/';-=09

)(8*=-0/']

15:14:00 PM

VIVARIUM
AN INTERNATIONALJOURNAL FOR THE PHILOSOPHY
AND INTELLECTUAL LIFE OF THE MIDDLE AGES AND
RENAISSANCE
vivarium
inparticular
isdevoted
totheprofane
sideofmediaeval
philosophy
andtheintellectual
lifeoftheMiddle
AgesandRenaissance.
- H.A.G.Braakhuis,
- C.H. Kneepkens,
EDITORS
L.M. de Rijk,(Leiden)
(Nijmegen)
- W.J.Courtenay,
- E.P. Bos,(Leiden)
- D. Perler,
(Madison)
(Groningen)
M.G.M.
van
der
Poel,
(Basel)
(Nijmegen).
oftheEditorial
Board:
Prof.
C.H.Kneepkens.
Secretary
Allcommunications,
thoseofa business
should
be addressed
nature,
except
toC.H.Kneepkens,
Faculteit
derLetteren,
Rijksuniversiteit
Groningen,
Vakgroep
P.O.Box716,9700AS Groningen,
TheNetherlands.
Mediaevistiek,
- Albert
- J.E.Murdoch,
ADVISORY
TullioGregory,
Zimmermann,
(Rome)
(Cologne)
COMMITTEE (Cambridge,
MA).
PUBLISHERS Brill,
TheNetherlands.
Leiden,
PUBLISHED Twiceyearly.
SUBSCRIPTION
Volume
XLI (2003)(320pp.):EUR 125(USD 145)forinstitutions,
andEUR
64(USD74)forprivate
inclusive
andpacking.
Price
includes
subscribers,
ofpostage
online
subscription.
orders
areaccepted
forcomplete
volumes
orders
Subscription
only,
taking
effect
with
thefirst
issueofanyyear.
Orders
onanautomayalsobeentered
ifthey
matic
basis.
Cancellations
willonly
beaccepted
arereceived
continuing
before
October
1stoftheyearpreceding
theyearinwhich
thecancellation
ifmade
istotakeeffect.
Claims
formissing
issues
willbemet,
free
ofcharge,
within
three
ofdispatch
forEuropean
customers
andfivemonths
for
months
customers
outside
Europe.
orders
orsubscription
Subscription
maybe madeviaanybookseller
agency,
ordirect
tothepublisher.
OFFICES
U.SA.
TheNetherlands
Brill
Academic
Publishers
Inc.
Brill
Academic
Publishers
Ste.400
112Water
P.O.Box9000
Street,
MA02109
PALeiden
NL-2300
Boston,
Tel. 1-800-962-4406
Tel.+31-71-53.53.566
(tollfree)
Fax(617)2632324
Fax+31-71-53.17.532
Email:cs@brillusa.com
E-mail:
cs@brill.nl
Allpricesandpostage
& handling
areexclusive
ofVAT in EU-countries
charges
outside
theEU).
(VATnotapplicable

Nowenjoyfreeonlineaccess to thisjournal
withyourprint
VisittheBrillWebsite
subscription.
section.
at http:/
www.brill.nl
andentertheonline
journals
BRILL
LEIDEN BOSTON
ISSN 0042-7543
version
version
)
(Online
(Print
); ISSN 1568-5349
Printed
in The Netherlands

Printed
on acid-free
paper

15:14:00 PM

Alternatives
toAlternatives:
toAristotle's
Approaches
Arguments
per impossibile
TANELI KUKKONEN

1. Introduction
: Indirect
Premises
Arguments,
Impossible
Aristotleshows a predilectiontowardsindirectargumentationin natural
sciphilosophy.This does not correspondto the model of demonstrative
ence presentedin the Posterior
More
in
this
Analytics.
enlightening
regard
is Aristotle'sintroduction
to the art and typesof deductionat the beginning of the Topics:
A deduction
is an argument
inwhich,
certain
, then,
things
beingsupposed,
something
different
from
thesuppositions
result
ofnecessity
them.It is a demonstration
through
ifthededuction
is from
which
either
arethemselves
trueandprimary
orhave
things
attained
thestarting-point
ofknowledge
aboutthemselves
someprimary
and
through
A dialectical
truepremises.
on theother
deduces
from
deduction,
hand,is onewhich
whatis acceptable.1
Aristotelian
deductions,then,appear to be conceivedof as synthetic
arguments:theyproduce a novel resultout of previouslyaccepted premises.
The difference
betweendemonstrations
and dialecticalarguments,meanwhile, comes down to a differencebetween scientificand contestable
of true (demonstrative)
science are seen as
premises.The starting-points
in
and
of
In
themselves.
dialectics,by contrast,initialpremises
acceptable
are accepted on the basis of, e.g., authority.As such, theycan be contested;theycan also turnout to be untrue(100a30-101a4). Furtheron,
Aristotleremarksthat one of the applicationsof dialecticalargumentation is where there is appreciable differenceof opinion (104b1-5). It is
no wonderthatAristodeshouldfinduse forthistypeof argumentin natural philosophy,where a large body of contrasting
views had been accumulatingever since the time of the Ionian philosophers.Aristotlealso
makes a furtherpoint. Sometimesan opinion is investigatedforits own
of such knowledgeonlybecomesapparS2ike;at othertimes,the usefulness
1 Topics
tr.byRobinSmith
in:Aristotle.
I andMil, Oxford
1997
, 1.1,100a25-30;
Topics
(translator's
emphases
retained).
Koninklijke
BrillNV,Leiden,
2002
Alsoavailable
online- www.brill.nl

Vivarium
40,2

15:14:08 PM

TANELIKUKKONEN

138

as proent later (104b8-12). Aristotleenvisionsdialecticalargumentation

in
demonstration
much
the
same
accumulative
way
knowledge
ducing
does (cf.the citationabove): the conclusionof one argumentcan become
a premisein the next.2
The refutationof some well-knownposition,togetherwith the conseis an obvious case of dialectical
quent acceptance of its contradictory,
in
the studyof nature,as well, as a
useful
one
argumentation;3 evidently
tool of eliminationand narrowingdown of options.4An indirectrefutatakesthe followingskeletalform.We firstassume
tionin Aristodetypically
that what is claimed (say, p') is true.We then posit a valid conditional
relationof the form"if p, then q". If q now turnsout to be impossible,
or manifesdyfalse,thenit seems evidentp was falseas well: for"a falsehood is always concluded throughfalsehoods"(Top. 8.12, 162b13-14).
And fromthe factthatp cannot reasonablybe held, not-pfollows.This
called in the Topics(8.2, 157b34-158a2)
methodof indirectargumentation,
- this time in
an argument"throughthe impossible",is also presented
(1.26; cf. also An. Pr. 1.44), where
Analytics
garb in the Posterior
syllogistic
it is called a "demonstration
leading to the impossible".The procedure
can be looselyformalisedas follows:
(P1) P
a, b, c . . .) q
(P2) p (+ auxiliary
premises
(Cl) q
(P3) ~Mq
(C2) ~Mp
Premises(PI) and (P2) lead to the acceptance of conclusion(Cl), a conclusionwhich,however,is shown to be impossibleby the mutualaccepthat we in the end come to
this impossibility
tance of (P3); it is through
conclude in step (C2) the opposite of our originalhypothesis(PI). The
two appellationsreferto one and the same type of argument.
2 Aristotle
outthatin
in thesamecontext,
hisfamous
alsomentions
pointing
aporiai
matter
forbothsidesofthecontested
areconvincing
somecases,there
(104b12arguments
be very
has someusagehere,too,evenifitsusecan hardly
dialectic
17).Apparently,
.
straightforward
3 According
thiswouldseemtobe theonlywaytoarguedialecEl., 2, 165b3-4,
toSoph.
whatareherecalled"dialecwouldconflate
butas weshallsee,thelatertradition
tically;
underdialectics.
tical"and"examinational"
arguments
4 Fortheuse ofdialectic
DoesAristotle's
in science,
see E. Berti,
ofDialectic
Conception
Problems
andProspects
in:W. Wians(ed.),Aristotle's
, Lanham
Development.
Philosophical
Develop?
1996,105-30.

15:14:08 PM

PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS

139

As Robin Smith has noted, Aristotle'sper impossibile

argumentsdiffer
in thatAristotle
frommodernconceptionsof reductio
ad absurdum
significantly
in the
does not thinkthatone need necessarily
pointto a self-contradiction
in
him
All
order
to
refute
or
her.5
one
has
to
do is
opponent'spremises
demonstratethat fromthe opponent'spremisessomethingfollowswhich
is falsein the opinion of all, the majorityof, or- at the veryleast- the
mostreasonablepeople. The significance
of thislies in thefactthatAristotle
does not thinkin termsof model theory,when he presentshis theoryof
dialecticalargumentation.When showingup the opponent'serrors,one
need not refersolelyto the set of propositionsput forwardby the opponent; the ultimatepoint of referenceis the (one and only) actual world.
Aristotledoes distinguishbetweena false suppositionand an impossible one in the De celoon the groundsthat "it is not the same to make
a false hypothesisas to make an impossiblehypothesis;an impossibility
[only]followsfromwhatis impossible"(1.12, 28 lb 15-16). He also remarks
that absolutefalsehoodsand impossibilities
differfromhypotheticalones,
with the latteronly obtaining"if certainconditionsare fulfilled"(b3-8).
But his distinctions
again have nothingto do withmodel theoreticalreaAristode's
soning.
example of a possiblefalsehoodis the claim thatsomeone is singingwhen he or she is in factplayingthe lyre(and not singing).
The example takeson a temporalaspect,when Aristotleevokeswhat we
presumeis a parallel case: sittingand standing,he says, are only relatively,not absolutelycontradictory
qualitiesin a man, fortheycannot be
assumed to be true at the same time, only successively.(28 lb9- 10, 1214, 16-18.) It is not immediatelyapparenthow thesevarious distinctions
relateto the generalframework
of indirectargumentation,
althoughclearly
Aristotlesees the two as being connected.
Anotherqualificationhas more immediaterelevance. It is obviously
only rarelythat the opponent's stated assumptionsparade a manifest
impossibility
up front.(Otherwisetherewould be littleneed forargument.)
Indeed, the simplefactthat the opponentstandsbehind his suppositions
may be enoughto dissuadehim,her,or the generalpublicfromendorsing
the truth:"unless it is extremelyobvious that it is false,people will say
that it is not impossible,so that questionersdo not get what theywant"
Aristotlerecommendsthatone
[Top.8.2, 158a2-3,tr.Smith).Accordingly,
use affirmative
deductionratherthan indirectrefutation
wheneverpossible. (Cf. An. Post. 1.26.) If, however,an indirectrefutationis necessary,
5 Cf.Smith
1997{op.cit.,
n. 1),inhiscommentary
onAristotle,
I andVIII,120.
above,
Topics

15:14:08 PM

140

TANELIKUKKONEN

one musttypically
add one or more auxiliarypremisesto get at an impossible conclusion:hence "a, b, c, etc." in our originalschmatisation(cf.
Top. 7.1, 152b17-24).
But the introductionof such additionalpostulatesbringswithit complications,forthe simplereason that theyare indeed somethingnot put
forwardby the opponenthim/herself.
It is entirelypossiblethatthe opponent will simplydeny one of the postulates,or that the conclusionfollows fromthe premises,especiallyif it has taken a lot of argumentative
steps to get there.6Or, alternativelyand this possibilitycarrieswith it
farmore potentialfordamage- the defendantmay claim thatthe (impossible)conclusionindeed follows:not,however,fromthe originalpremises,
but fromthe ones added by the interrogator.
This, in a word,was Galen's line of argumenton behalfof the Platonists
and againstAristotle,when the philosopherphysiciancame to examine
of self-motion.
the latter'salleged refutation
Accordingto Galen, Aristotle
in the firstchapterof the seventhbook of the Physics
slipsin an impossible
eliminate
the
his
when
he
tries
to
of
own,
only alternativeto
supposition
in motion is moved by something
his famousprinciplethat everything
But froman impossiblepremise,
tokinournenon
kineisthai).
{pan ananke
hypotinos
Aristotle'sargumentfails.7
therefore
further
follow;
only
impossibilities
Galen's briefstatementis betterunderstoodifwe borrowyetanotherleaf
fromAristode'sTopics.If one merelyrejectsone of the premisesthatled
Aristotlesays,one has yetto accomto a falseconclusionindiscriminately,
One
must
specificallytarget"that because of which the
plish anything.
falsehoodcame about" (cf. Top. 2.10): one must show why it was this
This is what Galen
premiseand no other that led to the impossibility.
fromAristotle's.8
evidentlyclaimsto have done onlywithresultsdifferent
The line of criticisminitiatedby Galen provokeda long and manyfaceteddiscussionamong commentatorson Aristotle.The commentators
soon founda parallelcase in chapter6.2 of the Physics',
; here,too, Aristode,
when outliningthe initial conditionsto one of his indirectarguments,
6 Forexample,
withe entails
entaild, andifd together
ifa, b, andc together
f,and
is
themanifestly
withp which
ifitis f takentogether
q, thenthere
impossible
produces
from
whichtheopponent
relations
andentailment
ofsuppositions
an abundance
already
maychooseto denyanyone.
7 See thereport
libros
in Simplicius,
InAristotel
commentario,,
posteriores
quattuor
Physicorum
toas
be referred
willhenceforth
Thisedition
ed.H. Diels,Berlin1895,1039.13-1040.12.
."
In Phys
"Simplicius,
8 It is noteworthy
as in
Aristotle
thatSmith1997{op.cit.,above,n. 1),135-6portrays
that
hesaysatonepoint
intheTopics
thistypeofcounterargument
factrecognising
, where
was
towhat
butnotonerelevant
conclusion
toa [valid]
"comes
onekindoffalseargument
to theimpossible)."
mostto thoseleading
Top.,2.12,162b5-7.
(which
happens
proposed

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS
PERIMPOSSIBILE

141

apparentlysays somethingcontraryto his usual assumptionsof what is

and what isn't possible in the naturalworld. The second passage was in
turnused to model severalsimilarargumentselsewherein Aristotle'snatural philosophy.
When arguing fromimpossiblepremises,what was Aristotle'srationale? Is therea way to salvage all of thesepurportedarguments"through
the impossible"?In this article,I wish to examine some of the answers
offeredby commentators
on AristotlerangingfromAlexanderto Buridan.
We shall see that withinthe discussion,a more systematicpicture of
Aristotle'sintentionsslowlyemerged.WhetherthispictureaccuratelyrepresentsAristotleis arguable. Because the cited examples arose in connectionwith some of Aristotle'suniversallyheld natural principles,the
discussionwas seen to tie in with cosmologicalissues of centralimportance. The various solutionsput forwardthereforeserve to reveal what
the discussantstook to be the limitsto the world's conceptualisation.It
is not quite a case of assessing'possible worlds'; this systematicnotion
only entersthe discussionin the early 14th century.Rather,what is at
stake is what the possible featuresof the one and only world are.
and Simplicius
2. Galen
on Physics7.1
, Alexander,
Aristotle'saim at the outsetof Physics
7 is to establishthe principlewhich
in Latin took the formulationomnequod movetur
necesseab aliquo moveri.
Aristotledoes thisby puttingforwardwhat looks to be a thought-experimentof sorts.Aristotleasks us to imaginethat a part CB of a body AB
is at restwhile the whole is in motion
in itsownright
andprimarily
autokmproton).
Butexhypothesi
AB is in motion
(kat/i'
initsownright
andprimarily.
ifCB is notin motion
Therefore
AB willbe at rest.
Butwehaveagreed
thatthatwhich
is at restifsomething
elseis notinmotion
must
be moved
thatis inmotion
mustbe moved
bysomething.
Consequently,
everything
. . (Physics
7.1,242a10-14,tr.R.P. Hardie& R.K. Gaye.)
bysomething.
Now as, e.g., Thomas Aquinas testifies,
"This proofof Aristotle'shas been
in
to
In
of the whole
objected
many ways".9 fact,the value and integrity
of Physics
7 was challengedalreadyin antiquity.10
We shall not enterinto
9 Thomas
Inocto
libros
Aristotelis
Aquinas,
, Rome1884(= vol.2 oftheLeonine
Physicorum
omnia
: henceforth
InPhys
istaautem
Opera
"Aquinas,
."),bk.7,cap. 1,lect.1,n. 4: "Contra
Aristotelis
obiicitur".
likewise
disprobationem
multipliciter
Simplicius
reports
widespread
satisfaction
(InPhys.,
1039.13-14).
10
knewthattheworkwastransmitted
in twoversions
Already
Simplicius
(cf.In Phys.
on thetopicsee further
W.D. Ross,"Introduction",
11-9ofAristotle,
1036.4-6;
,
Physics

15:14:08 PM

142

TANELIKUKKONEN

a discussionof the exegeticalproblemssurroundingthe book, nor shall

we pause to considereven its notoriouslydifficult
firstchapter.We shall
focusexclusivelyon what in Aristotle'sargumentation
caughtGalen's eye,
and subsequentlythe imaginationof later generationsof commentators.11
Though the exact wordsof Galen's objectionare lostto us in theGreek
hismainclaimis knownthroughSimplicius'monumental
original,
Commentary
on thePhysics.
The imaginarypremiseAristotlewants to build on- that a
part of somethingmovingessentiallyand primarilyshould be at rest is
simplyimpossible.(In Phys.1039.13-15.) Simplicius'terse reportis supplementedby anothersecond-handsource,a refutationof Galen by the
esteemed PeripateticcommentatorAlexander of Aphrodisias(fl. in the
From Alexander's
early 3rd cent.) only extantin an Arabic translation.12
we
learn
Galen
own
that
recalls
Aristotle's
claim
that froman
,
Refiitation
The
impossiblething nothingfollowsexcept for another impossibility.
impliedconclusionis that Aristotlehimselfin introducingan impossible
auxiliarypremiseis responsiblefor the impossibleconclusionof the syllogism:the argumentdoes not accomplishits statedtask of refutingselfabouttheworld.13
motion,in factit does notconveyany relevantinformation
The Arabic version of Alexander's refutationfurtherclues us in on
certainexegeticalmoveson Galen's part.Accordingto Alexander'sreport,
Galen assumedthatby "thingsmoved essentiallyand primarily"Aristotle
meantthingswhosesourceof motionis in themselves,
thesebeingidentified
withsimpleprimarybodies (<al-ajsmal-bastah
al-la).Besidesthe elements,
these would include the aetherialbody of the heavens, as well as the
heart. (67a 1-3, 68a 10-16.) Alexanderquotes Galen as follows:
book7 in
Oxford
to Simplicius,
Eudemus
andThemistius
1939).According
disregarded
accounts
ofthePhysics
doubts
itsproofs.
their
, andAlexander
concerning
Simplicius
expressed
in Physics
7 werereproduced
in improved
himself
thatthearguments
contained
thought
1037.1-3.
in
8. See In Phys.,
form
1036.8-11,
11ForPhysics
TheChain
1990.
a modern
ofPhysics
7 seeR. Wardy,
, Cambridge
ofChange
study
in thepassagewe areaboutto discuss.
doesnotseea problem
Interestingly,
Wardy
12See TheRefiitation
Treatise
ontheTheory
, ed.
ofMotion
ofAphrodisias
ofGalen's
byAlexander
Islamabad
1965(HereandM.E.Marmura,
with
translation
andcommentary
byN. Rescher
conofthemanuscript
after
Contra
"Alexander,
Gal").ShlomoPinesin hisearlystudy
lostPhysics
thetexttobe partofAlexander's
sidered
(cf.S. Pines,Omne
quod
commentary
andtheTheory
A refutation
movetur
necesse
estabaliquo
moveri:
ofAphrodisias
ofGalen
byAlexander
Pines
in TheCollected
Works
, in:Isis,52 (1961),21-54,at 22; reprinted
ofShlomo
ofMotion
a separate
contend
thatitis,rather,
Rescher
andMarmura
vol.2,Jerusalem
1986,218-51).
'
al-awwal
intheArabic:
RaddcalJtins
thetideofwhich
isknown
, or
treatise,
fi l-muharrik
& Marmura
mover".
Cf.Rescher
theprime
ofGalenregarding
the"Refutation
1965,60-2.
13See Alexander,
= running
Contra
Gal.,62al-ll (oftheEscurial
manuscript
paginaAlexander
mentions
thatGalen'sobjections
andEnglish
tionofboththeArabic
versions).
- an intriguing
claimthathasnotyetbeen
inChrysippus
wouldhavetheir
source
(64a6-7)
substantiated.

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS
PERIMPOSSIBILE

143

In orderthatthediscussion
withwhich
theargument
is resumed
is clear,letus then
thethings
whosesourceofmotion
is present
within
themthatthese
sayregarding
moveaccording
tothefirst
andregarding
thethings
thatlacksucha source
intention,
thatthesebasically
movein an accidental
to thefirst
intenwayandnotaccording
tion.It is clearthatwhenwe saythata thing
we haveindicated
no more
moves,
thanthatitmoves
tothefirst
Thisis because
boththeseexpresintention.
according
sionsmerely
refer
to thethings
in themandwhose
whosesourceofmotion
exists
motion
is notbasically
dueto anything
from
theoutside.14
Once the distinctionis made, it is of course not difficult
to prove that
the coming to rest of a part logicallyentailsthat the whole comes to a
halt as well: "For", as Galen puts it, "the part in thesethingsis no other
than the whole."15Hence the impossibility
of even positingthe premise.
Galen's reputedclaim thatthe heartis a self-mover
allowsus a glimpse
into his motivationsfor challengingAristode'sproof. For it has seemed
clear to many commentatorsthatone of Aristode'smain targetsin arguis the Platonic doctrineof soul as
ing forhis principleomnequodmovetur
If this is how Galen perceivedthe situation,then
indivisibleself-mover.
his long-termgoal may have been to pave the way for the re-introduction of self-moving
Even if nothspiritswithina Peripateticframework.16
ing can be said withcertaintybased on the excerptsleftto us, it is good
to noticethatthe notionof souls as self-movers
hoversin the background
of the discussionof Physics7.1.
Alexandertakesa comprehensiveapproach to addressingthe challenge
some philosophical,some
posed by Galen. He producesseveralarguments,
of a more rhetoricalcharacter,in defenceof Aristode.(1) Alexanderclaims
thatPlato, too, would have accepted the principlethateverymoved thing
is moved by something.17
As for Aristotle,(2) Alexander points to the
14Alexander,
Contra
Gal.,62b21-63al,
tr.Rescher
& Marmura
1965(op.cit.,
above,n. 12),
twounnecessary
additions
to thetext.
omitting
15". . . al-jaz*
fhadhihi
al-kull."
63a17(similarly,
63a15).
Ibid.,
'1-ashya*
laysahuwaghayr
16Cf.theanalysis
ofGalen'sargument
offered
& Marmura
1965(op.cit.,
byRescher
ofthesoulin Galen'sphilosophy
is currendy
above,n. 12),7-9.The status
undergoing
withsomescholars
thatGalenwas a kindof reductionist,
so
re-examination,
arguing
Galen'sargument
should
notnecessarily
be viewed
as constituting
a straightforward
reversalbacktothePlatonic
intheArabic
Galen'smedical
claims
However,
tradition,
position.
weregivena non-literal
The physician
can talkas ifthesoul
(Platonic)
interpretation.
wouldconsist
ofnothing
butthemovement
ofspirits
(thehumours,
etc.);yetthephilosoknows
thatin factitis a separate
substance.
pher
17Contra
translation
66b23-67al
Rescher
& Marmura
Gal.,Carullah
manuscript
(English
1965(op.cit.,above,n. 12),15-6).Alexander's
anddisingenuous
claim,rhetorical
though
it maybe,givessomeindirect
to oursuspicion
thatthestatus
ofPlatonic
selfsupport
motion
Aristotle.
Theclaimis laterpicked
layat theheartofGalen'sprotests
against
up
andThomasAquinas:
all threecontend
thatPlatois "intruth
Averroes,
bySimplicius,
notfarfrom
Aristotle".

15:14:08 PM

144

TANELIKUKKONEN

wider use of "essentiallymoved beings" in Aristotlethan what Galen

allowsfor.Accordingto Alexander,theseare not restricted
to beingswith
internalmovers (ContraGal., Escurial MS 63a25-b4). (3) What is more,
animals,too, have an internalmoverin the Aristotelianscheme,not only
Alexander
simple(i.e.,homogeneous)bodies(63b4-15).(4) Most importantly,
claims thatAristotledid not even put forwardas a premisethat a thing
would move essentiallyonce a part has ceased to move. This of course
would sufficeto deflectGalen's charge about one of Aristode'spremises
Alexanderis carebeing impossible(67b27-68a5). In the Arabic Refiitation,
ful to say that althoughthe parallel proofin Physics
8.4 is demonstrative
and thus more properlyscientific,the statementsin book 7 "are not
remote fromshowingthis thing set down, nor are they of the nature
describedin the chaptersof this book that attack them [i.e., Galen's],
even thoughthe proofthat followsnecessarilyfromthem is [more] suitable to dialecticalaffirmations."18
He goes on to treat Aristotle'sarguin the firstfigure(Cf. also Simplicius,
mentin book 7 as a simplesyllogism
In Phys.1041.5-11).
If successful,this move would obviate the need forfurtherdiscussion.
For if thereis only one impossiblepremise(the Platonist's),then thereis
no problem. However, there is mention of yet another argumentin
Simplicius,one that does not seem to square with the one given above.
Simpliciusreportsthat (5) Alexanderalso
forthepurposes
ofhypothesis
to hyposthechoseto claimthatitis notimpossible
in itsownright
sisethatpartofa thing
andprimarily
comesto a halt.
moving
of hypothesis
destructive
of one
'Because',he says,'forthepurposes
onlythings
rock'.19
another
areimpossible,
as,forexample,
sailing
through
Argument(4) says thatAristotledoes not assume that the part comes to
a halt whilstthe whole moves in its own rightand primarily;argument
(5) would seem to imply that he does. Are the two reportsmutually
Alexander
incompatible,and is one or the otherspurious?Not necessarily.
of the same argumentin an
may have chosen to give two interpretations
that
both
are
maintainable.
to
show
attempt
Regardlessof the textualbackgroundthe questionmay be put: What
does it mean for two thingsto be "destructiveof one another"?The
that most readilysuggestsitselfis that what is meant is a
interpretation
the subject"man" precludesthe predicate"irraconceptualcontradiction:
18Carullah
has
account
MS 61bll-62a7.Simplicius'
Escurial
MS 67a33-35;
similarly
here(InPhys.,
'morelogical'instead
of'dialectical'
1036.12-13).
19Simplicius,
OnAristotle
translation
InPhys.,
1039.16-19;
byCharles
Hagen,in:Simplicius
to theGreekindicated.
7,London1994,withpagination
Physics

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS
PERIMPOSSIBILE

145

is part of the essence

tional",forinstance(and vice versa),since rationality
of man.20The other option is to treatAlexander'sexample as denoting
somethingmore like a physicalimpossibility.
Sailing througha rock is
two
because
cannot
the
same spatialposition.21
impossible,
things
occupy
Aristotledid not reallydistinguishbetweenlogical and physicalmodalities,however,and the ambivalencecame to troublelater commentators;
what we seem to have here is an attempt,even if none too successful,
to distinguishbetween different
kinds of impossibility.
While we cannot
ascertain
this
from
the
exact
line
of
Alexander's
reasonreliably
excerpt
ing, the importantthingto notice is that only an explicitcontradiction
is disallowedin hypotheticalreasoning.22
Simpliciuswas not satisfiedwithAlexander'sanswers.He himselfproposed to analyse Aristotle'sproof in two parts. In the firstpart, when
Aristotletalks of thingsmoving of themselves(kath}auto),he is talking
about simpleundividedentities.Now, all thingsmovingin theirown right
divisible.But when these
(here: simple bodies qua bodies) are potentially
divisionsare made actual
we
have
a
different
,
propositionaltogether,
kindsof entities.
accordingto Simplicius.We are talkingabout different
Aristotle'sargumentthereforeinvolvesno impossibility,
nor does it beg
the question.The shiftfrompotentiallydivisibleto actuallydividedbodies is not accidental,nor is it unwarranted.Instead, it is used to clue
readers in on the fact that the impossibility
of self-motion
hence, the
- in
7.1
to
divided
proof
Physics pertainsspecifically actually
things,which
is to say, compositebodies. The presumedoppositionto (Platonic)selfmoving souls is in the final analysis unreal. (In Phys. 1041.22-1042.6.)
Simplicius'exegesistakes considerablelibertieswith the source text;evidently,it is stronglyPlatonicallymotivated.Like Alexander's argument
(4), it aims to disprovethatAristotlewould reallyhave introducedanother
impossiblepremisein additionto the one he wanted to refute.
20Galen,in Alexander,
Contra
Gal., Escurial
MS 65a27ff.
claimsthata conevidently
contradiction
is whatwe havehere.
ceptual
21Wearethenleft
witha problem
thatresembles
thefamous
Stoicpuzzleabouttherock
thatforever
liesatthebottom
oftheocean.Is itinvisible
intheweakorinthestrong
sense?
22Perhaps
whatAlexander
Ifweattempt
means
isthis.
toconstruct
hypothetical
argumentative
thatbothp and~p aretruedestroys
attheoutset
chains,
assuming
right
anychance
ofmeasured
Forifbothp and~p, thenall theconclusions
from
bothp
argumentation.
and~p mayalsobe drawn:
andthisgetsus botheverywhere
andnowhere
at once(ceritleadsus to all manner
offurther
The purpose
ofhyposthetising
tainly,
contradictions).
is defeated,
ifthereareno controls
fortheresults
itwillbring.
Ifthisanalysis
is correct,
thenAlexander
seemstohavecomeclosetoanother
devellogical
onlyexplicitly
principle
that"from
a contradiction
follows".
In thediscussion
opedin the12thcentury:
anything
is explicitly
7, thisprinciple
surrounding
Physics
brought
(cf.7 below).
up byBuridan

15:14:08 PM

146

TANELIKUKKONEN

3. Alexander
and Simplicias
on Physics6.2
Alexanderseems to have raised a questionof his own, similarenough to
the one we have been discussingto be consideredan extensionof the
same problematic.The source thistime is Physics6.2, where Aristotlein
fora continuum-related
argumentstatesthat
layingdown the groundwork
than it does.
in
faster
and
slower"
motion
both
can
move
"everything

[Phys.6.2, 232b21.)
"But this propositionappears to be false", as, e.g., Thomas Aquinas
complains:"forin nature,the velocitiesof motionsare determined".How
so? Aquinas reasons that all motionsare determinedby referenceto the
fastest:"for thereis a motion of such velocitythat none can be faster,
namelythe motionof the primemobile [object]."23Albertthe Great puts
To him,it is the forcesof all naturalmovers
the pointslightly
differently.
that are determinedand "likewise,none of the heavens can be moved
fasterthan it is". Albertexplicitlyattributesthis objectionto Alexander
Both Albertand Aquinas relyon Averroesfortheirexpoof Aphrodisias.24
sitionof the problem. They seem to have jumped to conclusionshere,
for Averroesnowhere indicates that Alexander would have raised the
problem merelythathe proposedto solve it.25The two Catholic doctors
we can ascertain
are nonethelesscorrect.For fromSimplicius'testimony
that the problem about the celestialmotionscan indeed be ascribed to
Alexander.Accordingto Simplicius,"Alexanderposes well the puzzle [of]
how movingfasterand sloweris true in the case of the revolvingbody,
which moves evenly".26
23ThomasAquinas,
videtur
bk.6, cap.2, lect.3, n. 9: "Sedhaecpropositio
In Phys.,
in natura:
estenimaliquismotus
motuum
enimsuntvelocitates
essefalsa.Determinatae
mobilis."
scilicet
motus
esseeo velocior,
itavelox,quodnullus
primi
potest
24"... sicutobicitAlexander,
et idea
suntvirtutum,
naturales
determinatum
motores
Alberti
velocius
nullum
caelorum
, ed.P. Hossfeld,
moveri,
Magni
Physica,
quammovetur."
potest
omnia
Aschendorff
1993,bk.6, tract.1,cap.4 (= Opera
4.2:453.61-63).
25Averroes
ofAristotle's
to notethatthepremise
seemsto havebeenthefirst
proof
libriocto.CumAverrois
auditu
dePhysico
Cf.Aristotelis
be thought
to be impossible.
might
dicente
de hacpropositione,
45:"Etquaeritur
commentariis
ineosdem
Cordubensis
, bk.6,comm.
motus
est
Nam
declaratum
suo
motu.
velociori
moveri
motum
omne
quod
potest
quod
estut
etcoelum
invelocitate
ettarditate:
estterminatus
motorm
naturalium
impossibile
estimpossibilis."
utpostdeclarabitur:
sitvelocius,
quaeponithicpossibilis,
ergopropositio,
inea opera
Cordubensis
Averrois
omnia
Aristotelis
omnes,
quiad
Opera.
quaeextant
Quotedfrom
a.M. 1962),9 vols.,
Frankfurt
Commentari
haecusque
i,Venice1562-74
(repr.
tempora
pervenere,
." andthiscomIn Phys
be abbreviated
4:fol.2551(Thisworkwillhenceforth
"Averroes,
"AOACC
edition,
".).
piled
26In Phys.,
in: OnAristotle
translation
o, London
Physics
941.25-27;
byDavidKonstan
to theGreekindicated.
1989,withpagination

15:14:08 PM

PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARGUMENTS
ARISTOTLE'S

147

of the problemdifferin theirspecifics.With

The variouspresentations
the passage of time, it seems, different
aspects of Alexander's original
foreach of the above
But
confirmation
to
be
came
highlighted.
problem
with
in
To
found
Aristotle.
claims can be
Aquinas' line of reabegin
soning,each typeof corporealcreaturehas setlimitsto itspossiblemotions.
the heavens only move at a fixedvelocity(Cf. De celo
More specifically,
and 8.8-9; Met. 12.7, 1072b3-10).And the
223bl2-224a2
2.6; Phys.4.14,
outermostheavenlysphere,movingacrossthe greatestdistance,mustnecessarilymove at the most rapid rate of all {De celo2.4, 287a23-26). Yet
one mightwonder about the strongmodal language involved.Even if
nothingcould move fasterthan the outermostsphere, why could the
fast,to be sure (videDe celo
sphereitselfnot move faster not infinitely
2.6, 288b27-289a4), but stillfasterthan it does? And why can the other
sphereslikewisenot move fasteror slowerthan theydo, so long as their
velocitydoes not exceed that of the outermostsphere?
and
Firstwe mustset apart the questionof actual heavenlyacceleration
Both are consideredsimplyimpossiblewithinthe confinesof
deceleration.
Aristoteliancosmology.The heavens rotate in a completelysteady and
even fashion,because as separate bodies made out of aether (whichhas
with theirmotion(Cf. De celo
no contrary)thereis nothingto interfere
1.2-4). This also makes the velocitiesof theirmotionsnecessaryin a certain sense. Given that the heavens have fromall eternityassumed a certain velocity,theycannot (anymore)assume another.This ties in with a
technicalmodal theoreticalissue, which seems to have formedthe main
focus of Alexander'sattention.If "in the case of the eternalthereis no
differencebetween being possible and being" (Phys.3.4, 203b30), then
one would assume thatshould the eternalheavensbe able to move faster
of slower,then at some point theywould do so. But thereare no genuine unrealisedpossibilitiesin the eternal,as Aristotlehad argued in the
famouschapter 12 of the firstbook of De celoet mundo.Hence, what is
eternalis necessaryand what is necessary,eternal.27
What factorfixed the celestial velocitiesfrom all eternity;and why
could these "global presets" not be other than what they are? One
27Cf.Degen.etcon
to
ofAlexander's
strict
adherence
., 2.11,338al-3,andforevidence
inAristotelem
Graeca.
vol.II/2,
theseprinciples,
1.18,in: Commentario,
Supplemento
e.g.,Aporiai,
R.W.Sharpies,
Alexander
ed. I. Bruns,
Berlin1895,30.25-32.18.
Cf.further
ofAphrodisias:
oftheInstitute
ofClassical
30 (1983),99about
Studies,
//,in:Bulletin
problems
possibility
withAristode's
modal
110; forfurther
comments
on theproblems
associated
historically
Modalities
andtheso-called
ofplenitude"
alluded
tohere,S. Knuuttila,
thought
"principle
inMedieval
, London& NewYork1993.
Philosophy

15:14:08 PM

148

TANELIKUKKONEN

approach to the question one which would have been attractiveto

Alexander- would be to point to the providentiality
of the currentcelestial arrangement.Alexanderwas the firstto distilfromscatteredhintsin
Aristotlethe view thatthe variegatedrotationsof all the heavenstogether
produce the cyclesof generationand corruptiontakingplace in the sublunaryworld.The way the spheresdraw forwardand push back the elementscorrespondto the steadinesswithwhichgenerationand corruption
occur.28Thus it mightbe thoughtthat should the currentarrangement
of the heavenlymotionsbe altered,this order would be disruptedand
the sublunaryworld fall into chaos and disrepair.29
This servesto establish at least the relativenecessityof the velocitiesof the various celestial
spheres,if not quite theirabsolute necessity.30
The two concernsoutlinedabove correspondto the two ways in which
: "that without
necessityis spoken of in book Lambda of the Metaphysics
whichthe good is impossible,and thatwhichcannotbe otherwisebutcan
existonlyin a singleway" (12.7, 1072b12-13). But it was the thirdinterpretationof necessitymentionedby Aristotlein the same contextthat was
to troublecommentators
the most,thatof the necessarybeing something
thatgoes contraryto nature(bl4). For ifeverynaturalbody has a capacity
formovingfasterand slower,and if natureis the principleof motionand
restin a body (as in Phys.2.1, 192b14-15), are the uniformand unceasing
rotationsof the heavens then somethingimposed on them violentlyand
fromtheoutside?The issue,via Aristotle's
famous'infinite
power'argument
in Physics8, ch. 10, was seen to tie in with the ongoing disputeabout
celestialanimationand naturalvs. voluntarymotionin the heavens.31The
28Aristotle
in De gen.etcorr.
and the
2.10-11,
onlyspeaksaboutthesun'sinfluence
ingeneral
forthegerms
ofa sysaboutthe"upper
terms;
Meteorology
(1.2)speaks
region"
inAristotle,
Aristotle's
tematic
notion
ofcelestial
influence
cf.F. Solmsen,
ofthe
System
Physical
in
andinfluence
areexpertly
tracked
World
Alexander's
innovations
, Ithaca1960,279ff.
circle
andinal-Kindt's
S. Fazzo& H. Wiesner,
Alexander
intheKindx
,
Cosmology
ofAphrodisias
andPhilosophy,
3 (1993),119-53.
in:ArabicSciences
29See C. Genequand,
Alexander
ontheCosmos
, Leiden2001,84, 11-15;cf.
ofAphrodisias
and 129.3-12.
Averroes,
, ed. M. Bouyges,
Tahfut
al-tahfut
S.J.,Beirut1930,44.13ff.
30Onecouldstillwonder
notbe spedup orslowed
downinequal
whyeverything
might
correofthevarious
characters
as in thecaseofa filmreel,wheretheactions
measure,
Thenagain:ifthis
instituded
(See5 below.)
bythefilm
projector.
spondtothetime-line
ofthe"cosmic
whocouldeverobserve
shouldhappen,
clock",
it,sincewe,as followers
Bothpoints
weredulynotedbyNicholas
wouldcontinue
toperceive
things
justas before?
tr.
ducieletdumonde
Oresme
, ed.A.D. Menut& A.J.Denomy,
(d. 1382):seehisLeLivre
A.D. Menut,
Milw.& London1968,bk.2, ch. 14,11.32-48.
Madison,
31See H.A.Wolfson,
Commentaries
theByzantine
Theproblem
ofthesoulsofthespheres
from
in theHistory
toKepler
in: Studies
toAristotle
theArabs
andSt. Thomas
, reprinted
of
through
Mass.1973,22-59.
andReligion
Vol.1, Cambridge,
Philosophy

15:14:08 PM

PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS

149

same kindsof questionsthatconcernedthe heavens' eternalmotionwere

also raisedover theircontinuedexistence.32
In thisway,the celestialproblematic came to be viewed as having a bearing on the issue of how
exactlythe necessityof the eternalwas supposed to be interpreted.33
(1) Afterthis lengthyintroductionto the largerdebate, we are better
equipped to understandSimplicius'assessmentof Alexander'sproblemat
Physics6.2. Accordingto Simplicius,Alexander resolved the puzzle he
himselfhad presentedin two ways:
ina weakway,I think,
First
thatAristotle
didnotsaythatthesamething
claiming
movesfaster
andslower,
butthatit can [so]move,which,
he says,is a
[actually]
oftherevolving
accordproperty
[body]toobecauseit movesthus[i.e.uniformly]
or as though
alsoin a
ingto itsownwill,and notunderanynecessity
moving
different
'Forgoodmen',he says,'do notdo
wayhasbeenprevented
bysomeone.
eveniftheyalways
do them,
buttheyhavethepowerof
good[deeds]bynecessity,
theopposite
as well.'(InPhys.
tr.Konstan.)
941.27-942.2,
[doing]
Alexander'scontentionthat the heavenlymotionsare to be considered
voluntarywas to attracta good deal of attention.In Islamic thought,
Avicennaand Averroeswould draw upon [Ps.-] Alexander'saccount and
) but
go on to state that the heavens exercisenot only "volition"(irdah
also "choice" (ikhtiyr
).34But the fact that Alexanderlaid stresson how
volitionentailspossibilitiesfor contrariesbroughtup problemsimmediatelypertinentto our subject.Are we to take it that at some point the
heavenlybodies could trulymove at different
speedsor even stop?35Surely
not, accordingto Simplicius:
I think,
to havenotedfirst
thatgoodmenaresaidto havethe
[Alexander]
ought,
thecontrary,
becausesometimes
toit.Buthow
powerof[doing]
theyactaccording
couldthings
thatareheavenly
and eternal
havea powerthatneveremerges
into
In Phys.,
withminor
942.2-5;tr.Konstan,
actuality?
(Simplicius,
alterations.)
Since theheavensplainlyneverdo move fasteror slower,it wouldbe wrong
to positin thema potencyfordoing so. What is said here is on the lines
32NotehowSimplicius
switches
between
"source
ofmotion"
and"source
ofbeing"in
thecontext
ofPhysics
7.1:In Phys.,
1040.18.
33See,e.g.,the
author's
andplenitude.
Twotraditions
onthenecessity
present
Infinite
power
of
theeternal
andtheClassical
Tradition
inIslam,
, in:J.Inglis
, and
(ed.),Medieval
Philosophy
Judaism
Christianity
, Richmond,
Surrey
2002,183-201.
34SeeGenequand
2001(op.cit.,
inAvicenna
above,n. 29),50,1-3;andcf.thediscussions
ed.M.Y.Mss,S. Duny& S. Zyid,
Cairo1960,381ff.
(980-1037),
Al-Shif3:
Al-ilhiyyt,
andcritique
ofAvicenna
in Tahfiit
(cf.382.10);al-Ghazlr,
, in: The
summary
al-falsifah
Incoherence
A parallel
tr.M.E. Marmura,
Provo1997,
ofthePhilosophers.
text,
English-Arabic
andAverroes,
in turnresponding
to al-Ghazlr,
in: Tahfut
471.5ff.
147ff.;
al-tahfut,
(for
andirdah
, also 189.12-13).
ikhtiyr
35Cf.herenotably
Alexander
MS 68a15-16.
Galen,in Contra
Gal.,Escurial
quoting

15:14:08 PM

150

TANELIKUKKONEN

of Phys
. 3.4, 203b30, that no possibilityin the eternalis leftunrealised.
The same kind of argumentSimpliciususes here went throughseveral
in late antiquity.Proclusused it to argue thattherecan be
permutations
no real potentialfordestructionor restin the heavens; Philoponuscounteredby statingthat since thereis,36it cannot go unrealisedforever;and
Simpliciuscame in defenceof eternalcelestialexistenceand motion by
statingthat the never-realised
possibilityof the heavens' destructionindicates no real potency,but ratherthe lack of one.37Simpliciuscompletes
his account with a distinctionbetween perfectand imperfectpotencies.
Alexanderought to have noted
thatnecessity
is oftwokinds,
one [kind]
to whichit
beingmoredivine,
according
is necessary
thatgodbe goodandthatuntainted
soulsnever
be corrupted,
theother
towhich
bad mentooareconstrained
[kind]
beingforcible,
according
bylawsnot
toerr.Powertoois oftwokinds,
onebeingperfect,
theother
andrather
imperfect
inpotential.
bothareunderthemoredivine
Heavenly
things,
accordingly,
necessity
ofalways
in thesamewayandhavea willthatis determined
in thegood
moving
andcompletely
fordivine
soulsdo
perfect
wayandpureofanyambivalent
power;
notpossess
thegoodin a waysimilar
to humansouls,butrather
thelatter[have
thegoodas] a finite
andonethatsometimes
intoitscontrary,
while
thing
changes
theformer
andforever
settled
in thesame
[haveit as] an infinitely
powerful
thing
condition.
In Phys.,
tr.Konstan,
withminor
942.5-14;
(Simplicius,
alterations.)
The passage presentsus with a confusingjumble of ideas. The distinctionbetweenperfectand imperfect
reflects
a stipulation
in Aristotle.
dynameis
states
actualisations
of
whichby
Normally,perfect
represent
potentialities,
the same token again have to lapse into a state of potentiality
at some
point. However, in the case of eternalbeings and states that have no
in the celestial
contraries
thiscannotbe the case. Consequently,
potentiality
can
be
as
Alexander
had put
spheres
only
predicated"by homonymy",
it. The heavens' actualityconsistsin activity
rather
than
,
actualisation;the
of theirmotionslies in theirexecution.So we have the heavens'
perfection
doubly divine natureto thankfor theirblessed and unturmoiledstate.38
36Sincetheheavens'
formoving
(and,ontheNeoplatonic
interpretation,
contrary
potency
is finite:
seePhysics
, 8.10.
sustenance)
37SeeProcli
commentario,
3 vols.,
Diadochi
InPiatonis
Timaeum
, ed.E. Diehl,Leipzig1903-6,
InPhys.,
andSimplicius,
1333.24-30;
1:293.14-294.8;
e.g.,
bySimplicius,
Philoponus,
quoted
InPhys.,
1331.30-33
Kukkonen
2002{op.cit.,
discussion,
above,n. 33).Proclus
(forfurther
creation.
Theprocession
from
theOnemustbe
a similar
putsforward
pointindiscussing
towards
sincea willwouldlapseatsomepointandturn
notdeliberative
natural,
bynature,
in:Procli
ed. V. Cousin,
thecontrary.
See In Platonis
Parmenidem
commentarium,
indita,
opera
Paris1864,786-8.
38See Aristotle,
forthereference
to Alexander,
Met.12.6,1071b3-1072a4;
Simplicius,
TheActivity
andff.,andA. Kosman,
Cf.alsoIn Phys.,
In Phys.
1358.18-26
1327.35-38.
of
andM.L.Gill(eds),Unity,
D. Charles
inAristotle's
in:T. Scaltsas,
Identity,
Being
Metaphysics,
The distinction
mirrors
to
andExplanation
inAristotle's
Oxford
1994,195-213.
Metaphysics,

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARGUMENTS

151

But the "divine"and "compulsory"necessitiescorrespondwith"theproducts of reason" and "the worksof necessity"of the Timaeuseven more
closelythan theydo withanythingfoundin Aristotle.Simplicius5
explanationin factexhibitsseveralof the (Platonic)revisionsmade to Aristotelian
cosmologyin late ancient school philosophy.Even thoughthe material
natureof the heavens makes the heavens destructibleand exhaustiblein
to being kept in
themselves,theirmatteris uniquelysuited (epitdeiottos)
existenceand moved in a circlead infinitum
a
that
neveradds up
, process
an
to
actual infinite(cf. In Phys. 1327.30ff.).In analogous fashion,the
celestialsouls are disposedinfinitely
and in a discursivemanner,and without any interruption
or distortion,to receive the goodness of intelligible
The tripartitedivisionbetween materialbody, discursivesoul,
reality.39
and immutableintellect,the allusion to the divine apeirodynamos
, and the
technicaluse of suitability(epitdeiots
) are all late ancient staples.40
However, Aristotle'scosmologyas a whole aims at supersedingthe
Platonic one, and we should thereforeexpect to run into seriousproblems reconcilingthe two accounts. The only way for a Neoplatonistto
talk about mutability
in the celestialrealm is by reducingit to an inherent but latent defectin the materialprincipleand then by statingthat
the superioractive principle(the mover,the source of being) will never
let this defectbe realised.Divine necessitiesand naturalnecessities,and
likewisedivinelydispersedas opposed to naturallyoscillatingdynameis
are
rather
than
notions.41
This
leads
to
an
unexcompeting,
complementary,
pected conclusion. Things possible by their own nature are rendered
impossibleby divine decree. Ultimately,it is the metaphysicalperfection
of God thatshutsoffcertainpossibilities.42
This is one possibleapproach
to the ontological status of counterfactualpossibilities.Other physical
worldsare imaginable,but theyhave no actualiser,since the Good only
createsin the most perfectfashion.
an extent
thedifference
between
andpoiesis;
it reflects
a viewwhereentelekhda
is
praksis
seenas a specialandsuperior
caseofenergeia.
Forthehappiness
ofpureintellection
see
alsoEJV,
and 10.7.
10.3,1073a29-b7
39Cf.the
Plutarch's
viewsin [Ps.]-Philoponus,
Ioannis
in
report
concerning
Philoponi
Aristotel
deAnima
libros
commentario,
ed. M. Hayduck,
Berlin1897,596.15-34.
,
40On
incosmology
Proclus
onPlenitude
see,e.g.,theauthor's
apeirodynamis
, in:Dionysius,
18(2000),115ff.;
ontheemergence
ofepitdeiots
as a technical
term
inlateancient
school
S. Sambursky,
ThePhysical
World
LateAntiquity
London1962,104-10.
philosophy,
,
of
41Cf.theremarks
in S. Gersh,
Kinesis
akintos.
A study
motion
inthephilosophy
ofspiritual
Proclus
From
Iamblichus
toEriugena
, Leiden1973,27-48;bythesameauthor,
of
, Leiden1978,
2000[op.cit.,
2002(op.cit.,
27-45;andKukkonen
above,n. 40)& Kukkonen
above,n. 33).
42Thecontention back
tothepromise
oftheDemiurge
in Timaeus
41B-Cto rengoes
dertheminor
their
natural
In cosmology,
thenotion
godsimmortal
despite
corruptibility.
canbe traced
Avicenna
at leastas faras Leibniz.
through

15:14:08 PM

152

TANELIKUKKONEN

(2) Simpliciusapprovesof Alexander'ssecond explanation,sayingthat

is
it 'good':
itoccurs;
overwhich
as themagnitude
hasthesameinterval
he saysthata motion
toaccomhavethepower
anda slower
faster
botha thing
thing
moving
accordingly,
607ft.]oroverone
overa stade[approx.
thatoccurs
ofa motion
plishtheinterval
ofthezodiac,buttheone [hasthepowerto do so] in lesstime,theother
section
in more.43
The two examples can be interpretedin two different
ways. If we take
two thingstraversinga stadium'slength,one faster,one slower,then it
amountsof time. In
is clear that the two span the distancein different
the case of the zodiac, what can also be meant is that two different
spheresspan the same sectionof the heaven measured in degrees in
the same time,yettheymove at different
speeds,because theyhave a diffurther
one
ferentdistancesto cross,the
away from,the othercloser
being
to the Earth'score (thecentreof the universe).In both cases, the implications are roughlythe same. Instead of meaning to say that everyexistent thinghas a real potencyto span a certaindistancefasteror slower
(whichin the case of the heavens has all mannerof unacceptableimplican be spanned
cations),whatAristodemeantto say was thateverydistance
This
a
slower
a
faster
or
providesa neat
interpretation
movingthing.
by
solutionto the exegeticalproblem and indeed, it looks as though this
needsforthepurposesof his argument.
wereall thatAristotle
Unfortunately,
thisis not all that he says; and at any rate, the solutionholds littlefurtherinterestwithregardto the questionconcerningimpossiblepremises.
* * *
had to explainhowthe
on Aristotle
FollowingGalen, ancientcommentators
bothuntrueand
from
could
premisesostensibly
argueindirectly
philosopher
this.(1) One
to
do
different
three
ways
impossible.There were (at least)
could posit a readingof the textthat would eradicate the problem.We
of Physics6.2, as
see this happeningin the last mentionedinterpretation
7.1 could be dividedinto
well as in Simplicius'idea thattheproofin Physics
two independentparts.These explanationsmightbe ad hoc; at any rate,
theydo not touch upon the more generalproblem(if,of course,thereis
one: the interpreter
mightdenythis).(2) Anotheroptionwould be to posit
43In Phys
Averroes
tr.Konstan.
., bk.6, comm.15,in:AOACC,
(InPhys
., 942.14-18,
doesnotappear
claimwhich
aninteresting
toEudemus,
thissolution
4:fol.
255M)attributes
in Simplicius.

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS
PERIMPOSSIBILE

153

that the impossibility

of the postulatedconditionis not due to the thing
when consideredin itself,but to some otherpresupposition.The 'more
divinenecessity'Simpliciusevokes is an example of this.The outermost
heaven cannot move fasterthan it does because the firstmover
is the most
powerfulone; the heavens (or a part of them)cannot stop, because the
divineperfectionof the celestialsouls precludesthisfromhappening.In
thesekindsof explanations,
theimpossibility
in questionis typically
referred
back to previousmembersin the causal chain to actualisingagentsand
theirpowers. (3) A thirdpossible solutionis hintedat by Alexander.In
statingthatonlymutuallydestructive
hypothesesare impossible,Alexander
a
of
to
assume
that
level
somehowstricter
than
only
impossibility
appears
the one we associatewiththe naturalorderof thingscan harmthe applicabilityof indirectarguments.What this means is not yet clear.
4. Avempace
andAverroes
on Physics6.2
Continuingwith Physics6.2, we move next to the Arabic tradition.The
firsthintsof scholarlyawarenessof an exegeticalproblemat 232b21 are
containedin theverymanuscript
we possessof HunaynIbn Ishq's Arabic
translationof the Physics.
This translationwas used in the Baghdd school
of the ChristianphilosopherYahy Ibn cAdI (d. 973). Accordingly,the
manuscriptcontainscomments,sometimesextensive,by both Yahy Ibn
cAdfand his pupil Ab cAlIbn al-Samh (d. 1027).44The latterfurnished
a note to the passage under consideration.Ibn al-Samh is asked- apparentlyby a pupil whetherthereis not somethingwrongwithAristotle's
argument.How fromthe fact that motion occurs over a certain time
does it followthatthereis also a quickerand a slowerone forthattime?45
Ibn al-Samh answersthatAristotlecannot have meant anythingelse but
thatwe can imagine
(yawhumu
) a fasteror slowermotion.For the purpose
of the argumentwe need not assume thata fasteror slowermotionactuallyexists,merelythatit is possibleforit to exist.46
Althoughthe comment
is interesting
in its own right,it seems the speakeris obliviousto the finer
44See theintroduction
to theinvaluable
P. Lettinck,
Aristotle's
anditsReception
Physics
inthe
Arabic
World.
With
anEdition
Parts
s Commentary
on the
oftheUnpublished
ofAvempace'
Leiden1994.
Physics,
45SeeAristotle,
Al-tabVah
Cairo1964,2 vols.,2:624.18, tr.H.I. Ishq,ed.CA.Badaw,
23. Becauseofthefirst-person
to thenote("I askedofAbcAlr
. . ."),Lettinck
beginning
1994(op.cit.,
thespeaker
withtheeditor
oftheArabic
above,n. 44),4-5associates
Physics
al-Basr
MS,Ab'1-Husayn
(d. 1044).
46Ibid.,624.24-625.3
andff.

15:14:08 PM

154

TANELIKUKKONEN

points of the ancient controversy.The special nature of the celestial

motionsis not acknowledged,nor are imaginability
and genuine (physiin
from
one
another.
cal) possibility any way distinguished
The situationis different
with the AndalusianphilosopherAvempace
, we find
(Ibn Bjjah, d. 1138). In Avempace's commentaryon the Physics
unmistakable
thoughanonymous referenceto the problemsraised in
the earlierdiscussion.What is more,we encounterforthe firsttime the
formulation
thatis to crop up laterin Aquinas. The problem,Avempace
avers,is that apparently"thereexistsa fastestmotion,i.e. that which is
In Avempace's
actual daily";thatis, the rotationof the outermostsphere.47
a
would
Aristode's
seriouslydamage
argueyes, single counterexample
mentin Physics
6, since a maximumand minimumvelocitywould entail
His point is thereforenot
a minimumtime and minimumextension.48
thatfromimpossiblepremisesimpossibleconclusionsfollow,but thatconclusionsotherthan what Aristotlehad wanted appear to be warranted.
The questionforAvempaceis whetherthereis a minimaland/ormaximal extensionof timeand/or space afterall; it would seem to have little
to do withthe matterof indirectargumentation.
Nevertheless,
Avempace's
commentsproved to be both inspiringand importantfroman historical
perspective.Avempace contendsthat time is indivisiblenot insofaras it
is time,but only insofaras it is connectedto motion.49Is motion itself
then somethingdiscrete?This would be hard to believe,since time and
motion in the Aristoteliananalysisare treatedequivalendythroughout.
Rather,we must interpretAvempace as sayingthat it is the specifically
thathave ascertained
movements
of thevariouskindsof existents
determined
limits.Accordingto Avempace,timeand motionwhenconsideredin themselvescould alwaysbe fasteror slower,sincetheiraccelerationor retardation
ad infinitum
always amountsto merelya potential,not an actual infinite.
The distinction
betweengenericpossibilitiesand specificimpossibilities
hinted at by Avempace is given a more elaborate treatmentby Ab
'1-Walrd
Ibn Rushd (theLatinAverroes,1126-1198).Whatis more,Averroes
47Avempace,
Beirut1978,80.6.(Thetext
ed. M. Ziydah,
Shuruht
al-samc
al-tab',
is richly
useofAvempace
noteadloc.)Albert's
here:seeZiydah's
corrupt
maybe slightly
so in this
oftheoutermost
bearsno mention
buthiscommentary
documented,
sphere,
Albert
forhimself,
either
readAvempace
case(1)Aquinas
by
(2) heardofhisviewsfrom
motion
ofthedaily
theexample
or(3)cameacross
oforalcommunication,
independently.
way
48Itis notaltogether
sincetheheavens
tofollow,
clearhowthisis supposed
onlyassign
"wherever
to themaxim
subscribes
tovelocity.
an upperlimit
simply
Perhaps
Avempace
there
is alsoa minimum."
is a maximum,
there
49Avempace,
al-samac
Shuruhat
81.1-2andff.
al-tabicii

15:14:08 PM

PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS

155

treatsthe problemsof Physics

6.2 and 7.1 together,claimingthat
explicitly
Aristotleused the same kind of argumentin both. Averroes'habit of systematisingAristotlemakes him a key figurein the ongoingdebate.
, Averroesmentionsthe
Alreadyin the early Compendium
of thePhysics
raised
with
to
His solutionat first
232b21.
exegeticalproblem
regard 6.2,
sightlooks to be influencedby Avempace. Accordingto Averroes,with
regard to the thingbeingmovedeverymotion could be fasteror slower,
since thereis nothingin the natureof body itselfthatwould preventthis.
But thenAverroesconcursthat it is the factthat thereis no more powin existencethan the Prime mover which makes the prime
erfulmover
mobile's assumed velocitythe fastestone and a fastervelocityan acciIn keepingwithSimplicius
dental- thoughnot an essential
impossibility.50
and the Neoplatonictraditionin general,Averroesconcursthatit is always
the prior and active component(mind, soul, actuality)that determines
the limitsin relationto the posteriorand more passive (matter,elemental motion,or- as here- celestialaether).
Averroesmakes it clear that to
As for Physics7.1, in the Compendium
him that argumentpresupposesthe conclusionsreached in book 6. The
firstpremisein Aristotle'sargument,thatwhich concernedthe divisibility
of themovedbody,refersback to the divisibility
113.9of motion.[Epitome,
It
is
this
that makes the premiseinitiallyplausible.Averroesadmits
11.)
to some puzzlementover the formof Aristotle'spurportedproofin Physics
7.1 and the "doubts expressedwith regardto thispassage" (115.19):
Ifitis shown
thatthereis something
whichis prohibited
from
to rest,as
coming
- werethatI
Aristotle
thenhow
bodies,
[tobe thecase]withtheheavenly
thought
- can theimpossible
knew!
herebe posited
If thisis so, ifrestis
as thepossible?
forsomemovedthings,
... itis an imaginary
rather
thana
impossible
[then]
proof,
demonstration.
[true]
(116.2-6.)
This recallsa questionraisedin Avempace'scommentary,
wherethe more
precise claim is made that for the heavens it is impossiblethat a part
shouldcome to rest,(iShurht
, 118.3-9.)Avempace solvesthe problemby
in
recourse
abstraction:
it is truethat "it is not possibleforfireto
taking
be cold, but this [is so only] on account of it being fire,not on account
of it being a body or on account of it being [something]moved" (119.23). Similarlythe heavens. Admittedly,a part of them cannot come to
rest,but this is not due to them being moved objects. Instead, "if we
posit a body moved in a circle,it cannot come to rest due to the fact
50See Averroes,
inPhysicorum
libros
, ed.J. Puig,Madrid1983,92.13ff.
Epitome

15:14:08 PM

156

TANELIKUKKONEN

that we [at once also] posit that its motion has no contrary"(119.4-5).
The conclusionthat the circularbody has an externalmover necessarily
follows.Averroes'solutionfollowsalong similarlines:
from
it is notprois prohibited
We saythatifa movedbodysomewhere
resting,
as itis movedin a specific
as itis moved,
butinsofar
hibited
from
doingso insofar
- I [might]
"insofar
as itsmover
is eternal"
or "insofar
as
fashion
say,forinstance,
Asfaras itsbeingmovedis concerned,
itcouldbe at
ithasno contrary".
however,
as it is
hereis assumed
insofar
as it is possible,
notinsofar
rest.Thusthepossible
116.7-11.)
impossible.
(Epitome,
The two examples account for the immaterial(active) and the material
(passive)componentsin eternalmotionand thus furnishus with a comof celestialrest.Again the immeprehensiveargumentforthe impossibility
But
Averroes
claims thatAvempace's
diate parallelsare with Simplicius.
of this passage, too, agrees with his own; and indeed, at
interpretation
least the contrastingof the more general with the more specificagrees
withwhat we findin Avempace. At this stage Averroesclearlybelieved
thatthe "abstraction"solutionand the idea of metaphysicalnecessitation
converge,at least when talk is of eternalthings.51
remarksthat "the volIn an interestingaside, Averroesoffhandedly
umes of existentsare definite"(114.9). This puts us in mind of Aquinas'
claim in the contextof Physics6.2 that the motionsof thingsare determined.What was said in that contextcould easilybe extrapolatedon to
the question about volume. For just as there can be no motion faster
than the one executedby the outermostsphere,so therecan be no volume greaterthan thatof the outermostheaven,whichcontainsthe whole
worldwithinitself.However,one could also raise a questionhere,namely,
how should we understandAristotle'sremarksthatwe can alwaysimagAverroes'state?52In my understanding,
ine, e.g., a largerman ad infinitum
an explanation
a
from
ment is best construedas followingas corollary
given "in the abstractsense" similarto what Avempace had proposed.
divisible(just as motion in itselfis
Though body in itselfis infinitely
51Averroes
in explaining
from
Aristode
fordeviating
seesfitto reprimand
Avempace
hadcorsinceAvempace
finds
thisallthemoreastonishing,
Averroes
, 6.2,232b21.
Physics
corIfI understand
Averroes
thequestion
solved
, 7.1(116.13-16).
Physics
concerning
rectly
does
work
is duetothefactthatAvempace
intheearly
hisquarrel
withAvempace
rectly,
of
in hisexplanation
motions
ofcelestiali
thecausaldetermination
stress
notsufficiently
232b21.
6.2,
,
Physics
52Physics
thanitis
theworldcouldbe larger
ofwhether
, 3.8,208a16-17.Thequestion
on thepagesoftheTahfiit
andAverroes
al-Ghazl
between
fired
up a heatedexchange
andtheTahit
al-tahit
(87ff.).
(37.17ff.)
al-falsifah

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS
PERIMPOSSIBILE

157

infinitely
divisible),all particularbodies even those of the elements(cf.
114.3-11) have a maximum and minimumvolume; and likewisethe
motionsof thosebodies. The cases of motion,time,and extensioncan be
handledequivalendy.Here as in othercontexts,the allusionto existenceor
"being" (iwujd
) in Averroes is not accidental. While extensionin the
abstractsense is indefinite
(it can be anythingbut infinite),
any truebeing
is by definitiondeterminate.To relyon thinkingin these kindsof cases
is absurd,as Aristotlemighthave put it (cf. Phys.3.8, 208a 15): what we
need to thinkabout when assessingtruepossibilities
is what the real world
is like and what the limitationspertainingto its actual existentsare.53
In the later, more extensiveCommentary
on Aristotle's
, Averroes
Physics
stateshis case more carefully
when it comes to explainingAristode'schoice
it is now clear that Averroeshas
of words in Physics6.2. Furthermore,
recourseto Alexander'scommentary,for he reproducesthe exact same
two explanationsas Simpliciusdoes (bk. 6, comm. 15, in: AOACC 4:fol.
255L-256A). As Averroesnow explainsthe situation:
we saythatevery
in so faras it is movedcanbe movedbya faster
movedthing
motion
thantheoneitpossesses
in so faras [this]
is a motion.
The causeforthis
is thatmotion
is of[a] continuous
andvelocity,
which
is inmotion,
is sim[nature]
ilar[inrespect
ofbeing]continuously
divisible.
continuJustas divisibility
proceeds
so alsovelocity
in motion.
. . . [Aristotle's]
therefore,
ouslyuntoinfinity,
proposition
is possible
in itself,
thatis to say,as occurswhenmotion
impossible
accidentally:
takesplacein natural,
i.e.material
things.54
We should take Aristotle'sreasoningin the passage to concernmotionin
the mostgeneral,most abstractsense; not thisor thatmotion,but rather
motion considered simplyas motion.55Only when we proceed to the
specificmovementsof a certain type of materialbody (like man, or a
specificcelestialsphere) can we begin to assign upper and lower limits
to the velocityit may assume. But thenwe are alreadyhandlingmatters
53See R. Glasner,
IbnRushd's
in: ArabicSciencesand
naturalia,
ofminima
theory
11,1 (2001),9-26.
Philosophy,
54"... dicamus
secundum
estutmoueaquodomnemotum
quodestmotum
possibile
turmotuvelociori
suo motusecundum
Et causain hocest,quoniam
quodestmotus.
motus
estde continuo,
etvelocitas,
estsimilis
in continuo.
diuisibilitati
quaeestin motu,
diuisibilitas
in continuo
in infinitum,
similiter
in
velocitas
Quemadmodum
igitur
procedit
motu.
. . . istapropositio
estpossibilis
scilicet
perse,impossibilis
peraccidens,
quiaaccidit
idestmaterialibus."
In Phys.,
bk.6, comm.15,in:
motui,
quodfuitin rebusnaturalibus,
AOACC
, 4:fol.255K-L.
55Cf.InPhys.,
bk.5,comm.
estinCaeloet
45,in:AOACC,
4,fol.235C:". . . declaratum
coelestis
nullam
habetinsediuersitatem.
Etad hocdicendum
Mundo,
quodmotus
corporis
estcorporis
secundum
noninquantum
est,quodhocproprium
coelestis,
quodcoeleste,
motum.
Etsermo
inhoclocoestdemotu,
nonsecundum
alicuius
quodestmotus
corporis."

15:14:08 PM

158

TANELIKUKKONEN

on the species,not on the genus level. Similarly,certainpossibilitiesthat

could be said to apply to the species (forinstanceman, who qua man
of
may sit or stand) mightnot be applicable to a certainrepresentative
thatspecies (say Zayd, who qua sittingcannot be standing).In each case,
narrowdown the scope of possibilities.On
the materialconditionsfurther
this model we can handle certaingeneral philosophicalnotionson the
of physicalexisconceptuallevel withoutever bringingthe particularities
tence into the equation; and thisis just what Aristotledoes in the probcould also
lematicpassages in the Physics.
However,just thischaracteristic
do not
be broughtup againstthe explanation.If the proofsin the Physics
talk about actual mobile objects,what do theytalk about?
andAverroes
on Physics7.1
5. Avicenna
With this,we shiftonce more fromPhysics6.2 to 7.1 and at the same
time fromAverroes,via Aquinas, to Avicenna. In commentingon how
Aristotle's
prooffrompartsrestingand the whole movingshouldbe interon thePhysics
firstanonymouslyrecounts
preted,Aquinas in his Commentary
we have
a solutionthat looks like a dead ringerfor the interpretation
to Avempace and Averroes:"even ifit is impossiblethata part
attributed
be at restwithrespectto some determinatenature- insofaras it is a body
- thisis nevertheless
of a certainspecies,forexample the heavens or fire
not impossible,if the common nature of body is considered.For body
as body is not prohibitedfrombeing at restor moving."56
bothof which
Aquinas thenreportstwo objectionsto thisinterpretation,
he creditsto Ibn Sm (Avicenna,980-1037). The firstobjectionis simple and to the point. If Aristotlehad in mind anythinglike the genusspecies distinction,then he would have had no need for the further
concerningparts and wholes, "because it can just as
mind-experiment
well be said that the whole body is not preventedfrombeing at rest".
The "speakingin the abstract"line of defencethusrendersthe argument
of Physics7.1 superfluous(it need not affectour reading of 6.2).57 The
56"Huicautem
sitpartem
obviare
obiectioni
dicendo,
quodlicetimpossibile
aliquis
posset
utputa
estcorpustalisspeciei,
determinatam
secundum
naturam,
inquantum
quiescere
consideretur:
si ratiocommunis
velignis,
nonesttarnen
caelum
quia
corporis
impossibile,
InPhys
velmoveri."
nonprohibetur
., bk.7,
Aquinas,
quiescere
corpus,
corpus,
inquantum
cap. 1,lect.1,n. 5.
57"Primo
quodnonprohibetur
possetdicide totocorpore,
quidemquiapariratione
fuitassumere
de parte;et itasuperfluum
ex hocquodcorpus
est,sicutdicitur
quiescere
In Phys
mobilis
et quietem
divisionem
ad probationem
., bk.7, cap. 1,
partis."
propositi
lect.1,n. 5.

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARGUMENTS

159

second objection cuts right across the board. According to Aquinas,

Avicenna is dissatisfied
with the whole practiceof thispurportedgenuslevel talk of possibilities:for
a proposition
is simply
reduced
to impossibility
ifthepredicate
is repugnant
to the
becauseofa specific
evenifit is notrepugnant
to it becauseof
difference,
subject
itsgenus.Foritis impossible
that"man"be irrational,
eventhough
he is notprefrom
vented
becausehe is an animal.
Henceitis simply
beingirrational
impossible
thata partofa moving
forthisis contrary
tothenature
bodybe at rest[by]itself:
ofsucha body,evenifitis notcontrary
ofbody.58
to thecommon
nature
The way Aquinas talksabout predicates"being repugnantto the subject"
lends the analysisa logical flavour.59
Bracketingfromthe argumentits
what
we
features,
get is this. An account of motion in
context-specific
the abstractpurportsto speak about motionconsideredsimplyas motion.
But thereis reallyno such thing;one can only findin existencethis or
thatmovingbody. And no matterwhat movingbody one takes,the rule
applies that for it to move essentially,a part of it cannot be at rest.It
is altogetherfutileto speak about motion- about anything,forthatmatter- in general or "in the abstract",if these abstractionshave no conceivableinstantiation.
7 purportsto talkabout movingbodies. But
Physics
since one cannot apply the suggestedpropositionto anymovingbodythereis so to speak no conceivable model of the world that one could
constructwhich would make the hypothesisreasonable- the premiseis
indeed impossibleand Aristotle'sproof(thusunderstood)self-defeating.
What followsnext in Aquinas' commentaryis equally remarkable.
Aquinas contendsthat it was Avicenna's objectionsthat led Averroesto
with regard to Physics7.1.60 This calls for
posit another interpretation
immediatecomment. First,it is clear that the objections recorded by
Aquinas are indeed pertinentwithregardto the solutionchampionedby
Averroes,especiallyifwe considerhow centralexistencewas forAverroes
in the scheme of scientificexplanation.But of course, Avicenna cannot
have been objectingto Averroes(an impressionAquinas, for his part,
triesto avoid);neitherdoes AverroesevokeAvicennain any of his accounts
58"Secundoquia
redditur
si praedicatum
aliquapropositio
simpliciter
impossibilis,
subiecto
ratione
differentiae
nonrepugnei
ei ratione
repugnet
specificae,
quamvis
generis.
Estenimimpossibile
nonimpediatur
irrationalis
esse
quodhomositirrationalis,
quamvis
ex hocquodestanimal.
Sic igitur
estquodparscorporis
moventis
simpliciter
impossibile
rationem
taliscorporis,
licetnonsitcontra
rationem
seipsum
quiescat,
quiahocestcontra
communem
In Phys
., bk.7, cap. 1,lect.1,n. 5.
corporis."
Aquinas,
59It alsoreminds
us ofthe"mutually
destructive
introduced
hypotheses"
byAlexander.
Whenreadin thisway,onecouldalmost
in words
saythattheLatinAvicenna,
phrased
is in factresponding
to a suggestion
madebyAlexander.
Thomas,
by60
originally
In Phys.,
bk.7, cap. 1,lect.1,n. 6.
Aquinas,

15:14:08 PM

160

TANELIKUKKONEN

of Physics7.1. It would thus seem naturalto treatAquinas' account as a

construction
ratherthan a reconstruction
of a debate among the Arabs.61
One mightalso be temptedto doubt the authenticity
of the attribution of the objectionsreportedby Aquinas to Avicenna. However, the
Arabic editionof the Physics
of Avicenna'sShi' allows us to observethat
frombook 2, ch. 1 of that work. A
Aquinas is quoting almost verbatim
considerationof motionas motionwould applyjust as well to the whole
as to any one of its parts; for what is the whole, but the sum of its
),
parts?62As for the possibilityof consideringmotion in itself(ibi-dhti-hi
Avicenna anonymouslypresentsone possible interpretation
of the proof
whichcorrespondscloselyto the one foundin Aquinas
againstself-motion
(or Avempace, or Averroes):
. . . perhaps
couldbe movedessentially,
andwecanimagine
itspartrestsomething
as it is partofsomeas it is a body,whilethisis notpossible
insofar
inginsofar
evenifitis possible
that
movedessentially
andaccording
toitsnature.
thing
Again,
this[happen]
to itinsofar
as itis a natural
body,it mayyetbe thatit is notpos- itsassumption
This
as itis a particular
is evenimpossible.
sibleforitinsofar
body
is notprohibited
insofar
as he is an aniresembles
thecaseofman,whoseflying
insofar
as he is a man.63
mal,butis prohibited
But Avicenna is not satisfied:for "when somethingis prohibited,then
fromsupposingan impossibility
anotherimpossiblesuppositionfollows".
of Physics
7.1, after
Consequently,thiscannotbe the correctinterpretation
all. Imaginingsomethingto be the case has no use for us, if the imagined thingcannot actuallycome to pass; in thisparticularcase, imagining somethingto come to a halt is inadmissible"insofaras it is impossible
forit to restin actual reality".64
should be thought
By Avicenna's account, a refutationof self-motion
kind of counterfactual
than the one the
to employan altogetherdifferent
or
what
he
should
have said (since
What
Aristotle
said,
Peripateticsposit.
61Aquinas'
infactreveal
awareofwhatheis doing.
thatheis fully
strategies
expository
forward
the"abstraction"
in other
Averroes
withputting
Although
placescredits
Aquinas
thatsolution
After
to first
herehe hasto resort
this,
solution,
anonymously.
presenting
thiscanAverroes
andonlyafter
counter
withhistwoobjections;
hasAvicenna
Aquinas
somemorerefined
comments.
topresent
arrive
on thescenein hisownperson,
3 al-tabi'i,
62Avicenna,
Cairo1983,88.12ff.
ed. S. Zyid& I. Madkr,
Al-sama
3 al-tabc,
63Avicenna,
is more
Al-sam
89.2-5.We maynotethatAquinas'argument
- whole
in scopethanAvicenna's:
whileAquinasholdsthatthe"partresting
universal
that
Avicenna's
is impossible
forall moving
bodies,
suggests
example
moving"
hypothesis
bodies.
forcertain
itis onlyimpossible
moving
64"... inna-m
Al-sam3
al-tabc
f'1-wujd":
suknu-hu
, 88.16.The
Avicenna,
yastahl
thathe
withwhich
theterm
suggests
(yawhumu
) cropsup inAvicenna
imagine
frequency
in YahyIbncAdr's
school.
in response
to thediscussion
is writing

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS
PERIMPOSSIBILE

161

Avicenna'sPhysics
is a systematic
workand not properlyspeakinga comon
it
is
to determinewhetherhe means to
difficult
mentary Aristotle,
attributethis superiorargumentto Aristotle)is that if a thingwith no
externalimpedimentto its motionscould move itself,then therewould
be no way forit to stop. But as it is in fact conceivableforeverybody
to come to a halt (the corporeal creature'sontologicalimperfection
is
allow
in
to
for
it
follows
that
motion
is
moved
this),
enough
everything
by somethingelse, and that eternal motionsmust be implementedby
immaterialeternalmovers.65The argumentis thus effectively
turnedon
its head. Instead of therebeing a problemwiththe apparentimplication
that the heavens mightact otherwisethan they do, that is the whole
is used to demonstratethe corporeal
point. The prooffromself-motion
heavens' reliance on more divine principles.The interpretation
reflects
even
as
it
ties
the
self-motion
Neoplatonicsensibilities,
argumentagainst
in withthe infinite
8.10. Simpliciushad earlier
power argumentof Physics
put forwarda similarsuggestion,and in the Arabic commentarytradition
thissolutionis recommendedby Ab '1-FarjIbn al-Tayyib(d. 1044).66
What are we to make of all this? Some general observationspresent
themselves.In lightof the fact that the words "genus" and "species" do
not occur in the Arabic at thispoint in eitherAvicenna or Averroes,we
may surmisethat Aquinas independentlycompared the accounts of the
and Averroes'Commentary
and set them in a systematicframeSufficientia
work.But thena moreinteresting
questionarises.How was it thatAquinas
could compile his textualevidence in thismanner?If Avicenna knew of
the "motionin the abstract"defencewell enough to refuteit already a
centurybeforeAvempace (a centuryand a half beforeAverroeswrote
his long Commentary
), thenone would assumethata commonsourceunderlies both accounts.Althoughthe mattercannot be pursued here in any
length,a recentstudyby ChristopherMartinwould seem to indicatethat
of thisapproachin naturalphilosophy.67
Philoponusis theultimateinstigator
3
()5Avicenna,
Al-sama
in a morestraightforward
alal-tabici,
89.6ff.;
fashion,
similarly
Cairo
108.6-109.5.
1938,
JVajh,
66See InPfys.,
1040.16-1041.4
andAristotle,
I owethelatter
ref2:741.
24ff.
Al-tabicah,
erence
to Lettinck
1994(op.cit.,above,n. 44),514-15.
67Although
thepreserved
ofthefourlastbooksofPhiloponus'
(inArabic)
fragments
onthePhysics
reveal
thatwouldresemble
the"abstraction"
commentary
nothing
approach,
Martin
hasuncovered
hints
towards
intheCorollary
onthe
intriguing
justsucha procedure
Void
: seeC.J.Martin,
theImpossible:
Non-Reductive
Thinking
from
Arguments
Impossible
Hypotheses
inBoethius
andPhiloponus
Studies
inAncient
Thesub, in:Oxford
, 17(1999),279-302.
Philosophy
further
jectmerits
study.

15:14:08 PM

162

TANELIKUKKONEN

7.1 clearlytroubled
of Physics
As forAverroes,the correctinterpretation
the Commentator'smindfora long time.We can appreciatethisfromthe
dedicatedto thetopic.Averroes
numberand rangeoftextstheCommentator
also tellsus as much himselfin the Paraphrase
, which dates
of thePhysics
fromthe middleperiod of his philosophicalcareer.Averroesconfessesto
havingbeen puzzled at firstabout how Aristotle's
proofshouldbe tackled.
Since then,he has come upon Alexander'scommentson the passage,and
he is now pleased to reportthatAlexanderagreeswithwhatAverroeshimself had earlier writtenon the subject.68If we accept the conventional
chronologyof Averroes'writings,the allusion to confusionwould refer
Since Averroes'understanding
of thestrucmainlyto the earlyCompendium.
7.1 has been analysedby Helen Tunik Goldstein
tureand aims of Physics
in a separatestudy,I will not go into the detailsof that questionhere.69
I willonlypointout a fewdetailspertainingto the subjectofperimpossibile
, Averroestookover from
arguments.It seemsthatin the earlyCompendium
as well as the
Avempace the rudimentsof the genus-speciesdistinction,
of
the
mover
that
is the decisive
notion
that
it
is
the
power
(Neoplatonic)
textand withAlexander's
factor.BecomingbetteracquaintedwithAristotle's
commentsled Averroesto reconsiderand revise,but not rejectthisbasic
explanatorymodel. In Averroes'laterworks,the "abstraction"solutionis
emphasisedand thelate ancientidea of ontologicalreliancecorrespondingly
de-emphasised.There are some originalfeaturesto Averroes'approach
Averroes
claimsto thecontrary,
as well.Unphasedby Alexander'srhetorical
7.1 is directedagainst
is well aware of the factthatthe argumentof Physics
of absoluteselfAverroesconsidersthe impossibility
Plato's self-movers.70
bimotionto be an establishedfact,somethingalmostself-evident
(macrf
- and here the Commentator
takes
sides
Most
again
).71
nafsi-hi
importandy
againstAlexander Averroesin his later worksis adamant on the point
Let us examine
7.1 does indeed argueperimpossibile.
thatAristodein Physics
Averroes'consideredview of proofsfromimpossiblepremisesand how
theyare employedin Aristotle'snaturalphilosophy.
68The passageis onlyextant
translation
offered
in Hebrew:
see theEnglish
byH.T.
'
Dordrecht
inPhysics
inAverroes
Goldstein
1991,48.
, ed. andtr.H.T. Goldstein,
Questions
offered
totheQuestions
thecopious
annotation
benefited
from
hasgready
Thepresent
study
Goldstein.
by69
Volume
VII, 1, in:Harry
andFunction
SeeAverroes
ontheStructure
Austryn
Jubilee
ofPhysics
1, 7 & 8).
1965,335-55(seealsothenotesto Questions
One,
Jerusalem
70See Questions
ad loc.
comments
inPhysics
, q. 1,6,andGoldstein's
71See thelongCommentary
ontheMetaphysics
, bk.9, comm.2; fortheviewthatthedisis something
evident
forchange
activeandpassive
tinction
between
(ma'rf),
esp.
potency
4 vols.,
al-tabcah
mbacd
theArabictextin Tafsr
, ed. M. Bouyges,
S.J.,Beirut1938-52,
2:1110.3-7.

