity. To date, there has been no comprehensive attempt to explain this complex phenomenon. This volume fills this lacuna by offering broad coverage of the subject from Hellenistic times to the sixth century AD. It is laid out chronologically and the 23 articles are divided into three sections: I. The Hellenistic Reception of Aristotle; II. The Post-Hellenistic Engagement with Aristotle; III. Aristotle in Late Antiquity. Topics include Aristotle and the Stoa, Andronicus of Rhodes and the construction of the Aristotelian corpus, the return to Aristotle in the first century BC, and the role of Alexander of Aphrodisias and Porphyry in the transmission of Aristotle's philosophy to Late Antiquity. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vuBWRUwZL9cVKBh","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":304,"pubplace":"Leiden \u2013 Boston","publisher":"Brill","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2016]}

The Earliest Aristotelian Commentators, 2016
By: Gottschalk, Hans B., Sorabji, Richard (Ed.)
Title The Earliest Aristotelian Commentators
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2016
Published in Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence
Pages 61-88
Categories no categories
Author(s) Gottschalk, Hans B.
Editor(s) Sorabji, Richard
Translator(s)
In Chapter 3, Hans Gottschalk surveys the commentators on Aristotle from the fi rst century bc to late in the second century ad , and some of their Platonist opponents. He gives the most space to the fi rst of them, Andronicus, persuasively rguing that he worked in Athens without going to Rome, and telling something of Andronicus’ philosophical comments on Aristotle and of his editorial work on Aristotle’s school writings (as opposed to his works then better known, but now largely lost, for publication outside the school). He rightly says that Andronicus presented Aristotle as a system. As I indicated in commenting on Chapter 1 above, his younger contemporary in Athens, Boethus, stimulated enormous reaction from later commentators by his detailed and idiosyncratic interpretation of Aristotle, fragments of which they recorded. So the description ‘scholasticism’, insofar as it suggests to us something rather dry, is not a description we should now be likely to use, especially aft er the recent discovery of new fragments of Boethus. But Aristotle Re-Interpreted will include a contribution on some of Boethus’ achievement and further detail on the commentators aft er him is supplied in other recent works listed above in note 6. Th e only big matter of controversy concerns the two words ‘critical edition’ at the opening of Gottschalk’s chapter, which could be taken for granted in 1990. It was challenged by Jonathan Barnes in 1997. 9 A critical edition is produced by comparing diff erent copies of the original in order to discover more closely what the original may have said. Barnes argued powerfully that this is not what Andronicus did. Indeed, if he did not go to Rome to examine the manuscript there, it is even less likely that he did. One reaction was to think that this greatly reduced the importance of Andronicus. But a contribution in Aristotle Re- Interpreted will take up the other editorial activity including the presentation of Aristotle’s school writings as a system. It was far more valuable, according to this argument, to create a coherent canon of Aristotle’s voluminous school writings, by joining or separating pieces and arranging them in a coherent order for reading, than to seek the original wording in a critical edition. [Sorabji: Introduction to the Second Edition, p. xii]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"535","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":535,"authors_free":[{"id":756,"entry_id":535,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":135,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Gottschalk, Hans B.","free_first_name":"Hans B.","free_last_name":"Gottschalk","norm_person":{"id":135,"first_name":"Hans B.","last_name":"Gottschalk","full_name":"Gottschalk, Hans B.