DOCSLIB.ORG

THE SCHOOL of AMMONIUS, SON of HERMIAS, on KNOWLEDGE of the DIVINE by ELIAS TEMPELIS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE SCHOOL OF AMMONIUS, SON OF HERMIAS, ON KNOWLEDGE OF THE DIVINE by ELIAS TEMPELIS A Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Department of Philosophy, Arts Faculty, University College London London 1994 ProQuest Number: 10045516 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest. ProQuest 10045516 Published by ProQuest LLC(2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 To my parents ABSTRACT The thesis undertakes a reconstruction and critical assessment of the theory of the Neoplatonic school of Ammonius, son of Hermias, on the presuppositions for the acquisition of knowledge of the divine and also on the contents and the purpose of this knowledge. The metaphysical position of the human soul between the intelligible and the sensible worlds allows it to know the intelligible world and the divine, in particular, provided that the cognitive reason- principles in the human intellect are activated. The purpose of such knowledge is the assimilation to the divine and is achieved by means of a personal struggle with the help of theoretical and practical philosophy. The school of Ammonius compared its philosophical attempt at knowledge of the divine to previous similar methods. Since the One is unknowable, the members of this school believed that man can know to some extent the Demiurge, who belongs to the second level of the intelligible world. The members of the school had different views on affirmative and negative theology. The intelligible ante rem universals, the most fundamental of which is Substance, constitute the cognitive and creative reason-principles of the demiurgic Intellect. The eternal activation of these principles result in the Demiurge's omniscience and the creation of the world, which is coetemal with the Demiurge. The Demiurge is incorporeal and exercises providence for what He has created, but He is not omnipotent. The theory of the school of Ammonius on knowledge of the divine is shown to be broadly consistent, though not necessarily convincing. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract.......................................................... 3 Acknowledgements.................................................. 5 Introduction...................................................... 7 a. Method......................................................... 7 b. Contents....................................................... 14 CHAPTER 1. PRESUPPOSITIONS AND PURPOSE OF OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE INTELLIGIBLE WORLD......................................... 16 1.1 The cognitive reason-principles in the human intellect........ 16 1.2 The role of philosophy in the knowledge of the intelligible world......................................................... 32 1.3 Assimilation to the divine.................................... 37 1.4 Neoplatonic evaluation of previous philosophical attempts at knowledge of the intelligible world........................ 41 CHAPTER 2. THE KNOWLEDGE OF UNIVERSALS............................ 53 2.1 The theory of universals...................................... 53 2.2 The ante rem universals in the demiurgic Intellect............ 60 2.3 The incorporeality of the ante rem universals................. 73 2.4 Substance as the most fundamental ante rem universal.......... 77 CHAPTER 3. THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE DIVINE............................ 80 3.1 The knowabi 1 ity of the divine................................. 80 3.2 Affirmative or negative theology ?............................ 85 3.3 The metaphysical system of the school of Ammonius............. 90 3.4 God: Incorporeal or not ?..................................... 97 3.5 Is God omnipotent ?........................................... 100 3.6 Divine omniscience............................................ 108 3.7 The creation of the world..................................... 117 3.7.1 The coeternity of the world with the Demiurge............... 124 3.8 Divine providence............................................. 130 EPILOGUE.......................................................... 134 NOTES............................................................. 137 BIBLIOGRAPHY...................................................... 189 a. Primary sources................................................ 189 b. Books and articles............................................. 197 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Robert Heinaman, of the department of Philosophy, UCL. I thank him for his comments as well as his patience and kindness. For the knowledge of ancient philosophy I shall be always indebted to my teachers at the University of Athens. I would like here to mention specifically Prof. Grigorios Kostaras, who is still a source of inspiration for me. I also feel fortunate to have consulted Prof. Gerard J.P. O'Daly and Dr. Robert Sharpies, thus having benefited from their knowledge of Greek philosophy. During my postgraduate studies, I had the privilege to attend the seminars in ancient philosophy organized by Prof. Richard Sorabji at the Institute of Classical Studies. As I had the opportunity to consult some of the best libraries in the world, I am indebted to the Librarians and Staff of the following: Library of the Societies for the Promotion of Hellenic and Roman Studies (Institute of Classical Studies), University College London, Senate House (UL), Warburg Institute and British Library. My studies in England would not have been possible without a three- and-a-half year scholarship which was awarded to me by the Greek State Scholarships Foundation (IKY). The very least I can do on this occasion is to thank the Administrative Board of the Foundation. To my parents, loannis and Erifyle Tempelis, I owe more than I can say for their encouragement and financial support. I am grateful to Christina Manolea for the useful discussions we have had on several philological matters. To Philip Pilkington, Margaret Gullan - Whur and Colin Annis goes credit for their appreciative comments and critiques. 6 Last but not least, I would like to thank my brother George for the proof-checking of my work. INTRODUCTION éauTÔv Y^O Tis tàiv yvÇ>» 6eôv efaexai Clement of Alexandria The present thesis undertakes a reconstruction and critical assessment of the doctrine of the Alexandrian school of Ammonius, son of Hermias, on the presuppositions for the acquisition of knowledge of the divine and also on the contents and the purpose of this knowledge. The study concerns their methodology for apprehending the intelligible world. By this I mean here not merely a statement of their method, but also a presentation of its theoretical foundation. The doctrines which are examined may seem antiquated and irrelevant to present concerns. I think, however, that if we devote a sympathetic but critical study to them, we may adjust our own arguments regarding the knowability of the ultimate principles of the universe. The factor which determined the choice of the subject-matter is the scant scholarship devoted to it and, more generally, to the final expressions of late antiquity. Much of the lack of interest may be due to the aversion caused by the untranslated volumes of this school's Greek commentaries. It is hoped that more recent scholarship may contribute to a drastic change of the persistent preconception about the decline and fall of classical thought by the time of Ammonius and his students. a) METHOD The question, then, arises: What is the theory of the school of Ammonius on knowledge of the divine? The problem is that the members of this school did not have the advantage of writing a systematic work in 8 which one could find a complete and coherent metaphysics or a full and complete presentation of such a theory. Their metaphysical beliefs are scattered amongst their commentaries on Plato, Aristotle, Porphyry, Nicomachus, Hippocrates and Paulus, which take the form of school treatises. As happens with similar cases in late Neoplatonism,^ the same author repeats his ideas in his different works, even in places where the context itself would not normally allow such speculations. Moreover, they tended to return to a topic on various occasions. Reference to knowledge of the divine can therefore be found in nearly all the lectures they gave to their listeners rather than in a particular book devoted to it. In reading the corpus of the commentaries of the school of Ammonius one cannot fail to notice the copious references to knowledge of the divine. Thus, we have more than sufficient evidence for the existence of this theory in their works. Consequently, such a theory must be a matter of reconstruction: in some cases one simply has to make explicit what is merely implicit in the writings of the members of this school. In order to speak of a theory of knowledge of the divine, it is necessary not only to give an account of the fundamental principles of such a theory, but also to explain the relation of these principles to the most general principles of their epistemology and metaphysics. I shall be arguing that Ammonius and his students had
Recommended publications
  • Zeno of Elea: Where Space, Time, Physics, and Philosophy Converge