15:14:08 PM

PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS

163

6. Averroes
onAristotle's
indirect
arguments
In an earlywork on logic Averroesoutlinesthe correctprocedurein an
We firstassumethecontraargument"throughtheimpossible"as follows.72
a
want
to prove. From thisstateof
statement
whose
we
validity
dictory
mentand fromotherpremisesknownto be truewe thenderive,through
a valid syllogistic
figure,an impossibleconclusion.Since the impossibility cannot resultfromthe valid premise(s)or fromthe logical form,it
is thereby
must originatein the originalstatement,whose contradictory
shown to be true. Averroesuses this explanationconsistendyin dealing
structurein Phys.
with Physics7.1, and he findsthe same argumentative
8.5, 256b3-12,whereAristotleaims to prove thatthe primemotioncanAverroesis additionallyof the opinion that Aristotle
not be accidental.73
uses
proofsof thiskind in his physicalworks.This makes the
repeatedly
perimpossibile
argumentan importanttool fornaturalphilosophy,even if
methodof sciencepropter
it does not followthe demonstrative
quid
in naturalphilosophyis treated
The questionof indirectargumentation
in the eighthof the physicalQuestions
editedby Goldstein.
mostextensively
Here, Averroespicks forinspectionyet anothercontroversialpassage in
the Physics
, namely,the infinitepower argumentof Physics8.10. Physics
7.1 is explicitlycited as a parallel (12), but Averroesalso detectsa sim(10) as well as
ilaritywiththe questionof increasingvolume indefinitely
with the problem found in Physics6.2, ostensiblybecause talk is once
more of dividingbodies and therebymotions.How can such a division
be carriedon to infinity,
as Aristotlesuggestswe imagine happening?
BeforeconsideringAverroes'answer,it is usefulto make note of his
moregeneralconcern.Accordingto Averroes,
certainmaterialist
Avicennians
had argued that since the infinitepower argumentis invalid,the most
we can reach by the aid of Aristotle'sprooffrommotionis a corporeal
FirstMover- i.e., the outermostheaven. Confusionabout Aristotle'sargumentationwould thereforehave led to serious consequences. (6-7.) If
thisclaim has any historicalmerit,thenwe willhave reacheda paradoxical
conclusion.Galen's aim in arguingagainst Aristotle'sway of reasoning
72Cf.theLatinEpitome
inLibros
Aris
totelis,in:AOACC,
1.2b&3:fol.50F-G;an
Logicae
' Three
translation
oftheArabicoriginal
is offered
inAverroes
Short
Commentaries
on
English
Aristotle's
and"Poetics",
ed. andtr.C. Butterworth,
"Rhetoric,"
1977,106-7.
"Topics,"
Albany
SincetheArabictitleoftheworktranslates
as What
is necessary
inlogic
theLatindesignationoftheworkas a commentary
is slightly
Butterworth
ispreparing
a critical
misleading.
Arabicedition
andEnglish
translation
oftheentire
textforpublication.
73See Averroes,
In Phys.,
4: fol.375K-M.
8, comm.36,in:AOACC,
74Cf. Questions,
comesclosest
to describing,
and endorsing,
this
q. 8, 5-6.Aristotle
method
ofinquiry
in De celo1.12,281b3-15.

15:14:08 PM

164

TANELIKUKKONEN

was to make room for the existenceof (separate and immaterial)selfmovingsouls. Yet his objectionshad given rise to a seriesof discussions
that would finallylead some (Muslim)thinkersto materialismand atheism. The resultcan be consideredironic.75
Averroes'own understanding
of the infinitepower argumentwas subNevertheless,a uniformpictureof the proof's
ject to several revisions.76
variedaccounts.
structure
underlies
all of the Commentator's
argumentative
as our guide. In the firstplace, to the
We shall use the eighthQuestion
Commentatorit is evidentthat the thoughtthat the forceof the heavfalse. But is this
enly motionbe doubled, quadrupled,etc., is manifestly
a "possible" or an "impossible"falsehood?(8.) Since Averroesroutinely
and since talk is here
gave the modal termsa temporalinterpretation,77
of eternalentities,one would assume that it is an impossibleone.
In the Compendium
, where Averroesdiscussesyet another
oftheDe celo
- thefamous
indirectargumentofAristotle's
argumentfortheworld'sincor- Averroes
the
distinction
as follows.An impossiblefalseexplains
ruptibility
hood positsthatsomethingwhichcannotat all existexists,whilea possible
falsehoodpositsthat somethingwhich does not exist,exists.An example
of a possiblefalsehoodis when we say that Zayd is in the market,when
in facthe is not.78This suggeststhatthe possiblefalsehoodis to be inter, the same example is
pretedin temporalterms.In the Tahfiital-tahfiit
When
we
an
say that something
temporal
interpretation.
given
explicidy
untrue is nonethelesspossible, we mean that it is true at some other
thesubstance
time.79Finally,in the sixthof Averroes'treatisesConcerning
of
Aristotle'sDe celoargumentis tied in with the infinite
thecelestial
sphere
power argumentof Physics8.10 and both are subjected to a temporal
3LostTreatise
75ForAverroes'
Mover
onthe
Prime
Averroes
concerns
seeH.A.Wolfson,
, repr.
inWolfson
1973(op.cit.,
i,in:C. Steel
above,n. 31),402-29andDe separatione
primi
prncipi
Cause.
Edition
and
the
Avwennians
onthe
First
Anunknown
treatise
& G. Guldentops,
against
ofAverroes
et Philosophie
translation
de Thologie
mdivales,
64, 1 (1997),86-135.
, in:Recherches
76See thecomments
Existence
inH.A.Davidson,
, andthe
, Creation
ofGod
Proofs
forEternity
andIslamic
inMedieval
1987,311-35.
, Oxford
Philosophy
Jewish
77I havediscussed
Averroes
Tahfut
al-tahfut.
Worlds
inthe
ofthisinPossible
someaspects
ofPhilosophy,
oftheHistory
onPlenitude
andPossibility
38, 3 (2000),329-47.
, in:Journal
London
& NewYork1991,
inherIbnRushd
remarks
Cf.alsoDominique
(Averroes),
Urvoy's
95-98.
78Kibal-sam3
Beirut1994,6 vols.,2in: Ras3il
IbnRushd
wa-'l-clam,
al-falsqfyyah,
in theParaphrase
Likewise
3:51.19-52.1.
, bk.1,ch. 10,hd.2, pt.3: Arabic
oftheDe Celo
Fez 1984,157.14-158.13
ed.J. al-Dnal-cAlaw,
al-sam3
textin Talkhs
wa-'l-clam,
(Latin
Aristotelis
libros
De Caelo
inquattuor
inAverrois
Cordubensis
translation
, in:AOACC,
paraphrasis
5:fol.289B-C).
79Tahafut
cf.Aristotle,
, 93.8-95.3;
1 above.
al-tahafat

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARGUMENTS

165

treatment.The heavens must be eternallyactual and all theirpotencies

forotherwisean impossibleconclusionwould follow:for
infinite,
ofthose
ifthereexisted
in thecelestial
bodiesa potentiality,
thentheassumption
have
thattheheavens
whosubscribe
to thisview,thatis,theproposition
affirming
foritis thenature
is a proposition
thatis falsebutpossible,
beendestroyed,
already
at sometime.Andifthispropoofpotentiality
andpossibility
tobecomeactualised
thatis absurd
and
thenthere
wouldfollow
from
ita conclusion
sition
werecorrect,
Butit has already
thatsomething
eternal
hasbeendestroyed.
namely,
impossible,
no
inthePrior
a proposition
thatis falsebutpossible
thatfrom
beenshown
Analytics
canfollow.80
absurd
conclusion
Both the De celoproof and the argumentof Phys.8.10 thereforeprove
The whole point of these argutheirpoint by reasoningper impossibile.
mentsis to posit a syllogismwith an impossibleconclusion,so the false
premisewe are tryingto locate must be impossibleas well (q. 8, 8).
time
So, is the assumptionof motionaccelerated(and correspondingly,
an assumptionwhich by any argumenton the lines
divided)ad infinitum
- also the
of De celo1.12 can be shownto be impossible
premiseat fault
it is not. This
in Physics8.10? Accordingto the eighthphysicalQuestion
perhaps surprisingconclusionis due to a furtherdistinction.The Commentatorclaims that in addition to possible and impossiblefalsehoods,
betweenaccidentaland absoluteimpossibilities.
one mustalso distinguish
From an accidentalimpossibility
follows,
only an accidentalimpossibility
and likewisefroman absoluteimpossibility
onlyan absoluteimpossibility.
- thatmotion
Now the conclusionof the argumentin questionin Aristotle
mighttake place in an instant is absolutelyimpossible.It cannot thereforehave come about fromthe merelyaccidentalimpossibility
of motion
being acceleratedindefinitely:
in thissyllogism
It is obvious
thatthepremise
thatproduced
theself-contradiction,
withtheproposition
whosenegation
is intended,
is essentially
but
together
possible
becauseno motion
thanthediurnal
faster
motion
accidentally
impossible,
[actually]
exists.
Butinasmuch
as theconclusion
inferred
from
thissyllogism
isabsolutely
imposcannotbe inferred
from
theproposition
thatis
sible,we knowthatthisconclusion
butaccidentally
Theimpossible
conclusion,
therefore,
essentially
possible
impossible.
canbe inferred
the[other]
theassumption
onlyfrom
posited,
assumption
namely,
ofan indivisible
time.81
80Averroes'
De Substantia
orbis.
Critical
Edition
Text
with
Translation
and
oftheHebrew
English
andCambridge,
Mass.1986,English
text
, ed. andtr.A. Hyman,
Commentary
Jerusalem
text11.19-22).
125-26(Hebrew
pp.
81Questions
withminor
In whatis probably
alterations.
a later
, q. 8, 11;tr.Goldstein,
addendum
totheearlyCompendium
is usedto explain
the
, thesamestructure
ofthePhysics
thatan infinite
cannot
ina finite
reside
inphysicorum
libros
,
proof
potency
body:seeEpitome
148.1
withMSS m&q.
Off.,
reading

15:14:08 PM

166

TANELIKUKKONEN

Averroes'conceptionthusemergesas a fairlysophisticated
systemof counterfactual
In
the
Commentator's
mind,we can mostfullyutilise
reasoning.
the valid syllogistic
tables when we carefullyrecord the modal statusof
every constituentof the syllogismwe are handling.This way, we can
determinethe statusof a premisewhose modalityis unknownto us, even
when arguingperimpossibile.
Information
about the real world,meanwhile,
can and should be used to deriveinformation
about the knownpremises,
as happens here in the case of consideringimaginaryacceleratedmotion.
The fact that the daily motion is the most rapid one makes a faster
motiona defactoimpossibility
It
not, however,an absoluteimpossibility.
is, to recall a passage cited earlier,one of the thingsthat are "impossible only accidentally,as happens when motion takes place in natural
is due to materialconditionswe have
things,in matter."Its impossibility
alreadyposited as obtainingin our world.
We may wrap up our assessmentof Averroesby consideringtwo tighdy
argued passages in the Paraphrase
of theDe celo.In explainingAristotle's
in
De
celo
where
it is per impossibile
2.14,
argument
supposed that the
earth is generated"in the manner some naturalphilosophersascribe to
it" (297a 12-13), Averroesremarksthat in this argumentthe premiseis
not supposed "insofaras it is impossible,but only insofaras it is possible", even thoughwe know it is both false and impossible.In such a
case, Averroes assures us, no absurditywill befall us.82A litde later,
Aristodesets out to refutethe way the Tvmaeus
produces physicalelementsout of geometricalshapes (ultimately,
pointsand lines). But when
Aristodesays that "a heavy thingmay alwaysbe heavierthan something
and a lightthinglighterthansomething"(3.1, 299a30-31),Averroesdetects
yet anotherimpossiblepremise:forthe physicalelementsdo have minimal extension(cf. 4 above), and therefore,
minimalweight.
Butifthisis so,thenthepossible
inthissyllogism
is posited
as itis posonlyinsofar
as itis impossible.
WhatI meanis thathereitis assumed
thatthe
sible,notinsofar
canbe divided
as itis heavy,
notinsofar
as itisfireorearth.
And
heavy
onlyinsofar
noimpossibility
results
from
theassumption
ofa possibility
insofar
as itisa possibility.83
Averroesagain stressesthat similardemonstrations
are oftenutilisedby
Aristodein the natural sciences.84These two examples reiteratefor us
3 wa-'l-'alam
82Talkhis
al-sam
5:fol.
, bk.2, pt.4, ch.7, Ar.text274.4-12
(Lat.AOACC,
cf.
In
De
bk.2, comm.104,LatintextinAOACC,
5:fol.167AT.
Celo,
312H-I);
83Talkhis
al-sama3
wa-'l-calam
,5:fol.
, bk.3,pt.3,ch.1,Ar.textp. 289.14-17
(Lat.AOACC
315F).
3 wa-'l-'lam
84Talkhis
5:fol.
al-sama
, bk.3, pt.3, ch. 1,Arabictext290.3(Lat.AOACC,
315G).

15:14:08 PM

PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS

167

to Avicenna,
thefactthatAverroesconsidersit possible,in contradistinction
to consider conceptual implicationson the generic as well as on the
specificlevel. Evidendy this is done prior to assigningcertainmaterial
conditions(e.g., the notionthatthereare exactlytwo heavy elements).It
is all relativeto the context:for "like illnessmay be preferableto death,
and yet illnessis not preferableabsolutely",as Averroes'example goes,
so "certainthingswhich are small withoutqualificationare at the same
time largerthan otherthings".85
7. Aquinas,AlbertofSaxony,and Buridan
between"sepWe have foundthatAverroesutilisesa kind of distinction
in
in
in
and
order
to explicate
arability thought"
"separability actuality"
Aristode'sreasoningperimpossibile.
ChristopherMartinhas in anothercontextsuggestedthat thiskind of distinctioncould have rootsin Aristotle's
Martindiscussesa curiouslyparallel developmentin the Latin
De anima.m
traditionat about the same time(the 12thcentury).In the earliestknown
treatiseson obligationslogic- the Emmeranian
treatises
and the Parisianoblig- Aristotleis
ations
as
the
of
quoted endorsing positing the impossible"in
order that one may see what followsfromit." There is nothingin the
preservedAristotleto exacdy reflectthis citation;but a somewhatsimilar principleis givenin Eudemus' name in Boethius'treatiseOn hypothetical syllogisms.
There, the concessionof a hypothesiswhich is a condition
in a sound consequence is contrastedwith a situationwhere a hypothesis "whichby no means can come to pass is yet conceded, in order that
reason may be chased to its limits."87
It appearslikelythatBoethius'expositionand endorsement
of Eudemian
acted
as
main
the
Aristotelian
for
principles
authority "positingthe imposfora certainkind of dissible",which again was used as a starting-point
putationin 12th and especially 13th centuryteachingof logic. In the
, the respondenthad the task of maintaininglogical conpositioimpossibilis
even
while
sistency
defendingan indefensibleproposition;the aim of the
was
to
break
thatconsistency.
There came to be an understanding
opponent
thatsuch disputationscould be envisionedas a kindof logical laboratory,
3
85Averroes,
Talkhis
al-sama
bk.3, pt.3, ch. 1,Arabictext288.23-24
wa-'l-calam,
(Lat.
AOACC
5:fol.
De celo3.1,299b4-5.
,
Aristotle,
315C);
86C.J.Martin,
andLiars
inMedieval
andGrammar
, in:S. Read(ed.),Sophisms
Obligations
,
Logic
at 359(Martin
alsorecalls
and7.10-11).
1029a7-19
Dordrecht,
1993,357-78,
Met.,
7.3,
87Boethius,
De Hypotheticis
Brescia1969,5; cf.Martin
1993
, ed.L. Obertello,
Syllogismis
(op.cit.,above,n. 86),358-61.

15:14:08 PM

168

TANELIKUKKONEN

whereconceptualrelationscould be testedin unconventionalconditions.88

A distinction
was also drawnin the earlyLatin traditionbetweenposforthe species or, to put the problem
sibilityforthe genus and possibility
between universalpossibilityand singularpossibility.But it
differently,
was used in a way directlyoppositeto Averroes'.For the Latins,something
possible in a singularcase mightnot be possible universally.The lesson
in this case is moralistic:thoughman may repressany particularsinful
impulse,he cannot resistthem all. It is a remarkablecoincidencethat,
e.g., someone like Simon of Tournai (in the 1160s) uses terminology
of Averroes,even thoughboth the contextand Simon's
closelyreminiscent
intentare quite different.89
In lightof all this,it would hardlybe surprising
to findconfusionwhen
the twowaysof arguingperimpossibile
and/or "in the abstract"converge,in
of the mid to late 13thcentury.That such confusiondoes
the scholasticism
commonmay be creditedto the factthatin natural
not seem particularly
the
Alexandrian-Arabic
was clearlyprevalent
exegeticaltradition
philosophy,
at first.
We have alreadyseen that,e.g.,Thomas Aquinaswas wellinformed
of the debate in the Arabic tradition.When explicatingAristotle'snatural philosophy,Aquinas, on the whole,seems to have been contentwith
Averroes' "abstraction"solution,as a comparisonof theirPhysicscommentariesshows.90Aquinas' explanationof Physics7.1 is an exceptionto
thisrule,althougheven here,his digressionappears to be mainlydue to
the objectionsposited by Avicenna (cf. 5 above). But thereis a curious
disputationsas well, as we findAquinas
vestigeof the positioimpossibilis
of Physics
7.1 in the followingmanner:
Averroes'
interpretation
explaining
and consequent
are
can be truewhoseantecedent
He claimsthatan implication
It is thereheis an irrational
animal".
likethisone:"Ifmanis a donkey,
impossible,
thatispresumed
forsomething
thatitis impossible
foreconceded
[inthisargument]
as a wholeor in part,
to cometo rest,either
to moveitself
justas itis impossible
is valid:
forfirenotto be hot,sinceitis thecauseofitsheat.Still,thiscondition
comesto rest,thewholecomesto rest."
"Ifa partofa mobile
itself
thing
moving
usestherestofa part
nowhere
ifhiswordsareconsidered
ForAristotle,
diligently,
88In addition
in Read 1993[op.cit
to thepaperscollected
., above,n. 86) see,e.g.,
andmedieval
Positio
M. Yijnsuuri,
1994,andS. Knuuttila,
, Helsinki
impossibilis
Obligationes
inMedieval
Semiotics
andLogic
in:C. Marmo
discussions
, verba.
imagines
(ed.),Vestigia,
ofthe
trinity,
Texts
1997,277-88.
, Turnhout
Theological
89SeeSimon's
Louvain
1932,44,2 and60,1 (pp.128.28, ed.J.Warichez,
Disputationes
O. Lottin,
cf.further
ofthisnotion,
Forthehistory
129.4and 170.26-171.3).
Psychologie
forthese
I thank
SimoKnuuttila
etmorale
auxXIIeetXIIIesueles
, Louvain1948,2:508ff.
references.
90See,e.g.,In Phys
., bk.4, cap.8, lect.12,n. 12;bk.6, cap. 2, lect.3, n. 9; bk.8,
In Phys
, 4:fol.359Iff.).
., bk.8, comm.23,AOACC
cap.3, lect.5, n. 6 (cf.hereAverroes,
theme.
motions
slower
on thefaster/
arevariations
Allthree
passages

15:14:08 PM

PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS

169

theforce
ofa conditional
forthepurposes
ofa statement
proposition.
having
except
thatBC comesto rest,
but"oncondition
Forhe doesnotsay"BC comesto rest",
thatthepartcomes
andagain:"oncondition
itis necessary
forAB tocometorest",
Aristotle
thisvalidimplication
to rest,thewholecomesto rest".Andfrom
proves
[hisintended]
proposition.91
case of
as the hypothetical
Aquinas' choice of exampledrawsour attention,
therebeing a creaturewhichis a man as well as a donkeywas a favourite
disputations.It was used to highlightcertain
example in positioimpossibili
and to question whetherone particular
facetsof substance-metaphysics
The
covertinterestin these matterswas
could
have
two
essences.
being
But
because Aristotle'sproofsdeal with
and
Trinitarian.92
Christological
and
naturaland not supernatural
entities, because any talkof twosubstances
is patentlyabsurd in the formercase, the analogy in the final analysis
breaks down. One thereforehas to wonder what Aquinas is gettingat.
What is crucial here is how Aquinas draws attentionto the fact that
form(condition)is valid, even if its startingpoint is
the bare syllogistic
rules of conunsound. This in itselfis in line with the positioimpossibilis
think
that
the
statement
talks
be
to
we
duct;
mightaccordingly tempted
constructed
about some kind of conceptually(even if counter-intuitively)
universe.But because Averroes' (in truth,Aquinas') response is placed
afterthe objectionraisedby Avicenna,such a temptationis to be resisted.
When viewed in context,Aquinas' intentbecomes clear. The point is
preciselyto reiteratethat when arguingfromimpossiblepremises,one
does not need to talk about any conceivableuniverseat all: one simply
takesthe conditionas it is. Because it is positedas a condition,one need
not care ifit is possible,accidentallyimpossible,or even essentiallyimpossible: one can simplystickto the realm of syntacticrelationsbetween
propositionsand "see what follows".This readingerases the whole problem of actuallysupposingthatthe part restswhile the whole moves. The
move representsa distortionof Aristotle,and it goes beyond even what
Averroeshad posited;but it makes it possibleforAquinas to re-evaluate
91 . . . dicitquodaliquaconditionalis
essevera,cuiusantecedens
estimpossibile
potest
etconsequens
sicutista:sihomo
estasinus,
estanimal
irrationale.
Concedendum
est
impossibile,
estquod,si aliquodmobile
movere
ergoquodimpossibile
ponitur
seipsum,
quodveltotum
velparseiusquiescat;
sicutimpossibile
estignem
nonessecalidum,
hocquodest
propter
sibiipsicausacaloris.
Undehaecconditionalis
estvera:si mobilis
moventis
seipsum
parsquitotum
Aristoteles
si verbaeiusdiligenter
utiescit,
autem,
considerentur,
quiescit.
nunquam
turquietepartis,
nisiperlocutionem
habentem
vimconditionalis
Nonenim
propositionis.
dicitquiescat
BC, sednecesse
AB, et iterum,
est,BC quiescente,
quiescere
quiescente
parte,
quiescit
totum
: et ex hac conditionali
demonstrai."
In Phys
vera,Aristoteles
.,
propositum
Aquinas,
inAverroes
seeInPhys.
7,cap. 1,lect.1,n. 6. Fora parallel
7, comm.2, fol.307I-308C.
92See Knuuttila
1997(op.cit.,above,n. 88).

15:14:08 PM

170

TANELIKUKKONEN

the statusofAristotle's
argument.Although"Averroessaysthatthisdemonstrationis not of the typeof simpliciter
demonstrations
but instead of the
called demonstrations
typeof demonstrations
fromsignsor demonstrations
in
which
certain
conditions
are
,
quia
used",93Aquinas can revertto the
view that Aristotle'sdemonstration
may be propter
quidafterall.
Let us in closing brieflyexamine some other Latin views regarding
Aristotle's
indirectarguments.BenotPatar has recentlyeditedan Exposition
and Questions
onthePhysics
whichhas traditionally
been attributedto Albert
of Saxony. In the expositionpart of thiswork,the distinctions
made by
Averroeswithregardto Physics
6.2, 232b21 are reproducedwithoutcomment. Motion, insofaras it is motion, does not exclude any velocity.
When asked what mightwarrantsuch an exclusion,the author takes a
liberal attitude:the motion of a specificbody, e.g., the celestialbody,
may cause a specificvelocityto be impossible,but so may its mover.The
writerdoes not differentiate
betweenthe two alternatives.94
In the Questions
the problemis not touchedupon anymore.The authordoes pick up one
aspectofwhathad been Avempace'ssolution.Velocityincreasedad infinitum
does not equal an infinitevelocity,since the term"infinite"should here
be used categorematically,
instead of syncategorematically.95
As for Physics7.1, the author of the Exposition
and Questions
evidently
workswith the foregonetradition.He does not seem overlyconcerned
with the attendantproblematisations.
The expositionpart simplyreproduces Aristotle'sproofin the formof a syllogism,much like Alexander
had done.96In the Questions
, the problematicnature of the syllogismis
not addressedat all. Instead, one question focuseson the broader issue
of whethersome thing'sbeing moved of itself(a se) is possible.All of the
traditional
candidatesforself-motion
are produced(soul,elementalmotion,
93"SeddicitAverroes istademonstratio
nonestde genere
demonstrationum
simquod
demonstrationum
demonstrationes
, sedde genere
pliciter,
, veldemonstraquaedicitur
signi
tionesquia
conditionalium."
In Phys
, in quibusestusustalium
., 7, cap. 1, lect.
Aquinas,
of/from
mina'l-dal3il
1, n. 6. The term"demonstration
signs"(Arabic:
) is usedin this
intheCommentary
connection
onDe Celo
95:". . . demonstrationes
autem
ducentes
, 1,comm.
ad impossibile
suntgeneris
5:fol.64D).(Unfortunately,
thisfolioleaf
(AOACC,
signorm"
is missing
from
Gerhard
Endress'
facsimile
edition
oftheArabicCommentary
onDe Celo)
94"DicitCommentator debet
nonrpugnt
motus
quod
intelligi
quodmotui
inquantum
hocbenesibirepugnet
estmotus
talismobilis
veliciori,
quantumlibet
quamvis
inquantum
et proveniens
a talimotore:
et explicat
de motucaeli."Expositio
etquaestiones
inAristotelis
adAlbertm
deSaxonia
lib.6, tr.1, cap. 3, ed. B. Patar,3 vols.,Paris
attributae,
Physicam
account
is evident
1999,vol.1,283,74-7(fol.42ra).The samekindofcombinatorial
in,
see hisIn Physicam
Aristotelis
etQuaestiones,
ed. Venice1501,
e.g.,Walter
Burley:
Expositio
Hildesheim
& NewYork1972,fol.179va-180rb.
repr.
95Expositio
etquaestiones
, lib.6, q. 7, 2:910-16
(fol.146rbff.).
96Op.cit.
, lib.7, tr.1,cap. 1, 2:318-19
(fol.47rb).

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
ARGUMENTS
PERIMPOSSIBILE

17 1

intellection,and will); against this, the authoritativestatementsof the

Philosopherand the Commentatorare recalled.97The conclusionis that
in self-movers
one mustdistinguish
betweenpassive and activepotentialitiesand that only in the case of the FirstCause is thereno passivityat
all. The Questions
thus seek a harmonisingsolutionheavilydependenton
the Islamic philosophersAverroesand Avicenna.98
Patar contendsthatthe Exposition
are actuallyattributable
and Questions
to Jean Buridan. In lightof our presentinvestigation
this seems doubtin
for
another
set
of
on
Aristotle's
thatunquesful,however,
Questions
Physics
of Aristotleis
tionablybelongs to Buridan a verydifferent
interpretation
advanced. Accordingto Buridan, somethingodd seems to be going on
in Physics
7.1, forAristotlethereappears to posit in two successivearguan indiments,no less somethingsimplyimpossiblewhen constructing
rectargument.We know as a matterof principle,however,thatanything
followsfrom a contradiction,so there seems to be little sense in the
philosopher'sprocedure.Now this principle(that froma contradiction,
or "the simplyimpossible,anythingfollows"),99
commonlyknownas the
firstparadox of implication,had not been introducedin this context
before.(The principlethat the impossibleonly followsfromthe impossiand the notionthatfroman impossiblepremise
ble is altogetherdifferent,
followis also not the same.) It was in factfirst
further
only
impossibilities
in 12th centurydiscussionsquite independently
formulated
of naturalphiBuridan's
use
of
the
here
is
therefore
losophy.100
principle
noteworthy.
Buridan summariseswhat he takes to be the solutionpropoundedby
Averroes,as well as "many others".(Presumablywe may count Aquinas
among these people.) The Commentator'sresponseto the problem had
been to say that the auxiliaryhypothesespostulatedin the argumentsof
Physics7.1 (partial rest and an infinitemotion)are only impossiblewith
regardto "special" (i.e., specific)bodies; as regardsthe common nature
of bodies in motion,however,theyare not impossible.On
[ratiocommunis)
97Op.cit
The authorhas sufficient
ofAverroes'
., lib. 7, q. 1, 3:936-38.
knowledge
to citetheCommentator's
claimtherethattheimpossibility
of
Metaphysics
commentary
absolute
self-motion
is self-evident.
3 al-tabc
98Cf.Avicenna,
Al-sam
The sameharmonising
is also
, 87.12-20.
tendency
seenin thefactthatin a variant
arealsobrought
in thisall-embracMS, thePlatonists
Cf.op.cit.,3:941,n. to 1.28.
ing99
synthesis.
. . ex eo quodestsimpliciter
omniasequuntur":
Buridan,
Quaestiones
impossibile
octo
libros
Paris1509,repr.Frankfurt
a.M. 1964,bk.7, q. 3, fol.
Aristotelis,
super
Physicorum
105rb(thepagecountreads"xcv").
100See K.Jacobi,
, in:P. Dronke
(ii):thelater
Logic
twelfth
centuiy
ofTwelfth(ed.),A History
Western
at 232;C.J.Martin,
William's
, Cambridge
1988,227-251,
Machine,
Century
Philosophy
in:Journal
ofPhilosophy,
83 (1986),564-72.

15:14:08 PM

172

TANELIKUKKONEN

Buridan's analysis,this interpretation

does not work,because the things
are
it
posited
simplyimpossible: simplygoes againstthe common nature
of somethingin motionthat it could (have a part which is at the same
timeat) rest,and consequentlythe same holds trueforeverysingleactual
body.Buridan'sobjection,then,takesroughlythe same formas Avicenna's:
if thereis no imaginableworld in which the hypothesisis true,then it
is absolutelyimpossible.One cannot talk "in the abstract",as it were;
one mustalwaystalkabout some (possible)world.(See Quoestiones
, fol.105rb.)
Buridan's own solutionto the problem purportsto move along just
mentionedin Physics7.1
such lines. Because the apparentimpossibilities
is
must referto some kind of possibility,the only viable interpretation
that Aristotleis in fact operatingwith a distinctionbetween divine and
Aristotleassumes things
naturalpossibilities.As a matterof fact,whenever
which are impossiblewithinthe contextof this world, what he has in
mind is this distinction.Aristotleis, or he must be, talkingabout other
worldsGod could have created.101
This readingof Aristotleis certainlynovel; it is also blatantlyanachronistic.Even Buridan has to admit that some people are likelyto retort
that Aristotlewould not recognise"supernatural"as distinctfrom"natural" possibilities.They would say that forAristotle,thereis only a sin(fol. 105rb). For Buridan,the oppositeis proven
gle kind of potentiality
by the fact that Aristotlesays of many thingsimpossiblenaturally( per
that theyare nevertheless
naturales)
possible absolutely(simpliciter).
potentias
Buridan conjures up a long list of apparent impossibilities
accepted by
Aristotlefor the purposesof argument:the heavens come to a halt; the
spheresare alternatelydivided and continuous;the heavens move faster
and slower;a corruptiblethingis presumedto be subtlerthan fire;corthereis somethingoutsidethe world. Most
poreal bodies interpenetrate;
of the itemson the listcan be tracedto the foregonediscussion;the ones
that are new in Buridan can be understoodon the basis of the former.
in fact"to a largedegree
All of thisforBuridangoes to showhow Aristotle
The discoveryhas
took part withus in the true faith",i.e., Christianity.
Buridan
tells
us.102
or
so
he
Buridan
prideshimselfon
greatjoy,
brought
this
clues
towards
to
notice
the
the
first
(cf.fol. 105vainterpretation
being
101Fol. 105rb;cf.also fol.104ra-va.
inBuridan's
S. Knuuttila,
See further
Necessities
andNatural
& J. Zupko(eds),TheMetaphysics
Natural
, in:J.M.M.H.Thijssen
Philosophy
Buridan
, Leiden2001,65-76.
Philosophy
ofJohn
102"Respondeo
in vera
nobiscum
Aristoteles
participans
magnam
partem
quodforte
fide. . . gaudeogavisus":
Quoestiones
, fol.105rb.

15:14:08 PM

ARISTOTLE'S
PERIMPOSSIBILE
ARGUMENTS

173

b). Why Buridan shouldwish to presentAristotlein such favourablelight

in his Questions
on thePhysicsis uncertain.103
His comments regarding
Aristotle'smodal reasoningin otherworksare less than complimentary.104
For all that Buridan in an effortto save the Philosopherheaps scorn
upon his Commentator,he stillcontinuesto make use of Averroes'analysis regardingthe way Aristotleproceeds with his indirectarguments.
Buridan makes note of the fact that an absolutelyimpossibleconclusion
onlyfollowsfroman absolutelyimpossiblepremise.And he reiteratesthe
factthatotherkindsof impossibilities
can accordinglybe introducedinto
an argumentwith an absolutelyimpossibleconclusionwithoutthereby
form(fol. 105rb).It would thereforeappear
compromisingthe syllogistic
thatAverroes'analysisof the syllogisms
employedin Aristotle'sarguments
in naturalphilosophyoutlivedthe modal model on which it was based.
This is all the more remarkable,since it is unlikelythat such syllogisms
lay under Aristotle'sargumentsin the firstplace.105
Helsinki
ofFinland
Academy
103Conceivably
haveplayedsomepart.Consider
thatBuridan
university
politics
might
wasoneofthefewmajorthinkers
tovoluntarily
a Master
remain
oftheArts;andrecall
thatthenewmodaltheory
in the14thcentury
advanced
Ockhamand
by,e.g.,Scotus,
Buridan
himself
wassometimes
calledthe"theological"
ofmodalities.
theory
(ForthedevelseeKnuuttila
1993{op.cit.,
TheclaimthatAristotle
himabove,n. 27),138-75.)
opments,
selfrecognised
theneedfora distinction
between
natural
and divinepossibilities
could
thenbe takenas a declaration
ofindependence
ofsorts:
it wouldobviate
theneedfor
to comein andcorrect
Aristotle
on thematter.
Cf.thenextnote,however.
theologians
104Forinstance,
in hiscommentary
on De celoBuridan
criticises
Aristotle's
argument
fortheworld's
See Ioannis
Buridani
(inDe celo1.12)on formal
incorruptibility
grounds.
etquaestiones
inAristotelis
De celo
, ed. B. Patar,Paris& Leuven1996,Quaestiones
expositio
,
bk.1, qq. 24-26,and,e.g.,thescathing
review
of
givenat theveryendoftheExpositio
thefirst
book:"... istetractatus
nonhaberet
multam
efficaciam
nequenaturaliter
loquendo
"
Cf.further
(bk.1,tr.4, cap.3; Patared.,p. 88; addedemphases).
nequesupernaturaliter
Aristotle
andCorruptibility.
A Discussion
De Celo
I.xii
, in:Religious
C.J.F.Williams,
ofAristotle,
1 (1965),
95-107and203-15,
andJ.VanRijen,
Losic
Studies,
Aspects
ofAristotle's
ofModalities.
Dordrecht
1989,73-102.
105
Thanks
areduetotheUniversity
ofToronto
Institute
Philosophy
Dept.,thePontifical
ofMedieval
theAcademy
ofFinland
and theBasilian
Fathers
ofSt. Michael's
Studies,
thisresearch
I thanktheanonymous
reviewers
at Vivarium
Collegeformaking
possible.
andAlfred
thismanuscript.
PartsofthispaperwerepreIvryfortheir
helpinpreparing
sented
at theMedieval
Seminar
at Trinity
in Marchand
Philosophy
College,
Cambridge
' in
at a symposium
on 'Averroes'
Commentaries
on Aristotle's
and Metaphysics
Physics
inJune2001. I wishto thank
andSteven
forinviting
Jerusalem
JohnMarenbon
Harvey
metospeakandChristopher
Charles
Manekin
andRuthGlasner
fortheir
searchMartin,
ingquestions.

15:14:08 PM

L'extension
de la listedes modalits
dans les commentaires
du Perihermeneias
et des Sophistici Elenchi de Guillaumed'Ockham}
ERNESTO PERINI-SANTOS

Il y a une differenceimportanteentre les thoriesmodales des comet sur le

mentairesde Guillaume d'Ockham sur les Rfutations
Sophistiques
Perihermeneias.
La listedes modalitsn'est pas la mme dans les deux cas.
distinctesde 'proposiCette difference
est la consquence de dfinitions
tion modale' et, plus largement,de deux dveloppementsdistinctsde la
prsenteune thorie
logique modale. UExpositioin LibrumPerihermeneias
modale la foisplus cohrenteet plus prochede celle de la SummaLogicae.
Nous prsentonsd'abord les deux versionsde la thoriemodale, ensuite
nous proposons une brve comparaison avec d'autres extensionsde la
listedes modalitsau Moyen Age, notammentcelle de Jean Buridan.Cet
articlepoursuitun double objectif: la comparaisonentreces deux textes
et l'indicationde la spcificitde l'approche ockhamiennedes modalits,
qui ne semble pas avoir t perue par les commentateurs.
1. L'extension
de la listedes modalits
chezOckham
L'extensionde la liste des modalitsn'est pas la mme dans ces deux
textes.Dans le chapitreconsacr au paralogismede la compositionet de
Elenchi
la divisiondans le premierlivre du commentairedes Sophistici
,
Ockham propose une liste de six modes, le vrai, le faux, le ncessaire,
- nous
et le possible
le contingent
appelleronsles termesde cette
l'impossible,
dans
listeles modalitsalthiques.Aprs avoir dit que touteproposition2
doit
tre
un
dictum
un
mode
avec
est
distingue
propositionis
pos
laquelle
1 Nousremercions
pourlescomJolBiard,ClaudePanaccioet IrneRosier-Catach
aussiHubert
Nousremercions
de cetarticle.
dansla composition
mentaires
utiles
Hubien,
Priora
inAnalitica
des Quaestiones
de sondition
, ClaudePanacciopour
pourl'utilisation

de ce textedanssonsminaire
antrieure
de prsenter
uneversion
nousavoirpermis
etJulieBrumberg-Chaumont,
de Qubec Trois-Rivires,
l'Universit
pourla correction
du franais.
2 Le terme
desentits
desphrases,
c'est--dire
renvoie
danscetarticle
'proposition'
de 'propositi.
suivant
trevraiesou fausses,
l'usagemdival
linguistiques
pouvant
Vivarium
40,2

BrillNV,Leiden,
2002
Koninklijke
- www.brill.nl
online
Alsoavailable

15:14:13 PM

LES MODALITS
DANSLES COMMENTAIRES
D'OCKHAM

175

selon la compositionet la division,le Venerabilis

Inceptor
prsentela liste
des modes :
Modiautemvocantur
: verum,
continsex,scilicet
falsum,
necessarium,
impossibile,
gensetpossibile.3
D'autres termes,ajoute le philosophe anglais, peuvent avoir un comportementsemblable:
Et sicutdictum
estde propositionibus
in quibusponuntur
telles
modi'necessarium',
dicendum
est
etc.,vel'necessario',
etc.,eodemmodouniformiter
'impossibile'
'potest'
de talibus
in quibusponuntur
istimodi'perse','peraccidens',
etsi
propositionibus
totispropositionibus
sicutaliimodi.Namsicut
qui sintconsimiles,
qui competunt
dicitur
dealiquapropositione
totaquodestvera,velfalsa,
velnecessaria,
velpossibilis,
velimpossibilis,
itadicitur
de totapropositione
quodestperse velperaccidens.4
Les expressionsperse' et peraccidens'parce qu'elles peuventtreattribues
des propositionsentires,peuventtre considrescomme des modes,
et les propositions
se comportent
commeles propositions
qui les contiennent
avec les sixpremires
modalits,du moinsen ce qui concernele paralogisme
de la divisionet de la composition.Il n'est pas tout fait clair si les
' doiventtre
modes 'perse' et 'peraccidens
ajouts la premireliste ou
non,mais ce n'estpeut-trepas essentieldans ce contexte,une foisque l'on
a comprisque la distinction
faitedans le passage les concernegalement.
Cette mme caractristiquegouvernel'associationplus restreinte
entre
les modalitsalthiqueset les termespistmiquesdans l'examen du paralogismede l'accident:
autem
concluditur
conclusio
cumaliquacondicione
totam
Aliquando
respiciente
propositionem
essefallacia
accidentis
sinefallacia
; et tuncpotest
consequentis
quantumsintverae.Et istomodoesthicfallacia
accidentis
: scioquod
cumquepraemissae
omnistriangulus
habettres; istetriangulus
esttriangulus
; ergoscioquodistetrianhicestfallacia
accidentis
'scioquodCoriscus
esthomo;
gulushabettres.Similiter
Coriscus
estveniens
esthomo'; similiter
hic'omnem
hominem
; ergoscioquodveniens
esseanimaiestnecessarium
esseanimaiestneces; Sortesesthomo; ergoSortem
et hocaccipiendo
illasde necessario
in sensucompositionis.5
sarium',
propositiones
Si les termespistmiquesn'y sont pas dits tre des modes, le traitqui
les unitaux modalitsalthiquesest le faitd'treprdicablede touteune
proposition.Il ne semble pas que l'on puisse tendrela liste des modalits partirde ce passage, les termespistmiquessont en effetassocis
au seul cas des propositionsmodales au sens compos, on ne sait pas si
3 Cf.Guillaume
Libros
Elenchorum
d'Ockham,
, I, 3, 6, 60-61,d. F. Del
Expositio
super
A. Gambatese
et S. Brown,
36.
Punta,
(OPh
III),
4 Exp.Elenchi
d. Del Punta,Gambatese
et Brown,
I, 3, 6, 106-113,
(OPhIII), 37.
5 Exp.Elench
et Brown,
., I, 6, 3, 30-39,d. Del Punta,Gambatese
(OPhIII), 51.

15:14:13 PM

176

PERINI-SANTOS
ERNESTO

les propositionsqu'ils affectent

peuventrecevoiraussi une interprtation
au sens divis. Si tel ne devait pas tre le cas, les termespistmiques
semblablesaux modalits; en fait,les propone seraientque partiellement
sitionsavec des termespistmiquespeuventrecevoiraussi une interprentreces termeset des expressions
.6 La diffrence
tationin sensudivisionis

comme 'pers et peraccidentsemble s'estomper.

Dans l'examen du paralogismede l'accident,7Ockham traiteles termes pistmiquescomme des modes, encore une fois,parce qu'ils peuvent affectertoute une proposition, sans que prdicats modaux et
pistmiquesne soientjamais explicitementassocis. Si la proximitdu
comportementlogique des termesmodaux et des prdicatspistmiques
est reconnue,la possibilitde les regrouperdans une catgorieunique
n'est pas considre.
tendsans ambigutla listedes modaPerihermenias
Or YExpositio
in librum
lits tous les termespouvant tre attribus une propositionentire,y
comprisles termespistmiques:
Et estdicendum
magisestmodalis
quam
quodalia causaquarealiquapropositio
nisiquiain aliquapropositione
alianonpotest
ponitur
aliquismodusseu
assignari
terminus
velponitur
verificabilis
terminus
de totapropositione
idem,
significans
aliquis
de totapropositione.8
diverso
modo,cumtalitermino
praedicabili
quamvis
in libros
Ce critretaitprsentde maniretimidedans YExpositio
Elmchorum,
'
'
comme
des modes,
o il permettaitde considrer'perse et 'peraccidens
quoi que d'une faon peu explicite,et d'envisagerl'adjonctiondes termes pistmiquesaux modalitsalthiques.Il est ici clairementannonc
et sert construirela liste des termesmodaux. Si le degr de modalit
ne semble correspondre rien dans la thorie ockhamienne,les conde 'propositionmodale' pour la constitution
squences de cettedfinition
de la liste des termesmodaux sont pleinementassumes.
Cette dfinitionconvientaux modalitstraitespar Alistte,le ncessaire, l'impossible,le possible et le contingent,mais elle s'applique aussi
bien d'autrestermes:
in quibusnonponitur
modales
suntpropositiones
Ex istopatetquodmultae
aliquis
'verum'
vel'falsum'
in
omnis
nam
modorum,
qua
ponitur
propositio
praedictorum
6 Cf.Exp.Eiench
etBrown,
Gambatese
d.Del Punta,
(OPhIII),236.
., II, 9, 3, 19-27,
7 Cf.,parexemple,
d. Del Punta,
., II, 9, 4, 56-61et II, 9, 4, 144-159,
Exp.Eiench
etBrown,
Gambatese
(OPhIII), 239; 241-2.
8 Guillaume
Aristotelis
Perhermeneias
inLibrum
d'Ockham.
, II, 5, 4, 34-38,d.
Expositio
et S. Brown,
A. Gambatese
(OPhII), 460.

15:14:13 PM

LES MODALITS
DANSLES COMMENTAIRES
D'OCKHAM

177

vel'demonstratum'
vel'scitum'
vel'creditum'
et huiusmodi,
estpropositio
modalis.
Undeomnestalessuntmodales
'omnem
hominem
esseanimalestscitum',
'omnem
habere
tresestdemonstratum',
ethuiusmodi,
ethocquiaintalibus
triangulum
propositionibus
ita ponitur
de totapropositione
sicutin
aliquisterminus
qui verificatur
aliis; igitur
itaeritpropositio
modalis.9
Il n'y a aucun doute quant aux modalitsacceptes,ni sur le critrequi
permetde les considrercomme telles. La liste de modes ainsi engendre resteouverte: tout ce qui satisfait ce critreest appel mode.
La thoriedes propositionsmodales dveloppe la suite prend en
examinela concomptecetteextension.Ainsi,lorsquele Venerabilis
Inceptor
versionentre les propositionsau sens divis et au sens compos ayant
ou un nom propre et pour prdicat
pour sujet un pronom dmonstratif
un termecommun,il prend soin de prciserque cela ne s'applique pas
aux modalitsconcernantnotre connaissance.10Cette remarque indique
qu'une thse gnrale sur une propositionmodale concerne en principe
tous les prdicatsmodaux de la liste tendue des modalitset non pas
les seules modalitsalthiques.
La dfinitionde 'propositio
modalis'l'extensionde la listedes modalits,
et la portedes thsesde la logique modale sont identiquesdans le commentairedu Perhermendas
et dans la SummaLogicae.Le mode est dfini
dans ce derniertextecomme ce qui est prdicablede toute une proposition.11Les modes ne sauraient se limiteraux modalits traitespar
:
Aristote,tout comme dans le commentairedu Perhermendas
Sed talesmodisuntpluresquamquatuor
: namsicutpropositio
alia est
praedicti
aliaimpossibilis,
aliapossibilis,
aliacontingens,
itaaliapropositio
estvera,
necessaria,
aliafalsa,aliascita,aliaignota,
aliaprolata,
aliascripta,
aliaconcepta,
aliacredita,
aliaopinata,
aliadubitata,
et sicde aliis.12
Les modalitsnon aristotliciennes
sont objet d'un traitementspcifique,
qui vientsystmatiquement
aprs l'examen du ncessaire,du possible,de
l'impossibleet du contingent.13
9 Exp.Per.,II, 5, 4, 53-60,d. Gambatese
et Brown,
(OPhII), 461.
10Exp.
d. Gambatese
et Brown,
Per.,II, 5, 4, 220-31,
(OPhII), 467.
11Guillaume
Summa
G. Gi et S.
d'Ockham,
, II, 1, 44-48,d. Ph. Boehner,
Logicae
dicitur
modalis
Brown,
(OPhI), 242-3: "Circaquodestsciendum
quodpropositio
propter
modum
additum
inpropositione.
Sednonquicumque
modussufficit
ad faciendum
propositionem
sedoportet
de totapropositione,
etideo
modalem,
quodsitmoduspraedicabilis
dicitur
'moduspropositionis'
verificabilis
de ipsamet
proprie
tamquam
propositione.".
12Summa
Gi et Brown,
243.
, II, 1,50-54,d. Boehner,
Logicae
(Ph
I),
13Cf.Summa , II, 29,les
30,41 43 et 64,de III-1, ou encoreIII-3,
Logicae
chapitres
Gi et Brown,
11,39-55,d. Boehner,
(OPhI), 638-9.

15:14:13 PM

178

ERNESTO
PERINISANTO
S

2. Les diffrentes
extensions
de la listedesmodalits
La natureet la raison de cette extensionde la liste des modalitsn'ont
d'Ockhamsurle Perikermerwas.
pas t saisiespar les diteursdu commentaire
Le renvoi,en note en bas de page, Siger de Courtraiet Ammonius
nous semble en effettrompeur.14
Il est vrai que ces auteurs ont considr que le nombre des modes n'tait point limit ceux traitspar
Aristote,mais la liste tendue des modalitsne correspondpas du tout
celle propose par le Venerabilis
Inceptor.
L'extensiondes modalitsconsidrepar Ammoniuset Sigerde Courtrai
se retrouvechez Boce. Pour le romain,le nombrede propositions
modales
est beaucoup plus importantque les quatre modalitsaristotliciennes,
puisque les adverbesy sont inclus:
Omnispropositio
autsineullomodosimpliciter
ut Socrates
ambulat
pronuntiatur,
veldiesestvelquicquid
etsineullaqualitate
suntautem
aliae
simpliciter
praedicatur.
dicuntur
velociter
ambulat.
ambulationi
modis,ut estSocrates
quae cumpropriis
enimSocratis
modusestadditus,
cumdicimus
eumvelociter
ambulare,
quomodo
enimambulet,
id quodde ambulatione
eiusvelociter
significai
praedicamus.15
Il n'y a pas de critrequi spare les modes aristotliciens
des adverbes,
si ce n'est le faitqu'Aristotene traiteque des premiers.Cette approche
des modalits,que nous appelonsadverbiale,se retrouve plusieursreprises
au long du Moyen Age. Ainsi plusieursauteursdistinguent
deux sens de
ou
exclure
les
adverbes
du
sens
'mode', davantage,pour
propre.16
L'hritage
textuelmontreune tension entre les quatre modalitsaristotliciennes,
d'un ct, et les adverbesbociens,de l'autre.
Ammoniuset Siger de Courtrai se situentdans cette tradition,l'extension de la liste des modalits aux adverbes se fait partir d'une
dfinitionde 'mode' comme modificateurdu verbe. Ainsi peut-on lire
dans la traductionlatine d'Ammonius:
14Exp.Per.,II, 5, 4, d. Gambatese
etBrown,
(OPhII), 461.
15Boce,InLibrum
Aristotel
DeInterpretationen
editio
secunda
, d.Meiser,
Leipzig1880,377,
4-11.
16Guillaume
- 'Introductions
de Sherwood.
William
inlogicami,
1.7.1,21-27,
ofSherwood
d.Ch.H.Lohr,P. KunzeetB. Mussler,
in: Traditio,
39 (1983),219-99.
Voirainsi,entre
Guillaume
de Sherwood,
autres,
Introduo,
1, 7, 1,d. Lohre.a.,232,21-7: "Modusigiturdicitur
communiter
etproprie.
Communiter
sic: Modusestdeterminado
alicuius
actus.
Et secundum
hocconvenit
omniadverbio.
sic: Modusestdeterminado
Proprie
praedicati
in subiecto
uthicpatet: 'Homonecessario
estanimal.'
Determinatur
enimhic,quomodo
inhereat
subiecto.
Si autemdiceretur
: 'Homocurrit
solumdetervelociter',
predicatum
minatur
actusverbisecundum
se etnoninherentia
eiuscumsubiecto.
Undea talibus
non
dicitur
modalis."
propositio

15:14:13 PM

LES MODALITS
D'OCKHAM
DANSLES COMMENTAIRES

179

Modusquidemigitur
estvoxsignificativa
inestpraedicatum
subiecto,
puta
qualiter
cumdicimus
'lunavelociter
restituitur'.17
velociter,
Le nombrede modes est videmmentnorme,ce sonten faitles adverbes,
dont personnene songerait dresserune liste:
nontamen
estcompreautem
natura
nonestinfinitus,
[. . .] numerus
ipsorum
quidem
hensibilis
sicutnequenumerus
universalium
subiectorum
velpraedicatorum.18
nobis,
En renvoyant Ammonius,Siger de Courtraia dans l'espritl'extension
des modalitsaux adverbes. Aristote,selon lui, ne compte que quatre
modes parce que
ad istosquosexprimit
modispereduci
[. . .] omnes
possunt
Philosophus,
tamquam
cialesad generales.19
moins
Si les modes sont les adverbes,cette rductionsemble difficile,
qu'il n'ait en vue, plus modestement,une parent de comportementde
Il reste que l'augmentationdu
ceux-ci et des modalitsaristotliciennes.
nombredes modalitsest bien accepte,au pointd'treincommensurable
par notreesprit,mais il s'agit d'une liste d'adverbes.
Or cetteextensiondes modalitsn'est pas du toutcelle d'Ockham. Le
rsultatobtenu n'est pas le mme, parce que les principesde la constructiondes deux listessont diffrents.
Sur ce point,le seul antcdent
d'Ockham que nous ayons trouv est un autre franciscainoxonien du
dbut du XIVe sicle, Martin d'Alnwick. Son activit est lgrement
antrieure celle du Venerabilis
. Il faut prendrecette hypothse
Inceptor
avec la prudencede mise pour ce typed'affirmation
touchantle Moyen
Age. Martin tait dans le couventfranciscaind'Oxford en 1300, et y a
t lecteuren 1311.20Sa dfinitiondes modalitsest trsproche de celle
d'Ockham, mme si elle est moins dveloppe:
Terminus
modalis
estomnis
talisterminus
velpredicatur,
velsaltem
suquisubicitur
bicivelpredicali
alicuius
sicut
totalis,
potest,
respectu
complexi
respectu
propositionis.21
17Ammonius,
Commentaire
surlePeHermeneias
Aristote.
Traduction
deGuillaume
deMoerbeke
,
d. G. Verbeke,
Louvain1961,388.
18Ammonius,
Commentaire
1961{op.cit.,supra,note17),388.
, d. Verbeke
19Sigerde Courtrai,
vanKortrijk,
Commentator
vanPerihermeneias
, d. G. Verhaak,
eger
Bruxelles
1964,148.
20Cf.A.B.Emden,
A Biographical
toA.D. 1500, vol.I,
oftheUniversity
Register
ofOxford
Oxford
1957,26-7.
Martin
De Veritate
etFalsitate
14th
d'Alnwick,
, 13,dans: L.M.de Rijk,Some
Propositionis
Tracts
ontheProbationes
Terminorum
, Nijmegen
1982,10.
Century

15:14:13 PM

180

S
PERINISANTO
ERNESTO

Il en tire la consquence pour l'extensionde la liste des modes. Outre

les modalitsaristotliciennes,
sontmodaux les verbesconcernantles actes
de l'espritet le terme per se'22 D'autres caractristiquesde la thorie
modale ockhamiennese trouventchez lui, comme le faitque toutesles
modales,
propositionsqui ont un termemodal ne sontpas ncessairement
le termedoit tre pris modaliter
; il doit tre attribu
, et non pas indefinite
toute la proposition,et non pas tre une partie du sujet et du prdicat.23Sans dvelopperdavantage ce parallle,il nous suffitde marquer
la spcificitde l'extension des modalits de Martin d'Alnwick et de
de celle qui faitdes adverbesdes modes,
Guillaumed'Ockham, differente
dans la traditionbocienne.
de la thorieockhamienneavec Siger de Courtrai
Si le rapprochement
et Ammoniusn'est videmmentpas correct,il y a encore une autrevoie.
Il s'agit des textesqui explorentla proximitdes comportements
logiques
des modalitsalthiqueset des termespistmiques,assez nombreuxau
secondaire,notamMoyen Age et maintesfoistudisdans la littrature
ment par Weidemann,24Knuuttila25et Boh.26 Cette parent de comportementapparat surtoutdans l'applicationde la distinctionentresens
diviset sens compos et dans l'examen de la validitdes infrencesavec
Le raples propositionsaffectesdes termesmodaux et pistmiques.27
prochemententreces deux typesde termesremonte,d'une certainefaon,
au XIIe sicle, qui concerne
aux discussionssur le statutde Yenuntiabile
des phrasesenchssesdans des contextescrsaussi bien par les modalits
22Alnwick,
etFabitate,
De Veritate
13,d. De Rijk1982{op.cit.,supra,note22), 10:
actumanime,ut 'scire',
concernentes
"Sic autemdico: talestermini
,
nescire'
'ymaginarf
'
'
'
'
cum
dicipotest
modalis,
', dubitare
[...]; et istadictioperse' que satisproprie
intellegere
ut'homo
estanimai
de aliquocomplexo
totali,
perse'"
ipsapotest
predicali
23Cf.Alnwick,
note22),10;
etFalsitate
De Veritate
, 13,d.De Rijk1982(op.cit.,
supra,
et Brown,
(OPhII), 461; id.,Summa
Ockham,
Exp.Per.,II, 5, 4, 44-45,d. Gambatese
III-1, 121-122,
d. Boehner,
Gi,et Brown,
(OPhI), 467.
Logicae,
24Cf.H. Weidemann,
dans: Archiv
beiWalter
desWissens
Anstze
zu einer
Burleigh,
Logik
derPhilosophie,
firGeschichte
62 (1980),32-45.
25Cf.S. Knuuttila,
inmedieval
Modalities
, London1993,176-96.
Philosophy
26Cf.I. Boh,Epistemic
Middle
intheLater
, London1993.
Ages
Logic
27Cf.Weidemann
Sensuscompositus,
1980[op.cit.,supra,note24); N. Kretzmann,
7 (1981),195-229
dans:Medioevo,
andpropositional
Sensusdivisus,
; J. Biard,Les
Attitudes,
dans: Vivarium,
etGuillaume
deSaxeentre
: Albert
dusavoir
Heytesbury,
JeanBuridan
Sophismes
imMittelalter,
undLogik
desWollens
ber
27 (1989),36-50; S. Knuuttila,
Argumentation
praktische
- Scholastische
undsemandans: K. Jacobi(d.),Argumentationstheorie
zu denlogischen
Forschungen
de
korrekten
tische
, Leiden1993,612-3.Une importante
partiede l'histoire
Folgerns
Regeln
etRichard
de Guillaume
autour
se dveloppe
cetteassociation
; cf.
Billingham
Heytesbury
Roma1972,540-600.
dellatarda
A. Maier,Terminologia
Scolastica,
logica

15:14:13 PM

LES MODALITS
DANSLES COMMENTAIRES
D'OCKHAM

181

althiques que par les expressionspistmiques.28S'il est clair que la

dfinitionockhamiennede la modalits'inscritdans cette ligne,encore
faut-ildistinguerl'admission d'un comportementlogique commun aux
termespistmiqueset althiquesde leur runionsous un conceptunique.
Il ne s'agitpas seulementd'une affairede dfinitionstipulative,
bien que
ce soit aussi cela, mais de l'ensembledes outilsthoriquesmis en uvre.
Ainsi Gauthier Burleigh,qui reconnatla parent de comportement
des termespistmiqueset des modalitsalthiques,ne les runitpas sous
un concept unique. Seules les derniressont pour lui des modalits:
Ad formam
dubitationis
dicendum
quodnonomnisdictiodenotans
propositionem
facitpropositionem
sed solumdictiones
modalem,
significantes
qualitatem
propositionis
denominatis
ed.Venetiis
addentes
, denominantis
(sicBoh
1497)radone
compositions
faciunt
modalem.
Et propter
aliquidsupracompositionem
hoc,"scipropositionem
ethuiusmodi
nonfaciunt
tum",
"dubitatum",
modalem,
propositionem
quiasignificant
animeet nonqualitatem
Sed "contingens",
et
qualitatem
"necesse",
propositionis.
huiusmodi
et ideocumaccipiuntur
ut determisignificant
qualitatem
propositionis,
nantverbum
ratione
faciunt
modalem.29
compositions
propositionem
Ce texteest reprsentatif
d'une traditionqui semble dominanteau XIVe
sicle. Elle associe le comportement
logique de ces deux typesde termes
sans les runirdans la mme catgorie.
Jean Buridan propose une versionintressanted'une thorieassociant
termespistmiques
et modalitsalthiques,en quelque sorteentreBurleigh
et Ockham. Les questionssur le Perihermeneias
et le Tractatus
de consequentiis
traitent
seulementdes modes "principaux",
les modesalthiques,
c'est--dire,
tout en admettantun nombrebien plus importantde modalits.30
28Cf.entre
autres
C.H. Kneepkens,
Please
don't
callmePeter
: I amanenuntiabile,
nota
A rwte
onthe
enuntiabile
andthe
Noun
Verba
thing.
, dans: C. Marmo
proper
(d.),Vestigia,
Imagines,
Semiotics
andLominmedieval
Texts
fTurnhoutl
83-98.
theological
(XHth-XIVth
century
j,
1997,
29Burleigh,
artem
veterem
. . ., citdansBoh 1993(op.cit.,supra,note26),144.II
Super
estsurprenant
de voircomment
Bohcitece textepourillustrer
l'inclusion
habituelle
de
' danslesdiscussions
'sturiet 'dubitatum
de logiquemodale,
sansremarquer
que Burleigh
lesexclut
desmodalits;
cf.Boh1993(op.cit.,supra,
note26),43-4.Ce textetardif
peut
treunecritique
la thseockhamienne.
Voiraussila critique
de l'assoparBurleigh
ciation
destermes
modaux
desprdicats
danslesdeuxversions
du
(aussiockhamienne)
De Puntate
Artis
De Puntate
Artis
d. Ph. Boehner,
St.
Logicae
(Gauthier
Burleigh,
Logicae,
Bonaventure
1955: Tractatus
brevior
, 56, 16- 57, 16,et Tractus
Longior
, 235,14- 237,12).
Weidemann
1980(op.cit.,supra,note24) traitedu comportement
logiquedes termes
la distinction
de leurporte
dansuneproposition,
sanslesinclure
pistmiques,
explorant
H. Weidemann,
Wrterbuch
; cf.toutefois
parmilesmodalits
, dans: Historisches
Modallogik
derPhilosophie,
Bd.6, Basel-Stuttgart
1984,36,quiattribue
l'extension
de la logique
modale
auxtermes
aussibien Ockham
pistmiques
qu'
Burleigh.
30JeanBuridan,
Tractatus
deconsequentiis
Louvain-Paris
56.
, II, 1,8-12,d.H. Hubien,
1976,

15:14:13 PM

182

PERINISANT
ERNESTO
OS

Dans une questionsur le Perihermeneias

, le matrepicard est trsproche
d'Ockham :
viderequidvocamus
Quia de modalibus
loquiincepimus,
oportet
propositionem
in
modalem.
Etde hoccommuniter
etbene,quodmodalis
dicitur
dicitur,
propositio
determinatio
innatadeterminare
et
kathegorice
qua ponitur
copulam
propositionis
etiampredicali
Et huiusmodi
sunt'nede hoctermino
determinationes
'propositio'.
cessarium',
'verum',
'falsum',
'scitum',
'creditum',
'possibile',
'contingens',
'inpossibile',
et huiusmodi.31
'opinatum',
'apparens'
Buridan dfinitles modalitspar une conjonction,dont seule la deuxime clause quivaut l'approche ockhamienne. Par cette dfinition,
doiventpouvoirexercerces deux fonctionstous les termesmodaux, dont
le cas le plus particulier,
la copule devant
les pistmiques; ils reprsentent
'
'
scitw
.32Ces deux
aussi
des
termes
comme
ou
tremodifie
opinatum'
par
fonctionnements
sparentles propositionsmodales composes et divises,
si bien que leur premirediffrence
est que
velpredicatur
etin divisis
modussubicitur
non,sedestdetermi[. . .] in compositis
natiocopule.33
S'il arriveau matrepicard de dire que les propositionsinsensucompositionis
il semblesurne sontpas des propositionsmodales proprementparler,34
toutavoirune logique modale double cl. On sera d'autantplus sensible
modal
cettediffrence
si l'on a l'espritles diffrents
degrsd'engagement
de foncde Quine et son refusdes modalitsdere, et donc le double registre
tionnement
possiblede la logique modale.35L'extensionde cetteremarque
Ockham doit prendreen compte les deux contextesconceptuelsdans
malgrsa thoriede
lesquelsles modalitsalthiquessonttraites.En effet,
est
le Venerabilis
la propositionmodale rsolumentmtalinguistique,
Inceptor
modal

un
sans doute plus dispos accepter engagementontologique
pour
des possibiliaque Quine, ce qui apparat dans sa thoriede la variation
de la suppositiondu sujet des propositionspossiblesin sensudivisionis.
31JeanBuridan,
Perihermeneias
Librum
, II, 7, d. R. vanderLecq,
Questiones
Longe
super
1983,77, 12-23.
Nijmegen
32Nousdevons
dansla comprhension
l'attention
ce typede cas et unecorrection
ClaudePanaccio.
de ce passagede Buridan
33Buridan,
, II, 7, d. Van derLecq 1983[op.cit.,supra,note31),77,
Questiones
Longe
25-6.
34Buridan,
II, 7, et II, 10,26,d. Van derLecq 1983(op.cit.,note,
Questiones
Longe,
onmodal
, dans:
Propositions
31),78,6-7,96,31-4.Cf.aussiR. vanderLecq,Buridan
supra,
andSemantics
L.M.deRijk(ds),
C.H. Kneepkens,
H.A.G.Braakhuis,
, Nijmegen
English
Logic
1981,428.
35W.V.Quine,Three
andother
Grades
, dans: id.,TheWays
ofParadox
ofModalIrwohment
Mass.1976,158-76.
Revised
andenlarged
Edition,
Cambridge,
Essays.

15:14:13 PM

LES MODALITS
DANSLES COMMENTAIRES
D'OCKHAM

183

Ce double registreapparat clairementdans le Tractatus

de consequentiis
de Jean Buridan, qui rservedes traitementsdistinctsaux propositions
modales au sens compos et au sens divis.Les livresII et IV, qui examinentles consquencesentreles propositionsmodales,traitentsparment
de deux types de propositions: les chapitres3 6 du livre II et les
chapitres2 et 3 du livre IV s'occupent des propositionsau sens divis,
alors que les propositionsau sens compos sont l'objet du chapitre7 du
livreII et du chapitre1 du livreIV. Seul le chapitre1 du livreII traite
des deux typesde propositionmodale,justementpour les distinguer.Les
propositionsmodales au sens divis sont proches des propositionsau
4
' et '
prsentet au futuret de certainsprdicatscomme mortuus
intelligi
bilis' par l'ampliationde la suppositiondes termes.Dans ces cas, l'ex'
pression quod est permet de rsoudrel'ambigutde la supposition,et
donc de dterminerquelles infrencessont valides.36Malgr cette distinctionde domaines,les termespistmiquesne sont pas inclus parmi
les modalits,mais sont traitsdans la partie consacre aux propositions
37Les contextes
de inesse.
propositionnels
qui causentl'ampliationde la supet
ceux
Y
n'ont pas le mme effet
position
qui provoquent appellatorationis
smantiqueet n'incluentpas les mmes cas.38
36Cf.Buridan,
Tractatus
deconsequentiis
, I, 8, 439-520;
II, 6, 3-17; III, 4, 299-321
; IV,
I, 10-16,d. Hubien1976(op.cit.,supra,note30),46-8; 6; 93-4; 111.La supposition
tendue
danslespropositions
modalits
aristotliciennes
etdanslespropositions
au pass
etau futur
estaussiaccepte
ce quine change
de 'propoparOckham,
passa dfinition
sition
ni la thorie
construite
partir
de cettedfinition,
maismontre
le double
modale',
danslequelsonttraits
lesmodalits
relles
; cf.Summa
registre
, I, 72 et
thorique
Logicae
entrela logiquetemporelle
et
II, 7, d. Boehner,
Gi,et Brown,
(OPhI). La continuit
celledesmodalits
chezOckham
estbienmiseen vidence,
entre
dans
autres,
althiques
C. Normore,
TheLogic
andModality
inthe
Later
Middle
: TheContribution
ofTime
Ages
ofWilliam
ofToronto,
1975; C. Normore,
Divine
, Thsede Doctorat,
ofOckham
Omniscience,
University
andFuture
: AnOverview,
dans: T. Rudavsky
Omniscience
Omnipotence
Contingence
(d.),Divine
andOmnipotence
inMedieval
A Study
, Dordrecht
1985,3-22; E. Karger,
Philosophy
ofWilliam
ModalLogic
ofCalifornia-Berkeley,
1976.La
, Thsede Doctorat,
ofOckham's
University
thsede Lagerlund
se limiteaussiaux modalits
Modal
; cf.H. Lagerlund,
althiques
intheMiddle
Leiden2000.
Syllogistics
Ages,
37Cf.Buridan,
deconsequentiis,
Tractatus
III, 3, 19-98,d. Hubien1976(op.cit.,supra,
note30),101-3.
38Surla diffrence
entre
lesdeuxcas,cf.A. Maier,
etConnotatio
chez
Buridan,
Significatio
dans: J. Pinborg
Buridan
, Copenhage
(d.),TheLogic
1976,112-3.Surla notion
ofJohn
rationis
etle traitement
des"verbes
mentaux"
chezBuridan,
cf.aussiE. P. Bos,
appellatio
Mental
Verbs
in Terministic
Buridan
Marsilius
dans:
, Albert
Logic(John
ofSaxony,
ofInghen),
16(1978),56-69; R. vanderLecq,John
Buridan
onIntentionality
Vivarium,
, dans: E.P.Bos,
Semantics
andMetaphysics,
LeCheval
deBuridan.
(d.),Medieval
1985,281-90
;J.Biard,
Nijmegen
etphilosophie
dulangage
dansl'analyse
d'unverbe
dans: O. Pluta(d.),Die
Logique
intentionnel,
im14.und15.Jahrhundert,
Amsterdam
Philosophie
1988,119-37
; Biard1989(op.cit.,supra,
note27); L.M.deRijk,
Buridan
onUniversals
etde morale,
, in: Revuede mtaphysique
John
97 (1992),35-59.

15:14:13 PM

184

S
PERINISANTO
ERNESTO

Il est toutefoisremarquable que cette diffrenced'effetsmantique

n'empchenullementla considrationdes sens diviset compos des propositionsayantun prdicatpistmique,qui pourronttreconsidres,de
Cette distincmodalescommeles autres.39
ce pointde vue, des propositions
terme
tiongnrale,qui dpendde diffrentes
peut avoirdans
portesqu'un
une proposition,permetnotammentla descriptiondes infrencesqui "exportent"ou "importent"le sujetdans ou horsde la portede la modalit.
On peut estimerqu' Ockham lui-mmeoffredes exemplesde propositionsdans lesquellesla copule est modifiepar un termepistmique,
et ainsi voir 'scitudans ' SortesscituresseanimaVcomme un modificateur
de la copule.40La modificationde la copule semble toutefoiss'approcher
plus des thoriesadverbiales,comme celle de Boce, que des thories
liant les termesmodaux aux propositions,comme l'ockhamienne.Il n'est
surtoutpas ais d'imaginerle rle des termespistmiquescomme des
de copule, du moins dans un cadre ockhamien; celle-ciest
modificateurs
alors que ceux-l sont des prun typede syncatgorme,
Ockham
pour
dicats catgormatiques.On peut se demander commentles modalits
de copule (ou
aristotliciennes
peuvent tre la fois des modificateurs
simplementdes copules) et des prdicats.Nous nous limiteronsici indiquer une pistepour la solutionde ce problmedans ce qu'on peut appeler
la fois en conla double appartenancedes modalitsaristotliciennes,
et dfiniscomme des prdicats
tinuitavec les copules passes et futures41
d'un certaintype. Il nous semble que la thorieockmtalinguistiques
hamienne de la propositionmodale offreun cadre mtathoriquedans
lequel se dveloppe la thoriedes modalitsdites relles,les modalits
mais aussi, entreautres,des modalitspistmiques.On
aristotliciennes,
peut ainsi estimerque la thorieockhamiennede la propositionmodale
est incomplte,elle ne traitepas de la smantiquedes modalitsarismme s'il y a une thorieockhamiennepour de tellessituatotliciennes,
tions.Il n'en va pas de mme dans la logique de Buridan,dans laquelle
toutefoisil n'est pas clair commentun termepistmiquepeut modifier
la copule. On remarqueraaussi que Burleigh,qui accepte ces deux clauses
de 'mode', ne garde que les modalitsaristotliciennes.42
pour la dfinition
Aussi bien chez Ockham que chez Buridan, on note l'existencede
logiques communsaux propositionsmodales althiqueset
comportements
39Voir,parexemple,
Priora
inAnalytica
, II, Quaestio18a,d.H. Hubien(non
Quaestiones
publie).
40Summa
Gi et Brown,
(OPhI), 273.
II, 9, 23-25,d. Boehner,
Logicae,
41Summa
Logicae
Gi,et Brown,
(OPhI), 214.
, I, 72,3-6,d. Boehner,
42Burleigh,
note
1955(op.cit.,supra,
d. Boehner
Artis
De Puntate
Brevior,
, Tract.
Logicae
29),234.

15:14:13 PM

LES MODALITS
DANSLES COMMENTAIRES
D'OCKHAM

185

celles qui possdentdes verbes concernantles actes de l'esprit,selon

l'expressionmdivale.Ils ne traitentpas les deux cas de la mme faon;
alors que l'anglais dploie une logique modale homogne mais incomplte, qui n'explique tous les aspects smantiquesdes prdicatsmodaux,
le franaisa un critreet une logique modale double entre,qui rend
des modalitsaristotliciennes,
compte du fonctionnement
quitte avoir
une thoriemoinsclairedes modalitspistmiques.
Le matrepicardchoisit
la voie qui semble prdominanteau Moyen Age tardif.On indique des
comportements
logiques communs ces deux typesde termes,notamment propos des sens divis et compos des propositions,sans les runir sous un mme concept,comme le faitGuillaumeHeystesbury.43
Il est
intressantde noterque Richard Billingham,dans son Speculum
Puerorum
,
runitles termesprdicablesde propositionsentirestanttsous le conmodalis
,
cept de terminus
officialis
(ou officiabilis
), tanttsous celui terminus
solutionqui est peu prs quivalenteau concept ockhamiende modalit.44En ce qui concerneBuridan,il est clair que sa dmarchethorique
43Voirainsilesdfinitions
dupremier,
dudeuxime
etduseptime
modes
selonlesquels
uneproposition
De
; Guillaume
peuttreau sensdiviset au senscompos
Heytesbury,
sensu
diviso
etcomposito
et4rb,Venise,
1500: "Unde7 vel8 modisaccidit
diversitas
, 3vb-4ra
veldividendi.
Etprimus
modus
sicutinprincipio
fuit
estmedicomponendi
exemplificatum
antehocverbo
velquocumque
consimili
sicut
convenit.
verum,
ampliativo
possum
ampliativo
: etsicde aliisquibuscumque
similibus
accidit
possibile,
impossibile,
contingens
compositio
etdivisio.
Secundus
modus
estmediante
termino
habente
vimconfundendi
: sicut
sunt
huiusmodiverba: requiro
: indigeo
: incipio
: desidero
: cupio: volo: teneo: debeo:
presuppono
necessarium
: semper
: in eternum
: eternaliter
: immediate
: et sic de aliis."; "Septimus
modusmediantibus
terminis
verbalibus
actumvoluntatis
siveintellectus
:
significantibus
sicutmediante
hocverboscio,hesito,
credo,volo,desidero,
et sicde aliis."
appeto.
' chezRichard
44Le
de 'terminus
couvre
aussibienlestermes
concept
ojjcialis
Billingham
concernant
lesactesde l'esprit
maisne le faitpas dansle cadred'une
que lesmodalits,
thorie
modale
; Richard
, 1, IV, 1-11,d. Maier,345-6:
Billingham,
Speculum
puerorum
"Terminus
officialis
diciquilibet
terminus
potest
qui in se importt
aliquodofficium
positivm
velprivativum,
velministerium.
Suntautemhuiusmodi
termini
concernentes
actum
ut 'scire','intelligere',
et
mentis,
'dubitare',
'credere',
'percipere',
'imaginari',
'apparere'
et universaliter
suntrespectu
et universaliter
similia,
quaecumque
complexi
quaepossunt
esserespectu
universalis
ut 'possum
tibipomum',
licetnechoc nec hoc,et
promittere
similiter
de aliis; similiter
haecquattuor
'contin'necessarium',
'possibile',
'impossibile',
'est'quandosumitur
ut 'estte esse',et haecdictio
gens',et hocverbum
impersonaliter,
'non'etquodlibet
universale
li 'non'cumquo convertitur."
ratione
signum
negativum
(cf.
A. Maier,
Lo "Speculum
siveTerminus
estin quem"di Ricardo
puerorum
Billingham,
'
dans: Studi
Medievali
Uneautreversion
du textea ''officiabilis
au lieu
, 3 (1970),297-397).
de 'officialis'
estin Quem
siveSpeculum
; cf. Terminus
, recensio
altera,1, 20, d.
puerorum
L.-M.deRijk,dans: id.,Some
14th
Tracts
onthe
Probationes
Terminorum
Century
, Nijmegen
1982,
86. Il estplusintressant
de noterqu'uneautreversion
de ce texte,
ou un autretexte
intitul
Puerorum
aussi Billingham
et trsprochede celuiditpar
, attribu
Speculum
'terminus
' cf.Richard
au lieude 'terminus
utilise
modalis
Maier,
;
ocialis'
Billingham,
Speculum

dans
:
L.M.
de
attributed
Another
Puerorum
toRichard
, 8-11,p. 215-7,
puerorum
Rijk,
Speculum
Introduction
andText
1 (1975),203-35.
, dans: Medioevo,
Billingham.

15:14:13 PM

186

PERINIS
ERNESTO
SANTO

cas de figure,tantt
double, qui tantttraitesparmentles diffrents
applique tous les termesmodaux la distinctionentresens compos et
sens divis, est plus importanteque sa dfinitiontendue de 'mode'.
Guillaume d'Ockham et, avant lui, Martin d'Alnwick,dfinissant
mode'
de faon assez large pour inclure les deux groupes, en tirentles consquences pour le dveloppementhomognede la thoriedes modalits.
Ils montrentla diversitd'approchespossiblespour rendrecompte d'un
mme type de phnomne.
Une brve remarque mtathoriquepeut rendreplus claire l'importance de cette diversitd'approche. Il nous semble que parler de reconnaissance des modalitsnon althiques,comme le fait Boh,45peut tre
trompeur,si l'on veut suggrerpar l l'existenced'un domaine indpendant des thoriesqu'il s'agiraitsimplementde dcrire.Les modalitssont
La reconnaisdes outilsconceptuelsdfinissurtoutde faon stipulative.46
modaux
termes
des
sance de la proximitdes comportements
logiques
nullement

les
rassembler
sous
ne
contraint
et
althiques pistmiques
un conceptunique. Mme si on le fait,ce conceptpeut ne pas trecelui
de modalit. La diversitde constructions
thoriquesn'est aucunement
en oppositionavec la reconnaissanced'un ensemblecommunde donnes
de l'examen
dont il fautrendrecompte; tel est le cas, nous semble-t-il,
des termespistmiqueset modaux par ces auteursmdivaux.
3. Conclusion
La diffrence
entreles deux textesockhamiensest vidente,par la dfinition
et par le nombrede modalits,mais aussi par la thoriemodale esquisest plus proche de la SummaLogicae
se. Le commentairedu Perihermeneias
Si les
des Rfoitations
commentaire
et plus dvelopp que le
Sophistiques.
45Cf.Boh 1993{op.cit.,supra,
surce point;
estplusprudent
note26),46. Knuuttila
note25),176.
1993{op.cit.,supra,
voirKnuuttila
46La prcaution
desthories
le doublestandard
icide ce qu'onpourrait
dcoule
appeler
et
ou linguistiques
la foisdesdonnes
rendre
mdivales,
logiques
compte
qui veulent
ellesontrecours
de l'usagedesconcepts
; si le premier
aspect
parla tradition
auxquels
desconsidrations
contraint
le deuxime
desdfinitions
offre
le terrain
prostipulatives,
Ockham,
attribu
UElementarium
, faussement
Logicae
explicatives.
pres desdfinitions
assez
dansunerfutation
desdfinitions,
de ce doublefonctionnement
donneunexemple
modalits
les
de
concernant
des
thses
;
ockhamienne,
maladroite,
Burleigh
d'inspiration
G. GaietJ.Giermek,
Elementarium
cf.Guillaume
IV, 18,d.E.M.Buytaert,
d'Ockham,
Logicae,
des
le tmoignage
de voirdanscetapocryphe
(OPhVII), 141-2.Il n'estpas sansintrt
dontcellessurlesmodalits
autourdesthses
discussions
; sur
ockhamiennes,
premires
17 20 du livreIV.
lessujets
ici,voirleschapitres
qui nousintressent

15:14:13 PM

LES MODALITS
DANSLES COMMENTAIRES
D'OCKHAM

187

deux textesvont dans le mme sens, il semble surtoutque l'intgration

de la rflexionsur ces termesest plus importantedans le commentaire
du Perihermeneias
, notammentpar la mise en place d'une stratgiedestine
rendrecompte de ce type de phnomne.
Cette conclusionpourraitinviter inverserl'ordre de compositionde
deux commentairespar rapport celui prsentpar les diteursde deux
Il est bien srpossibled'expliquerla diffrence
textes.47
d'tatde la thorie
sembleun locustextuelplus appromodale par le faitque le Perihermeneias
Mme si l'on
Sophistiques.
pri un tel dveloppementque les Rfutations
il reste expliquerpourquoi les rsultatsdu
accepte un tel raisonnement,
n'ont
t
dans le deuxime.
pas
intgrs
premier
L'ordre tabli par les diteursest taypar les renvoiscroissdans les
textesockhamiens.Le premierse trouvedans le commentairein librum
Elenchorum
:
, au Perihermeneias
Prototoistocapitulo
estnotandum
hictradita
quoddoctrina
Philosophi
specialiter
valetad impediendum
a divisis
ad coniuncta,
consequentiam
quandoarguitur
quando
in divisis,
de quo dictum
estin II Perihermeneias
.48
aliquidbisaccipitur
Le deuximeest dans le commentaire
du Perihermeneias
Elenchi
, aux Sophistici
,
par un verbe au futur:
Et estin omnibus
talibus
fallacia
sicutin II Elenchorum
ostendetur.49
accidentis,
Dans les deux cas, Ockham semble renvoyer son commentaire,plutt
qu' Aristotelui-mme,et le futurdu deuxime texte cit doit correspondre l'ordrede lecturedes textesdu Stagirite.Indpendammentdes
renvois l'intrieurdes textesockhamiens,cet ordre de lecture est la
motivationla plus fortepour placer la compositionde YExpositio
sur le
Perihermeneias
en premier.
En effet,l'argumentle plus importantse trouvesimplementdans l'ordrehabitueldes commentaires
des uvreslogiquesd'Aristote,
le Perihermeneias
,
comme partie de la Logica Vtus
venant
avant
les
,
,
Rfutations
Sophistiques
Yordonaturalis
, selon les diteursd'Ockham,50et dans le faitqu'il ne semble pas que le Venerabilis
ait eu le temps de les commenterplus
Inceptor
d'une fois. Si cette considrationest un argumentfortpour garder la
chronologieadopte par les diteurs,les diffrences
conceptuellesentre
47Exp.Per.,
d.Gambatese
etBrown,
Introductio,
Introductio,
(OPhII), 13*; Exp.Elenchi
d. Del Punta,Gambatese
et Brown,
13*.
(OPh
III),
48Exp.Elench.,
et Brown,
II, 16,4, 40-43,d. Del Punta,Gambatese
(OPhIII), 305.
49Exp.Per
et Brown,
451.
., II, 4, 6, 22-23,d. Gambatese
(OPh
II),
50Exp.Per.,Introductio,
d. Gambatese
et Brown,
(OPhII), 13*.