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1161498559","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":757,"entry_id":535,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"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":"The Earliest Aristotelian Commentators","main_title":{"title":"The Earliest Aristotelian Commentators"},"abstract":" In Chapter 3, Hans Gottschalk surveys the commentators on Aristotle from the \r\nfi rst century bc to late in the second century ad , and some of their Platonist \r\nopponents. He gives the most space to the fi rst of them, Andronicus, persuasively rguing that he worked in Athens without going to Rome, and telling something \r\nof Andronicus\u2019 philosophical comments on Aristotle and of his editorial work \r\non Aristotle\u2019s school writings (as opposed to his works then better known, but \r\nnow largely lost, for publication outside the school). He rightly says that \r\nAndronicus presented Aristotle as a system. As I indicated in commenting on \r\nChapter 1 above, his younger contemporary in Athens, Boethus, stimulated \r\nenormous reaction from later commentators by his detailed and idiosyncratic \r\ninterpretation of Aristotle, fragments of which they recorded. So the description \r\n\u2018scholasticism\u2019, insofar as it suggests to us something rather dry, is not a \r\ndescription we should now be likely to use, especially aft er the recent discovery \r\nof new fragments of Boethus. But Aristotle Re-Interpreted will include a \r\ncontribution on some of Boethus\u2019 achievement and further detail on the \r\ncommentators aft er him is supplied in other recent works listed above in note 6. \r\nTh e only big matter of controversy concerns the two words \u2018critical edition\u2019 at the \r\nopening of Gottschalk\u2019s chapter, which could be taken for granted in 1990. It was \r\nchallenged by Jonathan Barnes in 1997. 9 A critical edition is produced by \r\ncomparing diff erent copies of the original in order to discover more closely what \r\nthe original may have said. Barnes argued powerfully that this is not what \r\nAndronicus did. Indeed, if he did not go to Rome to examine the manuscript \r\nthere, it is even less likely that he did. One reaction was to think that this greatly \r\nreduced the importance of Andronicus. But a contribution in Aristotle Re-\r\nInterpreted will take up the other editorial activity including the presentation of \r\nAristotle\u2019s school writings as a system. It was far more valuable, according to this \r\nargument, to create a coherent canon of Aristotle\u2019s voluminous school writings, \r\nby joining or separating pieces and arranging them in a coherent order for \r\nreading, than to seek the original wording in a critical edition. [Sorabji: Introduction to the Second Edition, p. xii]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/PHI8XMmb3g5a6Pk","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":135,"full_name":"Gottschalk, Hans B.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":535,"section_of":200,"pages":"61-88","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":200,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabji1990","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2016","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1990","abstract":"The story of the ancient commentators on Aristotle has not previously been told \r\nat book length. Here it is assembled for the fi rst time by drawing both on some \r\nof the classic articles translated into English or revised and on the very latest \r\nresearch. Some of the chapters will be making revisionary suggestions unfamiliar \r\neven to specialists in the fi eld. Th e philosophical interest of the commentators \r\nhas been illustrated elsewhere. 1 Th e aim here is not so much to do this again as \r\nto set out the background of the commentary tradition against which further \r\nphilosophical discussion and discussions of other kinds can take place. \r\n Th e importance of the commentators lies partly in their representing the \r\nthought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools, \r\npartly in the panorama they provide of the 1100 years of Ancient Greek \r\nphilosophy, preserving as they do many original quotations from lost philosophical \r\nworks. Still more signifi cant is their profound infl uence, uncovered in some of the \r\nchapters below, on subsequent philosophy, Islamic and European. Th is was due \r\npartly to their preserving anti-Aristotelian material which helped to inspire \r\nmedieval and Renaissance science, but still more to their presenting an Aristotle \r\ntransformed in ways which happened to make him acceptable to the Christian \r\nChurch. It is not just Aristotle, but this Aristotle transformed and embedded in \r\nthe philosophy of the commentators, that lies behind the views of later thinkers. [authors abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/97asmgDU6HqIEPW","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":200,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Bloomsbury Academic","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"2","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2016]}