    Zeno of Elea: Where Space, Time, Physics, and Philosophy Converge

    Western Kentucky University TopSCHOLAR® Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Honors College at WKU Projects Fall 2007 Zeno of Elea: Where Space, Time, Physics, and Philosophy Converge An Everyman’s Introduction to an Unsung Hero of Philosophy William Turner Western Kentucky University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses Part of the Other Philosophy Commons, Other Physics Commons, and the Philosophy of Science Commons Recommended Citation Turner, William, "Zeno of Elea: Where Space, Time, Physics, and Philosophy Converge An Everyman’s Introduction to an Unsung Hero of Philosophy" (2007). Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Projects. Paper 111. http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses/111 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors College Capstone Experience/ Thesis Projects by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact [email protected]. P │ S─Z─T │ P Zeno of Elea: Where Space, Time, Physics, and Philosophy Converge An Everyman’s Introduction to an Unsung Hero of Philosophy Will Turner Western Kentucky University Abstract Zeno of Elea, despite being among the most important of the Pre-Socratic philosophers, is frequently overlooked by philosophers and scientists alike in modern times. Zeno of Elea’s arguments on have not only been an impetus for the most important scientific and mathematical theories in human history, his arguments still serve as a basis for modern problems and theoretical speculations. This is a study of his arguments on motion, the purpose they have served in the history of science, and modern applications of Zeno of Elea’s arguments on motion.
  • Ennius Or Cicero? the Disreputable Diviners at Cic

