Recent scholarship has drawn increasing attention to the role of the English master Richard Rufus of Cornwall in the early thirteenth-century reception of the «New Aristotle» in the Latin West. In 2003 Rega Wood published an anonymous commentary on Aristotle’s Physics , which she attributes to Richard Rufus of Cornwall. According to Wood, this commentary originated in lectures given by Rufus at the Arts Faculty of Paris in the mid 1230s and thus represents the earliest known witness (...) to lectures on Aristotle’s Physics at Paris after the interdictions of 1210, 1215, 1231. This article analyzes in detail Wood’s arguments in favour of Rufus’ authorship . It concludes that the anonymous commentary certainly belongs to the early English commentary tradition on the Physics and was influential on mid-thirteenth-century English commentators, but that Rega Wood has not conclusively proved her claim for Rufus’ authorship. (shrink)

In this contribution, which is part of a more comprehensive research project on the reception of the Aristotelian libri naturales in the XIIIth century, I wish to present the results of a preliminary investigation into an anonymous collection of questions on the De generatione et corruptione preserved in the MSS Erlangen, UB, 213 and Kassel, Stadt- und Landesbibl., Phys. 2° 11. Albeit still unpublished and hitherto almost completely ignored by scholars, this quaestiones commentary is not without interest for (...) historians of medieval Latin Aristotelianism. (shrink)

In this paper, I defend that the historiographical category of eclecticism is a correct way to describe the epistemology and the exegetical activity of the Anonymous commentator on Plato’s Theaetetus. In addition, I show that the interpretation of the platonic philosophy presented in this text not only presupposes an eclectic philosophical attitude, but also offers a conscious defense of a positive and philosophically relevant form of eclecticism. By eclecticism, I understand a method of inquiry based on the deliberate use (...) of hypotheses and arguments from different philosophical traditions. My claim is that Anon. intends to lay ground of his way of doing philosophy by attributing it to Plato and the platonic tradition. In doing so, Anon. provides us with a positive understanding of eclecticism as a legitimate methodology of philosophical investigation. (shrink)

In this article, I demonstrate that, of the two horoscopes transmitted by the Anonymous Commentary on Ptolemy’s ‘Tetrabiblos’, edited by Hieronymous Wolf, Basel, 1559, pp. 98 and 112, the first (H1) corresponds to an actual birth that took place in Lower Egypt on 25 June 448 AD, while the second (H2) is the same horoscope, slightly modified to fit the specific example for which it provides the illustration. The new date proposed here for H1 is important for establishing (...) a more precise chronology of the Anonymous Commentary, since it not only provides a terminus post quem for its composition (from the middle of the fifth century onwards) but also a particular geographical environment in the proximity of Alexandria. Given the large amount of formal and structural similarities which can be readily observed between the Anonymous Commentary and commentaries on Plato and Aristotle composed by Ammonius and his disciples in Alexandria, it becomes impossible not to link the work of the anonymous commentator to the Neoplatonic school of Alexandria of the fifth and sixth centuries, led by the philosopher Ammonius and his brother Heliodorus. (shrink)

The paper covers a topic that sits between theology and philosophy of language and is based on completely unpublished material. The bulk of the paper consists in the critical edition and annotated translation of a section of an unpublished and anonymous commentary on the _Ratnatrayaparīkṣā_ by Śrīkaṇṭha. This section describes the transition of the indeterminate knowledge to the determined one according to the early Śaiva Siddhānta perspective. The introduction contains parts that are more “philological” or “historical” and others (...) that are more “philosophical”. The paper contains one appendix on the significant variant readings of the _mūla_ text. (shrink)

The present paper investigates the question as to how and for what purposes the Middle Platonic author of the Anonymous Commentary on Plato’s Theaetetus uses Aristotelian and Stoic syllogistic in his interpretation of the Platonic text. This investigation shows that the commentator employs Aristotelian categorical syllogistic as an exegetical tool for reconstructing arguments in the Platonic text, enabling him not only to uncover doctrinal statements that are in his view hidden in the Platonic text, but also to dissociate (...) Plato from unwelcome propositions. By contrast, the commentator uses Stoic hypothetical syllogistic as a polemical tool for constructing ad hominem arguments against the Stoics. More precisely, the author exploits the Stoic type of deductive reasoning to draw anti-Stoic conclusions from premises that are accepted by the Stoics, and in doing so, he manages not only to refute Stoic doctrines, but also to corroborate the corresponding Platonic theories. (shrink)