15:14:13 PM

188

ERNESTO
PERINI-SANTOS

les textesdoiventtre prises en compte aussi, ce qui suggreun cadre

plus complexe de la productiondes uvresd'Ockham.51
Quoi qu'il en soit de leur ordre de composition,il nous semble clair
que les thoriesmodales de ces deux textesne sontpas les mmes et que
celle du commentairedu Perihermeneias
est la foisplus dveloppeet plus
superLibrosElenchorum.
proche de la SummaLogicaeque celle de YExpositio
La reconnaissancede ce point doit s'accompagnerde la reconnaissance
de la spcificitde l'extensionde la liste des modalitset, d'une faon
La thoriedu
Inceptor.
plus gnrale,de la thoriemodale du Venerabilis
matre nominalistereprsenteen effetune rupturepar rapport une
importantetradition,qui remonteau moins Ammonius et Boce,
associant les modalits des adverbes. Le cur de cette tradition,qui
claire chez GauthierBurleigh,est
trouveune expressionparticulirement
la comprhensiondes modalitscomme des modificateurs
de la copule.
voit
les
modalits

la
fois
comme
des
Buridan
Jean
prdicablesde propositionset comme des modificateurs
de la copule. Cette duplicitapparat
dans le fait que les termespistmiques,tout en tant comprisdans la
liste de modalits,ne figurentpas dans les textesque le matrepicard
des modalits.Guillaumed'Ockham, l'instarde
consacre au traitement
a
une
thorie
modale
Burleigh,
simpleet sans ambigut,mais sa dfinition
de modalitcomme des prdicablesde propositionsentires,et seulement
comme des prdicablesde propositionsentires,aussi bien dans le commentairesur le Perihermeneias
que dans la SummaLogicae,lui donne une
l'histoiredes thoriesmodales.
tout

fait
dans
originale
place
Belo Horizonte,Brsil
de Filosofia
Departamento
Universidade
Federalde Minas Gerais

51On remarquera
desmodaen un certain
sensmoinsdvelopp
aussile traitement
Dwina
dePraedestinatione
etdePraescientia
litsdansle Tractatus
, aussibiendansla classification
dePraedestinatione
comme
deinesse
affectes
destermes
despropositions
(cf.Tractatus
pistmiques
d. Ph.Boehner
Deirespectu
Futurorum
etdePraescientia
II, 45-51; III, 329-38,
Contingentium,
despropositions
du sensdivis
etS. Brown,
(OPhII), 521-2; 532),quedansl'explication
surle Perihermeneias
diffrente
de celleadoptedansYExpositio
modales
paruneapproche
et Brown,
d. Boehner
et dansla Summa
, I, 309-12,
(OPhII), 519).
Logicae
(cf.Tractatus
du croisement
traite
Cetteremarque
estd'autant
prcisment
quele texte
plusimportante
et desmodalits
destermes
althiques.
pistmiques

15:14:13 PM

The Liar ParadoxfromJohnBuridanbackto ThomasBradwardine

STEPHEN READ

1. Introduction
Thomas Bradwardinewas born shortlybeforethe startof the fourteenth
century.While at Merton College in Oxfordin the 1320s, he made two
seminal contributions
to our understandingof the world. One is generand
well
known: his reinterpretation
of Aristotleon the
ally recognised
ratio of velocityto force and resistance,that the second two vary with
the square of the first.The other insightis much less well known and
usuallycreditedelsewhere.Ralph Strode,friendand neighbourin London
of GeoffreyChaucer later in the centurywrote: "Then appeared that
prince of modern naturalphilosophers,Thomas Bradwardine,who first
came upon somethingof value concerningthe insolubles."1The insolubles are paradoxes or antinomiesof language, perhaps most famously
expressedin the Liar Paradox: 'What I am sayingis false'.Bradwardine's
solutionwas later taken up by Albert of Saxony and John Buridan at
the Universityof Paris, and is mostwell knownin Buridan'sversion,following discussionsby Ernest Moody and ArthurPrior2and translations
by Scottand Hughes.3Bradwardine'streatisehas not been translatedinto
English,and appeared in printfor the firsttime in 1970, edited from
two of the twelvemanuscriptsknown to have survived.4
1 RalphStrode,
tract.
6 De insolubilibus,
citedfrom
P.V.Spade,TheMedieval
Liar:
" Logica -Literature
' andBradA Catalogue
, Toronto
1975,p. 88;cf.Spade,'Insolubilia
oftheInsolubilia"
wardine's
in:Medioevo
7 (1981),115-34,
ofsignification,
p. 116.
2 E.A.theory
andConsequence
inMedieval
Some
, Amsterdam
1953;A. Prior,
Moody,Truth
Logic
inJohn
Buridan
oftheBritish
48 (1962),
, in: Proceedings
problems
ofself-reference
Academy,
281-96.
3J. Buridan,
onMeaning
andTruth
T.K. Scott,NewYork1966;G.E.
, trans.
Sophisms
Buridan
onSelfwith
a Translation,
Hughes,
John
Reference:
Chapter
Eight
ofBuridan's
"Sophismata",
anIntroduction
1984.
, anda philosophical
Commentary,
Cambridge
4 T. Bradwardine,
Insolubilia
despropositions
insolubles
au
, in M.-L.Roure,La problmatique
XIIesicle
etau dbut
duXIVe,suivie
del'dition
destraits
deW Shyreswood,
W.Burleigh
etTh.
Bradwardine
d'Histoire
Doctrinale
etLittraire
duMoyen
, in:Archives
Age,37 (1970),205Mertonense
31 (1969),174-224,
326;J.A. Weisheipl,
, in:Medieval
Studies,
Repertorium
p. 178.
Koninklijke
BrillNV,Leiden,2002
- www.brill.nl
Alsoavailable
online

Vivarium
40,2

15:14:21 PM

190

STEPHEN
READ

Even a quartercenturyafteritspublication,however,Edith Sylla could

writein her essayon Bradwardinein the Routledge
:
Encyclopedia
ofPhilosophy
"Bradwardine'sothermathematicaland logicalworks[besidesDe continuo]
do not seem to have been particularlynotable."5I wish to challengethis
evaluationof the treatiseon the insolubles.There was more excuse for
thisjudgmentwhenJohn Murdoch wrote: "Neither [De insolubilibus
nor
De incipitet desinit]
has been edited or studied,yet the likelihoodis not
that
will
great
they
eventuallyreveal themselvesto be much more than
of
the
expositions
opiniocommunis
concerningtheir subjects."6Not so.
Buridan's adaptationof Bradwardine'ssolutionlays it open to insuperable objections;even Albertof Saxony's alterationof it makes it unworkable. But Bradwardine'soriginalidea is not so open to challenge.It is
arguablya genuine and originalsolution.
The problem with a propositionlike 'What I am sayingis false', is
that we appear to be able to show not only that it is false,but that,in
consequence,it is true as well. Briefly,if it were true that what I was
sayingwas false,it would be false and so not true, hence (assumingit
mustbe eithertrueor false)it is false.But ifwhat I was sayingwas false,
thenwhat I said was true,as well as false.If we thinkto avoid thiscontradictionby suggestingthat what I said was neithertrue nor false,the
revengeproblemhitsback throughthe alternativeparadox: 'What I am
sayingis not true'.7The same reductio
proofshowsthatit is not true.The
problemfor truth-valuegap theoristsis to explain why I did not speak
trulywhen I anticipatedthem and said: 'What I am sayingis not true'.
Bradwardinelays down fromthe startthat everypropositionis true
or false. But he faces a similarproblem. He can show that the paradoxical proposition,'What I am sayingis false',is false,by the standard
reductio
proof.How can he avoid what seems an inevitableconsequence,
that I must then have spoken trulywhen I said that it was false?Too
often,purportedsolutionsto the Liar (as we will see below) concentrate
on proofsthat it is true,or that it is false. But that is to avoid the real
problem.We have a surfeitof proofs,both that it is true and that it is

5 E. Sylla,'Bradwardine,
Thomas(c. 1300-49)',
in: Routledge
,
ofPhilosophy
Encyclopedia
London1998,vol.1, 863-6,p. 865.
6J.E.Murdoch,
in:Dictionary
Thomas',
, vol.II, New
'Bradwardine,
ofScientific
Biography
York1970,390-7,p. 391.
7 Theterm'revenge
in his'Introduction'
to
wasintroduced
problem'
byR.M.Martin
R.M.Martin
onTruth
andtheLiarParadox
1984,4.
, Oxford
(ed.),Recent
Essays

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

191

false.What is needed is some analysiswhich blocks at least one of these

proofs.
areFalse
2. TheInsolubles
Bradwardine'sproposal is that the Liar paradox, and indeed all such
insolubles,are simplyfalse,and not true. At the heart of his diagnosis
lies his Thesis 2, that "If a propositionsignifiesitselfnot to be true or
itselfto be trueand is false."8His proofdependson
to be false,it signifies
and postulates,whichhe setsout explicitly:
certainbackgrounddefinitions
are.
is an utterance
Definition 1 A trueproposition
signifying
onlyas things
are.
is an utterance
other
than
Definition 2 A falseproposition
signifying
things
is trueorfalse.
Postulate 1 (Bivalence)
Everyproposition
or meanscontingently
or necessarily
Postulate 2 Everyproposition
signifies
everyor necessarily.
which
follows
fromit contingently
thing
or meaningis closed under
This closureprinciple,statingthatsignification
implicationand entailment,will play a crucial role in his diagnosis.His
and
thirdpostulatestateshis oppositionto his predecessors,the restringentes
the cassantes
:9
andforwhat
Postulate 3 Thepartcansupposit
foritswholeandforitsopposite
is equivalent
to them.
Suppositionwas the medieval equivalentof reference.Postulate3 rejects
the popular suggestionthat self-reference
is impossible.
and disjunctions
Postulate 4 (De Morgan)Conjunctions
withcontradictory
parts
contradict
eachother.
8 See Roure'sedition
ofthesec(citedabovein n. 4), 6.05,p. 298.Roure'sreading
ondthesis
is: "si aliquapropositio
se nonesseveramvelse essefalsam
significai
ipsam,
se nonesseveramet estfalsa."The proof
whichfollows,
theBodleian
manusignificai
Oxford
Can.lat.219whichI haveconsulted,
PaulSpade'scitation
oftheBruges
script
ms.in Spade1975(seeabove,n. 1), 109andin Spade1981[op.cit
., above,n. 1), 118
andRoure'sowntranslation
ofthethesis
[op.cit.above,n. 4: p. 238)showthatthesecond'non'hereis an incorrect
interpolation.
9 See,e.g.,P.V. Spade,Insolubilia,
in: N. Kretzmann
et al.,ed.,TheCambridge
History
Medieval
andBradwardine,
Insolubilia
, Cambridge
1982/88,
,
ofLater
Philosophy
IV.12,246-53;
chs.3-5,in Roure'sedition
[op.cit.,above,n. 4), 287-93.

15:14:21 PM

READ
STEPHEN

192

withtheopposite
Froma disjunction
Postulate 5 (Disjunctive
together
Syllogism)
ofoneofitspartstheother
partmaybe inferred.
Thesis 1
Everyproposition
or meansaffirmation
whoseterms
havemanysupposita
signifies
or denialfor anyof them;and
if it has onlyonesuppositum,
for thisorfor that.
We come finallyto
Thesis 2 If a proposition
itselfnotto be trueor to befalse, it signifies
signifies
to
be
true
and
is
false.
itself
The crucial passage is the following,where this thesisis proved:
it signifies
elseas
A signifies
itself
notto be true.Theneither
something
Suppose
A is nottrue,
ifwe suppose
itfollows
that
not.Consequently,
well,ornot.Suppose
thatitis notthecasethat
as A signifies
itis notwholly
1)andhence,
(byDefinition
all thatA signifies,
andso
A is nottrue(sincethatA is nottrueis,byhypothesis,
A signifies
itfor"asA signifies"
we cansubstitute
byThesis1 part2).10Therefore,
from
whatA signifies,
itself
to be true(byPostulate
2),sinceitsbeingtruefollows
it
is
not
true.
that
namely,
to signifying
itself
not
elseadditional
On theother
hand,ifA signifies
something
thatitis not
thatA is nottrue,
itfollows
tobe true,
e.g.,thatP, thenifwesuppose
1 andThesis
thecaseboththatA is nottrueandP (asbefore,
byDefinition
wholly
A is trueor not-P(bypostulate
1,part1 thistime)andhence,either
4).11Hence,
A is trueornot-P.
that
Butwesupposed
thateither
2,A signifies
againbyPostulate
thatP. Hence,it foloftheseconddisjunct
A signifies
theopposite
here,namely,
itself
as well,A signifies
lowsthatA is true(byPostulate
5). So on thisalternative
to be true(byPostulate
2 oncemore).
itself
tobe
nottobe true,thenitalsosignifies
thatifA signifies
itself
Thisshows
true.Thisis thefirst
partofThesis2.
itfollows
that
itself
tobe false.Fromitsbeingfalse,
thatA signifies
next,
Suppose,
itself
notto be true,andso bythe
itis nottrue.Hence,byPostulate
2,A signifies
A signifies
itself
to be true.Thus,ifA signifies
first
partofThesis2,justproven,
tobe true.Thisis thesecond
2.
itself
italsosignifies
itself
tobe false,
partofThesis
itself
notto be true,
either
thatanyproposition
We havenowshown
signifying
nottrue
bothbe either
itself
tobe true.Sinceitcannot
alsosignifies
ortobe false,
other
thanitis,andso itis false
itmustsignify
orfalse,
andat thesametimetrue,
is whatwewanttoshow)
false(which
itmustbe either
2). Moreover,
(byDefinition
itwouldbe true(byPostulate
ornot.Butifitwasnotfalse,
l)12andso wouldsig10Contrary
towhatSpadewrites
21),
(Spade1981(op.cit.,above,n. 1),121,footnote
of"Ais
thesubstitution
in usingthefirst
thesis
Bradwardine
is correct
here,to authorise
nottrue"for"asA signifies".
11Spadesaysthatthisstepis idle(Spade1981(op.cit.,above,n. 1),122,footnote
29).
as itwillbe.
be applied,
5 cannot
Butwithout
it,Postulate
12Rourehas'secundam':
ms.can.lat.
in Oxford
thismustbe a scribal
error,
repeated
219,f.55va.

15:14:21 PM

193

THE LIARPARADOX

2). Henceany
niyotherthanit is, and thusbe false(onceagain,byDefinition
is false.13
either
itself
notto be true,or to be false,
signifying
proposition
Bradwardinehas shownthatthe Liar paradox,and related
Unsurprisingly,
propositions,are false. As noted above, that is not the problem. How
does Bradwardineblock the subsequentinferencethatit is also true?For
a propositionto be true, says Definition1, thingsmust only be as the
itselfto be falseBut the Liar does not only signify
propositionsignifies.
one mightsay. It also signifiesitselfto be true,
its primarysignification,
as Bradwardineshowsin the firstpart of Thesis 2. So to be true,it would
have to be both false and true. But no propositionis both. So it is not
true,but false.
its Own Truth
3. Signifying
This solutionto the Liar paradox would seem to be familiarfromitspreand the extensivemodern
sentationby John Buridan in his Sophismata
discussionof his treatment.But by the time the doctrine appears in
Buridan it has undergonetwo crucial, and as I intend to show, fatal
changes.Buridan,in fact,discussesthe insolublesin at least fivepassages
in his survivingworks.14In the Sophismata
, in its revisedformthe latest
he
of these passages, probablydatingfrom 1356 or shordyafterwards,15
writes:"some people have advanced the followingview (and it was my
or assertsitself
opiniontoo at one time):. . . everyproposition. . . signifies
to be true,and as a resultany propositionthat eitherdirecdyor indirectlyassertsitselfto be false, is false."16Where Bradwardinerestricted
the claim that a propositionsignifiesits own truthto propositionsthat
Buridangeneralizesthe claim to all propositions.
theirown falsity,
signify
Elencorum
: "Let the
We findBuridan endorsingthe view in his Questiones
firstassumption be that every proposition on account of its formal

13Thisis a fairly
in 6.054freetranslation
oftheLatintextgivenin Roure'sedition
6, 299-300.
14See,e.g.,F. Pironet,
andchronology
Buridan
ontheLiarparadox:
ofanopinion
John
study
andJ. Buridan,
, Leiden1993,293-300;
, in:K. Jacobi(ed.),Argumentationstheorie
ofthetexts
Elencorum
, ed.R. vanderLecqandH.A.G.Braakhuis,
1994,IntroducQuestiones
Nijmegen
tion3.
15See,e.g.,B. Michael,
Buridan
: Studien
seinen
Werken
undzur
zu seinem
Leben,
Johannes
Theorien
imEuropa
desspten
Berlin1985,
seiner
Mittelalters
, Diss.FreieUniversitt
Rezeption
528.
16Trans.Hughes(seeabove,n. 3),7.7.1.

15:14:21 PM

194

READ
STEPHEN

itselfto be true."17His reasoningdepends on appresignification

signifies
betweentwo distinctaccounts,by Buridanand othciatingthe distinction
ers, of what is requiredfor the truthof a proposition.
These two accountsappear explicitlyat the startof Albertof Saxony's
He
treatiseon Insolubles
, incorporatedas treatise6 of his Perutilis
Logica.18
startswith a definition:
A trueproposition
is onesuchthatthings
arehowever
it signifies
theyare.19
But withina few lines he writes:
to be trueis foritssubject
Foranyaffirmative
The secondassumption:
proposition
andconversely;
andforit to be false
to supposit
forthesamething
andpredicate
to supposit
forwhatis notthesameandconversely.
is foritssubject
andpredicate
and
tobe trueis foritssubject
Thethird
Foranynegative
proposition
assumption:
andforittobe false
tosupposit
forwhatis notthesameandconversely;
predicate
to supposit
forthesamething,
andconversely.20
is foritssubject
andpredicate
Albertproceeds immediately,by way of a fourthassumption:
for
thatwhatitssubject
andpredicate
affirmative
supposit
signifies
Every
proposition
is thesame,
and a fifth:
for
andpredicate
thatwhatitssubject
supposit
signifies
Everynegative
proposition
is notthesame,
togetherwith the first:
or negative,
is affirmative
Every
proposition
to show his first,second and thirdtheses:
thatitis true.
affirmative
Thefirst:
signifies
Every
proposition
thatitis true.
The second:
signifies
negative
proposition
Every
in
the
world
thatitis true.
The third:
signifies
Every
proposition

17Ed. vanderLecqandBraakhuis
14),92.
(seefootnote
18It is alsoincluded
ofhisSophismata.
in theParis1502edition
19Trans.N. Kretzmann
Translations
TheCambridge
andE. Stump,
ofMedieval
Philosophical
Texts
1988,338.
, Cambridge
20Kretzmann
I haveadapted
andStump1988{op.cit.,above,n. 19),339;however,
Venice1522,repr.Olms1974,
Perutilis
Albert
ofSaxony,
translation
their
Logica,
following
3.
Someofthemss.(e.g.,Leipzig1387andPragueIV. G4) omitassumption
f.43rb.

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

195

The proofis straightforward,

given his assumptions.If everyaffirmative
thatwhat its subjectand predicatesuppositforis the
propositionsignifies
same (assumption4), and for an affirmative
propositionto be true it
sufficethatits subjectand predicatesuppositforthe same (assumption2),
theneveryaffirmative
thatit is true.The same direct
propositionsignifies
proofshows that everynegativepropositionalso signifiesthat it is true,
so everypropositiondoes (by assumption1). Straightforward,
certainly.
However, thereis a suppressedpremise,which in fullgeneralitywould
be Bradwardine'scrucial Postulate 2, that a propositionsignifieswhatever is entailed by what it signifies.Some such principleis needed to
connect the entailmentexpressedin the second premise (assumption2)
withthe firstpremise(assumption4) to replace 'whatits subjectand predicate suppositforis the same' by 'it is true'.
Buridan offeredthe same proof as Albert'sfor his thirdthesisin his
Elencorum
Questiones
, probablywrittensome fifteenor more years earlier:21
Forevery
is affirmative
or negative.
Buteachofthemsignifies
itself
to
proposition
be trueor at leastfrom
eachitfollows
thatitis true.Thisis clearfirst
concerning
forevery
affirmative
thatitssubject
andpredicate
affirmatives,
proposition
signifies
forthesame,andthisis foritto be true. . . Secondly,
itis clearconcernsupposit
fora negative
doesnotsignify
thatthesubject
andpredicate
ingnegatives,
supposit
forthesame,andthisis forthenegative
to be true.(ed.vanderLecq
proposition
andBraakhuis,
p. 92.)
He concludesthateverypropositionsignifies
itselfto be true,and so every
propositionwhich signifiesitselfto be false,is false,since it signifiesitself
to be true and false at the same time,which is impossible.
4. Signification
and Supposition
But what is the relationbetween these two criteriaof truth,first,that
"thingsare howeverit signifies",
secondly,that,forexample,foraffirmatives,
and
subject
predicatesuppositfor the same? Do the two criteriaalways
give the same answer?Is it possibleto prove thattheydo? Buridan tackles the issue directlyin ch. 2 of his Sophismata.
His conclusionis that the
criterionin termsof signification
is inadequate, and does indeed depart
fromthe second. However, the reason depends on a somewhatidiosyncraticaspect of Buridan'stheoryof signification.
The medievaisinherited
21Albert
waswriting
Elencorum
1350s;Buridan's
(inParis)in themidQuestiones
proba- see vanderLecq andBraakhuis'
thelate 1330s
blydatefrom
'Introduction',
[op.cit.,
above,n. 14),xxx.

15:14:21 PM

196

READ
STEPHEN

via Boethius,
theirconceptof signification
fromtwo sources:fromAristotle
and fromAugustine.22
They read Aristotleas sayingthatspokenand written languagesignified
conceptsin the mindwhichwere likenessesof things
in the world.In contrast,Augustineclaimed thatspokenand writtenlanguage signifiedthingsin the worldvia the mediumof concepts.Boethius
added to the Aristotelianviewpointthe suggestionthat spoken and writcenten language signifiedboth concepts and things.In the thirteenth
The
the
novel
that
also
came
things.
way
concepts
signify
tury
suggestion
was open for two prevailingconceptionsin the fourteenth
century:with
Ockham,Albertof Saxony and others,that,contraryto Aristotle,spoken,
writtenand conceptuallanguage signifiesthings(whatwe mightcall the
cen"Augustinin"conception,thoughit adds to Augustinethe thirteenth
turyinnovation);contrastedwiththe view of Buridanand othersthatspoken and writtenlanguage signifiesconcepts,which in turnare likenesses
of things,and so the formermediatelyor secondarilysignifythe latter
conception).
(what we mightdub the "Boethian55
So far,so good, if confusing.But thisis to concentrateon terms,the
extremesof a proposition.What of propositionsthemselves?The thirteenthcenturyinnovationwould lead to an impossiblepuzzle in the succeedingcentury.If the conceptof man signifiesmen, and the conceptof
animal signifies
animals,and Augustinewas rightto suggestthatthe mind
containsa conceptuallanguage, with conceptual or mentalpropositions
as well as terms,what does the conceptualproposition,'A man is an aniA fundamental
dividearose in thefourteenth
mal5,signify?
centurybetween
those,like Adam Wodeham and Gregoryof Rimini followinghim, who
claimed there must be suitablepropositionalobjects in the world, com, things(unlikemen and animals)whichwere capable only
plexesignificabilia
of being complexlysignified;and others,such as Ockham and Buridan
ways)who denied therewere any such things.Buridan
(in theirdifferent
claimed that although the spoken proposition,'A man is an animal',
signifiedthe conceptualproposition,'A man is an animal5,it signifiesin
the worldonlymen and animals.That is all thereis. There is, he averred,
or suchlike.
no furtherman-being-an-animal
that the "thingsare
It followsfromBuridan5stheoryof signification
fortruthmustbe rejected.For it is neither
howeverit signifies55-criterion

22Thehistory
inE.P.BosandS. Read,Concepts:
detail
outinsomewhat
isspelled
greater
andPaulofGelria
theTreatises
, Leuven2001,Introduction
2.
ofCleves
ofThomas

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

197

That it is not necessaryis shown,Buridansays,23

necessarynor sufficient.
the
of
the
by
example
proposition,'The Antichristwill walk', which is
what
it
and
true,though
signifies(among otherthings)is the Antichrist,
he is (as yet)nothing.Thus a propositioncan be trueeven thoughthings
are not (now) as it signifies.
Nor is the criterionsufficient,
since 'A man is an ass' is false,but what
it signifies
are men and asses, and thesecertainlyexist.'A man is an ass'
can signifyno more than what are signifiedby its terms,namely,men
and asses. But its truthdoes not followfromthe mere existenceof men
and asses. Indeed, 'A man is an ass' and 'No man is an ass' signifythe
same (forBuridan),namely,men and asses,but theycannotboth be true.
Hence the "thingsare howeverit signifies"-criterion
is neithernecessary
nor sufficient.
Truth,saysBuridan,is not a matter(simply)of signification,
but of supposition.It is the criterionin termsof supposition(that subject and predicate suppositfor the same, or not, as the case may be)
which counts.
5. Buridan'
s Account
of Truth
However,even thatcondition,in termsof supposition,needs to be applied
with care in the case of the insolubles,Buridan notes. Take the Liar
paradox, 'What I am sayingis false'. We have seen that we can show,
, thatit is false.However,proceedingcautiously,let us take the
by reductio
argumentstep by step. Suppose it is true.Then, takingthe suppositional
criterionas necessary,it followsthat subject and predicate suppositfor
the same (since it is affirmative),
and so it is false- i.e., 'false' supposits
forthe same as 'what I am saying'.Thus, assumingit is true,it follows
thatit is false,and so not true. Hence, by reductio
, it is not true- and so
it is false,by the principleof bivalence.But if it is false,then its subject
and predicate do indeed suppositfor the same, and so if the suppositional criterionwere sufficient
as well as necessary,it would followthat
the Liar paradox was true,as well as false,and the antinomywould have
returned.
Buridan's solutionis not to question the principleof bivalence used
here. Althoughit seems never to be explicidystatedin the Sophismata
, it
is implicitin everything
he writes.In fact,he argues for it explicidyin

23J. Buridan,
Cannstatt
, ed. T.K. Scott,Stuttgart-Bad
Sophismata
1977,87.

15:14:21 PM

198

READ
STEPHEN

his Questiones
Ekncorum
: truthis the highestgoal, and if that highestgoal
fails to be achieved in the smallestregard,falsehoodresults.So every
propositionis eithertrue,or if not true,false.24
To returnto ch. 2 of the Sophismata
: Buridan'sstrategyis to challenge
the sufficiency
of the suppositionalcriterion.Suppositingforthe same is
not sufficient
for truth(in the case of affirmatives
such as 'What I am
sayingis false',or forfalsityin the case of negativessuch as 'What I am
as his ninthand
sayingis not true5) it is necessarybut not sufficient,
tenthconclusionsof ch. 2 establish:
The ninth
conclusion
thatiftheterms
ofan affirmative
[is]thatitdoesnotfollow
forthesame,thentheproposition
is true. . . Thetenth
concluproposition
supposit
sionis thatforthetruth
ofan affirmative
itis required
that
categorical
proposition
theterms,
thesubject
andpredicate,
forthesamething
orthings."
namely,
supposit
The suppositionalcriterionis sufficient
onlyif the case is not one of selfthatis, where a propositionassertsits own falsityor something
reflection,
which entails that it is false. In the lattercase, a strongercriterionof
truthis needed, namely,thatwhateverit entailsbe true,thatis, thatany
propositionit entailsalso satisfythe suppositionalcriterion:
Hence... it shouldbe saidthatwherea proposition
hasor canhavereflection
on
it doesnotsuffice
forthetruth
ofan affirmative
thattheterms
for
itself,
supposit
thesame,as I havesaidelsewhere,
in suchan
butit is required
thattheterms
conclusion
forthesame.Thengiventhese[twoconditions]
the
implied
supposit
willbe true.26
proposition
For example, 'What I am sayingis false' entailsthat it is true,so to be
true,we need both that 'What I am sayingis false' satisfythe suppositional criterion,and that 'What I said is true' do so too. But that is

24Buridan,
Elencorum
Questiones
{ed.cit.,above,n. 14,90-1:"In istaquestione
primo
videndum
estqualiter
deveritate
... estde(qualitate)
estymaginandum
propositionis
propositionis
sicutde qualitate
summa
... Ita in proposito
estquod,si essetaliymaginandum
ita essetet nullomodosignificarei
aliter
significant
qua propositio
que qualitercumque
istaessetvera.Etquamcitosignificarei
aliter
desineret
aliqualiter
quamesset,
quamesset,
itaquodsicutad hocquodaliquid
dicatur
summe
esseveraetinciperet
essefalsa,
calidum,
itaad <hoc> quodaliquapropogradum
frigiditatis,
requiritur
quodnonhabeataliquem
aliter
sitiositvera,requiritur
quamest."See also,e.g.,Albert,
quodnullomodosignificet
veraestiliaque
Perutilis
tractIII ch. 3, f. 18ra:"premitto
Logica
primoquodpropositio
itaest;propositio
autemfalsaestiliaque nonqualitercumque
significai
qualitercumque
itaest."
significai
25Buridan,
, ed. Scott(op.cit.,above,n. 23),42.
Sophismata
26Buridan,
, ed. Scott,136.
Sophismata

15:14:21 PM

199

THE LIARPARADOX

impossible,for it would require that 'true' and 'false' suppositfor the

same, namely,what I said. Buridan rejectsthat possibilityexplicitly.27
This move of Buridan'sis clearlyad hocin the worstpossibleway. We
noted in 1 that to deal with the paradox, we need to block some step
in the reasoning.Buridan'ssolutiondoes so, but it providesno real explanation. He refusesto inferthat the Liar paradox is true fromthe fact
that it is false,even thoughthat is what it says. Why does he do so? It
appears to be for the best of reasons,for if a propositionentailssomethingfalse,it clearlycannot be true.So Buridaninfersthatforinsolubles
to be true,we need not only that they themselvessatisfythe suppositional criterion,but so too must any propositionthey entail. One such
propositionis the propositionthat they are true. Hence, to show they
are true,we must firstshow theyare true. That is, for the Liar propositionto be true,it is requiredthat it already be true. It is a medieval
Catch-22. In order to be true,it would have to be true already. So it
cannot be true. It is simplyfalse,and the paradox is blocked.
about this is to restrictit to the
What is ad hocand non-explanatory
insolublesalone. If insolublesmust not entail anythingfalse if they are
to be true,thatshould apply equally to otherpropositions."Everypropositionis falsefromwhich,togetherwithsome trueproposition,therefolSo the suppositionalcriterionshould not
lows a false one," he writes.28
for the truthof any proposition.If it is insufficient
be in itselfsufficient
for all. The requirementfor truth
for insolubles,it must be insufficient
if
its
is
true
a
should be: proposition
subject and predicatesuppositfor
and so too forany propositionit entails,the subthe same (ifaffirmative)
and for
should
and
suppositfor the same (if affirmative,
predicate
ject
27See Buridan,
in the1330sin his
ed. Scott,198.He hadarguedsimilarly
Sophismata
in preparation),
Posteriorum
librum
inprimum
q. 10:
(ed. F. Pironet,
Questiones
Analyticorum
affirmativae
ad veritatem
nonsufficit
estquodin multis
conclusio
"Secunda
quodtermini
istampropositionem
proeodem.Quia ego ponocasumquodego propono
supponant
aliam
nullam
et
est
falsa',
proponam
quamistam.
quod
ponamus
quampropono
'propositio
nonvera.
eratfalsa,et perconsequens
Verumessetdicerequodilla mea propositio
dicendo
sedfalsum,
dixissem
si fuisset
vera,egononverum
quodipsaestfalsa.
Quoniam
'falsum'
Tamentermini
supponit
proeodem,quia illudpraedicatum
ejussupponebant
. . . Tamen
etsicsupponit
indifferenter
falsa,
proilla,cumsitfalsa.
proomnipropositione
aliudad quodsequeretur
necassereret
se essefalsam
nonassereret
ubipropositio
ipsam
velinfinitae,
saltem
ad veritatem
credoquodsufficeret
essefalsam,
affirmativae,
singularis
proeodem."
supponerent
quodtermini
fromherforthcoming
me to citepassages
forallowing
to Dr Pironet
I am grateful
edition.
28Buridan,
, ed. Scott,138.
Sophismata

15:14:21 PM

READ
STEPHEN

200

different
things,if negative).But Buridan has claimed that everypropo- so
sition (togetherwith the claim that it exists
everypropositionthat
exists)entailsits own truth(ed. Scott,p. 136). Let us write'Trpv for"jfr1
satisfiesthe suppositional criterion'.Then
is true' and 6Srpv for cr/?n
Buridan's truth-condition
generalizesto all propositionsas:29
(B)
ry - (Sy a Vq((p - q) - S^)).
That thisstrongercondition,(B), sufficesfortruthemergesfromsuppos1
that is, that Srp1
ing on the contrarythat,for some p, Svp but iTr/?n,
Since TvfPis affirmative,
does not sufficefor Tr/?n.
SrTrprimeans that
CT'
it
for
the
so
entails
and
same,
Tr/?n.
Contraposing,it
rp1
supposit
followsfrom- TTp*that -iSrTvpv. Thus, given that Tp*exists,if STp^a
-i Tvp^then
(p - ry) a -sr7Y'
forBuridan has claimed that for adip (giventhat rp1exists)
p -+ ry
Generalizing,we obtain
3q ((p - q) a
which is equivalentto
-Xq((p - q) - SV)
-q) -> 5r^) then Ty, as Buridan says.
Contraposing,if S T(pa V </((/?
- even desirable.
But consider(B) more closely.It may look harmless
It is a trivialconsequence of
Tp* ++ Srp1

(,S)

For suppose (5) holds forall />,and supposep ^ q. Then if T^p1,it follows that Tvq*(by Modus Ponens) and so Svq~*(by S). So
ry

- Vq((p - q)

SY)

- notethatpropositions
29Foreachproposition
for
p, is a nameofthatproposition
vocalorinthemind.(B)has
aretoken
andother
medievais
Buridan
written,
inscriptions,
initshould
be takenas subbutthis,
andthequantification
thegenerality
interpretation,
suboftheproposition
of(B) givesthetruth-conditions
thatis,eachinstance
stitutional,
stituted
for*p'

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

201

withp yields(p -/>)

Conversely,suppose V^((p -> q) -Srq1). Instantiating
-
whence
and so Tvp^ (by S ). Thus (5) entails
<-V?((/>->?)->- -S'Y),
T1/)"1
and (5) is immediate.
The problem is that (.S ) is too strong,and () on its own too weak.
conditionfor
(.B) is in factdisastrous,forit robs Buridan of any sufficient
truthat all. For to show T7/?1,
it is, by (B), necessaryfirstto show Vq({p
-q)
T[pn, this requirementincludes
Srq1)). But since for all p, p
T
that
that
To
is,
vp^. do that,we have to show that
showingSvTvp^,
T' and rp1suppositforthe same, thatis, thatrp^is true.In otherwords,
is true.
(B) says that to show that rp1is T we need firstto show that r/?n
That's impossible,and ridiculous.30
This givesthe lie to Hughes' defenceof Buridan againstthe charge of
adhoccery.31
Hughes claims that Buridan could generalizehis truth-condition for insolublesto all propositionswithoutloss, since only insolubles
are (as Hughes describesit) "contextually
inconsistent".
We now see, howthat
which
are
consistent
can no more
ever,
propositions
contextually
meet Buridan'struth-condition
than
can
insolubles.
For
(B)
(B) is designed
to preventpropositionsfrombeing true. Propositionswhose truth-conditions are given by (B) are true only if theyare true. So (.B) specifiesno
truth-condition
forthem. (B) is useless as a criterionof truthin general.
Yablo's versionof the paradox bringsout the ad hocnatureof Buridan's
solutionin an effective
way.32Yablo considersa sequence of propositions:
arefalse.
(1)Allsubsequent
propositions
arefalse.
(2) Allsubsequent
propositions
(3) . . .
At firstsight,it appears we can reason as follows.Suppose proposition
(1) is true. Then all subsequent propositionsare false, including,e.g.,
its falpropositions(3) onwards. So proposition(2) is true,contradicting
So
must
in
be
which
case
some
false,
sity. proposition(1)
proposition,(),

30Cf.Plato,Theaetetus
"Atthatrate,thewaya roller
209E(tr.M.J.Levett):
goesround
or a pestleor anything
elseproverbial
wouldbe nothing
withsuchdirections;
compared
be morejustly
calleda matter
of'theblindleading
theblind'.To tellus to
theymight
addwhatwe already
have,in orderto cometo knowwhatwe aretalking
about,bears
a generous
resemblance
to thebehaviour
ofa manbenighted."
31Huerhes
1984(seeabove,n. 3),20.
32S. Yablo,Paradox
without
53 (1993),251-2.
, Analysis,
self-reference

15:14:21 PM

202

STEPHEN
READ

say, is true.By the same reasoning,proposition(n + 1) is both true and

false- paradox.
Unless he is to admitparadox, Buridan'sline of solutionhas to be to
block the move wherebypropositions(2) and (n + 1) are inferredto be
truefromthe factthatall theirsuccessorsare false,thatis, fromthe fact
that theysatisfythe suppositionalcriterion.That is not enough,Buridan
must say- each of them entailssomethingfalse,namely,that some successor is true. The simple suppositionalcriterionmust be extended,or
the paradox will ensue. Thus wheneverparadox threatens,Buridan must
invoke his special truth-condition,
(B). That is clearlyad hoc, unless the
truth-condition
is
special
generalized to all propositions.But then no
to
be
true.
propositiongets
- he makes it
In a minimalsense, Buridan's solutionworks
impossible
to show thatthe insolublesare true.Our investigations
have impaled him
on the horns of a dilemma,however. Either (B) applies only to insolubles, in which case it is an ad hocdevice designed solely,and without
any real diagnosis,to block the paradoxes; or (B) generalizesto all propositions,in which case it becomes impossibleto show that any propositions are true. Buridan ends up with no theoryof truthat all.
6. Albert'sTheory
The relationshipbetweenBuridan and Albertof Saxony and theirtheories of, interalia, signification,
one
suppositionand truth,is a difficult
which needs closer examination.Moody, Boehner and othersportrayed
Albert as a loyal pupil of Buridan's.33Recent researchnot only shows
Buridan respondingto Albert,e.g., in the finalversionof his Summulae
,
but pointsup substantialdisagreementsbetweenthem on all threematters. Indeed, one begins to suspect that Albert only became aware of
Buridan's doctrinesslowlyand relativelylate in the compositionof his
nationsat theUniversity
logicalworks.They belonged,afterall, to different
of Paris, and on many issues theyare diametricallyopposed.34
Buridan's account in his Sophismata
differsfromAlbertof Saxony's in
two regards.First,Albertis happy to say that everypropositionsignifies
33Moody1953{op.cit.,above,n. 2), 7; P. Boehner,
Medieval
Manchester
1952,
Logic,
70:Kretzmann
et al., TheCambridge
History
(seefootnote
9),865.
34See,e.g.,Fitzgerald's
'Introduction'
to hisedition
ofAlbert's
circa
Quaestiones
logicam
in:Michael
Albert
onLogic:
A Critical
Questions
J. Fitzgerald,
ofSaxony's
Twenty-Five
Disputed
Edition
ofhisQuaestiones
circa
Leiden2002.
logicam,

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

203

itselfto be true, as in Buridan's earlier account; but secondly,Albert's

account of truthapplies equally to insolublesand to non-insolubles.The
resultis, however,that Albertblocks the insolublesonly at the cost of
undermininghis whole account of truth.
Albertpresentsas his sixththesisa resultverysimilarto Bradwardine's
thesis2: "Every propositionsignifying
that it is true and that it is false,
is false."35His proof is straightforward.
Every propositionis affirmative
or negative.If affirmative,
it signifiesthat its subject and predicatesupposit for the same, for,as we saw in 3, Albert'ssecond assumptionis
thatforan affirmative
propositionto be true is forits subjectand predicate to co-supposit.36
But by the same assumption,it also signifies
its suband
not
to
for
that
is
what
2
ject
predicate
co-supposit, assumption says
it is foran affirmative
to be false. Clearly,subject and predicatecannot
both co-suppositand not. So thingsare not howeverit signifies
they
are as it signifies,
forit signifiessubjectand predicatenot to co-supposit,
and they do not, but thingsare also not as it signifies,for it signifies
- so it
them to co-supposit,so thingsare not altogetherhow it signifies
is false,by the definition
thatfortruth,thingsmustbe howeverit signifies.
A similarproof shows the same for negativepropositions,yieldingthe
sixththesis.
However, recall from3 Albert'sthirdthesis,that "everyproposition
in the world signifiesthat it is true." It enables Albertto show in the
familiarway thatthe insolublesare false.What he does not realise,however, is that his account will be inadequate as an account of truth,just
as we have seen Buridan's is, if Buridan chooses to avoid the charge of
Let us representtrpn
: Then Albert's
adhoccery.
signifiesthat by
definitionof truthis:37
{A)

Tvp" <-> V^O1 : e -> e)

thatis, rp]is trueif and onlyif howeverrp]signifiesthingsto be, so they

are. By thesis3, vp]: Tvp*(everypropositionsignifiesthatit is true).But
the right-handside includesthe condition:
35Albert
ofSaxony,
Perutilis
andStump
Logica
(seefootnote
20),f.43va;tr.Kretzmann
1988(op. cit.,above,n. 19),341.
36The secondassumption
in fact,fromconsiderations
in thePerutilis
earlier
follows,
'est'ponitur
tertio
adiacens[i.e.,addi, tract1 ch. 6, f.4r:"quandohocverbum
Logica
to subject
andpredicate]
ad subiectionally
significai
quamdam
compositionem
predicati
id est,subiectum
etpredicatum
tum,
supponere
proeodem... Ex hissequitur
quodomnis
affirmativa
subiectum
etpredicatum
propositio
significat
supponere
proeodem."
37Albert
ofSaxony,
Perutilis
cf.Kretzmann
andStump,
338.
, f.43rb;
Logica

15:14:21 PM

STEPHEN
READ

204

y : jy
and so, since ^
(4-)

-> ry

: T^1, (4) is equivalentto:

ry

Aryj

where the right-handside conjoins all the thingswhich rjtPsignifies.

Just
as in the case of (B), [A') reveals that Alberthas no sufficient
condition
fortruth,forp ++ (q a p) is equivalentto p
q, so (A') reduces to
T'p1 -

: e ^ e)

If rf?is true,it followsthat thingsare howeverit signifies.But the converse fails.That thingsare howeverrp1signifiesis not enough to show
thatrp1is true.For rp1signifiesthatr/?n
itselfis true. In order to be true,
must
be
Each
true if
rp1
(first) true.
propositionbecomes a Truth-teller,
it is true,falseif it is false.But therenow appears no way of determining which it is. That is just as inadequate as a theoryof truthas was
Buridan's.The insolublesare blocked,but at too high a price.
It is usefulhere to consideranotherdiscussionby Albertof the notion
of truth,in Question 11 of his Questions
onthePosterior
.38This quesAnalytics
tionexpoundsthe same doctrines,by the same arguments,
usingthe same
in
and
same
as
does
Buridan
the
10th of his
the
language,
examples
on thePosterior
Questions
(see footnote27). Here both Buridan and
Analytics
Albertfirmlyrejectthe suppositionalcriterionwhich Albertproposed in
tractof his Perutilis
Logica,citedin 3 above.
assumption2 of the Insolubilia
In theirQuestions
both
Albert
and Buridan argue
on thePosterior
,
Analytics
thatthe suppositionalcriterionprovidesonly a necessary,not a sufficient
but not necessaryconditionforfalseconditionfortruth,and a sufficient,
hood for affirmative
Albert
writes:
propositions.
forwhosetruth
it
is thatthere
aremanyaffirmative
The secondthesis
propositions
foris thesameas thatforwhich
the
doesnotsuffice
thatwhatthesubject
supposits
arefalsein which,
Forsomeaffirmative
however,
propositions
predicate
supposits.
I say,'Thepropoforthesame.Forexample,
andpredicate
subject
suppose
supposit
be A. Then
sition
whichI utter
is false'andnothing
else,andletthisproposition
38Albert
Aristotel
Librum
Posteriorum
subtilissime
of Saxony,
Quaestiones
Analyticorum
super
34 above).
in theAppendix
to Fitzgerald
2002(seefootnote
Primm
, Venice1497,edited
as Fitzgerald
intwosimilar
butdistinct
Albert's
arepreserved
versions,
Quaestiones
explains
in twenty-two
in his'Introduction'.
Version
mss.,wascomposed,
I, preserved
Fitzgerald
II preserved
in twomss.andthe1497
no laterthan1355,witha laterVersion
argues,
earlier
11 ofVersion
I citearefrom
The passages
edition.
II, expanding
pasQuestion
I.
13 ofVersion
Question
sagesfrom

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

205

A is falseanditspredicate
is 'false'.So itspredicate
wecanargue:proposition
supitssubject
forthe
A ofwhichit is part.Similarly,
supposits
positsforproposition
andpredicate
whichI utter
is false'.So thesubject
'Theproposition
same,namely,
A is falseis clear,because
A supposit
forthesame.Thatproposition
ofproposition
itself
to be trueandto be false,
it signifies
sinceit is an affirmative
bya corollary
affirmative
thesis
thatevery
inferred
from
thepreceding
signifies
[namely,
proposition
- thesamethesis
injustthe
as thesis1 oftheInsolubilia
itsowntruth
tract,
proved
itself
to be false.Butbecauseit cannotbe
sameway seebelow],sinceit signifies
are
is simultaneously
trueandfalse,things
bothtrueandfalse,forno proposition
arenotas itsignifies,
itfollows
A signifies.
Fromthis,thatthings
notas proposition
thatitis false.39
Albert'sargumentin this question is that the suppositionalcriterionis
for truth.But whereas Buridan in his
only necessaryand not sufficient
, in responseto the same difficulty,
proposed the strongersupSophismata
B
the
earlier
reaction
both of Buridan's and of
condition
),
(.
positional
what
is
both
Albert'sis different.
Rather,theysay,
necessaryand sufficient
is the criterionin termsof signification:
forthetruth
ofanyproposition
itis necessary
andsufficient
thatso
Thefifth
thesis:
itbe as is signified
byit.40
Insteadof proposingan additionalclause in the truth-condition
specifically
criterion
forthe insolubles,Buridan and Albertrevertto the signification
in order to block the inferenceto their truth.The counterexampleis
exactlythe same in all threecases.
39Albert,
subtilissime
Posteriorum
, ed. M. Fitzgerald,
Quaestiones
super
(Version
Analyticorum
11 (ed.Venicef. 10rb),
ed. Fitzgerald
2002(op.cit.,above,n. 38),359,11.
II), Question
conclusio:
multae
suntpropositiones
affirmativae
ad quarum
"Secunda
veritatem
848-862:
nonsufficit
illudproquo supponit
subiectum
esseilludproquo supponit
praedicatum.
enimpropositiones
affirmativae
suntfalsae,
ubitarnen
hocproquosupponit
subiecAliquae
Verbigratia,
tumesthocproquo supponit
praedicatum.
positoquodegodicam'propositi quamegoprofero
estfalsa'etnulla<m>alia<m>,etsitistapropositio
a. Tuncarguitur
estly'falsa'.Ergo,eiuspraedicatum
sic:A propositio
estfalsa,et eiuspraedicatum
supcuiusestpars.Et similiter
eiussubiectum
ponitproa propositione
supponit
proeodem,
scilicet
estfalsa'.Ergo,a propositionis
subiectum
etpraedicatum
'propositio
quamprofero
sitfalsapatet,
se esseveramet
supponunt
proeodem.Quoda propositio
quiasignificat
se essefalsam,
cumsitaffirmativa
illatum
ex praecedenti.
Et cum
perunumcorollarium
hocsignificat
se essefalsam.
Sedquianonestsicquodsitveraetfalsa,
cumnullapropositiositveraet falsasimul,
Et ex
ergononestitasicutpera propositionem
significatur.
earnessefalsam."
quo nonestitasicutperearnsignificatur,
sequitur
Notethestrong
to Buridan's
discussion
ofthesameissuein hisQuaestiones
,
similarity
citedin footnote
27 above.
40Albert
conclusio:
ad veritatem
cuiusabove,n. 38),359,11.876-877:
(ed.cit.,
"Quinta
libetpropositionis
sufficit
et requiritur
Buridan,
quodsicsitsicutperearnsignificatur."
inprimm
librum
Posteriorum
Questiones
Analyticorum
(seefootnote
27),q. 10:"Quintaconclusioestquodad veritatem
de inesseetde praesenti
etsufficit
propositionis
requiritur
quod
esseitaestin resignificata
velin rebussignificatisi'
qualitercumque
ipsasignificat

15:14:21 PM

206

STEPHEN
READ

What, however,of the proof(set out in 3 above) in the Perutilis

Logica,
that everypropositionsignifiesits own truth?For that proof depended
heavilyon assumption2. Albertbelievesit survivesthe revision.He writes:
Fromthisconclusion
thatsuppositing
forthesameis required
conclusion,
[thefirst
forthetruth
ofaffirmatives]
itfollows
thatevery
affirmative
itself
proposition
signifies
tobe true.Proof:
foran affirmative
tosupproposition's
beingtrueis foritssubject
Buteveryaffirmative
positforthesameas itspredicate.
proposition
byreasonof
theaffirmative
verbalcopulasignifies
thatitssubject
forthesameas its
supposits
So every
affirmative
itself
to be true.41
predicate.
proposition
signifies
The affirmative
copula, 'is', signifiesthat subject and predicate co-supand
so
an
affirmative
posit,
propositionsignifiesthat it meets the necesin
the
first
conclusion,fortruth.Does thatwarrant
sarycondition,given
Albert's corollary?To my mind, it does not. In assumption2 of the
Perutilis
Logica,where co-suppositingwas said to be both necessaryand
the proofwent through.Here it does not.
sufficient,
Marilyn Adams makes a similarpoint in her discussionof Paul of
Venice.42Paul presentsas his First Way (on the Truth and Falsityof
and threecorolPropositions)a theorymarkedby fourtheses{conclusiones)
laries. In the ms., Thesis 1 offersthe suppositionalcriterionas a necesand Thesis 2 makes it a
sary condition for the truthof affirmatives
sufficient
conditionforthetruthof negatives.Adams observesthatCorollary
2, thatnegativepropositionsare trueif and onlyif subjectand predicate
do not co-supposit,will followonly if Thesis 2 is strengthened
to give
thatconditionas necessaryas well as sufficient,
and notesthattheincunabulum does give the thesisin that form.She attributesthe FirstWay to
41Albert,
Posteriorum
Quaestiones
, (ed.cit.,above,n. 38),358,11.816super
Analytkorum
821:"Ex istaconclusione
omnem
affirmativam
se esse
sequitur
propositionem
significare
veram.
nampropositionem
affirmativam
esseveramesthocproquo supponit
Probatur,
subiectum
esseidemproquosupponit
Sedmodoomnis
affirmativa
praedicatum.
propositio
ratione
affirmativae
hocproquo supponit
subiectum
esseidem
copulaeverbalis
significat
affirmativa
se esseveram."
proquosupponit
praedicatum.
Ergoomnis
propositio
significat
Cf.footnote
36 above.Essentially
thesameproofis alsofound
in Albert's
Quaestiones
circa
, ed.Fitzgerald
above,n. 34),q. 9,p. 168170.1:"Existoinfero
Logicam
(op.cit.,
quod
omnis
seesseveram.
Faciliter
namomnis
velestcompropositio
significat
patet,
propositio
veldivisio,
id estvelaffirmativa
velnegativa.
Si affirmativa,
tuncsignificat
idem
positio
esseproquosupponit
velpraedicatum,
sedhocestpropositionem
affirmativam
esseveram.
Dicitur
autemsi estnegativa,
tuncsignificat
nonesseidemproquo supponit
subiectum
etpraedicatum,
et hocestpropositionem
esseveram."
negativam
Theproof
doesnotappearinquestion
10ofBuridan's
inAnalytkorum
Posteriorum
Questiones
,
buthe does.riveit,we saw,in hisQuestiones
Elencorum:
seeabove,6 3.
42PaulofVenice,
II 10-11,ed. andtr.F. delPuntaandM.M.Adams,
Logica
Magna
Oxford
U.P. fortheBritish
1978,252.
Academy

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

207

Albert,citingthe Perutilis
Logica.As we have seen, in that work Albert
gives the suppositionalcriteriain assumptions2 and 3 as both necessary
in the case both of affirmatives
and sufficient,
and of negatives.But he
in
denies
this
theses
and
3
of
2
explicitly
question 11 of the Posterior
1
Thesis
of
the
First
is
endorsed
Analytics.
Way
by Buridan and Albert
in the firstconclusionof theirrespectiveQuestions
on thePosterior
,
Analytics
and Thesis 2 in Buridan'sthirdand Albert'sfourthconclusion.Theses 3
and 4 combine to reject the simple formula,"thingsare as it signifies",
in favourof the stronger,"thingsare howeverit signifies",which both
Buridan and Albertaccept in theirfifthconclusions,cited in footnote40
above. Van der Lecq and BraakhuissuggestthatBuridan rejectsthe formula in this work (Buridan, Questiones
Elencorum
, p. xviii). But Buridan
in
clearlyendorsesit, as shown the quotationearlier.
Adams' anxietyabout Corollary 2 of the First Way is that co-suppositingsubjectand predicatewill not rendera negativepropositionfalse
unless theirnot co-suppositingis necessaryas well as sufficient
for the
negativeproposition'struth.She correctlytracesthisback to whethercoforthe truthof the corresponding
affirmative.
But
suppositingis sufficient
in neitherms. nor incunabulumdoes the FirstWay accept thiscriterion
as sufficient.
Consequently,thoughAdams does not remarkon thisconsequence, the proofof Corollary 1 fails.Paul writes:
1: every
affirmative
thatititself
is true.Proof:
(Corollary)
signifies
proposition
Every
affirmative
becauseofitscopulative
thatwhatthesubject
verb,signifies
proposition,
foris whatthepredicate
for.43
supposits
supposits
But unless co-suppositingis sufficient
for truth,the corollary,that the
affirmative
that
it
is
does
not follow.The premiseis rp1:
true,
signifies
S[p1, that any (affirmative)
propositionsignifiesthat it satisfiesthe supthe
desired
conclusionis vp^: Trp1, that it signifies
condition;
positional
itselfto be true. How can one bridge the gap? One way would be to
claimSvp1-> Tvp^and appeal to Bradwardine's
Postulate2, thatsignification
is closed under consequence. But the FirstWay has denied Srp1- Tvp~^,
in Thesis 1, just as Albertdoes explicidyin Thesis 2 of quesimplicitly
tion 11 of the Posterior
(cited above) and Buridan does also in
Analytics
Thesis 2 of question 10 his Posterior
(see footnote27). Given this
Analytics
rejection,vp^: T^p1 does not followfromrp1: Srp1.

43Logica
, ed. andtr.delPuntaandAdams,
Magna
(op.cit.,above,n. 42),7.

15:14:21 PM

208

READ
STEPHEN

Albert,however,is persuaded. What he fails to foresee,however,is

criterionfor truth,coupled with the
that revertingto the signification
claim that illpropositionssignifytheirown truth,places an insuperable
obstaclein the way of any proposition'sachievingtruth.In fact,we can
to all
presentAlbert(and Buridan, if he generalizeshis truth-condition
witha dilemma:iftheyare rightthatthe insolublesare simpropositions)
false
and
not true in virtueof being unable to meet the sufficiency
ply
or that everyproposidemand (thatthingsbe altogetheras theysignify,
tion theyentail satisfythe suppositionalcriteriontoo), then no proposition is clearlytrue in theirtheory,since Albertand Buridan both claim
or at leastimplies,itsown truth.In Albert's
thateverypropositionsignifies,
is
this:
the
dilemma
first,suppose we accept that everyproposition
case,
Then
no propositioncan satisfythe significational
its
own
truth.
signifies
conditionfor truthset out in (A), that howeverit signifies,so it is. On
the otherhand, suppose we rejectthe argumentforassumption2, on the
ground that the suppositionalconditionis only necessary,not sufficient
for truth.Then each insoluble is not only false, but true too, by (A).
Albert'spositionis as unstableas Buridan's.44
7. Bradwardine's
ofSignification
Theory
Bradwardine'stheorydoes not collapse into the absurdityof
Fortunately,
Albert'sor Buridan's.Bradwardinedoes not claim thateveryproposition
to the insolor impliesits own truth.His claim is restricted
eithersignifies
insoluble
that
not
claim
he
does
ubles. Even here,
every
signifies
simply
its own truth,as the later Buridan simplyassertsthat everyproposition
impliesits own truth.Bradwardineestablisheshis claim, by what we saw
The
was a carefuland intricateargument,frommore basic assumptions.45
that
claim
his
Albert's
of
than
corresponding
proof
proofis much deeper
all propositionssignifytheirown truth,which followedin Perutilis
Logica
the
crucial
In
Bradwardine's
his
from
case,
assumptions.
immediately

44Thesameproblem
basedontheclaimthat
willaffect
proposal,
EugeneMills'recent
solution
totheLiar
see E. Mills,A simple
to itself":
truth
attributes
, in:
"Every
proposition
89 (1998),197-212,
205.
Studies,
Philosophical
45As F. Rcanati,
etsonintrt
duMenteur
mdivale
duparadoxe
Unesolution
pourla smanToronto
du
and
C.
Vance
Amour
L.
Brin
in:
1983,
,
Archologie
Signe
(ed.),
,
contemporaine
tique
as an axiomthatevery
tosolvetheparadox
asserting
251-64,
bysimply
says(264),looking
is an adhocmanoeuvre
itsowntruth
orimplies
(cf.261,n. 23).What
signifies
proposition
it (p. 254).
notjusta wayofavoiding
whichsolvestheproblem,
wewantis an analysis

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

209

assumptionis Postulate2, that everypropositionsignifiesor means conor necessarilyeverything

which followsfromit contingently
or
tingently
is closed under implicationand entailment.
necessarily that signification
What I have renderedhere by 'contingently
or necessarily'corresponds
to the Latin 'ut nunc vel simpliciter',literally,'as of now or simply(or
absolutely)'.These are technicaltermsfromthe theoryof consequence.
fromvq^if Vp1is truewheneverrq1is. The
Propositionrp']followssimpliciter
inferencefromrq1to rp1may be enthymematic,
in requiringan additional
that
in this case be necessaradditional
will
premise.However,
premise
ily true.In contrast,rp1followsutnuncfromrq1onlyif the inferencefrom
true premise.For example,
rq1to rjt)1requiresan additionalcontingently
WalterBurley'streatiseon consequences(partof his De Puntate
ArtisLogicae
Tractatus
written
at
the
same
time
beforeBradwardine's
Brevior,
as, or shortly
Insolubilia
) starts:
a preliminary
Firstof all,then,I present
distinction:
one sortof consequence
is
another
sortis as-of-now.
Anabsolute
is onethatholdsgood
absolute,
consequence
- e.g.'A manis running,
forevery
time
an animalis running'.
Anas-oftherefore,
nowconsequence
holdsgoodfora determinate
timeandnotalways,
man
e.g.'Every
is running,
Socrates
is running',
sincethisconsequence
doesnotholdgood
therefore,
butonlywhileSocrates
is a man.46
always,
Both inferences
are enthymematic:
the firstrequiresthe additionalpremise,
man
is
an
the
'Socrates is a man'. But the first
animal',
second,
'Every
of these is necessarilytrue,while the second is only contingendyso.
One mightworry,however,that Postulate2 is too strong,in closing
under ut nuncconsequence. Recall Burley'sfamouscriticism
signification
of Ockham over the signification
of 'finger'.We notedin 4 thatOckham
reintroducedthe Augustininidea that spoken words signifythings,not
concepts. So by moving my finger,joked Burley,I could change the
meaningof 'move', sincewhen myfingerwas moving,it signified according to Ockham the finger,but when I kept my fingerstill,it didn't.47
But it is absurd, Burley declared, to suppose that I can change the
of a word just by movingmy finger.Rather- accordingto
signification
Burleyand the orthodoxybeforeOckham the meaningof 'move' is constantthroughsuch changes,forit signifiesthe concept 'move'.

46W.Burleigh,
DePuntate
Artis
St.Bonaventure
, ed.P. Boehner,
1955,199;trans.
Logicae
Kretzmann
andStump1988[op.cit.,above,n. 19),284-5.
47Burley,
Tractatus
Artis
, in:De Puntate
, ed.Boehner,
9; cf.G. de Occam,
Longior
Logicae
Summa
ed. P. Boehner
et al.,St.Bonaventure,
N.Y. 1974,ch.33.
Logicae,

15:14:21 PM

210

READ
STEPHEN

A similarodditylooks to threatenBradwardine'stheoryas a resultof

adopting Postulate 2, and includingut nuncconsequences in its scope.
Consider the proposition,'Everything
movingwas caused to move' call
it A. Suppose now that I move my finger.Then A implies ut nuncthe
proposition,Myfingeris caused to move' propositionB. So I can make
A signifyB ut nunc
, or not, at will,on Bradwardine'stheory.This seems
as good- or bad- an objectionto Postulate2 as Burley'sobjectionwas
to Ockham's account of signification.
But Bradwardinewould seem contentto accept it as a reasonableconsequence, given what he writesearlier in his treatise.For example, in
, he considersa situationfamildevelopinghis objectionsto the restringentes
:
iar in medieval discussionof insolubilia
is uttered
whenSocrates
Platoonlyhearsthesubject-term
says,'A falsehood
Suppose
andso inparThenPlatounderstands
falsehood,
bythissubject-term
bySocrates'.
in thisway
So thesubject-term
ticular
thefalsehood
uttered
signifies
bySocrates.
to therestringentist
thesis].48
[i.e.,thewholeofwhichitis part,contrary
Bradwardineseems thento believe that 'falsum'signifiesSocrates'propo, in virtueof the contingent
sition,but it clearlysignifiesit only ut nunc
fact that Socrates utteredthe propositionhe did.
In defenceof Bradwardine'sconceptionof ut nunc
, and more generas given by Postulate2, one mightpoint to
ally, secondarysignification
naturaluses of 'mean' whichfunctionin the same way. Suppose one says,
'All philosophersare naturalsceptics'.One would be challenged:'Do you
mean that Plato, and Descartes, were sceptics?' 'Yes,' must come the
reply.The universalclaim entailsthe particularclaims,'Plato was a sceptic' and 'Descartes was a sceptic',and so one musthave meant them,in
particular,by what one said. One meant whateverone's remarkentails,
and if any of themis false,what one said was false.What one meant by
thatfollowsfromit. But
what one said embracesand includeseverything
it is clearlycontingentthat Plato and Descartes were philosophers.So
these consequencesare ut nunc.

48Bradwardine,
Roure's
textherebycomI haveemended
ed.Roure,
3.05.However,
a
falsum
dicitur
ms.Can.lat.291.Hertextreads:"Sortedicente:
withOxford
parison
in uniomnefalsum
tantum.
TuncPlatoperilludintelligit
audiatPlatosubjectum
Sorte,
The
illiusPlatosic significai."
a Sorte.Ergosubjectum
dictum
versali,
ergoet falsum
in placeof'Plato'
and'Platonis'
in placeof'omnefalsum',
ms.has'essefalsum'
Oxford
ofBradwardine's
edition
needfora critical
an urgent
Thereis clearly
inthatlastsentence.
all twelve
mss.
text,
comparing

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

2 11

8. Truth
Bradwardinemustmeet a crucialobjectionto his theory,however.Recall
from5 Buridan's claim that everypropositionimpliesits own truth.It
does so ut nunc
, for it needs the extra premise,Buridan notes, that the
exists.
Nonetheless,this ut nuncimplicationwould mean that,
proposition
to
Postulate
2, everypropositionwould signify{utnunc)its own
according
truth.If Bradwardinewere forcedto concede that conclusion,his theory
would collapsejust as we have seen Buridan's and Albert'sto do. For it
would provideno sufficient
criterionforbeing true.
It is clear that Bradwardinedid not accept Buridan'sthesisthat every
propositionimpliesits own truth.If he had, he would not have given a
long and complex proofof the much weaker claim that everyinsoluble
signifiesits own truth,or at least, he would have followedit by that
strongerclaim. Take, for example, Albert'sproof that everyaffirmative
propositionsignifiesthat it is true. We should not inferthat he believes
thatnegativepropositionsdo not; he immediatelyproceeds to show they
do and so concludes that everypropositionin the world signifiesthat it
is true.49Bradwardinedoes not accept Albert'sor Buridan's claims. For
him, it is only insolublesthat signifytheirown truth,and it takes a subde argumentto show it fromclearlyarticulatedpremises.
Spade claims that Bradwardineis in factcommittedto the claim that
notjust insolublesbut everypropositionsignifies
its own truth.50
His argumentdepends on attributing
to Bradwardinenot only the closurecondition statedin Postulate2 (whichSpade dubs 'BP') but its converse,CBP,
the Converse BradwardinePrinciple:"whatevera [proposition]signifies
followsfromit" [op.cit.,p. 120). For if whenevervp]: e, it followsthatp
e, we can show (by permutation)that ifp then V^(rp1: e -e) and so
Ty, whencep
T*^1,and so by BP (Postulate2), rp1: Tvp*forany p.
We have seen thatifthiswere so, it would be disastrousforBradwardine's
solution.
CBP to Bradwardineis that "it is preSpade's reason for attributing
in
some
of
his
supposed
reasoning",in particular,in the second leg of
Bradwardine'sproofthat if A signifiesthatA is not true and P, then A
signifiesitselfto be true. But Spade's analysisof the proof(pp. 122-3) is
incorrect(cf.footnote11 above). Bradwardineargues as follows:suppose

49See above,3.
50Spade1981 cit.,above,n. 124.
(op.
1),

15:14:21 PM

212

READ
STEPHEN

A : (- 'TA a P). Since - 'TA -> - (- 17^4a P) by Definition1 and Thesis

1, -i TA - (7^4 v - iP) by Postulate 4, and so (- 'TA a P) - TA by
Postulate5. Hence by Postulate2, ^4 : TA. Bradwardinedoes not, and
need not use CBP in thisproof.
Anyone familiarwith Tarski's analysisof the concept of truth,however,will be puzzled.51How can Bradwardinedoubt that everyproposition impliesits own truth?Surely,Tarski's materialadequacy condition,
that
(T)

S is true iffp

be derivablein any adequate theoryof truth,where what replaces 'S' is

a name of the object-languageproposition(or sentence)whose translahas the immediateconsequence
tion into the metalanguagereplaces
- the
that everypropositionentailsits own truth
propositionis thereon
the right-handside, and the statementof its truthis on the left.
Bradwardinewould not accept,however,that(T) is correct.52
(T) does
not spell out fullythe requirementsfor a propositionto be true. They
were spelled out above in considerationof Albert'saccount of truth:
: e ^ e)
T'p1 ++
(A)
As Bradwardinesays in Definition1, "a truepropositionis an utterance
only as thingsare" and the insertionof 'only' here is crucial.
signifying
So when
Truthis an ideal, we saw any hintof failureresultsin falsity.53
other
is
an
utterance
"a
false
that
Bradwardinesays
signifying
proposition
than thingsare" (ed. Roure, 6.03), he means that if any part of what
it signifiesfails,the propositionis false.
Take Socrates' utteranceof 'What Socratessays is false'.To show that
Socrates' utteranceis true,it is not enough to show thatit is false.That
is only part of what it signifies.This is Bradwardine'sresponseto the
revengeproblem(see above, 1). The problemis this:Bradwardine'ssolution entailsthat Socrates' utteranceis false,and Bradwardinearguesthat

51See,e.g.,A. Tarski,
andPhenomenological
Thesemantic
, in:Philosophy
conception
oftruth
4 (1944),341-75.
Research,
52Thisis contrary
to Spade'sclaimin Spade 1981{op.cit.,above,n. 1), 131,and
Bradwardine
n.45),261.Consequently,
1983[op.cit.,
inRcanati
Recanati's
above,
implication
reductio
as Spadeinfers
is notcommitted,
proofs.
(132),to rejecting
53See above,5;andAlbert,
1988(op.cit.,
andStump,
Insolubilia
above,
, tr.Kretzmann
n. 19),344.

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

213

he has presentedthe true and correctsolutionto the insolubles.Yet did

Socratesnot say thatwhathe said was false?If it is truewhenBradwardine
says it, why is it not truewhen Socrates says it? Does it not followfrom
Socrates'utterance'sbeingfalse(Bradwardine'sverdict)thatwhat Socrates
said was true? RepresentingSocrates' utteranceby s, the schema (T)
yields:
Ts ++ Fs
(**)
Bradwardinetells us Fs, and so we conclude Ts, and the paradox has
taken its revenge.
George Hughes puts this objection to Buridan (JohnBuridanon Self, p. 25). He writes:"My enthusiasmfor [Buridan] dates largely
Reference
fromthe momentwhen it struckme that he could replyto it along the
lines suggestedhere." He continues:"Buridan does not tackle such an
argumentdirectly,but he comes so close to doing so that I thinkone
can workout withreasonableconfidencewhat his replyto it would be."
In Bradwardine'scase, we do not need to conjecture.He deals withthe
objectionexplicidy.We have representedSocrates' utteranceas V; Bradwardinealso utters,'What Socratessaysis false',whichwe represent,say,
and t are equiformtokensof the same type-proposition.
as
They
have (Bradwardineexplicitlynotes,at 7.023) the same subject,predicate
and copula. But theyare not equivalent.In general,equiformtokensof
are equivalentand have the same truth-value.
the same type-proposition
is
not
this
Nonetheless,
always so. If Socrates and his wifeboth utter,'I
utteranceis true and Xanthippe's is false.
a
Socrates'
am philosopher',
and so the two tokenshave
The propositioncontainsa token-reflexive,
different
truth-conditions.
accordThe propositions and t also have different
truth-conditions,
s

both
that
is false
ing to Bradwardine'stheory.Proposition signifies
and that i is true,and since it cannot be both, it is false. Propositiont
signifiessimplythat is false,and so, since s is false, t is true. It does
not followfromthe factthats is falsethats is true.For it is not sufficient
so
fors to be true that be false.It is requiredthathoweverit signifies,
thingsare, that it signifyonly as thingsare, and it does not signifyonly
that is both false
as thingsare. It cannot,forit signifiesa contradiction,
and true. It signifiespartlyas thingsare- is false. But it does not signifywhollyas theyare. So it is false.
It followsthat (T) mustbe mistaken,forit leaves out thatvital 'only'.
for the truthof (T)
It makes only part of what j signifiessufficient

15:14:21 PM

2 14

STEPHEN
READ

is not sufficient
of s, whichs signifies,
has (**)as an instance.But the falsity
of s (and indeed, of any proposition)
for its truth.The truth-conditions
are given by ():
Ts ++ '/e(s : e -e)
that is,
Ts

(Fs a Ts a . . .)

Since no propositionis both true and false,and everypropositionis one

or the other,s is false.
There is a moral here for a much discussedrecentaccount of truth,
Horwich claims that the conjuncnamely,Horwich's minimaltheory.54
tion of all non-paradoxicalinstancesof (T) provides"the entireconceptual and theoreticalrole of truth"(Truth,
p. 5). The factthathe excludes
the paradoxical cases of (T) fromthe account of truthshows,first,the
nature of his account of the paradoxes- after
ad hocand unsatisfactory
account of truthto whichhe can appeal to explain
all, he has no further
the exclusion.In this regard,he is with Buridan entirely,in excluding
the paradoxes simplybecause they are paradoxical. But secondly,their
exclusionmeans that the minimaltheorygives no account at all of their
truthor falsity.Thus, the minimal theorydoes not give an adequate
account of truth,which can only come from rejecting( T ). More is
requiredforthe truthof a propositionthan (T), read fromrightto left,
but howexhibits.It is necessarythat thingsbe, not just as it signifies,
as shown in (A).
ever it signifies,
Paradox
9. Curry's
Bradwardine'sThesis 2 exhibitstwo exceptionsto (T), namely,propositions which signifythemselvesnot to be true and those which signify
themselvesto be false. Bradwardineis able to show that these apparent
insolublesare not true,but false. One mightwonder,however,whether
thereare not furtherexamples of antinomieswhich are not covered by
Thesis 2 and whichwill allow antinomyto return.Indeed, Haskell Curry
proposed what threatensto be such a proposition,in seekingto formu-

54P. Horwich,
Oxford
1998.
Truth
, secondedition,

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

215

late Russell'sparadox in a language withoutnegation.55

Curryparadoxes
have the form
If this conditionalis true thenp.
Call this conditional,c. Then if c is true, it is a true conditionalwith
true antecedent,so its consequent is true, that is, Tc -jfr,which is c
itself.Inferringthat c is true, we have a true conditional with true
antecedent,so its consequentis true. That proves rj1,whateverp is. If
rp1is false,we have a contradiction;if rp1is true,we have a surprising,
and unconvincing,
proofof rp1.(Suppose vp^is 'God exists',or Goldbach's
Conjecture.)
The crucial step, as far as our earlierdiagnosisis concerned,is that
where we inferfromTc -> p (thatis, c) that c is true. Clearly c : (Tc
p), but is that all that it signifies?
Things are "as c signifies"(namely,Tc
but
are
"however
it
p'
they
signifies"or "only as it signifies"?If vp*
- 'Tc, so c : - iTc, and c fallsunder Thesis 2.
is false,then (Tc -p)
But if Vp1
is true then c does not (obviously)signifythat it itselfis false,
thusis not coveredby Thesis 2, and it seems thatBradwardine'saccount
may not have the resourcesto deal with all insolubles.
In fact,Curryparadoxes were not unknownto the medievais.Albert
of Saxony presentsthisversion:56
If God exists,some conditionalpropositionis false,
all other conditionalshaving been destroyed,and where the antecedent
is a standardmedievalexampleof a necessaryand indubitablytrueproposition.Albertinfersthat the conditionalis false,for if it were true, its
consequentwould needs be true since its antecedentis, and so if true it
would be false.To block the subsequentargumentthatit cannotbe false,
Albertnotes that its consequentis not true even thoughthingsare as it
signifies,
applyingthe truth-condition
(A). For ifits consequentwere true,
the conditionalwould be true,and we would have a contradiction.
This reasoningdepends on takingtruthof consequentto be sufficient
forthe truthof the conditional.Thus the conditionalis treatedby Albert
as a materialconditional,equivalentto the disjunction
55See H.B.
Theinconsistency
ofSymbolic
, in: TheJournal
Curry,
ofcertain
formal
logics
form
oftheparadox,
andP.T.
Logic,7 (1942),115-7,in whichhe givesa set-theoretic
in:Analysis
15 (1954-5),
71-2forthenatural
version.
Geach,On(Insolubilia'
language
56Albert,
Insolubilia
andStump,
1988[op.cit.,above,n. 19),359-60.
, tr.Kretzmann

15:14:21 PM

READ
STEPHEN

216

EitherGod does not existor some conditionalpropositionis false.

AlthoughBradwardinedoes not deal explicitlywiththe conditionalform
of Curry'sparadox, he does discussthe disjunctiveform(as does Albert).57
Bradwardinewrites:
'A manis an ass or a falsedisjunction
is
thisdisjunction:
utters
SupposeSocrates
A anditsseconddisjunct
B. ThenA is false
callthedisjunction
uttered
bySocrates',
thatsomedisjunction
uttered
B itfollows
as areeachofitsparts,
forfrom
bySocrates
forA, so theconcluofthisconclusion
is false,
andthesubject
uniquely
supposits
thateachpartof
thatA is false.Fromthis,byPostulate
sionsignifies
6, it follows
thatB is false.So oneshouldtreatthiscase
A, including
so B signifies
B, is false,
ones.58
justliketheprevious
thatthe disof Bradwardine'sargumentis clear: B signifies
The structure
If
A
both
its disjuncts
false.
is
is
false,
junction utteredby Socrates,A,
are false,and so in particular,B is false. So by Postulate2, B signifies
that it itselfis false,whence by Thesis 2, it signifiesthat it is true and
so is false.But s otherdisjunct('A man is an ass') is also false,and so
A is false.
So far, so good. A and B are false. Can we be sure, however,that
theyare not also true?Yes, fornot only does B signifyitselfto be false,
and so fallsunder Thesis 2, but so too does A. For A signifiesthat B is
false(by Postulates2 and 5, since 'A man is an ass' is false)and so that
A is false(by Postulate2 again, forE s being falseimpliesthatA is false,
since no man is an ass).
: (- iT^p1
More generally,and closeryetto Curry'sparadox: supposer/?n
v q). FollowingBradwardine,suppose firstthatthisis all thatrp]signifies.
Then by Definition1, -nTy -* - 1(-iTTp v q), so - iTvp^-( T Vp1a -i^),
v
by Postulate4 (De Morgan), whence -'Tvp* - Tvp^.Thus rp1: (T1//1
call
it
then
else
as
on
the
other
r,
well,
hand, Tp*signifies
something
q). If,
1
-'Tvp^ - {{Tvp^a ~^q) v -ir). But rp^: r, so again rp1: Trp v q. The
truth-condition
(A) accordinglyyields:
ry

-+ hry

v q) A (ry

v q)

57Bradwardine,
and
tr.Kretzmann
ed.Roure,1970[ed.t.,aboven. 4) 8.05;Albert,
1988(op.cit.,aboven. 19),358-9.
Stump
58In Roure'stext,
Postulate
2 is certainly
is toPostulate
2. Butalthough
thereference
it is notusedat thispoint.WhereRoure,andtheOxford
usedin theargument,
ms.,
reads'sextam
ms.Q 276,f. 164ra,
theErfurt
have'secundam
supposisuppositionem',
is false
alia, thata disjunction
6 says,inter
forPostulate
which
is logically
correct,
tionem',
is false(Roure1970(ed.t., aboven. 4),6.04,297).
ifeachdisjunct

15:14:21 PM

THE LIARPARADOX

217

i.e.,
7-y - g
is false (as in the case, 'A man is an ass'), so is rp].Conversely,
So, if r<7n
suppose rq1is true and univocal, in particular,not an insoluble.Then,
whateverelse - iTvp*implies,(A) will give
rp1 ++ (-.ry

v q) A rp1 v q) A (. . . v q) A . . .

where each conjuncton the right-handside containsq as a disjunct.So

the truthof rq1 sufficesfor that of rp1.Hence
T'p1 ^

and Curry'spropositionTvp1 -q (or - iTvp^v q) is truejust when rq1is,

otherwisefalse.
10. Conclusion
My purpose was to counterrecentinfatuationwithBuridan's analysisof
the Liar paradox and otherinsolubles,and show not onlyhow he derived
his solution from Bradwardine,but how he altered it for the worse.
Buridan was a great logician and philosopher.He was careful,methodical and had a greatinfluenceon succeedinggenerations.But his analysis of the Liar paradox was flawed.It introducedan ad hocsupplement
to the truth-conditions
of just those propositionswhich induce paradox
to preventthe contradictionfromarising.What was reallyclever in his
analysis,and attractedthe attentionof, among others,Moody, Priorand
Hughes, was in fact derived fromBradwardine,in whose hands it was
dealtwithboth consistently
and successfully.
Bradwardinedoes not require
different
truth-conditions
for insolublesand others:in order to be true,
all
must
they
signifyonly as thingsare. He does not assertsimplyas a
basic postulatethat insolublessignifytheirown truth:he proves it from
more basic postulates.One of those postulates,Postulate2, is admittedly
be closed under implication,even as-ofverypowerful:that signification
now (utnunc)implication.Yet certainly,any propositionis falsifiedby the
falsityof whateverit implies,even if thatimplicationholds onlyin virtue
of a contingently
true enthymematic
premise.So that consequence is at
least implicitly
in
contained the originalproposition.That is whythe Liar
and so it canpropositionis false. It implicitlycontainsa contradiction,
not be true.