  • PAGE 11 OF 94
Aristotle's Categories in the Greek and Latin medieval exegetical tradition. The case of the argument for the non-simultaneity of relatives, 1996
By: Demetracopoulos, John A.
Title Aristotle's Categories in the Greek and Latin medieval exegetical tradition. The case of the argument for the non-simultaneity of relatives
Type Article
Language English
Date 1996
Journal Cima (Cahiers de l'institut du Moyen Âge grec et latin, Université de Copenhague)
Volume 66
Pages 117-134
Categories no categories
Author(s) Demetracopoulos, John A.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)
To conclude: even if we are eager to say that in the case of Anselm’s use of the Aristotelian passage 7b38-39 we notice a medieval misconcep­
tion  of the text of the  great ancient philosopher,  first  we should  not hasten to infer from this that the medievals couldn’t understand Aristotle 
or generally  ancient writers;  and second,  we should not be at all sur­prised.  Commentators and users of Aristotle’s works have often been 
exceptional men, but not super-human. Complaining about the texts’ lan­
guage  and  so  implicitly  apologizing  for the  value of his  interpretive  work, one commentator notes that the interpretation of many Aristotelian 
texts presupposes something like oracular powers of divination (Sophonias, CAG XXIII,2, 2, 8-13).  Such modesty on the part of one of the Greek 
commentators of Aristotle ought to shake any confidence we might have in definitive interpretations of certain difficult or ambiguous Aristotelian 
passages, which, as often as we insist on examining them intensely, con­
stantly answer our exegetical anxiety with a spiteful silence. [conclusion, p. 133]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1302","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1302,"authors_free":[{"id":1925,"entry_id":1302,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":89,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Demetracopoulos, John A.","free_first_name":"John A.","free_last_name":"Demetracopoulos","norm_person":{"id":89,"first_name":"John A.","last_name":"Demetracopoulos","full_name":"Demetracopoulos, John A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130017159","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotle's Categories in the Greek and Latin medieval exegetical tradition. The case of the argument for the non-simultaneity of relatives","main_title":{"title":"Aristotle's Categories in the Greek and Latin medieval exegetical tradition. The case of the argument for the non-simultaneity of relatives"},"abstract":"To conclude: even if we are eager to say that in the case of Anselm\u2019s use of the Aristotelian passage 7b38-39 we notice a medieval misconcep\u00ad\r\ntion of the text of the great ancient philosopher, first we should not hasten to infer from this that the medievals couldn\u2019t understand Aristotle \r\nor generally ancient writers; and second, we should not be at all sur\u00adprised. Commentators and users of Aristotle\u2019s works have often been \r\nexceptional men, but not super-human. Complaining about the texts\u2019 lan\u00ad\r\nguage and so implicitly apologizing for the value of his interpretive work, one commentator notes that the interpretation of many Aristotelian \r\ntexts presupposes something like oracular powers of divination (Sophonias, CAG XXIII,2, 2, 8-13). Such modesty on the part of one of the Greek \r\ncommentators of Aristotle ought to shake any confidence we might have in definitive interpretations of certain difficult or ambiguous Aristotelian \r\npassages, which, as often as we insist on examining them intensely, con\u00ad\r\nstantly answer our exegetical anxiety with a spiteful silence. [conclusion, p. 133]","btype":3,"date":"1996","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/p6iQ64RPOX9NvXe","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":89,"full_name":"Demetracopoulos, John A.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1302,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Cima (Cahiers de l'institut du Moyen \u00c2ge grec et latin, Universit\u00e9 de Copenhague)","volume":"66","issue":"","pages":"117-134"}},"sort":["Aristotle's Categories in the Greek and Latin medieval exegetical tradition. The case of the argument for the non-simultaneity of relatives"]}