In his commentary on Aristotle’s Physics, Nicole Oresme propounds a very specific theory of the ontological status of accidents. Characteristic of Oresme’s view on accidents is that he does not consider them accidental forms, but only so-called condiciones or modi of the substance. Unlike the term “modus”, the term “condicio” seems to be very characteristic of Oresme’s own terminology. Up to now it has been unknown whether Oresme exerted any influence with his condicio-theory of accidents. This paper presents an (...) anonymous 14th-century commentary on Aristotle’s Meteorology, in two Questions of which the term “condicio” occurs in an ontological context. Moreover, the text shows further striking coincidences with known works by Oresme, and this makes an influence by Oresme appear all the more probable. (shrink)

These two volumes consist of a critical edition and English translation of the two earliest known Armenian sets of scholia on the Heavenly Hierarchy of Dionysius the Areopagite. Composed in the monastic schools of Erznka in the late thirteenth century, these scholia provide significant insight into how the Heavenly Hierarchy in particular, and Armenian translations of Greek texts in general, were understood by Armenian scholars in the Middle Ages. This editio princeps of the scholia represents a rare critical edition of (...) a native Armenian composition from the medieval period. In addition to the text and translation, these volumes include a textual commentary as well as a critical collation and English translation of a number of scholia from the Armenian version of the Greek scholia on the Heavenly Hierarchy. (shrink)

Contrairement à ce qui est pris d’ordinaire pour acquis, le Commentateur Anonyme du Théétète est philosophiquement stimulant, comme le démontre la confrontation avec le Stoïcisme. Le Commentateur Anonyme déploie une stratégie subtile, ne visant pas tant à rejeter des doctrines nettement stoïciennes qu’à les incorporer dans son propre système platonicien, en présupposant que seul ce dernier peut assurer des fondements adéquats aux doctrines. Le Commentateur Anonyme peut de la sorte s’approprier le Stoïcisme et régler de manière définitive l’ancienne querelle entre (...) Stoïcisme et Platonisme. Qui plus est, le Stoïcisme n’est pas une question séparée, mais il fait partie d’une question plus large. Car la comparaison avec le Stoïcisme aide aussi le Commentateur Anonyme à défendre son interprétation unitaire de la tradition académique platonicienne. Commenter un texte n’est pas une pratique neutre, mais bien plutôt un des aspects les plus importants de la philosophie post-hellénistique. (shrink)

The anonymous Armenian commentary was transmitted together with the Armenian translation of Aristotle's Peri Hermeneias. It was composed in the Hellenizing style and commonly associated with the figure of David the Invincible, a philosopher of the Neoplatonic School of Alexandria. This article presents a general structural analysis of the commentary followed by a comparative study and translation of its first chapter. It argues that the commentary was indeed written in the tradition of late antique Greek commentaries (...) but was probably not associated with late Neoplatonism. The Armenian commentary shares many common features with Ammonius’ commentary, but also departs from it on many crucial aspects. From a philosophical standpoint, it has much more in common with Boethius’ and Alexander of Aphrodisias’ commentaries than with those of the Neoplatonic School of Alexandria, thus suggesting an early writing date. (shrink)

In this paper, I consider Richard Rufus’ account of generation and corrup- tion. This is a fundamental metaphysical question in the Aristotelian framework. Given that there are things that are corruptible (such as trees and cats and the human body), and things that are incorruptible (such as the celestial bodies and angels), what is it that makes one one, and the other the other? In other words, what is the ultimate explanation (in Rufus' terminology, the principle or principles) of corruptibility (...) and incorruptibility? Do corruptible and incorruptible things have the same principles – the same fundamental metaphysical constitution – or are their principles different? Richard Rufus was among the first ones lecturing on Aristotle’s _Metaphysics_ at the University of Paris. He addresses these questions in book 4 (Gamma), lectio 1, question 2 of his longer commentary on Aristotle’s work (the _Scriptum_), which will provide the main textual basis of this paper. The other textual basis is an anonymous commentary on Aristotle’s _On generation and corruption_, found in Oxford, Corpus Christi MS 119, whose treatment of these issues is remarkably similar to Rufus’. As I show, we can learn a great deal about Rufus’ general metaphysical commitments by looking at this particular question, especially concerning his view of prime matter and his view of the qualities of the resurrected bodies. (shrink)