15:14:21 PM

218

READ
STEPHEN

By all the historicalevidence,Bradwardine'sproposal was an original

insight.On analysis,it is seen to be a great and instructiveone, too.
it has become best knownin a corruptedand flawedform.
Unfortunately,
It is time to returnour attention,and our recognition,to a great logician's master,the doctor
, Thomas Bradwardine.
profiindus
St. Andrews
ofLogicand Metaphysics
Department

15:14:21 PM

Two PossibleSources
for Pico's Oratio1
M. V. DOUGHERTY

When the 15th centuryItalian thinkerGiovanni Pico della Mirandola

wrotehis Oratio
, he had intendedit to prefacethe public disputationof
his 900 Theses
, a compilationof wide-rangingstatementsboth historical
and original,which he had publishedin December I486.2 The disputation was to take place in Rome in the next year, and the youthfulPico
envisioneda forumheld beforethe College of Cardinals with the Pope
himselfservingas the judge of the proceedings.Distinguishedscholars
were expectedat the eventas well,forPico had offeredto pay the travel
expenses of "any philosopheror theologian" who wished to travel to
Rome to join the proceedings.3At the time,Pico was 23 years old and
was well-versedin Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic texts,and his theseshad
been drawn fromvaried sourcesincludingscholastic,Islamic,Peripatetic,
1 The Oratio
is bestknown
on theDignity
ofMan"though
this
bythetitle"Oration
titleappears
to havebeentheinvention
oflatereditors
rather
thana designation
establishedbyPicohimself.
include
thetideOratio
dehominis
andDe
Earlyprintings
dignitate
hominis
No original
titleis extant.
On thehistory
ofthetitleofthiswork,
seethe
dignitate.
recent
workofS. A. Farmer,
intheWest:
Pico's900 Theses
Syncretism
(1486):TheEvolution
andPhilosophical
, Tempe,Arizona1998,18-19.
ofTraditional
Religious
Systems
2 LatintextsofPico'sworkare takenfrom
De Hominis
De Enteet
Dignitate,
Heptaplus,
Uno
Firenze
adHermolao
Barbaro
, ed.Eugenio
Garin,
1942;Epistola
, in:Corpus
,
Reformtorm
Vol. 9. ed. CarolusGottlieb
HalisSaxonum1842,678-87;and Farmer
Bretschneider,
1998[op.cit.,above,n. 1).Translations
ofPico'sworks
aretakenfromOntheDignity
of
Charles
GlennWallis,
PaulJ.W.Miller,
Man,OnBangandtheOne,
, trans.
Heptaplus
Douglas
Mirandola
andErmolao
Barbaro
Carmichael,
1998;TheCorrespondence
Indianapolis
ofG.Picodella
the
Relation
andRhetoric
oftheHistory
ofIdeas,13(1952),
, in:Journal
Concerning
ofPhilosophy
andFarmer1998{op.cit.,above,n. 1). References
in thenotesarealways
to
392-402;
theLatintext.Historical
documents
tothePapalinvestigation
ofthe900Theses
pertaining
can be foundin Picdela Mirandole
enFrance
ed. LonDorezand Louis
(1485-1488),
Paris1897.
Thuasne,
3 Pico'sinvitation
andpromise
ofpayment
cameas a codicilat theendofthepublicationofthe900 Theses
whichread:"Andifanyphilosopher
or theologian,
evenfrom
theendsofItaly,wishes
to cometo Romeforthesakeofdebating,
thedisputing
lord
himself
to paythetravel
from
hisownfunds
aut
promises
expenses
(Etsiquis
Philosophus
etiam
ab extrema
Italiaarguendi
Romam
venire
disTheologus
voluerit,
gratia
pollicetur
ipseDominus
seviatici
Ulisoluturum
desuo
inFarmer
1998(op.cit.,
putaturus
expensas
)." Thetextis preserved
above,n. 1),552.
Koninklijke
BrillNV,Leiden,2002
- www.brill.nl
Alsoavailable
online

Vivarium
40,2

15:14:27 PM

220

M. V. DOUGHERTY

Hermetic,and Caballic works.Yet the elaborate disputationnever took

place. A papal commissionof theologiansand juristswas convened by
Innocent VIII in 1487 to examine the veracityof the theses,and, no
doubt to the displeasureof Pico, the membersof the commissionfound
Pico's work to "deviate fromthe straightpath of orthodoxfaith[a recto
ortodoxe
Pico's planned disputationin Rome was sustramite
fideideviare)"*
900
Theses
were
burned afterbecomingthe firstprinted
and
his
pended
book to be prohibiteduniversally
by the Church.5Afterwritinga spirited
defenseof his banned work,Pico was excommunicatedby Pope Innocent
VIII.6 For these historicalreasons,the Oratiowas never presentedpubYet this work has
licly and was never publishedduringPico's lifetime.7
the distinctionof being one of the best-knownand most anthologized
expressionsof Italian Renaissance humanism.Pico's legendaryerudition
and deep acquaintance with nearly all the academic schools known at
the timehave long made him an interesting
subjectof studyforstudents
of the Renaissance. His panoptic view of diverse intellectualtraditions
was bolsteredby the beliefthat these major traditions,which are commonly held to be opposed, are in truthharmonious,and his syncretic
900
orientationseems to have been the impulse behind his far-ranging
Plato
and
Aristotle
.8
Thesesas well as otherworks,includingOn theConcord
of
4 Thetextofthefindings
inDorez1897{op.cit.,
arecontained
ofthePapalcommission
above,n. 2), 114ff.
5 The novelty
Pico'sbookhasbeenrecognized
ofthePapalactiontoward
byseveral
in 1487the900
"Innocent
VIII prohibited
Hirsch
Of theeventRudolf
scholars.
writes,
broadinquisitoin hisbullEtsiexinjuncto.
Thisis thefirst
theses
ofPicodellaMirandola
oftheindices
librorum
thepromulgations
inthehistory
ofprinting,
rialaction
proheralding
andReading:
1450-1550
hibitorum."
See R. Hirsch,
1967,89.
, Wiesbaden
Selling
Printing,
6 Thebullofexcommunication
VI in 1493.
waslaterlifted
byPopeAlexander
7 Forthedetails
Portraits
events
ofPico'slife,seeEugenio
ofthehistorical
Garin,
fiom
and
A. VelenandElizabeth
Victor
theQuattrocento
Velen,NewYork1963,190-221;
, trans.
1998(op.cit.,above,n. 1),1-179.
Farmer
8 Forvarying
Introduction
seePaulOskarKristeller,
accounts
ofPico's"syncretism,"
, in:
Giovanni
Picodella
G. Graven,
TheRenaissance
Philosophy
ofMan,Chicago1948,220;William
Geneva1981,91-107;
Modem
: Symbol
Mirandola,
Thinker,
Interpretations
ofa Renaissance
ofhisAge:
Ideas.Parts
A Study
intheHistory
Giovanni
PicodellaMirandola:
ErnstCassirer,
ofRenaissance
345.
ofIdeas,3 (1942),123-44,
in:Journal
oftheHistory
319-46,
/-//,
esp.pp. 128-31,
ofFarmer
1998{op.cit.,
work
is therecent
ofPico'ssyncretism
account
Themostextensive
ofthe900
to thetextandtranslation
introduction
above,n. 1).In a generous
179-page
Pico'stext"as an ideallabas onethatapproaches
hismethod
Farmer
identifies
Theses,
ofcorrelative
andthegrowth
textual
between
theconnections
to study
exegesis
oratory
with
in conjunction
hasbeen"developed
thestudy
(xiv).Astheauthor
explains,
systems"
andphilosophical
ofpremodern
modeloftheevolution
a cross-cultural
systems"
religious
theat a latertime(ix).Readers
topublish
intends
which
theauthor
mayfindFarmer's
Farmer's
to be somewhat
andapproach
methods
oretical
untraditional,
yetnevertheless

15:14:27 PM

TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES
FORPICO'SORATIO

221

The purpose of thispaper is to inquireinto the theoreticalroots that

undergirdthe main principleof the Oratioand to argue that important
parallelsexistbetweenthisprincipleand severalclaimsfoundin the writings of Boethius and Aristotle.The influenceof Boethius and Aristotle
on Pico's doctrinein the Oratiohas been much neglectedby commentators.In the shortworkPico defendsthe unusual thesisthathuman beings
have no nature {imago,
, natura)proper to themselves;rather,moral
facies
decisionsthat human beings make cause them to become such thingsas
beasts or divinities.This account of human self-determination,
which is
central to the Oratio
, has been interpretedin manifoldways by commentators,and there does not appear to be consensusamong scholars
or purpose of such a claim. The interpretive
regardingthe intelligibility
is magnifiedwhen attempting
to findpossibleinfluences
on Pico's
difficulty
thought,for a brieftour throughthe headings of the 900 Thesesshows
that Pico was familiarwith many traditions,which he categorizesunder
such headingsas magical,mathematical,Hebrew Cabalisi, Greek,Latin,
Chaldean, Arabic and manyothers.Still,the importanceof such an investigationinto Pico's sources has long been recognized,and Pico remains
a puzzling figurein the historyof thought.Controversyover the thesis
of the Oratiothat human beings are devoid of a propernatureand must
choose a naturethroughmoral activitieshas led interpreters
to label Pico
in ways which, althoughperhaps all interesting,
cannot all possiblybe
true. Pico's thesisin the Oratiohas been understoodin various ways to
make Pico a proto-reformer,
a late medieval,a defenderof voluntarism,
a buddingSartreanexistentialist,
a neo-Pelagianist,and an earlyphilosoof
will.9
Pico
cannot
bear each of thesedesignationsequally
pher
Clearly
workis an important
contribution
to thestudy
ofPico'slifeandthought.
Farmer
credits
to Picoat least10 "syncretic
thatserveas thecoreofthesyncretic
strategies"
project,
whichtheauthor
identifies
as "deductive
reconciliations,"
"eliminating
arbitrary
equivo"letter
andanagrammatic
"temcation,"
method,"
symbolism,
gematria,
"allegorization,"
seeFarmer
edition
ofthe900Theses
others;
1998,59-73.Farmer's
poralstrategies,"
among
doesnotcontain
an edition
of theOratio
an important
, buttheintroduction
provides
account
ofthehistorical
events
theproposed
to havebeenhad
surrounding
disputation
in Romein 1487.
9 Fora
of Picoas "reformer,"
see PhilipEdgcumbe
Picodella
presentation
Hughes,
Mirandola
1463-1494:
A Study
Part/,in:Philosophia
ofanIntellectual
Reformata,
Pilgrimage,
ForPicoas a latemedieval,
23 (1958),168-71.
seeAvery
Concordiae:
Pico
Dulles,Princeps
dellaMirandola
andtheScholastic
Tradition
Mass.1941,xi,whosummarizes
his
, Cambridge,
thesis
as theattempt
to "demonstrate
that[Pico's]philosophy
wasprimarily
a scholastic
Fora comparison
between
Picoand theexistentialism
ofSartre,
see Hiram
synthesis."
NewYork1950,349.Fora criticism
ofthosewhofindin
Renaissance,
Haydn,TheCounterPicoan existentialist,
see PaulOskarKristeller,
Renaissance
,
Eight
Philosophers
oftheItalian

15:14:27 PM

222

M. V. DOUGHERTY

well, if at all, and it is hoped that by re-examiningthe sourcesof Pico's

doctrineof human beingssome lightwill be shed on Pico's trueplace in
the historyof Renaissance humanism.
The presentpaper is divided into fourparts. First,I will address the
importthat most scholarshave placed on the role of theologicaltextsin
the formationof Pico's thesisof the Oratio.I will address the relevance
of such a claim and suggestthatthereis evidencethat could modifythis
commonlyaccepted view (Part I). Second, I will turnto Pico's Oratioand
examine the textualevidence for the thesisthat human beings have no
natures proper to themselves(Part II). Third, I will suggesttwo new
sourcesforthe doctrinethat hithertohave been unrecognizedwithinthe
literature(Part III). A summaryof the thesiswill complete the present
paper (Part IV).
Orientation
I. TheAllegedTheological
ofPico
As has been mentionedabove, in his OratioPico setsforththe claim that
human beings have no nature {imago,
facies,natura
) proper to themselves,
and, throughmoral decisions,human beingsbecome such thingsas beasts
or gods. It has been seen that the receptionof this positionby readers
of the Oratiohas been rathervaried, and many inconsistentlabels have
been applied to Pico. Yet in one respectthereis unanimityamong many
prominentscholars,for many agree that Pico's theoryof human beings
in the Oratiois essentiallytheologicalin origin.Perhapsthe mostsustained
presentationof thispositionhas been accomplishedby Charles Trinkaus,
who in a large studycontendsthat "Pico's image of man is basically
a religiousone" and statesthat "Pico restshis claim on apologeticand
theologicalgrounds more than on philosophicalones."10Similarlyone
seeErnst
Cassirer
Picoas a neo-Pelagianist,
Stanford
1942
1964,67.Forviews
presenting
of
., above,n. 8), 329andPhilipEdgcumbe
Hughes,
op.cit.,133.Fora rejection
{op.cit
ofa
the"voluntarist"
Pico,see Farmer1998{op.cit.,above,n. 1), 108.Forcriticisms
Picodella
Mirandola
ofPico,seeKristeller,
1964,op.cit.,
66-7;id.,Giovanni
"Pelagian"
reading
dell'umanedi Giovanni
PicodellaMirandola
nellastoria
e ilpensiero
andHisSources
, in:L'Opera
New
anditsSources,
ed. MichaelMooney,
Firenze1965,53; id.,Renaissance
simo,
Thought
Renaissance
York1979,175;Craven1981{op.cit.,above,n. 8), 33; Stephano
Dominioni,
18(1986),50; and
andHuman
Pico's''Dignity
Nature:
ofMan',in:Contemporary
Philosophy,
Eckhard
in:Charles
B. Schmitt,
Charles
H. Lohr,Metaphysics,
Skinner,
Kessler,
Quentin
1988,581. Fora
ofRenaissance
Philosophy,
Cambridge
JillKraye(eds),TheCambridge
History
in: On
Introduction
ofwill,seePaulJ. W. Miller,
ofPicoas an earlyphilosopher
rejection
GlennWallis,
PaulJ. W.
trans.
Charles
andtheOne
theDignity
, Heptaplus,
ofMan,OnBeing
1998,xiv.
Miller,
Indianapolis
DouglasCarmichael,
10Charles
inItalian
Humanist
andDivinity
In OurImage
andLikeness:
Trinkaus,
Humanity
Vol.2, Chicago1970,521,512.
Uought,

15:14:27 PM

FORPICO'SORATIO
TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES

223

findsEdward Mahoney contendingthatthe Oratio"is not purelya philosophical treatise"and that "it seems out of the question to see Pico's
views. . . removedfromtheologicalinterests."11
Althoughin itselfthe claim that Pico's orientationis primarilytheoit is importantto see that thisposilogical does not seem controversial,
tion is most oftenpremisedon claims about the antecedentsto Pico's
doctrine.Those who argue fora theologicalbasis to Pico's view of human
beings have tended to identifythe sources for Pico's doctrinein theoin Patristicwritings.Yet when
logical documents,and more specifically,
it comes to identifying
Church
Fathers whose writings
particularearly
are said to give rise to Pico's theory,therehas been some room fordispute. Some scholarssuch as AveryDulles have suggestedthat Patristic
sourcesare lurkingbehind Pico's doctrine,yet no effort
is made to identhem.12
Wind
and
Edward
on
the
other
hand, have
tify
Edgar
Mahoney,
arguedat lengththatthe fundamentalsourceof Pico's doctrineon human
beingsin the Oratiois the third-century
theologianand apologistOrigen.13
The most exhaustivetreatmentof the issue of PatristicsourcesforPico's
Oratiois foundin a studyby Henri de Lubac, who claims that "La 'metaclbre
, elle aussi,d'unetrslonguetradition
, et la
morphose'
par Jean Pic hrite
de cettetradition
connaissance
est indispensible"
and then goes on to cite no
fewerthan fourteenpossiblePatristicantecedentsto Pico's theoryincluding such figuresas Clement of Alexandria,Origen, Gregoryof Nyssa,
Macarius the Egyptian,and others.14
That Pico was familiarwith many
Patristicsourceshas never been a point in dispute,forhis acquaintance
withsuch traditionscan be establishedby both internaland externalevidence. As for the former,Pico does referexplicitlyto theologianslike
Origen in the Oratioand in his 900 Theses}0As forthe latter,published
listsof the contentsof Pico's libraryshow that it was repletewith both
Latin and Greek Patristicdocuments.16
In preparingfora new argumentregardingthe sourcesof Pico's Oratio
,
we are calling into question the prevalentbeliefthat Pico's doctrineon
11EdwardP. Mahoney,
Giovanni
PicodellaMirandola
andOrigen
onHumans,
Choice
, and
5 (1994),376.
, in:VivensHomo:Rivista
Florentina,
Hierarchy
Teologia
12Dulles1941(op.cit.,above,n. 9), 16.
13EdgarWind,TheRevival
Miner(ed.),Studies
inArtandLiterature
, in:Dorothy
ofOrigin
da Costa
Green
1994{op.cit.,
, Princeton
1954,413-6;Mahoney
above,n. 11),359ff.
forBelle
in thewritings
alsosuggests
thattextsfound
ofGregory
on Nyssamayhave
Mahoney
beeninfluential
forPico;cf.360ff.
14Henride Lubac,Picdela Mirandole:
Etudes
etdiscussions
, Paris1974,184.
15See,forinstance,
Oratio
4>29.
, 154,156;and Theses
16On thepresence
of GreekPatristic
in Pico'slibrary,
sources
see PearlKibre,The
see62-4.
, NewYork1936,35-6.ForLatinPatristic
sources,
ofPicodellaMirandola
Library

15:14:27 PM

224

M. V. DOUGHERTY

the mutabilityof human beings is fundamentally

theologicalor religious
in orientation.17
The approach of the presentpaper will be to disputethe
assume betweenPico's docsingulardependencethatsome commentators
trineof the mutability
of human beingsand the religiousor Patristicallygroundedtheologicalsources.The procedureto be followedwill be the
identification
of hithertounrecognizednon-Patristic
sourcesforPico's doctrine.More specifically,
it will be argued thatcommentators
have tended
to neglectphilosophicaltextsas sourcesforPico's doctrine.The need for
the presentinquiryhas been hinted,albeit indirectly,
by some scholars.
Paul Oskar Kristellerhas remarked"I do not thinkthat we should go
so faras to treatPico exclusivelyas a theologian,or to considerhis doctrine as merelytheological."18It will be necessaryto establishlines of
influencebetweenearlierphilosophicalthinkersand Pico. Commentators
have noted,however,thatthe taskof establishingsourcesforPico's views
is not a particularly
easy one. As one of themhas put it, "We oftencannot tell to what extentPico was influenceddirectlyby the writingsof
ancientor medievalauthors. . . thedoctrinalsourcesof Pico's thought
. . . are
stillpartlyunexploredor subjectto debate."19The historicaltaskof identifyingthe sources for Pico's thoughtis furtherimpeded by a difficulty
that pertains particularlyto the study of Pico, namely, his syncretic
approach to seeminglyopposed intellectualtraditions.20
One mightobject thatPico's syncreticapproach to textsand traditions
mightmake a distinctionbetweenphilosophicaland theologicalsources
Yet thereappears to be evidence that Pico did not consider
superfluous.
his syncreticapproach to be incompatiblewith a beliefin a distinction
17It should
in
be mentioned
thatthenotable
Picoscholar
Garinjoinsothers
Eugenio
fora theological
orientation
to theviewofhumanbeingsin theOratio,
forhe
arguing
in a moment
in Italian
contends
thattheOratio
was"composed
ofreligious
enthusiasm"
Humanism:
andCivic
PeterMunz,Oxford
, trans.
1965,105.
LifeintheRenaissance
Philosophy
Yetas forthefundamental
or theological
sources
Pico'sview,Garin
religious
animating
doesnotprivilege
Patristic
sources
butrather
identifies
"Gnostic
andHebrew
texts
and. . . cabbalistic
to notethatin arguing
for
mysticism,"
op.cit.,105.Aswell,itmaybe important
a theological
Trinkaus
identifies
as themotivating
source
viewin PicoCharles
scripture
notethat
forPico'sdoctrines.
See Trinkhaus
1970(op.cit.,
above,n. 10),519.Oneshould
is corroborated
thathistheory
ofthemutability
ofhumanbeings
Picohimself
contends
110.
withPsalm
49,20 and82,6. See Oratio,
18Kristeller
1965(op.cit.,above,n. 9), 78.
19Kristeller
1965(op.cit.,above,n. 9),40.
20Onemight
"a traditional
remarks
ofS. A. Farmer,
whowarns,
consider
thesobering
interms
andRenaissance
todiscuss
Pico'sthought
ofeachoftheancient,
medieval,
attempt
in anyevent,
on points
of
. . . would,
soonbe superceded
sources
drawn
on in hiswork.
covered
overmorethana smallpartofthetraditions
detail:No onecanclaimmastery
in Pico'stext"(Farmer
1998(op.cit.,above,n. 1),xiv).

15:14:27 PM

TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES
FORPICO'SORATIO

225

betweentheformalities
ofphilosophicaland theologicaldisciplines.
Evidence
can be found in the very orderingof the 900 Theses.It is true that in
the first402 of his 900 theses,where Pico reportsof positionsheld by
previousthinkersand schools of thought,he does not divide the philosophical premisesfromtheologicalones. The absence of any divisionis
indicated furtherin an early section of the work, where the "Theses
Accordingto the Teaching of Latin Philosophersand Theologians(Conclusionessecundum
doctrinam
latinorum
et theologorum
philosophorum
)" are grouped
togetherunder one heading.21But if we examine the latter498 theses,
where Pico turnsaway fromhistoricalreportsand instead reveals "theses .. . accordingto his own opinion (conclusiones
. . . secundum
opinionem
prowe
find
that
Pico
has
thoseopinionsthatare
),"
priam
neady distinguished
conclusiones
fromthose which are conclusiones
in theologia.22
Yet
philosophice
the neat divisionsof the textsalone is not sufficient
to establishthat Pico
to obtain between the formalities
of theologyand
recognizesdifferences
for
one
could
that
Pico
is
established
conphilosophy,
argue
following
ventionsof the day. Rather,one must turnto the textof the 900 Theses
itself.In a discussionfromthe second half of the 900 Theses
, where Pico
discussesthe temporalstatesof incorporealcreatures,he admits a division betweendisciplines.We find:
T1 Theologically
I saythatin aeviternity
there
is a non-continuous
sucspeaking,
cession
thatis formally
buta limited
one.Following
thephilosophers,
intrinsic,
I statethecontrary
dicoquodinaevononestsuccessio
however,
(Theologice
loquendo
intrnseca
sedbene
secundum
tarnen
aliter
continuativa,
terminativa;
formaliter
philosophos
dicerem
) (Thesis4>28).23
That Pico is willingto distinguishdiscoursethat proceeds theologically
fromdiscoursein the mode of a philosopher(secundum
(theologice)
philosophos)
is evidence that the formalitiesof the philosophicaland theologicaldisof Pico's
ciplinesare not called into questionby the syncreticframework
writing.A syncreticprincipleand a divisionof disciplinesexist together
withinPico's universeof discourse.24
21Thisdesignation
isgiven
tothesection
115theses,
thefirst
from
1.1through
covering
6.11.
22The first
thesis
ofthose"according
to hisownopinion"
is thesis
403,or 1>1. The
citedheading
occursabove1.1.The respective
ofthephilosophical
andtheologigroups
cal theses
are2>1 through
2>80 and4>1 through
4>29.
23Somecommentators
havefoundThesis4>28 to be emblematic
of "double-truth"
in Pico'swork.See Farmer
1998{op.cit.,above,n. 1),61-3;435.
theory
present
24Mostcommentators
do acknowledge
someparallels
between
oftheMarcilio
writings
theFlorentine
translator
ofGreekworks
andPico'sfriend,
andPico'sdescriptions
Ficino,
ofhuman
nature.
PaulOskarKristeller,
ThePhilosophy
Ficino
See,forinstance,
,
ofMarsilio

15:14:27 PM

226

M. V. DOUGHERTY

Indeed, even scholarswho contendthatPico's projectis generallytheological do acknowledgethat to Pico the formalitiesof philosophyand
theologyare conceptuallydistinct.In the actual courseof presentingarguments,however,the disciplinesmay appear to overlap. Charles Trinkaus
explains: "Pico . . . stressedthe importanceof a distinctionbetween theology and philosophy. . . yet there is in Pico ... as he actuallypresents
his arguments,a far greaterblurringof the differences
. . ."25Indeed, in
actual practice one may findit difficult
to identifystrictly
philosophical
autonomousargumentsin the corpus of Pico's works.Contextsand the
The issue can
varietyof sourcesforpremisescontributeto the difficulties.
be exhibitedwhen one reflectsthatPico even uses the contextof a commentaryon scriptureto exhibita numberof philosophicaland scientific
views,as is the case with his commentaryon the earlyparts of Genesis
titledHeptaplus.The variegateduse of sources,however,does not preclude the identification
of strictly
philosophicalsourcesto Pico's doctrines.
In the presentpaper, I seek to highlightsome philosophicalsources to
Pico's account of human beings.
II. TheHumanBang of theOratio
Having identifiedthe tendencyof most scholarsto assign a theological
orientationto Pico's view of human beings and having found evidence
that he endorsesa formaldistinctionbetweenphilosophicaland theological orientations,
we now turn to the textualevidence of Oratiofor the
theorythathuman beingshave no propernature.Yet it should be noted
that some scholars call into question the very project of searchingfor
theoreticalargumentation
withinthe Oratio.In his monographarguingfor
a scholasticbasis to Pico's writings,
AveryDulles downplaysthe Oratioas
"least importantin content"due to its "oratoricalcharacter."26
Dulles is
not alone in minimizingthe Oratioin lightof thisobjection,forin more
recenttimesWilliam G. Craven has offereda similaraccount by contending:"The idea of man literallychoosinghis own nature,in a metaphysicalsense,would have been nonsensicalto Pico."27Elsewherehe contrans.
NewYork1943,407-10;Lohr1988(op.cit.,above,n. 9), 579.
Conant,
Virginia
Whilemostcommentators
fasten
Platonic
, XIV.3, onewoulddo
uponsuchtexts
Theology
wellto include
I. 55,III. 44,I. 57,III. 60.
Epistola,
25Trinkaus
1970(op.cit.,above,n. 10),520.Foran extended
see505-29.
discussion,
26Dulles1941[op.cit.,above,n. 9), 15. Forcriticisms
of Dulleson thispoint,see
1965(ob.t., above,n. 9),53: Kristeller
1979(oto.
Kristeller,
cit.,above,n. 9), 176.
27Craven1981(op.cit.,above,n. 8), 32.

15:14:27 PM

FORPICO'SORATIO
TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES

227

His elaborationof the

tinues:"Pico precludedphilosophicalinvestigation.
The styleof the Oratiois markedindeed
idea of mutability
is rhetorical."28
givenits purby oratoricalflare,yet thisfactshould not be too surprising
of
the
900 Theses.
as
the
to
the
preface
planned public disputation
pose
Pico did meditateon the relationshipbetween philosophyand oratory.
In a letterto Hermolao Barbaro, Pico (perhaps ironically)writes:
... to conjointhemis wicked
withwisdom
is notto be conjoined
T2 Eloquence
nonconiunxisse
. . . coniunxisse
sitnefas)
adHermolao
. . . cum
[Epistola
(eloquentia
sapientia
Barbaro
, 680).
How one should take such remarksis open to debate, yet many scholars
have noted thatPico's rigorousargumentcallingforthe separationofeloenough,in a veryeloquent
quence fromphilosophyis done, interestingly
the argumentthatthe Oratiois a unique workthat
manner.29
Nevertheless,
is not properlyto be approached for theoreticalinsightsis a position
needingto be addressed.If one is to use the Oratiotext as a source for
the theoreticaldoctrinesof Pico's thought,at least one mustestablishthat
the workis not anomalous in the corpus of Pico's writings.
Several scholarshave takenup thisissue in detail.Paul Oskar Kristeller
and Charles H. Lohr have arguedthata unityof thoughtobtainsbetween
the views of human beingsset forthin the Oratioand a subsequenttreatment of the issue a few years later in a piece called the Heptaplus
.30
in
the
modes
of
the
two
works
are
Although
expression
quite different,
a unityof doctrineis held to existbetweenthem.As well,Kristelleroften
notes that portionsof the Oratioare incorporatedalmost verbatiminto
Pico's Apologia
, whichwas the ill-fatedworkmeant to defendPico against
the charges of heresythat had met the publicationof the 900 Theses
.31
Yet anotherpair of scholarshave takenup a quite different
approach in
defendingthe theoreticalsignificanceof Pico's Oratioby arguing for a
unityof thoughtbetweenthe veryearly Oratioand the last of Pico's work,
adver
sus astro
his Disputationes
ErnstCassirerand Antonino
logiamdivinatricem.
Poppi have contendedthatPico's projectof assertingthe freedomof selfdetermination
of human beingswhichis spelledout in the Oratiorequires
28Ibid 35.
29See Eugenio
andtheMagus
Garin(ed.),Renaissance
Garin,ThePhilosopher
, in:Eugenio
Characters
, trans.
above,n. 17),
LydiaG. Cochrane,
Chicago1991),141;Garin1965[op.cit.,
BreenGiovanni
PicodellaMirandola
ontheConflict
andRhetoric
103;Quirinus
, in:
ofPhilosophy
oftheHistory
ofIdeas,13 (1952),384-5.
Journal
30See Kristeller
1964{op.cit
1979[op.cit
., above,n. 9), 67; Kristeller
., above,n. 9),
176-7;Lohr1988(op.cit.,above,n. 9), 579.
31SeeKristeller
1965(op.cit.,
1979(op.cit.,
above,n. 9),53;Kristeller
above,n. 9),177.

15:14:27 PM

228

M. V. DOUGHERTY

as a complementthe destructionof the notion of astrologicaldetermin- one

The two works
early,
ism, a projectcarriedout in the Disputationes.
one late- are held to complementeach other in this intimateway and
in theworld.32
humanpre-eminence
servethe singlepurposeof establishing
Having seen that there are reasons set forthby commentatorsfor
regardingthe Oratioas a legitimatesource forextractingtheoreticalpositionson the part of Pico, we are now in a positionto examine the evidence for Pico's doctrineof human mutability.It has been noted above
that Pico maintainsearly on in the work that human beings have no
nature (iimago
, facies
, natura)proper to themselvesand that it is through
moral decisionsthathuman beingsbecome such thingsas beasts or gods.
We mustexamine thisclaim and see how Pico defendssuch a doctrine.
Pico begins his Oratiowith a discussionof human nature,and contends
that the traditionalnotionsfor proclaimingthe pre-eminenceof human
His earlyuse of the term
natura
nature{humana
) have been unsatisfactory.33
for it is prehumananaturaat the beginningof the work is noteworthy,
ciselythe standardmeaning of this expressionthat will subsequentlybe
called into dispute.Pico proceeds by givinga creationnarrativewhere
God produces human beings not accordingto a singlemodel (archetypus)
but accordingto all models. We find:
ofitsveryowncould
thatthattowhich
decided
artisan
T3 The supreme
nothing
to each
hadbelonged
whatsoever
be in common,
be givenshould
individually
comutcuidarenihil
tandem
andevery
poterai
proprium
opifex,
optimus
(Statuii
thing
esset
mune
, 104).
) (Oratio
filerai
singulis
privatum
quicquid
In thistextPico firstsuggeststhat human beings have no traitsthat are
Human beingsare thelast creaturesto be produced
peculiarto themselves.
and
no unique archetypesremainafterwhich they
divine
the
artisan,
by
could be patterned.Rather,human beingsare composedfromqualitiesor
featuresalreadynaturallypossessedby othercreatures.Human beingsdo
thatwould be unique to themnot have anythinglike a specificdifference
selves. Even traitssuch as rationalityand intellectionalready have been
32See ErnstCassirer,
Mario
inRenaissance
andtheCosmos
TheIndividual
, trans.
Philosophy
ideaofPico'soration
"Thedominant
writes:
NewYork1963,115.Cassirer
Domandi,
inthistreatise
itsfullandpureexpression
ofMan'finds
'On theDignity
]."
[theDisputationes
Freedom
andHuman
Providence
Antonino
, in The
Poppi,in hispieceFate,Fortune,
Similarly,
1988(op.cit.,above,n. 9),651-2,concurs,
stating:
Philosophy
ofRenaissance
History
Cambridge
... IntheDisputationes,
freedom
ofhuman
celebration
a splendid
. . . contains
Oratio
"thefamous
astralanddemonic
from
thisindependence
stresses
Picofurther
influences,
hislastwork,
man'sself-fashioning
soas tohighlight
andinstinctual
from
capacities."
determinism,
physical
33Oratio
, 102.

15:14:27 PM

TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES
FORPICO'SORATIO

229

allocated to heavenlyanimals and angels in the orderof creationpriorto

the subsequentassignationto humanbeings.34
Humans are thusaggregates
composed of featuresfound already existingin otherparts of creation.
It is importantto note preciselywhatkindsof featuresthe divineartisan
is said to depositinto human beings.We will see thatPico's account privilegespsychicqualitiesover bodily ones. We can begin by examininga
textdescribinghuman capacitiesas seeds implantedat birth.Pico writes:
T4 Atman'sbirth
theFather
sortofseedandsprouts
ofevery
placedinhimevery
kindoflife.The seedsthateachmancultivates
willgrowandbeartheir
fruit
in him(Nascenti
homini
semina
etomnigenae
vitae
indidit
Pater
; quae
omnifaria
germina
excoluerit
illaadolescent
suos
inilio
, etjructus
, 106).
quisque
ferent
) (Oratio
We findPico hearkeningback to an ancientnotionof spiritualseeds {semina) that are latentin human beings and require actualization.Pico will
use thisimage of seeds quite frequently
in the Oratio
, and here he writes
of the need to cultivate(excolere)
these seeds in the process of self-determination.Later in the Oratiohe will speak of the cultivationof soul [cultusanimi)?0There is strongevidenceto view thesefeatureslatentin human
beings to be psychic states that are actualized by moral decisions. By
emphasizingthat a human being can choose which life to bring about,
Pico emphasizesthe moral dimensionof his theory.A human being has
thecapabilityof livingthepsychiclifeof othercreatures.We findelsewhere:
T5 It is nottherindwhichmakestheplant,buta dullandnon-sentient
nature;
notthehidewhichmakesa beastofburden,
buta brutal
andsensual
soul;
nota spherical
butright
reason;and nota
bodywhichmakestheheavens,
from
thebodybuta spiritual
whichmakesan angel
separateness
intelligence
enim
sedstupida
etnihil
sentiens
natura
iumenta
sed
cortex,
; eque
corium,
(Meque
plantam
bruta
anima
etsensualis;
neccaelum
orbiculatum
sedrecta
necsequestratio
corratio,
corpus,
sedspiritalis
, 108).
poris,
intellegentia
angelm
facit)
(Oratio
Here Pico offersa psychiccriterionforanalyzingindividuals.On the one
hand he seems to inheritthe traditionaldivisionof souls into vegetative,
sentient,and rational,yet on the other hand he is willingto foregoan
in the humanindividualifthatindianalysisof the potentialforrationality
vidual seems to servethe vegetativeor sentientsoul only. In givingsuch
an accountPico makeshumanidentity
a fundamentally
moralissue.Moral
choicesplay a fundamentalrole in self-constitution.
Materialor bodilyfeaturesare consideredas irrelevantin the investigation
of the identityof a
for
such
characteristics
are
creature,
presentedas no more thanaccidental.
34See Oratio
, 106.
35Oratio
, 132.

15:14:27 PM

230

M. V. DOUGHERTY

Humans as such do not existjointlyas a species withinthe hierarchyof

being,but ratherindividualhumansare located in the universeaccording
to what livestheyare livingand what kindof soul accountsforhow they
spend theirtime.The mere existenceof potenciesforhigherpsychicdispositionsis not the criterionforlocatingan individualhuman being ontologicallyin the hierarchy,but ratherPico rates individualsaccordingto
the psychiclives that are actuallybeing lived. In such a taxonomyof
beings,individualsexist at a level that is determinedby moral choices.
Pico underscoresthe point elsewherethatthe identityof a thingis not
to be identifiedwithits body, but with the kindof soul. Pico contends:
T6 Ifyouseea mangivenoverto hisbellyandcrawling
it is
upontheground,
. . . delivered
a bushnota manthatyousee.If yousee anyone
overto the
itis a brutenota manthatyousee.Ifyoucomeupona philosopher
senses,
himyoushallhonor;
not
allthings
heis a heavenly
reason,
discerning
byright
an earthly
Ifyoucomeupona purecontemplator,
ofthebody,
animal.
ignorant
nota heavbanished
totheinnermost
heis notan earthly,
placesofthemind,
he is moresuperbly
a divinity
clothed
withhuman
flesh
{Siquern
enlyanimal;
si
enim
videris
deditum
ventri
, humi
vides;
hominem,
est,nonhomo,
fiutex
serpentem
quern
. . . sensibus
brutum
vides.
Si recta
est,nonhomo,
quem
mancipatum,
philosophum
quern
nonterrenum.
Sipurum
conratione
omnia
hunc
venerem
estanimal,
; caeleste
discernentem,
mentis
hicnonterrenum,
noncaeleste
inpenetralia
nescium,
relegatum,
templatorem
corporis
36
hieaugustius
estnumen
humana
carne
animal;
, 108).
circumvestitum)
(Oratio
It is importantto note forour presentpurposesthatin thiscatalogue of
possible vitaeopen to human beings rangingfrombeastlyto divine
thereis no naturalplace fora humanbeingsto livesimplyqua humanbeing.
Again Pico emphasizeshis claim thathuman beingsdo not have a nature
AlthoughPico does contendthatGod places human
properto themselves.
center
of
the universe{medium
at
the
mundi)at theircreation,such
beings
a placementis only temporary.37
Human beings do not lie in equipoise
at the centerof the world, or at the center of the hierarchyof being,
but ratherfromthe beginninga movementin some directionwill occur.
in turn
The numerouspossibilities
open forhuman beingsare highlighted
36Asa parallel
consider
Oratio
onemight
seeds,
, 106:"Ifhecultivates
vegetable
passage,
Ifrational,
he
he willgrowintobrute.
he willbecomea plant.Iftheseedsofsensation,
Ifintellectual,
he willbe an angel,anda sonofGod.
animal.
willcomeouta heavenly
buttakeshimself
Andifheis notcontented
withthelotofanycreature
up intothecenin thesolitary
darkness
withGodandsetded
madeonespirit
terofhisownunity,
then,
Whodoesnot
he willstandaheadofall things.
whois aboveall things,
oftheFather,
Si ratioSi sensualia,
obrutescet.
thatweare?(Sivegetalia,
wonder
at thischameleon
fiet.
planta
concreaturarum
sorte
etsi nulla
erit
etDeifilius,
animal.
Si intellectualia,
caeleste
evadet
nalia,
angelus
insolitaria
Patris
unus
cum
Deospvdtus
suaesereceperit,
tentus
inunitatis
centrum
caligine
qui
factus,
chamaeleonta
nonadmiretur?)."
nostrum
antestabit.
omnia
constitutus
omnibus
estsuper
Quishunc
37Oratio
, 106.

15:14:27 PM

TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES
FORPICO'SORATIO

231

by Pico witha continuationof spatial imagery.In the creationnarrative

Pico has God tell human beings:
T7 Thoucanstgrowdownward
intothelowernatures
whichare brutes.
Thou
from
natures
whichare
canstgrowupward
thysoul'sreasonintothehigher
divine(Poteris
ininferiora
bruta
insuperiora
div; poteris
quaesunt
degenerare
quaesunt
inaextuianimi
sententia
, 106).
regeneran
) {Oratio
The polaritiesof divinityand bestialityofferthe two possible directions
forhuman self-constitution.
The spatial imageryis continuedthroughout
the Oratio
for
we
find
Pico
,
repeatingagain:
in oursouls;bytheonenature
T8 Twonatures
areplanted
wearelifted
upward
totheheavens,
andbytheother,
shoved
downward
tothelower
world
(duplicem
naturam
innostris
animis
altera
sursum
tollimur
adcaeiestia,
altera
deorsum
sitam,
quorum
ad inferna
trudimur
, 116).
) (Oratio
Such a descriptionof human beings as centeredbetween two opposing
possibilitiessuggeststhat a taxonomyof human beings firstrequires a
knowledgeof the moral state of the individual.
We have seen Pico presentan account of human beings where each
individual'sstatusin the world is contingentupon what kind of life(vita)
is beingled, and livesare determinedaccordingto whichsoul- vegetative,
or rational
sentient,
primarily
guidestheindividual'sactions.Pico presents
a moral ontology,forhe considersthe choice of lifeto be metaphysically
of a human being. Human beings are ratherunique in the
constitutive
order of creation,forwhile all creaturesotherthan human beings have
a vitaproper to theirspecies, human beings are bereftof a proper vita
of theirown.
We are leftto question how it is one acquires a vita
, and Pico does
not foregoan account of this process. The example to which he gives
the mostattentionis the acquisitionof the angeliclifeby a human being.
To acquire a vitaPico cautions individualsfirstto observe the actions
that are characteristic
of that sort of life.We find:
T9 Letusseewhatthey
aredoing,
whatlifethey
areliving.
Ifwetoolivethatlife
forwe can- we shallequaltheir
lot(Videamus
vivant
vitam.
quidUliagant,
quam
Earnsi etnosvixerimus
illorum
sortem
iamaequaverimus)
enim,
, 110).
possimus
(Oratio
As well, we findin a subsequentpassage:
T10 Ifourlifeis to be shapedafter
themodelofa cherub's
life,itis wellworthwhiletohaveinreadiness
andbefore
oureyeswhatthatlifeis andwhatsort
itis,whatactions
andwhatworks
aretheirs
si adexem(Atvero
operae
precium,
cherubicae
vitanostra
est,quaeiliaetqualis
sit,quaeactiones,
plarvitae
formanda
quae
illorum
etinnumerato
, 112).
opera,
praeoculis
habere)
(Oratio

15:14:27 PM

232

M. V. DOUGHERTY

With theseT9 and T10 passages it becomes apparentthatPico identifies

to acquire
a vitawitha more traditionalnotionof a habit. By attempting
an
becomes
and
somehow
vita
the
lives
habits
one
angel.38
angelic
angelic
By acting like an angel, one becomes an angel; by acting like a plant
one becomes a plant,etc. With such a doctrinePico takes up the traditional notion of habituationand gives it metaphysicalsignificance.Pico
provideshis listenersor readerswitha moradontologythat takesits center in the notionthathuman beingshave no habit properto themselves.
AlthoughPico presentsthe vitaof a beast and the vitaof a god as equal
possibilitiesfor any individuadhuman being, he clearlyposits the latter
as more desirablethan the first.Pico seems to contendthat the factthat
human beings have seeds or potenciesfor higherlives makes it incumbent upon individualsto spurnthe lower kindsof lives.39
Antecedents
III. Two Philosophical
of human
Having set forthan accountof Pico's doctrineof the mutability
antecedents
some
to
in
a
are
now
we
philosophical
position explore
beings,
to the views set forthin the Oratio.Pico's paternityover a novel view of
human beings should not suggestthat the view lacks a notable philosophical ancestry.It will be shown that this ancestryincludesthe works
Roman philosopherBoethiusand as well as the
fromthe sixth-century
Greek philosopherAristode.
as far as I have seen, have attemptedto identify
No commentators,
of Boethiusas a source forPico's doctrineof the
the Consolatio
Philosophise
withsuch
human
of
beings.That Pico was somehowunfamiliar
mutability
a popular work seems to be unlikely.Althoughthe Consolatio
only first
Pico
that
show
came into printin its entiretyin 1491, records
possessed
38Picoseemstoadmit
nature
intoan angelic
be formed
thatonecannot
byone'sown
"We maynot
He writes,
is in somewayrequired.
assistance
and thatoutside
powers,
nonliceat)
nobis
cum
. . . (Quod
ourselves
tothisthrough
, 112)."
attain
(Oratio
pernos. . . consegui
traChristian
the
both
himself
with
reconcile
to
Pico
in
admission
this
attempts
Perhaps
the
considers
which
tradition
ofgraceanda Platonic
thenecessity
which
dition
postulates
one'sownpowers.
ortoKa^vto be in somewaybeyond
totoevortoyafv
ascent
39Therewouldseemto be additional
theOratio
outside
evidence
, whichwouldsubofhuman
themutability
thatwehaveseenregarding
someofthedoctrines
stantiate
beings
theHeptaplus
from
ofpassages
In a number
vitae.
loweror higher
, a commentary
toward
ina humanbeing
thatbeastsarepresent
ofGenesis
on thecreation
, Picocontends
story
the
with
beast
internal
the
to
seems
he
times
At
body,as when
identify
(268,280,284).
fartopass
so thatwedo nothavetotravel
ourentrails,
arewithin
"Thebrutes
hestates:
situt
utnon
bruta
adeovisceribus
innostris
enim
intothem"
sunt,
peregrinandum
procul
atque
(Intus
is givenbyPlatoas wellas by
thatsucha doctrine
ad ilia)(280).Picocontends
migremus
state.
to fallintosucha beastly
there
is always
Moses,andthatthedanger

15:14:27 PM

TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES
FORPICO'SORATIO

233

at least fourversionsof the workin his library.40

Scholars have long recthe
of
the
in
work
ognized
widespreadavailability
manuscriptand printed
form.41
As well, there is internalevidence fromPico's writingsthat he
was familiarwiththe Consolatio
, forsome scholarshave argued that Pico
in his treatmentof such subjectsas divineknowlalludes to the Consolatio
edge and eternity.42
The treatmentof the Consolatio
here will be to indicate some themes
thatseem parallel to the doctrinesof Pico's Oratio.In short,the Consolatio
presentsa dramaticsettingwhere the lady Philosophiaargues not infrequentlyfor the thesisthat human beings can lose theirnatures.43One
finds,forinstance:
Til

Foryoulearned
a little
timeagothateverything
thatis,isone,andthatoneness
itself
is good;andfrom
thisitfollows
thateverything,
sinceitis,is seenalsoto
begood.In thisway,then,
whatever
falls
from
ceasestobe;wherefore
goodness,
- butthattheywerementillnowtheir
evilmenceaseto be whattheywere
- andtherefore
stillsurviving
form
ofthehumanbodyshows
to
byturning
wickedness
human
nature.
Butsinceonly
theyhavebythesameactlosttheir
canraiseanyone
abovemankind,
itfollows
thatwickedness
goodness
necessarily
thrusts
downbeneath
thenameofmenthose
whom
ithascastdown
deserving
from
thehuman
condition.
So itfollows
thatyoucannot
hima man
adjudge
whomyouseetransformed
leftgoodness
aside
byvices... So hewhohaving
hasceasedtobe a man,sincehecannot
turns
state,
passoverintothedivine
intoa beast(Omne
esseipsumque
unum
bonum
essepauloante
namque
quodsitunum
cuiconsequens
estutomne
sitidetiam
bonum
essevideatur.
Hocigitur
modo
didicisti,
quod
a bono
essedesistit
essequod
sedfuisse
; quofitutmalidesinant
quidquid
deficit
fiierant,
homines
adhuc
ostentat.
versi
inmalitiam
humanam
ipsahumani
Quare
corporis
reliqua
species
amisere
nturm.
Sedcumultra
homines
solaprobitas
quoque
quemque
provehere
possit,
necesse
estutquosab humana
condicione
hominis
meritum
detrudat
deiecit,
infra
improbitas.
Evenit
vitiis
videos
hominem
aestimare
non
... Ita
, utquem
igitur
transformatum
possis
deserta
homo
essedesierit,
cum
indivinam
condicionem
transir
non
fitutquiprobitate
posinbeluarr)
sit,vertatur
, IV. p. 3, 44-56,67-9).
(Consolatio
Philosophiae

Withsuch an argumentPhilosophiais presentedas endorsinga somewhat

Plotinianpositionwhere being depends upon unityand a convertibility
40Forthe
in Pico'slibrary
ofworks
theConsolatio
, see
presence
containing
Philosophiae
Kibre1936(op.cit.,above,n. 16),180,1092,1211,1450.
41Fora brief
account
oftheaccessibility
oftheConsolatio
intheRenaissance,
Philosophiae
seeAnthony
TheAvailability
Works
Grafton,
, in:TheCambridge
ofAncient
History
ofRenaissance
1988(op.cit.,above,n. 9), 778-9.See alsoRobert
BlackandGabriella
Philosophy
Pomaro,
La consolazione
della
nelMedioevo
e nelRinascimento
italiano.
Libri
discuola
eglosse
neimanofilosofia
scritti
Boethius's
Consolation
ofPhilosophy
inItalian
Medieval
andRenaissance
Education.
fiorentini.
Schoolbooks
andtheir
Glosses
inFlorentine
2000.
Manuscripts
, Firenze
42See Olivier
Boulnois
andGuiseppe
in:JeanPicDe La Mirandole,
Oeuvres
Tognon,
, Paris1993,101.
Philosophiques
43See,forinstance,
Consolatio
, I. p. 6, 50-1;II. p. 5, 85-8;IV. p. 2,110-2;
Philosophiae
IV. p. 3, 50-69;IV. p. 4, 1-3.Latintexts
andEnglish
translations
forBoethius
aretaken
fromTheTheological
Tractates
andTheConsolation
H. F. Stewart,
E. K.
, trans.
ofPhilosophy
Mass.1973(= LoebClassical
Rand,S.J. Tester,
, Vol. 74).
Cambridge,
Library

15:14:27 PM

234

M. V. DOUGHERTY

is held to obtain among being, unity,and goodness.44With the acquisition of vice an individualfallsfromgoodness,and such a fall is paralleled with a fall frombeing. In a parallel fashion,those who possess
virtuesratherthan vices are held to have some kindof increasein being.
Philosophiacharacterizesthe movementinto vice as a de-evolutionof an
individualinto somethingwhich falls shortof humanity,and she characterizesthis movementas the loss or sendingaway {amisere)
of humana
natura.We also see here that BoethiusanticipatesPico in identifying
the
lifeof a beast as one pole in the spectrumof human actions.It is interestingto see that like Pico, Boethius argues that moral actions play a
constitutiverole in self-determination.
What one is is contingentupon
moral acts. With immoralacts, a body may remain,but human nature,
whichlater comes to be identifiedwiththe mind or soul {mens,
anima),is
no longerpresent.This Til passage also suggeststhe counterpartto the
doctrinethathuman beingscan become beasts,namely,thatmoral goodness can "raise" one above human nature to the point of becoming
divine.45It is importantto see that the loss of humananaturaforBoethius
admitsof two possibilities:one can become eithera beast or a divinity.
Boethiusand Pico appear to agree thatthebody is accidentalto an individual's identityin the hierarchyof being. In anotherpassage we finda
doctrinewhich seems to expressdetailsquite similarto Pico, forwe find:
andI seethatitisnotwrongly
saidthatthewicked,
T12 I admit,
although
they
preservetheform
ofa humanbody,yetin thequality
oftheirminds
theyare
intobeasts
neciniuria
dicivideo
tametsi
humani
vitiosos,
(Fateor
corporis
speciem
changed
servent
tarnen
animorum
, inbeluas
, IV. p.4, 1-3.).
mutari)
(Consolatio
qualitate
Philosophiae
In this text Boethius provides some furtherprecisionsconcerninghow
one should understandthe claim that moral reprobatesare turnedinto
beasts.By usingthe expressionqualitasanimihe seemsto amplifyhis claim
that humans turn into beasts, insofaras he applies his analysisto the
level of psychicstatesor habits. In this respectwe see a move that is
analogous to Pico's line of argument,for we saw above that Pico was
concernedwithevaluatinghuman beingsaccordingto the kind of soulsensitive,vegetative,or rational which takesprecedencein the daily life
of the individual.Pico suggestedthatif a human individual'sfundamental
44See Plotinus,
ofthedependency
ofbeing
Enneade
VI, 9, 1,3. ThePlotinian
principle
at Consolatio
is alsousedbyPhilosophia
, III. p. 11,27-30andIII.
Philosophiae
uponunity
p. 11,104-7.
45Thisposition
III. p. 10,84-9;
in othertexts.
See Consolatio
is reaffirmed
Philosophiae,
seealsoI. p. 4, 145;II. p. 5, 76; IV. p. 3, 28-9;III. p. 12,90-1.

15:14:27 PM

TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES
FORPICO'SORATIO

235

vitawas one found to be widespreadin beasts, therewas sufficient

evidence to considerthat person to be a beast in the hierarchyof being.
For both Pico and Boethiuspsychicqualities are set forthas the criterion by which to rate beings in the hierarchyof being.46
For our presentpurposes it is importantto note that Boethius spells
out a theoryin the Consolatio
in which he claims that human
Philosophiae
natureis somethingthatcan be lost,retained,preserved,dispossessed,or
servare
Such
, amittere
, mutare)
retiere,
changed (destituerez
by an individual.47
occurrencesare contingentupon moral choices made by the individual,
and in this respectwe find congruencebetween the moral anthropologies of Pico and Boethius.Both thinkersexplicitlyset forthdivinityand
bestialityas two poles in the range of possibilitiesopen to human beings.
However,further
precisionsneed to be made in lightof the comparison.
One shouldnote thatBoethiusneverappears to claim thathuman beings
have no natureproperto themselves.Rather,we have seen Boethiuscontendthatit is preciselythe human naturethatnaturallybelongsto human
or entirely
beingsthatis eitherlostby meansof immoralactivity
superceded
by virtuousactivity.Pico, one will recall,contendsin T3 and T4 thatall
naturesare presentto human beings, and that no particularnature is
properto human beings. The presence of all naturesin human beings
along Pico's account suggeststhat human beings are in fact devoid of a
proper nature. For this reason, the Boethian human nature cannot be
identifiedwith the aggregatenature that Pico ascribesto human
strictly
beings. The Boethian theoryconcerninga loss of nature is thus transformedby Pico's contentionthat human beings possess all natures.Pico
comes to appropriatethe Boethian contentionthat divinityand bestiality
are the possibilitiesfor human beings,but does so means of an absorption of all naturesin his anthropology.
Having set forthsome textualparallelsthatexistin the writingsof Pico
and Boethius,we now turnto some neglectedpassages fromthe Aristotle.
Althoughthe propinquityof Pico's thoughtto that of Aristotleis in a
numberof ways difficult
to ascertain,his acquaintance with Aristotelian
doctrinesis not. As to the formerissue, Paul Oskar Kristellerhas been
able to speak of "Pico's generalAristotelian
orientation"whileat the same
timemaintaining
thathe sees "no dangerin applyingthelabel of Platonism
46One might
notethatThomasAquinas
readsthetexts
oftheConsolatio
as
Philosophiae
forthelossofhuman
nature
as meaning
thelossofhabits;
cf.II Sent
arguing
., d. 35,q. 1,
a. 5 corp.
47Consolatio
, I. p. 6, 51; IV. p. 2, 111;IV. p. 2, 111/IV.p. 4, 3; IV. p. 3,
Philosophiae
51; IV. p. 4, 4.

15:14:27 PM

236

M. V. DOUGHERTY

to Pico's work."48The difficulty

of tryingto establishPico as eitherfunPlatonic
or
in natureis a ratherproblematicissue,
Aristotelian
damentally
especiallygivenPico's contention,as noted above, thatin core issuesany
betweenthe two ancientsare only verbal at
philosophicaldisagreements
best.49One may take as emblematicof the difficulty
of thisissue the fact
that Pico's contemporary,
Hermolao Barbaro, feltfreeto addresshim in
the course of singleletteras both an Aristotelianand a Platonist.50
Yet
to
the
side
a
moment
this
issue
for
the
Greek
leaving
concerning
philosophical allegiancesof Pico, thereis littledisputeas to Pico's knowledge
of Aristotelian
doctrines.In his responseto theletterof Hermolao Barbaro,
Pico concedes thathe has spentnot less than six yearsstudyingscholastic
thinkersand reportsof many scholasticinterpretations
of Aristotlein the
51Pico's no
historicalportionof the 900 Theses.
extant
On theConcord
longer
Plato
and
Aristotle
a
must
have
demonstrated
with
of
greataffinity the teachings of the Stagirite.As well, in the firstof the thesesgiven "according
to his own opinion" Pico was willingto defendthe followingclaim:
in whichAristotle
T13 Thereis no natural
or divinequestion
and Platodo not
in theirwordstheyseemto disandsubstance,
although
agreein meaning
estquaesitum
naturale
autdivinum
inquoAristoteles
etPlatosensu
etre
agree(.Nullum
nonconveniant,
verbis
dissentire
videantur)
(Thesis
1>1).
quarrwis
Pico explicitlysaw himselfas continuingthe Boethian unfinishedproject
of settingforththe harmonybetween Plato and Aristotle.52
Furtherevidence of Pico's knowledgeof Aristodeis suggestedby the surviving
records
of Pico's library.Accountsshow thatit was well stockedwithAristotelian
textsin the originalGreek as well as in Latin translation,
includingeight
, and numerouslogical,
, seven copies of the Politics
copies of the Ethics
For our presentpurposesit will be
metaphysical,and biologicalworks.53
notable thatboth the Ethicsand Politics
were presentin the libraryin the
Greek
original
language.54
48Kristeller
1965(op.cit..above,n. 9),63,69.
49Lohrsuggests
Picois said
ofPico'sphilosophical
a developmental
account
allegiances.
withChristian
to endlatter
to Pico'sPlatonism
to beginwithallegiance
Aristotelianism;
seeLohr1988{op.cit.,above,9),578-82.
50A translation
from
Hermolao
Barbaro
toPicois contained
oftheApril5, 1485letter
in Breen1952(op.cit.,above,n. 29),392-5.
51
adHermolao
Barbaro
, 679.
52Epistola
hisproetuno.Boethius
states
144;cf.162,as wellas theProemto De ente
Oratio,
Boehi
Commentarvi
Manlii
Severini
onDe Interpretation
II, ch.3; seeAnicii
jectintheCommentary
ree.C. Meiser,
editiosecunda,
inlibrum
Aristotelis
PeriHermeneias,
Leipzig1880,79-80.
53See Kibre1936(op.cit.,above,n. 16),28-30,304,Paul OskarKristeller
1965
dt.,above,n. 9),54-5.
(op.
54See Kibre1936(op.cit.,above,n. 16),28; 497;703.

15:14:27 PM

TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES
FORPICO'SORATIO

237

My presentinterestin approachingPico's intellectualrelationshipto

Aristotleis to set fortha parallel between Pico's doctrineof the mutabilityof human beings and some rather challengingpassages in the
Aristoteliancorpus that seem to bear some affinities
to the claims of the
Oratio.If a parallel between the teachingsof Pico and Aristotleon this
point can be established,we will have succeeded in openingup the possibilityof establishingto a greaterdegree some philosophicalsourcesfor
Pico's doctrine.
As an ingressto thisissuewe may beginwitha textfromtheNicomachean
Ethicsin whichthe Stagiritebeginshis account of ethicaldispositions.We
find:
T14 As theopposite
ofbestiality
itwillbe mostsuitable
to speakofsuperhuman
orgoodness
on a heroicordivine
scale. . . Henceif,as mensay,survirtue,
virtue
menintogods,thedisposition
tobestiality
will
passing
changes
opposed
be clearly
somequality
morethanhuman;
forthere
is nosuchthing
as virtue
in thecaseofa god,anymorethanthereis viceor virtue
in thecaseofa
beast. . . Andinasmuch
as it is rarefora manto be divine
... so a bestial
character
israreamong
human
xrv
avp|ixxoi
0r|pixr|xa
|KxX,iax'
beings
(rcp
vxivami0eav,. . . coox'
xf]v
Aiyeiv
f|pcovicri
rcp
Tijia
pexf|v,
ei,Karcep
cpaav,
0eoii' pexfj
oxii'
yvovxai
vGpcoTccov
xoiaxri
i)7iepo.f|v,
xiav eirjfjXov
Kaiyapcoarcep
o')89r)po')
axiKaica
o'pexri,
xr'0T|pi)ei
vxixi0ep.vr|
eiov)6
0eot>
. . . otixa)
Kai 0r|picT|
vxocv0pco7toi
ouxco
amvio){Nicomachean
55
Ethics
, VII, ch. 1, 1145a18-30).
A ratherstrikingfeatureof this passage for our presentpurposeslies in
the contentionthat the spectrumof moral dispositionsavailable to a
human being terminatesin the extremesof divinityand bestiality.The
acquisitionof virtuesor vices moves one towardbeing a god (0e) or a
beast (Grjpiov).
Yet it is not insignificant
thatin thisT14 passage Aristotle
does appear to be reportingterminological
distinctions
thathave currency
in establishedparlance. In the course of subsequentdiscussionshe will
reportfurtherthat Spartans use the appellationsof "divine" and "bestial," and he will contend that the latterterm is reservedas a special
expressionof opprobriumfor individualswho have acquired a surpassing (')7cepcxMx)VTa<;)
degree of vice.56This textdoes seem to serve as an
55TextsforAristode
aretakenfrom:
Ethica
ed. I. Bywater,
Oxford1894;
Mcomachea,
Politica
Books
ed. D. M. Balme
, ed. W. D. Ross,Oxford1957;History
VII-X,
ofAnimals:
andAllanGotthelf,
Mass.1991(= LoebClassical
, Vol. 439).English
Cambridge,
Library
translations
aretaken
from
Ethics
Nicomachean
H. Rackham,
Mass.1968
, trans.
Cambridge,
Mass. 1990
, Vol. 73); Politics
(= LoebClassical
, trans.H. Rackham,
Library
Cambridge,
oftheHistory
textis that
, Vol.264);andthetranslation
(= LoebClassical
Library
ofAnimals
ofW. D. RossfromTheComplete
Works
TheRevised
Translation
ofAristotle:
, Vol. 1,
Oxford
ed.Jonathan
Princeton
1995.
Barnes,
56Nicomachean
Ethics
, VII, ch. 1 1145a30-34.

15:14:27 PM

238

M. V. DOUGHERTY

importantparallel to Pico's text identifiedabove as T7, at least to the

extentthat there is a congruencein the respectiveassertionsthat the
poles of god and beast definethe range of possible ethical dispositions.
Yet at thispoint we are in need of more evidenceto establisha genuine
Aristoteliandoctrine,for along a conservativereading Aristotleappears
to be reportingthe use of certaintermsand one mustbe on guard not
to mistakethispracticewith the actual endorsementof any metaphysics
that is impliedby such nomenclature.57
Yet there are other textsin which Aristotleat least suggeststhat the
notionsof god and beast are helpfulin approachingthe range of possible
human dispositions.In the Politics
, forexample,Aristotlewill appeal to the
termsafterhavingjust previouslycontendedthat "a human being is by
One finds:
naturea politicalanimal ( vGpamo
(paeitco^itikv
cpov)."58
orwhoisself-sufficing
intopartnership,
T 15 ... a manwhoisincapable
ofentering
be
so thathe musteither
thathe hasno needtodo so,is nopartofa state,
i'axpKEiav
koivcovev
a beastora god( Svvnevo
^ir|v
e|ievo
axer'0T|pov
o')0vjipo
r'0e)(Politics,
I, ch. 1 1253a27-29).
rctaco,
With such a text we find furtherevidence that Aristodepreservesthe
conceptualpolaritiesof god and beast in his analysisof the humanpolis,
yet any metaphysicalground to such termsremainsto be established.59
in this regard.
Other discussions,though,will prove to be more fruitful
Ethics
, we begin to findthe tracTurningback now to the Nicomachean
Aristotleprovidesthe rather
individual.
for
a
bestial
of
an
ontology
ings
briefaccount:
is not
Forthebestthing
morefrightening.
is lessthanvice,though
T16 Bestiality
it [thebest
as inhe caseofman,butrather
[inthebestial
person]
corrupted,
5-oyap
0r|poxTi
mica,(poepcoxepov
(eXaxxov
thing]is notpresent
Ethics
'o>k
vxcp
xeA/uiaxov,
,
coarcep
i<p0apxai
v0pco7icp,
e'xei)
(Nicomachean
VII, ch.6 1150al-3).60
57Perhaps
to
atPolitics
remark
Aristotle's
consider
onemight
, III,ch.6 128lb19-20
passing
xcv
vioi(av0pco7coi)
totheT14 text:"xuxippODCiv
be a parallel
0t|p(ov
enoeircev;"
58Politics,
I, ch. 1 1253a2-3.
59An additional
to thepolesofgodandbeast
reference
in whichanother
discussion
at Politics
occurs
conduct
ofhuman
as possibilities
arementioned
, III, ch. 11 1287a28-30.
seemsto recommend
thatthelawshallgovern
thatrecommends
We find:"He therefore
addsa wild
buthethatwouldhavemangovern
aloneshallgovern,
thatGodandreason
xv0evKaixvvov
okeKetaeiv
KeX-eoov
beastalso(jievovvxvv|iov
apxeiv
apxeiv
Kal0t|pov)."
'v0p(D7tOV
KE^ETJCOV
7tpOax0T|Gl
H-VOD,
60In translating
1968(op.cit.,
Rackham
I havefollowed
thelastpartofthistext,
above,
seemstobe
which
ox>k
XTC
lieintranslating
difficulties
n. 55),411.Theinterpretive
e'xei,
"inthe
or rather
reasonis notpresent"
thesenseof"inthebestial
person
opento either
I haveoptedfortheformer.
beast
reasonis notpresent."
Rackham,
Following

15:14:27 PM

TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES
FORPICO'SORATIO

239

In thispassage we would seem to finda contrastbetweentwo individuals,

wherethefirstis someonegivenoverto vice,and the otheris an individual
who has become bestial.The text,accordingto one reading,would suggest
that in the bestialindividualthe best thing,i.e., intellect,is not present.
At a minimum,this T16 passage would suggestthat a bestial person is
in a worse conditionthan being merelyin the possessionof vice.
We turn now to a final text for more insightinto the metaphysical
thatmay undergird
Aristotle's
scattereddiscussionsof human
underpinnings
in
of
In
terms
beasts
and
the
Historia
Animalium
we finda text
beings
gods.
whichcomparesthepsychicdispositions
foundin humansto thosefoundin
animals,and Aristodedefendssome unusual claims. Aristotlemaintains:
T17 In thegreatmajority
ofanimals
there
ofpsychical
aretraces
orattiqualities
which
aremoremarkedly
in thecaseofhuman
differentiated
tudes,
qualities
Forjustas wepointed
outresemblances
in thephysical
so in
beings.
organs,
a number
ofanimals
we observe
or fierceness,
mildness
or cross
gentleness
or timidity,
fearor confidence,
or lowcunning,
temper,
courage,
highspirit
to intelligence,
to sagacity.
Someof
and,withregard
something
equivalent
thesequalities
in man,as compared
withthecorresponding
in aniqualities
thatis to say,a manhasmoreorlessofthis
mals,differ
onlyquantitatively:
andan animalhasmoreorlessofsomeother
... in children
quality,
maybe
observed
thetracesand seedsofwhatwillone daybe settled
psychological
a childhardly
differs
forthetimebeingfrom
habits,
though
psychologically
an beast(0r|piov);
so thatoneis quitejustified
in saying
man
that,as regards
andanimals,
certain
areidentical
withoneanother
psychical
qualities
(eveoxi
Kaitcv
ccAcdv
icvrcep
ypvtojctaaxoi
rr|v
fyvri
wcov
yuxfiv
xprccov,
oatep
rci
tcv
Kaiypfmepiri
Kaiypirri
vGpcmcov
%ei
xcc
cpavepcoTEpa
iacpopcx.
KaiTtpaii
Kaixa7rrr|
KaivpaKaieiAiaKaicpooi
Kai0ppr|
Kai0u|ioi
Kaimvoupyai
Kairrjrcep
veiaivvrcoAo
aTv
irjivoiavoDvaeco
71
i TCV
Ta |1V
Kaif|TTOV
|10lTTie,
K(X0a7C8p
|lpCV
AyO|lV.
ypTCp
|J.CxAOV
tvavGpomov,
Kai av0pomo
noXk
tcov
. . . cpavepcoraTov
iacppei
rcp
rcp
cpcov
vTOTOI
'egttotoiojtov
7ci
Tv7cacv
TT^v
fi^iKav
Xe'|faoiv
yptvlv
aTiv
iSevolov^vri
KaiaicpinaTa,
' ovkv
')GTpov
aop-vcov
^ecv
iacppei
co
eijcev
tcv
Animalium
fj
Trj
0r|p(cv KaTatvxpvov
,
tovtov)
[Historia
VIII, ch. 1 588al6-bl).
The unusualpositiondefendedin thistexthas been notedby some scholars.61From this passage we may be able to gather some interpretative
insightswithrespectto any metaphysicalfoundationswhich may ground
Aristotle'ssustainedreferencesto the polaritiesof god and beast. Here
Aristotlebegins his treatmentby assertingthat thereare some psychical
qualitieswhich are presentin both animals and humans. These qualities
of soul (ipTCoi
are presentboth to animals and humans
rcepittv'|A)XT|v)
61In referencing
thistext,
W. D. Rosscomments:
"In theHistoria
Animalium
[Aristotle]
takesfrequent
noticeofpoints
ofaffinity
between
menandanimals."
See hisDe Anima:
with
Introduction
andCommentary
Edited,
, Oxford
1961,9.

15:14:27 PM

240

M. V. DOUGHERTY

yet differonly in a quantitativesense. These psychic qualities, which

and not qualitaand fear,differquantitatively
include courage, timidity,
tivelybetweenhumans and animals.62The suggestionthat psychicqualities may differonly in quantitycould be taken to implythat univocal
predicationof psychicqualitiescould be attemptedwithrespectto humans
and animals. Aristotleseems to develop this possibilityfurtherby suggestingtoward the end of T20 that the soul of a child does not differ
This latterclaim
much in comparisonwith the soul of a beast (Gripiov).
does surfaceelsewherein the Aristoteliancorpus.63In short,in the suggestionthatcertainpsychicqualitiespresentin both animalsand humans
differonly in degree,we finda beginningof a metaphysicalfoundation,
albeit in the formof a psychology,thatwould allow us to interpretsome
of the claims we have seen surfacein otherpassages fromAristotle.One
could perhaps call a human being a "beast" if one were to discernthat
that individualpossessed a particularpsychicquality in such a degree
that normallyis found only in a beast in that degree. In all, we have
foundthe hintsof a philosophicalgroundin Aristotleforusingthe nomenclatureof "beast" in referenceto human beings,and to this extentwe
may have discovereda philosophicalsource forthe unusual doctrinesset
.64
forthin Pico's Oratio

62One maywishto notethatvpeaandotherpsychic

of
arepredicated
qualities
Animalium
at Historia
animals
, IX, ch.3 610b22.
again
63See,forinstance,
Kai0r|pioi
"raiyaprcaiai
Ethics
Mcomachean
, VI, ch.13 1144b9-10:
ai guaimi')7ipxouaiv
ei."
64Outsidethescopeofthispaperliestheissueoftheextent
docto whichancient
ofPico'sviewofthe
to theformulation
oftransmigration
trines
mayhavecontributed
forin a
suchan influence,
Thereis goodreasontoconsider
ofhuman
beings.
mutability
toidentify
Picohimself
andEmpedocles
ofPythagoras
discussion
transmigration
attempts
See Oratio
ofhuman
withhisviewson themutabliliy
as consonant
doctrines
, 108.
beings.
fr.112,117,
seeEmpedocles,
inthephilosophical
oftransmigration
Fordefenses
tradition,
620a(cf.alsoTimaeus
fr.7; Plato,Phaedo
, 81e,82a,Republic
115,9, 127,136;Xenophanes
of
ofthedoctrine
Ennead
, III, 4, 2; VI, 7, 6. On theorigins
42c,9Id, 92c);andPlotinus,
ofthispaperdisHistoria
see Herodotus,
, II, ch. 123.Forthepurposes
transmigration,
forthereasonthatit
hasbeenavoided,
oftheissueoftransmigration
cussion
primarily
a religious
ora philosophical
is primarily
whether
to determine
is difficult
transmigration
ofProteus
seetheaccounts
to Pico'sdoctrine,
antecedents
Forpossible
doctrine.
literary
ofthe
a
For
discussion
730-8.
and
in Homer,
,
VIII,
Ovid,
454,
,
IV,
Metamorphoses
Odyssey
ExileandChange
seeA. Bartlett
inRenaissance
Giamatti,
literature,
literary
imageofProteus
Literature
inRenaissance
, NewHaven1984,115-50.

15:14:27 PM

TWOPOSSIBLESOURCES
FORPICO'SORATIO

241

V. In Sum
In the course of the presentpaper I have broughttwo hithertounrecognized sources into the discussionof Pico's account of human beings
cited by much of the currentrelevantliterabeyond those consistently
ture.The recognitionof strongtextualparallelsbetweenpassages of the
Oratioand the Boethian and Aristotelianworks have established new
sourcesforPico's
avenues of inquiryin the ongoingprojectof identifying
a
novel
view
of
human
should not
Pico's
over
beings
thought.
paternity
view
lacks
a
notable
and
the
inclusion
of posithat
the
ancestry,
suggest
tionsof Boethiusand Aristotleprovidefor a new approach in interpreting the Oratio.It has been shown that in spite of his syncreticorientaof philosophyand
tion Pico defendsa distinctionbetweenthe formalities
rather
than
and
theologicalsources
theology,
by identifying
philosophical
forhis thoughtI have providedfora new contextforthe interpretation
thisimportantdocumentof Italian Renaissance humanism.65
Milwaukee,Wisconsin
Marquette
University

65I am grateful
toJamesB. South,Lawrence
and Michelle
Masek,
JohnSimmons,
fortheir
comments
on an earlier
draft
ofthispaper.
Ruggaber

15:14:27 PM

Juan Ginsde Seplvedaund diepolitische

im Zeitalter
der Conquista}
Aristotelesrezeption
CHRISTIANSCHFER

I. Die Ausgangslage
ChristophKolumbushattewhrendeinerseinererstenEntdeckungsfahrten
auf der von ihm Hispaniola" benanntenInsel- dem heutigenHaitieine kleine Garnison unter den Eingeborenenhinterlassen.Als er 1495
dorthinzurckkehrte,
um die Garnison zu entsetzen,fand er nur noch
erbrmlicheberreste der spanischen Mannschaftam Leben und die
gesamtefrdie kastilischeKrone beanspruchteInsel in hellemAufruhr.
Auf seinemerbostenVergeltungsfeldzug
gegen die dafrverantwortlichen
karibischen
Indiosnahmer eine Anzahlvon Gefangenenunterden benachbarten Stmmen. Einige dieser Gefangenenlie er nach Spanien brinals Sklavender Krone deklarierte
und zum finanziellen
gen,wo er sie offiziell
Gewinn des Knigshauseszum Verkaufanbot.2Kolumbus hatte damit
eine de-factoSituationgeschaffen,
die in den folgendenJahrzehnteneine
schierendlosejuristische,theologischeund philosophischeDiskussionber
die Rechtmigkeiteiner Versklavungvon neuentdecktenVlkern auslste, eine Diskussion,die von den Universittenteilweisehitzigauf die
Politikund breiteGesellschaftsschichten
Spaniens bergriff.3

1 DieserAufsatz
isteineberarbeitete
undin mehreren
Punkten
verngravierenden
derteFassung
einesVortrags,
denzu halten
ichwhrend
einesKongresses
zurAntikenimFebruar
hatte.Eineinsgesamt,
v.a.aberim
Rezeption
(Heidelberg
1999)Gelegenheit
Teil starkgekrzte,
im historischen
ausphilosophisch-argumentativen
jedochteilweise
fuhrlichere
Version
desVortrags
istmittlerweile
indenKongreakten:
erschienen
DieThese
vondernatrlichen
Sklaverei
inantiker
undspanischer
, in:ManuelBaumbach
Philosophie
Conquista
Tradita
etInventa.
derAntike,
zurRezeption
2000,S. 111-30.
(Hg.),
Beitrge
Heidelberg
2 Vgl.zu diesem
historischen
z.B. LesleyByrdSimpson,
Losconquistadores
Hintergrund
indio
americano
, Barcelona
1970,S. 16f.
y el
3 Umso mehr,
alssichSklaventransporte
vondenWestindischen
InselnaufBetreiben
desKolumbus
undanderer
in denfolgenden
kniglicher
Kolonialbevollmchtigter
Jahren
undzwaroffenbar
sehrzumrger
undgegendenWiderstand
derkastiliwiederholten,
schenKnigin
Isabel:vgl.dazuetwau.a. Simpson
1970(s.o.,Anm.2), S. 17ff.
sowie
PrezLuo,La polmica
delNuevo
Mundo
, Madrid21995,S. 191f.
Antonio-Enrique
BrillNV,Leiden,2002
Koninklijke
- www.brill.nl
Alsoavailable
online

Vivarium
40,2

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 243
die Sklavereieine
Dabei war im Spanien des 15. und 16.Jahrhunderts
zwar weitgehendmarginale,aber dennochwohlbekanntesoziale Erscheiwaren es insbesondereschwarzeSklaven,die
nung.4Im 16. Jahrhundert
man durchausauch im christlichen
Spanien nach dem Fall von Granada
im Jahr 1492 von muslimischenoder portugiesischen
Anbieternerwerben konnte.5Die Entdeckungder Neuen Welt und die dadurch erffnete
VersklavungganzerVlkeraber machtedie
Mglichkeitflchendeckender
Sklavereierst zum wirklichenjuristischenund politischenProblem: Es
muslimische
Erzfeinde
gingnichtmehrnurum einigewenigeunterworfene
oder erkaufteoder sonstwieerworbeneIndividuen,die aufgesaugtvom
Leben als Einzelschicksaleuntergingen,
sonderndarum,
gesellschaftlichen
- zumindestteilweise
Vlker
ob das riesigeMenschenreservoir
ganzer
knnte.
der systematischen
Versklavungdurch die Spanier offenstehen
die diametralenExtrempositionen
Ich willkurzund starkvereinfachend
in der damaligenDebatte um die Rechtmigkeit
der VersklavungneuentFestes Fundamentbeider Standpunkteist
deckterVlker nachskizzieren.6
der spanidabei die Einsichtin die Tatsache, da das Aufeinanderprallen
als irreversibles
schenKulturmitden amerikanischen
Faktum
geschichtliches
angesehenund pragmatischals Aufgabe,so wie sich die Situationnuneinmal bot,angenommenwerdenmute;nurder dieserAufgabeentsprechende
Lsungswegblieb kontrovers:
Gegen die Versklavungder Indios sprach allgemeingesagtdas (vor- Der
christlich
Menschlichkeitsideal.
motivierte)
dringlich
Dominikanerpater
4 ZurSklaverei
im SpanienderReconquista-Zeit
undzurTradition
derVersklavung
muslimischer
siehekonzis
bsico
de
Kamen,Vocabulario
Kriegsgefangener
Henry
dargestellt
la Historia
Moderna
Barcelona
1986,S. 85-9.Kamenistauch
1450-1750),
(Espaa
y Amrica
in derEinschtzung
zu folgen,
da die ehersporadischen
des 14.
Versklavungsaktionen
und15.Jahrhunderts
werden
Spanienniezu einerregelrechten
Sklavenhaltergesellschaft
lieen(a.a.O.S. 85f.:Die Sklaverei
undhattekeinerlei
rassiwarnichtsehrverbreitet
stische
Dominanzstrukturen
zurGrundlage";
ber.C.S.).
5 So weckt
imDonQuijote
schwarzer
(I,Kapitel
29)dieinAussicht
gestellte
Beherrschung
inSanchoPanzaunmittelbar
Untertanen
anihreDeportation
denGedanken
(thiopischer)
als Sklaven
in Spanien,
undihrenVerkauf
wasalsooffenbar
keinauffallig
auergewhnliches
oderVorgehen
indenAugeneineseinfachen
des16.Jahrhunderts
Ereignis
Spaniers
seinkonnte.
6 berflssig
zu sagen,da einesolchekrudeNachzeichnung
den angesprochenen
Theorien
nichtin denDetailsgerecht
werden
undntzlich
dieseauch
kann,so wertvoll
zurgerechten
In Nuancen
seinmgen.
undTeilzustimmungen
lassensich
Interpretation
selbstverstndlich
vonAutorzu Autorzwischen
diesenExtrempositionen
(undwohlauch
in ihnenDifferenzierungen)
undMischformen
derArgumentation
und
Schattierungen
aufdie hieraberzu meinem
Leidwesen
nichteingegangen
wererkennen,
Standpunkte
denkann.Ichverweise
dazuweiter
aufdiehervorragende
vonMauricio
21997.Verffentlichung
La querella
dela Conquista
Beuchot,
, Mexiko/Madrid

15:14:33 PM

244

CHRISTIAN
SCHFER

und sptere Bischofvon Chiapas in Mexiko, Bartolom de Las Casas,

kannhierals wohl berhmtester
Vertreter
genanntwerden.Gesttztwurde
diese Sicht der Dinge durch die scholastischeNaturrechtstradition,
aber
auch durch autoritativekirchlicheStellungnahmenin dieser Frage, die
sich schon erstaunlichbald einstellten.Sie legtenlehramichfest,da es
sich bei den Bewohnernder Neuen Welt um Menschen im vollen Sinne
handeltemitallen Rechtenund Pflichten,
die aus diesemStatuserwuchsen,
insbesondereaber mitdem Recht,ihrerFreiheitals Personennichtberaubt
werdenzu drfen.7
Diese Positionder naturrechtlich
rationalen
begrndetenvollkommenen
und
menschlichen
sowie
der
daraus
ableitbaren
Fhigkeiten
Wertigkeit
allgemeinenGrundrechteder Indios und die Aufgabe der andauernden
moralischenEntrstunggegenberden Greultatender Spanier an der
im spanischenDominikanerwurdeinsbesondere
eingeborenen
Bevlkerung
orden, und zwar gegen massive Opposition der kolonialpolitischen
7 Zu erwhnen
isthierzunchst
z.B. die BullePapstAlexanders
VI. Inter
cetera
vom
Mai 1493,inder(nurwenige
MonatenachKolumbus'
erster
zwarvom
Entdeckungsreise)
RechtderSpanischen
KroneaufInbesitznahme
undKolonisierung
derneuenLnderdie
Redeist,beides
aberstrikt
undallein
unter
dieZielvorstellung
derVerbreitung
desGlaubens
whrend
undmaterielle
Vorteile
desKulturkontakts
wird,
gestellt
politische
ausgeklammert
werden
einewichtige
furdieBeurteilung
derIndiosvorausgenom(wobei
Vorentscheidung
menwurde:
siesindin demMaevernunftbegabt,
da sieoffenbar
ohneweiteres
christianisiert
werden
underfllen
somit
dieallgemeine
desaniMenschseinsdefinition
knnen,
malrationale
abervorallemdieBullePapstPaulsIII. Sublimis
DeusvomJuni1536,
); sodann
inderexplizit
undunmiverstndlich
aufdasmittlerweile
virulent
Problem
der
gewordene
deramerikanischen
Indianer
alsWerkdesTeufels
undmit
Versklavung
bezuggenommen
demchristlichen
Missionsbemhen
kontrastiert
wird:So [.. .] entscheiden
underklren
Wirkraft
Unserer
Vollmacht
durchdiesesSendschreiben,
da die vorgeapostolischen
nannten
Indiosundalleweiteren
dienochdurchChristen
entdeckt
werVlkerschaften,
an Christus
densollten,
wennsiedemGlauben
auchnochso weitentfernt
weder
stehen,
Gter
beraubt
sondern
nochknftig
ihrer
Freiheit
nochihrer
werden
drfen,
gegenwrtig
bersieund
berbeidesfreiverfugen
knnen
mssen.
Sie habenfreie
Verfgungsgewalt
Niemand
hathingegen
das Recht,sie
drfen
sieungehindert
undrechtmig
genieen:
sollals nullundnichtig
zu versklaven.
JedeZuwiderhandlung
gegendieseAnordnung
Text
nochVerbindlichkeit
siehatwederGltigkeit
werden,
[. . .]" (Lateinischer
angesehen
XVIparala historia
deMxico
ediert
in:M. Cuevas(Hg.),Documentos
inditos
delSiglo
, Mxico
21975,S. 499f.;
Metzler
Primi
Saeculi
auchin:Josef
Porra
Pontificia
neuerdings
(Hg.),America
ihre
1493-1592
, Vatikan1991,Bd. 1, Nr.84). Die Bulle,odervielmehr
Evangelizationis
in Spanien
vonderKronerelativ
schnell
unddenKolonien,
wurde
untersagt
Verbreitung
inbegrenzten
Umlauf
undnureineabgemilderte
Textversion
gebracht:
vgl.dazuz.B.H.
der
Gtersloh
undChristentum.
EinHandbuch
zurGeschichte
1992,
Neuzeit,
Grnder,
Welteroberung
Rolle
daSeplveda
mitseiner
einflureichen
S. 122f.
MandarfmitVorsicht
mutmaen,
Rolle
in kolonialpolitischen
dabeieinegewisse
beiHofunddezidierten
Fragen
Meinung
an einigen
Stellen
nimmt
seinDemcrates
Alter
habenmag.Jedenfalls
exponierten
gespielt
ohnesiejedochalsArgumentgegner
undmotivisch
BezugaufdieBulle,
eindeutigen
sprachlich
zu nennen.

15:14:33 PM

UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 245
SEPLVEDA
Interessengruppenbernommen.Die Dominikanerbtendabei von ihrer
nicht zu unterschtzendenPosition des Bildungs- und
gesellschaftlich
von
berhaupt(den Leyes
Predigerordens der erstenKolonialgesetzgebung
de Burgos" von 1512)8 bis weit ins 17. Jahrhundert
politischund administrativnachhaltigenEinfluin der Indiofrageaus.9
- zumin Die Gegentheseeinerdenkbarenund uerstzweckdienlichen
der Bewohnerder Neuen Welt
dest teilweisen
Versklavungsmglichkeit
konomischen
war einerseitsnatrlichvor allem von rein pragmatischen,
und
Interessen
und machtpolitischen
getragen;sie schien
berlegungen
Blickauf das kolonialeAlltagsgeschft
aber auch durchden vergleichenden
Staaten gerechtfertigt.
Andererseitskonntesich diese
andererchristlicher
Positionauch auf ein altestheoretisches
sttzen,
Rechtfertigungsfundament
und dort unter anderem bei
das sich explizit im antiken Schrifttum,
- im antiken
Aristotelesfindenlie, und dessen Umsetzung
Kriegsbrauch
- offenbar
auch das Christentum
nie ganz aufgegeben
ein Allerweltsverfahren
hatte:10
es handeltsich um den Grundsatz,da der im gerechten
KriegunterworfeneFeind rechtmigmit Leib und Leben in den Besitz des Siegers
bergeht.Das Argumentfindetsich genauso bei Cicero wieder,von wo
aus es ins Renaissancedenken
seinenwiedererstarkenden
Einflugenommen
haben drfte,war aber auch in der scholastischenDiskussionder servitusUnd es war im brigengenau diesesArguFrage nie ganz untergegangen.11
8 Verl.
dazuz.B.U. Horst
u.a.(Hg.),Francisco
deVitoria
: Vorlesungen
S. 85.
/,Stuttgart
1995,
9 Reprsentativ
istindiesem
anFrancisco
zu erinnern
deVitoria,
seinZusammenhang
erzeit
derfhrende
Gelehrte
derSalmantinischen
dessen
berhmte
undauchbei
Schule,
Hofekommentierten
Relectiones
berdieKolonialfrage
unddasKriegsrecht
alleausdentraditionellen
aufdie Eroberung
und
Argumenten
abgeleiteten
spanischen
Rechtsansprche
derNeuenWeltfurunhaltbar
unddaherfurnichtig
erklrten.
SolcheArgumente
Aneignung
ihrHeidentum
unter
anderem:
diekulturelle
derIndiovlker,
und
waren,
Unterlegenheit
ihrebarbarische
sichpolitisch
selbst
zuverwalten,
aberauchetwaderuniversale,
Unfhigkeit,
unddashie:weltweite
desrmischen
dasmitKarlV.
Kaisertums,
Herrschaftsanspruch
aufdieSpanier
zu seinschien.
Relectio
deIndisrecenter
bergegangen
Vgl.v.a.de Vitorias
deutsche
vonU. Horst(Hg.),Francisco
de Vitoria:
inventisi
//,Stuttgart
Ausgabe
Vorlesungen
1997,S. 370-541.
10Vgl.dazu u.a. die Ausfhrungen
undbibliographischen
Weiterverweise
berdie
vonlat.sclavus
beiCh. Fleler,
undInterpretation
derAristotelischen
Politica
Etymologie
Rezeption
imspten
Mittelalter
, Bd. 1,Amsterdam
1992,Anm.286zu S. 85.
11Vgl.De ojjkiis
auerdem:
and
I, 34-40.ZurRezeption
JeanDubabin,TheReception
Politics
A. Kenny,
, in:N. Kretzmann,
Interpretation
ofAristotle's
J.Pinborg
(Hg.),TheCambridge
Medieval
sowie:
The
, Cambridge
1982,723-37,
Barnes,
History
ofLater
Philosophy
Jonathan
In derEinfhrung
kommentierten
, in:ibid.,S. 771-784.
JustWar
(S. CLXVII)zu seiner
derPolitik
nicht
, Paris21968)listet
zweisprachigen
(Aristote,
Ausgabe
Politique
JeanAubonnet
als 21 Neueditionen
undbersetzungen
derPolitik
zwischen
1498und1608auf
weniger
auchdie Seplvedas
von 1548).Von Interesse
darinisthierinsbesondere
die
(darunter
vonErasmus
dermitihmin regem
(Basel1531),die auchaufSeplveda,
mitbesorgte
Austausch
vonBedeutung
ist.
stand,
gewesen

15:14:33 PM

246

CHRISTIAN
SCHFER

von 1495 ins Feld

ment, das Kolumbus fr seine Versklavungsaktion
fhrte:die (in seinen Augen) Vertragsbrchigen
Indios seien von ihm in
einem gerechtenKriegszug- als solchergalt ihm seine karibischeStrafexpedition besiegtund somitrechtmigins EigentumseinesKriegsherrn,
der SpanischenKrone, berfhrt
worden.12Man vergleichezum ganzen
Problemkreisals AusgangspunktAristoteles,Politik1055a5ff.,der diese
These als eine communis
seiner Zeit
opinioder Versklavungsrechtfertigung
zitiert.Aristotelesselbstist allerdingsder Auffassung,
wirklichgerechtfer; eine Versklavungvon Unterworfenen
tigtsei nur die Sklavereia natura
habe also nur dann unumstlichesRecht, wenn der gerechteKriegund darin bestehtja zum groen Teil seine Berechtigung
gegen solche
Menschen gefhrtwird,die ihrerniederenNatur nach schon nichtfrei
sind und defacto
schwachenKonstitution
, v.a. ihrergeistig-seelisch
wegen,
- Was das Weiterleben
ihrLeben nichtfreianlegenund bestimmen
knnen.13
der Aristotelischen
Politikim (akademischen)Gedankengutseit 1260, dem
ihrer
ins LateinischedurchWilhelmvon Moerbeke,
Jahr
(ersten)
bersetzung
im
so
ist
da die servitus
hierwesentlichchrisdich
betrifft,
brigenauffallig,
vor allem als Folge der Snde, also nichtals ein natrlicher
interpretiert
Urzustand des Menschen oder von Menschengruppen,angesehenwird,
sondernim Gegenteilals bittereKonsequenz des Sndenfalls(vgl. z.B.
Thomas von Aquin, Sentenzenkommentar
Was ander, II Sent. 44.1.3.C.O.).14
erseitsim 16. Jahrhundert unterNichtbeachtungdes Unterschiedsvon
Sklaven"(in der antikenund besondersin der Aristotelischen
Vorstellung
von 8o,o)
und Unfreien"(wie sie etwa Thomas5Zeitgenossenals servi
- aber auch als christlichverbrmtes
im Auge gehabt haben drften)
12hnliches
vonMexiko:
Von Versklavungen
derIndiobei derEroberung
passiert
hrtmanindenQuellen
erstnachdersog.Noche
durch
dieSpanier
Triste",
bevlkerung
in denAugenderSpanier
verrterischen
es zumeindeutig
alsonachdem
kriegerischen,
danach(offenbar
erstmals
aufseinem
war:Corts
Aufstand
derMexicas
gekommen
beginnt
zu versklaven
undsiemiteinemG" (furguerra",
Eroberungszug)
Besiegte
Eingeborene
zu machen:
zu brandmarken,
umdenGrund
frihreVersklavung
offenkundig
Vgl.
Krieg)
Hernn
Mexico21990,S. 276(mitdenentsprechenden
Corts,
QuellenJosLuisMartnez,
angaben).
13Die ZitateausderAristotelischen
entnommen
derdeutschen
Politik
sindimfolgenden
Werke
Bd.9, hg.vonHellmut
in:Aristoteles,
vonEckart
Flashar,
Schtrumpf,
bersetzung
Darmstadt
1991.
14ZurInterpretation
zum Ihema
scholastischer
dieserundanderer
Stellungnahmen
istFlelers
zumscholastischen
sowiegenerell
(1992,s.o.,Anm.
Einfhrung
servitus-Rtg
Diskussion
derSklaverei
zuThomas
undseiner
aufschlureich;
10),S. 35-85uerst
speziell
S. 27)von
istdieEinleitung
in Aufnahme
vonAristoteles
undAbgrenzung
(insbesondere
Politik
derAristotelischen
FranzSchwarz
zu seiner
1989)intere(Stuttgart
bersetzung
in derScholastik
undihrer
AbrizurPo/zM-Kommentierung
sant;fureinenkurzen
genuineoriginality"
vgl.z.B.JeanDubabin1982(s.o.,Anm.11).