Aristotle, Plotinus, and Simplicius on the Relation of the Changer to the Changed, 2005
By: Wilberding, James
Title Aristotle, Plotinus, and Simplicius on the Relation of the Changer to the Changed
Type Article
Language English
Date 2005
Journal The Classical Quarterly
Volume 55 (New Series)
Issue 2
Pages 447–454
Categories no categories
Author(s) Wilberding, James
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"431","_score":null,"_source":{"id":431,"authors_free":[{"id":582,"entry_id":431,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":257,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wilberding, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Wilberding","norm_person":{"id":257,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Wilberding","full_name":"Wilberding, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143517465","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotle, Plotinus, and Simplicius on the Relation of the Changer to the Changed","main_title":{"title":"Aristotle, Plotinus, and Simplicius on the Relation of the Changer to the Changed"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/5oyjVkiNRcsn7CM","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":257,"full_name":"Wilberding, James","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":431,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Classical Quarterly","volume":"55 (New Series)","issue":"2","pages":"447\u2013454"}},"sort":["Aristotle, Plotinus, and Simplicius on the Relation of the Changer to the Changed"]}

Aristotle’s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories, 2014
By: Militello, Chiara
Title Aristotle’s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories
Type Article
Language English
Date 2014
Journal PEITHO / EXAMINA ANTIQUA
Volume 1
Issue 5
Pages 91-117
Categories no categories
Author(s) Militello, Chiara
Editor(s)
Translator(s)
This paper lists and examines the explicit references to Aristotle’s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic commentaries on the Categories. The references to the Topics by Porphyry, Dexippus, Ammonius, Simplicius, Olympiodorus, Philoponus and David (Elias) are listed according the usual prolegomena to Aristotle’s works. In particular, the paper reconstructs David (Elias)’s original thesis about the proponents of the title Pre-Topics for the Categories and compares Ammonius’, Simplicius’ and Olympiodorus’ doxographies about the postpraedicamenta. Moreover, the study identifies two general trends. The first one is that all the commentators after Proclus share the same general view about: the authenticity of the Topics, Aristotle’s writing style in them, the part of philosophy to which they belong, their purpose, their usefulness and their place in the reading order. The second one is that whereas Porphyry, Dexippus and Simplicius use the Topics as an aid to understanding the Categories, Ammonius, Olympiodorus and David (Elias) do not. [author's abstract]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1485","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1485,"authors_free":[{"id":2570,"entry_id":1485,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":2,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Militello, Chiara","free_first_name":"Chiara","free_last_name":"Militello","norm_person":{"id":2,"first_name":"Chiara ","last_name":"Militello ","full_name":"Militello, Chiara ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/13666461X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotle\u2019s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories","main_title":{"title":"Aristotle\u2019s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories"},"abstract":"This paper lists and examines the explicit references to Aristotle\u2019s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic commentaries on the Categories. The references to the Topics by Porphyry, Dexippus, Ammonius, Simplicius, Olympiodorus, Philoponus and David (Elias) are listed according the usual prolegomena to Aristotle\u2019s works. In particular, the paper reconstructs David (Elias)\u2019s original thesis about the proponents of the title Pre-Topics for the Categories and compares Ammonius\u2019, Simplicius\u2019 and Olympiodorus\u2019 doxographies about the postpraedicamenta. Moreover, the study identifies two general trends. The first one is that all the commentators after Proclus share the same general view about: the authenticity of the Topics, Aristotle\u2019s writing style in them, the part of philosophy to which they belong, their purpose, their usefulness and their place in the reading order. The second one is that whereas Porphyry, Dexippus and Simplicius use the Topics as an aid to understanding the Categories, Ammonius, Olympiodorus and David (Elias) do not. [author's abstract]","btype":3,"date":"2014","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/hTYSsDkZELV4RZP","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":2,"full_name":"Militello, Chiara ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1485,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"PEITHO \/ EXAMINA ANTIQUA","volume":"1","issue":"5","pages":"91-117"}},"sort":["Aristotle\u2019s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories"]}

Aristotle’s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides, 1991
By: Kerferd, George B., Blumenthal, Henry J. (Ed.), Robinson, Howard (Ed.)
Title Aristotle’s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 1991
Published in Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary volume: Aristotle and the Later Tradition
Pages 1-7
Categories no categories
Author(s) Kerferd, George B.
Editor(s) Blumenthal, Henry J. , Robinson, Howard
Translator(s)
[Conclusion, p. 7]: id  Aristotle  envisage  the  same  criticism  as  this  of Parmenides? 
Some help here may be derived from a consideration of what Aristotle 
says in Metaph. i,986bi8-987a2. Aristotle clearly felt that one of his own 
greatest discoveries was the need for Matter as  a substrate to explain 
how what is one in definition can come to appear or be seen as many in 
experience. It is perhaps with this in mind that he proceeds to speak in 
praise  of Parmenides’  insight and  declares of him that
claiming that besides the existent nothing non-existent exists, he thinks that of 
necessity  one  thing exists, viz.  the  existent  and  nothing else  ...  But  being 
forced to follow the observed facts, and supposing the existence of that which 
is one in definition, but more than one according to our sensations, he now 
posits two causes and two principles calling them hot and cold, i.e. fire and 
earth; of these he ranges the hot with the existent, and the other with the non­
existent. (Trans. W. D. Ross)
It  should,  I  suggest,  be  apparent  that  this  fits  perfectly  with  what 
Aristotle  says  in  the  De caelo  and  with  Simplicius’  approach.  It  may 
even in addition be a correct account of what Parmenides was saying, 
though now rephrased  in Aristotle’s own language.  But this is indeed 
another question.