    Ennius Or Cicero? the Disreputable Diviners at Cic

    ACTA CLASSICAXLIV(200/) 153-166 ISSN 0065-1141 ENNIUS OR CICERO? THE DISREPUTABLE DIVINERS AT CIC. DE DIV. 1.132 A.T. Nice University of the Witwatersrand ABSTRACT At the end of the first book of Cicero's De Divir1atior1e, Quintus remarks that, even though he believes in divination, there are some diviners whom he would not trust to give accurate predictions. These comments are followed by a quotation from Ennius' Telamo. Most modem scholars have assumed, therefore, that the previous lines also contain an echo, if not a paraphrase of Ennius' work. This supposition does not seem to be supported by the language or style employed by Cicero. The lines should rather be understood as embodying the parochial view that elite Romans had towards forms of divination that were foreign, rustic or mercenary and not practised by the Roman state. I At the end of the first book of De Divinatione ( 1.132), Quintus completes his argument in favour of divination by denying the respectability of certain kinds ofdiviners: Nunc illa testabor, non me sortilegos neque eos, qui quaestus causa hariolentur, ne psychomantia quidem, quibus Appius, amicus tuus, uti solebat, agnoscere; non habeo denique nauci Marsum augurem, non vicanos haruspices, non de circo astrologos, non Isiacos coniectores, non interpretes somniorum; non enim sunt ii aut scientia aut arte divini. 1 The lines that follow, '(sed)2 superstitiosi vates inpudentes harioli ... de his di vitiis sibi deducant drachmam, reddant cetera,' are normally attributed to Ennius. Some previous commentators considered that the Ennius quotation should begin earlier, specifically from 'non habeo denique nauci.' 3 In favour 1 I use here the Teubner edition of R.
  • Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics CAMBRIDGE TEXTS in the HISTORY of PHILOSOPHY

    Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics CAMBRIDGE TEXTS in the HISTORY of PHILOSOPHY

    CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY IMMANUEL KANT Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Series editors KARL AMERIKS Professor of Philosophy at the University of Notre Dame DESMOND M. CLARKE Professor of Philosophy at University College Cork The main objective of Cambridge Textsin the History of Philosophy is to expand the range, variety and quality of texts in the history of philosophy which are available in English. The series includes texts by familiar names (such as Descartes and Kant) and also by less well-known authors. Wherever possible, texts are published in complete and unabridged form, and translations are specially commissioned for the series. Each volume contains a critical introduction together with a guide to further reading and any necessary glossaries and textual apparatus. The volumes are designed for student use at undergraduate and postgraduate level and will be of interest not only to students of philosophy, but also to a wider audience of readers in the history of science, the history of theology and the history of ideas. For a list of titles published in the series, please see end of book. IMMANUEL KANT Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics That Will Be Able to Come Forward as Science with Selections from the Critique of Pure Reason TRANSLATED AND EDITED BY GARY HATFIELD University of Pennsylvania Revised Edition cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521828246 © Cambridge University Press 1997, 2004 This publication is in copyright.
  • Neoplatonism: the Last Ten Years

    Neoplatonism: the Last Ten Years

    The International Journal The International Journal of the of the Platonic Tradition 9 (2015) 205-220 Platonic Tradition brill.com/jpt Critical Notice ∵ Neoplatonism: The Last Ten Years The past decade or so has been an exciting time for scholarship on Neo­ platonism. I ought to know, because during my stint as the author of the “Book Notes” on Neoplatonism for the journal Phronesis, I read most of what was published in the field during this time. Having just handed the Book Notes over to George Boys­Stones, I thought it might be worthwhile to set down my overall impressions of the state of research into Neoplatonism. I cannot claim to have read all the books published on this topic in the last ten years, and I am here going to talk about certain themes and developments in the field rather than trying to list everything that has appeared. So if you are an admirer, or indeed author, of a book that goes unmentioned, please do not be affronted by this silence—it does not necessarily imply a negative judgment on my part. I hope that the survey will nonetheless be wide­ranging and comprehensive enough to be useful. I’ll start with an observation made by Richard Goulet,1 which I have been repeating to students ever since I read it. Goulet conducted a statistical analy­ sis of the philosophical literature preserved in the original Greek, and discov­ ered that almost three­quarters of it (71%) was written by Neoplatonists and commentators on Aristotle. In a sense this should come as no surprise.
  • B Philosophy (General) B