15:14:33 PM

ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 247
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
SEPLVEDA
fiirdie Versklavungder Indios nach antikemMusterumgedeutet
Argument
werdenkonnte,wo sie als gerechteKonsequenz frder Snden der Versder Sklavennehmer
nichtals Konsequenzder sndhaften
klavten,
Korruption
Lebenswandelverausgelegtwurde: Ihr Heidentumund ihr schuldhafter
langten geradezu nach Versklavung,die dann sozusagen nur noch als
ein rechtlicherVollzug
sichtbaresRealsymbol fr ihre Schuldhaftigkeit
auf diesen Gedanken
ihres moralischenZustands sein wrde. Man trifft
der Verbindungvon Sklavereiund bellum
justumbei Seplveda: Aufgrund
[des Rechts, C.S.], das auf der Hand liegt und auf dem Vlkerrecht
genausowie aufdem der Naturberuht,und dessensichauch die trefflichsten
Menschenim allgemeinenbedienen,da diejenigen,die in einemgerechten
worden sind, ebenso wie ihre Habe, den Siegernund
Krieg unterworfen
Erobererngehren;so entstandnmlichursprnglich
die Sklaverei";15
und
zur Frage der Gerechtigkeitdieses Krieges: Wollen wir also wirklich
da diese so unzivilisierten,
so barbarischen,
so schndlichen
daran zweifeln,
und von allen mglichenSchurkereienund sndhaftenReligionsbungen
durchsetztenVlker mit vollem Recht von einem trefflichen,
frommen
und so uerst gerechtenKnig, wie es Ferdinand war und jetzt der
Kaiser Karl ist, und von einer zivilisierten
und an allen nur denkbaren
wurTugenden hervorragendenNation zur Beherrschungunterworfen
den?" (S. 112);16oder: Was also konntediesenWilden besseresund heilsamerespassieren,als da sie der Herrschaft
wrden,
jener unterworfen
durch deren Klugheit,Tchtigkeitund Frmmigkeit
sie von wilden und
kaummenschlichen
Wesen zu humanenund- soweites ihreVerstandeskraft
zult zivilisierten,
und von Freveltternzu sittsamenMenschen, von
Dmonendienern
zu Christenund zu Verehrerndes wahren
gottlosen
Gottesund der wahren Religion umgewandeltwerden?"(S. 132, lateinischer Text ausfhrlichin Anm. 49), u..
Whrendder akademischeStreitum die angedeutetenPro- und ContraPositionenin der Schwebe war, mute natrlichpolitischund jurisdiktionellmglichstschnell und pragmatischgehandeltwerden. Man fand
viafactieine (wie man dachte)vorlufigeLsung, die im wesentlichenaus
15Demcrates
Alter
Menendez
, hg.vonMarcelino
y PelayoundManuelGarca-Pelayo,
Mxico1987[2. Nachdruck
derEinzelerstauflage
1941],S. 158:Ea [seil,
lege]scilicet,
etiambonicommuniter
et
est,qua homines
utuntur,
quaein promptu
quaejuregentium
naturae
utquijustobellovietifuerint,
ii etipsietipsorum
bonavictorum
fiant
continetur,
etcapientium;
hincenimservitus
civilis
nataest."
16Hasigitur
tamincultas,
tambarbaras,
tamflagitiosas,
etcunctis
sceleribus
et
gentes
dubitabimus
ab optimo,
contaminatas,
impiis
religionibus
pio,justissimoque
Rege,qualis
etFerdinandus
fuit
etnuncestCarolus
etab humanissima
etomnivirtutum
Caesar,
genere
natione
in ditionem
fuisse
redactas?"
praestante
jureoptimo

15:14:33 PM

248

CHRISTIAN
SCHFER

der spanischenLeibeigenengesetzgebung"
entwickelt
wurde,und die als
in
die Kolonialgeschichteeinging:17
sogenanntesencomiendaSystemauch
die Krone bertrug
encomendar",(einen Landstrichoder Sprengel)in
- hierbei mittelbaroder unmittelbarden Kolonialherren
commendavi
dare
verschiedenerGre, die sie nahezu wie Vizeknige
Verwaltungsgebiete
und Auflagen)verwaltendurften.
Voraussetzungen
(jedochunterbestimmten
Mit dieser Beauftragunggingen die Bewohner der verliehenenGebiete
zwar nicht als Personen,wohl aber insofernes ihre Arbeitskraft
betraf,
ber.18Diese Manahme,
weitgehendin das Eigentumdes Administrators
welche die (brigensmeistensnicht an die Scholle gebundenen)Indios
rechtlichnichtihrerpersnlichenFreiheit,sondernihrerArbeitsautonomie
beraubte,war zunchstoffenbarnur als eine ArtZwischenlsunggedacht;
doch bewahrheitetesich auch an ihr beeindruckendeine ernchternde
Einsichtaus dem tglichenLeben: Nichtshlt so lange wie ein Proviso- Das
rium.
der (im Laufe der Zeit freilich
stndigmodifizierten
Fronsystem
und neu durchdachten)19
encomienda
berdauertefaktischdie spanische
Kolonialzeitin Lateinamerika.
In den Intellektuellenstreit
um die Behandlungder neuentdeckten
Vlker
eine
Amerikasmischtesich in den vierzigerJahrendes 16. Jahrhunderts
Stimme von einigem wissenschaftlichenRenommee und politischem
17Das encomiendainseinen
stammt
ausdemspanischen
12.Jahrhundert:
Anfangen
System
wurden
krzlich
den Muslimen
entrissene
Grenzgebiete
kriegserprobten
Ursprnglich
derReconquista
zurVerwaltung
umdieVerteidigungslinie
christlichen
Adligen
bertragen,
Landstriche
voranzutreiben.
Zu Geschichte
und
unddieRekatholisierung
dieser
zu festigen
derencomienda
Grundgedanken
vgl.auchH. Kamen1986(s.o.,Anm.4),S. 79ff.
18EineHandhabe,
aberkonvenienterweise
aufVorlufer
auchin
die sichgroenteils
und
derInkasundAzteken
sttzen
undberufen
denindianischen
Groreichen
konnte,
hatte
erschien:
Auchindenprkolumbinischen
wohlauchdeswegen
alsgeeignet
Imperien
- meist
- mutatis
zur
seiner
Arbeitskraft
derLandarbeiter
mutandis
etwaeinDrittel
jhrlichen
erdenRestderZeitzurstaatlichen
zurVerfugung,
whrend
Abgabe
eigenen
Nutznieung
aufmerksam:
macht
aufdiesen
Brauch
beidenAzteken
mute.
aufwenden
Agri
Seplveda
muneutunaparsessetattributa
enimetprae
dia,sicerantdistributa,
Regi,altera
publicis
etpblicos
tertia
ad singulorum
ususseditautiidemregios
ribusac sacrificiis,
agroscol- Einkurzes,
derberabervielsagendes
Textdokument
Alter
erent"
, S. 110).
{Demcrates
imbrigen
1970
von1544reproduziert
encomienda
einermexikanischen
Simpson
tragung
(s.o.,Anm.2),S. 191.
19Zeitweilig
des 16.Jahrhunderts
wurdedie encomienda
schonwhrend
sogarganz
derspanischen
Protests
dejur),muteaberwegendeswtenden
(zumindest
abgeschafft
- Kamen1986(s.o.,Anm.4), S. 85 istwahrscheinlich
werden
Siedler
wieder
zugelassen
in
nachseinerEinfhrung
unmittelbar
rechtdarinzu geben,da das encomiendaSystem
zu
faktisch
kaumvonSklavenhaltung
1503aufHispaniola)
wohlzunchst
Amerika
(zuerst
derDominikaner
dieffentlichkeitsarbeit
seit1510steuerte
unterscheiden
war;sptestens
Krone(etwa1512dieLeyes
derSpanischen
Orden)sowiedieGesetzgebung
(undanderer
undMibruchen
1542dieLeyes
de Burgos",
bergriffen
Nuevas")
jedochdenbrutalen
verstrkt
derKolonialherrn
entgegen.

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 249
Gewicht:die des HumanistenJuan Gins de Seplveda (1490-1573).20Er
selbstschreibt:
Dahermeinte
ichberdieseDingemitnachdachte,
in
ich,alsmir,whrend
einiges
denSinnkam,wodurch
die Debatte,
wiees schien,
da
werden
knnte,
beigelegt
undernsthaftester
ich,bei derart
groen
Meinungsverschiedenheiten
hochgelehrter
Mnner
bersolchbedeutende
in
Dinge,nichtin einerffentlichen
Angelegenheit,
dersichso vieleumtun,
seindrfe,
oderschweigen,
wo sichschonso viele
unttig
zu Wortgemeldet
haben.ZumalichvonSeiten
Mnner
vongroem
hochrangiger
Einflu
ichsollemeineAnsichten
schriftlich
ummein
wurde,
aufgefordert
darlegen,
Urteilkundzutun,
demsie,als iches in wenigen
Worten
frher
einmalmndlich
offenbar
hatten.21
aussprach,
zugestimmt
Nach wissenschaftlicher
seinenvielgelobten
AristotelesTtigkeit(insbesondere
an
der
Mediceischen
von
Akademie"
bersetzungen)22
Careggiund unter
dem Medici-PapstClemensVII. war Seplveda nach dem Sacco di Roma
offizieller
Hofchronistder SpanischenKrone und zum Praeceptor"des
Erbprinzen,des nachmaligenKnigs PhilippII., geworden. In diese Zeit
seineshchstengeistigenwie politischenEinflussesfalltSeplvedasWortmeldungzur Indiofrage.
Diese Wortmeldung
nahm Gestaltin Formeinesphilosophischen
Dialogs
den
etwa
um das Jahr 1543 verfathaben drfte,und
an,23
Seplveda
20Das Geburtsjahr
hatAngelLosadawohleinigermaen
sicher
errechnet
de
(JuanGins
dasTodesdatum
hltderGrabstein
fest(a.a.O.,TafelII).
, Madrid1973,S. 14f.),
Seplveda
GeburtsundSterbeort
istPozoblanco
inAndalusien.
ZurBiographie
istzusamSeplvedas
menfassend
auerdem
nochinteressant:
VenancioCarro,La teologa
y lostelogos-juristas
antela conquista
deAmrica
, Bd. II, Madrid1944,S. 324ff.
espaoles
21PrologzumDemcrates
Alter
eruditissimorum
et gravissimo, S. 43f.:In tantaigitur
rumvirorum
de rebusmaximis
cumquaedam
mihihisde rebuscommentanti
dissensione,
in mentem
dirimi
nonexistimavi
in publico
venisset,
quibuscontroversia
possevideretur,
tammultis
mihiessecessandum,
autloquentibus
negotio
tacendum;
occupatis
praesertim
cumessema magnis
auctoritate
virisadmonitus,
ut scripto
magnaque
quidmihijudicii
essetexponerem,
ut meamsententiam,
antedicta
quama mepaucisverbis
(sic)probare
declararem".
Von denjenigen,
die Seplveda
zurschriftlichen
videbantur,
Niederlegung
seiner
Thesenbewogen
istzumindest
daderErzbischof
vonSevilladazu
haben,
bekannt,
Venancio
Garro1944(s.o.,Anm.20),S. 326.
gehrte:
Vgl.
22ImVorwort
zurersten
seiner
Druckauflage
(1548)weist
P<';-bersetzung
Seplveda
selbst
darauf
nochnichtangemessen
insLateinische
bertrahin,da dieSchrift
bislang
sei.Seinelateinischen
imbrigen
nachwie
genworden
Aristoteles-bersetzungen
gelten
vorals diemitunter
besten:
1995(s.o.,Anm.3), S. 190;hnlich
Vgl.A.-E.Prez-Luo
Introduccin
a la Poltica
deAristteles
derPolitik
, in seiner
J.Maras,
,
zweisprachigen
Ausgabe
Madrid1951,S. LXV; vgl.auchdieTextbelege
berdieRezensionen
des 17.und18.
dieLosada1973(s.o.,Anm.20),S. 282f.reproduziert.
Jahrhunderts,
23Vgl.denProlog
zumDemcrates
Alter
, S. 46: Itaquelibenter
feci,utmoreSocratico,
et Augustinus
multis
in locistenuerunt,
in dialogo
quemnoster
Hieronymus
quaestionem
etjustassuscipiendi
causasin universum,
belligerendi
rationem
persequerer,
rectamque
et aliasquaestiunculas
necproposito
et ad cognoscendum
alienas,
complecterer,
perutiles
obiter
explicarem."

15:14:33 PM

250

SCHFER
CHRISTIAN

sivede corwenientiae
Alterbetitelte.24
Einen Demcrates
den er Demcrates
{Primus)
ber
cum
Christiana
militaris
Religione
Dialogus
allgemeine
Fragen
disciplina#
des gerechtenKrieges hatte er bereitsvorher geschriebenund herausalterSive dejustis bellicausisapud indios
gegeben gehabt. Der Demcrates
nimmtdas Thema des erstenDemcrates
auf, wendet es jedoch spezifisch
in der Neuen Welt an. Die Schrift
auf die spanischeEroberungspolitik
zwischenzwei fiktivenCharakteren,einem
entwickeltein Streitgesprch
DeutschennamensLeopold, der durchseine skeptischen
Anfragenan die
spanischeConquista-Politikdas Gesprch in Gang bringtund stetsneu
Geist getraanfacht,und einem gebildetenund ganz von Aristotelischem
in
dessen
und
Lehren
namens
Gelehrten
Demokrates,
Argumenten
genen
zum Thema man wohl uneingeschrnkt
SeplvedaseigeneMeinungerkenvon Valladolidverteidigt
nen darf(auch im GroenStreitgesprch
Seplveda
die Thesen des Demokratesals seine eigenen).
im Dialog weist auf drei autoriDer Hauptstrangder Argumentation
tativeQuellen hin, auf die sich Seplvedas Gesamtthesesttzt:25
des AltenTestaments,
(1) Die Bibel, insbesonderedie Geschichtsbcher
derenErzhlungvon der Landnahmeund ExpansionIsraelsdeutlichmacht,
den Krieg,unterUmstndenauch den Versklavungsda die HeiligeSchrift
Gottes
des
Volkes
gegen andere Vlker gutheienkann.26
krieg,
und unterihneninsbesondereAugustinus,dessen
(2) Die Kirchenvter,
Schriftenbeweisen, da militrischeUnternehmenwie die Bestrafung
Unglubigerdurch Christen,oder unterUmstndensogar ein religiser
des chrisdich-rmischen
Imperiumsgegen Heidenvlker,
Expansionskrieg
Lehre nichtwidersprechenmssen.27
der christlichen
24Die eigentmliche
im
derDemocrates-Alter-Manuskripte
undschwierige
Textgeschichte
vorEndedes19.Jahrhunderts
daderDialognicht
istdafr
16.Jahrhundert
verantwortlich,
de la Real
Menndez
wurde
imDruckediert
erstmals
y Pelayoim:Boletn
(vonMarcelino
mit
dieseErstausgabe
1941wurde
BandXXI [1892],S. 260ff).
de la Historia,
Academia
Alter
desDemcrates
inMexiko
alsersteEinzelverffentlichung
pubbersetzung
spanischer
Seitenverweisen
liziert
(aufdenlateini(vgl.oben,Anm.15);sieliegtdenTextauszgen,
wie
Arbeit
dervorliegenden
schenText)unddeutschen
genauso
zugrunde,
bersetzungen
lateinidemziterten
undAusarbeitung)
Lesarten
Bedenken
teilweisen
gegenber
(beietilen
hatauerdem
insSpanische
schenTextselbst.EineneuereEditionundbersetzung
Nahean LosadasVorgaben
A. Losada,Madrid1951(Nachdruck
bewegt
1984)vorgelegt.
Coroleu
durchAlejandro
derSchrift
sichauchdie neueste
Ausgabeundbersetzung
III, Pozoblanco
1997.
Obras
Completas
Liegetin:JuanGinsde Seplveda,
25EinerechtguteZusammenfassung
ltsichu.a. bei V. Carro
dieserGesamtthese
nachlesen.
1944(s.o.,Anm.20),S. 344ff.,
26Vgl.z.B.Demcrates
u..
S. 166ff.
S. 114-20,
Alter,
27So z.B.imDemcrates
Alter
, S. 52,S. 94 u..

15:14:33 PM

ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 251
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
SEPLVEDA
dessenpolitischeSchriften
lehren,da die Unterwerfung,
(3) Aristoteles,
Beherrschungund Versklavungvon Barbaren durch hherentwickelte
Menschen ein Gebot der Natur ist und sogar als einzig natrlicherWeg
der Koexistenzvon Besserenund Schlechterenein ethischesErfordernis
darstellt.28
Von diesen drei Sulen, auf denen Seplvedas These von der einund Dienstbarmachungder
wandfreienBerechtigungauf Unterwerfung
VlkerAmerikasruht,mchteich im folgendenallein die dritteund funin der Hoffnung,
damentalstebehandeln,die mitAristoteles
argumentiert,
da sie sich isoliertvon den anderen beiden einigermaeneinleuchtend
darstellenlt. Denn auch darin folgtSeplveda Aristotelesaufs Wort,
da er zwar den gerechtenKrieg als Argumentfr die Unterwerfung
und VersklavungfremderVlker (worum es ja in den Argumenten(1)
und (2) geht)kenntund gutheit,dessenBerechtigung
allerdingsnochmals
sehen will,und diese
durcheine naturrechtliche
Absicherunggrundgelegt
bildet erst die Tatsache der natrlichenUnterlegenheiteinigerVlker
gegenberanderen,die von der Natur zum Fhren bestelltsind.
Sklaverei
II. Die Thesevondernatrlichen
Seplveda hat sicherlichrecht damit, da die traditionelledominikanivordie im Spanien des 16. Jahrhunderts
sche Aristotelesinterpretation,
herrschendwar, den antikenPhilosophenscholastischverbog und (teils
Er selbstdagegenwollte,wie er es ausumdeutete.29
gewaltsam)christlich
28Wasinderpolitischen
Vorlufer
zu habenscheint:
sokeine
derScholastik
Philosophie
indiesem
ZusamdortTheorien
desbellum
Zwarwurden
und,wiegesehen,
justum
gewlzt
diskutiert.
Da aber
vonKriegsgefangenen
derservitus
auchdieRechtfertigung
menhang
voneinem
ernstzunehmenden
vonbestimmten
dienatrliche
Menschengruppen
Unterlegenheit
istbisdahineigentlich
zurBerechtigung
desbellum
christlichen
Autor
wird,
justum
herangezogen
bis
dergerechten
die Einzelfragen
Die scholastischen
unerhrt.
Theorien,
Kriegsfhrung
verob einKriegdannseineBerechtigung
inVerstelungen
wiedemProblem
verfolgten,
habendasAristotelische
zu Kampfhandlungen
wennes auchan Feiertagen
kommt,
liert,
inihren
Diskussionen
nieernstlich
dernatrlichen
servitus
(soverherangezogen
Argument
von
TheJustWar(1982;s.o.,Anm.11),in seiner
liert
Barnes'Beitrag
Analyse
Jonathan
eines
Parameter
meritum
undcausaals derscholastischen
conditio,
intentio,
auctoritas,
affectus,
indiesem
keinWortberirgendeine
Sinne).
signifikante
Stellungnahme
Krieges
gerechten
- unddarber
imklaren
Anm.37)- mit
ister sichoffenbar
(vgl.unten,
bringt
Seplveda
desAristotelischen
vondernatrlichen
Direktbernahme
seiner
Arguments
ungeschnten
im wesentlichen
neuen
des christlichen
bellum
Sklaverei
einenfrdie Tradition
justum
insSpiel.
Deutungsversuch
29Zweiderbedeutendsten
im 16.
dominikanischen
GegnerderIndianerversklavung
derbereits
erwhnte
Francisco
de VitoriaundDomingode Soto,interJahrhundert,

15:14:33 PM

252

SCHFER
CHRISTIAN

Brche dem Aristotelesfolgen,um

drckte,ganz und ohne interpretative
anhand
der
reinen
Aristotelischen
Lehre zu zeigen,
dann erstanschlieend
da diese berkulturelleGltigkeit auch fr Christen beanspruchen
knne.30Also anhand der Lehre desjenigenPhilosophen,den die hervorragendstenPhilosophen und Theologen als Meister in Fragen der
und berhauptauch aller anderensittlichen
Tugendensowie
Gerechtigkeit
als scharfsinnigsten
Ausleger der Natur und der natrlichenGesetze
Alter
anfhren"{Demcrates
, S. 152) eine allgemeingltige
Beantwortung
der virulentenFragen seinerZeit zu entwickeln:
nicht
Ich willdamitzu verstehen
geben,da maneinUrteilberdas Naturrecht
auchbei
undEvangelientexten
suchen
sondern
alleinin christlichen
Denkern
darf,
dieinbester
undscharfsinnigster
WeiseberdieNatur
denheidnischen
Philosophen,
sowieberdieSitten
undallemglichen
staatsderDingeberlegungen
angestellt
VorallemaberbeiAristoteles,
dessen
haben.
theoretischen
gehandelt
Angelegenheiten
vonseiner
undungeteilter
Zustimmung
Einhelligkeit
Vorgaben
[. . .] mitsolcher
alsWorte
dieseseinzeldasiejetztschonweniger
Nachwelt
wurden,
aufgenommen
anGrundalsGemeingut
undLehrstzen
alsvielmehr
allenGelehrten
nenPhilosophen,
Alter
schlechthin
, S. 66f.).31
(Demcrates
gelten

vorbeiundwollan derantiken
Aristoteles
etwastracks
Sklavenhaltungspraxis
pretierten
undnicht
einereinfachen
nichtmehrals nurdie natrliche
tenoffenbar
Grundlegung
imersten
BuchderPolitik
ausdemArgumentationsgang
Dienstschaft
eindeutig
spezifizierten
zudeSotosAristoteleserkennen
sowie,
speziell
(vgl.PrezLuo1995(s.o.,Anm.3),S. 192f.,
1997(s.o.,Anm.6),S. 44).
Beuchot
Interpretation,
30So in derEinfuhrung
an sichselbst
etregis
alsAnspruch
zu De regno
formuliert;
officio
Rckkehr
zum
beiPrezLuo1995(s.o.,Anm.3),S. 195.Zu Seplvedas
zitiert
strategischer
Indians
1959
Aristotle
andthe
American
LewisHanke,
Aristoteles"
, London
wahren
vgl.zudem
- , S. 3Iff.
zurFragederspanischen
nachwievoreinStandardwerk
Eroberungsphilosophie
auerdem
nochdas (wohlauchals Spitzegegendie
ImDemcrates
machtSeplveda
Alter
Arisalstreuer
vonAquinmsse
auchThomas
Zugestndnis,
Dominikanerpartei
gedachte)
S. 152:
was die Sklavenfrage
aufseinerSeitestehen,
betrifft,
notwendig
totelesausleger
moranonsolum
citasti
auctorem
Aristotelem,
quoutaliarum
cujussententiae
[Leopold:]
naturalium
etnaturae
sicjustitiae
liumvirtutum,
interprete
sagacissimo
legumque
magistro
Thomam
scholasticorum
sedetiam
Divum
etTheologi
utuntur
etPhilosophi
[e]stantissimi;
prae
naturae
inexplicandis
ete[/ae]mulum
facile
legiejusenarratorem
Theologorum
principem,
- WiesehrSeplveda
declaraveras."
etab aeterna
essedivinas
bus,quasomnes
legemanare
haben
ThesenmitdenendesAristoteles
seiner
an dieDeckungsgleichheit
geglaubt
eigenen
de Aristteles
wieaquellasententia
ma",die er
mu,zeigenWendungen
y declaracin
verwendet
Notiz,dieLosada1973(s.o.,Anm.20),S. 286
(hierin einerhandschriftlichen
reoroduzier).
31Nempe
solumetscriptis
nona christianis
utintelligatur
judicium
legumnaturalium
etsagacissime
esse,sedetiamab iisphilosophis
putantur
quioptime
Evangelicis
petendum
abArisratione
rerum
ac demoribus
denatura
dissentisse,
praesertim
dequeomnireipublicae
utjam
sunta posteritate
etapprobatione
consensu
recepta
totele,
[. . .] tanto
cujuspraecepta
videantur."
esse
ac
decreta
sententiae
communes
sed
nonunius
voces,
sapientium
philosophi

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 253
- auch im Urteilder modernen
Das gelangihm tatschlich
Forschung32
gemessenan seinem Vorhaben und im Vergleichmit dem zeitgenssischen Aristotelismus
erstaunlichakkurat,und zwar unteranderem seiner
Arbeitstechnik
Aristoteles
nicht;zwischen
wegen: Seplveda kommentierte
der
und
stehen
Passagen
Bibelexegese
Kirchenvter-Interpretation vielmehr
im Demcrates
Alterals Versatzstckeimmerwiederoftwrtlichbersetzte
und durchnur wenigeErluterungsbeispiele
unterbrochene
Textpassagen
aus der Aristotelischen
Politikund Nikomachischen
Ethik.Diese Einschbe
dienen Seplveda als philosophischeGrundlegungfrseine theologische
und rechtstheoretische
Diskussion.Inhaltlichunverdrehtund weitgehend
wirdalso die antikeThese von der natrlichen
Dominanz
interpretationslos
hherer
Menschen
und
der
o')taoc
oder
servitus
a
naturader
(paei
einiger
Barbarenim Aristotelischen
Wortlaut33
auf die politischeEinzelkonstellation der Unterwerfung
der EingeborenenAmerikasdurch die Spanier
Wortlautund als
bertragenund mit Hinweis auf diesen Aristotelischen
vetusopinioder klassischenPhilosophieals naturrechtlich
sanktioniert
angefhrt.
ZwischenNaturrecht
und GottesRechtbestehtdabei keininhaltlicher
was auch die inhaltliche
der Aristotelischen
Unterschied,
Deckungsgleichheit
32Sh. u.a. beiPrezLuo1995(s.o.,Anm.3). Tatschlich
befindet
sichja Seplveda
als Humanist
in einemzeittypischen
dasVenancio
Carro1944
Dilemma,
gewissermaen
etwasbieder,
aberinvielerlei
Hinsicht
durchaus
nicht
(s.o.,Anm.20),S. 329f.,
unrichtig
zu charakterisieren
hat:Thomas
versucht
vonAquinundseineAnhnger
folgendermaen
warenAristoteliker,
unddergriechische
verdiente
solcheEhrbekundung
auch
Philosoph
DochderAristotelismus
derHumanisten
hateinanderes
Um es in
gnzlich.
Geprge.
zweiWorten
zu sagen:Manknnte
wohlbehaupten,
da dieTheologen
des 13.Jhdts.,
mitAlbertus
Thomasan derSpitze,
ihnchristianisiert
haben,
Magnusunddemheiligen
whrend
sichdieHumanisten
mitihmzu Heidenmachten,
wennauchnichtunbedingt
alleimselben
Mae.Die Renaissance
warinderMehrheit
derFlleundindenmeisten
Nationen
keineSchuleguterSittenoderchristlichen
Im Gefolge
der
Gedankenguts.
frdiegriechischen
undlateinischen
Klassiker
deraltenHeidenvlker
verBegeisterung
breitete
sichmitdenPhilosophen
eineberdieStrnge
schlagende
paganeGeisteshaltung,
die berall
etc.[bers.C.S.] Vielleicht
wardas auchdie Sichtweise
der
Einzughielt",
Dominikaner
hinsichtlich
eineraristotelischen"
derethischen
spanischen
Konzeption
in derConquista-Politik.
Sh. dazuauchweiter
untendie Bemerkungen
zum
Aufgaben
letzten
Abschnitt
Scheitern".
Seplvedas
33Aristoteles'
in derPolitik
TheoriederSklaverei
istunteranderem
eineimplizite
mitrivalisierenden
antiken
diejede ArtvonSklaverei
als
Theorien,
Auseinandersetzung
ansahen
TheGreeks.
A Portrait
vmico
lediglich
begrndet
(vgl.z.B.PaulCartledge,
ofSelfand
Others
AusdenScholien
zurAristotelischen
Rhetorik
wissen
, Oxford
1993,S. 12Iff.).
wir,
da einerderKpfedieservonAristoteles
derGorgiasschler
und
ungenannten
Gegner
berhmte
Alkidamas
war Scholien
1273b
zurRhetorik
Stegreifredner"
18).Seplveda
mag
" des(.
sichauchhierals getreuer
Aristoteles
derversucht,
dienatrliche
aemulator
sehen,
derVersklavung
demVorwurf
anderer
zu verteidigen,
dieSklaverei
Grundlage
gegenber
seiausWillkr
undnurvonwillkrlicher
ohnenaturrechdiches
geboren
positiver
Satzung,
Fundament,
getragen.

15:14:33 PM

254

CHRISTIAN
SCHFER

Lehrenmitden biblischenausmacht:Als Naturrecht

definieren
(ethischen)
die Philosophenjenes, das berall die gleiche Bewegkraft
hat, ob es uns
so gefalltoder nicht.Die Theologen definierenmit anderenWortendasselbeso: Das Naturrechtist die Mitteilungdes ewigen Gesetzes an die
Kreatur" [Demcrates
Alter
, S. 66; meine Kursiva).34Denn
vernunftbegabte
das fundamentalste
Naturrecht,nach dem sich alle anderen iusnaturalistischenund positivenBestimmungenals dessen Ableitungenzu richten
haben, sei, so sieht es Seplveda im Anschlu an Aristoteles,da das
Bessere ber das Minderwertige
herrsche.35
Insbesonderedie Argumenteaus dem fnften
Kapitel des erstenBuchs
der Potiti#6
sindes, die sichSeplvedahierbeifrseineneigenenBeweisgang
zu eigen macht. Seplveda betontin diesem Zusammenhangausdrcklich, da es genau diese Argumenteseien, die bislang in der Diskussion
um die Rechtmigkeit
der Versklavungneuentdeckter
Vlkerunbeachtet
eine
bedauerliche
geblieben waren,
philosophische Lcke, die seine
in
dieser
schlieen
wolle und damitrechtfertige:37
Wortmeldung
Streitfrage
34Legemnaturalem
earnessedefiniunt,
vim,
philosophi
quaeubiquehabeteamdem
in hunc
nonquia sic placuitaut secus.Theologialiisverbissed eodempertinentibus
modum:
Lexnaturalis
estparticipado
in creatura
rationis
legisaeternae
compote."
35Vgl.Politik
es deranderen
fehlt
nmlich
da
1255a19:Demgegenber
Auffassung,
dasan hohermenschlicher
nicht
oderdespotisch
herrschen
Qualitt
berlegene
gebieten
anjeglicher
In 1254a31f.
warbereits
Sttze
wieberzeugungskraft".
wordrfe,
festgestellt
den:Inallen[natrlichen
undeinbeherrschter
C.S.]wirdeinherrschender
Ordnungen,
Teilsichtbar,
undes istdieuniversalie
vonderherdieses(Ordnungsprinzip)
den
Natur,
Lebewesen
innewohnt
sowiein bl4ff.:
Tcaafj
(pGeco
vumpxei
to|x'|/t>xoi)";
(iexfj
istimVerhltnis
derGeschlechter
dasMnnliche
vonNaturausdasBessere,
das
Ferner
- Vgl.
dasandere
wirdbeherrscht".
Weibliche
dasGeringerwertige,
unddaseineherrscht,
bei Seplveda,
Demcrates
Alter
enimalioquejurepaterimperat
aliter
, S. 82: aliter
filiis,
viruxori,
aliterdominus
alitercivibus
aliterrexpopulis
servis,
magistratus,
atquemortalibusqui suntipsiusimperio
cumsintdiversa,
cumrecta
tarnen
subjecti,
quaeimperia
ratione
omnianituntur
varioquidem,
sedprofecto,
utdocent
viri
constant,
jurenaturae;
virab unoprincipio
etinstituto
utperfecta
fortia
debilibus,
naturali,
sapientes
imperfectis,
ac dominentur.
utin
tutepraestantia
dissimilibus
imperent
Quodestusqueadeonaturale,
alterum
cunctis
sivecontinuis,
sivedivisis
consistant,
rebus,
quodpotius
quaeex pluribus
utphilosophi
um
scilicet
alterum
essevideamus
declarant",
est,tenere
subjectum
imprium,
nureinBeispiel
anzufhren.
36Nurdiesewerden
Demcrates
nochzahlreiche
hiererlutert;
daneben
hatSeplvedas
unddemfnund-zitate
vorallemausdemzweiten
weitere
Aristotelesthesen
aufzuweisen,
soll.
weiter
werden
ftenBuchderMkomachischen
Ethik
, washierabernicht
verfolgt
37Seplveda
des Dialogsuern,diese
ltden Stichwortgeber
Leopoldwhrend
under findesie merkwrdig.
Thesenhabeer bishernochnie gehrt
philosophischen
mten
sie
antwortet
seiensie wohl,abereigentlich
Demokrates
souvern,
denkwrdig
Alter
einem
Gebildeten
bekannt
sein,Demcrates
, S. 80:
jedenphilosophisch
etpraeter
hominum
L.- Miranda
narras,
Demcrates,
receptam
opinionem.
a liminesalutarunt:
D.- Mirandafortasse,
sed iis qui Philosophiam
itaquete magis

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 255
Als Beispielkann hier der Katalog vergleichbarer
naturgemerDominanzen herangezogenwerden,den Seplvedavon Aristoteles
zur Festigung
seinerLehre von der natrlichenSklavereibernimmt(im Demcrates
Alter
insbesondereS. 80ff.).Diese nmlichsei gleichsamein politischesAbbild
und eine gesellschaftliche
Konsequenz des natrlichenBeherrschtwerdens
und der natrlichenInbesitznahmeder Krpers durch die Seele, [Politik
1254a34-b9),der Tiere durch den Menschen (b10-20),etc. Ein wichtiges
linkder Argumentationskette,
insofernsie die Versklavungsfrage
missing
der Barbarenvlkerbetrifft,
stelltdabei die PolitikStelle 1253a29 dar:
Auerhalb des Poliswesens (also vornehmlichbei den Barbaren), so
Aristoteleshier, sei man entwederein Gott (das heit wohl: ein unumschrnkter,
ungebundenerTyrann) oder ein Tier.
- Es handelt sich also um
die von Aristotelesals
Herrschaftsformen,
die
durch
solchegekennzeichnet
Inbesitznahme
des Beherrschten
werden,
durch das HerrschendeZustandekommen,
und die auf das ontologische
Grundprinzipder Unterordnungdes Geringerenunterdas Hherwertige
sind (a.a.O.).38Die Artder so begrndetenHerrschaftsausbung
rcklufig
in
der
Aristotelischen
ist,
Definition,die despotische(SearcoTiiai
ap%r|1254b
in
sie
hat
ihren
klassischen
Ausdruck
der
des
5);
Unterordnung Sklaven
unterseinen Herrn. So 1255b18: Denn politischeHerrschaftwird ber
von Natur Freie ausgebt, despotischeaber ber diejenigen,die (von
Natur) Sklaven sind".
Aufflligist bei Seplveda aber die Erweiterungder Beispielliste,die
man bei Aristoteles
findet:Whrenddiese in 1254a34 mitder Leib-SeeleDichotomiebeginnt,setztbei Seplveda diese anthropologische
Differeneinleitend
mit
der
von
Form
und
ein
Materie
zierung
Unterscheidung
die
Form
das
die
Materie das Beherrschte"),
Beherrschende"ist,
(wobei
miror
doctum
hominem
vetus
etmaxime
naturale
decretum,
philosophorum
dogmanovum
esseputare.
- ZumGanzenvgl.auchdieeinschlgigen
beiPrezLuo1995(s.o.,
Bemerkungen
Anm.3). S.196.
38Vgl.dazuSchtrumpfs
Kommentar
1991,s.o.,Anm.13),S. 249:Die
(Schtrumpf
frdespotische
Herrschaft
deruniversalen
ein
Natur,
Rahmenbedingung
[. . .] entstammt
Aufschlureich
istfrdiesen
dieParallelisierung
ontologisches
Argument".
Zusammenhang
in 1254b13f:,,xappevrcp
x0fj,u
xnvKpexxov
xexepov,
mi x(lvapxovx
(paei
- wennmandavonausgeht,
Worausim Groben
da das rcp
0'pxnevov".
grammaoderdochzumindest
dengesamten
nurdasunmittelbar
nchtisch,
Satz,nicht
sinngem,
ststehende
bestimmt
Dominanzenstruktur
Begriffspaar
folgende
spricht:
Ebene: naturrechtl.
Grundmuster:
Bereich
:
konom
. Ebene:
Beispielpolitischer
Mann
Besseres
Herrscher
Herr
-(b15-26)
Frau
Beherrschter
Sklave
Geringeres

15:14:33 PM

256

SCHFER
CHRISTIAN

also mit einer Unterscheidung,

die sich an diesersystematischen
Stelle in
der Politikdes Aristotelesnicht findet.Das mag zunchst verwundern,
auch wenn es wohl nicht falschgedacht ist: Seplveda bringtmit der
wohl tatschlichdie unausgesprochene
Aristotelische
Hylemorphismuslehre
I
des
aus
Politik
5
auf
einen
Nenner:
Grundlage
Dominanzenapparats
ex materia
etformacompositis,
Quoniamex rebusetiaminanimatis
formaquiaperestpmestetquasidominatur,
materia
etquasiparetimperio'
um dann
subest,
fectior
erstfortzufahren:
esse
in
animalibus
multo
etiam
manifestius,
quod , ajunt,
quippe
animamimprium
tenere
et tamquam
dominam
esse
et quasiservum
, corpus
subjectum
Alter
, S. 82). Doch warum begngter sich nicht damit, die
{Demcrates
Aristotelischen
Beispieleeinfachzu zitieren? Ich denke,da die Antwort
in einer Vorwegnahmeeines stillschweigenden
Deutungspostulatsliegt,
das SeplvedasThese von der richtigen
Zu- und Unterordnung
von Neuer
Der neu gefundeneKontinentist
und AlterWelt allenthalbenbeherrscht:
eine tabularasa, ein weier Fleck und eine terraincognita
nichtnur auf der
- kulturelle
sondern
auch
was
seine
zumindest
Landkarte,
Formungbetrifft.
Er ist eine Art ungeformter
Materie, die des Formprinzipsharrt,auf es
verwiesenist und es nachgeradentighat, um wirklichaus seinerbloen
zu werden. Eines
Mglichkeit,in der er bislang schlft,herausgefhrt
in
diesen
wie
es
fr
Formprinzips,
Seplvedas Augen
weitgehendnoch
terminus
ad quemder Neuen Welt in ganz ausgezeichneter
strukturlosen
Weise die Spanierdarstellen.AufdieserBetrachtungsweise
der Dinge baut
Theorie
des
spanischenKulturauftrags
Seplvedas gesamtenachfolgende
und der Notwendigkeitseiner unbedingtenDurchsetzungauf.39Diese
39Es scheint,
denfragwrdigen
alswrde
hierinseiner
Schritt
Seplveda
Interpretation
InWirklichkeit
vontheoretischer"
zu praktischer"
Philosophie
unabgesttzt
gehen.
jedoch
verbindet
er lediglich
die Aussageaus der Form-Materie-Diskussion
der
ergnzend
ausDe anima
Aristotelischen
412ab,dieSeeleseidie
Metaphysik
(etwa1037a)undnatrlich
Kadenzdernatrlichen
und
FormdesKrpers,
mitderin Politik
1254abvorgefundenen
derSeeleberdas
auszubenden
wovoneinediejenige
Herrschaftsformen,
naturgem
als Perversion
wird(.Politik
derInverszustand
dezidiert
ist,whrend
gechtet
Krperliche
desscholastischeint
sichdabeidengngigen
Materia-hehre
1254b
Iff.).
Vorgaben
Seplvedas
zu wollen.
DiesemgiltdieMaterie
nahtlos
anschlieen
schenAristotelismus
(insbesondere
darauf
als reinepassive
diewesentlich
die materia
ist,von
angelegt
Mglichkeit,
prima")
zu werden.
Da dieMaterie
inWirklichkeit
berfuhrt
einem
unddamit
Agenten
geformt
invielen
derFormist,ltsichals Gedanke
derVerwirklichungsoderBettigungsraum
finden.
Solchermaen
Traditionen
etwaauchimNeuplatonismus)
(besonders
philosophischen
Materie
Raumundinforme
als tabula
rasabegriffen
{materia
(v.a.leerer")
konvergieren
auchbei einigen
selbst
derenIdentifikation
Aristoteles
hatte,
eigentlich
abgelehnt
prima),
vomWeltenraum
v.a.auchin derAuffassung
Aristoteleskommentatoren
wieder.
brigens
imKommentar
De caelo
zu Aristoteles'
, BuchI Kommentar
92-95)
(wieetwabeiAverroes
Erdeoder
Urzustand.
Geradedieseinforme
undseinem
formlosen
terrarum
undvomorbis

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 257
auch, da Seplvedakeineswegs
Betrachtungsweise
zeigtaber kurioserweise
nur zum Nutzen der Spanier in der Amerikafrageargumentierenwill:
SeinersolchermaenAristotelischen"
Konzeptionnach gewinntdie amorNeue
Welt
durch
die
erstein eigenes
phe
spanischeFormungsmanahme
Sein
im
und
Verein
mit
einer
sie
Form
selbstndiges
durchdringenden
erstmalseine eigene Dignitt,wie es eben auch in der hylemorphistischen Sichtweiseder (bloen) Materie geschieht.
Starkherausgestellt
istbei Seplveda auerdemdie teleologischeSttze,
die Aristotelesseiner Lehre von der cpaeiScxutaagibt (1254b14-26):
In Anbetrachtder Tatsache, da einige Menschen von anderen so weit
unterschiedensind (8iOT&aiv:
bl6) wie Seele und Krper, Mensch und
etc.
und
ihrer
Roheit sozusagen ganz als vernunftloser
Tier,
aufgrund
und
somit
als
ihrer
natrlichen
Beschaffenheit
Krper
wegen durch die
Vernunft
erscheinen,istes frdiese Menschenvon unbeleitungsbedrftig
streitbarem
Vorteil,da sie als Sklavendienen(egicpoei
Sovxn,
o eXxiov
cmvapxG0oci:1254bl9f.), hnlich, wie es fr den Krper vorteilhaft
Seele in despotischenBeschlag genommenund
ist,von der vernnftigen
gegen seine eigenen Triebe und Inklinationengefhrtzu werden.40Die
Versklavung etwa im gerechtenKrieg istfrsolcheMenscheneigentlich
nichtsweiterals der neue de-jure-Ausruck
einer seit von Geburt bestehenden fe^/afo-Situation,41
denn Sklave wird man nicht,Sklave ist man
eigentlichschon immer seiner rationalen oder seelischen Defizienzen
wegen.42
Seplvedamachtim selbenSinneaufeine hnlicheDifferenzierung
Weltsteht
somitals rumliche
Extension
frdie formlose
Materie.
Das missing
link
, das
informe
Materie
undformlose
hierverbindet,
unddaswohlauchSeplveda
Raumgre
undseineZeitgenossen
inderfrsienochunstrukturierten
geographischen
Erstreckungsgre
derNeuen
Welt"unddemMateriebegriff
dereigenen
istdabeineben
sahen,
Philosophie
derinformitas
wohlv.a. in dergrundlegenden
derExtension
zu sehen,die
Bestimmung
kennzeichnet.
beide,RaumwieMaterie,
40Da diese
in dieAristotelische
werden
Deutung
vorwiegend
Teleologie
eingeordnet
Erachtens
So auchSchtrumpfs
Kommentar
mu,istmeines
offenkundig.
(s.o.,Anm.13),
S. 249,zu Politik
neben'vorteilhaft'
dannwird
I, Kapitel5: Wenn'naturgem'
steht,
zumAusdruck
da die naturgeme
Herrschaft
derErhaltung
derBeteiligten
gebracht,
diesenthlt
einen
dient,
Aspekt".
41Vgl.nochmals teleologischen
a.a.O.: 'VonNatur'Sklaveistauchderjenige,
dernoch
Schtrumpf
in Freiheit
werden
lebt,'vonNatur'heit:'derBestimmung
nach',die nochaktualisiert
mu[. . .1undmeint
dieEinordnung
in eineHierarchie".
42Miteinigen
Vorbehalten
demWerkundseiner
Grundtendenz
(diegenerell
gegenber
mchte
ichmichdarinimgroen
undganzenPaulCartlegdes
bestehen)
Interpretation
auerdem
a.a.O. S. 193-5
(1993,s.o. Anm.33),S. 125f.anschlieen.
Cartledge
bringt
eineausfhrliche
neuere
zurFragederSklaverei
beiAristoteles,
inderauch
Bibliographie
Stimmen
ihrenPlatzfinden
undinsbesondere
auchdas Sklavenbild
der
apologetische"
Ethik
Nikomachischen
dasvondemderPolitik
wird,
bercksichtigt
Abweichungen
zeigensoll

15:14:33 PM

258

SCHFER
CHRISTIAN

Whrenddie Philosophendie Sklavereials einenangeborenen

aufmerksam:
Zustand erkennen,ist sie in juristischerHinsichtdas Resultateiner powie bei
so wirdsowohlbei Aristoteles
sitivenRechtssatzung;diese freilich,
allein in der ontoschnellklar,hat ihre Rechtfertigung
seinem aemulator
logischen Grundlegungdes Sklaveseins,also in der philosophischen"
Definitiondes Sklaven:
in ganzanderem
Sinne
vondenRechtsexperten
[. . .] nurwirddasWortSklaverei
einendem
bezeichnen
alsSklaverei
alsvondenPhilosophen.
Jenenmlich
gebraucht
oderVlkerdurch
menschliche
uerlichen
unddurch
Menschen
Gewalt,
brgerliches
eineangeborene
diePhilosophen
recht
Zustand,
geistige
hingegen
zuwegegekommenen
Alter
Lebensweise
undbarbarische
undeineunmenschliche
,
{Demcrates
Rckstndigkeit
S. 80f.).43
die Argumentation
In mindestens
einerHinsichtscheintSeplvedaschlielich
und empirischsichererdurchfhren
frdie natrlicheSklavereistringenter
zu knnenals der Stagiriteselbst:Gegen Ende des 5. Kapitels von Politik
I (1254b27-39)fhltsichAristoteles
gemigteinzurumen,da die natrliche berlegenheiteiniger sowie das naturgemeSklavesein anderer
nicht durchwegsan ueren Merkmalen, auch nicht an krperlicher
Hherentwicklungablesbar ist. Es gibt offenbarAusnahmen, und ein
Thrakerkann in dieserHinsichteinem Griechendurchausberlegensein:
Aristotelesgibt zu, er knne bei diesem Argumentnur ut in pluribus
Hier gilt
sprechen.44Nicht so in Seplvedas Indio-Spanier-Dichotomie:
als
da
die
und
ohne
GattungsEingeborenen
Einschrnkung,
generell
den hherentwickelten
wie als Individualmerkmal
europischenEroberern
auch in der physischenKonstitutionunterlegensind: sie sind durchwegs
kleiner,kriegsuntauglicher,
wenigerrobustund mnnlich,etc.45
zwischen
Herr
Freundschaft
dermglichen
BuchzumProblem
imsechsten
(insbesondere
in derantiken
desSklaveseins
Konstitution
Zurnatrlichen
undSklave).
philosophischen
undwehrhafte
Thrakernnen
Diskussion
,
Skythen
vgl.danebenu.a. BalbinaBbler,Fleissige
interessanten
1998,v.a. S. 17-20mitzahlreichen
bibliographischen
Stuttgart/Leipzig
des Aristoteles
derTheorien
Zu Piatons
Weiterverweisen.
(wohlauchzumVerstndnis
undontoSklaverei
undihrekosmologische
berdienaturgeme
Lehren
bedeutsamen)
vonGregory
nochklassischen
denimmer
Beitrag
vgl.insbesondere
Fundamentierung
logische
21981,S. 147-63.
Studies
inPlato's
, Princeton
, in:ders.,Platonic
Vlastos,
Thought
43[..Slavery
a
diversa
res
tarnen
servitutis
quama philosophis
jureperitis
apellatione longe
.]
ac interet ab hominum
illienimadventitiam
vi,jurequegentium,
declaratur;
quamdam
inhumanos
ac
insitam
etmores
tarditatem
duma civili
conditionem,
Philosophi
profectam
servitutis
barbaros
nomine
appellant."
44Vgl.zumProblem
z.B.
mitderAristotelischen
Physiognomielehre)
(inVerbindung
Abriderantiken
1993(s.o.,Anm.33),S. 125.Einenm.E.recht
griechiguten
Cardedge
bietetBbler1998(s.o.,
vonSklaven
Konstitution
derphysischen
schenDarstellungen
Befunds.
desliterarischen
ihreUntersuchung
dabeiv.a.S. 20ff.
Anm.42),interessant
45So imDemcrates
hocestetiaminipsismagis
Alter
portento
, S. 104f.:
quaeimmanitas

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 259
Da im brigen die berlegenenMenschen gerade ihrer hherentwickeltenphysischenKonstitutionwegen nichtfr harte Arbeitgeeignet
den Aristotelesund Seplveda dabei teilen.
sind, ist ein Gesichtspunkt,
Er geht,was Seplvedasuerungenund Interessenlagebetrifft,
offenbar
einhermitdem Selbstverstndnis
der Conquistadoren,unterdenen augenscheinlichTendenzen bestanden,die Neue Welt zu erobern,nichtetwa
um eigenesLand zur Bearbeitungzu bekommen,sonderngerade um keine
krperlicheArbeitverrichtenzu mssen(es ist in diesem Zusammenhang
auch vermutetworden,da die jahrhundertelange
Reconquistain Spanien
das Bewutseineiner Art Kriegerkasteherausgebildethaben knnte,die
sich zum Erobern und Beherrschenvon neugewonnenemLand berufen
und tauglichverstand,nichtaber zur Bearbeitungdes Landes).46
Das Fazit Seplvedas aus all dem ist schlielichdasselbe des Aristoteles:
Fr einige gilt,da sie von Natur [. . .] Sklaven sind, und frdiese ist
es vorteilhaft
und gerecht(Skociv
(cruiicpepei)
axiv),als Sklavenzu dienen"
[Politik1255a 1-3).47Fr Seplveda bestehtdiese beiderseitsvorteilhafte
der Versklavungvon Indios durch die Spanier darin, da
Gerechtigkeit
durch
diese
wie der vernunftlose
Seele
jene
Krper durchdie vernnftige
zu einem Menschwerdungsprozegefhrtwerden, der sie von bloen
homunculi
zu vollgltigen
Menschenund schlielichsogarzu gutenChristen
absunt
ab invicta
humanis
vescesimilis,
quo longius
Scytharum,
qui et ipsiscorporibus
cumsintadeoignaviet timidi
utvixnostrorum
hostilem
ferre
bantur,
feritate,
aspectum
et saepeipsorum
multamilliaperpaucis
ne centum
possint,
Hispanis
quidemnumerum
cesserint
muliebri
undS. 106:Cortesius
autem
ad hunemodm
explentibus
fugadissipati";
urbepotitus,
hominum
inertiam
et ruditatem,
utterrore
tantopere
contempsit
ignaviam,
nonsolum
ei prncipes
injecto
coegerit
Regemetsubjectos
jugumetimprium
Hispanorum
sedRegemipsum
conscientiae
inquadamejus
Regisaeeipere,
propter
suspicionem
patratae
invincula
etignavia
necis,
provincia
quorumdam
Hispanorum
conjecerit,
oppidanis
stupore
et nihilminus
armisad Regemliberandum
quiescentibus,
quam
sumptis
conspirantibus",
u..- Seplveda
bricht
damitaucheineLanzegegeneineGrundthese
seinesverhaten
LasCasas,derbehauptete,
dadieIndios,
weilsiedurchschnittlich
schwchGegners
gerade
licherseienals die Europer,
an derSklavenarbeit
undalleinschon
zugrunde
gingen
nicht
zu solchharter
Arbeit
werden
drften.
deswegen
gezwungen
46Wasja auchdas uereGrundthema
desDonQuijote
verist,einesim Landleben
armten
undzurArbeit
offenbar
, dersichaberzumKriegerleben
psychisch
untauglichen
hidalgo
seiner
Vorfahren
berufen
fhlt
undmiteinereigentmlichen
ausRomantik
und
- FrMischung
Frustration
aufAbenteuersuche
indieWelthinauszieht.
(zeitweise
geradezu
groteske)
zursozialen
Situation
undSelbsteinschtzung
derspanischen
Kolonisten
zeitgenssische
Belege
in derNeuenWeltvgl.u.a. LewisHanke1959(s.o.,Anm.30),S. 13ff.
47Ohneweitere
ohneweitere
in derPolitik)
korreBegrndung
(jedenfalls
Begrndung
hierbeiAristoteles
dieBegriffe
undgerecht",
und
spondieren
vorteilhaft",
naturgem"
werden
wiesalvaventate
austauschbar
verwendet:
gewissermaen
vgl.dazudieBemerkungen
beiE. Schtrumpf
1991(s.o.,Anm.13),S. 248f.

15:14:33 PM

260

SCHFER
CHRISTIAN

war ja am Anfang,seitder ppstlichen

macht.Der Missionierungsauftrag
Bulle Interceteravon 1493, die Grundlage der kirchlichenZustimmung
zur spanischenInbesitznahmeder Neuen Welt. Seplveda,dessenThesen
sich trotzeinigerZugestndnisseund einigemBemhennichtgenerellmit
Stuhlshinsichtlich
und Forderungendes Apostolischen
den Entscheidungen
der Indiofragedecken(vgl.oben Anm. 7), siehtin der Christianisierung
neben der religisenVerpflichtungder Glaubenspredigt insbesondere
auch die letzte Konsequenz und gewissermaendas Endziel eines Kulder den Spaniern als (wie er sagt) zu seiner Zeit kulturell
turauftrags,
fhrendemVolk der alten Welt mit der Entdeckungder Neuen zugefallenist, und den sie nun annehmenmssen. Fr die Spanier dagegen
Vorteilder Indioversliegtder (in SeplvedasAugen brigensgeringere!)48
leichter,vielverklavung darin, ihrer natrlichenFhrungsdisposition
in
als
zu
knnen
nachkommen
sicherer
und
jeder anderen
sprechender
denkbarenForm von Herrschaftsausbung.49
- Es
mag angesichtssolcherAussagen seltsamerscheinen,aber es ist
in der Forschungteilweise(unterUmstnden mit- allerdingsvielleicht
doch delatorischer
worden,da Seplveda an eine
Vehemenz)bestritten
Indios
der
gedachthabe; vielmehrhabe er zwar
regelrechteVersklavung
Humanisten
christlichen
aber
eines
dezidierte,
keineswegsunwrdigepragmatische Thesen zur Grundlegungeines Dienstverhltnisseszwischen
Die servitus
und Eingeborenengeuert.50
Kolonialherrn
, von der er spreche,
48Demcrates
devictorum
sedmulto
Alter
, S. 98: [.. .] cumaliquavictricis
majore
gentis
comhocestprofecto
sowieS. 134:quodipsis,
barbarorum
commoditate";
quamHispanis
habetur".
omniauroetargento
ethumanitas,
modius,
virtus,
pretiosior
veraque
religio
quo
49NureinBelegbeispiel
barbans
S. 132f.:quidpotuit
vonvielenimDemcrates
Alter,
velmagissalutare
istisvelcommodius,
subjicerentur,
imperio
contingere,
quamuteorum
etproipsohumani
etvixhominibus
ex barbaris
et religione
virtute,
quorum
prudentia,
ac veri
servis
Christiani
et daemoniorum
et flagitiosis
rumcaptuciviles,
probi,ex impiis
cultores
Dei veraeque
efficerentur;
ergo,et gravissimis
[. . .] Agevero,et multis
religionis
ex causisistibarbari
quodipsis,
legenaturae;
jubentur
accipere
imprium
Hispanorum
omni
ethumanitas,
hocestprofecto
commodius,
religio
veraque
quovirtus,
quamHispanis
armis
habetur.
auroetargento
recusent,
eritque
cogipossunt,
Itaquesiimprium
pretiosior
auctoribus
et Theologis
et Philosophis
ut supramaximis
id bellum,
declaravimus,
lege
naturae
[. . .]".
justum.
50Einigesolcher
z.B. PrezLuo1995(s.o,Anm.3), S. 185f.
zitiert
Wortmeldungen
des
zurmexikanischen
inseiner
verweist
AuchManuelGarciaPelayo
Ausgabe
Einfuhrung
Stimmen
Hinsicht
in
dieser
auf
Anm.
Alter
Demcrates
s.o.,
apologetische
15)
einige
(1987,
derAnstze
isthieraberv.a.ngelLosadasVerteidigung
Seplvedas
(S. 2f.).Zu nennen
Alter
desDemcrates
zu seiner
Vorwort
etwaimumfnglichen
undihrer
,
Ausgabe
Wirkung,
bei
sindauchvorgeschlagen
am negativen
Madrid21984.Berichtigungen
Seplvedabild
de
La utopa
Mauricio
Beuchot1997(s.o.,Anm.6), S. 55, BeatrizFernndez
Herrero,
Humanismus
Aristotelischer
sowiebeiHorstPietschmann,
America
1992,S. 224-35,
, Barcelona
Reinhard
Ureinwohner
unddieamerikanischen
undInhumanitt?
, in: Wolfgang
(Hg.),
Seplveda
undNeueWelt
Humanismus
1987,S. 143-66.
, Weinheim

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 261
sei nichtmit der SklavereiantikenStils und ihrerRechtsauffassung
vom
servusals reinem Werkzeug,persnlichemBesitz und als res deckungsgleich noch eigentlichvergleichbar.51
solcherapologetischer
Versuche
Dagegen,das heitgegendie Haltbarkeit
in der Seplvedadeutung,
scheintmirunteranderemfolgendeszu sprechen:
Zwar schlgt Seplveda keine flchendeckendePauschalversklavung
aller Vlker der Neuen Welt vor, denn viele dieser Vlker lieen sich
auch ohne Zwangsmanahmenvon den Spaniernfhrenund zivilisieren,
wren ihnen also ohnehin,auch ohne Sklaven zu sein, botmig.52
Auf
die
sich
dem
und
diejenigenEingeborenenallerdings,
Fhrungsanspruch der
der
Humanisierungsarbeit Spaniernichtffnenoder sichihrgar entziehen
zu vollstndigenMenschen werden und
wollen, die also nicht freiwillig
somit ihr natrlicheslXoq nicht anstreben wollen, auf diese wendet
die Aristotelische
aus dem fnften
Seplveda wortwrtlich
Argumentation
I
deren Vordersatzdie
Kapitel von Politik an, eine Argumentationskette,
Definition
bildet:Wer von Naturaus nichtsichselbst,sondernals Mensch
einem anderen gehrt,der ist von Natur aus Sklave" (1254al4f.), und
deren Conclusio die ebenzitiertePassage darstellt,da es freinige von
Natur aus zutrglichsei, als Sklavenzu dienen (1255alff.).Auch die enge
und mitunterpeinlich wortwrtliche
Anlehnungan Aristotelesund der
den
antiken
Wortlaut
so wenigwie mglichdurch
AnspruchSeplvedas,
51Eine
aus dervermeintlichen
von
Argumentation
Doppeldeutigkeit
" diesbezgliche
imengeren
servus
Sinneodereinfach
wertfrei
ableiten
zu wollen,

(Sklave"
Diener")
scheint
mirhingegen
undbei eingehender
problematisch
Betrachtung
sogareherein
vomservus
alsSklaven
stark
imantiken
Sinnzu sein:
Argument
irSeplvedas
Auffassung
Zwarkannte
dasMittellateinische
dasWortsclavus
sensu
stricto
zu bezeich, umdenSklaven
nenundeinigeunsbekannte
Autoren
undAristoteleskommentatoren
verwenden
es auch
so (vgl.Fleler
1992(s.o.,Anm.10),S. 85);daSeplveda
aufdieseeindeutige
allerdings
nichteingeht
undservus
sichaus seinenliterarischen
schreibt,
Begriffsverwendung
ergibt
Vorbildern
undseinen
humanistischen
Ambitionen:
Mittellatein
kommt
hiergarnicht
erst
in FrageundzurVerwendung,
unddergesamte
istbetont
derklassischen
Begriffsapparat
antiken
Literatur
undangeglichen;
heitservus
imDemcrates
nachgebildet
geradedeswegen
Alter
hnlich
wiebei denantiken
Schriftstellern
Sklave",
ganzbestimmt
(voralleman
Vorbild
Ciceroistzu denken)
im
verwendet:
Seplvedas
groes
sprachliches
hauptanalog
Sinneeiner
res
einem
denpersnlichen
Besitz
eines
, diegleich
menschengestaltigen
Werkzeug
Herrndarstellt.
In derGranDisputade Valladolid
in derSeplveda
seine
schlielich,
DemcratesThesen
istunmiverstndlich
vonesclavos"
dieRede,nicht
vonsierverteidigt,
vos"o..;vgl.zumganzenProblemfeld
schlielich
Hanke1959(s.o.,Anm.30),S. 58ff.
52Demcrates
Alter
, S. 166:Itaquein hisbarbaris
longealiacausaesteorum,
qui Conductise Christianis
in potestatem
Namutde
silio,auttimore
atquefidem
permiserunt.
illorum
liberiate
etfortunis
victor
suojureac volntate
fuerit
princeps
potest
quodvisum
sichosin servitutem
et bonisspoliare
statuere,
est,ne dicamimpium
redigere
injustum
et nefarium.
et vectigales
haberelicetproipsorum
videlicet
Quos tamenstipendiaries
natura
etconditione".

15:14:33 PM

262

CHRISTIAN
SCHFER

scholastische
Traditionenoder Begriffsumbildungen
verflscht
wiederzugeben,
lassen daran zweifeln,da Seplveda ausgerechnetfrden Zentralbegriff
der servitus
von der frdie gesamteArgumentation
Aristogrundlegenden
telischenDefinitionder 8oD,eiaabgewichensein sollte;um so mehr,als
sie doch das prominenteste
von Seplveda zitierteBeispiel einer Argumentationfrdie servitus
a naturain der antikenGeschichtewar.
Von besonderemInteressefrdie Frage drfteaber auch Seplvedas
Aufnahmeeines Argumentssein, das sich weiterfhrend
im 7. Kapitel
von PolitikBuch I (1255bIff.)findet,wo Aristotelesden Unterschiedvon
politischerHerrschaft
gegenberdespotischerfestsetzt:
jene sei von Freien
ber freieGleiche, diese von Herren ber unfreieSklaven.Diese Unterscheidungwird anschlieendmit der zwischen Staatslenkung(tcoitucti
Kal ccvp%r|)und Haushaltsverwaltung
^D0pG)v
(okovo|xikt|
|iovccp%a)
parallelisiert:Auch hier wird nur auf politischerEbene ein Verhltnis
unterGleichen und Freien definiert,
auf konomischer"hingegenauch
die despotischeHerrschaftverschiedenenGrades eines einzelnen(durch
natrlicheGegebenheitendafrbestellten)
ber Sklaven,Tiere und anderes
Hab und Gut. Verblffend
ist die zeitweisegeradezu naive Paraphrase,
in der Seplveda dieses Aristotelische
Schulstckin seine eigene Argumentationaufnimmt.53
Zwar differenziert
er Aristoteles'
Herrschaftsschema
und argumentiert
strkerzugunstender Monarchieals der Stagirite,doch
denktSeplveda offenbargar nichtdaran, einen Unterschiedzu machen
zwischenden antikensozialen Grundmustern,
die Aristotelesvor Augen
53Demcrates
S. 17Off.
: Naminhomines
humanos
etintelligentes
Alter,
probos,
imprium
civileconvenit,
hominibus
accomodatum
imiest,velregium
quodliberis
quodpaternum
in barbaros
et parumhabentes
et humanitatis,
herile[herilis"
ist
tantur,
sol[l]ertiae
desAristotelischen
Seplvedas
bersetzung
despotisch";
C.S.].ItaquenonmodoPhilosophi
sedetiamprestantissimi
nondubitant
essenationes
in quas
affirmare
Theologi
quasdam
herileimprium
autcivileconveniat
ratione
accidere
magisquamregium
quodduplici
velquiasuntnatura
aut
docent,
servi,
[...], velquiamorm
qualesprovenire
pravitate,
aliacausanonaliter
in officio
in his
nunccongruit
contineri;
possunt
quorum
utrumque
nondum
benepacatis
barbaris.
interest
inter
natura
liberos
etnatura
serQuantum
igitur
interesse
debetinter
radones
etbarbaris
istisimperandi
vos,tantum
Hispanis
legenaturae,
inalteros
herile.
Estautem
convenit,
quippeinalteros
regium
imprium
regium
imprium,
namdomesticam
utPhilosophi
simillimum
administratoni
administradocent,
domestiche,
domus
essetradunt;
administrationem
domestionem,
regnum
vicissimque
regnum
quoddam
in magnadomofiliisintet servi
ticamcivitatis,
etgentis
autplurium.
Cumigitur
unius,
seu manicipia,
et utrisque
ministri
conditiones
et omnibus
liberae,
interjectis
justuset
nontarnen
unomodo,sed cujuscumque
ordinis
condihumanus
paterfamilias
imperet,
etjustorege,quivelit,
utdebet,
talempatremfamilias
imitione:Hispanos
egoab optimo
istostamquam
essedico;barbaros
sed
tari,paterno
ministros,
propeimperio
gubernandos
exherili
etproipsorum
ettemporis
etpaterno
liberos,
regendos,
quodam
temperato
imperio
conditione
tractandos."

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 263
des 16.
hatte,und den sozialen Gegebenheitenoder familirenStrukturen
Hier sindpaterfamilias,
, minister
, etc. generellwie
Jahrhunderts.
filius,servus
bei Aristoteles,bestenfallswie in der antiken rmischenHausordnung
In dieserBeschreibungder Haushaltsstruktur
und gebraucht.54
vorgestellt
findetsich dann auch der Unterschiedvon serviund Bedienstetenfreien
55
Standes {ministri
conditionis
liber
ae), wobei erstereeindeutigals manicipia
bezeichnetwerden.Es drftehierkeinWeg an der Annahmevorbeifhren,
da Seplveda an die antike oder an eine der antiken vergleichbare
des Sklaven,zumindestdes Haussklaven,aber eben des Sklaven
Bestimmung
als einesMenschenim persnlichen
BesitzeinesanderenMenschengedacht
und sie auf die Indiofragebertragenhat. Herausgearbeitet
hatteer diesen
der
Sklaverei
aber
anhand
der
Aristotelischen
von der qyuaei
These
Begriff
SoaAea, und so scheintes auf der Hand zu liegen,da Seplveda tatschlichdie Lehrevon der natrlichen
Sklaverei(im antikenSinne)vertreten
- ihre
und- mutatis
mutandis
Anwendungauf die der despotischenFhrung
von Natur aus bedrftigen
homunculi
der Neuen Welt empfohlenhat. Eine
an der trotzeiniger(im Textganzenwie nachgeschobenwirkFeststellung,
ender) vershnlicherer
uerungenSeplvedas am Ende, sozusagen im
der
Werks
(S. 174f.)wohl kaum zu rttelnsein drfte.
Anhang"
III. Erklrungsversuche
Die Frage mu gestelltwerden,wie es zu solch einer unmittelbaren
und
mitunter
fastwortwrdichen,
teilweisegeradezunaivenAristotelesrezeption
54EsistdieseeinederSchlsselstellen,
umzuverstehen,
anwelche
ArtvonDienstverhltnis
derunterworfenen
Vlker
Demcrates
denkt:
servi
, waszunchst
Seplvedas
ja auchnureinfachDiener"
oderKnechte"
bedeuten
wirdals seumanicipia
also
knnte,
konkretisiert,
imSinnevondasheit:Sklaven".
tatschlich
Im folgenden
dannSeplveda
empfiehlt
immer
innerhalb
seiner
der
die
der
(und Aristotelischen)
Haushaltsanalogie"Behandlung
Indiosalsfreie
Bedienstete
sedliberos)
undschrnkt
ihreVersklavung
im
ministros,
(tamquam
Sinnedesmanicipium
aufdenFallschlimmer
etperfidia
etinbello
Vergehen
(quiscelere
gerendo
crudelitate
als Strafe
diese
etc.)ein,die in seinenAugendas Sklavendasein
rechtfertigen;
Strafe
wirdallerdings
auchschondurchdieandauernde
Verweigerungshaltung
gegenber
demspanischen
undKulturfhrungsanspruch
Humanisierungsgerechtfertigt.
Manicipium
heitim (alten)rmischen
Rechteigentlich
derfrmliche
KaufeinerSache(res),
im
SinndannaberKaufsklave",
einMensch
also,der,ohneberindividumetonymischen
elleFreiheit
zu verfgen,
zumEigentumsbestand
seines
Herrn
undrechtlich
zurres
gehrt
wird.Da derHaushalt,
denderHumanist
hierundimfolgenden
beschreibt,
Seplveda
natrlich
derdesSpaniens
seiner
dochvieleherjenerderaltrmiZeit,sondern
garnicht
schenFamilienstruktur
an welchedermglichen
Formen
ist,ltperanalogiam
ersehen,
vonUnterordnung
unter
denHerren
habenmag.
Seplveda
gedacht
55Demcrates
S. 172:servi
seumanicipia,
et utrisque
ministri
conditioAlter,
inteijectis
nislibera".