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"889","_score":null,"_source":{"id":889,"authors_free":[{"id":1309,"entry_id":889,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":215,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Kerferd, George B.","free_first_name":"George B.","free_last_name":"Kerferd","norm_person":{"id":215,"first_name":" George B.","last_name":"Kerferd","full_name":"Kerferd, George B.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1158138547","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1310,"entry_id":889,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1311,"entry_id":889,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":139,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Robinson, Howard","free_first_name":"Howard","free_last_name":"Robinson","norm_person":{"id":139,"first_name":"Robinson","last_name":"Howard ","full_name":"Robinson, Howard ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172347122","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotle\u2019s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides","main_title":{"title":"Aristotle\u2019s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides"},"abstract":"[Conclusion, p. 7]: id Aristotle envisage the same criticism as this of Parmenides? \r\nSome help here may be derived from a consideration of what Aristotle \r\nsays in Metaph. i,986bi8-987a2. Aristotle clearly felt that one of his own \r\ngreatest discoveries was the need for Matter as a substrate to explain \r\nhow what is one in definition can come to appear or be seen as many in \r\nexperience. It is perhaps with this in mind that he proceeds to speak in \r\npraise of Parmenides\u2019 insight and declares of him that\r\nclaiming that besides the existent nothing non-existent exists, he thinks that of \r\nnecessity one thing exists, viz. the existent and nothing else ... But being \r\nforced to follow the observed facts, and supposing the existence of that which \r\nis one in definition, but more than one according to our sensations, he now \r\nposits two causes and two principles calling them hot and cold, i.e. fire and \r\nearth; of these he ranges the hot with the existent, and the other with the non\u00ad\r\nexistent. (Trans. W. D. Ross)\r\nIt should, I suggest, be apparent that this fits perfectly with what \r\nAristotle says in the De caelo and with Simplicius\u2019 approach. It may \r\neven in addition be a correct account of what Parmenides was saying, \r\nthough now rephrased in Aristotle\u2019s own language. But this is indeed \r\nanother question.","btype":2,"date":"1991","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/W835pVoHs7zvZ2Q","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":215,"full_name":"Kerferd, George B.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":139,"full_name":"Robinson, Howard ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":889,"section_of":354,"pages":"1-7","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":354,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary volume: Aristotle and the Later Tradition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Blumenthal\/Robinson1991","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1991","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1991","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/anTH9fx9QKBfykf","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":354,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Clarendon Press","series":"Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Aristotle\u2019s Treatment of the Doctrine of Parmenides"]}

Aspasius: The Earliest Extant Commentary on Aristotle's Ethics, 1999
By: Alberti, Antonina (Ed.), Sharples, Robert W. (Ed.)
Title Aspasius: The Earliest Extant Commentary on Aristotle's Ethics
Type Edited Book
Language English
Date 1999
Publication Place Berlin – New York
Publisher de Gruyter
Series Peripatoi
Volume 17
Categories no categories
Author(s)
Editor(s) Alberti, Antonina , Sharples, Robert W.
Translator(s)
This book comprises essays on the nature of Aspasius’ commentary, his interpretation of Aristotle, and his own place in the history of thought. The contributions are in English or Italian.

Aspasius’ commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics is the earliest ancient commentary on Aristotle of which extensive parts survive in their original form. It is important both for the history of commentary as a genre and for the history of philosophical thought in the first two centuries A.D.; it is also still valuable as what its author intended it to be, an aid in interpreting the Ethics. All three aspects are explored by the essays.

The book is not formally a commentary on Aspasius’ commentary; but between them the essays consider the interpretation of numerous problematic or significant passages. Full indices will enable readers quickly to locate discussion of particular parts of Aspasius’ work. This volume of essays will form a natural complement to the first ever translation of Aspasius’ commentary into any modern language, currently in preparation by Paul Mercken.