    B Philosophy (General) B

    B PHILOSOPHY (GENERAL) B Philosophy (General) For general philosophical treatises and introductions to philosophy see BD10+ Periodicals. Serials 1.A1-.A3 Polyglot 1.A4-Z English and American 2 French and Belgian 3 German 4 Italian 5 Spanish and Portuguese 6 Russian and other Slavic 8.A-Z Other. By language, A-Z Societies 11 English and American 12 French and Belgian 13 German 14 Italian 15 Spanish and Portuguese 18.A-Z Other. By language, A-Z 20 Congresses Collected works (nonserial) 20.6 Several languages 20.8 Latin 21 English and American 22 French and Belgian 23 German 24 Italian 25 Spanish and Portuguese 26 Russian and other Slavic 28.A-Z Other. By language, A-Z 29 Addresses, essays, lectures Class here works by several authors or individual authors (31) Yearbooks see B1+ 35 Directories Dictionaries 40 International (Polyglot) 41 English and American 42 French and Belgian 43 German 44 Italian 45 Spanish and Portuguese 48.A-Z Other. By language, A-Z Terminology. Nomenclature 49 General works 50 Special topics, A-Z 51 Encyclopedias 1 B PHILOSOPHY (GENERAL) B Historiography 51.4 General works Biography of historians 51.6.A2 Collective 51.6.A3-Z Individual, A-Z 51.8 Pictorial works Study and teaching. Research Cf. BF77+ Psychology Cf. BJ66+ Ethics Cf. BJ66 Ethics 52 General works 52.3.A-Z By region or country, A-Z 52.5 Problems, exercises, examinations 52.65.A-Z By school, A-Z Communication of information 52.66 General works 52.67 Information services 52.68 Computer network resources Including the Internet 52.7 Authorship Philosophy.
  • 23-49 Angelov.Pdf

    23-49 Angelov.Pdf

    Classifications of political philosophy and the concept of royal science in Byzantium DIMITER G. ANGELOV Recent years have seen a new rise of interest in the history of Byzantine political and social thought. Almost no attention has been paid, however, to the ways in which Byzantine authors classified and defined politics as a philosophical discipline on the basis of the ancient premise that the intel- lectual inquiry into politics belonged to the field of philosophy.1 The Byzantine divisions of philosophy (divisiones philosophiae) and other classificatory texts are particularly revealing in this regard. They contain in a nutshell a description of the preoccupations of politics as a philosophical discipline, and comment on the connection of politics with other areas of philosophical knowledge. The taxonomic descriptions are a rich source ma- terial for studying continuity and change in the usage of political concepts with philosophical origin and content. My discussion will consist of three parts: first, an examination of the classification of political philosophy in the divisions of philosophy; second, an attempt at historicizing some notably divergent views on political philosophy voiced in a classificatory context; and third, an investigation of the usage and significance of the Platonic con- cept of royal science (βασιλικὴ ἐπιστήµη), which was sometimes applied to the taxonomic description of philosophy and its divisions. A note should be made at the outset about the methods, approaches and limitations of the following discussion. The discussion aims to highlight sa- lient tendencies in the classification of political philosophy and is not comprehensive. The time span covered is mostly the period after the elev- enth century, but occasionally material will be drawn from late antique as well as ancient philosophy.
  • The Routledge Handbook of Neoplatonism the Alexandrian

    The Routledge Handbook of Neoplatonism the Alexandrian

    This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 25 Sep 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK The Routledge Handbook of Neoplatonism Pauliina Remes, Svetla Slaveva-Griffin The Alexandrian classrooms excavated and sixth-century philosophy teaching Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315744186.ch3 Richard Sorabji Published online on: 30 Apr 2014 How to cite :- Richard Sorabji. 30 Apr 2014, The Alexandrian classrooms excavated and sixth-century philosophy teaching from: The Routledge Handbook of Neoplatonism Routledge Accessed on: 25 Sep 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315744186.ch3 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. 3 The Alexandrian classrooms excavated and sixth-century philosophy teaching Richard Sorabji It was announced in 2004 that the Polish archaeological team under Grzegorz Majcherek had identifi ed the surprisingly well-preserved lecture rooms of the sixth-century Alexandrian school.1 Th is was a major archaeological discovery.2 Although the fi rst few rooms had been excavated twenty-fi ve years earlier, identifi cation has only now become possible.
  • 582 in Altman's Two Books on Plato, Plato the Teacher