15:14:33 PM

264

SCHFER
CHRISTIAN

kommenkonnte.Die Antwortdaraufwird,wie ich denke, auch gleichzeitigzur Beantwortungder Frage beitragenknnen,warum Seplvedas
Thesen sich nicht durchsetzenkonnten,politischscheitertenund keine
akademischeAnerkennungfanden.
Neben Seplvedasenthusiastischer
und geradezupersnlich
anhnglicher56
in
mit
er
Renaissancemanier
ohne histofr
dem
Aristoteles,
Begeisterung
ristischeBrche oder Bedenken wie mit einem Zeitgenossenumging,
von Bedeutung:
scheinenmir folgendeGesichtspunkte
Die erstePhase der Conquista gleichzeitigdie Phase der abenteuerlichen und ritterromantischen
Eroberungszge zeichnetsich durch eine
AufnahmealterSchematazur Beschreibungdes unerhrten
eigentmliche
Neuen aus, das da entdeckt,erschlossenund erobertwird. Offenbarwar
das Ausdrucksmedium,
das die klassischeBildung und der Umgang mit
dem europischenMenschendes 15. und 16.JahrhunantikemSchrifttum
und Interpretationsso dominant,da es die Perspektive
dertsvermittelte,
in
grundlagefr alles Neue normativ Beschlag nehmen und eindeutig
formenkonnte:
Ein Beispielistdie Naturgeschichte
Westindiens"
des Gonzalo Fernndez
de Oviedo57von 1535,eine Darstellungder Neuen Welt,die in Motivwahl,
Komposition,Methode und Stil ganz und gar am Vorbild der NaturgeOviedos
schichte"Plinius' d.. ausgerichtetist.58Das Bildungsrepertoire
lie diese Art der Beschreibungder Neuen Welt anhand des Mastabs
offenbarilsgeeigneteDarstellungsweise
einer antikenWeltbeschreibung
erscheinen.
So greiftetwa auch
hnlichespassiertin der Zeitgeschichtsschreibung:
Hernn Corts,der ErobererMexikos,bei der Beschreibungseinerersten
56Diesetreue
seinen
Dankbarkeit
undausgesprochene
gegenber
groen
Anhnglichkeit
einerderherundFrderern
scheint
Lehrern
wiezeitgenssischen
antiken
Vorbildern,
aus vielenseiner
zu sein.Sie spricht
gewesen
Charakterzge
Seplvedas
ausragendsten
undfindet
ihrennachgerade
undbrieflichen
rhrseligen
uerungen
Handlungsweisen
Lebenimmer
undvomhfischen
Reisedesalternden
in derbeschwerlichen
Hhepunkt
insKloster
Privatiers
vonAndalusien
strker
Yuste,wo er dengichtzurckgezogenen
KarlV., besucht,
umihnin diesem
denabgedankten
Brotherrn,
ehemaligen
brchigen
krank
und
Lebennocheinmalzu sehen(imFebruar1557;1560musichSeplveda
Lebenzurckziehen):
fastganzvomgesellschaftlichen
zunehmend
erblindet
Vgl.Losada
1973(s.o.,Anm.20),S. 11Of.
57GonzaloFernndez
natural
delasndias
Historia
de Oviedoy Valdes,
, hg.Juan
generly
Prezde TudelaBueso,Madrid1959.
58Vgl.Antony
Amerika
, Mnchen1996,S. 85f.Der Leibarzt
Pagden,Das erfundene
der
z.B. bei seinerbersetzung
versuchte
auerdem
Hernndez,
II., Francisco
Philipps
in
Pflanzenarten
amerikanische
insSpanische,
Plinius
deslteren
gewisse
Naturgeschichte
die
durch
Plinius
alte
die
als
ob
die
denTextunterzubringen,
beschreibt,
Welt,
so,
ganz
erklrt
werde.
Neuebesser

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 265
Kontaktaufnahme,
Unterhandlungenund anschlieendenUnterwerfung
der Aztekenauf Motive,Sprache,Charakterzeichnungen
und Darstellungsformenaus CaesarsBellumGallicum
und das dortberdie gallischen
Stmme
und ihre BesiegungGesagte zurck.Corts' frseinen Stil bestimmende
die hnlicheAbsichtshaltung
seinerSchrift
mitderCaesars
Lateinschullektre,
sind,wie Caesars BellumGallicum
, im wesendichen
(Corts'CartasdeRelacin
eine Mischungaus historischem
Berichtund Rechtfertigungsschreiben
fr
seine Landsleute),das Bewutsein,wie die alten Rmer die Zivilisation
durch Eroberungzu den Barbaren zu tragen,und vieles mehr- all das
lie den Conquistadorin seinerliterarischen
zum Feldherrn
Selbstdarstellung
des (neuen)RmischenReiches Karls V. werden,59
und als solchermute
er den daheimgebliebenenLesern seines Tatenberichtsauch erscheinen.
Alter
, wohl unter dem Eindruck
Seplveda selbstzieht ja im Demcrates
dieserund hnlicherTatenberichte,
vergleichbareParallelenzwischenden
zivilisationsbringenden
Expansionskriegender alten Rmer gegen die
Barbaren und denen der Spanier gegen die Indios:
sein,wiewirbereits
[. . .] dieserKriegwrdedannvonNaturrechts
wegengerecht
derAussagen
namhaftester
undTheologen
haben,
aufgrund
Philosophen
festgestellt
undnochsehrvieleheralsder,dendieRmergegendiebrigen
Vlker
begonnen
undzwarin demselben
haben,um sie zu unterwerfen,
Mae,wiedie christliche
besser
unduntrglicher
istalsdieantike
undwiedieSpanier
an
rmische,
Religion
undVerstandeskrften
Menschlichkeit,
greren
geistigen
Fhigkeiten,
Klugheit,
KrperundAusgezeichnetheit
inallenTugenden
berjenenarmseligen
Menschengeschpfen
Vlkern
Alter
, S. 134).60
legensind,als diealtenRmerdenbrigen
(.Demcrates
Oviedo und Corts sind in diesem Zusammenhangkeineswegszufallig
waren eine Hauptquellefrdie zeitgeschichtlichen
genannt.Ihre Schriften
des spanischen Hofhistoriographen
Verffentlichungen
Juan Gins de
und
fr
seine
Seplveda
Informationshintergund
Einschtzungder Sachlage
in der Neuen Welt, die er selbstja nie gesehen hat (zudem war Corts
wahrscheinlich
Und auch das ist
persnlichmit Seplveda befreundet).61
59Vgl.dazuu.a.Eduardo
El continente
vaco
Subirais,
, Madrid1994,S. 63f.Aufschlureich
ebenfalls
Eberhard
DasBellum
Iustum
desHernn
Corts
inMexico
Wien1976,
Straub,
, Kln/
sowieManuelAlcal,CsaryCorts
, Mexico1950,undnichtzuletzt
JosLuisMartnez
1990(s.o.,Anm.12),S. 112ff.
undS. 147ff.
(mitweiterfhrenden
Literaturangaben).
60[.. .] eritque
id bellum,
ut supramaximis
et Philosophis
et Theologis
auctoribus
multoetiammagis,quamquodRomaniad caeteras
declaravimus,
legenaturae
justum,
nationes
suosubjiciendas
melior
ac certior
estChristiana
inferebant,
imperio
quo scilicet
et majoriingenii,
et animi
Religio,
quamolimromana,
humanitatis,
prudentiae,
corporis
ac omnis
virtutis
excessu
istishomunculis
roboris,
Hispani
praestant
quamcaeteris
gentibus
veteres
Romani."
61WennauchSeplvedas
Demokrates
nieseineQuellennamendich
so istdoch
angibt,
wohlv.a.an diesebeidenhierzitierten
zu denken,
wennersagt: [. . .] dieErzhlungen

15:14:33 PM

266

CHRISTIAN
SCHFER

nichtzuflligso: Die klassisch-antike

und
Ausrichtung,
Darstellungsweise
dieser
Schriften
muten
den
von
der
italienischen
Bildungsgrundlage
RenaissancederJahrhundertwende
enthusiastischen
Humanisten
geprgten,
Seplveda in ganz besondererWeise ansprechen,frsich einnehmenund
vielleichtsogar als einzigangemesseneund wrdigeArtder Beschreibung
der Neuen Welt und ihrerEroberungerscheinenlassen.
So ist Seplvedas Stellungnahmein der Indiofragetatschlichinnerhalb einer zu seinerZeit bereitstraditionellen
und erfolgreich
erprobten
der
zu
Die
sehen:
Einordnung
Conquista
Eroberung der Neuen Welt
wirdin literarischer
und Aufnahmezur Paralleleder bewunAusgestaltung
dertenresgestaeder antikenKulturvlker
und ihrerHelden wie Alexander
und Caesar, ihreskulturbringenden
Eroberungskampfes
gegendie Barbaren
am Rand der bekanntenWelt. Vielleichtist es auch nicht zuviel psychologisiert,wenn man vermutet,da sich Seplveda als Erzieher des
Erzieherdes
ErbprinzenPhilippals eine Artneuer,spanischerAristoteles,
makedonischenErbprinzenAlexander,empfundenhaben mag.62Wenn
in der Durchsetzungseinerpolier freilichauch, genauso wie Aristoteles,
tischenIdeen bei seinem Zgling scheiterte.
In einem wichtigenPunktergnzen sich zudem Aristoteles'politische
das auch SeplTheorien und ein Grunddatumdes Renaissancedenkens,
vedas Menschenbildbestimmt:Es handeltsich um das Prinzip,da vollstndiges,zu seinemxekoqgelangtesMenschseinkeindurchZeugungoder
Geburt schon immervon selbstmitgegebenesFaktum ist. Vielmehrsei
habe"
berdieTatenbeiderEroberung
[...], dieichvorkurzem
Neu-Spaniens
gelesen
S. 96f.).
1990(s.o.,Anm.12),S. 74Iff.,
Alter,
[Demcrates
Vgl.auchdazuJosLuisMartnez
in Betracht
in Valladolid
einGesprch
mitCorts
derdieMglichkeit
zieht,
Seplvedas
desDemcrates
Alter
seiderZndfunke
frdieAbfassung
(S. 742),an demCorts
gewesen
habenknnte
u.U.sogaraufdieeineoderandereWeisemitgearbeitet
(S. 764).
62Seplveda
Wohlaberscheint
erseine
sichnicht
zu einemneuenAristoteles.
erklrt
als ErbeneinesGroreiches
und
demInfanten
Rolleals Philosoph
Philipp
gegenber
demKronprinzen
Alexander
mehrfach
mitderdesAristoteles
Barbarenbeherrscher
gegenber
dafr:
SeinStatusbeiHofunddie
Verschiedene
Indizien
andeuten
zu wollen.
sprechen
imDemcrates
dieErwhnung
demErbprinzen;
(S.
Philipps
gegenber
Praeceptor-Stellung
derBarbaren
und
mitderFragenachmilitrischer
Unterwerfung
56)imZusammenhang
amRandederWelt(nicht
zuvergessen
Gebiete
derunterworfenen
Neuordnung
politischer
unddie Rolle
Lnderals westindisch"
derneuentdeckten
istdabeidie Identifizierung
als Indieneroberer);
schlielich
Alexanders
kolonialpolitischer
korrespondiert
Seplvedas
Herrschaft
Barbaren
einedespotische
denamerikanischen
gegenber
Richtlinienvorschlag,
fastwrtlich
abereineknigliche,
auszuben
, S. 170),berseineLandsleute
(.Demcrates
an Alexander
vonAristoteles
genaumitdem,was manvonderverlorengegangenen,
vonO. Gigonzu seiner
wei:vgl.dieEinleitung
Schrift
berdieKolonien"
gerichteten
61997,S. 23. ZurSelbsteinschtzung
in
vonSeplveda
derPolitik,
Mnchen
bersetzung
auchobenAnm.30 undAnm.33.
schlielich
auf
Aristoteles
vgl.
bezug

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 267
Menschsein,der EndpunkteinesZivilisaMenschsein,zumindestvollgltiges
in dem man sichzum Menschenbildet:factushomo
, nonnatus
,
tionsprozesses,
heitdie Devise,63die bei Seplveda ihrenNiederschlagdarinfindet,da
- das heit:zivilisiertes
- Menschsein
frvollgltiges
und kulturellgereiftes
auch humanitas
,64eine humane Lebensweise,eine gewisse Herzens- und
die wilden
Geistesbildung
Voraussetzungist.Dieser humanitas
widersprechen
ihr
ihreMenschenopfer,
inhumanenBrucheder Indios:ihrKannibalismus,
Gtzendienstsowie das Fehlenvon Technik,von geschriebenenGesetzen,
Alter
,
ja von Schriftberhaupt,in den meistenIndianerkulturen
{Demcrates
S. 104).
Die Indios sindihrerdefizienten
humanitas
,65gerinwegen eher homunculi
Vorstufen
des
die
eher
noch
Affen
Menschen,
gere
gleichen[simiaprope
dixerim
, entfahrtes Demokrateseinmal) und die Bildungzum Menschen
ntighaben, bevor sie wirklichals verstndigeMenschen geltendrfen.
Hier war die Einstiegstelle
frdie bernahme der Aristotelischen
Lehre
von der natrlichenSklaverei.Diese amerikanischen
homunculi
waren den
zivilisierten
in einem Sinne unterund gebildeteneuropischenhomines
Theorie der naturgemenUnterordnung
legen,wie es die Aristotelische
des Geringerwertigen
unterdas Hhere zur Begrndungder natrlichen
63Vgl.dazuu.a. A.
ab Schpfer
seiner
selbst
des
, imArt.Mensch"
Hgli,DerMensch
Historischen
Wrterbuchs
derPhilosophie
zu vergleichen
, Bd.5 (hierSp. 1074- 81).Interessant
istauchdieEntwicklung
diesesGedankens
beiHannah-Barbara
Diezweite
Gerl-Falkovitz,
derWelt:
inderRenaissance
Erkenntnis,
, Mainz1994,insbesonSchpfung
Sprache,
Anthropologie
dereimKapitelXII: Wiewird
derMensch
Das Menschsein
des
zumMenschen
?, S. 161-73:
Menschen
istgemderAntikeninterpretation
des 16.Jahrhunderts
demfacere
zu vernichtdemnasci.
Menschwirdmanalsonichtdurchnatrliches
Wachsen
wie
danken,
Pflanzen
oderTieredaswerden,
sondern
durch
zumMenschen,
insbesondere
aber
Bildung
durch
an denkulturellen
antiker
dieHhe
Geister;
Orientierung
Leistungsvorgaben
groer
desMenschseins
wirddieserTheorienachsomitdurchImitation,
nichtdurchselbsturerreicht.
sprndich-freie
Entfaltung
64Vgl.Demcrates
S. 100:quodcumitasint,
si modo
Alter,
intelligis
profecto,
Leopolde,
nostigentis
moreset naturam,
istisnoviorbiset insuutriusque
jureHispanos
optimo
larumadjacentium
barbaris
virtute
omniac humaniimperitare,
qui prudentia,
ingenio,
tatetamlongesuperantur
ab Hispanis,
mulieres
a viris:
saevi
aetate,
quampueria perfecta
et immanes
a mitissimis,
et intemperantes
a continentibus
et temperatis,
prodigi
denique
simiae
ab hominibus",
u..
quam
propedixerim
65So fter
imDemcrates
ac moribus
homncuAlter,
etwa,S. 104:talesigitur
ingenio
losutesse,ac certeanteHispanorum
adventm
fuisse
tambarbaros,
taminculscimus,
armiscogipossunt,
tos,taminhumanos",
oder,S. 134:itaquesi imprium
recusent,
id bellum,
utsupramaximis
et Philosophis
et Theologis
auctoribus
eritque
declaravimus,
multo
etiammagis,
nationes
legenaturae
justum,
quamquodRomaniad caeteras
imperio
suosubjiciendas
melior
ac certior
estChristiana
inferebant,
quoscilicet
Religio,
quamolim
etmajori
etanimiroboris,
ac omnis
virromana,
humanitatis,
ingenii,
prudentiae,
corporis
tutis
excessu
istishomunculis
veteres
etc.
Romani",
Hispani
praestant
quamcaeteris
gentibus

15:14:33 PM

268

CHRISTIAN
SCHFER

Sklavereierforderte.
und seine zivilSeplvedas Renaissancehumanismus
isatorischund kulturphilosophisch
definierte
hatte
Menschseinsbestimmung
somiteinen Platz in Aristoteles'sklavereirechtfertigender
Wertigkeitsskala
gefunden.66
IV. Seplvedas
Scheitern
Die eingangs skizzierteDiskussion ber die politischeBehandlung der
Ureinwohner
der Neuen Welterreichte
ihrenHhepunktimJahre 1550/51
von Valladolid".Dieses offizielle
beim sogenanntenGroenStreitgesprch
sich
eine
Reihe
von Sitzungenund sogar
ber
(das
Streitgesprch
ganze
war
unter
anderem
Sitzungsperiodenhinzog)
ntig geworden,weil die
GesetzConquistadorenund spanischenSiedlermitder indiofreundlichen
gebung von 1542 (die als Leyes Nuevas" in die Geschichte einging)
unzufriedenwaren und sie teilweiseschlichtignorierten
oder offengegen
- sie schrnkteihre
sie opponierten
ein, indem sie
Ausbeutungsstrategien
In diesem
etwa Zwangs- und Akkordarbeitfr die Indios untersagte.67
Vertreter
akademischenDisput bekam nun Seplveda als prominentester
- die
also
der kolonialen Interessengruppe
andere,
sozusagen die der

66Einenicht
sichan dieseFeststellung
an:Dachte
leichthin
entscheidbare
Frageschliet
es konnte,
diealshomunculi
anders
alswohlAristoteles
daran,da Menschen,
Seplveda,
aus dem
einfach
Sklavensind,am Endedes Kultivierungsprozesses
natrlicherweise
mssen?
unddannebensonatrlich
als Freiegelten
Sklavenstatus
heraustreten
knnen
imchristlichen
zujenerZeiteheralstemda Sklaverei
Dafrwrdesprechen,
Spanien
z.B.diese
Kamen1986(s.o.,Anm.4),S. 86f.vertritt
Phnomen
betrachtet
wurde:
porres
erseischoneineinGaleerensklave,
AuchimDonQuijote
(I, Kapitel22)uert
Meinung.
Es steht
zu
undseiesjetztebenwieder.
malfureinige
allerdings
JahreSklavegewesen,
undKulturbildungstheorie
ausPolitik
Gemeinschaftsvermuten
I,
(wennmanAristoteles'
daSeplveda
undSeplvedas
dazunimmt),
Humanismuspostulat
Kapitel1-3zugrundelegt
Zustand
derSklaverei
ausdemnatrlichen
Proze
zurHerausfuhrung
wohlehereinlngerer
einerpolitisch
undmoralisch
habenmu:Erstdieallmhliche
Heranbildung
vorgeschwebt
mit
Gesamtkultur
wrde
frderlichen
und-entfaltung
dermenschlichen
Selbstbestimmung
- Bei
inderNeuenWeltfuhren.
vonnatrlicherweise
derZeitzurExistenz
Freigeborenen
derSklaverei
Aristoteles
selbst
eindeutiger
jedermenschdagegen
gehtdasNaturgeme
1991(s.o.,Anm.13),S. 249).Allerdings
voraus"
lichen
(Schtrumpf
Entwicklungsmglichkeit
umstritten
Stellen
dieser
Aristotelischen
istauchdieInterpretation
1254a23)
(v.a.etwaPolitik
nochmals
(veri,
Schtrumpf
a.a.O.).
67Die wichtigsten
ingedrngter
Zusamzitiert
Nuevas"
Artikel
derLeyes
einschlgigen
in voller
1970(s.o.,Anm.2),S. 147-50;
LngeistderGesetzestext
menstellung
Simpson
Sources
and
Civilisation.
American
bei LewisHanke,History
am leichtesten
ofLatin
greifbar
derOpposition
, London1969,Bd. 1,S. 144-9.ZumProblem
gegendieneue
Interpretations
darauf
Indienrates
desKniglichen
drastischen
Reaktion
undderteilweise
Gesetzgebung
Widerruf
nachderNeuenWeltbisaufkniglichen
etwaalleExpeditionen
(1549wurden
sh.u.a. Hanke,a.a.O.,S. 36f.
verboten)

15:14:33 PM

UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 269
SEPLVEDA
unterLas Casas vertreten
wurdevon der Dominikanerfraktion
Indiorechte,
der Indios
seineThese von der natrlichen
die Gelegenheit,
Unterlegenheit
hchsten
kolonialen
dem
Indienrat
Verwaltungsgremium)
(dem
gegenber
vor einemhochrangigen
Expertenkollegium
juristischenund theologischen
welcheder beiden Parteien
Es
ist
bis
heute
heftigumstritten,
darzulegen.68
im Groen Disput von Valladolid wirklichsiegreichhervorging;restlos
siegreichwohl keine:69der Konfliktin Politikund Philosophieschwelte
weiter.Auch
nochjahrzehntelang(und im groenund ganzen ergebnislos)
ist unsere Kenntnisdessen, was whrend des Disputs wirklichpassierte,
Nur sovielistklar:In seinemGrundanliegen
immernoch uerstlckenhaft.
konntesich Seplveda nichtdurchsetzen;die Leyes Nuevas" von 1542
mit ihrerindioschtzendenGrundtendenzwurden durch seine offizielle
noch grundlegendmodifiziert,
Stellungnahmeweder zurckgenommen
geschweigedenn eine Entwicklunghin zu einerArtVersklavungsstrategie
im Sinne von Seplvedas Vorschlageingeleitet.70
Lehre und kolonialpolitischen
WarumSeplvedasphilosophische
Vorschlge
sich in der Gran Disputa" nicht durchsetzenkonnten,ist wohl nicht
mehrganz schlssigzu rekonstruieren.
Mag sein, da es weder mehrdie
Aristotelesaufnahme
Zeit noch der rechte Ort einer naiv-unmittelbaren
im
war: Was etwa
antikisch-humanistisch
durchtrnkten
Ambiente des
Mediceischen Hofs der Jahrhundertwende
als berzeugende und zeitund
geme politischeMeinung
Argumentationsstrategie
gegoltenhaben
konnte
durchaus
am
Hof
des
barocken
drfte,
Siglo de Oro
Spanischen
scheitern,und mute es vielleichtsogar. Antike"Denkungsart,Bildung
68DerKaiserselbst
hattediese,Junta"
an seinen
einberufen,
spanischen
Regierungssitz
vonKolonialpolitik
weilesinderRegierung
undamHofberderFragederRechtmigkeit
undEingeborenenlegislative
Zustnden
war(vgl.
zu brgerkriegshnlichen
gekommen"
21965,S. 117.Generell
L. Hanke,
TheSpanish
intheConquest
Boston
for
Struggle
Justice
ofAmerica,
zurGranDisputade Valladolid
sh.dortS. 111-32).
69EinenVersuch
oderRekonstruktion,
(wohlkaummehrals das)derInterpretation
welche
RolleAristoteles'
Theorien
aufdemGroen
habenmgen,
politische
Disput
gespielt
hatLewisHankein Aristotle
andtheAmerican
Indians
, S. 44-61(s.o.,Anm.30) vorgelegt.
Generell
zurGranDisputa"
Werk
AllMankind
is One.
A Study
ofthe
vgl.Hankes
Disputation
Between
Bartolom
deLasCasasandJuanGins
deSeplveda
in1550onthe
Intellectual
andReligious
theAmerican
Indians
/Illinois
1974.
, Dekalb
Capacity
70Dieof
undforschungsgeschichtlichen
derGran
Nachwehen"
juristischen,
philosophischen
habenebenfalls
beiHanke1959(s.o.,Anm.30),S. 74-98undHanke1974(s.o.,
Disputa
Anm.69)ihreweitreichende
undWrdigung
NeuereStudien
zur
Interpretation
gefunden.
DebattevonValladolid
sind:EduardoAndujar,
Bartolom
delas CasasandJuanGins
de
MoralTheology
versus
Political
undAlfredo
, sowieRafaelAlvira
Cruz,The
Seplveda:
Philosophy
between
Las CasasandSeplveda
at Valladolid
in: KevinWhite
, beideerschienen
Controversy
intheAgeofDiscovery
D.C. 1997,Seiten69-87und
, Washington,
(Hg.),Hispanic
Philosophy
88-111,
respektive.

15:14:33 PM

270

SCHFER
CHRISTIAN

und Philosophiewaren hier nicht mehr Mastab aller Dinge; vielleicht

den Seplveda aufgeandersals im italienischen
Renaissancehumanismus,
man
in
Linie
war
hier
erster
katholisch,und erstin zweiter
sogen hatte,
Kann auch sein, da
Linie an antikenkulturellen
Vorbilderninteressiert.
man hier an einem dieser- freilichtrotz allem normativen
Vorbilder,
in
offenbar
christlicher
nmlichan Aristoteles,
vordringlich
Brechunginteroder thomanischen
essiertwar,sozusagenam scholastischen"
Aristoteles",
denn worin berall wollte man einem antikenDenker trauen,der, wie
Las Casas vor Kaiser Karl V. schon zu frherer
Gelegenheitim Rahmen
der Sklavenfragegeuerthatte,ein Heide war und jetzt in der Hlle
brenne,und von dessen Lehren man nur soviel Gebrauch machen sollte
als in bereinstimmungmit unserem heiligen Glauben und mit der
christlichen
Lebenspraxisstehe".71
Vielleichtwar Seplveda aber auch in einer anderen Beziehung mit
seinerSicht der Dinge und ihrerDarlegung unzeitgemgeworden:Die
bildet- und die Leyes Nuevas sind ein sichtMitte des 16. Jahrhunderts
- den Abschlu der ersten,heroischen
bares Zeichen untervielen dafr
aber auch der romantischenund groartigen,
und draufgngerischen,
und in vielen bunten Ausschmckungen
ungeheuervielversprechenden
erzhltenPhase der Conquista, die Phase der blutigenLandnahme, der
nie geahntenkriegerischen
Eroberungen,des persnlichenEinsatzesund
Phase wurdezu jener Zeit abgelstdurch
diese
todbringenden
Wagemuts;
ein zweite,in der man den Sinn nunmehrauf Befriedung,Neuordnung
und Vershnung,kurz auf die Suche eines praktikablenund christlich
Koexistenz
Modus' einer zunehmendressentimentlosen
verantwortbaren
Gewissen
in den Kolonienrichtenmute,und das durchausmitschlechtem
und im Bewutsein der eigenen begangenen Fehler72 eine mitunter
71Zitiert
a.a.O.
nachLewisHanke1965(s.o.,Anm.68),S. 124.Hankemacht
allerdings
als
unddarinistihmrechtzu geben,da Aristoteles
darauf
aufmerksam,
richtigerweise
einebestimmende
des16.Jahrhunderts
natrlich
auchimSpanien
Macht,
derPhilosoph"
an derauchdie
in Naturrechtsfragen,
insbesondere
blieb,einegeistige
Machtstellung,
unddes
derAristotelesdeutung
IhreandereStrategie
nichtvorbeikamen.
Dominikaner
wares aber
Gedankenumfeld
christlichen
Textineinem
mitdemAristotelischen
Umgangs
machte.
letztendlich
zumstrkeren
wohl,dieihrenStandpunkt
72Vgl.dazu Subirats
die
1994(s.o.,Anm.59), S. 60, u.. Tatschlich
untersagte
Gebrauch
des Terminus'
denoffiziellen
Krone1573schlielich
Conquista"
Spanische
ihrer
zurBezeichnung
denBegriff
statt
undversuchte
dessen,
Befriedung"
(pacificacin)
Endes
Zeichen
desfaktischen
durchzusetzen
(vgl.a.a.O.,S.58).Einueres
Kolonialpolitik
waru.a.auchdiepolizurZeitderGranDisputa
derConquista
derheroischen
Erstphase
- undwohlauchpervon
der
Tod
und
tische
Seplvedas
politischem
Entmachtung
(Teil-)
fr
Zeit
der
zu
seiner
Hernn
Freund
snlichem
Corts,
(undspeziell
groen allgemein
in
Helddes spanischen
vorbildliche
als derbewunderte,
Eroberungskampfes
Seplveda)
derNeuenWeltgalt.

15:14:33 PM

SEPLVEDA
UNDDIE POLITISCHE
ARISTOTELESREZEPTION 271
beschmteArt der eigenen Geschichtsbetrachtung,
der Seplveda verstndnislosfernstand.Seplveda als der Bewunderer und begeisterte
Historiographder angesprochenenerstenPhase der Conquista bekannte,
diskutierte
und propagiertein seinen SchriftenmithinkolonialeIdealvorund
die eigentlichbereitsberholtund
stellungen
Entwicklungszustnde,
ihr
an
inneres(und auch bald ueres)Ende gekommenwaren.Las Casas
und seine Dominikaner dagegen konntenmit ihrer Gegenpositionals
als Initiatoreneiner Neubesinnungin der
Vorreiter,
ja sogar grtenteils
Sie
hatten
die Zeichen und Notwendigkeiten
der
Kolonialpolitikgelten.
Zeit und der fortschreitend
vernderten
Situationeher erkanntund voraus- Auch
denkendmitbestimmt.
historischen
angesichtsder vernderten
Lage
und ihrerEinschtzungalso konntesich SeplvedasAristotelische
Theorie
der natrlichenSklaverei weder auf akademischer noch auf offiziellpolitischerEbene jemals wirklichdurchsetzen.
Im Gegenteil:Seplvedas bis dahin verffendichte
Wortmeldungenin
der verhandeltenFrage wurden im Gefolge der Gran Disputa noch
whrend der fnfziger
Jahre auf Betreibenvon Krone, Inquisitionund
Universittskreisen
kassiert,um die Verbreitungseiner einschlgigen
Gedanken (insbesonderein den Kolonien) zu verhindern.In den langen
Nachwehender Disputa mitihrenzahlreichenGutachten,Gegengutachten
und prominentenWortmeldungenund Einflunahmenpro und contra
, die
Seplveda, verfatedieser seine Apologia
pro librodejustis bellicausis
dem Verbot des Demcrates
ohne
es
aber
letzdich
sollte,
entgegenarbeiten
verhindernoder aufhebenzu knnen:Zu schwerwogen die abschlgigen
Gutachteninsbesondereder UniversittenSalamanca und Alcal.73Der
Demcrates
Alterschlielichdurfteaufgrunddes gleichenVerbots nie von
blieb aufJahrhunderte
hinSeplveda publiziertwerden,und die Apologia
aus neben einigenSummarienseinerGegnerdie einzigegedruckteQuelle
frseine kolonialpolitischen
Gedanken.Denn erstknapp 350 Jahrespter
erschieneine erste kritischedierte Druckfassungdes einzigen (damals)
noch bekanntenManuskriptsdes ^weitenDemcrates
im Mitteilungsblatt
der
Geschichtsakademie
als
verscholKniglich Spanischen
sozusagen
lange
lenes historisches
Kuriosum.
UniversittRegensburg
Institut
fiirPhilosophie

73Zurwechselvollen
Geschichte
umdasImprimatur
fiir
denDemcrates
Alter
vgl.nochmals
V. Carroa.a.O.,S. 326ff.

15:14:33 PM

ReviewArticle
:
context
and its earlydevelopment
The originsof humanism
, its educational
a reviewarticleof Ronald Wits 'In the Footsteps of the Ancients5
ROBERT BLACK

' The Origins

Ronald G. Witt's cIntheFootsteps
of Humanism
of theAncients
fromLovatotoBruni(Brill,Leiden BostonCologne 2000, Studiesin Medieval
and ReformationThought, LXXIV) traces the historyof Renaissance
humanismfromits birthin the later thirteenth
centuryto the beginning
it
Bruni
and
his contemporaries,
with
Leonardo
of the fifteenth
when,
emerged as a fullymature learned movement.For Witt the essence of
the phenomenonis style:genuinehumanismcame into being in the second half of the thirteenth
centurywhen Lovato Lovati began to imitate
classicalLatin verse.At firsthumanistendeavourswere limitedto poetry,
The domprose remainingin the domain of the medieval ars dictaminis.
inance of poetry began to wane in the mid-fourteenth
centurywith
imitation
to
classical
but
his
eclectic
Petrarch,
preventeda fullapproach
for
scale revivalof antique prose style.The turningpoint
prose compositionwas the teachingof Giovanni Malpaghini da Ravenna in Florence
at the veryend of the fourteenth
century:he put forwardCicero as the
and
Latin prose,and his pupilswere finally
rhetoric
model
for
preeminent
able to achieve a genuinelyclassicalprose stylebased on CiceronianimiCiceronian prose writerto emergefromthis
tation.The firstsignificant
stablewas PierpaoloVergerio,but it was Malpaghini'sotherpupil,Leonardo
Bruni, who for Witt representedthe firstsuccessfulattemptto imitate
Cicero.Wittconcludeshis accountwiththespreadof Bruni'sCiceronianism
to Venice and Milan, under the auspices of such figuresas Gasparino
Barzizza, Uberto and Pier Candido Decembrio and Andrea Biglia.
Witt'sown descriptionof his book as a 'monograph'in no way does
justice to its wide scope. Some idea of the breadth of Witt's treatment
will be apparentin the fiveaspects of thisbook which I propose to discuss in this reviewarticle:(1) Witt'sdefinitionof humanism;(2) his discussion of the originsof humanism;(3) his treatmentof the educational
Vivarium
40,2

BrillNV,Leiden,2002
Koninklijke
- www.brill.nl
online
Alsoavailable

15:25:32 PM

RONALD
WITT'S'INTHEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'

273

contextof humanism'searly history;(4) his discussionof early humanism's affiliations

with Christianity;
and (5) his emphasis on humanism's
as
to
dimensions.
literary, opposed political,
* * *
Witt'spreoccupationwith stylestemsfromhis definitionof humanism:
tocenter
ofhumanism
onstylistic
derives
. . . from
Mydecision
mydiscussion
change
a humanist
thata litmus
foridentifying
washisintention
to imitate
myconviction
ancient
Latinstyle.
Attheleast,a dedication
tostylistic
imitation
initiated
thedestabilization
ofan author's
ownlinguistic
universe
hiscontact
withthatofantithrough
Asa consequence,
I donotregard
as humanists
those
whowere
quity.
contemporaries
inhistorical
andphilological
research
onancient
culture
butwhoshowed
no
engaged
toemulate
I consider
ancient
butrather
themantiquarians.
signofseeking
style,
(22)
This definition
focuseson the implicit,ratherthan the explicit,meaning
of humanism.The nature of everyhistoricalphenomenonis not clearly
ifonlybecause forthemitsessentialfeatures
articulated
by contemporaries,
were so obvious as to requireno explanation.In the case of humanism,
any moderatelyinformedresearchercan detectthe presenceof a humanist
textsimplythroughits Latin: by attempting
to show his readersthathe is
however
with
the
Latin styleof the ancients
himself,
affiliating
imperfectly,
as opposed to the moderns(or medievaisin modernparlance),a writeris
withthe humanistmovement.
makingan implicitdeclarationof his affinity
For the explicitmeaning of humanist,one has to turn to the classic
definitionof humanism as a discipline, as developed by Paul Oskar
Kristeller(to whose memory,in fact,the book is dedicated).In his seminal article 'Humanism and scholasticismin the Italian Renaissance',1
Kristellerreturnedto contemporaryusage of the later fifteenth
century,
when the word humanista
was invented to designate a teacher of the
humanitieson the analogy of such medieval universitylabels as legista,
or artista.
, canonista
jurista
Althoughthe termhumanismwas a nineteenthKristeller
connectedhumanista
with a definedgroup of
centurycoinage,
the
studia
humanitatis
, normallyconsistingof grammar,rhetoric,
subjects,
a recognizedacapoetry,historyand moral philosophyand constituting
demic disciplinedistinctfromthe philosophical,medical and theological
studies now known as scholasticism.It has subsequentlybeen demonstratedthat Coluccio Salutati was the firstto revive the phrase studia
1 First
in:Byzantion,
17(1944-45),
andrepublished
sub346-74,
published
manytimes
sequently.

15:25:32 PM

274

ROBERTBLACK

humanitatis
(in 1369) on the basis of Cicero's usage in the oration Pro
is
but
Arckia,2 the core of fivesubjectsembodied in the studiahumanitatis
alreadyevidentin Petrarch'slist of favouritebooks, datingfromthe first
halfof the fourteenth
Moreover,althoughPetrarchneverseems
century.3
to have used thephrasestudiahumanitatis
, he did make mentionof 'humanorum studiorum'.4
have theiradvantagesand disadvantages.Witt's
Both these definitions
aims of the humanistmovementand to disto
the
novel
helps identify
from
their
medievalforeruners,
whileKristeller'stends
humanists
tinguish
from
whichit emerged.
the
medieval
to assimilatehumanismwith
disciplines
Kristellerwas aware thathis emphasison humanismas a disciplinetended
to blurtheboundariesbetweenmedievaland Renaissancelearning.On the
one hand, he attemptedto overcomethisdifficulty
dialectically.Excluding
such as ultramontane
of theItalianhumanists,
fromhis definition
precursors
classical scholars and writersof the twelfthcentury,as well as Italian
fromthe twelfthand earlierthirteenth
practitionersof the ars dictaminis
thesis
that humanismwas fullyborn only
he
forward
the
centuries, put
when ultramontaneclassicismwas mergedwithItalian rhetoricalactivities
On the otherhand, Kristeller'sdefiat the end of the thirteenth
century.5
nition has the advantage not only of contemporaryusage, but also of
embracing a wide range of activities,writersand scholars under the
umbrellaof a broad discipline.By applyingKristeller'sdefinition,
signs
of early humanismcould be detectednot only in the areas highlighted
by Witt,such as Lovato Lovati's attemptsto imitateclassicalverseforms
or in AlbertinoMussato's revivalof Senecan tragedy,but also in Brunetto
Latini's study and use of Ciceronian orations and rhetoricaltexts,in
BartolomeoBenincasa'sand GiovanniBuonandrea'slectureson Ciceronian
rhetoricalhandbooks,in Giovanni del Virgilio'steachingof the classical
Latin poets, in Ger d'Arezzo's and Giovanni de Matociis's early efforts
at criticalliteraryhistoryor in Geremia da Montagnone'sand Benvenuto
Campesani's readingof rare Latin authorssuch as Catullus and Martial.
Witt'snarrowerfocus on Latin styleas the 'litmus'of humanismcan
tend to exclude ratherthan include. While scholars such as Kristeller,
2 B. Kohl,Thechanging
Renaissance
humanitatis
inthe
studia
, in:Renaissance
early
ofthe
concept
6 (1992),187-8.
Studies,
3 R. Black,Humanism
Medieval
1998,248-9.
, Cambridge
, in: TheNewCambridge
History
4 Lefamiliari
1933,vol.1,47.
, 1.9,ed.V. Rossi,Florence
5 P. O. Kristeller,
Humanism
Antecedents
TheMedieval
, inhisEight
Philosophers
ofRenaissance
California
Renaissance
1964,160-2.
, Stanford,
oftheItalian

15:25:32 PM

RONALD
WITT'S<INTHEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'

275

RobertoWeiss6or BertholdLouis Ullman7have recountedthe earlyhistoryof humanism,Witt's definitionleads him to a preoccupationwith

who and who were not in fact the firsthumanists:his
distinguishing
accountcan become less a historyof humanismthan of thosefigureswho
meet his criteriaas humanists.Thus Witt rejectsthe humanistcredentialsof Geremia da Montagnone,despitehis 'knowledgeof a wide range
of ancient authors' (113), as well as of Riccobaldo of Ferrara, 'whose
fidelityto a medieval genre of historicalwritingand apparent lack of
interestin expressinghimselfin classicizingstylemake him more like
Geremia da Montagnonethan like Lovato' (114). Similarly,despitetheir
achievementsas criticalscholars,the humanistcredentialsof Giovannide
Matociis and Benzo d'Alessandriaare rejected:
LikeGeremia
da Montagnone
in Padua,de Matociis
andBenzoshould
notbe considered
humanists.
Allthreemen,andespecially
thelatter
ofhavtwo,gaveproof
towards
their
sources
andanincipient
senseofanachronism.
inga newcritical
mentality
Butwhereas
Lovato'sstudyof Seneca'smeters
thewayforMussato's
prepared
inVerona
thephilological
ofscholars
remained
Senecan-style
patriotic
tragedy,
progress
inertuntiltheycouldbe translated
intothenewclassicizing
medium.
culturally
theidentification
oftexts
andauthors,
andthereconstruction
research,
Philological
ofsegments
ofancient
werevitaltothedevelopment
ofhumanism,
butthey
history
couldonlybecomehumanistic
whencontributing
to thereconstruction
ofa society
ofhuman
andtheir
distinctive
ofthought
andfeeling.
The revivifybeings
patterns
stemmed
from
thehumanists'
effort
to recreate
thestylethatencoded
ingprocess
theemotions
andthoughts
ofancient
(168)
society.
One has to wonder if the unexplained absence fromthis book of an
extendedtreatmentof Boccaccio is due to his failureto meet the stylistic criteriarequiredby Witt'sdefinitionof humanism.
* * *
Particularlyprovocativeis Witt's treatmentof the originsof humanism.
For Witt,Latin literacythrivedin northand centralItaly for 'the first
fivecenturiesfollowingthe fall of Rome . . . Broad strataof the general
populationhad frequentcontactwith documents,and elementaryLatin
literacyseems to have been relativelywidespread'.(14) This Italian Latin
literaryculturereached its peak in the eleventhcentury:
6 II primo
secolo
dell'umanesimo:
studi
e testi
inItaly
, Rome1949;TheDawnofHumanism
,
London1947.
7 Some
TheSorbonne
andtheItalian
Renaissance
humanism,
oftheorigin
aspects
ofItalian
,
library
in hisStudies
intheItalian
Renaissance
, Rome1955,27-54.

15:25:32 PM

276

ROBERTBLACK
north
of
As in their
French
Italiancathedral
schools
eleventh-century
counterparts,
in theancient
instruction
writRomepreserved
bookculture,
Carolingian
stressing
before
thegreat
ofLatinletthepoets.Norinthiscentury
ers,especially
flourishing
in theirownpoetic
tersin Francedid theItaliansappearin anywayinferior
to theFrench.
(15)
compositions

However,thisthrivingliteraryand classical culturewas shatteredby the

InvestitureContestat the end of the eleventhcentury:
A majorcasualty
inGregory
ofecclesiastical
reforms
wasthecathedral
VII'sprogram
inwhich
ofnorthern
andcentral
thatinstitution
thegrammatical
curriculum
school,
Italian
Within
thelasttwenty-five
yearsoftheeleventh
century,
Italyhadthrived.
overaspects
ofreform
such
cathedral
bydisputes
chapters
appeartohavebeenriven
Shattered
schools
as clerical
andlayinvestiture.
strife,
byfactional
disapmarriage
insomecasesformany
decades.
ofchapter
thedocumentation
life,
Although
pearfrom
in thetwelfth
as cena fewcathedral
likethatat Lucca,survived
schools,
century
to themodmostothers
seemto havebeencommitted
tersofliberal-arts
training,
fortheperformance
oftheir
functions.
esttaskofpreparing
thediocesan
religious
clergy
ofthetradieducation
entailed
thedeterioration
The withering
ofcathedral-school
education
tional
ofgrammatical
(16)
goingbacktotheCarolingian
period.
program
For Witt,traditionalliteraryculturewas replacedby a new practicaland
professionaleducationalmovement:
waslargely
andcentral
The intellectual
lifeofnorthern
Italyin thetwelfth
century
andRomanandcanon
concerns
anddirected
driven
bydictatores
bylegal-rhetorical
wasgenerally
determined
ofgrammar
. . . The extent
bythehumtraining
lawyers
dictamen
to
In thecaseoftheelitewhowentbeyond
ofarsdictaminis.
ble demands
in reading
andwriting
years'
legalLatinformed
partofmany
legalstudies,
training
direction.
instruction
undera lawyer's
(16-7)
Accordingto Witt,classical studiesin Italy lay dormantuntilthe end of
the twelfthcentury:the
scholinvasion
ofFrench
after1180,whena massive
ofgrammar
revived
fortunes
ofRome.
lifeofItalynorth
influences
transformed
theintellectual
arlyandliterary
andpoetsmadetheir
. . . French
Attheheight
oftheir
majorcongrammarians
glory
almost
a ceninItaly.
After
ofletters
andscholarship
future
tribution
tothebrilliant
decades
to
studies
an auxiliary
roletorhetoric,
ofplaying
grammatical
required
tury
of
in northern
ofLatinpoeticcomposition
buttheburst
revive;
Italybythemiddle
showstheir
thethirteenth
bythattime.(17)
development
century
vigorous
Witt does not give furtherdetails in this book, but refersto his earlier
article'Medieval Italian cultureand the originsof humanismas a stylistic ideal', where he cites Geoffreyof Vinsauf as an agent of French
influencein Italy,Henry of Settimello'sElegyof 1193 as an example of
classicizingpoetryin the Gallic manner and Boncompagno of Signa as
a contemporaryItalian who reacted against the school of Orlans and

15:25:32 PM

RONALD
WITT'S'INTHEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'

211

itspreference
forrhetoricbased on the traditional
studyof ancientauthors.8
Witt's thesisregardingthe originsof Italian humanismis that its seeds
were sown at the end of the twelfthcenturybut that they took over
nearlya hundredyears (1180 to 1267-68) to germinatein the person of
Lovato Lovati and his fellowLatin classicizingpoets in the second half
of the thirteenth
century.
Witthas persuasivelyidentifiedthe key elementsin the backgroundto
Italian humanism,especiallythe decline of medievalItalian classicaleducation and the rise of the professionaland legal studies.But his account
of the way and particularlythe chronologicalorder in which these elementscombinedto give birthto humanism,in my view, needs revision,
and I thinkthathe places too much emphasison the role of Frenchclassicismin the dawn of Italian humanism.
In the firstplace, it is unclear that traditionalItalian clericalgrammar
educationunder the auspices of ecclesiasticalschoolswas in decline during the twelfthcentury.It may be true that the InvestitureContesttemthe functioning
of churchschools:here,to the listof
porarilyinterrupted
citiesaffectedby the crisiscould be added Arezzo, where no mastersare
mentionedin the documentsbetween 1088 and 1138 and where one
pupil is known to have returnedto Arezzo froma school elsewherein
1082.9This kind of evidence,togetherwith the examples cited by Witt,
amountsto argumentexsikntio
and musttherefore
be inconclusive.Indeed,
in the case ofArezzo,it is knownthatby 1138 the churchgrammarschool
of S. Maria della Pieve was again in operation,10
and that the cathedral
11
school was functioning
in 1178; thereis also a long seriesof canon magistiin the Aretinechurchfrom 1158 to 1240.12
More suggestive,I think,is the evidenceof actual Italian school books
datingfromthe twelfthcentury.In my recentbook on the Latin school
curriculumin Italy,I have been able, withthe help of the palaeographer
Gabriella Pomaro, to identify41 Italian textsof classical authorsused as
8 In:A. Rabil(ed.),Renaissance
Humanism:
andLegacy,
1988,
Foundations,
Forms,
Philadelphia
I, 44-50.
9 H. Wieruszowki,
Politics
andCulture
inMedieval
andItaly
, Rome1971,423;R.Black,
Spain
Studio
e scuola
inArezzo
durante
il medioevo
e il Rinascimento.
I documenti
d'archivio
finoal 1530,
Arezzo1996,100-1.
10Black1996
above,n. 9), 101,n. 8.
(op.cit.,
11Ibid.,107,n.
29.
12Ibid.

15:25:32 PM

278

ROBERTBLACK

schoolbooksand produced during the twelfthcentury.13

Most of these
textbookswould have been used at Italian ecclesiasticalsecondaryschools
duringthe twelfth
century,and indeed two of them (textsof Cicero's De
amicitiaand of Sallust's BellumIugurthinum
) actuallycontain referencesto
and
ecclesiastical
life.14It is no accident that
contemporaryepiscopal
Roffredoda Beneventoreferredto the flourishing
state of Latin literary
studyin Arezzo at the turnof the thirteenth
century(Trater,cum venisti
ab Aretio ubi hodie vigetstudiumlitterarum').15
A more persuasivepictureof Italian educationaldevelopmentsin the
twelfth
centurymay be thattherewere in facttwo competingtendencies
in education:one emanatingfromtraditionalgrammarschools based on
the classical authorsand stilllinkedto ecclesiasticalinstitutions,
and the
other stemmingfromnascent lay highereducation,focusedon notarial
in Bologna
and legal studies,which led to the emergenceof universities
in the twelfthcenturyand then in Arezzo and Padua in the early thirteenth.As Wittpointsout, these two approaches to educationwere diametrically
opposed: the formerprivilegedclassicalauthors,whilethe latter
emphasizedpracticaland rapid Latinityaimed at entryinto the professions. The first,more classical and grammaticalapproach,is represented
Italian schoolbooksidentifiedin my survey,and is
by the twelfth-century
reflectedin the neo-classicalpoetryof a clergymansuch as Henry of
Settimello,who studiedin Bologna probablyin the thirdquarterof the
twelfth
The second,more practicaland less classicalapproach,
century.16
of Albericof Montecassino(ca. 1075);
is firstnoticeablein the arsdictaminis
it had spread to Bologna by the middle of the twelfthcenturyand is
associated with a manuals by Adalberto da San Marino, Bernardo da
Bologna and anotheranonymousBolognese dictator}1
As Wittand manyothersbeforehim have shown,thisconflictis vividly
portrayedin the writingsof the eminentBologneseprofessorof rhetoric,
Boncompagno da Signa (c. 1165-c. 1240). First,Boncompagno declares
thathe had neverimitatedCicero nor indeed everlecturedon him. Then
13R. Black,
Tradition
andInnovation
inMedieval
andRenaissance
Humanism
andEducation
Italy.
theTwelfih
totheFifteenth
inLatin
Schools
2001,186-92.
, Cambridge
Century
from
14Black2001(<
MediceaLaurenziana
Biblioteca
., above,n. 13),190-1(Florence
op.cit
Pluteo64.18and76.23).
15Wieruszowski
1971(op.cit
., above,n. 9), 390.
16A. Montiverdi,
italiani
in: Dizionario
s.v.Arrigo
da Settimello,
, Rome
biografico
degli
vol.4, 315.
1960-,
17Witt1988{op.cit.,
andthedefense
above,n. 8),43 and65,nn.64-6;id.,Boncompagno
of
16 (1986),4-5.
andRenaissance
ofMedieval
rhetoric
Studies,
, in:TheJournal

15:25:32 PM

RONALD
WITT'S(LNTHEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'

279

he goes on to reject his predecessors'methodsof teachingthe ars dictaminis

, accusing them of too much reliance on the ancients:of the traditional five parts of the letter,only three were actuallyessential;if this
was against the doctrineof the ancients,then theirteachingshad been
useless and damaging. He derides the methodsof writinglettersbefore
his day: mastershad spenthuge amountsof time adorningtheirepistles
withvivid displaysof verbiageand learned quotationsfromthe authors,
who were believed to providethe seal of approval fortheirliteraryproductions.He even criticizesCicero's theoryas inept and self-contradictory.He saysthathe was reprimandedforrejectingthe traditional
practice
of padding his prose with classical quotations(proverbia
) and ratifiedterminology,complainingthat he was derided for lackinga knowledgeof
Latin literature{litter
atur
a), and for drawingexamples fromthe present
At
the
turn
of the thirteenth
day.
century,the school of Orlans was particularlyassociatedwiththe traditionalstudyof the classicalauthors,and
Boncompagno accuses his academic opponentsof too much indulgence
in Aurelianism.18
What is crucial here is the geographicalcontextof thisbattleforand
againstthe ancientauthors.Wittseems to assume thatthe source of classicismwas France,whichhe sees as now challengingtime-honoured
Italian
rhetorical
But
this
constitutes
a
non-classicizing
practices.19
only partial
too is thefactthatBoncompagno
readingof Boncompagno'stexts.Important
presentshimselfas an innovator,revisingthe methodsof his predecessors, to whom he constantlyrefers.The pictureof rhetoricalhistoryas
presentedby Boncompagno is that he was attemptingto replace traditionalclassicalteachingas hithertopractisedin Italy;thesetime-honoured
methodshad been sanctionedand reinforcedby the authorityand presas an
tige of the school of Orlans. Boncompagno's self-advertisement
innovatorand a radical would be difficult
to understandif Witt's view
of Italian educationas dominatedby the ars dictaminis
in the twelfth
cenin
turywere the whole picture.In fact,as a resultof the rise of dictamen
the twelfthcentury,culminatingwith Boncompagno in the early thirteenth,traditionalItalian educators,whose approach may have been reinforcedby Orlanistdictatores
now feltthreatened
workingin thepapal curia,20
and so attackedBoncompagno as the leading representative
of the non18Fortextual
seeBlack2001(<
references,
., above,n. 13),192-3;seealsoWitt1986
op.cit
., above,n. 17),passim.
(iop.cit
19Witt1988((op.cit
., above,n. 8),45.
20Witt1986(op.cit.,
above,n. 17),7-8,n. 16.

15:25:32 PM

280

ROBERTBLACK

in response,he presentedhimselfas the leader

classicaltypeof rhetoric;21
of the educational innovatorsand radicals, singlingout the school of
Orlans as the bastion of traditionalclassicism.Boncompagnoin fact is
the traditionalauthor-basedapproach to grammarand rhetoric
criticizing
which had long been practisedin Italian ecclesiasticalschools and which
he now wanted to displace with a more rigidlypracticaltraining.The
factthatBoncompagnostrodeforthas a modernizeronto the Italian educational scene must mean that therehad been a traditionaleducational
in
establishment
long in existencewhen he was writing.The reformers
Italian educationat the turnof the thirteenth
centurywere not the advocates of Orlanismso much as Boncompagno,Bene da Firenzeor Guido
Fava, who were displacingthe traditionalclassicallybased educational
approach of medieval Italy (and France).
Boncompagno'spolemics show that classicismexistedin Italian education at the end of the twelfthcentury,but one has to wonderwhether
thistendencywas whollyor even mainlyimportedfromFrance. Geoffrey
of Vinsauf'sverse textbookon rhetoric,datable between 1208 and 1213,
may reflectpossible teachingactivityin Italy; moreover,it was the most
influentialtreatiseon rhetoricalstylein Italian schools fromthe time of
its publicationto the end of the fifteenth
century.But the kind of style
he taughthad nothingto do with classicalprose, but ratherrepresented
associatedwiththe practiceof the arsdican abstractelegance,intimately
indeed,Geoffrey
taminis;22
quoted no classicalexamplesin his work.Henry
of Settimello'sfamouselegyis the mostsignificant
piece of neo-classicizing
Latin poetrywrittenin ItalybeforeLovati and the emergenceof Paduan
humanism.It shows the directinfluenceof both Ovid's poetryof exile
Echoes of Vergil and Horace are also
as well as of Boethius'sConsolation.
to the classicalworld,whilebiblical
references
are
countless
there
evident;
allusionsare rare. Henry'sstoicphilosophyis possiblyinspiredby Seneca.
relevantis thatHenrywas drwnto the FrenchLatin
What is particularly
of
the
twelfth
century,such as Walter of Chtillon,Alain of Lille
poets
eccentricites
and MatthewofVendme,whosepoetictechniquesand stylistic
thisFrench
was
drawn
to
is
how
The
he appropriated.23 question
Henry
material.Witt supposes that the 'communicationbetween France and
intensein theseyears,because Walter's
Bologna musthave been relatively
borrowed
which
from
Alexandras
purpose,
,
generouslyfor stylistic
Henry
21ForBoncompagno's
seeWitt1986(op.cit
traditionalist
., above,n. 17),1,n. 1.
critics,
22Black2001{op.cit.,
above,n. 13),342-9.
23Montiverdi
above,n. 16),315-6.
(op.cit.,

15:25:32 PM

THEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'
RONALD
WITT'S<LN

281

had been composedonlyabout a decade beforetheElegiaitself'.24

However,
it seems unlikelythat Henry came into contactwiththistextat Bologna,
where he had been a student:afterhis studentdays Henry rose up the
ecclesiasticalhierarchy,onlyto be deprivedof an importantpost,possibly
by the Bishop of Florence a loss which provided the stimulusfor his
poem.25If the date of the Elegy(1 193), writtenin the wake of his displacementfromhighecclesiasticaloffice,is takenintoaccount,Henryhad probablyleftBologna to workin the diocese of Florencebeforethe composition
ofAlexandras
(1 182). Moreover,Henry'sknowledgeof Frenchpoetryseems
to have been unique in Italy during the twelfthand earlier thirteenth
century:as Witt declares,'Henryjoined the Frenchpoets in influencing
a second Italian writer,Stefanardodi Vimercate,whose De controversia
hominis
etfortunae
[ca. 1265] reflectsboth the manneriststyleand French
With only Henry and Stefanardo(d. 1297), one
concerns.
philosophical
Instead of evidence for the
can hardlyspeak of a literarymovement'.26
1180, Henryof Settimello
influx
of
French
classicism
on
after
major
Italy
is the proverbialexceptionto the rule. CommuncationbetweenBologna
and France cannot have been intensein thisperiod,if Henryis the only
example of Gallic neo-classicismbeforeStefanardo.
Witt is rightto identifythe presence of French classicismin Italy in
the secondhalfof the twelfth
of Orlanism
century:thereis thepenetration
into the papal chancery,the evidence of Henry'sElegyand, most important,the testimonyof Boncompagno. But it seems unconvincingto me
that thistendencycould have been transplantedonto barrenItalian soil;
indeed Witthimselfgivesevidenceforcontinuedclassicalstudyin twelfthcenturyItaly:
in thetwelfth
of course,
one encounters
instances
of some
Occasionally
century,
oftheancient
in northern
writers
andcentral
knowledge
Italy.PaulofCamaldoli's
in thelasthalfofthecentury27
Introductiones
written
. . . indicates
Paul'sacquaintance
withthestandard
Latinpoets.[Thereis also]a twelfth-century
Italiancommentary
on theDe inventione
. . .28
24Witt1988(op.cit
., above,n. 8),49.
25Montiverdi
above,n. 16),315.
(op.cit.,
26Witt1988(iop.cit
., above,n. 8),49.
27LeIntroductiones
diPaoloCamaldolese
dictandi
inedito
delsec.XIIex.),ed.V. Sivo,
(testo
in: Studie ricerche
dell'Istituto
di Latino,3 (1980),69-100.See alsoLe Introductiones
de notitia
versificando
diPaoloCamaldolese
inedito
delxec.XII ex.),ed.V. Sivo,in:Studi
(testo
e ricerche
dell'Istituto
di civilt
classica
cristiana
5 (1982),119-49.
medievale,
28G. C. Alessio,
Brunetto
Latini
e Cicerone
in:Italiamedievale
e umanistica,
(e i dettatori),
22 (1979),125-6,citedbyWitt1988(op.cit.,
are
above,n. 8), 66, n. 71. The following
somefurther
Italiancommented
ofCiceronian
rhetorical
texts
twelfth-century
manuscripts

15:25:32 PM

282

ROBERTBLACK

Indeed, accordingto Otto of Freisingthe Lombards in the firsthalf of

the twelfth
century'retainthe elegance of the Latin language.'29A more
is thatindigenousItalian classicalgrammaticalstudies,
crediblehypothesis
French
in ecclesiastical
concentrated
schools,werestimulated
by thisimported
classicism,producinga work such as Henry's Elegyand Boncompagno's
Italian schoolbooksof
radicallynegativereaction.The 41 twelfth-century
classical Latin authors that I have been able to identifyin Florentine
these are explicittesFrenchinfluence;30
librariesshow no contemporary
traditionin the
and
Italian
an
to
grammatical
indigenous
thriving
timony
twelfthcentury.
Wittis correctto highlightFrenchinfluenceon Italy fromthe end of
the twelfth
century,but the principalimportwas not classicism.The burItalian
clerical,notarial,legal and academic classes
administrative,
geoning
methodsof artificial
slowtraditional
withthepainfully
could not be satisfied
immersionin the authors;these were aspiringprofessionalswith careers
and rising
to pursue and quickerprogresswas needed. The ars dictaminis
a
twelfth
the
studies
of
centuryrepresented practical
Italy during
legal
and professionalacademic direction,requiringa correspondingly
pragmatic and simplifiedunderpinningin Latin at the secondarylevel. This
was providedby the new Parisianlogical school of grammar,developed
by teacherssuch as William of Conches and particularlyPetrusHelias.
This systematicand logical approach to language, as created by the
Parisiangrammarians,did not remainan esotericbranch
twelfth-century
of higherlearningin the middle ages; on the contrary,it was brought
down to the humblerlevelsof the educationalhierarchyin the mostdeciPluteo50.7
Biblioteca
MediceaLaurenziana,
libraries:
in Florentine
thatI haveidentified
Medicea
ad Herennium
Rhetorica
), glossed
bya later12thc. hand;Biblioteca
(Deinventione,
in a
written
adHerennium
Pluteo50.10(Deinventione
, Topica
, Rhetorica
Laurenziana,
), partly
in Caroline
minuscule
hand(11/12th
Beneventan
(12thc.),with12thc. glosses
c.),partly
MediceaLaurenziana,
ofDe inventione
to thebeginning
in Caroline
minuscule
; Biblioteca
first
ad Herennium
Rhetorica
Pluteo50.43(Deinventione,
half,central
Italy,
), 12thc. possibly
unidentified
a hitherto
toDe inventione
with12thc. glosses
(thisms.contains
bythescribe
visible
ofPoggio,
exlibris
light:[fol.86r]LiberPoggii
onlyunderultraviolet
autograph
sec.'ap. Fl. 1 Ir.L. 2. S. 16 [thecostofthebookis addedbya latercursive
hand]);
ad
Rhetorica
VI.175(Deinventione,
Nazionale
Biblioteca
Centrale,
Florence,
Magliabechiano
12thc. glosses.
Herennium
), withsomepossible
29Tr. from
inJ. B.
Chroniclers
Fideri
Gesta
, andreprinted
ofItaly
Early
byU. Balzani,
Reader
Medieval
RossandM. McLaughlin
, NewYork1949,281.
(eds),ThePortable
30TheonlyFrench
ofgramI havebeenabletoseeinthesebooksis a series
influence
ofplace,usingFrench
casesofnounsandadverbs
on changing
matical
exercises
place
on Horace,butthesedatefrom
verseglosses
to someFrench
namesandcorresponding
seeBlack2001(op.cit
thesecondhalfofthethirteenth
., above,n. 13),189,n. 91.
century:

15:25:32 PM

WITT'S'INTHEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'
RONALD

283

sive imaginable manner at the very turn of the thirteenthcentury.In

' 11
99, Alexander of Villedieu composed what must be one of the most
influentialand innovatoryworks in the historyof education: Doctrinale.
One aim of thistextbookwas to providea practicalsubstitute
forPriscian's
had a further
in
a numberof
Institutiones.
Doctrinale
common
with
purpose
otherworkscomposedat theturnof thethirteenth
thedisplacement
century:
of the Roman classicsfromthe school curriculum.This was not only an
but also of Alexander'sEcclesiale
, where he
explicitobjectiveof Doctrinale
a
as
declared
of
the
school
of
famous
forits
Orlans,
emerged
opponent
classicism.Alexander'santi-classicism
not only indicateda new direction
for the literaryside of the curriculumbut also a new approach to the
teachingof syntaxin the classroom:the traditionalmethodof immersion
in the authorswas to be put to one side, and replacedby grammarbased
on logic and philosophy.Alexanderemergesnot only as the arch-enemy
of Orlans but also as the championof the new philosophy'shome, Paris,
where he had himselfstudied.31
and the othergreatFrenchverse grammar,Evrard
AlthoughDoctrinale
of Bthune's Graecismus
(1216), were both northernFrench works,they
reached Italian schools rapidlyin the thirteenth
century.Conclusiveevidence here comes fromItalian grammarswrittenin the thirteenth
cenPietroda Isolella'sSumma
contains
, datableto the thirteenth
tury.32
century,
materialtakenfromDoctrinale
and Graecismus
, as does Giovannida Genoa's
33
Catholicon
, completedin 1286. Most important,
however,is the testimony
of the PiedmontesegrammarianMayfredodi Belmonte,who in 1225
, in imicomposed a grammarin Vercelli,givingit the tide of Doctrinale
tationof and homage to Alexanderof Villedieu.34This new styleParisian
to the congrammarimportedto Italy correspondsin its anti-classicism
anti-classical
Italian
ars
dictaminis
of
temporary
Boncompagno,Bene da
Firenze and Guido Fava of the earlierthirteenth
century.
The earlythirteenth
not
a
centuryrepresented
period of slowlyrising
classicismin Italy,but the collapse of traditionalItalian classicallybased
secondaryeducation. An indicationof the spin-offon the school curriculumfromthe professionaldirectionof Italian highereducationcomes
in a renownedFrenchtextof the earlythirteenth
Henri d'Andeli's
century,
La batailledes.VII. ars: among the forcesranged againstgrammarand the
31Fortextual
seeBlack2001(<
references,
., above,n. 13),74-5.
op.cit
32Black2001(op.cit.,
above,n. 13),82-3.
33Black2001(op.cit.,
above,n. 13),83-4.
34Black2001(op.cit.,
above,n. 13),55,n. 131.

15:25:32 PM

284

ROBERTBLACK

The Lombards
authorsis rhetoric,marshallingmany Lombard knights.35
rhetoric
rode
with
dialectic,
following
together
wounding many honest
enemiesfromthe authorialcamp.36The authorsare now abandoned in
are removed from grammar'sjurisdiction.
France; artistiand canonisti
Bretonsand Germansstillare undergrammar'ssway,but grammarwould
be throttledby the Lombards,given the chance.37
This collapseof classicaleducationin thirteenth-century
Italyis confirmed
by my recentlypublishedsurveyof schoolbooksnow housed in Florentine
libraries.In comparisonwiththe 41 manuscriptsof classicalLatin authors
Italy,the figurefor the next
produced as schoolbooksin twelfth-century
to
a
total
of
10.38
This
only
pattern,to some extent,mircenturydrops
rorsthe drop in overallnumbersof classicalmanuscriptsbeing produced
in Europe as a whole in the thirteenth
but the extremityof
century,39
catthe fallsuggeststhatthe shiftaway fromthe classicswas particularly
in
Italian
schools
of
the
Duecento.
aclysmic
While emphasizingthe impactof Frenchclassicismon Italyafter1180,
Witthimselfprovidesevidenceat the same timethatclassicalstudieswere
in decline in Italy duringthe firsthalf of the thirteenth
century:
on an ancient
thesurest
Thatno Italiancommentary
author,
signthattheancient
to theperiod1190to students,
candefinitely
be assigned
author
wasbeingtaught
weretaught
theancient
works
ofhowextensively
1250,raisesthequestion
literary
evenafter1190,andevenin Bologna.
(35)
Indeed, in place of the authorstherenow burgeonedpracticalmanuals
forthe studyof secondaryLatin in thirteenth-century
Italy,a genrewhich
had hardlybeforeexistedsouth of the Alps. The thirteenth
centurysaw
the firstgreat floweringof Italian grammaticalstudies;this was also a
period in whichmany copies were made in Italy of Alexander'sDoctrinale
In some sense,the lattertwo workscame to serve
and Evrard'sGraecismns.
a dual purpose in thirteenth-century
Italy: on the one hand, theyreinforcedpreviousgrammaticali
knowledge,providingrules and listsin an
memorized
verse
format;on the other,theyprovideda typeof subeasily
stitutefor the study of the authors themselves,and were accordingly
35TheBattle
Andeli
A French
Arts.
, ed. L. Paetow,
Berkeley
byHenry
poem
oftheSeven
1914,43,w. 68-9.
36Ed. Paetow,
51,w. 224-5,228-9.
37Ed. Paetow,
60,w. 444-9.
38Black2001(op.cit.,
above,n. 13),192.
39See L. Reynolds
a dropof
andTransmission
1983,XXVII,giving
, Oxford
(ed.),Texts
citedin thebook(from
280to 140)between
ofmanuscripts
number
50% in theoverall
XIIc. andXIIIc.

15:25:32 PM

RONALD
WITT'S'INTHEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'

285

glossedrepeatedlyin the traditionalschool manner,as soon as theymade

theirappearance in Italy.
If collapsing,not rising,classicismwas the prevailingcultureof Italian
education in the early thirteenth
century,how then can the emergence
ofhumanismbeginning
withLovatolaterin thatsame century
be explained?
Here Witt'sfocuson the rise of Provenaland vernacularpoetryin early
thirteenth-century
Italy is crucial. This period is famous for the rise of
the Italianvernacular,and thismovementcorrespondsexactlyto the anticlassicismcharacteristic
of Italiangrammarand rhetoricteachingin schools
and universities
at the same time.What Lovato's humanismrepresented
was a reactionagainst the overwhelminganti-classicism
of the preceedas
vernacular
and
Provenalpoetry:
ing generations, typifiedby
LovatodeiLovati
. . . implied
thatthepopularity
ofvernacular
him
poetry
spurred
towrite
Latinpoetry
outofa spirit
ofcompetition.
in a letter
So he suggested
that
he wrote
about1290to hisfriend,
Bellino
a Latinpoetwho,perhaps
Bissolo,
only
forthepurpose
of argument,
was apparently
to champion
thevernacular
willing
Lovato's
criticisms.
LovatotoldBellino
... hehadcomeacross
a singer
. . . 'belagainst
thebattles
ofCharlemagne
andFrench
in French,
in barlowing
exploits'
'gaping
barous
them
outas hepleased,
intheir
nopartofthem
fashion,
order,
rolling
proper
on no effort'.
thelisteners
hadhungon every
word.
Nevertheless,
songsrelying
Whilerecognizing
thewisdom
ofmaintaining
themiddle
coursebetween
writing
verses
forthefewandforthemany,
Lovatodeclared
that'ifyoumusterron one
. . . The obvious
reference
herewasto his
side,it shouldbe on thesideofdaring'
intention
to write
in Latinas opposed
hispoetry
to thevernacular:
Do youdespise
him[thecourageous
thatonemustfolpoet]becausehe believes
lowinthefootsteps
oftheancient
vatum
poets(veterum
vestigia
) ... I won'tchange
my
mind.I standfast,
as is myhabit,
andI won'tcorrect
theviceofmylongdisease.
Thisletter
ofca. 1290conveys
theelitism
ofLovato,
wholookeddownon vernacularliterature
as inferior
to Latin. . . Although
theimmediate
was
antagonist
- Provenal
- givenLovato's
French
status
poetry
poetry
commonly
enjoyed
higher
totheveterum
vatum
canbe nodoubtthatheconsidered
, there
loyalty
vestigia
Provenal
alsoinferior
to Latinverse.Moregenerally,
theletter
indicates
thecreative
poetry
tension
between
vernacular
andLatinpoetry
at thedawnofhumanism
andinjects
an element
ofcompetition
intothemixture
ofcausesleading
to theriseofa new
Latinpoetry
around1250.(53-4)
In short,I agree withWittthattherewas a thrivingclassicalgrammatical
cultureprevalentin Italian ecclesiasticalschools untilthe twelfth
century.
However, fromthat point I believe the evidence does not substantiate
Witt'spictureof a rapid decline in classical education in Italy nor of a
collapseof ecclesiasticalgrammarschoolsthereduringthe twelfth
century.
On the contrary,the evidence suggeststo me a coexistenceduringthe
twelfth
centuryof a classicallybased grammareducationin ecclesiastical
schools togetherwith a risingnon-classicaleducation focusedon the ars
dictaminis
and professionalstudy.At the turn of the thirteenth
century,

15:25:32 PM

286

ROBERTBLACK

these two conflictingapproaches openly clashed, as is clear from the

polemicsof Boncompagno.The practical,non-classicalemphasisquickly
prevailed,bolsteredas it was by the nascentuniversities,
by the influxof
new streamlinedFrench-style
methods
and by the rise
grammarteaching
of the vernacular.I do agree with Witt that Lovato's humanismwas a
reaction,one, however,which was not just against the vernacularbut
also opposed to the anti-classicism
of the entire'secolo senza Roma', to
or
'l'exil
des
belles
lettres',in the words of Gilson.41
quote Toffanin,40
* * *
Just as Witt'spictureof the culturalambience in which humanismwas
born seems to require revision,so too does his view of the educational
contextin which early humanismgrew.Accordingto Witt
itseems
thatbythemiddle
decades
ofthethirteenth
courses
likely
century,
university
in ancient
literature
werebeingoffered
at bothPaduaandBologna,
andperhaps
alsoat Arezzo.(89)
It is correctto suggestthattherewas a minimalamountof classicsteaching subsistingin thirteenth-century
Italy. This is confirmedby Witt'sreference to a commentaryon Persius made at Bergamo in 1253 and a
copy of Horace, used as a Schoolbookin Treviso duringthe second half
of the thirteenth
century.(89-90) Moreover,it has been knownformore
than fiftyyears that Geri d'Arezzo read Terence at school in Arezzo
probablyduringthe 1280s.42None of thesescatteredpieces evidencecontradictsthe view that the studyof the classicshad drasticallydeclinedin
Italy since the thirteenthcentury,substantiatedas it is by direct conand by myrecentsurveyof schoolbooksin Florentine
temporary
testimony
libraries.Indeed, Wittseems at timesto supportthisview, declaringthat
'most of the earliestItalian humanistswere autodidactsas far as classical literaturewas concerned' (133), although he does not seem to be
entirelysure about this point, statingas well that 'the young Lovato
profitedin the 1250s and 1260s fromthe revivalof formalstudyof the
ancienttextsin the studioof Padua' (95).
In fact,Witt'spersuasiveand perceptivediscussionof Dante's earlyeduin favourof the view that therewas mincation offersfurthertestimony
imal teachingof the classicsin thirteenth-century
Italiangrammarschools:
40II secolo
dalXIIIalXVIsecolo
1933.
Roma
dell'umanesimo
senza
, CittdiCastello
, inhisStoria
41E. Gilson,
Paris1962,400-12.
auMoyen
ge,
Philosophie
42R. Weiss,
e testi
Il primo
secolo
dell'Umanesimo:
Studi
, Rome1949,128.

15:25:32 PM

RONALD
WITT'S(LNTHEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'

287

We knownothing
aboutDante'searlyeducation
otherthanthatLatinicouldhave
beenhisgrammar-school
master.
Whether
or notthiswasthecase,Latini'sown
on intermediary
sources
forhisfrequent
references
to ancient
dependence
poetsin
theTresor
underlines
thegeneral
ofthosepoetsin Florentine
lifeand
neglect
literary
ifDantewasLatini's
makes
itprobable
ancient
that,
pupil,thenDantedidnotstudy
in grammar
school
...
poetry
in developing
absorbed
hiscreative
talents
in composing
vernacular
Passionately
Dantehimself
laterimplied
inJune1290,
that,untilthedeathofBeatrice
poetry,
whenhe hadbeenin hismidtwenties,
he hadhadlittle
needforotherintellectual
stimulation.
Overwhelmed
itwasthen,
he tellsus in Convivio
thathe
11.12,
bygrief,
turned
toBoethius's
De consoatione
andCicero's
De amicitia.
Butheencounphilsophiae
in reading
tereddifficulty
theLatin:
"andit happened
thatfirst
it wasdifficult
forme to understand
theirmeaning,
I entered
butfinally
intoitas faras I couldwiththegrammar
[i.e.Latin]I had
anda little
ofmynative
(214-5).
insight"
Witt's picture of Dante's weak Latin education in thirteenth-century
Florenceis echoed by PatrickBoyde, who, as paraphrasedby Witt,
divides
Dante'seducation
into'twoages,'in thefirst
ofwhichhe waspassionately
devoted
tovernacular
In thefiveyearsafter
thedeathofBeatrice,
heentered
poetry.
intothe'second
andcontemplation
. . . was
age,'whenhecametoseethat'speculation
man'shighest
. . .' Boydeidentifies
histurning
forconsolation
to Cicero's
De
activity
amicitia
andBoethius's
De consoatione
as thefirst
philosophiae
phaseofthe'second
age'.
(216,n. 124)
In my view, Witt,moreover,has successfully
cleared up the interpretativeproblemsinvolvedin Dante's referenceto his 'lungo studio'of Vergil
in Inferno
I, 82-83, by referenceto FrancescoBarberino'sview,articulated
in 1313-15,thatthis'lungo studio'may have meantthathe 'made notable
progressin his studyin a shorttime' (220).
What is unclearis whetherthisminimalteachingof the classicsoccurred
at the level of higheror post-secondary
education.In townssuch Arezzo,
and
Padua, secondarygrammarteachingwas supervisedby the
Bologna
universityauthorities;this practice goes back to the thirteenth
century,
and is evident,for example, in the famousAretineuniversity
statutesof
1255.43But this university
umbrelladoes not mean that the teachingof
classical authorswas not at the secondarylevel, intendedprimarilyto
completethe educationof grammarschool boys. The firstdocumentsof
a university
to read classicalauthorsis Giovannidel Virgilio's
appointment
at Bologna in 1321 to teach Vergil, Statius,Lucan and Ovid; the election was made by the commune of Bologna and thereis no mentionof
the Studiumor university.Giovanni was simply appointed along with
BertolinoBenincasa, the latterto teach rhetoric.It would be misleading
43See most
Black1996(op.cit
., above,n. 9), 184-5.
recently,

15:25:32 PM

288

ROBERTBLACK

to argue thatthisappointment
was therefore
independentof the university,
as Bologna was of course the seat of one of Europe's greateststudiageneratici.
On the otherhand, the authorswere not normallyincludedin the
universitycurriculumin Italy until the fifteenth
century;Giovanni del
here
would
constitute
an
uncharacteristic
Virgilio'sactivity
example in
the Trecento,especiallygiventhathis teachingdutiesin Bologna weresaid
to include rhetoricin a subsequentdocument.It could be argued that,
ratherthan a university-level
appointment,his post at Bologna resembled
the workof a communalgrammarteacherand auctorista
, who also taught
the authorsand rhetoricto more advanced pupils,like,forexample,Nofri
di Giovannida Poggitazziat Colle Valdelsa in 1382, who 'leggieVergilio,
Lucano et tuctialtori,rector[ic]a et anche lo Dante, a chi volesseudirlo'.44
Wittgoes on to suggestthat therewas littleteachingof the classicsat
the grammarschool level in centraland northernItalybeforethe end of
the fourteenth
century(195-7). I have no doubt that this view is incoras
there
is
substantialevidence showingthat the revivalof the clasrect,
sics in Italian grammarschoolsgoes back to the earlyfourteenth
century.
In a late twelfth-century
manuscript of Lucan (Biblioteca Medicea
hand (not very late)
Laurenziana, Pluteo 35.15), a fourteenth-century
rewrotethe originaltext and cleaned all the parchment,includingthe
numerousnotes of possessionat the end of the manuscript:one of these
erased ownershipnotes was 'Iste Lucanus est <. . . e>lis <. . .> Magisti
Andree', suggestingthe usual formula'morantisin scholismagisti';previouslythe book seems to have belonged to Maestro Andrea himself,
judging fromanothernote on lr: 'Lucanus MagistiAndree'. In another
Lucan, this time copied in the thirteenthcentury(Florence,Biblioteca
Riccardiana,546), thereare a numberof erased notes of possession,one
of whichspeaksof 'morantisin sc<. . .>' (1 13v); thesenotesmustgo back
to the fairlyearly Trecento,because theywere covered by seven verses
writtenin cancelleresca
script,datable no later than the thirdquarter of
the fourteenth
century.In a manuscriptof Ovid, copied at the end of
the twelfth
century(BibliotecaMedicea Laurenziana,Pluteo 36.14), a note
of possessionon the finalfolio referring
to MaestroJacopo da Vigevano
century.A Sallustcopied
may even go back to the end of the thirteenth
in the twelfthcentury(Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Pluteo 89 inf.
,45who left
20.2) was later owned by a lawyercalled Ognibene de Vedrotis
44Black2001(op.cit.,
above,n. 13),201-2.
45Fol.64v:Explicit
iudicis.
D. Ugnibeni
de Vedrotis
liberSalustii

15:25:32 PM

THEFOOTSTEPS
RONALD
WITT'SCIN
OFTHEANCIENTS'

289

not only ricordi

of his various professionalactivitiesin 1349, 1351 and
1352 (2v, 9v), includinga period as a judicial rectorin Pescia but also
this possible indicationof his own schooldays:'Require illud modicum
istiusprimilibriin librotuo Apostilorum
dominidey,et principiumsecundi
libriin DonatoMagistiGuiardi optimiprofessoris.'(32v)46This annotationrefersto theteachingof earlyhumanist,
MaestroGuizardoda Bologna,
who taughtin his native cityfrom 1289 to 1319 as well as in Florence
from 1321 to 1322; it is possible that this Sallust came to Ognibene in
the contextof Guizardo's teaching.There is also a clear North Italian,
Lombard school Sallust in Florence (Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana,
Ashburnham900), datingfromthe earlyfourteenth
centuryand bearing
the followinglate-Trecentonote of possession:'Est Marcholi de Pergamo
qui legit in iscola Magisti<Bar>tolomei de Magna' (13v),47as well as
BibliotecaMedicea Laurenziana, Pluteo 36.5, a compositeMetamorphoses
and at the turnof the fourteenth
copied in the thirteenth
century(212r:
Liber MagistiPeregrinide Pisis). Other earlyfourteenth-century
schoolbooks include a Horace (BibliotecaMedicea Laurenziana, Pluteo 34.22)
and a ValeriusMaximus (BibliotecaMedicea Laurenziana,Pluteo 63.28).
Particularlyproblematicis Witt'sview that in Florence the 'firstlevel
of education was designed to provide studentswith trainingin reading
and writingtheirown language' (194), arguing'for the formalteaching
of the vernacularin Florentineschools' (193, n. 74). I am certainthat
the vernacularwas not used at what mustseem to us as the most obvious point in the curriculum:the elementarystages of learningto read.
All survivingelementaryreading texts from Italy before 1500 are in
Latin.48It may have been educationallyproblematic,if not impossible,to
teach basic readingtechniquein a language withoutany fixedorthograbeforethe sixteenthcentury.Indeed, in
phy, such as the Italian volgare
the middleages and earlyRenaissance,Latin was regardedas an artificial,
created,unchanginglanguage, an ars suitablefor teaching,whereas the
vulgarlanguageswere regardedas changeable,unstable,and literallyas
formsof babble,49learnt naturallybut formallyunteachable; only with
triumphof the humanistview of Latin as itselfa natural, historically
46Thisannotation,
at endoftheincomplete
BC andacephalous
coming
BJ, indicates
where
tofindthemissing
passages.
47Fol. 12v:Marcoloidentifies
himself
as sonof'DominiMichaelis
de Pergamo'.
48See Black2001
above,n. 13),41-2.
(op.cit.,
49On changing
ofLatinandvernacular
inthemiddle
conceptions
agesandRenaissance,
seetheimportant
il latino
e il volgare
study
byS. Rizzo,Petrarca,
, in: Studipetrarcheschi,
andbibliography.
(1990),8-40,whocitesa widerangeoftexts

15:25:32 PM

290

ROBERTBLACK

changinglanguage in the sixteenthcenturycould it become conceivable

to teach fundamentallanguage skillsin the vernacular medium. It is
of ars
importantto rememberthe close association,even identification,
and teachingin the middle ages; Latin was teachable preciselybecause
it was consideredan artificiallanguage,whereas teachingthe vernacular
not an ars.A parwas inconceivablebecause it was natural,not artificial,
indicationof exclusivelyLatinate elementaryeducaticularlysignificant
tion,moreover,is the progressivestructureof the elementarycurriculum.
CurriculumoutlinesthroughoutItaly specifya similarsyllabusprogressing fromtable to psalterto Donatus. The elementarycurriculumwould
make littlesense if vernaculardevotionaltexts,for example, the seven
penitentialpsalms,had been insertedas a preparationto read a demanding elementaryLatin worksuch as Ianua. The factthatvernacularprayers
thatthesewere texts
and psalmsexistin manuscriptin no way indicates50
used to learn reading:an accuratereadingof the MargheritaDatini's letter to her husband Francesco about the early readingof theirdaughter
Tina at the turnof the fifteenth
century,suggestingthatthe sevenpsalms
were no longersynonymouswiththe psalterby the turnof the fifteenth
century,is concreteevidencethatcollectionsof the sevenpsalms,whether
in the vernacularor in Latin, were not used as psaltersto teach reading.51The evidenceforan entirelylatinatereadingsyllabusin fourteenth
seems conclusive.52
and fifteenth-century
Italy,therefore,
50As suggested
Florence
Art.Grammar,
andculture
inTrecento
,
society,
byP. Gehl,A Moral
in
areknown
IthacaN.Y. 1993,36: 'penetential
, forexample,
psalmsin Tuscanvolgare
ofItalian
thefirst
andwouldbe among
presses
printing
popular
products
many
manuscripts
forbeginhavethought
ituseful
masters
wouldsurely
andwriting
in the1470s.Reading
in thevernacular'.
nersto learnto readsuchtexts
51See Black2001(<
., above,n. 13),38-9.
op.t
52Nevertheless,
cenGehl1993(<
., above,n. 50),32,saysthat,forthefourteenth
op.cit
inthevernacular
butinconis sketchy
wasentirely
thatsomeschooling
the'evidence
tury,
attheCrossroads:
Hercules
a document
as evidence
Witt,
trovertible',
byRonald
published
citing
the
N.C. 1983,31,n. 13regarding
Salutati
TheLife,
andThought
, Durham
Works,
ofColuccio
in 1372:'[thecommune]
in Buggiano
communal
schoolmaster
possit
proeiussalariosibi
libros
libros
si docebit
et,si nondoceret
stantiare,
gramaticam,
quinquaginta
gramaticam,
, 31, takesthispassageto meanthat'localschoolmasters
Witt,Hercules
vigintiquinque.'
often
didnotknowLatin'.Gehl'sinterpretation,
32-3,
bytheseruralcommunes
employed
fora stipend
statutes
is: '[...] in thecaseoftheBuggiano
provided
[. . .] thecityfathers
and25 lireiftheonlyoneavailwhocouldteachgrammatica
of50 lirefora schoolmaster
but
whocouldnotteachgrammatica
suchinstruction
ablecouldnotoffer
[. . .] Themaster
in Latin.'A moreaccurate
notteaching
weissurely
andwriting
whocouldteachreading
to him[namely,
can authorize
oftheLatintextis: [thecommune]
translation
payment
of50 lire,andifhe werenotteaching
ifhe willteachgrammar,
theteacher],
grammar,
wouldbe paidaccordlire.Gehltakesthepassageto meanthata teacher
oftwenty-five
moreifhe knewLatin,lessifnot.Butsincethetextis notabout
ingto hisabilities:

15:25:32 PM

OFTHEANCIENTS'
WITT'S'INTHEFOOTSTEPS
RONALD

291

Witthas continuedto argue in favourof the vernacular

Nevertheless,
as a mediumforteachingreadingin earlyRenaissanceFlorence,53
putting
forwardthreepossiblepieces of concreteevidence. Firstly,he notes that
some vernacularversionsof the Latin classics 'appear in manuscriptsas
if theywere used forteachingpurposes,withthe textin the middle and
commentariesand notes in the wide marginsor between the lines'.54
Secondly,he saysthat'Florentinevernacularverseson the ABCs ascribed
to a certainGuidottoexistforthe fourteenth
century,suggestinga direct
in the tavola
:'.55Thirdly,he pointsto a collectionof
linkwithinstruction
vernaculartexts(BibliotecaMedicea Laurenziana,Gaddi 193) which'served
as a vernacularparallel to shortLatin textssuch as the Disticha[Catonis]
56used at the
and Dittochaeon
grammarschoollevel' (103).57I remainunconvinced. Firstly,translatedcommentariessometimesaccompanied Latin
texts(e.g. excerptsfromWilliam of Conches's commentaryon Boethius
were translated and copied into the margins of Biblioteca Medicea
do not seem to have
Laurenziana,Pluteo 23 dxt. 11)58but the translations
been used for teaching.59Commentarieswere mechanicallytranslated
along with textsfrom commentatedLatin versions(see e.g. Biblioteca
Riccardiana, 1338 (translationof Henry of Settimello,Elegia)84v ff.)but
thiskind of vernacularmechanicaltranslationof textsdoes not indicate
teachingor a school context,any more than the mechanicalcopyingof
Latin commentaries.Secondly, Maestro Guidotto's alphabetic rhyming
couplets(foranotherms. not mentionedby Witt,see Florence,Biblioteca
Nazionale Centrale,II. 11.68, 239r-v)call to mind the opposite of reading in the vernacular:oral, not written,teachingof the alphabet (a type
of alphabeticnurseryrhyming).Thirdly,as Witt acknowledges,the text
of BibliotecaMedicea Laurenziana, Gaddi 193 cannot itselfbe a schoolbook, giventhatit is writtenin mercantesca
script(hardlyfoundin schoolbooks) and is an unused copy; he goes on to speculate that thereis 'a
collectionswhich
strongprobabilitythat the Gadd. 193 representsvolgare
ofthe
thesubject
he does,teachgrammatica
whether
theteacher
can,butwhether
(Latin),
nothislinguistic
is thelevelat whichhe willbe teaching,
capacities.
passage
53What
Florence
read
andunite?
inearly
Renaissance
didGiovannino
, in:I TattiStudies,
Literacy
6 (1995),83-114.
54Ibid,83-4.
55Ibid, 102.
56On thesetexts,
seeBlack2001(iop.cit
, above,n. 13),173ff.
57Witt1995(iop.cit
, above,n. 53),103.
58SeeR. BlackandG. Pomaro,
and
Boethius'
s Consolation
ofPhilosophy
inItalian
Medieval
andtheir
inFlorentine
libraries
Renaissance
Education:
schoolbooks
, Florence
2000,86,239ff.
glosses
59Ibid,310,n. 522.

15:25:32 PM

292

ROBERTBLACK

wereso used and subsequently

However,
disappearedfromwear and tear'.60
the assumptionthat this book was the work of schoolboysis uncertain:
the ownersare not identifiedas attendingschools,and the hand of the
copyistrecallsnot a school contextbut the vernacularambience of devotional codices fromthe mid-fourteenth
century.
* * *
Wittconsidershumanismas in essence a secular movement,involvedin
literaryand philologicalactivitiesdistinctfromthe Christiantradition.For
to antique
him,humanismwas born when Lovato succeededin returning
verse style as practised by the great Roman pagan poets; he himself
showed no particularreligiousinclinations,nor did AlbertinoMussato,
his successoras the leader of the movement,untilthe end of his life.In
Witt'sview, Petrarchwas an aberration,as was Salutati: theirattempts
to integratehumanismand Christianity
were not entirelysuccessful,and
with the rise of early Ciceroniansmunder the leadershipof Leonardo
Christianinclinationsand returned
Bruni,humanismshed its artificially
to a less volatileand internally
secularmovement.Wittsugcontradictory
that
Christian
humanism
made a genuine returnonly with Valla
gests
and his generationin the mid-fifteenth
century.
There is much to recommendthisapproach: it would be hard to find
a group of writersand intellectualsless outspokenabout theirChristian
affiliations
than the practitioners
of the ars dictaminis
and so it is convincing to findthat theirimmediateprofessionalsuccessors,the firsthumanIn fact,it was not
ists,were also lackingin deeper Christiansentiments.
the
dictatores
as
forerunners
of
the
who,
humanists,showed little
only
explicitinterestin the Christiantradition.The grammaticaltradition,as
embodied in the studiesof grammarteachersin medievalItaly,was also
to Christiansources.In my recentbook on the gramnotablyindifferent
in medievaland RenaissanceItaly,I foundthatthe explicmar curriculum
in manuscriptglosseswere 'overwhelmingly
itlynamed authorities
literary/
in character.'The entirelistincludesonlythree
grammatical/philological'
authoritiesin theology:Boethius,Augustineand Jerome. Old and New
Testamentsare both near the bottom.'61Similarly,in my recentstudyof
in medievaliand Renaissance
manuscriptglossesto Boethius'sConsolation
grammarschools,I found that the only theologicalauthorityto emerge
60Witt1995(op.cit.,
above,n. 53),104.
61Black2001{op.cit.,
above,n. 13),303.

15:25:32 PM

RONALD
WITT'S'INTHEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'

293

was Augustine,and that he lagged behind Seneca, Ovid, Cicero and

Horace.62In Boethiusglosses,the Bible made a bettershowingthan in
glossesto literarytexts,but it seems clear that the overall characterof
Boethiusglosseswas literary/philological,
not philosophical/theological.
The evidence emergingfromWitt's studyof the early humanists,as
well as frommy work on grammarschool glossing,confirmsKristeller's
pictureof the Renaissance and humanismas showing
thesteady
andirresistible
ofnonreligious
intellectual
interests
which
werenot
growth
so muchopposedto thecontent
ofreligious
as rather
withit
doctrine,
competing
forindividual
andpublicattention.
Thiswasnothing
new,butrather
fundamentally
a matter
ofdegree
andofemphasis.
TheMiddle
a religious
Ageswascertainly
epoch,
butitwouldbe wrong
to assumethatmen'sentire
attention
wasoccupied
byreliletalonebytheological,
... I amconvinced
thathumanism
was
gious,
preoccupations
initscoreneither
norantireligious,
buta literary
andscholarly
orientation
religious
thatcouldbe and,inmany
without
discourse
onrelicases,waspursued
anyexplicit
whootherwise
be fervent
or nominal
members
of
gioustopics
byindividuals
might
oneoftheChristian
churches
. . .63
Wittdistinguishes
betweengenuineChristianhumanists,such as Petrarch
and Salutati,and thosewhose adherenceto Christianity
hardlypenetrated
theirhumanismto any significant
degree,such as Lovato and Bruni.Again,
thisis furtherdemonstration
of the soundnessof Kristeller'sapproach:
thetermhumanism,
to theRenaissance
ofthewords
Confining
according
meaning
humanist
and humanities,
to therhetorical,
and moralconcerns
of the
classical,
Renaissance
oftheparticular
ortheological
humanists,
regardless
philosophical
opinionsheldbyindividual
andofthetheological,
or
humanists,
scientific,
philosophical,
whichindividual
scholars
withtheirhumanist
juristic
training
mayhavecombined
wemight
choose
tocallChristian
humanists
allthose
scholars
whoaccepted
education,
theteachings
ofChristianity
andweremembers
ofoneofthechurches,
without
necortheological
intheir
orscholarly
essarily
discussing
religious
topics
literary
writings.
allRenaissance
before
andafter
theReformation,
Bythisstandard,
humanists,
practically
wereChristian
sincetheallegedcasesofopenly
conhumanists,
paganor atheistic
victions
arerareanddubious.
Butitisprobably
tousetheterm
Christian
preferable
humanism
in a morespecific
itto thosescholars
witha humansense,andtolimit
istclassical
and rhetorical
whoexplicitly
discussed
or theological
training
religious
in all or someoftheir
problems
writings.64
Where I should to some extentpart fromKristellerand Wittis in their
insistencethatthe rootsof the Renaissancewere essentially
non-Christian.
For Witt,Renaissance humanismwas born, as has been already seen,
62BlackandPomaro2000 cit
(op. , above,n. 58),6-8.
63Kristeller,
andChristianity
in hisRenaissance
TheClassic,
and
Paganism
Scholastic,
Thought.
Humanist
Strains
, NewYork1961,72,74-5.
64Ibid,86.

15:25:32 PM

294

ROBERTBLACK

when Lovato attemptedto recapturethe poetic style of the ancients.