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"286","_score":null,"_source":{"id":286,"authors_free":[{"id":2496,"entry_id":286,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":506,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Alberti, Antonina","free_first_name":"Antonina","free_last_name":"Alberti","norm_person":{"id":506,"first_name":"Antonina","last_name":"Alberti","full_name":"Alberti, Antonina","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2497,"entry_id":286,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","free_first_name":"Robert W.","free_last_name":"Sharples","norm_person":{"id":42,"first_name":"Robert W.","last_name":"Sharples","full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114269505","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aspasius: The Earliest Extant Commentary on Aristotle's Ethics","main_title":{"title":"Aspasius: The Earliest Extant Commentary on Aristotle's Ethics"},"abstract":"This book comprises essays on the nature of Aspasius\u2019 commentary, his interpretation of Aristotle, and his own place in the history of thought. The contributions are in English or Italian.\r\n\r\nAspasius\u2019 commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics is the earliest ancient commentary on Aristotle of which extensive parts survive in their original form. It is important both for the history of commentary as a genre and for the history of philosophical thought in the first two centuries A.D.; it is also still valuable as what its author intended it to be, an aid in interpreting the Ethics. All three aspects are explored by the essays.\r\n\r\nThe book is not formally a commentary on Aspasius\u2019 commentary; but between them the essays consider the interpretation of numerous problematic or significant passages. Full indices will enable readers quickly to locate discussion of particular parts of Aspasius\u2019 work. This volume of essays will form a natural complement to the first ever translation of Aspasius\u2019 commentary into any modern language, currently in preparation by Paul Mercken.","btype":4,"date":"1999","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/eSDwVjUW7hhV4oS","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":506,"full_name":"Alberti, Antonina","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":286,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi","volume":"17","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Aspasius: The Earliest Extant Commentary on Aristotle's Ethics"]}

Aspects de la théorie de la perception chez les néoplatoniciens : sensation (αἴσθησις), sensation commune (κοινὴ αἴσθησις), sensibles communs (κοινὰ αἰσθητά) et conscience de soi (συναίσθησις), 1997
By: Hadot, Ilsetraut
Title Aspects de la théorie de la perception chez les néoplatoniciens : sensation (αἴσθησις), sensation commune (κοινὴ αἴσθησις), sensibles communs (κοινὰ αἰσθητά) et conscience de soi (συναίσθησις)
Type Article
Language French
Date 1997
Journal Documenti e Studi sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale
Volume 8
Pages 33–85
Categories no categories
Author(s) Hadot, Ilsetraut
Editor(s)
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"643","_score":null,"_source":{"id":643,"authors_free":[{"id":918,"entry_id":643,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","free_first_name":"Ilsetraut","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":4,"first_name":"Ilsetraut","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/107415011","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aspects de la th\u00e9orie de la perception chez les n\u00e9oplatoniciens : sensation (\u03b1\u1f34\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2), sensation commune (\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1f74 \u03b1\u1f34\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2), sensibles communs (\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac) et conscience de soi (\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2)","main_title":{"title":"Aspects de la th\u00e9orie de la perception chez les n\u00e9oplatoniciens : sensation (\u03b1\u1f34\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2), sensation commune (\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1f74 \u03b1\u1f34\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2), sensibles communs (\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac) et conscience de soi (\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2)"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"1997","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ENXqCcYm89glA38","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":643,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Documenti e Studi sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale","volume":"8","issue":"","pages":"33\u201385"}},"sort":["Aspects de la th\u00e9orie de la perception chez les n\u00e9oplatoniciens : sensation (\u03b1\u1f34\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2), sensation commune (\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1f74 \u03b1\u1f34\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2), sensibles communs (\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac) et conscience de soi (\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2)"]}