This article offers a detailed presentation of three anonymous, unedited sets of questions on Aristotle’s Physics. The commentaries survive in manuscripts in Oxford, Munich and Sint Agatha. A comparison of the lists of quaestiones suggests that there is a close correspondence between the three commentaries, on the one hand, and the ultima lectura of John Buridan’s Quaestiones super octo libros Physicorum, on the other. Judging from the lists of quaestiones, it makes sense to attach the label secundum Buridanum to (...) all three commentaries. However, the texts of the three commentaries differ significantly both from each other and from Buridan’s lecture. To illustrate the differences, in the Appendix I present editions of one question from Book I of the Physics and one question from Book III from each of the three commentaries. The edited questions correspond with Book I q.4 in Buridan’s ultima lectura, “Utrum in omni scientia ex cognitione principiorum, causarum et elementorum contingat alia sci... (shrink)

This article examines the anonymous progymnasmata in John Doxapatres' commentary on Aphthonius' Progymnasmata for evidence about their authorship, origin, and relations to other progymnasmata. These exercises include three chreias, a refutation and confirmation of the myth of Ganymedes, an encomium and invective of Agamemnon, a comparison of the grapevine and olive tree, and an ethopoeia on the deposition of the emperor Michael V Kalaphates. In addition to providing a formal rhetorical analysis of the exercises, the article offers further (...) support for the view of R. F. Hock and E. N. O'Neil that Doxapatres did not compose these exercises and that they all derive from a single collection. In an appendix, it argues that George Pachymeres, in his comparison of the olive tree and grapevine, used the anonymous comparison in Doxapatres and not the four parallel exercises by Ps.-Nicolaus. (shrink)

These two volumes consist of a critical edition and English translation of the two earliest known Armenian sets of scholia on the Heavenly Hierarchy of Dionysius the Areopagite. Composed in the monastic schools of Erznka in the late thirteenth century, these scholia provide significant insight into how the Heavenly Hierarchy in particular, and Armenian translations of Greek texts in general, were understood by Armenian scholars in the Middle Ages. This editio princeps of the scholia represents a rare critical edition of (...) a native Armenian composition from the medieval period. In addition to the text and translation, these volumes include a textual commentary as well as a critical collation and English translation of a number of scholia from the Armenian version of the Greek scholia on the Heavenly Hierarchy. (shrink)

The anonymous Declaratio on the Elementatio theologica of Proclus transmitted in MS Vat. lat. 4567 is the last of the three professed commentaries on the text extant in Latin to receive a critical edition. The commentary is not only a paraphrase of Proclus’ own remarks on 210 of the original 211 propositions, but frequently provides additional arguments and clarifications. Its author is clearly influenced by the Liber de causis and aims to compare the metaphysics of Aristotle and Proclus. (...) The introduction to the following edition compares the methods of the Declaratio to the other two Latin commentaries on the Elementatio theologica and considers a few clues that may shed light on the identity and aims of its author. (shrink)

This study investigates the ethical implications of American newspaper policies that call for the automatic rejection of anonymous submissions to "letters to the editor" forums. The investigation is a qualitative analysis of more than 30 practitioner essays printed in journalism trade journals in the mid-to-late 20th century and interviews conducted with editors from 16 U.S. newspapers. The analysis found that contemporary American editors exhibited a blind spot toward anonymous commentary that seems to be in contention with certain (...) tenets of codes of ethics. Although editors took some steps toward making ethical arguments in favor of those policies, they either truncated or skipped some steps-such as considering all of the facts, considering journalistic principles, and acknowledging their personal biases toward anonymity-in making ethical decisions. The study concludes that editors who make ethical arguments in favor of "must-sign" policies should reconsider either their ethical justifications for those policies or the utility of the policies themselves. (shrink)