Similarly,Kristellerwrotethat the
oreven
a religious
humanism
wasinitsorigin
view. . . thatRenaissance
movement,
intheMiddleAges,seems
tendencies
a religious
certain
reaction
antireligious
against
or exaggerated.65
to meequally
wrong
In a paper which I publishedin 1995, I believe I demonstratedthat the
idea of the Renaissance as a rebirthof a time of lightas opposed to a
precedingdarkerperiod was relatedto discussionsof ecclesiologyin the
middle ages.66In particular,Petrarch'sideas of ancientand modernhistorywere developed explicitlyfromhistoricalschemes about the primitive and modern periods of church historyin which the Donation of
Constantineprovidedthe crucial turningpoint.67Moreover,I showed,I
think,that Petrarch'slinkingof religiousand culturalhistorywas carried
on by many later humanistsand persistedthroughoutthe sixteenthcenIn view of this new evidence,it seems to me that Kristellerand
tury.68
the religiousimplicationsof the Renaissance's
Wittgo too farin dismissing
early development.Althougha key early humanistsuch as Bruni may
not have writtenexplicitlyreligiousor Christiantexts,it is hard to believe
that when he talked about the revivalof the arts69he could have been
unaware of the powerfuland inherentlinkbetweenthe declineof antique
classicismand the decay of the early churchwhich had been developed
so powerfully
by Florentine
by Petrarchand thenechoed soon afterwards
writerssuch as Boccaccio and Filippo Villani.70What I am sayingis that
the ideology of the Renaissance, as created by Petrarch,was potently
linkedto the ideal of the revivalof the primitiveand apostolic church;
it is hard to agree that humanismwas an
in this basic sense, therefore,
65Kristeller
1961(op.cit
., above,n. 63),74.
66R. Black,TheDonation
a newsource
?, in:
oftheRenaissance
fortheconcept
ofConstantine:
51-85.
Oxford
Renaissance
and
AlisonBrown
1995,
,
Italy
of
(ed.),Language Images
67Ibid.,64-9.
68Ibid.,69-77.
69E.g.in hisLifeofPetrarch
in RossandMcLaughlin
intoEnglish
(eds),The
, translated
Reader
Portable
Renaissance
, NewYork1978,128.
70Black1995{op.cit.,
di Bandino,
Domenico
fellow
Aretine,
above,n. 66),78. Bruni's
fellow
thatoneofBruni's
link:seeibid.,78,n. 98. It is alsointeresting
madea similar
humanist
a
secular
as
in
book
Witt's
who
Giceronians,
appears
Vergerio,
Pierpaolo
early
a panwrote
ofdeepreligious
evidence
actually
commitment'),
givelittle
(383:'hiswritings
and
fortheendoftheGreatSchism
inan oration
church
oftheprimitive
pleading
egyric
oratio
cardinales
ad Romanos
ecclesia
in 1406:see Proredintegranda
delivered
tempore
uniendaque
storico
habita
inconsistorio
schismatis
, ed. C. A. Combi,in:Archivio
per
, a. 1406,novembri,
1
360-74.
il
e
l'Istria
Trentino,
Trieste,
(1881-2),

15:25:32 PM

RONALD
WITT'S'INTHEFOOTSTEPS
OFTHEANCIENTS'

295

secular movement.Humanism may have begun along a 'noninherently

Christiandirectionunder the
religious'path, but it took an irreversibly
reins of Petrarch,when he created the ideology of the Renaissance in
termsof a contrastbetweenantiquityand moderntimeswith the dividing line providedby the Donation of Constantine.
* * *
For Witt,humanismwas in essence a literaryphenomenon;the social
and particularly
the politicalideas of the humanistswere secondaryconcerns. This is a refreshing
approach, especiallyin the wake some twenwhich
tended to place the politicalimplications
tieth-century
scholarship,
of humanismin the historicallimelight.Most influential
here was the theof
'civic
a
label
invented
Hans
in 1925 to
Baron
humanism',
ory
by
describewhat he believed to have been a decisivemomentof change in
Westernthought:fromthe contemplative,monarchicalemphasis of the
middleages to the active,republicanideals of the Renaissanceand beyond.
However,it is now commonlyaccepted that Bruni,like Salutati71before
after
him,was an apologistforthe oligarchicregimein Florenceinstituted
Bruni
and
1382;
many of his compatriotswere not the idealisticand
patrioticrepublicansportrayedby Baron.72EliminatingBaron's claim to
have foundthe momentof transitionfrommedieval to modernthought
reduces 'civic humanism'to a more or less fleetingideology,fashioned
frompre-existing
traditionsof politicalideas. It is misleadingto call these
apologetics'civic humanism':it is well knownfromKristeller'sworkthat
humanismdid not constitutea philosophy,73
and so any civic varietyof
humanismcould not involvea new directionforhumanistthought.It is
a misunderstanding
of the nature of humanismto see it as an evolving
seriesof philosophicaloutlooks:humanismwas not a developingphilosophy but rather a rhetorical
/philologicalapproach and method. The
of
works
quantity pro-monarchical
(forexample,'mirrorof princes'tracts)
faroutweighsgenuinelypro-republican
productionsduringtheRenaissance,
a facthardlysurprisingin a period which saw the witheringand virtual
demise of the Italian communal tradition.Medieval scholasticthought,
71See R. Black,The
chancellors
political
, in:TheHistorical
thought
oftheFlorentine
Journal,
29 (1986),991-1003.
72SeeJ. Hankins Renaissance
Civic
Humanism
, Cambridge
(ed.),
2000,esp.thearticles
by
andM. Hrnqvist;
A. Field,Leonardo
Florentine
traitor?
theMedici
and
J.Najemy
Bruni,
Bruni,
anAretine
51 (1998),1109-50.
of1437,in:Renaissance
conspiracy
Quarterly,
73Kristeller
1944-45
., above,n. 1).
(<
op.cit

15:25:32 PM

296

ROBERTBLACK

on both sides of the Alps, could be richlyrepublican,anti-monarchical

and favourableto activepoliticalparticipation.Notable here are not only
familiarfiguressuch as Marsilius,Ptolemyof Lucca and Aquinas, but
also othersrarelyencounteredin this context,such as Nicole Oresme,
John of Paris, Engelbertof Admont and William of Ockham.74'Civic
humanism'is a misnomer:most Renaissance political thoughtwas not
civic,and muchmedievaland Renaissancecivicthoughtwas not humanist.
For Witt,on the otherhand,theheartof humanism'searlydevelopment
is theemergenceof a classicalprosestyleand particularly
of Ciceronianism.
There can be no doubt that Witt'semphasishere is historically
correct.
Despite the early poetic predelictionsof Lovato, Mussato and even the
youngerPetrarch,prose soon became the overridingpreoccupationof
humanists;almostall humanistswroteLatin prose,whereasonlya minority
attemptedLatin verse. What united the vast majorityof humanistswas
not a particularpoliticalphilosophyor even any special interestin politics
or politicalthought,but ratheran attemptto reviveclassicalprose style.
Baron's concentrationon humanistpoliticalideas is an anachronisticdistortionof the humanists'actual interestsand activities.Politicsand political thoughtloomed largerin the twentiethcenturythan latinity,but in
theRenaissanceit was just the opposite.It is perhapsWitt'smostsignificant
achievementto have at last restoredthe properbalance betweenthe literaryand politicalsides of Renaissance humanism.
* * *
is a wide-rangingsynthesisof
Ronald Witt's (In theFootsteps
oftheAncients'
his own copious earlier researchand writings,as well as of a massive
amount of otherscholarlyliterature.He adds to this existingmateriala
detailed stylisticanalysis of key examples of medieval and particularly
earlyhumanistpoetryand prose. Out of thismaterialhe fashionsa stimof the originsof humanismand its
ulatingand provocativeinterpretation
of
from
the interpretative
It
detracts
originality
subsequentdevelopment.
Witt'sachievementforhim to suggestthathe is the firstscholarseriously
to considerthe generationsbeforePetrarchas genuinehumanistsrather
than pre-humanists(18-21). In fact, Roberto Weiss entitledhis classic
whileKristellerwrote
book,publishedin 1949, Il primosecolodell'umanesimo,
that 'Petrarchwas not the fatherof humanism,nor the firsthumanist,
" andmedieval
74J.Blythe,
humanism
2000(op.cit.,
"Civic
above,
, in:Hankins
thought
political
n. 72),30-74.

15:25:32 PM

OFTHEANCIENTS'
RONALD
WITT'S'INTHEFOOTSTEPS

297

of a movementthat had begun

but merelythe firstgreat representative
at least one generationbeforehis time'.75AlthoughI do not agree with
neverthelessit is undeniable that this
several of Witt's interpretations,
to the fieldof humaniststudies,and thatit
book is a major contribution
discussionand research.
will stimulatefurtherfruitful
Universityof Leeds
SchoolofHistory

75Kristeller
1964(op.citabove,n. 5), 162.

15:25:32 PM

Reviews
Walter
undEpochenstil
imlateinischen
Mittelalter.
IV. Ottonische
Berschin,
Biographie
Biographie.
Das hohe
920-1220n. Chr.ErsterHalbband,
920-1070n. Chr.Anton
Mittelalter,
Hiersemann
1999XIV & 272S. ISBN3 71729102(Quellen
und
Verlag,
Stuttgart
desMittelalters,
zurlateinischen
Band12,2)
Untersuchungen
Philologie
Ebensowiein denvorhergehenden
Bndenfallt
beiderLektre
desneuesten
Teils(IV,
erster
vonBerschins
fesselnd
undEpochenstil
imlateiniHalbband)
geschriebener
Biographie
schen
Mittelalter
auf,dasses kaumeineliterarische
Gattung
gibt,in derdie traditionsgebundenen
Elemente
Aufbau
undinzahlreichen
einegrssere
Einzelheiten)
(imallgemeinen
alsin dersptantiken
undmittelalterlichen
Treffsicher
weissder
Rollespielen
Biographie.
ininhaltlicher
Autor
wiesichdenvetera
allmhlich
auchnova
sowohl
zugesellen,
darzulegen,
daraufhin
Hinsicht
alsinderliterarischen
Form.Erweist
(S. 128),dassdie
beispielsweise
im allemannischen
vonAugsburg
erstmals
Raumeine
Vita(I) S. Uodalrici
vonGerhard
nichtklsterlicher
Kultur
die das Ergebnis
stdtischer,
ist,und
Biographie
reprsentiert,
imMittelalter
indieser
Literaturform
erbetont
erstmals
(S. 212),dassAdamvonBremen
mit
dieVorzge
undSchwchen
einerPerson(Bischof
Adalbert
vonHamburg-Bremen)
hat.
Aufmerksamkeit
bedacht
gleicher
Im vierten
zuerst
die beklagenswerte
Bandbeschreibt
Berschin
Lage,in dersichdie
imAbendlande
zwischen
einerZeit,in
lateinische
Literatur
920und960n. Chr.befand,
schwere
NotberEuropagebracht
derdieAngriffe
derWikinger,
Sarazenen
undUngarn
zu
stellter fest,wusste
sichauchdamalsnocheinigermassen
hatten.
Die Biographie,
siesicheinJahrhundert
Darauf
entwickelte
Literaturgattung,
langalsdiefhrende
behaupten.
in
war.Der Schwerpunkt
wiesiedas auchin derMerowingerzeit
lagzunchst
gewesen
aus dem
undEngland
im zwlften
traten
Jahrhundert
jedochFrankreich
Mitteleuropa,
Schatten
hervor.
Berschin
sichvorzglich
Imspezifischen
desMittelalters
kennt
Vokabular
aus,wasseinen
berprziseWorthatin mancher
beachtenswerter
Bemerkung
Niederschlag
gefunden
ornamenta
sindzumBeispiel
Kunsthistorisch
Bemerkungen;
folgende
wichtig
bedeutungen.
die 'Inneneinrichtung';
ecclesiae
bezeichnet
den'Kirchenschatz'
(S. 146),nichtallgemein
wieHychni
findet
manfirlucida
whrend
dependentes
(S. 145)in denLexikabersetzungen
Versuche:
exlaquearibus'
'lustre',
'Fenster'),
(andere
'Glasgemlde',
'lampe','candlabre'
aufIsidorus,
bietetBerschin
die richtige
Etymologiae
Ubersetzung
'Apsis',unterHinweis
Berschin
unsauftischt.
lanx
welche
Es isteinefachmnnisch
bereitete
satura,
15,8,7.
Feinsinnige
derLatinitt
derverschiedenen
Perioden,
Beschreibungen
eingehende
Charakterisierungen
Hinweise
aufTopoiundtraditionelle
Autoren
undvielesachkundige
derwichtigsten
ist
Zu korrigieren
in reichem
Masszu finden.
Bandwieder
sindauchindiesem
Elemente
von
anlsslich
einerStellein der Vita(I) S. Uodalrici
eineStelle(S. 144),wo Berschin
das Nomen
istam Anfang
'In griechischen
bemerkt:
vonAugsburg
Gerhard
Majuskeln
XPYI0Yhypergrzisierend
sacrum
I, 0 statt
T) wiedergegeben
(prol.2).'Ermchte
(Y statt
Es handelt
sichhierjedoch
Buchstaben
also'Christi'
lesen,in griechischen
geschrieben.
ist:
dreierNominasacra,wobeieinenderung
um einegelufige
berflssig
Krzung
zumBeispiel
Manvergleiche
SohnGottes').
(MP0Y,
Y(i)I0(eo)Y('Christus,
XP(iai)
findet.
als auchaufMosaiken
in Handschriften
dassichsowohl
'Mutter
Gottes'),
Vita
S. Odilonis
alsQuellefirIotsald,
weist
Berschin
1,13(S. 246)aufSuetonius,
Richtig
Vwarium
40,2

BrillNV,Leiden,2002
Koninklijke
- www.brill.nl
online
Alsoavailable

15:25:40 PM

REVIEWS

299

latericium
etreliquisse
marmoreum.
WasKaiserAugustus
vonRom
Vita
28,3hin:invenisse
Augusti
latericium
ist
zu korrigieren:
hat,sagtOdilovonCluny.Hieristdie bersetzung
gesagt
traditionelle
sondern
'aus Ziegeln'.
Um nocheinigebewusst
verwendete
nicht'hlzern',
hervorzuheben:
wieAbraham
sumetpereElemente
(Gen.
23,4)vonsichselbst
sagt:Advena
inWidmungsbrief
derGesta
vos
sichAdamvonBremen
, bezeichnet
Hammaburgensis
grinus
apud
eeclesiae
ebenfalls
als einenFremden
(S. 212).EineStelleaus der Wiboradavita
pontificum
an das Gleichnis
vombarmherzigen
Samariter
zu erinnern
(S. 123semi(c. 33) scheint
semivivo
auchplagis
hat
necem
discesserunt
nebenLuk.10,30abierunt
relicto;
impositis
relinquentes
hiereineParallele).
DerTextin derWiboradavita
istjedochbewusst
mitanderen
Worten
worden.
stilisiert
inseiner
AlsJohannes
desBischofs
Adalbert
vonPrag(c. 8) die
Canaparius
Biographie
melior
bono
verwendet
erseinModellinderklas(S. 163),findet
Formulierung
augustus
patre
EinEchoklingt
Carm.
nach
sischen
Horatius,
1,16,1o matre
pulchra
filiapulchrior.
Dichtung:
inderAdalbertpassion
maior
exparentibus
(II) c. 1 vonBrunvonQuerfurt:
filius
magnis
(S. 169)
undweiter
nochzweimal
am Schluss
derselben
Stelle:Bonus
sedmelior
mater,
pater,
Optimus
exipsis
sedpukrior
; und:pulcra
quinascitur
facie,
spiritu.
istauch,dassdasvonPetrus
DamianiamAnfang
Zu bemerken
derVorrede
zurVita
S. Romualdi
verwendete
mundus
immundus
Schriften
(S. 264)sichindenchristlichen
Wortspiel
seitAugustinus
findet.
Die lateinische
des
Klinck,
Vgl.zumBeispielRoswitha
Etymologie
Mittelalters
Studien
Aevum,
1970,S. 117f.;
(Medium
Philologische
17),Mnchen
J.Werner,
Lateinische
undSinnsprche
desMittelalters
, Darmstadt
1966,S. 72 (M 82)Mundus
Sprichwrter
caret
necmundo
nomine
laude
Venantius
Carmina
claret,
Fortunatus,
3, 23a, 11 (Ausg.Leo,S.
mundi
mundus
necsinttibicrimina
mundi.
; ibid.4,6,3(S. 84):Sedquiatumundus
74):inlecebris
In Abbo,Passio
S. Eadmundi
c. 12(S. 229)antwortet
dasabgeschlagene
HauptdesKnigs
aufdieFragedersuchenden
Leute'Wobistdu':Her,her,
Latinus
sermo
her,
quod
interpretatum
Kontext
knnte
einEchosein
Hic,hic,hic.Das hic,hic,hicin einemwunderbaren
exprimit:
vonderWeise,in derPaulinus
vonMailand(VitaAmbrosii
Hist.
51; vgl.auchOrosius,
dieErscheinung
desverstorbenen
Bischofs
Ambrosius
derMascezel
deutbeschreibt,
7,36,7)
lichmacht,
dassdieserebenan derStelle,wo er dreimal
mitseinem
StabdenBoden
berseinenBruder
Gildosiegenwird(Hinweis
(ait:'Hic,hic,hic',signans
schlgt
locum)
A. Bastiaensen).
AmEndedeszweiten
Halbbandes
wirddieAuswahl
literarisch
undhistorisch
bedeutender
lateinischer
in Gruppen,
die Zeittafel,
das Verzeichnis
derzitierten
Biographien
Handschriften
unddasNamenregister
zu finden
sein.Das monumentale
Werkistmitdem
Halbband
wieder
seiner
nhergekommen.
jetzterschienenen
Vollendung
Nijmegen

G.J.M.Bartelink

"Historia
- bersetzung
- literaturwisHasse(ed.),Abaelards
calamitatum".
Text
Dag Nikolaus
Walter
de
Berlin-New
York
ISBN
2002.
senschaftliche
Modellanalysen.
Gruyter,
3-11-017012-4.

Abelard's
Historia
calamitatum
hasneverceasedto provoke
theinterest
ofreaders
from
a
widerangeofdisciplinary
andnational
Forcenturies,
thistexthasbeenseen
backgrounds.
- a rebelagainst
as presenting
Abelard
as thearchetypal
'modern'
theauthority
of
figure
whoanticipates
theindividualism
ofmodernity.
is theexchange
tradition,
Justas famous
ofletters
between
HeloiseandAbelard,
attached
tothisautobiographical
narrative
always
in themanuscript
tradition.
The longhistory
ofscholarly
these
controversy
surrounding
texts
itself
testifies
to their
oftwelfth-century
keyrolein anydebateaboutthecharacter
Koninklijke
BrillNV,Leiden,2002
- www.brill.nl
Alsoavailable
online

Vivarium
40,2

15:25:46 PM

300

REVIEWS

editedbyDag Hasse,proThisnewvolume,
to modernity.
anditsrelationship
culture
to a newstagein thisdebate.It brings
videsa welcome
contribution
essays
by
together
ofliterary
in applying
a variety
interested
ofyounger
German
a newgeneration
scholars,
inbotha Latinedition
toa familiar
text,
(basedonthatofMonfrin,
presented
perspectives
translation
anda German
ofthecritical
elements
withonlyessential
retained)
apparatus
The volume
oftheotherletters).
oftheHistoria
calamitatimi
not,unfortunately,
(although
Latintext,
buta range
notonlyAbelard's
toolthatpresents
an excellent
teaching
provides
thathasneverlostitstopicality.
on a narrative
ofcontemporary
perspectives
moveawayfromthehotly
Hassenotesthatall thecontributors
In hisintroduction,
scholars
so muchinthe1970sandearly1980s.
thatagitated
ofauthenticity,
debated
issues
ofa
traces
thatthebodyofletters
thattheyreston a 'newconsensus'
He argues
betrays
thatcomesfromthetimeofAbelardand Heloise,in whichthe
'Gesamtkomposition'
as an independent
conceived
calamitatimi
wasoriginally
Historia
composition,
byAbelard
tradition
of
themonastic
within
to a corpusofletters,
butwasthenattached
preserved
inhisintrotheseperspectives
theParaclete
(Hasse,p. viii).Hassedoesnotclaimtounify
theAbelard-Heloise
thattheyall consider
otherthanto suggest
duction,
correspondence
in thisvolume
is a desireto move
to all theessays
models.
in terms
ofliterary
Implicit
intention
or
ofauthorial
to readthesetextsin terms
conventional
attempts
awayfrom
of
the
concerns
into
a
The
collection
insight
fascinating
provides
individuality.
subjective
ofoneofthemostcelin theirreading
theorists
ofGerman
a newer
literary
generation
of
all shapedin onewayoranother
texts
ofthetwelfth
ebrated
bytheconcerns
century,
rather
thanindividuality,
formodels
they
hopetomakeeviBylooking
post-structuralism.
clichs.
to stereotyped
reduced
texttoooften
ofa medieval
dentthecomplexity
a number
concerned
is explicitly
Whilethevolume
calamitatimi,
onlywiththeHistoria
This
Abelard
withtherestoftheHeloisecannot
avoiddealing
ofessays
correspondence.
on
ofMarkus
thecasewiththechapter
is particularly
Asper
'Rezeptionssthetik'.
Asper
book'forthesisa 'Foundation
to provide
wasintended
thatthecorrespondence
argues
has
intimate
intowhichinauthentic
oftheParaclete,
ters(andperhaps
dialogue
monks)
ofHeloiseservaboutthemonastic
an exemplum
topresent
beenincluded
life,theletters
toestabwithanyattempt
The difficulty
conversion.
a modelofmonastic
ingtoprovide
reader
ofthis
is thattheonlyknown
calamitatum
oftheHistoria
function
lishthe'original'
manis thattheearliest
wasHeloise.Evenmoreproblematic
textin thetwelfth
century
outside
inthelatethirteenth
tocirculate
ofthecorrespondence
century
onlystart
uscripts
as
as a wholefunctioned
thatthecorrespondence
milieu.
Whiletheargument
a monastic
Luscombe
like
scholars
raised
book'attheParaclete,
a 'Foundation
Waddell,
previously by
as a wholewere
theletters
as towhether
remains
one,thequestion
etc.,is a reasonable
To
left
unresolved.
are
so
issues
when
a
as
written
many
composition,
single
originally
liferisks
modelofthereligious
a monastic
impospresents
arguethatthecorrespondence
different
between
withtension
thatbrims
ona dialogue
uniform
subtly
category
inga single
andHeloiserespectively.
ofreligious
models
life,ofAbelard
ofMichel
in drawing
on thethought
ofFrankBezneris moresatisfying
The chapter
calamiofselfin theHistoria
oftheconstruction
context
thepolemical
toexplain
Foucault
of
theascetic
is thatit situates
ofBezner's
Partofthestrength
tatum.
argument
analysis
aboutthe
in thesermons
ofhiswiderargument
thecontext
within
narrative
Abelard's
claims
without
oftheworld,
andtherejection
ofChrist
imitation
anyproblematic
making
of
Abelard's
is thewayBenzertraces
interest
aboutHeloise.Ofparticular
understanding
thatChrist
hisdoctrine
a basisforhiscontroversial
as providing
proChristology,
exemplum
Foucault
totheloveofGod.While
wearedrawn
which
videsthesupreme
through
example
andmodtotheMiddleAges,as totheancient
as muchattention
never
devoted
himself
thatcanbe madebyapplythecontribution
shows
article
Benzer's
ernperiods,
brilliantly
texts.
oftheselfto medieval
abouttheconstruction
inghisinsights
Breith
is a paperbyAstrid
Studies'
of'Gender
as an example
included
The chapter
revealItisperhaps
letters.
andassociated
calamitatum
intheHistoria
construction
ongender

15:25:46 PM

REVIEWS

301

should
be preserved
torefer
toa modeofanalying,thatan English
phrase
bytheeditor
sisthatseemsto havea farmoreslender
holdin theGerman
thanit hasin
academy
North
wherefeminist
discourse
hashada greater
on medieval
America,
studies,
impact
andon study
ofAbelard
andHeloisein particular.
Breith's
treats
'Heloise'as a
chapter
fiction
within
thecorrespondence.
Herargument
is at itsmostconvincing
when
literary
to Abelard,
forwhomthereis a verycleargendered
in which
natural
order,
referring
malerulesoverfemale,
as spirit
rulesoverflesh.
Whether
theletters
ofHeloisesimply
collaborate
in thisconstruction,
or question
thisconstruction
(as muchNorthAmerican
hasdone)is another
notdiscussed
matter.
scholarship,
byBreith,
LucDeitzoffers
as an example
ofrhetorical
a detailed
examination
ofAbelard's
analysis
in theHistoria
account
calamitatum
11.280-424)
ofhisaffair
withHeloise,
culmi(Monfrin,
inhiscastration.
He convincingly
demonstrates
thatalthough
a logician
rather
than
nating
rhetorician
Abelard
tothefulla gamut
ofrhetorical
devices
tocrebytraining,
employed
atea powerfully
dramatic
account.
Rather
is the'literary
different
psychology'
approach
ofHannesFrick,
whoexplores
theroleofAbelard's
needtoovercome
thetrauma
ofcasor at leastto display
howhe hasdoneso in theHistoria
calamitatum.
Frickdoes
tration,
notdenythedifficulty
ofapplying
in dealing
withthetherapy
oflivconcepts
developed
toa literary
text.Hisreading
makes
a goodcasefortaking
Abelard's
ingsubjects
seriously
allusions
to thestigma
ofcastration
as symptomatic
ofprofound
trauma.
Thechapter
ofDag Hassepresents
itself
as 'Kulturwissenschaft
He
(NewHistoricism)'.
relates
Heloise's
aboutrejecting
bothas reported
andin
argument
marriage,
byAbelard,
Heloise
's first
to contemporary
ecclesiastical
to outlaw
in the
reply,
attempts
concubinage
Eversince
outthispassage
in TheRomance
Rose
clergy.
JeandeMeunsingled
, Heloise's
ofthe
hasbeenoneofthemostdebated
in theentire
corargument
against
marriage
passages
Abelard's
ofherargument
theidealofphilosophic
respondence.
report
certainly
privileges
therebuke
fromHeloisein herfirst
letter
thathe hadpassedoverhis
purity,
earning
aboutpreferring
lovetomarriage.
Hasse'sargument,
thatwhenHeloise
however,
arguments
saidshepreferred
tobe Abelard's
shewasreferring
toa wayoflifeshared
concubine,
by
other
concubines
oftheclergy,
seemnaively
inthatitfailstodiscuss
the
historicist,
might
ethical
dimension
ofherargument
thattrueloveis notconcerned
withexternal
appearances.Thesameprinciples
underlie
whatshehastosayinherthird
aboutthedanletter,
inreligious
life.Abelard
forward
an ideal
gersofexternal
appearance
maywellbe putting
ofmoralpurity,
in linewiththatofotherreformed
monks
andclerics
ofhisgeneration,
buthismodelofupright
behaviour
is notnecessarily
thesameas thatpresented
in the
letters
ofHeloise.
The finalessayin thecollection,
is farlesscertain
thanthatof
byNicolaKaminski
HasseandAsperthatthere
is unified
theme
tothecollection
ofletters.
that
Emphasizing
arepurely
artificial
as in rhetorical
aboutmoderconstructions,
binary
opposites
phrases
shearguesthatAbelard
usespolluisse
in a waythatdeliberately
alludesto poliere.
nity,
on Derrida's
ownloveofwordplayin French
to evokedeferred
that
Drawing
meanings
areneverfully
in thepresent,
Kaminski
thatbehind
Abelard's
talk
encapsulated
suggests
ofpollution
liesa wholeraftofunexamined
here.Her
ideas,toofullto be documented
is thatshedoesnotreally
ideastogether
intoa unified
readdifficulty
pullthesesuggestive
calamitatum.
ingoftheHistoria
Thereis muchofinterest
in thisanthology,
whichdeserves
to be studied
byall those
in oneoftheclassictexts
interested
ofthetwelfth
notjustbyGerman
century,
speaking
scholars.
Thereis stillmuchtobe doneinapplying
theinsights
ofliterary
notjust
theory
tothefamous
ofAbelard
andHeloise,
buttotheir
other
as well.
correspondence
writings
Thevolume
editedbyHassemakesan important
stepin thisdirection.
Australia
Victoria,

ConstantMews

15:25:46 PM

302

REVIEWS

Diskurses
imdreizehnten
desphilosophisch-anthropologischen
Theodor
Khler,
Jahrhundert:
Grundlagen
Verstndnis.
Leiden2000
imzeitgenssischen
umdenMenschen
DieErkenntnis-Bemhung
Brill,
Bd.71)x & 745pp.ISBN
desMittelalters,
undTextezurGeistesgeschichte
(Studien
90 04 116230
ofphilosophical
anthroa massive
bookon "thefoundations
Khlerhaswritten
Theodor
butowesitsgreat
in thethirteenth
The bookhasa simple
organization,
century.
pology
andsummaries.
Khler
texts
withtranslations
a richsupply
ofprimary
to having
length
andwithsources.
Thebookhas
workwithmanuscripts
hasclearly
donea lotoforiginal
sources.
and secondary
ofbothprimary
an excellent
However,
it,likethe
bibliography
thanKhlersuggests.
hasa morelimited
ofthebookin general,
domain
compass
scholthestateofcurrent
In thefirst
he discusses
as follows:
Khlerproceeds
chapter,
lackin
and
finds
it
the
thirteenth
about
century,
gravely
anthropology
arship
philosophical
In the
whenI applyittohisownwork.)
hiscritique
todiscuss
below,
ing.(I shallreturn
about
sources
andthequestions
oftheprimary
hegivesa preliminary
nextchapter,
survey
ofmanwas
howthescience
In thethird
Khlerdiscusses
manthattheyraised.
chapter,
of
thefields
sciences
ofmedieval
tofitintotheordering
, including
(Wissenschaften
thought
ofthehuman
howthescience
he discusses
andtheology).
beingcame
Finally,
philosophy
while
sciences
within
itself
alltheother
ofas theultimate
tobe thought
science,
including
culmination.
as their
at thesametimeserving
someofwhichare
thebooktendsto haverepetitions,
Becauseofthisorganization,
do serve
cross-listed
[e.g.,79 & 239;472n. 1039;52-5& 488-97& 558].Therepetitions
source
as a reference
ofthereader's
thefunction
beingableto usethebookpiecemeal
in themainbodyofhisworklongdisAs Khleralsohasincluded
forvarious
topics.
I canseeusing
ofvarious
workst
andsources
ofthedating,
cussions
contents,
authenticity,
On theotherhand,thebookcouldbe conthebookin thisway[e.g.,97-103;168-75].
andsources
andwithout
ofpoints
without
so muchrepetition
shortened
having
siderably
inthemaintext.Becauseofthisapproach,
andauthenticity
aboutdating
longdiscussions
thatitstitleis somewhat
ofthebook,I shallsuggest
as wellas thecontent
misleading:
abouthuman
oftheories
somuchas 'a preliminary
notthe"foundations"
survey
[Grundlagen)
in thethirteenth
andtheir
century'.
significance
beings
well.He showshowtherewasa shift
historical
Khlermakessomesignificant
points
tomanas a being
"inbutopposed
tonature"
manas a transcendent
from
being,
studying
a spiritualistic
from
in nature[58].Thatis,therewasa shift
per[72]to a naturalistic
and
viewto a moreAristotelian
andAugustinin
a morePlatonist
[147],from
spective
ofBathtookup
andlater,thoselikeAdelard
one.So, in thetwelfth
Averroistic
century
reflects
thata human
seeninPlato'sRepublic
anewtheviewalready
beingas a microcosm
olderviewwasthat"manis in
ofthecosmos[52-5;488].The prevailing,
thestructure
statethatit
sincethegoalofa soul,at leastnowin thefallen
butopposedto nature",
The
without
as possible,
hasnow,is togetoutofthisworldas quickly
mortally.
sinning
Arabicsources,
thanPlatothough:
viewsofthisnewgroupwentfurther
they
following
in
canbe found
ofthecosmos
andall thestructures
thatevenall theelements
asserted
on thehumanbeingsoftheir
humanbody.Theyhad a newemphasis
theindividual
ofman
ofthenature
tothemoreBiblical
as opposed
actualacquaintance,
preoccupation
eveninvestigated
ofConches
before
theFall[60;72].William
development
embryological
a bit[62].
Platonist
Aristotle
thoselikeNeckham,
sources,
Plato,orrather,
Later,
replaced
through
hasa spiritual
itself
ofanimals
thattheknowledge
It wasclaimed
as themaininfluence.
overthesexlifeoffrogs
William
ofConches
dimension.
[122],butthose
mayhaveglossed
ofbeavers
in theself-castration
couldfindmoredidactic
likeNeckham
[141;cf.
meaning
ofhowthespotted
themeaning
itseems,
thattheydidnotdiscuss,
529].- I amgrateful
- Certainly
ofbiolofthespiritual
someofthediscussion
significance
hyenareproduces!
Vivarium
40,2

BrillNV,Leiden,2002
Koninklijke
online- www.brill.nl
Alsoavailable

15:25:51 PM

REVIEWS

303

ofjustifying
theutility
ofsuchresearch
totheChurch,
which
distrusted
ogyhadthepurpose
suchworkandcontinued
to do so, as therebukes
to theMertonian
in the
calculators
fourteenth
attest.
or Aristotle,
forthatmatter,
Still,we,likemodern
century
zoologists
wellwonder
whether
thismaterial
is"scientific".
Theuseofanetymological
might
approach,
donebadly,reinforces
theseworries.
thoselikeNeckham
understood
Isidore,
Following
'
' as 'arbor
'
withthehairbeingtheroots
ofthetree,
andthelimbs
thelimbs
anthropos inversa
- I won'tevenaskaboutthefruits!
- Wealsomight
wonder
whether
Khler
isstray[150].
hisstated
thesocialconditions
forthestudy
of
ingfrom
subject
bydiscussing
necessary
anthropology.
Laterwriters
inthethirteenth
continued
towrite
onthese
butnowmostly
issues,
century
in Summae,
andcommentaries
on Aristotle
compendia,
[167].One majorissueconcerned
where
manshould
be studied
WasAristotle's
De anima
a treatise
on thesoul
scientifically.
orontheensouled
Howdoesmoralscience
fitintothescheme
ofthescibody?[336-42]
ences?[385]Therewasin general
no explicit
science
ofmanstudied
in a separate
sciit seems,
to Aristotle's
nothaving
hadone [449;381;296].Stillthe
ence,duemostly,
Summae
treatises
likeAquinas'
De homine
etc.,andalsoa fewshort
, diddealwiththeissues
insucha science.
Theknowledge
ofman,ifnota special
butunderstood
as philoscience,
cametobe considered
thehighest
sophical
self-knowledge,
goal[442].Thereweredifferent
either
onphilosophy
as theconsummation
ofself-knowledge,
oronself-knowledge
emphases:
as theconsummation
ofphilosophy
[458].
The microcosm
viewreemerged
in thedoctrine
thatmanis a universal
of
principle
as he unites
thecorporeal
andthespiritual
Manbecomes
"theworknowledge,
[487-97].
thiest
ofcreatures",
notforhisnatural
butforhismoralvirtues.
Hence
properties
(Wesen),
natural
science
therecameto be morefocuseither
on
gota lowerstatus
[486].Instead,
human
in general,
on "manquaman",as Albert
rationality
putit,oron onlyintellectual
ofFreiburg
to speakofa transempirical
self-knowledge
[584-5].Thisfocusled Dietrich
suchan intellect
are
intellect,
sc.,self-consciousness
[575-9].Thosewhoseekto develop
Hencethephilosopher
becametheculmination
ofman;otherwise
manis
philosophers.
another
animal[611-3].Concentrating
on developing
thistransempirical
merely
intellect,
thephilosopher
shouldbe monastic
andvirginal
shift"
[620].Khlerseesno "paradigm
tohomo
solus
intellectus
from
animal
FortheAristotelian
sci(Leitkonzepi)
perfectissimum
[622-3].
enceof thewholemanprevailed.
manwas no longerseenin an
Yet,Khlerinsists,
Aristotelian
butin a moreHeideggerian
existence,
wayas a thing
way,in hisconcrete
withan intellect
thatis notthing-like
[640].
"Foundations
It is besttounderstand
whatthisbookis andwhatitis not.I found
thetitle,
Discourse
..." rather
(Grundlagen)
ofthePhilosophical-Anthropological
First,
misleading. thebook
doesnotanalyze
ofthesources
thatitcitesandsummarizes.
It
verymuchthereasoning
doespresent
whattheauthors
themselves
ofman.Yet,evenhere,
sayaboutthenature
Khlerhimself
hasreserved
theanalysis
oftheirtheory
to a laterwork[34-7;204].So
he mostly
often
thetablesofcontents
or headings
discussions,
givessummary
byparsing
inthebooksthathecites[e.g.,206-13].
As he alsothensummarizes
their
contents
in his
owntables,
itseemsthatsometimes
he couldhaveomitted
thoselongsummaries.
Whatanalysis
Khlerdoesgiveseemsoften
andbrief.
Forinstance,
Khlerdiscryptic
cussesLull'sinsistence
on theimportance
ofthequestion:
'Whatis a human
and
being?',
"
hisanswer
toit,"enshomoficans
thisvery
Lullis asserting
the
[80;88].He finds
significant:
ofreflexive
self-consciousness
theimportance
ofnottreating
man
centrality
(andperhaps
'
' looks
as a merething)
andthata meredefinition
doesn't
suffice
[86-8].Yet enshomoficans
evenmoretrivial
than'homo
rationalis'
wouldbe nice.
So, at theleast,moreexplanation
I found
theuseof'anthropological'
Khlerhimself,
incriticizing
the
Again,
misleading.
earlier
remarks
thattherewasno "anthropology"
nor"psychology"
literature,
secondary
so calledin thethirteenth
thathe meansby"philoproperly
century
[27-8].He explains

15:25:51 PM

304

REVIEWS

reflections
on thenature
ofman[34].Thecentral
sophical-anthropological"
philosophical
becomes:
whatmanis,whata humanbeingis in herlifeas a wholeandin
question
whatthatwholelifeconsists
[73].
In practice,
Khlerlimits
hisdiscussions
to whatthe"philosophers"
saidaboutthe
humanbeing.Thesewouldinclude
thosein natural
bothphysical
andmedphilosophy,
thosein thefaculties
ofartsandoftheology,
or those
ical,andin theology,
sc.,mostly
an equivalent
likeAverroes,
Khlerdoes
status,
Lull,or IsaacJudaeus.
However,
having
notdiscuss
all thephilosophical
works
thatbearon thetheory
ofwhatthosetextssay.
Forexample,
as we haveseen,therecameto be a newemphasis
on thestudy
ofthe
human
thestudy
of"manquaman".Khler
devotes
beingas thefocalpointofphilosophy:
muchattention
to considering
whatAlbert
theGreatsaysaboutthelogicalstructure
of
'manquaman'[585-94].
Yethe considers
andhiscommentaries
on the
onlyhisSentences
Ethics
andon De anima
discussions
ofreduplication
in thelogi, andnothismoreformal
cal works,
northesecondary
literature
on them(A.Bck'sOnReduplication
, Leiden1996,
bychancecomesto mind.)
Nowwe might
wellask,too,whatdoesall thishaveto do with"anthropology",
sc.,
themodern
scientific
MuchofwhatKhlerdiscusses
doesnotappearin moddiscipline?
ernanthropology:
intotheanatomy
of a womanbefore
theFall
e.g.,an investigation
overthetitleofa book:whether
thesubject
ofAristotle's
[204],or a consuming
worry
De anima
is theanimate
in natural
discussed
ortheimmortal
rational
science,
soul,
being,
as "anima"
wasoften
takento suggest
ofstudy
[353;381].Dividing
up fields
justaccordandsubject
matter
ofthe[extant!!]
booksofAristotle
seemshardly
to
ingtothenumber
- Indeed,
savethephenomena.
criticized
Albert
forhaving
a treatise
on rational
Aquinas
- Thatis,on bothempirical
didn'thaveone [381].
andon
activity
justbecauseAristotle
muchofwhatKhlerreports
wouldbe dismissed
as notbeing
methodological
grounds,
inspeculating
After
isnotmuch
overa prototypical
woman
all,there
"anthropology".
point
basedsolelyon an interpretative
of Scripture,
norin basing"anthropological"
reading
research
onthehermeneutical
ofcertain
texts
ofAristotle
taken
tobe canoninvestigation
icalifnotquasi-sacred.
Science
thephenomena,
andnotpasttexts
todaystudies
primarily
offers
theories
ofmechanisms
thatcanbe corroboaboutthephenomena.
Anthropology
ifnotrefuted,
andexperiment
as Khler
observation
rated,
Moreover,
[K. Popper].
through
usedin thethirteenth
therewasno unified
remarks,
century
terminology
"anthropologiis a criterion
ofhaving
cal" discussions
[307].Yet,as Kuhnholds,standard
vocabulary
in
We canseeglimmers
ofa modem
scientific
normal
science
undera paradigm.
theory
in theempirical,
medical
as wellas in thesyssomeofthismedieval
material:
research,
oftheory
onAristotelian
wouldnot
tematization
Still,
or,ifyoulike,Hempelian,
grounds.
historians
ofscience
whofollow
Kuhn?
thismaterial
be considered
bycurrent
'protoscience'
- even,it
Aristotle
himself
dida greatdealofempirical
workin developing
histheories
The magisti
seemrather
tohavedissected
thehearts
ofpigsandturtles.
seems,
dissecting
wouldthePhilosopher
havehadforthem?
ofAristotle.
Howmuchapproval
thetexts
ofthe
with"philosophical
thathe is concerned
Khlermaywellreply
anthropology",
in
at Catholic
universities
ofMan"courses,
sortstilltaught
generally
todayas "Philosophy
. Thus,hedefines
"thephilosophical-anthroandphilosophy
[cf.32-3]
departments
theology
ofphilosophical
efforts
toknowaboutman"[34]. But,
discourse"
as "thetotality
pological
andreflection
to all thetheory
in thatcase,whynotbroaden
thescopeoftheinquiry
on in thethirteenth
ofhumanbeingscarried
and condition
aboutthenature
century?
Khlerdoesnotdiscuss
muchwhatcan be
themin passing,
For,although
mentioning
thematerials
ontheInvestiture
abouthuman
from
attitudes
aboutmedieval
beings
gleaned
- notto speakofwhatcan be gleaned
commentaries
Biblical
Conflict,
theory,
political
too
scholars
forconcentrating
hisfellow
Khlercriticizes
artandliterature.
from
Indeed,
and
totheexclusion
andethical
muchon themetaphysical
of,say,themedical
literature,
himhereon similar
we notcriticize
literature
thetheological
grounds?
[30].Yet,might
Khler's
tothe"philosophical"?
the"anthropological"
And,evenifweshould,
Whylimit

15:25:51 PM

305

REVIEWS

waswidely
read[410,n.795].
himself
notesthatthePolitics
hasitsgaps.ForKhler
survey
discussed
itsuse.
Yethe barely
a "modofmedieval
In sum,Khlerdoesshowus newaspects
Yet,from
philosophy.
muchofthematerial
thathe
notfroma postmodern,
ern",albeitperhaps
perspective,
A lotofthesedoctrines
haveonly
thesilliness
ofsomemedieval
confirms
thought.
presents
ofthismaterial,
we
interest.
Asforthetransempirical
historical
orantiquarian
significance
itto us later.
shallhavetowaitforKhlerto explain
Allan Bck

Kutztown

Cannstadt
Thomas
lesen.
Albert
2000(Serie
Zimmermann,
Stuttgart-Bad
Fromman-Holzboog,
2) 296 S. ISBN 3 772820050
Legenda,
Arbeiten
berdiemittelalterliche
Nebenseinen
vielen
strikt
wissenschaftlichen
Philosophie
Prof.Dr. Albert
hatderbekannte
Emeritus
desKlnerThomasInstituts,
Zimmermann,
in das DenkenThomasvonAquinspubliziert
unterdemTitelThomas
eineEinfhrung
indiezentralen
an Handeiniger
lesen.
Es isteineEinfhrung,
Textbeispiele,
Fragestellungen
derLehredesAquinaten.
In diesem
sehrwichtige,
vielleicht
diewichtigsten
Buchbehandelt
Zimmermann
Aspekte
zwischen
Glauben
undWissen,
dieWissenschaftslehre,
derLehredesThomas:
dasVerhltnis
Er lssteinekurze
dieAnthropologie
unddieEthik.
dieSeinslehre,
dieErkenntnislehre,
undschliet
des LebensundWerks
das Buchab miteinem
Beschreibung
vorausgehen
KapitelberdieWirkungsgeschichte.
SeineAbsicht
zu bringen'
ist,wieersagt,'ThomaszurSprache
(S. 9). Er willdeutlich
wieThomas
auchfrdiemodernen
Menschen.
Es sind
machen,
wichtige
Fragen
aufgreift,
dieThomasbehandelt.
ja ewigeFragen,
betont
Zimmermann
dieRationalitt
desDenkens
vonThomas,
pacedesThomismus,
derThomasmanchmal
unkritisch
verehrte
Thomasistfrunsauchhierdurch
(S. 13-14).
undverstndlich,
daaucherineinerunsicheren
Zeitlebte(S. 14).
wichtig
sagtderAutor,
willThomasdarstellen
in Diskussion
Zimmermann
mitanderen,
undnichtals einen
Es handelt,
frdenallesfesteht.
sichin diesemBuch
Systemdenker,
sagtZimmermann,
berThomaswieeinemPartner
imGesprch
(S. 9).
Vorallemkannmansagen,daZimmermann
in gutverstndlicher
sehrklarschreibt,
Er hat,wiebekannt,
einegroeKenntnis
derLehrevonThomas.Es istklar,
Sprache.
daThomasdemAutor
sehrsympathisch
erdieGedanken
desThomas
ist,undso macht
auchbesser
verstndlich.
Dannundwannkannmannichtgutsagen,wo genauZimmermann,
undwo genau
in demKapitelberdieNotwendigkeit
Thomasspricht.
So zumBeispiel
desGlaubens.
In seinerallgemeinen
da manThomasgut
(S. 54/55)sagtZimmermann,
Darstellung
Er sagt:'berall
verstehen
durchdenkt.
kann,wennmandieErfahrung
grndlich
gibtes
undzwaraus einemZustandgeringerer
in einenZustand
Dinge,die sichentwickeln
Vollkommenheit'.
oderspricht
der
grerer
SagtThomasdiesin diesem
Zusammenhang,
Autor?
UndistdieseAuffassung
selbstverstndlich?
AufS. 66:'Stellung
undBestimmung
desMenschen
zu ergrnden,
istbleibendes
Anliegen
derPhilosophie
bisinunsere
Das giltja dochnicht
frallePhilosophen,
zum
Gegenwart'.
nicht
frdieanalytischen?
Beispiel
Manknnte
hierdieEinfhrung
etwamitAnthony
vergleichen
Kenny's
Aquinas
(Oxford
welche
Arbeit
aucheineEinfhrung
zu Thomas
alsPhilosoph
ist.Manknnte
1980),
sagen,
daKenny
einegrere
Distanzzu Thomaseinnimmt,
sichsogar,
dannundwanngegen
Thomas
Ermacht
stellt.
zumBeispiel
inArten
desDenkens
about
und
Unterschiede,
(thinking
Koninklijke
BrillNV,Leiden,2002
Alsoavailable
online- www.brill.nl

Vivarium
40,2

15:25:51 PM

306

REVIEWS

dieThomasnichtmacht.
In seinem
da es nichtntig
thinking
that),
Preface
sagtKenny,
denkt
mitThomasmit.
sei,da derLeserThomas'Lehreteile.Zimmermann
dagegen
Dannundwannverweist
derAutor
aufmoderne
undTheorien.
Dasgeschieht
Standpunkte
selten.
Erverweist
zumBeispiel,
undnicht
sehrexplizit,
aufFrege(S. 126),auch
allerdings
aufHobbes(S. 149).Ichhatteerwartet,
dahier,weilZimmermann
ThomaszurSprache
inHauptpunkten,
wrde.
will,eineausfuhrlichere
Diskussion,
bringen
wenigstens
prsentiert
AufS. 62 (vergi.
S. 66)spricht
Zimmermann
bereinige
dienicht,
groePhilosophen,
wieThomas,
dasGlckdesMenschen
in derErkenntnis
dertheoretische
Wissenschaften
sehen.
Leider
nennt
derAutor
hierkeine
Namen
undprzisiert
nicht
alternative
Mglichkeiten.
Zimmermann
nenntin einerFunote
Ansichten
des HansJonas.Er isteinbekannter
Forscher
derGnostik
desAltertums,
aberdochnichtsehrbekannt
als Philosoph.
IndemKapitel
berdieWirkungsgeschichte
verweist
Zimmermann
u.a.aufdenThomisten
Marchal
undsagt(S. 278),da dieseArbeit
auchvielKritik
herJoseph
(1878-1944),
habe.WennderAutor
wrde
diessehrinforhtte,
vorgerufen
einige
Kritikpunkte
genannt
mativ
sein,glaubeich.
gewesen
Das BuchZimmermanns
sehrklarundhinreiend,
ichdann
ist,wieichsagte,
obgleich
undwannBeispiele
vermite
S. 160ff.,das KapitelberdieErkenntnis).
(zumBeispiel
Die Bibliographie
am EndedesBuchesistwertvoll,
namentlich
wegenderbersicht
deutscher
derWerke
desThomas.
bersetzungen
Leiden

E.P. Bos

dermittelalterlichen
inderTheologie
desThomas
Park,DieRezeption
Seung-Chan
Sprachphilosophie
vonAquin.
Mitbesonderer
derAnalogie.
YorkKln
Brill,Leiden-New
Bercksichtigung
1999(Studien
undTextezurGeistesgeschichte
desMittelalters,
Bd.65)ISBN90 04
112723
in theMiddleAgeswerewelltrained
students
in grammar,
University
logicandrhetoric,
before
oneofthehigher
Alsotheologians
faculties.
tookwiththem
thetechniques,
entering
distinctions
andarguments
in thetrivium
, andputthemto usein distheyhadlearned
Butwhatdidthisbasicknowledge
consist
in,and
cussing
specifically
theological
problems.
howdiditfunction
in scholastic
Overthelastforty
underthe
theology?
years,
especially
influence
ofthepioneering
work
ofLambertus
de Rijkinthe1960s,
research
intomedieval
oflanguage
hasincreased
thenewknowlHowever,
logicandphilosophy
considerably.
thatresulted
from
theseefforts
havehadonlya rather
limited
effect
so
edgeandinsights
faron thestudy
ofscholastic
Different
reasons
forthis.Themidtheology.
mayaccount
around
thetimetheSecondVatican
Council
alsomarked
therapiddecline
1960s,
ended,
ofinterest
in medieval
theproponents
of
Moreover,
thought
amongCatholic
theologians.
a morehistorical,
medievalist
to medieval
logicfelta certain
approach
urgeto emancithedominance
oftheearlier
neo-scholastic
andneo-Thomist
and
patefrom
metaphysics
barriers
andongoing
within
thefieldofmedieval
studtheology.
Language
specialization
iesaddedto thedifficulties
therediscovery
ofscholastic
its
logichad(andhas)infinding
medieval
is at oddswiththepractice
This,ofcourse,
wayto thosewhostudy
theology.
ofthemedieval
scholastics
whothought
oflogicandtheology
as distinct,
but
themselves,
notseparate,
academic
disciplines.
ofstudy.
Morerecently,
seemstobe a tendency
tointerrelate
there
againthetwofields
in medieval
between
The tentative,
butgrowing,
mutual
logic
understanding
specialists
in thisstudy
ofa young
Koreanscholar.
It is the
andinscholastic
is epitomized
theology
I knowofthatexamines
theroleofmedieval
first
systematically
philosophy
monograph
ofde Rijk,Pinborg,
in scholastic
on thebasisofthefindings
oflanguage
Jacobi
theology
BrillNV,Leiden,
Koninklijke
2002
- www.brill.nl
Alsoavailable
online

Vivarium
40,2

15:26:01 PM

REVIEWS

307

to focuson theonemedieval
thinker
who
(tonamejusta few).Parkdoesnothesitate
had beenthecentral
of neo-scholasticism,
ThomasAquinas,
to
and,moreover,
figure
address
oneofthemostdiscussed
viz.analogy.
The author,
topicsofThomas'thought,
a student
ofCharles
LohrandKlausJacobi,
hisstudy
as a dissertation
to the
presented
ofTheology
at theUniversity
ofFreiburg
i. Br.in 1998.
Faculty
After
an introductory
theauthor
first
information.
He
chapter,
givessomebackground
sketches
thehistorical
ofmedieval
summarizes
thechardevelopments
logicandgrammar,
acterization
Thomasgivesofthescientiae
sermonicales
he might
have
, andliststhesources
used.Withregard
tothelatter,
Parkpaysspecialattention
tothemorespecialized
extant
texts
ofThomas'contemporaries,
viz.thelogical
ofPeterofSpain,William
of
compendia
andLambert
ofAuxerre,
andthetreatises
onthemodi
He acknowlShyreswood,
significandi.
evidence
forThomas'direct
ofthesesources
is not
edgesthatthehistorical
knowledge
conclusive.
Notmuchis known
aboutThomas'owntraining.
thelogical
Furthermore,
textbooks
from
different
anditis notclearat whattime
originated
geographical
regions,
in Paris(andto Thomas).And,finally,
thetreatises
on themodi
theybecameknown
thathavebeeneditedso far,onlygo backto around1270.Parkjustifies
the
significandi
useofthesetexts
forexamining
whatinfluence
thecontemporary
oflogicandgramstudy
marhadonThomas,
towhatde Rijkhascalled"a universe
ofcommon
docbyreferring
thatistosay,thetexts
a largely
transmitted
trine",
represent
(intheir
general
outlines)
orally
anddoctrines,
shared
all overtheLatinWest.
masters
bodyofknowledge
bytheArtes
In chapter
Parkexplains
thebasictechnical
terms
Thomasuses.He interprets
three,
thembycarefully
thecontexts
in whichtheyappearin Thomas'texts,
andby
analysing
howtheyarediscussed
in thethirteenth-century
textbooks.
The mostimporexamining
tantonesaresignificato
ratio
nominis
andressignificata
(including
impositio,
), modus
significandi,
andanalogy
andequivocity).
Theseexplanations
areresumed
suppositio,
(including
univocity
in thenextchapter,
in whichParkinterprets
sixlonger
keytextsofThomasthatillustratethefunctions
oflogicaland grammatical
in theological
distinctions
discourse.
The
selected
textsdealwithcentral
in theology:
thedoctrine
ofdivinenamesand
problems
theproblem
ofreference
inchristological
andtrinitarian
fiveoffers
a syssayings.
Chapter
tematic
account
ofThomas'viewon naming
from
thepreviGod,basedon theresults
ousdiscussions.
Thisstudy
setsa shining
oftextual
andinterpretation
ofThomas'
theoexample
analysis
Themeticulous
ofthetexts
alsoserves
Park's
crux:
logical
writings.
reading
methodological
theimportance
oftaking
intoaccount
theactualcontext
within
whichThomasdiscusses
a problem.
Whomis headdressing?
Whataretheobjections
heis dealing
with?
Andwhat
doeshe wanttoprevent?
Thesequestions
direct
Thomas'choicefora
misunderstandings
certain
andtheydetermine
howhe (re-)formulates
certain
rulesin a particular
strategy
whatdistinctions
or subdivisions
he thinks
areuseful
to make,andwhatexamples
text,
hechooses.
toPark,oneshould
notgather
statements
from
different
take
According
texts,
themoutofthespecific
whichbothsupports
andlimits
their
andthen
context,
cogency,
a general,
Thomist
on a subject.
Thisgoesafortiori
for
trytoreconstruct
systematic
theory
Thomas'
scattered
remarks
onissues
Thomas
explored
bycontemporary
logicandgrammar.
draws
onthebroadbackground
ofhisaudience,
without
toomuchabout
knowledge
caring
technical
andterminological
details.
heis notinterested
inthesetopics
fortheir
Moreover,
ownsake.He addresses
themonlyinsofar
theotheycanplaya rolewithin
specifically
andhe adaptsthelogicalor grammatical
distinctions
anddivisions
to
logicaldiscussions,
meetthetheological
under
discussion.
Thomas'
remarks
from
their
theoproblems
Isolating
thevalidity
andapplicability
oftheirargumentative
logicalcontext,
universalizing
force,
andthenestablishing
theThomist
doctrine
leadstoa
of,forexample,
supposition,
usually
distortion
ofThomas'thought
ortotheunwarranted
conclusion
thathechanged
hismind
- andteaching
- Thomas
orcontradicts
himself.
Parkshowsagainthedanger
ofstudying
statements
from
thecorpora
ofarticles
in theSumma
or the
bywayofcollecting
Theologiae
outtheobjections
andtheanswers
to them.
, whileleaving
Questions
Disputed

15:26:01 PM

308

REVIEWS

Park'smethod
of reading
Thomasalso accounts
fortheorganization
and presentationofhismaterial
in thewayI indicated
earlier.
The advantage
ofthestructure
ofhis
bookis thatitshows
thefluidity
withwhich
Thomasdrawson hissources,
clearly
adapts
andshifts
on thecontext
ofthetheological
he
arguments
priorities,
depending
questions
is discussing.
On theother
textual
intheform
hand,italsoleadstoa certain
redundancy
ofrepetitions
andinternal
references.
togive
This,andthefactthatParkhasa tendency
detailed
information
thatis notquiterelevant
forunderstanding
Thomas'texts
(forexamsubdivisions
oftheModistae)
burden
on thereader.
ple,theintricate
placea certain
The mostnotorious
ofover-systematizing
Thomas'thought
is theattempt
of
example
- and manyafterhim
- to piecetogether
'thedoctrine
of analogy
of Thomas
Cajetan
Parkshowsthatin thevarious
in which
texts
Thomasusesthenotion
ofanalAquinas'.
aredifferent
andtheological
andconsiderations
ogy,there
logical,
metaphysical,
objections
inviewofwhich
chooses
anddivisions.
involved,
Furthermore,
Aquinas
particular
emphases
Parkargues
thatanalogy
is notthekeyinstrument
ofThomas'theology,
butonlyoneof
themanymeansbywhichThomasexplores
andindicates
thepossibilities
andlimits
of
in naming
humanlanguage
God.Othersuchmeansare,forexample,
thedistinctions
between
a quoandad quod
modus
I agree
andressignificata.
, orbetween
impositio
significandi
thatmostThomists
haveoverstated
theroleofanalogy.
The mainmotive
behind
this,I
wouldliketo add in support
ofPark'sthesis,
is notjusttheirwishto givea moresystematic
account
ofThomas'
butrather
thereluctance
totakeseriously
theapophatic
thought,
character
ofhisdoctrine
ofGod.ParknotesthatCajetanandotherThomists
usedthe
so-called
as an epistemological
method
to gainknowledge
ofGod
analogia
proportionalitatis
ofGodis notthegoalofhiscom(pp.391,450).ButforThomashimself,
knowledge
ments
on analogy,
buttheir
offaith,
nourished
andexpressed
knowledge
presupposition:
andprayer
thesecond-order,
reflection
on the
byScripture,
liturgy,
precedes
theological
divine
names.Analogy
serves
whatthefaithful
know:we speak
onlyto explicate
already
abouttheGodwe believe
thanwe canthink
or say.
in,butGodis always
truly
greater
Becausetheyseta different
ofanalogy,
Thomists
hadto seeit as a
goalforthenotion
meansofcircumventing
or neutralizing
Thomas'strong
statements
abouttheineffability
andincomprehensibility
ofGod'sbeing.Park,on theotherhand,rightly
seeksexplicitly
toembedThomas'texts
onthedivine
namesinthegeneral
framework
ofhistheoiogia
negativa.
itis alsoat thispointthatI wantto takeissuewithPark,becausesomeof
Hower,
hisarguments
of
andphrases
areambiguous,
whenit comesto thesemantics
especially
God-talk.
Thomasexplicates
theapophatic
character
ofdivinenameson twolevels.First,
synnamesfallshortbecauseoftheirmodus
whichhas to do withthe
significando
tactically,
different
wordclasses(nouns,
concrete
andabstract
tenses
verbs,
terms,
etc.)
adjectives,
in
human
this
has
not
to
be
understood
a
sense.
although
exclusively
grammatical Next,
innaming
words
arealsoimperfect
Godsemantically,
thatis,onthelevelofsignification.
ofGod
Thisdoesnotonlygoformetaphors,
butalsoforthosenamesthatarepredicated
in their
one
literal
sense.'Goodness',
'life',andthelike,signify
onlya limited
perfection,
instatParkfollows
Ashworth
thatis different
forexample,
or 'knowledge'.
from,
'justice'
in terms
thissemantic
ofmodus
significandi
deficiency
ingthatThomasdoesnotexplicate
butitdoes
Thisseemsto be correct,
e.a.; cf.pp. 428,461-68).
(paceMclnerny,
Pinborg
of
is givenwiththeverystructure
notaltertheclaimthatalsothesemantic
imperfection
intellect
canconsider
and
Parkstates
a coupleoftimes
thatthehuman
human
language.
ofitsmodeofbeing,
intentional
or
a perfection
thatis,irrespectively
'absolutely',
signify
or thedivine
whether
itexists
to thecreaturely
extramental,
and,ifthelatter,
according
hisclaimwithreference
tothenatura
absolute
modeofbeing(cf.pp.300,365).He supports
intwoofhisearlyworks,
Thomasmentions
considerata
8, 1 andDe Ente
Quodlibetale
, which
andpropthatitis thebasisforpredicating
etEssentia
3, andParkseemstosuggest
truly
- misleading.
the
is- at least
ofGod.In myview,thissuggestion
First,
erlyperfections
works.
occurs
consideration
notion
ofanabsolute
Next,
early
onlyinThomas'
(Avicennian)

15:26:01 PM

REVIEWS

309

Thomas
from
thepeculiar
a nature
onlysaysthatsucha consideration
prescinds
properties
hasin either
intentional
or in extramental
buthe doesnotspecify
thelatter
existence,
intocreaturely
anddivineexistence.
it givestheimpression
thatthereis a kind
Finally,
inwords
ofunivocity
ofGodandofcreatures.
Thisimpression
is strengthened
predicated
thatThomasadoptsa (moderated)
between
themodi
by Park'sassumption
isomorphy
in thesamewayas theModistae
do (pp. 162,284,323).
, andessendi
significant,
intelligent
I think,
thatThomasdisagrees
withthe(later)
Modistae
on thispoint.
however,
explicidy
His frequent
reference
to theso-called
of reception'
is received
'principle
('everything
tothemodeofthereceiver'),
withitsepistemological
concentration
according
('everything
is known
to themodeoftheknower,
notofthething
is meantto
according
known'),
stress
thediscontinuity
between
themodeofunderstanding
and
precisely
(andsignifying)
thewaythings
are.
Park'sanalysis
andinterpretation
do notmakeit quiteclearthat,in discussing
analthatthenegativity
cutsalsoright
intotheheartofthe
ogy,Thomaswantsto emphasize
semantics
ofkataphatic
God-talk.
The meaning
ratio
nominis,
of,
(ressignificata,
significatimi)
forexample,
includes
thatit is a specific
andlimited
kindofperfection,
dis'goodness'
tinct
from
etc.:itincludes
a modeofbeingthatbefits
creatures.
justice,
knowledge
Precisely
thismode,which
is calledin De Pot.7, 5, ad 2 themodus
is,hasto be deniedof
significati
itis inextricably
boundup withtheverystructure
ofhuman
God,although
language.
Parkhas extensive
of themajordoctrines
of thirteenth-century
knowledge
logicand
he is sensitive
to thedeeptheological
motivations
ofThomas'thought,
andhe
grammar,
hasthepatience
toanalyse
ingreatdetail.
Thomas'texts
Thesethree
factors
haveresulted
ina study
thatreintegrates
scholastic
oflanguage
andtheology,
andshedsnew
philosophy
on oneofthemostdebated
thenotion
ofanalogy.
light
topicsofThomist
theology,
Utrecht

HarmGoris

Dietrich
vonFreiberg,
seiner
Neue
und
Perspektive
Philosophie,
Theologie
Naturwissenschaft.
Freiburger
10-13Mrz1997.Herausgegeben
vonKarl-Hermann
Burkhard
Kandier,
Symposion:
Franz-Bernhard
Stammktter.
1999(Bochumer
Mojsisch,
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
Studien
zurPhilosophie,
28)viii+ 287 S. ISBN90 60323556
Im Mrz1997wurdein Freiburg
imBreisgau
einSymposion,
anllich
desAbschlusses
derkritischen
Edition
derWerkeDietrichs
vonFreiburg
veranstaltet.
DieseWerkesind
imRahmen
desCorpus
Teutonicorum
Medii
Aevi
worden.
Dietrich
von
Philosophorum
publiziert
isteinsehrwichtiger
undTheologe,
dessen
Werke
(ca. 1250-1318/20)
Freiburg
Philosoph
dieletzten
mitgutem
Rechtvielbeleuchtet
werden.
erDominikaner
Jahrzehnte
Obgleich
seinen
berhmten
ThomasvonAquinscharf
war,hatDietrich
kritisiert,
Ordensgenossen
besonders
derInterpretation
des aktiven
Intellekts
den
bezglich
(Dietrich
interpretiert
Intellekt
alseinenProduzenten
derKennobjekte,
mandiesnicht
fassen
darfwie
obgleich
Immanuel
KantesJahrhunderte
tunwrde.
Dietrich
hatsichbesonders
vonProklos
spter
undDionysius
beeinflussen
lassen).
Die Intellektslehre
Dietrichs
istnichtdas Einzige,
das das Interesse
derHistoriker
der
undTheologie
Diesisimvorliegenden
Banddeutlich:
Dietrich
von
Philosophie
erregt.
Freiberg.
seiner
Neue
undNaturwissenschaft.
Die Herausgeber
habenzwlf
Perspektive
Philosophie,
Theologie
ZehnderBeitrge
sindin deutscher
eineristin franzsiBeitrge
gesammelt.
Sprache;
einerin englischer.
scher,
Aufsehroriginelle
Weisefangt
derBandmitzweiBeitrgen
berdieGeographie
des
heimatlichen
Umfelds
Dietrichs
an. DieseBeitrge
berSachsenals
(vonK. Blaschke
undvonO. Wagenbreth
berFreiburg
undseinen
in derZeit
Kulturlandschaft,
Bergbau
Koninklijke
BrillNV,Leiden,2002
Alsoavailable
online- www.brill.nl

Vivarium
40,2

15:26:01 PM

310

REVIEWS

die
stellen
dengeographischen
Dietrichs
da, u.a. die Silberminen
Dietrichs)
Hintergrund
hat.Die beidenArtikel
enthalten
Dietrich
wahrscheinlich
selbstgesehen
auffalligerweise
wohlaberweiterfhrende
Literaturhinweise.
keineFussnoten,
Dererste
istvonJanAertsen.
Wiebekannt
istAertsen
Beitrag
philosophisch-historische
Erkonzentriert
aufden
dermittelalterlichen
Transzendentalienlehre.
sichbesonders
Spezialist
tranzendentalen
Terminus
kritisiert
dassdieser
,Eines'.Aertsen
(S. 24) KurtFlaschdafr,
imkantischen
Dietrich
als einenTranszendentalphilosoph
Sinnecharakterisiert
hat,und
eineNeufassung
derTranszendentalientheorie
Burkhart
(S. 43,n.41),dassDietrich
Mojsisch
sollen.
htteentwerfen
zu leicht
voneinerdeutschen
Interessanterweise
weist
Aertsen
darauf
hin,dassmannicht
weilBerthold
vonMoosburg
eineganzandere
Dominikaner-Schule
kann,
Auffassung
sprechen
LehredesEinenderaristotelischen
derTranszendentalien
hat.Berthold
ziehtdiePlatonische
Einheit
Dietrich.
Derletztere
sieht
wieeine,reelle
Intention',
vor,underkritisiert
Philosophie
der,Sein'demNichts
Manwundert
DunsScotus,
demNichts.
sich,inwieweit
gegenber
S. 43,N.43).
verhlt
sichhierzu Dietrich
stellt,
(berDunsScotusbeiAertsen
gegenber
vonTizianaSuarez-Nani
werIn dem(infranzsischer
Beitrag
geschriebenen)
Sprache
undEngeldiskutiert.
SiesindTeildermitdendiegeschiedenen
Substanzen,
Intelligenzen
Im Mittelalter
man,apprivoisier
desJensits'.
versuchte
telalterlichen
,Metaphysik
l'espace
de l'au-del',
undSuarex-Nani
weistdaraufhin,dasses sichhierum einengrossen
Die Schriften
desProklus
sindhierwiederum
zurmodernen
Kultur
handelt.
Unterschied
des,ordo
konkludiert
frDietrich.
DerVerfasser
(S. 66-67)dassderZwischenraum
wichtig
ist.AufdieseWeise
aufdieMetaphysik
undauchaufdieTheologie
rerum'
eineAntwort
Dietrich
unterlsstsichverstehen.
unddiegttliche
istdasUniversum
Leitung
intelligibel,
denmittelalterDer Autorunterstricht
zweiOrdenen
derVorsehung.
scheidet
zwischen
isthierdasBeispiel
dafr.
undDietrich
lichenoptimistischen
Rationalismus,
macht
Markus
L. Fhrer
es deutIn einem
inenglischer
Beitrag
geschriebenen
Sprache
in
denGrossen,
undnicht
in derTradition
desAlbertus
vonFreiburg
lichdassDietrich
Intellekts
WasdieTheoriedesaktiven
derdesThomasvonAquinsteht.
anbelangt,
gilt
mitseinem
nichtidentisch
istderIntellekt
desMenschen
Einfluss.
BeiAlbertus
Proklus'
Der Intellekt
is alsosuperior.
desWesens.
beiDietrich
istderIntellekt
Wesen,
aufGrunde
vonMoosburg
isteinerder
am Anfang
einerSchule(S. 88);Berthold
So steht
Dietrich
Schler.
wichtigsten
kosLinieneineGeschichte
Im sechsten
Jeckin grossen
Beitrag
gibtUdo Reinhold
Mansoll,
knnen.
Sachensichndern
diegttlichen
d.h.inwieweit
Paradoxe,
mologischer
derHimmelkrper
lassen,dassdie Anomalien
erklrungsgelten
sagtJeck,das Faktum
derHimmelkrper
wardieStillederBeweging
sind.BeiAristoteles
unmglich.
bedrftig
derZeit,
Es istda keinProblem
wirdenParadoxien.
Testament
AuchimAlten
begegnen
Gottes.
aberdesEingriffes
auchBriefe
kleinen
Schriften
hatnebenseinesehrbekannte
Ps. Dionysius
,mystische'
den ,Spruchdes
deman Polycletos)
hier(imsiebten
Wirfinden
Briefe,
geschrieben.
behandelt
vonFrieberg
dergttlichen
berdienderung
Dinge.Dietrich
Apollophanes'
des
isthier,was,derSpruch
Zentral
De origine
entium
in seinem
diesenBrief
separatorum.
zumBeispiel
berdieSonnenfinsternis
wird.Hierspricht
Dionysius
genannt
Apollophanes'
Dietrich
sindnurbei Christus
SolcheWunder
beimTod Christi.
argumentiert
mglich.
dasBewegliche,
Willen
nachseinem
zuweilen
dassderersteBeweger
(S. 116),wieAlbert
Er
als Albert.
Er gehtaberweiter
zu manipulieren
d.h.die Himmelkrper,
vermag.
Sachen.
derkosmischen
Hierarchie
mitderneuplatonischen
Alberts
dieTheorie
verknpft
berJohannes
miteinerDiskussion
Weiseschliesst
Aufinteressante
Jeckseinen
Beitrag
ab. KeplerhatauchdenBrief
demberhmten
(S. 116-119).
Astronomen,
gelesen
Kepler,
nova
klar.1604wardie Super
derHimmelsphren
AuchfrKeplerwardie Konstanz
damitund
sichintensiv
Helle.Keplerbeschftigte
einSternmitbergrosser
erschienen,
ber
sichKeplermitTheorien
befasste
nachdemSinndesPhnomens.
suchte
Zugleich

15:26:09 PM

3 11

REVIEWS

Er fanddenSpruch
Christi.
desApollophanes
dasGeburtsdatum
Jeckschliesst
vernnftig.
dassderBrief
desDionysius
nochnicht
unterseinen
ab mitderBemerkung
genug
Beitrag
suchtwurde.
Er untersucht
imBandistvonKarl-Hermann
Kandier.
die
Der theologischte
Beitrag
istauchTheologe,
undin dieser
Dietrichs.
Dietrich
theologischen
FolgenderPhilosophie
Hinsicht
istesbedauernswert
dasssseinePredigte
nicht
aufbewahrt
sind.Die Intellektslehre
an Dietrich,
stehtim Mittelpunt
des Interesses
derHistoriker
aberes gehtihmnach
in seinem
Kandier
umeineEinung
mitGotthin.BeiderAbendmahlslehre
willDietrich
mandasHeilmysterium
Deaccidentibus
welche
esgibtfalls
zeigen,
Schwierigkeiten
philosophisch
will.In seiner
Christus
ascendent
omnes
celos
erklren
dieKandier
zusamsuper
QuestioUtrum
menfassend
Dietrich
nicht
sondern
er
bersetzt,
argumentiert
philosophisch,
sagtKandier,
berdenAusdruck
an handvonSchriftstellen.
reflektiert
Franz-Bernhard
Stammktter
legtdardassaufdemFeldederpraktischen
Philosophie
Dietrich
nicht
sehrwichtig
ist.In seinem
Tractatus
dehabitibus
ister,wennerberdenWillen
Problemen
interessiert.
ZumBeispiel
umnaturphilosophische
und
spricht,
gegenEckhart
Ulrich
vonStrassburg
interessiert
ersichmehrfrmetaphysische
Probleme
derGotteserkenntnis
alsfurdiepraktische
SeitederReligion.
Vielleicht
istderGrund,
sagtStammktter,
dassDietrich
zuvielmitderOrganisation
desDominikanerordens
war.
beschftigt
Sehrfundamentale
in Dietrich
werden
vonNikiausLargier
Begriffe
metaphysische
Es handelt
sichberNegativitat,
undFreiheit
im
bei Dietrich
dargestellt.
Mglichkeit,
mitMeister
Eckhart.
Die Diskussion
berdenIntellekt
handelt
letztendlich
ber
Vergleich
dasIch,dasdenGrundin sichselbst
hat.Ausser
demIntellekt
istMglichkeit.
Das Ich
istnachLargier
ein Theorieteil.
Dietrich
lehrteineTheoriederlauteren
Mglichkeit.
Dietrich
undEckhart
stehen
damitausserdemHorizont
einerOnto-Theologie.
Wouter
GorisgibtunseineschneDarstellung
mitdemTitelDietrich
vonFreiburg
und
Meister
Eckhart
ber
dasGute.
NebstdemBeitrag
vonAertsen
handelt
diesersichauchum
dieTranszendentalien.
Bei Dietrich,
einrelationeller
sagtGoris,ist,guprimr
Begriff,
derdas Seiendekonstituiert.
DerBeitrag
Norbert
istdergrsste
Winklers
desBandes(78 Seiten)
undenthlt
neben
einerEinfhrung
einebersetzung
desaltdeutschen
Traktats
VonderWirkenden
unddervervonderSeligkeit
an Eckhart
vonGrndig
), zugeschrieben
(DieLehre
mgenden
Vernunft
(Anfang
des14.Jahrhunderts,
dieser
Eckhart
istnicht
identisch
mitMeister
vonHochheim).
Eckhart
DieserTraktathandeltberdie Naturdes Intellekts
und der Gnade.Nach dem
Aristotelismusstreit
konkludieren
DieterundEckhart,
dassnebendemVerstand
Gnade
ist(S. 223).Bemerkenswert
Textdarber
wiedieTrennung
ist,dassdieser
ntig
schweigt,
vonGottberwunden
Er gibtdemGlauben
werden
knnte.
hierkeineRolle.
Ein Beitrag
vonBurkhart
schliesst
denBandab undstellt
da wieBerthold
Mojsisch
vonMoosburg
dieKritik
desAristoteles
umdieIdeePiatons
Dietrich
berckinterpretiert.
dieseKritik.
Berthold
dieUniversalientheorien
Albertus
und
Avicennas,
sichtigt
verknpft
umdieEinwnde
Aristoteles
anPlatozu entkrften.
NachBerthold
hatAristoteles
Dietrichs,
Platozu Unrecht
kritisiert
alswrendieIdeensingulre
Formen.
Die platonischen
Ideen
sindaufgrund
derUniversalitt
ihresAbgetrennt-sein
(d.h.nichtnurlogisch)
allgemein.
Dervorliegende
Bandenthlt
wertvolle
zumStudium
eineswichtigen
Beitrge
Philosophen
undTheologen.
Es gibtzwareinenNamenregister,
aberichvermisste
eineTotalbibliographie
undeinIndexderBegriffe.
Das BuchistvonGrner
worden.
Verlagschnundsorgfaltig
herausgegeben
Leiden

E.P. Bos

15:26:09 PM

312

REVIEWS

andPaulofGelria.
TheTreatises
BosandStephen
Read,Concepts.
ofThomas
ofCleves
Egbert
de
Introduction.
Editions
de l'Institut
AnEdition
with
a Systematic
Suprieur
oftheTexts
+
xii
147.
Louvain-Paris
Editions
2001,
Peeters,
Louvain-la-Neuve;
pp.
Philosophie,
t. XLII)
ISBN90 429 09013 (Philosophes
mdivaux,
18and30 pageslongrespecan edition
oftwobrief
contains
Thisslimvolume
treatises,
or itscareful
foritsoriginality
treatise
is particularly
Neither
developnoteworthy
tively.
ofmedieval
to thehistorian
buttheyareinvaluable
mentofphilosophical
logic.
points,
andthey
illusthoseofBuridan,
ofnominalist
doctrines,
especially
Theyshowthediffusion
ofthelatefourteenth
tratethelogicalcommonplaces
Moreover,
theyareexpliccentury.
andof
discussions
ofsignsandsignification
Sincethisheading
covers
itlyaboutconcepts.
andsyncategorematic
first
andsecondintentions,
ofterm,
categorematic
including
types
distinctions
came
howlogical
wecanseeclearly
andunivocal
andequivocal
terms,
terms,
in terms
ofmental
to be discussed
byPeterof
language.
Onlyone othersuchtreatise,
tookup the
authors
at leastsevenknown
from
is available
thesameperiod,
though
Ailly,
andearlysixteenth
centuries.
topicin thelatefifteenth
tohavedetermined
He is known
ThomasofClevesis theearliest.
Ofthetwoauthors,
at thecatheBuserin 1364,andhe latertaught
William
ofParisunder
at theUniversity
at therefounded
He waslisted
morethanonceamongthemasters
dralschoolinVienna.
of
at theUniversity
ofVienna,and in 1391waslistedamongthemasters
University
at Parisintheearly
which
He diedin 1412.Histreatise,
mayhavebeenwritten
Cologne.
Paulof
ofthreecommentaries.
andwasthesubject
in twomanuscripts,
1370s,survives
underhimat Parisin 1375.He taught
determined
GelriawasThomas's
student,
having
inPrague
forlessthana yearbefore
in 1382.He stayed
forPrague
atParisbefore
leaving
ofColognefrom1397
at theUniversity
ofVienna.He taught
to theUniversity
moving
in onlyone manuscript,
is heavily
whichsurvives
untilhisdeathin 1404.His treatise,
withthehuman
itaddstwoextrasections
on thatofThomas,
dealing
though
dependent
works
mention
no other
The editors
ofcognition.
andwiththeobjects
cognitive
powers
Thomasor Paul.
byeither
onp. 91 line14itwouldbe preferseemsimpeccable,
ofthetexts
Theedition
though
velvisuicolsolumauditui,
ableto read'sonum'for'solum'in thephrase"applicans
theindexcouldhave
is generally
materiell
The editorial
oratum."
though
veryhelpful,
Therearegooddisofparallel
thefinding
to facilitate
beenlonger,
passages.
especially
The mainpart
edendi.
andtheratio
livesandofthemanuscripts
cussions
oftheauthors'
in
found
ofthedoctrines
is devoted
toa clearanduseful
oftheintroduction
presentation
mention.
On p. 10 Lambert
thatdeserve
Therearejusta fewsmallinfelicities
thetexts.
than
is datedat c. 1240rather
ofLagny)
ofAuxerre's
(moreprobably
byLambert
Logica
thatthe
fallintotheerrorofsuggesting
c. 1250(orevenlater).On p. 29, theeditors
In fact,
senseperceives.
sensibles
arewhatthecommon
common
theyarethosesensibles
Paul'stextis reatheproper
sensibles.
unlike
thatareperceived
bymorethanonesense,
andthecomcolouradequately
thatvisioncognizes
clearon thispoint,saying
sonably
monsensibles
acceptwithout
non-adequately
(p. 116).On p. 39 andp. 41 theeditors
'substance'
isa substance
term
Paul'soddclaimthatthewritten
comment
(p. 123),although
Thereis a tableon p. 43
as an example.
text(p. 94) gave'quality'
Thomas's
parallel
shadesofgreyandblack
different
which
is rendered
bytheuseofinsufficiently
mysterious
theinformation.
to convey
an overview
offourteenth
ingiving
is successful
Theeditors'
introduction
century
logic
ofall the
a detailed
itdoesnotattempt
in relation
to thetwotexts.
However,
exposition
and
withthedefinitions
which
wouldbe illuminated
comparison
bymoreextensive
points
ofthelate
nominalists
discussed
JohnDorp,andtheParisian
byPeterofAilly,
problems
didnothave
thattheeditors
One canunderstand
andearlysixteenth
fifteenth
century.
to
ThomasandPaulmorefully
orto relate
theseissuesthrough,
timeorspacetofollow
Vivarium
40,2

BrillNV,Leiden,2002
Koninklijke
online- www.brill.nl
Alsoavailable

15:26:14 PM

REVIEWS

3 13

theircontemporaries
and successors,
butit is worth
at justone case,thedisglancing
tinction
between
andsignifying
Thomas(p. 91) is like
signifying
instrumentally
formally.
PeterofAillyin regarding
words
insofar
as instrumentally
as theyare
spoken
significative
instruments
fortheproduction
ofconcepts
and,whilehe doesnotdirectiy
speakofconhe does(despite
theeditors'
denialon p. 36) do so indiceptsas formally
significative,
whenhe remarks
thatsignsotherthanconcepts
arenotformally
rectly
significative
(p.
on theother
hand,
92),thatis,significative
justbecauseofwhattheyare.PaulofGelria,
is muchclosertoJohnDorpwhenhe speaksofa signas an instrumentally
effective
or
formal
ofthething
ofinstrumentality
cognition
signified
(p. 121).Dorpusedthenotion
to distinguish
humanconcepts
from
theintellect
as suchandfrom
God,bothofwhich
canbe thought
ofas representative
insomesense.Allthesesenses
ofinstrumentality
were
in laterParisian
tofigure
discussions.
Sometimes
a fullexposition
ofthetexts
wouldhaveinvolved
a lookbackwards
intime.
Thomas's
brief
ofmetaphorical
andironic
usesofterms
case
handling
(p. 92) is a useful
in point.The general
division
between
thetwouseswas discussed
in his
byBuridan
Summulae
desuppositionibus
butwhereBuridan
4.3.1,withsomeof thesameexamples,
themoreusualword'transsumptio
as ifit applied
', Thomasdoesuse'metaphor'
employs
to anyfigure
of speech.In hisbrieflistof typesof figure,
he listsseveralmodesof
modesofclassification
in
forinstance,
found,
metonymy,
alongwiththemoregeneral
Gervasius
ofMelkley,
ofidentity
for
similitude,
namely
identity,
(a subdivision
equality
andcontrariety.
Thismishmash
ofrhetorical
lorepresumably
meant
Gervasius)
something
tothemedieval
student
whohadbeeninstructed
inthese
butisa lotmoredifficult
matters,
forthemodern
reader
to sortout.
The treatises
areoften
becausetheyareso succinct,
butthisuseful
edition
frustrating
willundoubtedly
further
research
intohowthedoctrines
touched
on byThomas
inspire
andPaulwereactually
usedanddeveloped.
Ont.
Waterloo,