Aspects of Avicenna, 2001
By: Wisnovsky, Robert (Ed.)
Title Aspects of Avicenna
Type Edited Book
Language undefined
Date 2001
Publication Place Princeton
Publisher Markus Wiener Publishers
Categories no categories
Author(s)
Editor(s) Wisnovsky, Robert
Translator(s)
The articles in this volume aim to further our understanding of the work and thought of the philosopher and physician Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥusain ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sīnā (born before 370 AH/980 CE-died 428 AH/1037 CE), known in the West by his Latinized name Avicenna. 
It seems to me that what much of the best new schlorahip has in common, and what the articles in this volume aspire to, is a mature and subtle appreciation of the history of Avicenna’s philosophy. By this I mean two things. First, the increasing availability of edited Avicennian texts has allowed scholars to examine a broader spectrum of passages about particular topic than they were able to in the past. This, in turn, has made possible the recent and ongoing attempts to periodize Avicenna’s philosophical career through the careful dating of individual work. Scholars now have to come to terms with the fact that there may not be a single Avicennian position on a given issue, but rather a history of positions, adopted at different periods of his life. 
Second, many of the ancient commentaries on Aristotle, though available in the original Greek for a hundred years now, have only recently been translated into English. These translations, along with the new scholarly work on the commentators which has followed in their wake, have made a massive but heretofore forbidden resource for the history of late-antique and early-medieval philosophy easily accessible to speciallists in Arabic philosophy. The more precisely we understand how Greek philosophy developed durig the period between 200 CE and 600 CE, the better able we shall be to situate the theories of philosophers such as Avicenny in their intellectual-historical context. [introduction/conclusion]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1452","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1452,"authors_free":[{"id":2450,"entry_id":1452,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":483,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","free_first_name":"Robert","free_last_name":"Wisnovsky","norm_person":{"id":483,"first_name":"Robert","last_name":"Wisnovsky","full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aspects of Avicenna","main_title":{"title":"Aspects of Avicenna"},"abstract":"The articles in this volume aim to further our understanding of the work and thought of the philosopher and physician Ab\u016b \u02bfAl\u012b al-\u1e24usain ibn \u02bfAbd All\u0101h ibn S\u012bn\u0101 (born before 370 AH\/980 CE-died 428 AH\/1037 CE), known in the West by his Latinized name Avicenna. \r\nIt seems to me that what much of the best new schlorahip has in common, and what the articles in this volume aspire to, is a mature and subtle appreciation of the history of Avicenna\u2019s philosophy. By this I mean two things. First, the increasing availability of edited Avicennian texts has allowed scholars to examine a broader spectrum of passages about particular topic than they were able to in the past. This, in turn, has made possible the recent and ongoing attempts to periodize Avicenna\u2019s philosophical career through the careful dating of individual work. Scholars now have to come to terms with the fact that there may not be a single Avicennian position on a given issue, but rather a history of positions, adopted at different periods of his life. \r\nSecond, many of the ancient commentaries on Aristotle, though available in the original Greek for a hundred years now, have only recently been translated into English. These translations, along with the new scholarly work on the commentators which has followed in their wake, have made a massive but heretofore forbidden resource for the history of late-antique and early-medieval philosophy easily accessible to speciallists in Arabic philosophy. The more precisely we understand how Greek philosophy developed durig the period between 200 CE and 600 CE, the better able we shall be to situate the theories of philosophers such as Avicenny in their intellectual-historical context. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":4,"date":"2001","language":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wL5bMZgjyTXYzBp","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":483,"full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":1452,"pubplace":"Princeton","publisher":"Markus Wiener Publishers","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Aspects of Avicenna"]}

Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato, 2015
By: Hadot, Ilsetraut,
Title Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato
Type Monograph
Language English
Date 2015
Publication Place Leiden – Boston
Publisher Brill
Series Studies in Platonism, Neoplatonism, and the Platonic tradition
Volume 18
Categories no categories
Author(s) Hadot, Ilsetraut
Editor(s)
Translator(s) Chase, Michael(Chase, Michael )
Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato by I. Hadot deals with the Neoplatonist tendency to harmonize the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle. It shows that this harmonizing tendency, born in Middle Platonism, prevailed in Neoplatonism from Porphyry and Iamblichus, where it persisted until the end of this philosophy. Hadot aims to illustrate that it is not the different schools themselves, for instance those of Athens and Alexandria, that differ from one another by the intensity of the will to harmonization, but groups of philosophers within these schools.

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"217","_score":null,"_source":{"id":217,"authors_free":[{"id":278,"entry_id":217,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","free_first_name":"Ilsetraut","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":4,"first_name":"Ilsetraut","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/107415011","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2562,"entry_id":217,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":25,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Chase, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Chase","norm_person":{"id":25,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Chase","full_name":"Chase, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031917152","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato","main_title":{"title":"Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato"},"abstract":"Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato by I. Hadot deals with the Neoplatonist tendency to harmonize the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle. It shows that this harmonizing tendency, born in Middle Platonism, prevailed in Neoplatonism from Porphyry and Iamblichus, where it persisted until the end of this philosophy. Hadot aims to illustrate that it is not the different schools themselves, for instance those of Athens and Alexandria, that differ from one another by the intensity of the will to harmonization, but groups of philosophers within these schools.","btype":1,"date":"2015","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/OiaDbFMvR7B1V8o","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":25,"full_name":"Chase, Michael ","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}}],"book":{"id":217,"pubplace":"Leiden \u2013 Boston","publisher":"Brill","series":"Studies in Platonism, Neoplatonism, and the Platonic tradition","volume":"18","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato"]}