The Anonymous Philosophical Treatise was preserved only in Armenian. It was published first half-a-century ago in Armenian and in Russian translation, but is barely known to western scholarship. Here a new edition is presented, prepared on computer, together with critical apparatuses, translation and commentary. A variety of tools for the study of the text are included: a concordance, a word list of the English translation, triliteral tables of Armenian - Greek - English technical terminology and more.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:246 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY lish a line of succession from Schleiermacher to Stenzel and further on to some of the most recent Platonic scholars in Germany. In this connection the peculiar character of Platon der Erzieher is a side issue. Gaiser seems only moderately interested in paideia and even tries to free Stenzel from the suspicion that he should have considered paideia as the essence of Platonism. Some sentences (...) in Stenzel's book which might suggest such an opinion are said to be "consciously one-sided formulations" (p. viii, note 7). Gaiser's true interest is Plato's ontology. Nothing explains his stand better than his endorsement of H. J. Kr~imer's representative work Arete bei Platon und Aristoteles. Kr~imer, whose major objective is a reconstruction of what he thinks was Plato's esoteric philosophy, has emphatically declared that he arrived at his results by pursuing the method and the factual interests of Stenzel. Gaiser's attempt to locate Stenzel's position must be understood in the light of this and perhaps similar declarations.1 This is not the place to discuss those of Stenzel's theories which are at best touched upon in Platon der Erzieher or even the theories of those who proclaim to be his heirs. There is, however, one point on which I insist. Gaiser tries to link Stenzel with Heidegger and points to the interest which Stenzel took in Heidegger in his later years. Platon der Erzieher appeared in the same year as Sein und Zeit. I believe that the two works belong to entirely different worlds. Whereas Heidegger powerfully broke up new dimensions of thought, the philosopher Stenzel, for better or worse, represents a period which had reached its end when he died in 1934. ERNST MORITZ MANASSE North Carolina College at Durham Anonymous Prolegomena to Platonic Philosophy. Introduction, Text, Translation and Indices by L. G. Westerink. (Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co., 1962. Pp. lii + 69.) L. G. Westerink, whose interest in the Alexandrian commentators on Plato has already borne ample and distinguished fruit in his editions of the Alcibiades commentaries of Olympiodorus and Proclus and of Damascius' lectures on the Philebus, has now further enriched our knowledge of Platonic studies in the sixth century A.D.by publishing a new critical text of a little-known set of introductory lectures to Plato, which originated in the Alexandrian school. The importance of the present work is indicated by the facts that the last critical text of these prolegomena, which forms part of a tenth-century manuscript in the Vienna National Library (Vindob. 1Cf. also Gaiser's new book Platons Ungeschriebene Lehre (Stuttgart, 1963), which appeared after this review was written. BOOK REVIEWS 247 phil. gr. 314), was published over a century ago by K. F. Hermann in his Appendix Platonica, and that the most recent commentary is that of L. Skowronski in a dissertation published in 1884. In other words, nothing substantial had appeared on the Prolegomena after the publication of the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, and Westerink's great merit consists in bringing to bear upon the present work the insights gained from a study of these Aristotelian commentaries. For the same professors taught both Plato and Aristotle at Alexandria, and not only did their teaching of one color their views on the other, but they frequently borrowed ideas, quotations, stories, and even phrases from one another. The chief aim of the Introduction (pp. ix-l) is to investigate the authorship of the Prolegomena, which the almost unanimous agreement of scholars since 1675 (the one exception is Beutler in RE s.v. "Olympiodorus") had attributed to Olympiodorus. W. begins by establishing the Alexandrian background of these lectures and by discussing, one by one, the characteristic beliefs of the various members of the school and the way in which these are reflected in introductory lectures to Aristotle. This is followed by a painstaking analysis of the sources of the Prolegomena and finally the conclusion that the present text belongs "in the immediate surroundings of Olympiodorus and Elias" (p. xlix). Discrepancies between the biography of Plato here and in Olympiodorus' commentary on the A lcibiades militate, according to W., against Olympiodorus' authorship, although... (shrink)

Reprint of the first edition. This incisive critique was written around 1807 by Tracy [1754-1836], a French philosopher and path-breaking psychologist who was a friend of Jefferson [1743-1826]. Jefferson saw the Commentary when it was still a manuscript and was so impressed that he took pains to have it printed. He even helped with the translation and corrected the page proofs. Although the translation was published anonymously, we can identify the author and translators through a letter by Jefferson dated (...) January 26, 1811. Elsewhere in this letter he commends it for correcting the Spirit of the Laws. While other studies had merely "nibbled only at its errors...This want is now supplied, and with a depth of thought, recision of idea, of language and of logic, which will force conviction into every mind. I declare to you, Sir, in the spirit of truth and sincerity, that I consider it the most precious gift the present age has received.": The Writings of Thomas Jefferson V:566-571. (shrink)