    582 in Altman's Two Books on Plato, Plato the Teacher

    582 Book Reviews William H. F. Altman, (2016) The Revival of Platonism in Cicero’s Late Philosophy: Platonis aemulus and the invention of Cicero. Lanham, MD; London: Lexington Books. xxxii + 351 pp. $100.00. ISBN 9781498527118 (hbk). In Altman’s two books on Plato, Plato the Teacher (2012) and The Guardians in Action (2016), we find the traditional reading of Plato, i.e., the philosopher of ‘unchanging, eternal, and transcendent Ideas’ (p. xviii), combined with a rather unique interpretation of Plato as a pedagogue, whose main goal is not to instantiate the ideal state in reality but rather to spread an enlightened form of democracy through an ennobling education program of philosophy. Altman’s interpretation of Cicero as reader of Plato naturally progresses from these two books. Cicero is not the Academic Skeptic, as recent scholarship has argued, but rather an advocate for Platonic transcendence – and one no less relevant to our own historical moment than to the crisis for which Cicero’s philosophy was immediately intended: the fallen Republic. Central to Altman’s argument on Cicero is the main theme of his earlier work on Plato: the return to the cave. According to Altman, although Plato’s belief in transcendent Ideas of the world of intelligibility is genuine, the goal of Plato as philosophical pedagogue is not transcendence but rather a return to the chaotic world of becoming, in which politics take place. Cicero then, in his emulation and rivalry of Plato, is picking up where Plato left off. He is not merely indulging in Platonic transcendence but relying on his philosophical rhetoric at its most subtle level to win over an ideologically fraught and often incredulous Roman readership to political enlightenment and devotion to the Ideas.
  • Downloaded from Brill.Com10/01/2021 09:01:16AM Via Free Access C.-P

    Downloaded from Brill.Com10/01/2021 09:01:16AM Via Free Access C.-P

    The International Journal of the Platonic Tradition The International Journal of the Platonic Tradition 7 (2013) 156-179 brill.com/jpt Possessed and Inspired: Hermias on Divine Madness* Christina-Panagiota Manolea Hellenic Open University [email protected] Abstract Hermias of Alexandria (5th cent. A.D.) wrote down the lectures given on the Phaedrus by his teacher Syrianus, Head of the Neoplatonic School of Athens. In the preserved text the Platonic distinction of madness is presented in a Neopla- tonic way. In the first section of the article we discuss Hermias’ treatment of possession. The philosopher examines four topics in his effort to present a Neo- platonic doctrine concerning possession. As he holds that divine possession is evident in all parts of the soul, he first argues that it is primarily applied to the one-in-the-soul. Secondly, he explains that possession is also applied to reason, opinion, imagination, thymos and desire, all the above being distinctive parts of the human soul, but not as important as the one-in-the-soul. The third issue he discusses is whether all causes of possession are identical to the divine. Then, Hermias examines the fact that possession is to be traced not only in the human soul but also in the statues. In the second section of the article Hermias’ analysis of the four kinds of Pla- tonic madness is presented. The philosopher first analyzes the interdependence between all four divine kinds of madness and then describes their function on two levels, inside and outside the soul. The function within the soul is richer and is realized in four fields: (a) the restoration of the soul after its fall, (b) the resto- ration of the human being as a whole, (c) the Pythagorean mathematical system and (d) the logic processes.
  • Rhetoric and Platonism in Fifth-Century Athens

    Rhetoric and Platonism in Fifth-Century Athens

    Trinity University Digital Commons @ Trinity Philosophy Faculty Research Philosophy Department 2014 Rhetoric and Platonism in Fifth-Century Athens Damian Caluori Trinity University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/phil_faculty Part of the Philosophy Commons Repository Citation Caluori, D. (2014). Rhetoric and Platonism in fifth-century Athens. In R. C. Fowler (Ed.), Plato in the third sophistic (pp. 57-72). De Gruyter. This Contribution to Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy Department at Digital Commons @ Trinity. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Research by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Trinity. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Damian Caluori (Trinity University) Rhetoric and Platonism in Fifth-Century Athens There are reasons to believe that relations between Platonism and rhetoric in Athens during the fifth century CE were rather close.Z Both were major pillars of pagan cul- ture, or paideia, and thus essential elements in the defense of paganism against in- creasingly powerful and repressive Christian opponents. It is easy to imagine that, under these circumstances, paganism was closing ranks and that philosophers and orators united in their efforts to save traditional ways and values. Although there is no doubt some truth to this view, a closer look reveals that the relations be- tween philosophy and rhetoric were rather more complicated. In what follows, I will discuss these relations with a view to the Platonist school of Athens. By “the Platon- ist school of Athens” I mean the Platonist school founded by Plutarch of Athens in the late fourth century CE, and reaching a famous end under the leadership of Dam- ascius in 529.X I will first survey the evidence for the attitudes towards rhetoric pre- vailing amongst the most important Athenian Platonists of the time.
  • Plaatsingssystematiek Wijsbegeerte