Au terme d’une tradition: Simplicius, lecteur du Phédon, 2015
By: Gavray, Marc-Antoine, Delcomminette, Sylvain (Ed.), Hoine, Pieter d’ (Ed.), Gavray, Marc-Antoine (Ed.)
Title Au terme d’une tradition: Simplicius, lecteur du Phédon
Type Book Section
Language French
Date 2015
Published in Ancient Readings of Plato’s Phaedo
Pages 293-310
Categories no categories
Author(s) Gavray, Marc-Antoine
Editor(s) Delcomminette, Sylvain , Hoine, Pieter d’ , Gavray, Marc-Antoine
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1412","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1412,"authors_free":[{"id":2206,"entry_id":1412,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":125,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Gavray, Marc-Antoine","free_first_name":"Gavray","free_last_name":"Marc-Antoine","norm_person":{"id":125,"first_name":"Marc-Antoine","last_name":"Gavray","full_name":"Gavray, Marc-Antoine","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1078511411","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2210,"entry_id":1412,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":391,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Delcomminette, Sylvain","free_first_name":"Sylvain","free_last_name":"Delcomminette","norm_person":{"id":391,"first_name":"Sylvain","last_name":"Delcomminette","full_name":"Delcomminette, Sylvain","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/142220701","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2211,"entry_id":1412,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":104,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Hoine, Pieter d\u2019","free_first_name":"Pieter","free_last_name":"Hoine, d\u2019","norm_person":{"id":104,"first_name":"Pieter d' ","last_name":"Hoine","full_name":"Hoine, Pieter d' ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051361575","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2212,"entry_id":1412,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":125,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Gavray, Marc-Antoine","free_first_name":"Marc-Antoine","free_last_name":"Gavray","norm_person":{"id":125,"first_name":"Marc-Antoine","last_name":"Gavray","full_name":"Gavray, Marc-Antoine","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1078511411","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Au terme d\u2019une tradition: Simplicius, lecteur du Ph\u00e9don","main_title":{"title":"Au terme d\u2019une tradition: Simplicius, lecteur du Ph\u00e9don"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2015","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/OAUIV1cw8jvq6yd","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":125,"full_name":"Gavray, Marc-Antoine","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":391,"full_name":"Delcomminette, Sylvain","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":104,"full_name":"Hoine, Pieter d' ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":125,"full_name":"Gavray, Marc-Antoine","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1412,"section_of":1411,"pages":"293-310","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1411,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Ancient Readings of Plato\u2019s Phaedo","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2015","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WNJQNBkQ67guxBj","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1411,"pubplace":"Leiden \u2013 Boston","publisher":"Brill","series":"Philosophia antiqua","volume":"140","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Au terme d\u2019une tradition: Simplicius, lecteur du Ph\u00e9don"]}

Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie, 1987
By: Haase, Wolfgang (Ed.)
Title Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie
Type Edited Book
Language undefined
Date 1987
Publication Place Berlin – New York
Publisher De Gruyter
Categories no categories
Author(s)
Editor(s) Haase, Wolfgang
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"335","_score":null,"_source":{"id":335,"authors_free":[{"id":429,"entry_id":335,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":325,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","free_first_name":"Wolfgang","free_last_name":"Haase","norm_person":{"id":325,"first_name":"Wolfgang","last_name":"Haase","full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117757527","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aufstieg und Niedergang der r\u00f6mischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie","main_title":{"title":"Aufstieg und Niedergang der r\u00f6mischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie"},"abstract":"","btype":4,"date":"1987","language":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vfjxEDHCVxKINhf","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":325,"full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":335,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Aufstieg und Niedergang der r\u00f6mischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie"]}

  • PAGE 11 OF 94