In the first half of the 15ᵗʰ century there was a coherent philosophical system of teaching at the Jagiellonian university, so-called ars vetus, concerning the interpretation of three treatises: Aristotle’s Categories and Hermeneutics and Porphyry’s Isagoge. The question-commentaries on the Categories that have been preserved in several manuscripts show astonishing similarity in solving individual problems – there are three copies of Benedict Hesse’s commentary and one copy of Paul of Pyskowice’s work, moreover, in BJ 1941 there is an (...) class='Hi'>anonymous commentary on the Categories that is also very close to the ones mentioned before, to prove that fact. This paper, discussing the four-fold division of opposition in those Polish commentaries on Aristotle’s Categories, is part of the studies on the manuscript material that has not been critically edited yet. The main goal is to show the philosophical views on contraries, contradictories, relatives and possession and privation in a wider perspective, comparing the Polish commentaries’ doctrine with the authoritative text itself. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Anonymous Versus Open Donation and Queerness as Political:Comments on Groll's Conceiving PeopleAmanda Roth (bio)1. IntroductionIn this commentary on Daniel Groll's 2021 book Conceiving People: Genetic Knowledge and the Ethics of Sperm and Egg Donation, I examine a number of the book's major themes, especially around the idea that donor-conceived children have a significant interest in genetic knowledge and therefore, donor-conceiving parents are morally required to use an (...) open donor.1 I point to some concerns about Groll's case for this view and, in doing so, highlight the way in which taking up an LGBTQ+ perspective complicates and undermines the case against anonymous donation. The major theme of my comments is that the open versus anonymous decision is not merely an ethical decision, but a political one.My comments are organized around a few of the book's major themes, so I'll begin with laying out the most relevant themes in some detail. I then take up four points to consider in more depth. In so doing, I'll be drawing on my own scholarly perspective on issues of nontraditional reproduction, which is informed by my own social positionality in relation to family matters; this means that I (not so subtly) bring a queer perspective to the discussion of Groll's book. The through-line of my comments is this: While I agree with and appreciate much of Groll's approach, I want to stress the sense in which gamete donation is not just an ethical issue, but a political one, given its implication in bionormativity (and heteronormativity). I wonder if a deeper acknowledgment of the political nature of the issues might lead to moral conclusions that are different from those that Groll comes to, even assuming similar ethical values as starting points.2. Groll's major claims(1) Claim 1: Disclosure to donor-conceived offspring—in the usual case at least—is morally required given the intimacy argument: [End Page 166]The intimacy argument suggests that keeping "the secret" about donor conception involves intentional deception and undermines the proper intimacy of parent-child relationships (Groll 2021, 36–49).(2) Claim 2: Anonymous donor conception is (generally) morally impermissible because of the significant interest view.Donor-conceiving parents can reasonably foresee that their children will likely develop a significant interest in genetic knowledge. Significant interests "matte[r] quite a lot to the person who has [them]," "tak[e] up a space … in a person's mental economy" and/or "pla[y] a structuring role in a person's life and self-conception" (Groll 2021, 62–3). But not all donor-conceived people take such an interest in genetic information, and this information is not necessary for identity construction or psychological wellbeing (Groll 2021, 58, 61).2 Rather, multiple routes to self-identity exist, the genetic route being one among the options. Moreover, one needn't experience any loss in not taking this route; however, for those who take it up, genetic knowledge is objectively valuable and nonfungible (Groll 2021, 81–9). This is because genetic knowledge is uniquely relevant to the identity-related question "Who am I?" (Groll 2021, 112–3).3Groll argues that donor-conceiving parents should assume that their child will form such an interest because this is empirically a "good bet." Further, significant interests—at least when they are worthwhile (that is, not trivial and not morally objectionable)—are connected to one's wellbeing by the wellbeing principle: In satisfying a non-instrumental significant worthwhile interest, one's life goes better (Groll 2021, 62). It follows, then, that parents ought to choose open donors since (to simplify) parents are obligated to promote their children's wellbeing (ibid).4Counter to what one might expect, Groll does not take his ethical case against anonymous donor conception to justify prohibition of the practice. This is because wronging children in this way is within the realm of (unethical) choices we allow parents to make without societal interference.5 Moreover, to aim regulation at anonymous donor conception could reinforce bionormativity and target already marginalized families for special negative attention (Groll 2021, chapter 8).(3) "Claim" 3: Groll's own personal... (shrink)