    Plaatsingssystematiek Wijsbegeerte

    Plaatsingssystematiek Wijsbegeerte 0 -108 Wijsbegeerte :: voor naslagwerken en bibliografieën → TH-WY 0 Algemene werken 0 .1 Periodieken 0 .2 1Niet-wijsgerige naslagwerken 0 .21 1Woordenboeken. Grammatica's 0 .214 Grieks (klassiek) 0 .216 Latijn 0 .22 Encyclopedieën (o.a. Pauly-Wissowa) 0 .3 1Wijsgerige woordenboeken en encyclopedieën 0 .31 Alfabetisch naar onderwerp, zonder ingangen op personen 0 .32 Systematisch ingericht 0 .33 Alfabetisch naar onderwerp, inclusief ingangen op personen en/of instellingen 0 .34 Alfabetisch naar personen en/of instellingen 0 .35 Biografieën, voor zover niet op persoon indeelbaar 0 .37 Diversen :: terminologiegeschiedenis, ... 0 .4 1Bibliografieën 0 .4 Algemeen :: Inleidingen, literatuurgidsen, bibliografieën van bibliografieën, documentatie, systematiek 0 .41 Universele bibliografieën Vormbibliografieën :: Bibliografieën van: tijdschriften; artikelen per tijdschrift; congresbijdragen; 0 .42 Festschriften 0 .43 Landenbibliografieën 0 .44 Persoonsbibliografieën 0 .45 Onderwerpsbibliografieën 0 .46 Bibliografieën en catalogi van handschriften 0 .47 Catalogi Congressen :: AGB + jjjj (Association G. Budé) ** APA-CD + jjjj (American Phil. Ass., Central Div.) ** APA-ED + jjjj (American Phil. Ass., Eastern Div.) ** APA-PD + jjjj (American Phil. Ass., Pacific Div.) ** APA-WD + jjjj (American Phil. Ass., Western Div.) ** CIF + # (C. Intern. di Filosofia) ** CIP + # (C. Intern. de Philosophie = Wereldcongres) ** CSPLF + # (C. des Soc. Phil. de Langue Française) ** DKP + # (Deutsche Phil. K. ** NFD + # (Nederlandse
  • JPT 009 01 89-98-Critical Review.Indd

    JPT 009 01 89-98-Critical Review.Indd

    The International Journal The International Journal of the of the Platonic Tradition 9 (�0�5) 89-98 Platonic Tradition brill.com/jpt Critical Review ∵ Philoponus and His Development: Four Recent Translations on Nature, Knowledge, and the Physical World Philoponus, On Aristotle: Posterior Analytics 1.19-34. Translated by Owen Goldin & Marije Martijn. Bloomsbury, 2012. Pp. vi + 217. Philoponus, On Aristotle: Physics 4.1-5. Translated by Keimpe Algra & Johannes van Ophuijsen. Bloomsbury, 2012. Pp. vii + 151. Philoponus, On Aristotle: Physics 4.6-9. Translated by Pamela Huby. Bloomsbury, 2012. Pp. vi + 138. Philoponus, On Aristotle: Meteorology 1.4-9,12. Translated by Inna Kupreeva. Bloomsbury, 2012. Pp. vii + 198. These four volumes constitute the most recent translations of Philoponus’ commentaries to appear in the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle series edited by Richard Sorabji. They also bring to completion the translation of Philoponus’ extant commentaries on Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics, Physics, and Book 1 of the Meteorology in the Ancient Commentators series, along with the majority of the texts of Philoponus edited in the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca. The exceptions are Philoponus’ commentaries on the Categories and Prior Analytics for which there are only currently limited plans (although a forthcoming joint volume of his commentary on Categories 1-5 along with his A Treatise on Whole and Parts is now planned for 2015). Since first appearing in hardcover, they are also now available both in paperback and eBook versions (a very welcome development for the series as a whole). Each of the four volumes supplies useful information for Philoponus’ approach and interpretation of Aristotle.