E.J.Ashworth

Lamenti
Vallensis
De linguae
latinae
Ad IoannemTortellium
Aretinum
elegantia.
perme
M. Nicolaum
Ienson
Venetiis
est.M.CCCC.LXXI.Introducopusfeliciter
impressum
traduccin
cin,edicincrtica,
y notasporSantiago
LpezMoreda,TomosI-II.
Universidad
deExtremadura,
Cceres1999(Grammatica
Humanstica.
SerieTextos.
3)
833pp.ISBN84 77233578 / 84 77233586
Das Werk
De linguae
Latinae
desitalienischen
Humanisten
Valla(Laurentius
Lorenzo
Elegantia
zu denwichtigen
Schriften
aus demHumanismus,
vondenenes noch
Vallensis)
gehrt
keinetextkritische
Edition
sichausdenUmstnden,
unter
denen
gibt.DieseLckeerklrt
das Werknochzu VallasLebzeiten
das Lichtsah.Die Elegantiae
wurden
nmlich
ohne
VallasZustimmung
in einernochsehrvorlufigen
FormvonAurispa
verffendicht.
Zu
einer
istesbeiVallasLebzeiten
nicht
mehr
Schon
endgltigen
Verffendichung
gekommen.
vorseinem
Todewarenzahlreiche,
an vielenStellen
erheblich
voneinander
abweichende
Versionen
derElegantiae
in Umlauf.
Die erstegedruckte
Edition
erschien
imJahre1471,
dasheitvierzehn
JahrenachVallasTod.
derElegantiae
1441
LpezMoredamacht
glaubhaft
(S. 24-5),da dieersteRedaktion
undeinezweiteRedaktion,
frdie VallaeineAnzahlneuentdeckter
Werkevonu.a.
Plautus
ist.Die endgltige
Version
datiert
hatte,1443erschienen
durchgesehen
Lpez
MoredaaufdasJahr1448(S.25).
NacheinerEinfhrung,
in derLpezMoredakurzVallasLeben(S. 13-6),seine
Polemiken
mitPoggioBracciolini,
Antonio
del Rho,Sanchezde las Brozas,Panormita,
Koninklijke
BrillNV,Leiden,2002
Alsoavailable
online- www.brill.nl

Vivarium
40,2

15:26:23 PM

314

REVIEWS

Bruni(S. 16-22)errtert,
selbst
und
FaciusundLeonardo
gehternheraufdieEkgantiae
aufdieBedeutung
desBegriffes
beidenHumanisten
ein(S. 23-41).1
elegantia
inseinem
einerspaniBucheineTextausgabe
derElegantiae
nebst
LpezMoredabietet
habenJ. IJsewijn
undG. Tournoy
zum
schenbersetzung.
Vorungefhr
Jahren
dreiig
undgedruckten
Editionen
derElegantiae
MaleineKatalogisierung
derHandschriften
ersten
Edition
zu ermglichen.2
Dieses
mitdemlangfristigen
Ziel,einetextkritische
vorgenommen,
inSicht.Lpez
derobenerwhnten
nochlangenicht
Zielistaber,wegen
Schwierigkeiten,
vonIenson
Textesaufdie Textausgabe
Moredahatsichbei derWahldeslateinischen
In seinem
wurde.
textkritischen
dieimJahre1471inVenedig
beschrnkt,
gedruckt
Apparat
beschrnkt
die Abweichungen
den gedruckten
gegenber
LpezMoredasichdarauf,
vonGryphius
Aldus(Venedig
Editionen
1557)
1536)undSteelsius
(Paris1532),
(Antwerpen
wiederTitelseinesBuchessuggeriert,
alsonicht,
zu verzeichnen.
LpezMoredabietet
derEdition
vonIenson.
vielmehr
handelt
es sichumeineNeuauflage
eineedicin
crtica'
Editionen
In denwenigen
Fllenin denenLpezMoredadenTexteinerderanderen
es sichauerdem
umeineeindeutige
demdesIensonvorzieht,
handelt
Fehlentscheidung.
oleiinventrix
DiesistdieLesart
So gibtLpezMoredaS. 56,Z. 28-29:Minerva
putatur.
quod
in derklassischen
aber
Literatur
erweisen
Die Belegstellen
vonSteelsius;
Iensonhatoleae.
des
als die Erfinderin
Lesartseinmu,weilMinerva
da oleaedie korrekte
deutlich,
wird.3
Warum
desOlivenls
lbaums
undnicht
(oleum)
LpezMoredain
dargestellt
(olea)
wirdnicht
klar.
diesem
Einzelfall
dieLesartdesSteelsius
vorzieht,
entfernt
textkritischen
Edition
nochvoneinerrichtigen
WieweitdieWissenschaft
ist,
in demsieeine
BuchvonMariangela
manausdem1993erschienenen
ersieht
Regoliosi,
Zur
zumerstenBuchderElegantiae
textkritische
Editiondes Vorworts
prsentiert.4
Edition
basierenden
textkritischen
Handschriften
deraufdenvorhandenen
Rechtfertigung
mehralshunbraucht
dieVerfasserin
Seitenzhlenden,
dieseseinen,
nurfiinf
Vorwortes,
Werkabernicht
vertraut.5
dertSeiten.
LpezMoredaistmitdiesem
So
Fehler.
Textfinden
sichleiderzahlreiche
In demvonLpezMoredagebotenen
so S. 58,Z. 3:
Worten
einf wo eins zu lesenistundumgekehrt;
gibterin bestimmten
statt
secundus.6
deskorrekten
sitanstatt
abhominibus
fit,S. 404,Z. 21fecundus
quemadmodum
So gibter,wo Vallaim
Fehler.
unterlaufen
Auchinhaltlich
LpezMoredadesfteren
zu
vonHieronymus
zumvierten
Buch(S. 406,Z. 34)bereinenBrief
Vorwort
spricht,
es mitla cartadelgranorador".
ortorem
: epistola
illaadmagnum
Unrecht
,7undbersetzt
weistValla
sondern
es sichabernichtumeinengroen
handelt
Tatschlich
Redner",
LXX desHieronymus
hin.8
Brief
aufdenan denRedner
Magnusgerichteten
dem
imTextvonIensongegenber
indenendieAbweichungen
NebendenFunoten,
bietetLpezMoredaweiverzeichnet
AldusundSteelsius
TextvonGryphius,
werden,
klassischer
Autoren
ZitateausWerken
in denendievonVallagegebenen
tereFunoten,
undwimmeln
sindaberallesanderealsvollstndig
werden.
DieseFunoten
identifiziert
BuchderElegantiae
zumersten
vonFehlern.
Wennwirunsaufdas Vorwort
geradezu
da LpezMoredahiernurS. 62 Z. 21
sichheraus,
dannstellt
beschrnken
(S. 56-64),
Zitateund
erkennbare
identifiziert.
einZitatvonVergilius
Sogarwennes sichumleicht
deutet
. . . handelt,
tandem
wieS. 62,Z. 11: Quousque
, Quintes
LpezMoreda
Anspielungen
wirdas BuchvonRegoliosi
nichtan,da es sichumeinZitathandelt.9
auf,10
Schlagen
ausklassischen
schon
siebzehn
indiesem
Vorwort
dasieallein
sichheraus,
sostellt
(!)Zitate
firdas ganzeWerk
istleiderbeispielhaft
hat.DieseNachlssigkeit
identifiziert
Autoren
unterlaufen
odereineUngenauigkeit
WennVallaeinFehler
vonLpezMoreda.11
ist,fehlt
Ferner
schreibt
eineErluterung.12
fastimmer
LpezMoredadie Zitateaus klassischen
so da derLeserzu Unrecht
nurteilweise
Autoren
sehroftnichtganzsondern
kursiv,
dasWorthat.13
istundVallawieder
dadasZitatabgeschlossen
denEindruck
bekommt,
Autoren
es auchvor,da LpezMoredaeinZitatausklassischen
Wiederholt
kommt
zum
aus demVorwort
vondenschongenannten
nichterkennt.
Beispielen
Abgesehen
identifizierten
undunrichtig
ersten
BuchkannmaneinelangeListevonnichterkannten
Zitaten
aufstellen.14

15:26:23 PM

REVIEWS

3 15

Das BuchvonLpezMoredaistnochin einemanderen

Bereich
sehrunbefriedigend.
Es handelt
sichumdieZitatewelche
Valladenrmischen
insbesondere
ausden
Juristen,
entnommen
hat.Vallaselbst
hebtimVorwort
zumdritten
Buchnachdrcklich
Digesten,
da er die fnfzig
BcherderDigesten
vonAnfang
bis Endedurchgenommen
hervor,
undstudiert
diesesjuristischen
Werkes
freingutes
hat,wobeier die groeBedeutung
Verstndnis
lateinischer
betont.
Es istdahererstaunlich,
da Lpez
unzhliger
Begriffe
Moredasichgeradebei VallasZitatenrmischer
als berfordert
Juristen
systematisch
erweist.
ZitateausJustinians
Institutiones
vertraut;13
LpezMoredaistnurmitdenDigesten
identifiziert
erdaherzu Unrecht
alsFragmente
ausdenDigesten,
selbst
wennVallainaller
Deutlichkeit
aufJustinian
hinweist.16
Ferner
derNameTribonian
nichts.17
sagtihmselbst
Die Hinweise
aufDigestenstellen
sindauerordentlich
undoftschlechthin
falsch.18
ungenau
berdie ofterheblichen
Unterschiede
zwischen
demWortlaut
dervonVallazitierten
unddemTextdermodernen
Standardedition
vonMommsen
verliert
Digestenstellen
Lpez
MoredakeinWort.19
Auchin derbersetzung
finden
sichmanchmal
seltsame
Sachen.20
AnallenEckenundKanten
sichnicht
dieMhegegeben
man,daLpezMoreda
sprt
Hinweisen
Vallassorgfaltig
So erklrt
VallainElegantiae
hat,nicht-spezifischen
nachzugehen.
III 7 (S. 312),das Wortliberi
im allgemeinen
nurim Plural,
aber:
("Kinder")
begegne
Liberum
tarnen
etapudPaulum
In denFunoten
profilioetapudQuintilianum
Caiumque
reperio.
fehlt
einHinweis
aufQuintilian,
wohlaberweist
eraufzweiDigestenstellen
LpezMoredas
undDig.50,16,148pr.
Erstere
Stellebeinhaltet
denfolgenhin,undzwarDig.26,2,22pr
denText:Si quistutorem
dederit
suosenium,
liberum
cum
esset
iseque
esse,
servus,
filio
quem
putabat
liber
tutor
et.Es bedarf
wohlkeiner
dadasWortliber
hiernicht
eque
"Kind,
Erluterung,
Sohn"sondern
"frei"
auerdem
stammt
dasZitatnicht
vonPaulussondern
von
bedeutet;
Die zweiteTextstelle
stammt
vonGaius:Nonestsine
Ulpian.Das Zitatistalso falsch.
"habet
"nonhabet
cuivelunus
unave
enuntiatio
liberos"
liberos"
semliberis,
filius
filiaest:haecenim
numero
sicut
et
et
codicilli.
Dieses
Zitat
ist
also
korrekt.21
perplurativo profertur, pugillares
Derartige
Fehlzitate
sindgangundgbe;LeserdesBuchesvonLpezMoredawerden
daheralle
ZitateundHinweise
mssen.
genauberprfen
Einzweites
inElegantiae
IV 1 (S. 412-416)
ValladenBedeutungsunterBeispiel:
bespricht
schied
zwischen
libertinus
undlibertus.
In diesem
weist
Kapitel
LpezMoredaaufnureinen
htten
sichzahlreiche
hin,undzwarDig.1,5,2lpr.Geradeindiesem
Digestentext
Kapitel
Hinweise
aufdieDigesten
finden
sollen.
Vallasagt(S. 412,Z. 1-2):Libertinus
etlibertus
sola
habent
necgrammatici,
neciurisperiti
maxime
elegantiae
gratia
differentiam,
quam
(quod
pudendum
est)
sciunt.
DieseAussage
Vallaskanmanwiderlegen
durcheinenHinweis
aufDig.40,15,6
tiens
seconfitetur,
libertm
autem
GaiiSeiisenegat
. . . In Z. 18
(Ulpian):
quo
quislibertinm
quidem
conditionem
sicut
einHinweis
hominis,
sagtValla:Perlibertinm
; hierfehlt
significarne
peringenuum
aufDig.1,1,4(Ulpian):
liberi
ethiscontrarium
servi
ettertium
idesthiquidesierunt
liberti,
genus
esseservi.
In Z. 22 erklrt
Valla:utiniure
civili:
sunt
Servitute
manumissi
sunt".
libertini
quiiusta
Deutlicher
kanneinHinweis
aufdie Digesten
nichtsein;es handelt
sichumDig.1,5,6:
Libertini
manumissi
sunt.
Ebensogehrte
zu Z. 23: Quemadmodum
e
sunt,
quiexiustaServitute
"
contrario:
matre
servi
aufDig.
sunt,
nati,necpostea
Ingenui
quilibera
factisuntein Hinweis
libera
natisunt
aufJust.,
Inst.l,4pr:Ingenuus
1,5,5,2:
sunt,
Ingenui
, undeventuell
quiexmatre
utnatus
estliber
est.LpezMoredabietet
keinerlei
somit
est,quistatim
Hinweise;
geschieht
VallaUnrecht,
weilderLesernicht
in derLageist,VallasWerkvollzu wrdigen.22
Der
dademVerfasser
diejuristische
nicht
sichauch
Umstand,
ist,rcht
Terminologie
gelufig
in Elegantiae
IV 48:Aliud
essealiudiura(S. 474-476).
Vallapolemisiert
leges
gegendiemittelalterlichen
wieAccursius,
underrtert
Rechtsgelehrten
dann,dadiesemodernen
Juristen
einZitatvonPaulus,Ulpianodereinemanderen
rmischen
einelexnennen;
Juristen
diesenWortgebrauch
hltVallafrinkorrekt,
da sichdasWortlexbeidenRmern
auf
wiedie lexAquilia
kannmannurverstehen,
wenn
, bezog.DiesePolemik
ganzeGesetze,
mandiejuristische
derGlossatoren
kennt:
dieseunterteilen
einTextfragment
Terminologie
ausdenDigesten
in tituli
undleges
P LpezMoredaistdieseTerminologie
nicht
gelufig,
unddaherbleibt
in seiner
derKernderPolemik
unklar.
bersetzung

15:26:23 PM

316

REVIEWS

mittels
einesZitates
In Elegantiae
ValladenBegriff
VI 46 (S. 770-2)errtert
instratum,
Instratum
aus Dig.50,16,45(nicht,
wieLpezMoredazu Unrecht
gibt,Dig.34,2,25,3):
lautetder
omne
Labeoait.In Wirklichkeit
vestimentum
continere,
quoamkimur
Ulpianus
inquit
mitDig.
omne
vestimentum
Zusammen
Text:In stratu
continere,
quodiniciatur.
Ulpianus
inquit
non
. . . fuhrt
dieszu derSchlufolgerung,
sivictum
velstratum
42,1,34:
inferri
quisiudicato
patiatur
oder
hatund,undda es stratum
da es keinWortinstratum
gibt,da Vallasichgeirrt
hierber
aberkeinWort.
stratus
heit.LpezMoredaverliert
(der4. Deklination)
undUnrichtigkeiten.24
Auch
vonUngenauigkeiten
Das BuchvonLpezMoredastrotzt
nichteinwandfrei.
So
verfahrt
in methodologischer
Hinsicht
LpezMoredamanchmal
esse
VI 59 (S. 796,Z. 8-9)dieLesart:
bietet
erimTextvonElegantiae
Necobidveteratorem
debeconsidestudiis
eruditus
sit
diesabermitY porestomismo
, bersetzt
quodliberalibus
wobeierbemerkt
enlostrabajos
rarse
veterator
elqueseaexperto
liberales",
(S. 797,Funote
nam
de la variante
, quedanlasediciones,
y nopor
86):Hemosoptadoporla traduccin
conla diferenciacin
entreel
de Valla.La congruencia
nec,comoapareceen la edicin
NunhatdiebesteHandschrift
derDigesten,
aslo requiere."
veterano
esclavo
y el novicio
nam.Die codices
deteriores
untersttzen
AuchdieBasilica
derFlorentinus
(F),dieLesartnam.
dahersoll
aberhabendienec.Es istalsoklar,daVallaausletztgenannter
Quellezitiert:
Buchkeineswegs
Hierwirderneut
werden.
auchnecbersetzt
klar,da LpezMoredas
Arbeit
da mitLpezMoredas
Edition
darstellt.
Es istzwarerfreulich,
einetextkritische
Werk
vonVallaswichtigem
undbersetzung
handliche
eineschngestaltete,
Textausgabe
dieman
WeisedenAnforderungen
wirdaberinkeinster
vorhanden
ist,dieArbeit
gerecht,
stellen
darf.
an einesolcheVerffentlichung
Leonter Beek
Nijmegen
1 Aufschlureicher
Elegantiae
inLorenzo
Valla's
Grammar
istD. Marsh,
,
, andpolemic
, method
19 (1979),S. 91-116.
in:Rinascimento,
2 Cf.J. Lfsewijn
- G. Tournoy,
a stampa
e delle
censimento
deimanoscritti
Unprimo
edizioni
di Lorenzo
18
Elegantiarum
Valla
sex
latinae
libri
Lovaniensia,
, in: Humanstica
linguae
degli
delle
e delle
deimanoscritti
contributi
edizioni
., Nuovi
Elegantiae
perl'elenco
(1969),S. 25-41;idd
diLorenzo
Valla
20 (1971),S. 1-3.
Lovaniensia,
, in:Humanstica
3 Cf.Verg.,Georg.
Minerva
' inventrix;
1,18-19:
priquod
Hyg.,Fab.164,1:Minerva
oleaeque
Minerva
suas
esoleas
Resrust.
ineaterra
oleam
mm
;
Ov.,Mix12:mirata
1,2,19;
sevit,
Varro,
saepe
oleaMinerva.
AufdieseZitateverweist
Deci.13,19:inventrix
LpezMoredaaber
Ps.-Quint.,
nicht.
4 Cf.M. Regoliosi,
Elegantie
delle
e montaggio
delValla.
Nelcantiere
Elaborazione
,Roma1993.
5 Er erwhnt
S. 43-7.
in derBibliographie
undes fehlt
es nirgendwo
6 Auchsonst
S. 60,Z. 24:everta
alsfehlerfrei.
istderTextallesandere
EinigeBeispiele:
S.
statt
S. 280,Z. 22:pothac
stattcomposuerit;
S. 62,Z. 25: composuerint
statt
posthac',
eversa;
stattmalehabeat
S. 454,Z. 12:malahabeat
stattceperunt,
; S. 474,Z.
292,Z. 10:coeperunt
S. 798,
S. 792,Z. 8: eastatt
statt
S. 750,Z. 30: ewitais
statt
22: civilium
earn;
civitatis',
civile',
istdurchweg
Wrter
Die Akzentuation
statt
Iavolenus.
Z. 6: Iabolenus
unrichtig,
griechischer
so S. 60,Z. 13;S. 314,Z. 17-18;S. 450,Z. 13;S. 600,Z. 22; S. 762,Z. 4.
7 Derselbe
delquattrocento,
E. Garin,Prosatori
sichin demStandardwerk
Fehlerfindet
TextohneweihatLpezMoredadiesen
[1952],S. 618-9;wahrscheinlich
Milano-Napoli
teresbernommen.
8 Cf.I. Hillberg,
ParsI: Epistulae
Sancii
Eusebii
I-LXX,VindobonaeEpistula,
Hieronymi
1890(CSEL 54),S. 700-8.
Lipsiae
9 Cf.Cic.,Cat.1,1;Liv.6,18,5;Sali.,Cat.20,9;Quint.4,1,68und9,2,7.
10Cf.Regoliosi
1993(s.o.,Anm.4), S. 120-5.
11Bei Zitaten
deutet
aus denPsalmen
an,da es sichum
LpezMoredamanchmal
dieseAndeutung
iuxta
Hebraicum
LXX(G)oderumdiePsalmen
iuxta
diePsalmen
(H)handelt;

15:26:23 PM

3 17

REVIEWS

aberS. 158,Z.4: Psalm.141,4G; S. 484,Z. 5: Psalm.

fehlt
104,23,2G; S. 554,Z. 4:
Psalm.
31,8 G.
12So S. 112,Z. 26,woVallaausdemXXVILBuchederDigesten
inWirklichkeit
zitiert;
VallaausPsalmo
handelt
es sichumBuchXXIX.AufS. 146,Z. 6 zitiert
undcimo;
Lpez
Moredabersetzt
mit"en el salmoXXI". Tatschlich
hatVallasichgeirrt,
abereine
wreamPlatzgewesen.
AufS. 198,Z. 30 spricht
VallaberPsalmXL,was
Erluterung
In Wirklichkeit
ohneweiteres
bernimmt.
handelt
LpezMoredain seinerbersetzung
es sichaberumPsalmCXL.
13Beispiele:
S. 452,Z. 17-18:hocestenim
auctoritatem
fienistnochZitatvonPaulus(in
S. 584,Z. 2-3:Et. . . licitatio
derbersetzung
istnochZitatvon
unrichtig
angedeutet);
S. 750,Z. 23-27istvollstndig
Zitat
unrichtig
Ulpian(inderbersetzung
angedeutet);
wohlin derbersetzung
S. 752,Z. 6-8:nochZitatvon
(imTextnicht,
angedeutet);
Marcian(LpezMoreda,Z. 2, nenntihnzu Unrecht
Marcus);S. 752,Z. 35: appellantes
. . . reponeretur
nochZitatvonCelsus;
S. 756,Z. 10-11:
ZitatvonModestinus;
vollstndig
S. 756,Z. 12-15:dasZitatvonFlorentinus
Z. 15 dicuntur,
S. 762,
gehtbiseinschlielich
Z. 6: Contra
. . . ager
nochZitatvonVarro;S. 796,Z. 1-9:vollstndig
ZitatvonVenuleius
nichtangedeutet);
S. 796,Z. 10-18:vollstndig
ZitatvonUlpian(in
(inderbersetzung
derbersetzung
nichtangedeutet);
S. 798,Z. 15-16:Namque
. . . duorum
nochZitatvon
. . . exauctoravisse
istvollstndig
ZitatvonUlpian(nicht
Ulpian;S. 800,Z. 13-16:Ignominiosa
vonJulian,
wieVallaZ. 13 sagt,brigens
ohneda LpezMoredadieseVerwechslung
S. 800,Z. 32:Depectus
. . .pactus
inderbersetzung);
istZitatvonUlpian(richtig
bemerkt);
S. 802,Z. 24-31:vollstndig
ZitatvonUlpian(inderbersetzung
nichtangedeutet).
14Beispiele:
S. 64,Z. 4: cf.Liv.5,49,7;S. 124,Z. 3: Priscianum
bezieht
sichaufPrise.,
Inst.3,2(GLKIII, S. 93);S. 178,Z. 5 zitiert
VallaausCic.,Brut.
e Cilicia
dece1,1:Quum
In seiner
dens
Rhodm
venissem.
e Sicilia
decedens
Rhodm
gibtLpezMoreda:Quum
bersetzung
"
wozuer in einerFunote
bemerkt:
venissem,
Cic.,Brut.1,1:Sicilia
proCilicia(sic!)In
Wirklichkeit
habendieManuskripte
Cicerosnurdas korrekte
Cilicia.
AufS. 204,Z. 24,
wo Vallaaus Ov.,Her.19,76:Copia
sitmodo
identifiziert
placandae
parvatuizitiert,
Lpez
MoredadiesalsOv.,Her.19,74,undfgt
hinzu:Esincorrecto
porquesolohay15cartas."WasLpezMoredasichhiergedacht
hatistrtselhaft.
AufS. 212,Z. 14-15,
zitiert
VallaausCassiusHemina,
abernicht
ausdem2. sondern
ausdem4. Buch(cf.H. Peter,
Historicorum
Romanorum
Iteratis
curisdisposuit
recensuit
est.Volumen
reliquiae.
praefatus
prius,
Lipsiae1914,S. 109-10).AufS. 292,Z. 4-5 fehltein HinweisaufCic.,Mur.28: si
mihi.
. . stomachum
moveritis.
AufS. 308,Z. 5, istderHinweis
Reg.7,17in Reg.3,7,17zu
ndern.
AufS. 324,Z. 28-29,spricht
Vallavonseinenlibri
dialectici.
LpezMoredasagt
in einerFunote,
VallanehmehieraufEleg.II 25 Bezug.In Wirklichkeit
bezieht
Valla
sichnatrlich
aufseinWerk
Dialecticae
an demVallainderselben
Zeitarbeitete
disputationes,
unddas 1439verffendicht
wurde.
AufS. 330,Z. 25 zitiert
Vallaausdem5. Buchder
OdendesHoraz";einHinweis
da es sichumeineUmschreibung
desBuches
darauf,
derEpodenhandelt,
wrehieram Platz.AufS. 334,Z. 14,istderHinweis
Psal.8,2,10
in Psalm.
AufS. 392,Z. 9 istin derFunote
8,2.10zu ndern.
Cic.,Sal.5,5"in Ps.zu ndern.
AufS. 396,Z. 21,zitiert
Valla
Cic.,Inv.inSali.2,5(keinbuchstbliches
Zitat)"
Cicero:Equits
nonoptimos
misisse
credo
Caesar
ad tuum
, nihil
equitatum.
LpezMoredasagt
in einerFunote:
hierzu
. Es istkeinWunder,
da diesesZitatsich
Caes.,noninvenitur
beiCaesarnicht
weiles,wieVallaimTextdeutlich
findet,
sagt,demCiceroentnommen
bersetzt
ist,undzwarCic.,Deiot.
8,24.brigens
LpezMoredahierad tuum
equitatum
mitparala preparacin
de tucaballera"
zu deiner
imVergleich
unrichtig
(sollheien:
AufS. 410-1identifiziert
als
Kavallerie").
LpezMoredaeinZitatvonEuripides
lediglich
aus derHecuba
es handelt
sichumdieVerse814-9dieserTragdie.
AufS.
stammend;
vondemdurchVallamit
442,Z. 20 undZ. 21 verdeutlicht
LpezMoredazweiZitaten
Namengenannten
Boethius
nurdurchBoeth
.". AufS. 490,Z. 9-10,zitiert
VallaCicero:
vela seorsum
vel(utCiceroni
a seorsum
eundo
dicta.
Seditio,
sedendo,
placet)
LpezMoredagibt

15:26:23 PM

318

REVIEWS

Zitataus
berliefertes
es handelt
sichaberumeinbeiNoniusMarcellus
keinen
Hinweis,
omnia.
Fase.39:
dem6. BuchedesDe republica
; cf.M. TulliCkeronis
scripta
quaemanserunt
K. Ziegler.
Accedit
tasextum
De re publicalibrorum
sexquae manserunt
recognovit
a M. Tullio
estinlib.
bula,Lipsiae1964,S. 122:Non.,p. 25,3: seditionis
manifestata
proprietas
seditio
diciture.
Mansehe
eunt
aliiad alios,
VI:,eaque
dissensio
derepublica
civium,
quodseorsum
skutCicero
aitinderepublica.
AufS. 494,
est<dissensio
auchServ.,
Aen.1,149:seditio
civium>,
undzwar:o mieinZitatvonCiceronichterkannt,
Z. 11 hatLpezMoredawiederum
InWirklichkeit
invenitur".
administrandi
consulatus.
seram
conditionem
sagtnur:non
LpezMoreda
administrandae
sed
o condicionem
miseram
nonmodo
istdasZitatausCic.,Cat.2,14entnommen:
iuventa
ein
reipublicae.
AufS. 530,Z. 26-27,istpetulansque
etiam
conservandae
mglicherweise
= Carm.
mai.9,84:quosinter
Honorio
dictum
ZitatausClaud.,Epithal.
petulans
Aug.etMariae
aufdasbekannte
Vincere
Iuventas.
AufS. 558,Z. 3-4isteinHinweis
altacervice
seis,
Hannibal;
AufS. 604,Z. 21,istdasZitatin Hor.,Serm.
utinescis
zu ergnzen.
victoria
(Liv.22,51,4)
mortis
einHinweis
beidemZitatPropositis
AufS. 646,Z. 15,fehlt
zu ndern.
1,1,16-17
auf
Clodicontentionesque
etexilii
manseheCic.,Att.2,19,1:minae
minis;
<quae>proponuntur,
es is
huicurbi
beidemZitatMagnum
einHinweis
derselben
Seitefehlt
ostenditur,
periculum
ostenditur.
AufS. 786,Z. 27,gibtLpez
einZitataus Cic.,Div.2,47:urbiigitur
periculum
sich
aufeinenDigestentext;
es handelt
einenHinweis
MoredabeieinemZitatausFestus
= S. 22 Mller.
AufS. 776,Z. 21,wo Vallasagt:quod
S. 20 Lindsay
aberumFestus,
"
si convictus
esset
XII tabularum
: Calumniator
idem
illam
declaratur
quo(sic)reus,
patiatur,
perlegem
Vallaaus Ps.zitiert
weistLpezMoredanuraufDig.,o Gell."hin;in Wirklichkeit
etcalumniator
idem
utproditor
morte
..erant
enim
Deel.19 arg
pateretur
quod
leges,
puniretur,
Quint.,
esset.
si convictus
reus,
15Auffallig
aus
wieLpezMoredaFragmente
wirkt
dieArtundWeise,
undverwirrend
z.B.Dig.20,1,5,1,1.
Er gibtkonsequent
einenfnfstelligen
zitiert.
denDigesten
Hinweis,
Hinweis:
blichisteinvierstelliger
Buch,Titel,lexundParagraph.
LpezMoredaweist
desParagraphen
nochaufdieZeileinnerhalb
darberhinaus
Ziffer
dieletzte
durch
(offenbar)
nichtdie
hat.Jedenfalls
benutzt
er hierfr
abernichtwelcheTextausgabe
hin,erwhnt
in operis
Iustiniani
Th. Mommsen,
Standardedition
recognovit
adsumpto
Augusti
Digesta
Berolini
1962-1963.
Vol.I-II.Editioalteralucisopeexpressa,
PauloKruegero.
societatem
TrundTor.
Fehlern
ffnet
Zitierweise
Moredas
unbliche
Lpez
16AufS. 492,Z. 34,weist
Inst.
Inst.
4,6,15
4,6,15statt
Just.,
LpezMoredaaufGramm.
Iustiniani
S. 746,Z. 2-6:Noxaededere,
bietet
hin.Eingutes
pace,siveTreboniani
Beispiel
estpersonae
Latinas
litteras
neciura,necforsitan
namIustinianus
etsociorum,
dare,
novit,
Ille autemait:,Noxa,estcorpusquod
ob noxam,qua significatur
sivetradere
culpa.
"
aber
daillesichhieraufIustinianus
noeuit.'Es istdeuich,
bezieht,
LpezMoredaweist
Inst.4,8,1.AufS. 747,
handelt
es sichumJust.,
hin.In Wirklichkeit
aufDig.9,1,1,11
AufS. 748,
verfehlt.
undDig.50,16,238
aufDig.35,2,63
Funote
55,sinddieHinweise
exeoappellatur
idem
in bezugaufdasZitatTestamentm,
einHinweis
Z. 1,fehlt
quod
inquit,
Inst.2,1Opr.
istJust.,
aufJustinian;
sichidem
mentis
est.Auchhierbezieht
testatio
gemeint
VallagegendenGlossator
AufS. 784,Z. 17-22polemisiert
der,nachAussage
Accursius,
in Institutionibus,
verkennt:
desWortes
Vallas,dieBedeutung
qui(jc.Accursius)
lignum
fiunsicinterex qua aedificia
ubidicitur
significatur,
ligniomnismateria
,appellatione
materiam
immemor
a iurisconsultis
etlapides,
utcaementa,
prolignoad
exponi
pretatur,
et Plinius
et Cato et Varroet Columella
aedificia
qui de agricultura
utili;quamquam
etbreviter
illiusmateriam
etiamarborem
appellant,
particulamque
scripsere,
aliiquevivam
sonvonlignum
woabernicht
Inst.2,1,29,
aufJust.,
einHinweis
Hierfehlt
omnelignum."
= Dig.41,1,7,10
statt
dieRedeist(demGaius,Dig.50,16,62
dernvontignum
[mitquibus
utili
beziehen
adaedificia
materiam
a iurisconsultis
Die Worte
proligno
exponi
qua]entnommen).
ut
nomen
sichaufDig.32,55pr
est,sedsicseparatur,
generale
Ligniappellatio
(Ulpian):
necesfulciendum
Materia
sitaliquidmateria,
est,quaead aedificandum
aliquidlignum.
est."FrCatoltsichu.a. auf
causaparatm
comburendi
sariaest,lignum,
quidquid
fiirColumella
furVarrou.a.aufResrust.
1,22,1und1,41,1,
6,3und21,2verweisen,
Agr.

15:26:23 PM

REVIEWS

3 19

aufResrust.
si necessitas
1,2:materiam
lapidemque,
aedificandi
coegerit
(undpassim
), frPlinius,
httedie Erwhnung
Nat.hist,
passim
(BTL 164Mal).AufS. 792,Z. 6-10,wo
gengt
Vallaspricht
vonIustinianus
cumUlpiano
vero
inInstitutionibus
dicens
, weistLpezMoredaauf
Inst.4,6,7hin;auerdem
Dig.20,1,5,1,1
(sic)stattdeskorrekten
Just,
gibter Z. 8 nicht
earn
sondern
dasungrammatikalische
ea.
17In Elegantiae
VI 35,aufS. 747,Funote
sei
54,behauptet
LpezMoreda,Trebonianus
derlatinisierte
NamedesJuristen
In Wirklichkeit
warTribonian
derwichtigTryphoninus.
- E. Seckel,
stederjustinianischen
cf.H. Heumann
Handlexikon
zudenQuellen
Kompilatoren;
=
desrmischen
Rechts
der
, 10.Auflage,
Jena1907 Graz1958,S. 593:528-529
Mitglied
Kommission
frdie Ausarbeitung
des KodexersterLesung,530-533Prsident
der
533 mitdenProfessoren
undDorotheus
in demmit
Digestenkommission,
Theophilus
derInstitutionen
betrauten
Urheber
derL decisiones
Ausschusse,
Abfassung
geistiger
(cf.
lust.Inst.I 5, 3),534erstes
derKommission
frdieHerstellung
descodexrepetiMitglied
taepraelectionis;
inhohen
Aemtern:
535ff
wieder
officiorum,
magister
quaestor,
gest.546".
ManseheauchCod.Iust.l,17,2pr.9.1
law
1.17;A. Berger,
,
Encyclopedic
dictionary
ofRoman
1953= 1968,S. 742;T. Honor,Tribonian,
London1978.
Philadelphia
18Folgende
Hinweise
sindzu korrigieren:
S. 584,Z. 3 lesemanDig.39,4,9,1-2;
S. 584,
Z. 9 Dig.18,2,14pr-2;S. 776,Z. 32 Dig.48,16,lpr-l;
S. 778,Z. 4 Dig.48,16,1,6;
S. 782,
Z. 22 Dig.47,10,15,11-12;
S. 790,Z. 26-29Dig.50,16,43-44
(Ulpianbeziehungsweise
Z. 10Dig.21,l,37pr.
AufS. 800,Z. 13 istein
ibid.,
Gaius);S. 796,Z. 3 Dig.21,1,65,2;
Hinweis
aufDig.3,2,2,2zu ergnzen;
in derselben
Zeilezitiert
Vallairrtmlicherweise
statt
Julian
Ulpian.
19Als
dieneein TextvonGaiusaus Dig.39,4,9,1-2
Beispiel
(nicht1-3,wieLpez
MoredaaufS. 584,Z. 3-9zitiert),
wobeiichin eckigen
Klammern
denWortlaut
der
Mommsenschen
Edition
Licitatio
hinzufge:
[locatio]
vectigalium,
quaecalore[calor]licitantium
ultramodumsolitaeconditionis
ita demumadmittenda
inflatur,
[conductionis]
et cautionem
offerre
est,si fideiussores
idoneos,
is,qui licitatione
vicerit,
sit;ad
paratus
conducendum
invitus
nemocompellitur.
Et ideocompleto
convectigal
[impleto]
tempore
ditionis
sunt.Licitatores
ad
[conductionis]
alloquendi
[elocanda]
[reliquatores]
vectigalium
iterandam
conductionem
conductioni
satisfaciant,
admittendi
non
ante,quamsuperiori
sunt".
Auchin anderen
vonVallazitierten
TextensinddieUnterschiede
zumderzeitigen
Standardedition
ohnedaLpezMoredasieerwhnt.
Einkrasser
Fallistauch
erheblich,
wo es bei LpezMoredavonovesundovem
die Rede
Dig.47,14,1,1
(S. 710,Z. 19-24),
Mommsen
boves
undbovem
hat.brigens
istabigens
in Z. 23 (inderberist,whrend
aufS. 711 beibehalten)
ohneweiteres
essollabigeus
heien.
EineAusnahme
setzung
unrichtig:
findet
sichaufS. 750,Z. 10,wo dasdurchVallageschriebene
nonimDigestentext
fehlt
undLpezMoredadiesineinerFunote
erwhnt.
Dennoch
mutet
dieseeinsame
Funote
komisch
an,wennmaneinigeZeilenspter
(S. 750,Z. 31 - S. 752,Z. 8) imTextvon
zahlreiche
durch
nicht
Dig.50,16,239,3
LpezMoreda
signalisierte
Abweichungen
gegenber
demDigestentext
vonMommsen
feststellt
undauerdem
denNamendesJuristen
Marcian
zu Marcusverstmmelt
sieht.EinezweiteStellewo LpezMoredaselbst
Textvarianten
erwhnt
findet
sichS. 771,Funote
aufdenTextselbst(Dig.
76,wo abereinHinweis
fehlt.
Unerwhnte
erhebliche
finden
sichferner
S. 756,Z. 3-11
48,5,35)
Abweichungen
S. 762,Z. 4 (griechisch);
S. 762,Z. 27-31(= Dig.32,52,1,
nicht
(= Dig.50,16,60pr),
Dig,
S. 768,Z. 11-16(einTextvonMarcian,
nichtvonMarcus),
undzwarDig.
32,52,2,1);
Ferner
aufS. 770,Z. 6-10(= Dig.48,5,6,1)
35,2,91(nicht
Dig.35,2,1,2).
Abweichungen
imGriechischen.
Einmerkwrdiger
Fallfindet
sichweiter
S. 770-771,
wo sichZ. 10das
Wortiaicpevaiv
inderbersetzung
dasfehlerhafte
und
findet,
griechische
iaKjrpcuaiv
indenDigesten
AufS. 776,Z. 3,zitiert
Valla
cp0opv
(vonLpezMoredanicht
erwhnt).
ausDig.50,17,65
undDig.50,17,177
Hinweise
sind
(dievonLpezMoredagebotenen
Natura
. . .; in denDigesten
findet
cavillationis,
unrichtig):
aK(i|iaappellaverunt
quamGraeci
sichabernichtaxxowia
sondern
AuchhierkeineErluterung.
Im ZitataufS.
acopixr|v.
wimmelt
es ebenfalls
nurso vonAbweichungen
782,Z. 11-18(= Dig.47,10,15,3-5)

15:26:23 PM

320

REVIEWS

demDigestentext.
AufS. 788,inElegantiae
VI 55,errtert
ValladieBedeutung
gegenber
derWrter
liberi
undposteriores.
Vallafangt
miteinem
ZitatausDig.38.10,10,7
, maiores,
patres
wieLpezMoredazu Unrecht
an (Z. 12):Patres,"
(nicht,
gibt,Dig.38,10,10,8,1)
inquit
ad tritavos
vocbulo
Paulus,
usque
proprio
nuncupantur
apudRomanos
LpezMoredaerwhnt
da Paulusin denDigesten
nichtvonpatres
sondern
vonparentes
wasim
nicht,
spricht,
Falleinengroen
Unterschied
macht.
AufS. 802,Z. 24-31istimTextvon
gegebenen
nur 17)obsidiani
veientani
zumrtselhaften
absciani
neuentani
verDig.34,2,19-17-19
(nicht
ballhornt.
20So bersetzt
mitM. Manilio",
waser,ibid.,
LpezMoredaaufS. 293M. Manlius
Funote
Es handelt
sichabernichtumeinenManilius,
sondern
umden
8, wiederholt.
bekannten
Retter
Roms(cf.Liv.5,47,1-8).
AufS. 782,Z. 15,bersetzt
LpezMoreda
adversus
bonos
mores
mit"enrelacin
a lasbuenascostumbres";
istnatrlich
"congemeint
trario
a las buenascostumbres".
21HtteLpezMoredasichetwasmehrMhe
so htte
erfolgende
Parallelen
gegeben,
finden
knnen:
Cod.Iust.3,28,33pr:
Si quissuotestamento
maximam
libero
derequidem
portionem
Illiusetiam
talem
linquet
(ausdemJahre529)undCod.Iust.5,9,8,4(5):
patris,
quiinsuapotestate
liberum
velliberos
habens
. . . (ausdemselben
Jahr).
22Aufhnliche
Weisefehlt
aufS. 454,Z. 10 (pupillus)
einHinweis
aufDig.50,16,239
inpatris
esseautmorte
autemanciest,qui,cumimpubes
est,desiit
Pupillus
(Pomponius):
potestate
AufS. 474,Z. 25 (iuscivile)
fehlt
einHinweis
aufDig.1,1,
lusautem
patone.
7pr(Papinian):
civile
senatus
decretis
auctoritate
venit
est,quodexlegibus,
scis,
consultis,
plebis
principm,
prudentium
undeventuell
aufJust.,
Inst.1,2,3:Scriptum
iusestlex,plebiscita,
senatus
consulta,
principm
S. 484,Z. 26: Silvaetlucus
sicdifferunt,
edicta,
placita,
magistratuum
responsa
prudentium.
saltusque
silva
nomen
est
solet
esse
caed.ua
istzweifelsohne
teilweise
einem
; praeterea
quod
generalius
Digestentext
vonGaius,Dig.50,16,30pr,
entnommen:
Silvacaedua
est,utquidam
putant,
quaeinhochabetur,
utcaederetur.
FrS. 486,Z. 23 (vectigal)
cf.Dig.50,16,17,1
Publica
intelvectigalia
(Ulpian):
exquibus
. . . FrS. 500,Z. 6 (monumentum)
cf.Dig.11,7,2,6
debemus,
legere
vectigal
fiscus
capit
servandae
Monumentum
memoriae
frS. 500,Z. 19cf.Dig.38,1;
est,quod
existt,
(Ulpian):
gratia
furS. 500,Z. 22 cf.Dig.38,1,1.FrS. 626,Z. 30 {occupare)
cf.Just.,
Inst.2,1,12:quod
enim
ante
raone
conceditur.
FrS. 752,Z. 24 cf.Dig.15,1,5,4.
nullius
est,idnaturali
occupanti
AufS. 752,Z. 21 istderHinweis
aufDig.15,1,5,4,2
durch
zu ersetzen.
Auf
Dig.15,l,4pr
S. 758,Z. 11 ersetze
manDig.50,16,60,1,1
durchDig.50,16,198.
AufS. 762,Z. 7-8
= S. 175Mller,
VallasichaufFestus,
aufDig.50,16,30,2.
bezieht
S. 181Lindsay
nicht
AufS. 768,Z. 19 ersetze
manDig.27,3,1,9,1
durchDig.27,3,1,8-9.
AufS. 768,Z. 29
fehlt
einHinweis
aufDig.48,5,35pr
stattcupidinis).
Zu S. 770,Z. 2-3:
(mitconsuetudinis
innupta,
invirgine,
velvidua,
velpuero
committitur
mandenHinweis
Adulterium
stuprum
ergnze
innupta
invidua
velvirane
velpuero
committiaufDig.48,5,35,1:
Adulterium
admittitur,
stuprum
aufdenlocus
aufDig.3,2,4,4einHinweis
tur.AufS. 776,Z. 26,fehlt
bei denHinweis
statt
adversa).
geminus
Dig.47,15,lpr
(mitaltera
23Mansehe
15.
auchFunote
24So spricht
VI 48 (S. 774,Z. 12)vonC. Flaccus
VallabeiLpezMoredainElegantiae
lautet:
Fiaccoen el
inlibro
deiure
Granio
, wasaufS. 775in derbersetzung
Papiniano
nicht
korHierhatLpezMoredawieder
einenFehler
librodelderecho
de Papiniano".
sondern
umeinevon
es handelt
sichnichtumdenbekannten
Juristen
Papinian,
rigiert:
dassogenvonleges
Sextus
rund500v.G.angelegte
regiae,
(oderPublius)
Sammlung
Papirius
curinanteiusPapirianum;
cf.Dig.1,2,2,2
Etitalegeset ipse(sc.Romulus)
(Pomponius):
inlibro
exstant
etsequentes
atasad populum
tulit:
tulerunt
reges.
Quaeomnes
conscriptae
Corinthii
exprinDemarathi
SextiPapirii,
illistemporibus,
filius,
quibusSuperbus
quifuit
de
nonquiaPapirius
iuscivilePapirianum,
viris.
Is liber,
utdiximus,
appellatur
cipalibus
latasinunumcontulit;
undibid.36:
sedquodlegessineordine
suoquicquam
ibiadiecit,
Mansehe
in unumcontulit".
Publius
Fuitautemin primis
(sic)Papirius,
quilegesregias
desrmischen
Die Quellen
1907(s.o.,Anm.17),S. 403;L. Wenger,
auchHeumann-Seckel
1953(s.o.,Anm.17),S. 617 (ungenau).
Rechts
, Wien1953,S. 356-7;Berger

15:26:23 PM

32 1

REVIEWS

' nelMedioevo
e nelRinascimento
della
'Laconsolazione
Robert
Black& Gabriella
Pomaro,
filosofia
'
/ Boethius'
s 'Consolation
Libri
discuola
e glosse
neimanoscritti
italiano.
ofPhilosophy
fiorentini
Schoolbooks
andtheir
Glosses
in Florentine
Medieval
andRenaissance
Education.
inItalian
e archivi,
SISMEL:Edizioni
delGaluzzo,Florence
2000(Biblioteche
7)
Manuscripts.
xxii& 362pp.with50 plates.ISBN88-87027-92-7
ofBoethius'
Consolatio
is the
bookonthetradition
Thismagnificently
Philosophiae
published
in Florentine
libraries.
The
ina projected
series
ofstudies
ofmanuscript
schoolbooks
first
willeventually
coverallthemajorschool
series
Horace,
authors,
Cicero,
Claudian,
including
Valerius
SenecatheTragedian,
Sallust,
Statius,
Terence,
Lucan,Ovid,Persius,
Juvenal,
whowerereadin thegrammar
schoolof
as wellas minor
Maximus
andVergil,
authors,
in Florentine
Florence.
Out ofover1,300manuscripts
extant
medieval
andrenaissance
as schoolbooks
for
theauthors
haveidentified
about325which
canbe regarded
libraries,
contain
thesignatures
ofpupils
at school,
oranother.
onereason
Theymay,forexample,
thatclearly
suchas elementary
or showotherfeatures
marginal
pointto theclassroom,
in anthologies
oftexts
andinterlinear
, andthepresence
probationes
pennae
glosses,
grouped
auctorum
which
reflect
curricula
andsyllabus
outlines.
It is theauthors'
intencontemporary
a fullpalaeographical,
andhistorical
ofeachmanutionto publish
philological
analysis
to itseducational
context.
Judged
script,
giving
particular
emphasis
bythehighscholarly
in thestudy
ofthefirst
thisseries
willbecomea landmark
ofmedieval
volume,
qualities
in Italy.
andrenaissance
schooling
Boethius'
Consolatio
wasa logicalchoicewithwhich
to opentheseries.
The
Philosophiae
andwasreadbypeoplefrom
different
in society.
In
bookwasimmensely
ranks
popular,
schools
it waswidely
witness
theage-oldtradition
ofglosses
and
thegrammar
studied,
A suresignofitspopularity
is thefactthatthe37 MSS oftheConsolatio
commentaries.
inFlorentine
libraries
andidentified
as schoolbooks,
found
constitute
thelargest
number
of
MSS foranyschool
textinthesurvey
BlackandGabriella
Pomaro.
this
byRobert
Among
- again,thelargest
aretwelve
as schoolbooks
number
ofsigned
groupthere
copiessigned
MSS foranyauthor
inthesurvey.
In theintroduction,
school
written
anexplanabyBlack,
tionis givenforitspreeminent
He showsthattheConsolatio
amongschoolbooks.
position
inthecurriculum
wasa staple
oflayandcommunal
a transitional
schools,
holding
position
between
theminor
authors
Prudentius'
and
, Aesop's
fables,
Dittochaeon,
(suchas Cato'sDistichs
classics
suchas Horace,
Ovid,Cicero
Epigrammata
) andmajorauthors
(Latin
Prosper's
Vergil,
and Sallust).
The Consolatio
circulated
almost
whichsetsit
codices,
alwaysin single-text
theminor
texts
which
werenormally
included
inanthologies.
Blackalsosuggests
apartfrom
thatallusions
toother
texts
arefrequent
in majorbutrarein minor
texts.
In thisrespect
seemsto belongto themajortexts,
it is unclear
howmany
too,theConsolatio
although
allusions
arein factmeresententiae
takenfrom
thesummary
ofthe
anthologies
(compare
authors
citedonpp.6-7withthelistofsententiae
onp. 14).On theother
hand,thepresenceofextensive
vernacular
thatithadmoreincommon
withtheminor
glosses
suggests
- which
- thanwiththemajortexts.
texts
werefrequently
in thevulgar
glossed
tongue
Thistransitional
status
oftheConsolatio
as a schooltexthasbeenhinted
at byearlier
scholars
buttheevidence
herepresented
is thefirst
clear
(e.g.thelateMargaret
Gibson),
Blackconvincingly
relates
thispointto curricular
andinstitutional
in
proof.
specialisation
latermedieval
catered
forthehigher
theteaching
of
Italy.Universities
disciplines,
leaving
inthegrammar
toteachers
andcommunal
schools.
The Consolatio
becamea stagrammar
oftheseschools,
which
areoften
pleinthecurriculum
explains
whytheglosses
verysimandphilological
focus.It is therefore
not
ple andhavean overwhelmingly
grammatical
thatbefore
thethirteenth
theConsolatio
washardly
usedas a schooltext,
surprising
century
themajority
ofMSS dating
from
thefourteenth
andearly
fifteenth
centuries.
ref(Dante's
madein thefirst
decadeofthefourteenth
to theConsolatio
as 'thatbook
erence,
century,
known
to onlya few'seemsto confirm
thispoint;Convivio
thatthe
Il.xii.)Blacksuggests
Koninklijke
BrillNV,Leiden,2002
- www.brill.nl
Alsoavailable
online

Vivarium
40,2

15:26:28 PM

322

REVIEWS

in themonastic
Consolatio
didnotfindmuchfavour
andecclesiastical
schools
morecharacteristic
oftwelfth
andearlythirteenth-century
thethirteenth
Italy,for'before
century,
thetextwouldhaveentered
intoa comprehensive
andunspecialised
curriculum
extendtherudiments
ofreading
andwriting
all thewayto metaphysics
andtheology.
ingfrom
In thiscontext,
itwasinconceivable
thatthephilosophical,
scientific
andtheological
dimensionsoftheConsolation
couldhavebeenignored'
(pp.28-29).WhentheItaliansituation
is compared
to thatin northern
seemscertainly
Europe,Black'ssuggestion
plausible.
ofAuxerre
andWilliam
ofConches(ca. 1125) certainly
(ca. 900),hisrevisers
Remigius
didnotignore
thesedimensions.
Thisdoesnot,however,
ruleoutthepossibility
thata
evenwithin
sucha broadanduniversal
chosetoignore
the
teacher,
curriculum,
working
andto treattheConsolatio
as a grammar
andtheological
text.After
philosophical
aspects
a merely
northern
all,thereareMSS from
twelfth-century
Europewhichreflect
gramsimilar
totheoneinlatermedieval
matical
Italy.Whythiscouldnothavehapapproach
penedin twelfth-century
Italyis stillan openquestion.
observations.
He hasfound
usein the
Blackmakesseveral
further
extensive
important
MSS oftheBoethius
ofAuxerre
Florentine
commentaries
andespecially
by
byRemigius
which
I havesomeWilliam
ofConches
andNicholas
Trevet.
theview,
(Thisshould
qualify
thathumanists
fromthe'pretimescomeacross,
consciously
onlyglosses
appropriated
Aninteresting
is thetranslation
twelfth
intothevernacular
of
century.)
discovery
gothic'
as wellas extensive
extracts
from
thehitherto
unfrom
William's
commentary
excerpts
di Carmignano
identified
vernacular
translation
BML,Pl. 23 dxt.
(Florence,
byGiandino
has
oftheuseofthevernacular
toteachLatinlanguage
andliterature
11).Thequestion
R. Witt,
'Inthe
scholars
beensubject
tosomecontroversy
(seemostrecently
Footsteps
among
thisMS,which
seemstobe excepLeiden2000,194-5,
n. 74).Apartfrom
Ancients',
ofthe
- Blackis sceptical
- indeedatpresent
translations
abouttheuseofvernacular
tional
unique
in Latineducation
noteon p. 319n. 522),buthe notesthatvernacu(seehisimportant
in theMSS (33 outofthe37 Boethius
schoolbooks
larglosses
arefrequently
encountered
inthesame
inFlorence
often
different
commentators
vernacular
contain
byseveral
glosses,
in thecategory
oftheminor
whichwere
texts,
MS). Thisseemsto placetheConsolatio
notable
in thevernacular
farmorefrequently
thanthemajortexts(with
excepglossed
I think,
thesharpedgesofthe
shouldsoften
tions,see p. 37 n. 59). His conclusions,
debate.
nature
ofthe
theoverwhelmingly
observation
concerns
Another
philological
important
thatthe
It is commonly
assumed
(e.g.byE. Garin,P. Gehland P. Grendler)
glosses.
MSS showan almost
total
buttheFlorentine
Consolatio
served
toteachmoralphilosophy,
In general,
leveloftheglossing
theintellectual
andmoralinterest.
lackofphilosophical
to
butit forms
a welcome
antidote
is low.Thisconclusion
maynotsoundspectacular,
with
in itstrainan enhanced
viewthathumanism
thecommon
preoccupation
brought
Was
education.
withreference
to Italianhumanist
in particular
in theclassroom,
morals
in dailyclassroom
withmoralphilosophy
there
activities,
apart
anyserious
preoccupation
or defended
theircurmadewhentheyadvertised
fromtheelevated
claimshumanists
Previous
letters
andotherappropriate
in prefaces,
riculum
orations,
genliterary
genres?
facevalue,claims
claimsat their
elevated
ofscholars
often
tookthehumanists'
erations
andwiseperintovirtuous
wasessential
forturning
thattheir
totheeffect
pupils
training
ofhumanist
Theimpact
liteofstateandchurch.
sons,fittobe employed
bytheruling
Thisviewhasrecently
classeswastakenforgranted.
on society
anditsruling
education
that'itis clearat leastthat
Black'sconclusion
butit is stillwidespread.
beencriticised,
formoralinspiralookto Boethius
teachers
andpupilsdidnotsignificantly
Renaissance
sucha view.In addievidence
tionandguidance'
against
important
(p. 23) is therefore
Italian
onthecommentaries
valuable
sections
contains
hisintroduction
bytwofamous
tion,
in Italian
on theConsolatio
da MuglioandGiovanni
Pietro
Travesio,
teachers,
grammar
humanists.
ofitspopularity
andon thedecline
incunables
amongthefifteenth-century
be
areequally
ofthisvolume
sections
Theother
valuable,
theywillprobably
although

15:26:28 PM

REVIEWS

323

studied
Pomaro's
erudite
oftheMSS is
onlybya smallgroupofspecialists.
description
a modelofitskind.(A smalladdition:
a fragment
ofa
Florence,
BML,Pl. 77.3contains
aboutitsauthenticity,
not
Pomaro,
Vergil
commentary
byTrevet;
p. 108,is stilldoubtful
oftheimportant
article
Studies
knowing
, 54 (1992),in which
byM. L. Lordin Mediaeval
Trevet's
is proved
Thethird
section
contains
authorship
beyond
anydoubt.)
transcriptions
ofsubstantial
extracts
ofinterlinear
and marginal
otherthings)
glosses,
showing
(among
theimpact
ofthecommentaries
ofConches
andNicholas
Trevet
ontheItalian
byWilliam
schooltexts.
thisimpressive
volume.
Fifty
platesconclude
The question
is ofcourseto whatextent
thesefindings,
basedon an important
but
localgroupofMSS, arerepresentative
forotherregions
thanTuscany.
A fewtentative
arein order.Grammar
schoolauthors
wereusedas schoolbooks
suggestions
throughout
andgreat
inthewaythey
differences
wereread,orinthegrammatical
andphiloEurope,
taken
tothem,
areprobably
nottobe expected.
Thetransitional
status
logical
approaches
oftheConsolado
isalsoapparent
from
Thereisevidence
thattheConsolatio
transalpine
Europe.
waslectured
onintheGerman
inthelatermedieval
universities
sinceitismentioned
period,
inrecords
from
andVienna.It alsoappears
ina number
of'Introductions
Erfurt,
Prague
toPhilosophy'
ina thirteenth-century
Artscourses),
but
(forexample
guidetotheParisian
itisunlikely,
intheabsence
ofanyclearevidence,
thatitbelonged
tomainstream
university
In thetransalpine
curriculum
teaching.
too,Boethius'
proper
placewasinthepre-university
thatis,in thegrammar
schools
andin thereligious
housesbefore
students
were
years,
senttotheuniversity.
ThusTrevet's
waswritten
attherequest
ofhisconfrres
commentary
intheDominican
andquickly
attained
a widedissemination
theinternational
order,
through
network
ofhisOrder.Thecommentary
wastoolongandtoocomplicated
fortheaverage
so ithadtobe extracted
andcutdowntomanageable
size- a process
teacher,
grammar
which
ofcourse
tookplacebothnorth
andsouthoftheAlps,andwhich
resulted
notonly
in countless
butalsoin entire
but
marginal
glosses
commentaries,
inspired
byTrevet's,
ofa lessdemanding
nature.
ofthecommentaries
intellectually
(One thinks
byWilliam
Tholomaeus
de Asinariis,
da Cortemilia,
andArnoul
Wheteley,
Guglielmo
Greban.)
in Italianeducation
seemsto haveresulted
in a greater
on
Specialisation
emphasis
issues.Certainly
thisis moreapparent
in Italianschoolclassesthan
merely
grammatical
in thoseofnorthern
in northern
schools
Europe.Andwhenthemasters
too,
European
suchas BadiusAscensius
andJohannes
restrict
themselves
to gramMurmellius,
mainly
commentaries
arestillmoreadvanced
thantheglossing
wefind
intheFlorentine
mar,their
MSS. In transalpine
hadalways
beenmorethanjusta schooltext.
EuropetheConsolatio
It waswidely
readat thecourts,
anditbecameverypopular
ofthe
amongtheBrethren
Common
Lifein thelateMiddleAges.Thus,eventhough
somehumanists
didtheir
best
todiscredit
'whoseagewasbarbarous
andhencehisprosewasflawed'
Boethius,
(asJ. C.
theexistence
ofa variedreadership
a market
for(cheap)ediScaliger
wrote),
guaranteed
tionsduring
theearlyprinting
ofthetext.Ifit is truethatBoethius
wasreadin
history
as a schoolauthor,
tobe replaced
maiores
Italyalmost
exclusively
, this
bythetrueauctores
thegreatdifference
between
thenumber
ofincunabular
editions
ofthetext:
might
explain
editions
eightItalianversus
fifty-six
transalpine
(ata conservative
estimate).
couldonlybe madethanks
tothisexcellent
book.Itis thefirst
detailed
Myobservations
ofBoethian
muchmorethana complement
totheCodices
Boethiani
survey
manuscripts,
being
which
hasserious
technical
as itdoesmanuscripts
which
conproject,
limitations,
omitting
tainonlycommentaries
without
thetextoftheConsolatio
to reconstruct
the
, andfailing
behind
individual
It is a significant
contribution
notonlyto thestudy
story
manuscripts.
oftherichBoethian
tradition
butalsoto thedebateon thecontinuity
anddiscontinuity
ofschooling
andeducation
in theMiddleAgesandRenaissance
in general.
LodiNauta

Groningen

15:26:28 PM

BooksReceived
Petri
Abaelardi
IV: ScitoTe Ipsum
ediditR.M. ligner.
Turnhout
Opera
Theologica.
Brepols,
Continuatici
2001(CorpusChristianorum.
Mediaevalis,
190)lxix& 109pp. ISBN
2 503 049028
"Historia
- Ubersetzung
- literaturwissenschaftliche
Abaelards
calamitatimi".
Text
Modelanalysen.
vonD.N. Hasse.Walterde Gruyter,
Berlin/New
York2002(de
Herausgegeben
Texte)xiv& 322pp. ISBN 3 11 0170124
Gruyter
Albert
s Twenty-Five
onLogic.
A critical
edition
ofhisQuaestiones
Questions
ofSaxony3
Disputed
circa
Leiden
/Boston
/Kln2002(Studien
undTexte
Brill,
logicam
byM.J.Fitzgerald.
zurGeistesgeschichte
Bd. 79)ix & 433pp.ISBN90 04 125132
desMittelalters,
inquinqu
Ammonius
Hermeae:
Commentarla
voces
bersetzt
vonPomponius
Gauricus.
Porphyrii.
= CAGXIII/I).
InAristoteli
'scategorias
Nachschrift
desJohannes
(erweiterte
Philoponus
bersetzt
vonIoannes
Rasarius.
Neudruck
derAusgaben
1539und
Baptista
Venedig
vonRainerThielundCharles
Lohr.Frommann1562miteinerEinleitung
Venedig
in Aristotelem
Graeca.Ver2002(Commentaria
Holzboog,
Stuttgart-Bad-Cannstatt
sioneslatinaetemporis
resuscitarum
litterarum
(CAGL),Bd. 9) XXII & fol.20 &
coll.69-204ISBN 3 772812295
miteinerEinAnselm
vonCanterbury,
ber
dieWahrheit.
Lateinisch-deutsch.
bersetzt,
vonM. Enders.
undAnmerkungen
Meiner
leitung
herausgegeben
Verlag,
Hamburg
Bd. 535)cxv& 126pp.ISBN 3 787315799
2001(Philosophische
Bibliothek,
andRenaissance
Tradition
andInnovation
Robert
Humanism
andEducation
inMedieval
Black,
Italy.
inLatin
Schools
theTwelfth
totheFifteenth
Press2001
from
Century.
University
Cambridge
XV& 489pp.ISBN0 521401925 (HB)
Tractatus
Petri
EditparJolBiardet
BlaisedeParme,
Questiones
magisti
Hispani.
super
logice
duMoyen
Graziella
Federici
Vescovini.
Vrin,Paris2001(Textes
philosophiques
Age,
20)434pp.ISBN 2 711614999
II: Austria
A Conspectus
Codices
Boethiani.
, Belgium,
Denmark,
ofBoethius,
ofManuscripts
oftheWorks
The Warburg
TheMetherlands,
Editedby L. Smith.
Switzerland.
Sweden,
Luxembourg,
and
London-Turin
Institute
Institute-Nino
2001(Warburg
Editore,
Surveys
Aragno
Texts,XXVII)xvi& 259pp.ISBN0 854811214
A Conspectus
Codices
Boethiani.
, III: ItalyandtheVatican
ofBoethius
ofManuscripts
oftheWorks
andL. Smith.
The Warburg
Institute-Nino
EditedbyM. Passalacqua
Aragno
City.
Institute
andTexts,XXVIII)xxi&
London-Turin
2001(Warburg
Editore,
Surveys
619pp. ISBN0 854811230
oftheTexts
TheTreatises
ofThomasofClevesandPaulofGelria.AnEdition
Concepts.
Read.ditions
de l'Institut
Edition
Bos and Stephen
witha Systematic
byEgbert
Louvain-la-neuve/
Editions
Louvain-Paris
de philosophie,
2001
Peeters,
suprieur
mdivaux,
XLII) xii& 147pp.ISBN90 429 09013
(Philosophes
A. Marmodoro,
medievale
Documenti
e studi
sullatradizione
, XII (2001)586pp.contents:
fibsofica
Alessandro
diAfrodisia
a confronto
Delta7:diversi
soluzioni
; M. Bonelli,
esegetiche
Metaphysica,
nel
astronomiche
intermedie
e ledimostrazioni
e la metafsica
; A. Longo,Le sostanze
scientifica
diAristotele:
M etN dellaMetafisica
diSiriano
suilibri
delcommento
; Th.-A.Druart,
prologo
dans
Legenre
dessubstances
inAvicenna
; L. Bauloye,
of'Being'
Shay'orResas Concomitant
arabialla
di alcuni
commenti
ebraica
M. Zonta,Sullatradizione
la mtaphysique
d'Averros;
testuLe citazioni
A. Bertolacci,
Ibnal-Tayyib
e Averro)'
Metafisica
implicite
(Abl-Farag
di
Alberto
nel
Commento
alla
Metafisica
di
Avicenna
ali dellaPhilosophia
Magno:
prima
andCelestial
Double
Albert
theGreat,
analisi
; G.
Truth,
; D.B. Twetten,
Causality
tipologica
3
a
nelcommento
di Tommaso
delladefinizione
dell
Galluzzo,Il problema
dAquino
oggetto
Thomas
andRobert
Faith
andtheWilltoBelieve.
Metafisica
; R. Tyrinoja,
Aquinas
10-11
ber
das
Heinrich
vonGent
M. Pickav,
ontheVoluntary
Holkot
Nature
Belief
ofReligious
Bate's
inHenry
Averroes
derMetaphysik
alsErsterkanntes
;
; G. Guldentops,
Metaphysics
Subjekt
Vivarium
40,2

BrillNV,Leiden,
Koninklijke
2002
- www.brill.nl
online
Alsoavailable

15:26:33 PM

BOOKSRECEIVED

325

indicedei
ontheSentences',
inPeter
Aureol's
W. Duba,Aristotle's
Commentary
Metaphysics
INDICE
DEINOMI
MANOSCRITTI,
Librum
Sententiarum.
inTertium
etQuartum
Guillelmus
de la Mare,Quaestiones
Herausgegeben
C.H. Beck),
Akademie
derWissenschaften
vonH. Krami.Bayerische
(Kommission:
Mnchen
200119*& 243 S. ISBN 3 769690222
Oxford
andrecovery
Thetransmission
Sextus
LucianoRoridi,
ofPyrrhonism.
University
Empiricus.
Classical
vol.46)
American
Association:
Press2002(American
Studies,
Philological
xvi& 150pp.ISBN0 19 5146719
mitAusblick
beiDunsScotus
DieIdeen
undPossibilien
Creatura
intellecta.
TobiasHoffmann,
auf
Mnster
undMastrius.
Aschendorff
2002(Beitrge
vonMayronis
Franz
, Poncius
Verlag,
desMittelalters,
undTheologie
derPhilosophie
zurGeschichte
NF,Bd.60) 356pp.
ISBN 3 402 040115
critical
edition
andindexes
Summulae:
De demonstrationibus
, introduction,
Buridanus,
Johannes
2001(Artistarium,
Publishers,
10-8)lx
Groningen-Haren
byL.M.de Rijk.Ingenium
& 265pp.ISBN90 7041941 6
Rekonstruktion
einer
De Obligationibus.
Brill,
Disputationstheorie.
sptmittelalterlichen
Hajo Keffer,
Leiden/Boston/Kln
2001ix & 290pp. ISBN90 04 122486
Matter
Theories.
Edited
andEarly
Modern
LateMedieval
J.E.Murdoch,
byC. Lthy,
Corpuscular
andEarly
Modern
/Boston
/Kln2001(Medieval
W.R.Newman.
Leiden
Science,
Brill,
W.R.
C. Lthy,
vol.1)viii& 611pp.ISBN90 04 115161 contents:
J.E.Murdoch,
in
Minima
Particles
andMinima
Introduction:
Atoms,
; D. Jacquart,
Newman,
Corpuscles,
Tendencies
Salerno
Bacon's
Medical
Texts
; G. Molland,
Corpuscular
from
Roger
Twelfth-Centuiy
andDiscrete
Lull'sTheoiy
ossetes
te*
s too
;
); C. Lohr,Ramon
oftheContinuous
(andsome
ofGr
TheMedieval
andRenaissance
Tradition
ofMinimaNaturalia;
J. Henry,
J.E.Murdoch,
andFrancesco
da Cher
so's UseofAtomistic
Mathematical
Realism
Void
Patrzi
Arguments',
Space,
From
Ancient
Sources
towards
Modern
Science
Giordano
Bruno's
Soul-Powered
Atoms:
H. Gatti,
;
in theNorthumberland
Circle
S. Clucas,Corpuscular
Matter
; S.A. Manzo,Francis
Theoiy
A Reappraisal
DavidGorlaeus'
or:TheMarriage
Bacon
andAtomism:
Atomism,
; C. Lthy,
of
Italian
W.R.Newman,
Protestant
with
Natural
Experimental
Corpuscular
Metaphysics
Philosophy',
inAristotelian
: From
Geber
toSennert,
E. Michael,
Sennerts
SeaChange:
Atoms
Alchemy
Theoiy
onMixtures',
andCauses',
D. Des Chene,Wine
andWater:
Honor
Fabri
C.R. Palmerino,
A Bridge
totheRotaAristo
telisParadox:
between
Matter
and
Galileo's
andGassendi'
s Solutions
Motion
Wasthe
Mechanical
Theories',
Non-Epicurean
M.J.Osier,HowMechanical
Philosophy?
andtheir
; A. Gabbey,Mechanical
ofNature
Aspects
ofGassendi's
Philosophy
Philosophy
A. Clericuzio,
Charleton
andBoyle
onmatter
andMotion',
P. Anstey,
Gassendi,
Explanations',
L. Downing,
TheUseofMechanism:
in
Matter,
against
Thinking
Corpuscularianism
Boyle
A andB ofLocke's
L.M.Principe,
Wilhelm
Drafts
Homberg:
Chymical
Corpuscularianism
Essay;
intheEarly
indexof names,
list of
andChiysopoeia
; bibliography,
Eighteenth
Century
CONTRIBUTORS
GordonLeff,
andReligion
intheMedieval
West.
Aldershot
2002
Heresy,
Philosophy
Ashgate,
x & 322pp. ISBN0 86078888 1
(Variorum)
Mediaeval
Commentaries
ontheSentences
Lombard.
VolumeI: Current
Research.
Edited
ofPeter
Leiden-Boston-Kln
2002xiv& 548pp.ISBN90 04 119817
byG.R.Evans.Brill,
contents:
A Biographical
Lombardus
electronicus:
Database
S.J.Livesey,
ofMedieval
Commentators
onPeter
theLombard's
L. Hdl,DieSentenzen
desPetrus
Lombardus
Sentences;
inderDiskussion
seiner
Schule
TheSentences
1250-1320.
; R.L. Friedman,
Commentary,
General
TheImpact
andtheTestCaseofPredestination',
paris:
Trends,
Orders,
oftheReligious
TheCommentary
ontheSentences;
L.O. Nielsen,
J. Dunbabin,
ofJohn
ofParis(Quidort)
Peter
Auriol's
Words.
TheGenesis
Auriol's
Commentaries
onPeter
Lombard's
Waywith
ofPeter
First
andFourth
Books
ontheSentences;
Chr.Schabel,
Parisian
Commentaries
Peter
from
Auriol
toGregory
andtheProblem
P. Bermon,
La Lectura
sur
ofRimini,
ofPredestination',
lesdeux
livres
desSentences
deGrgoire
deRimini
O.E.SA.(1300-1358);
oxford:
premiers
R. Wood,EarlyOxford
thesentences
Theology;
R.J.Long,TheBeginning
ofa Tradition:

15:26:33 PM

326

BOOKSRECEIVED

Fishacre
Franciscans
Ockham:
Walter
Chatton
and
O.P.;Chr.Schabel,
ofRichard
Oxford
after
AdamWodeham;
R. Edwards,
Themes
andPersonalities
inSentence
Commentaries
at Oxford
inthe1330s;J.-F.Genest,
Lespremiers
crits
deBradwardine:
textes
indits
et
thologiques
dcouvertes
rcentes
Bakker
& Chr.Schabel,
Sentence
Commentaries
; othercentres:
PJ.J.M.
Fourteenth
ontheSentences
; M.J.F.M.
Hoenen,TheCommentary
oftheLater
Century
of
Marsilius
R.L. Friedman,
Conclusion
; index
ofInghen;
La musica
nelpensiero
medievale
Ravenna
2001274pp.
, a curadi L. Mauro.LongoEditore,
ISBN 88 8063291 4 contents:
G. Fioravanti,
Presentazione
; F.A.Gallo,Introduzione
;
G. Stabile,
Musica
e cosmologia:
l'armonia
delle
neicommenti
ai
; L. Mauro,La musica
sfere
Problemi:
Pietro
d'Abano
e Evrart
deConty;
P. Proietti,
e musica
nelMedioevo:
Numero
da
allacomplessit
delQuattrocento
Suono
e musica
inunenciclopedista
del
; A. Morelli,
Agostino
XIIIsecolo:

diBarnais;
M. Bettetini,
Musica
tracielo
e terra:
lettura
delDemusica
Vincenzo
diAgostino
L'orecchio
come
risonatore
neitrattati
Deanima
; G. Mambella,
d'Ippona
organo
e inmedicina
concionatore.
Unpassodi Tommaso
e l'eloquenza
; E. Artifoni,
Orfeo
d'Aquino
nelle
citt
italiane
nelsecolo
L'udito
inSanBonaventura;
XIII;F.M.Tedoldi,
politica
spirituale
diAgostino;
L. Folli,Canticum
: la musica
cordis
e l'interiorit
nellEnarrationes
inpsalmos
C. Crisciani,
dimusica
medicinale.
A. Fiori,
La voce
Note
tramusica
e mediAppunti
rapsodici;
cina.Tematiche
e suggestioni
A. Puca,Astronomia
e musica
munda
lessicali;
interdisciplinari
nella
Commedia
diDante;
O. Weijers,
La placedela musique
la Facult
desarts
deParis.
;
indicedegliautori,delle opereanonime
e deglistudiosi
Nicolasd'Autrcourt,
condamns.
TextelatintabliparL.M. de Rijk.
, articles
Correspondance
traduction
et notespar Ch. Grellard.
Introduction,
Vrin,Paris2001(Sic et Non)
190pp.ISBN 2 711614883
Stefano
Aristotle's
andItsRenaissance
Commentators
Leuven
Perfetti,
Zoology
(1521-1601).
University
and Medieval
De Wulf-Mansion
Press,Leuven2000(Ancient
Centre,
Philosophy.
SeriesI, XXVII)x & 258pp. ISBN90 5867050 3
Dominik
Theorien
derIntentionalitt
imMittelalter.
Frankfurt
am Main
Perler,
Klostermann,
Bd. 82) xiii& 435pp.ISBN 3 465 031784
2002(Philosophische
Abhandlungen,
andLogic
inDunsScotus.
AnInterpretation
inthe
Pini,Categories
Giorgio
ofAristotle's
Categories
LateThirteenth
2002 (StudienundTextezur
Brill,Leiden-Boston-Kln
Century.
desMittelalters,
Bd. 77)viii& 225pp.ISBN90 04 123296
Geistesgeschichte
L.M. de Rijk,Aristotle.
Semantics
andOntology.
VolumeI: General
Introduction
on
, TheWorks
2002(Philosophia
Brill,Leiden/Boston/Kln
CI/I)xviii& 749pp.
Logic.
Antiqua,
ISBN90 04 123245
L.M. de Rijk,Aristotle.
Semantics
andOntology.
VolumeII: TheMetaphysics.
Semantics
in
Aristotle's
/Boston
/Kln2002(Philosophia
Brill,Leiden
ofArgument.
Strategy
Antiqua,
CI/II)xi & 498pp. ISBN90 04 124675
EricL. Saak,HighWaytoHeaven.
TheAugustinin
Between
andReformation,
Piaform
Reform
in Medieval
1292-1524.
andReformation
2002(Studies
Brill,Leiden/Boston/Kln
vol.89)XVI & 880pp.ISBN90 04 110992
Thought,
Thomas
von
Summa
contra
Wissenschaftliche
RolfSchnberger,
Aquins
gentiles.
Buchgesellschaft,
Darmstadt
2001236pp.ISBN 3 534 142667
et traduits
sousla direction
deJ.-C.Bardout
et O.
Surla science
divine.
Textesprsents
Presses
universitaires
de France,
Paris2002469pp.ISBN2 130511058
Boulnois.
- Pierre
- Huguesde Saint-Victor
- PierreAblard
- Robertde Melun
Avicenne
deJeanOlivi Henride
LombardAlexandre
de Hals Thomasd'AquinPierre
- Thomas
- Grgoire
- JeanDunsScot
- Guillaume
de
d'Ockham
Bradwardine
Gand
- Gabriel
- Luisde Molina
Descartes
Sebastin
Ren
Rimini
Izquierdo
Vzquez
undzurWirkungsgeschichte
desNikolaus
Ludus
Studien
HansGerhard
zumWerk
sapientiae.
Senger,
undTextezurGeistesgeschichte
Leiden
/Kln2002(Studien
vonKues.
/Boston
Brill,
Bd. 78)x & 411pp.ISBN90 04 120815
desMittelalters,
auMoyen
tudes
danssesrapports
avecla thologie
etla consolatrice.
La philosophie
La servante
Age,
runies
3) xv
parJ.-L.Solreet Z. Kaluza.Vrin,Paris2002(Texteset traditions,

15:26:33 PM

BOOKSRECEIVED

327

La
& 258pp.ISBN2 711615634 contents:
J.-L.Solre,
Avant-propos;
J.-L.Solre,
etstructure
des
Le besoin
demtaphysique.
desthologiens
; O. Boulnois,
Thologie
philosophie
la thologie
etretour,
mdivales
Bacon
delaphilosophie
; C. Trottmann,
Roger
mtaphysiques
etthologie
danslesPrologues
dela Lectura
etde/'Ordinario
G. Sondag,
(lm
Mtaphysique
duConvivio
deDante
deJeanDunsScot,
T. Ricklin,
etphilosophie
;
Thologie
Alighieri
partie)
etTrinit
duXIIeau XIVesicle
A. Maier,Universaux
; M.J.F.M.
Hoenen,
JeanWyclif
etlesuniversalia
realia:ledbat
surla notion
devirtus
sermonis
auMoyen
etlesrapAgetardif
univocit
etseparabilit
des
entre
la thologie
etla philosophie
Bakker,
Inhrence,
; P.J.J.M.
ports
accidents
: observations
surlesrapports
entre
etthologie
auXIVesicle,
eucharistiques
mtaphysique
: JeanBuridan,
inMetaphysicam
Quaestiones
(s. ult.Lect
.), L. IV, q. 6, Marsile
appendice
inMetaphysicam
, L. IV, q. 5
Quaestiones
d'Inghen,
Studien
II. Herausgegeben
vonP. Ochsenbein
undK. Schmuki.
zumSt.Galler
Klosterplan
Historischer
Verein
desKantons
St.Gallen,
St.Gallen2002(Mitteilungen
zurvaterlndischen
Bd.52)368pp.ISBN3 906395316 contents:
P. Ochsenbein,
Geschichte,
W.Jacobsen,
DerSt.Galler
300Jahre
Die
%ur
Einfhrung,
KlosterplanForschung,
J.Duft,
umdenSt.Galler
in denJahren
W. Vogler,
oder
1948-1962;
Sorge
Klosterplan
Realplan
St.Galler
ber
denSt.Galler
zurbarocken
Idealplan?
berlegungen
Klostergeschichtsschreibung
Die Reform
in derersten
des9.
Klosterplan;
J. Semmler,
geistlicher
Gemeinschaften
Hlfte
underKlosterplan
vonSt.Gallen;
W. Berschin,
DerSt.Galler
als
Jahrhunderts
Klosterplan
A.A.Hussling,
inderKarolingerzeit
undinderSt.Galler
Literaturdenkmal;
Liturgie
Klosterplan;
B. Brenk,
derVierflgelanlage
infrhchristlich-frhmittelalterlichen
^umProblem
(Claustrum)
C. Eggenberger,
DerSt.Galler
imReichen
dervera
F. Huber,
Der
Klstern;
crux;
Klosterplan
St. Galler
imKontext
derantiken
undmittelalterlichen
Architektur
und
Klosterplan
Zeichnung
H. Gelbhaar,
Ein neues
unddieMassangaben
ModellzumKlosterplan
im
Messtechnik;
V. Hoffmann,
DerSt.Galler
einmal
anders
R. Fuchs
Kirchengrundriss;
Klosterplangesehen;
& D. Oltrogge,
einer
desSt. Galler
Ergebnisse
technologischen
Untersuchung
Klosterplanes;
F. Huber,
vonSt.Gallen;
personenundortszumkarolingischen
Bibliographie
Klosterplan
VERZEICHNIS
DERZITIERTEN
HANDSCHRIFTEN
REGISTER,
8-9(1997-1998).
Universit
deCaen/ Universidad
deSalamanca,
Ediciones
Universidad
Voces,
de Salamanca,
contents:
ActasdelEncuentro
inter2000 337 pp. ISSN 1130-3336
nacional
sobre
lxico
latino
18-19noviembre
Lxico
((Salamanca
1999)i.a. C. Codoer,
y
enla EdadMedia.
El Catholicon;
V. deAngelis,
Z/elementarium
diPaia:mtodo
gramtica
eprassi
diunlessicografo;
C. Jacquemard,
Avant
la Practica
attribue
Hugues
geometriae
deSaintVictor:
le lexique
dela gomtrie
au XIesicle;
E. Montero
El
Cartelle,
pratique
lxico
mdico
latino
entre
la Antigedad
la asimilacin
delosmodelos
mdicos
y elRenacimiento:
y lxico
" zummdico
AnneWigger,
Vom
BilddesArztes
imSpanien
matasanos
perfecto
Zjimliterarischen
des16.Jahrhunderts.
Berlin
2001412pp.ISBN 3 92586756 2
VerlagWalter
Frey,

15:26:33 PM

/';-=09

)(8*=-0/']

15:26:38 PM

be accompanied
induplicate
andpreferably
should
be submitted
Contributions
bya disk.
an ASCIIandMicrosoft
Wordareaccepted
BothWordPerfect
wordprocessing
programs;
formatted
diskis alsoacceptable.
andthetextmust
in either
French
or German
shouldbe written
English,
Manuscripts
mustbe numbered
The manuscripts
andin goodliterary
be grammatically
correct
style.
biblioall notes(ina separate
andcomplete,
file),
including
consecutively,
double-spaced,
etc.
references,
tables,
graphical
within
to theeditor
whichshould
be returned
forreading,
Authors
receive
galley
proofs
arereadbytheeditor.
oneweekofreceipt.
Pageproofs
than
madetoproofs
other
authors
forchanges
theright
tocharge
Thepublisher
reserves
orconversion
errors.
correction
ofcompositor's
Citation
abstracted
in:ArtsandHumanities
Vivarium
isindexed/
Index;ATLARDB;Current
FRANCISdatabase;
Internationale
IndexPhilosophicus;
Dietrich's
Contents;
Bibliographie
of
ofBookReviews
Wissenschaftlicher
Literatur/International
derRezensionen
Bibliography
ausAllenGebieten
derZeitschriftenliteratur
Internationale
Literature;
Bibliographie
Scholarly
Iter
from
all FieldsofKnowledge;
ofPeriodicals
desWissens
/International
Bibliography
the
Middle
and
to
LinguisBibliography/
Bibliographie
Linguistic
Gateway
Ages Renaissance;
on theModern
ofBooksandArticles
Languages
Bibliography
tique;M L A International
Periodicals
and Index;Old Testament
and Literatures;
MiddleEast:Abstracts
Abstracts;
IndexOne:Periodicals
Contents
Index;Religion
Index;The Philosopher's
(RIO);Religion
Author
Works.
IndexTwo:Multi-

Copyright
Brill
TheNetherlands
2002byKoninklijke
NV,Leiden,
stored
in
reserved.
bereproduced,
Allrights
Nopart
translated,
ofthis
publication
may
orbyanymeans,
a retrieval
ortransmitted
inany
electronic,
form
system,
written
orotherwise,
without
mechanical,
prior
recording
photocopying,
ofthe
permission
publisher.
tophotocopy
items
orpersonal
useisgranted
Authorization
forinternal
to
that
theappropriate
feesarepaiddirectly
byBrill
provided
Clearance
Suite
222Rosewood
Center,
Drive,
910,
Copyright
MA01923,USA.Feesaresubject
tochange.
Danvers,
PRINTED
INTHENETHERLANDS

15:26:38 PM

/';-=09

)(8*=-0/']

15:26:38 PM