In 1991, Benoît Patar published a set of anonymous commentaries on Aristotle’s De anima. He argued that both works should be ascribed to John Buridan and, taken together, constitute the first of Buridan’s three series of lectures on De anima. Even though Patar’s proof of the authenticity of the commentaries has not been unanimously accepted, his attribution of the works to Buridan turned out to be persistent. This article examines the question of the authenticity of the two anonymous (...) commentaries. It argues that there is no conclusive reason to attribute the works to Buridan. The texts are closely related to works by Buridan, but they bear the same relation to commentaries written by Nicole Oresme. As a consequence, the works should be considered to be exactly what they are: anonymous commentaries on Aristotle’s De anima, written in the same context and around the same time in which the commentaries by John Buridan and Nicole Oresme were also written. (shrink)

Thirty years ago, H. Flashar discussed the introduction to an anonymous commentary on the Aphorisms of Hippocrates. The text contains an interesting picture of Hippocrates as a culture hero, who saved suffering humanity by the introduction of systematic medicine. The first section of this introduction offers some complicated problems. It ends with an extremely long and difficult sentence, which, has not yet been explained quite satisfactorily, and it contains a curious use of the verb σαρκόω, combined with τν (...) ύσιν, which has led Flashar to suspect Christian influence. These two points are the subject of the first part of this paper. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Questions of Evidence: An Anonymous Tract Attributed to John TolandRhoda RappaportIn 1695 there was published in London a tract with the unprepossessing title, Two Essays sent in a Letter from Oxford, to a Nobleman in London, by “L. P. Master of Arts.” Because the larger part of this work attacks John Woodward’s theory of the earth, published earlier that year, historians of geology have long been familiar with (...) the Two Essays, even if none has managed to identify L. P. In 1975 Giancarlo Carabelli offered evidence for a conjectural attribution of the Two Essays to John Toland (1670–1722), the famous deist who established his notoriety the next year with his Christianity Not Mysterious (1696). 1 Carabelli’s cautious attribution would require no comment, were it not for the fact that what began as conjecture has evolved into a strong probability and even into an established fact—all this without any notable addition to Carabelli’s evidence. It is surely time to look more closely at that evidence.Carabelli first presents the main points of the Two Essays: a rejection of Woodward’s supernaturalism, a preference for natural causes to explain even the origins of the earth, and a reduction of the Bible to the level of ancient myth and legend. We have here a pronounced free-thinker and materialist, and Toland’s later writings make him a plausible candidate as author. (Whether this interpretation of the Two Essays is accurate will be discussed later in this study.) Carabelli then provides three pieces of evidence, without discussion or evaluation. The next paragraphs rehearse that evidence, with commentary. [End Page 339]The Rumor in OxfordAccording to Edward Lhwyd (or Lhuyd), Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford rumor had it that Toland was L. P. Lhwyd denied the rumor, chiefly because L. P. seemed to have had the aid of “some good naturalist”—this did not fit Lhwyd’s notion of Toland’s temperament. 2 In truth, although Lhwyd did not yet know it, L. P. did indeed get such aid from Tancred Robinson, F.R.S., but Robinson declined to identify L. P. 3 Thus far Carabelli.A rumor is no secure basis for attribution, especially when it is contradicted by someone who knew Toland reasonably well. In the small community of Oxford, Lhwyd quickly knew about Toland even before meeting him, because the two had common antiquarian interests. Toland had gone to Oxford with the intention of compiling an Irish dictionary, and fragmentary evidence shows that the two then met to discuss their Celtic researches. 4 A distinguished naturalist, Lhwyd also was consulted by Toland on matters of natural history—at least, the surviving text on this issue shows Toland asking one question of a trivial sort. Lhwyd then comments that Toland is “not conversant in these studies” but yet has ideas about them. 5 As the latter phrase indicates, Lhwyd learned much about the temper and opinions of Toland. He knew that Toland was “railing in coffee houses” about matters religious and political, but he did not associate religious radicalism with the Two Essays. Instead, Lhwyd assessed Toland’s fitness to deal with Woodward entirely in terms of temperament and personality: Toland was a man “of excellent parts, but as litle [sic] a share as may be of modesty or conscience; and one of the best scolds I ever met with.” In the same letter Lhwyd assessed Woodward as Toland’s presumed equal in stubbornness and egotism. 6In saying that L. P. must have had the advice of “some good naturalist,” Lhwyd seems to imply that Toland was too ignorant (of natural history) and too intemperate to profit from or perhaps even to seek advice. [End Page 340] Despite these doubts, is it not possible that Toland could have acquired sufficient knowledge of natural history, in a period of about four months (between the publication of Woodward’s book and that of the Two Essays), to display the expertise shown by L. P.? Any British virtuoso could surely have done so, and the Two Essays actually include a good little bibliography of suitable publications that would provide a working knowledge of the latest ideas... (shrink)

Crimea is a fructiferous Ottoman land that nurtured many important individuals. There are some Sufis among these people. Sufis have written books and treatises in many fields. Crimean Sufis mostly belong to Halvetîyye, Nakşbendiyye and Kadiriyye orders. Halvetî, which was widespread in the Ottoman Empire, is also the most common sect in Crimea. Halvetism has brought important personalities up in Crimea. Muhammed Kırîmî is an important person in terms of Crimean Khalifa. In his work titled, Mirâ'tü’s-sâlikîn, he has written a (...) treatise under the title "Annotation to the Hymn of Hakkı Efendi". There are many people known by the name of Hakkı. Hakkı Efendi's identity is the most important problem of our work. In addition, the author, lyrics and composer of the hymn that is the subject of our article had been unknown and anonymous until today. It is one of the lost poems of Bursevi, known to have more than ten thousand couplets. According to the data by Bursevi experts, up to three thousand couplets of Bursevi's poems are identified. We hope to make a huge contribution to the field by determining the hymn's belonging to him and the composer. In our study, we will endeavor to put forward his Sufi views within the framework of the principles of the Halvetî order in the context of this commentary on the hymn "Benem", which is known an anonymous work but belongs to Bursevî and which we have determined as the composer of Muallim İsmail Hakkı Bey. (shrink)

In this paper, I discuss an anonymous Quaestiones super librum Ethicorum in the manuscripts of Worcester Cathedral Library and the notion of felicitas in this work. The question has characteristics similar to those once called “Averroists’ commentaries”, i.e., the commentaries on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics written by Parisian masters of arts in the late 13th century. There are, however, elements peculiar to the Worcester commentary and others that resemble to aspects of the work written by John of Tytynsale, a (...) contemporary Oxford master of arts. Like some of those Parisian commentaries, the Worcester text describes felicitas as “a conjunction with the first cause”. The anonymous author claims that the knowledge of divine essence obtained through this conjunction is non-demonstrative. (shrink)

A passage from Michael of Ephesus’ Commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics, book V (p. 50, 6–10 Hayduck), gives some information on the Anonymous Commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics, books II–IV. Michael cites a series of ancient annotations to the third book, written by ancient exegetes and which have come down to him. It can therefore be assumed that Michael had the Anonymous Commentary in front of him when he wrote these lines. It is thus possible (...) to assume that it was Michael of Ephesus himself who organised the entire commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics and inserted the Anonymous Commentary on Books II-IV after Eustratius’ commentary on Book I and before his own commentary on Book V. (shrink)

Edition of the commentary on Aristotle's De interpretatione by an anonymous Parisian master from the first half of the 13th century.

v. 1. Eustratius on Book I and the anonymous scholia on Books II, III, and IV. Critical ed. with an introductory study / by H. Paul F. Mercken.

We present here the first translation into a modern language of the anonymous commentary on the second book of the Nicomachean Ethics. It is an evidence of the style of exegetical work that was being done in the Peripatetic schools during the 2nd–3rd century AD, and a testimony to a particular version of 2nd century Aristotelianism. Even if the comment is not continuous, one gets the impression of listening to a good lecturer illustrating Aristotle’s text. He paraphrases it (...) at times, makes comparisons with other passages of the corpus, illustrates the structure and the logic of the discourse, and shows the difference between Aristotle’s positions and those of other schools. In the most theoretically interesting parts of the commentary the anonymous discusses aporiai, and opposes Aristotle’s ethical theories to other schools, especially to the Stoics. (shrink)

This paper presents the first edition, translation and analyse of al-Mns commentary of the Book X of Euclid one. For the first time, irrational numbers are defined and classified. The algebraisation of Elementsrizms Algebra, shows irrational numbers as solution to algebraic quadratic equations. The algebraic calculus makes here the first steps. On this occasion, negative numbers and their calculation rules appears. Simplifications imposed by the algebraic writings are sometimes in opposition with the conclusions of propositions conceived in a purely (...) geometrical framework, revealing a contradiction between geometrical and algebraic goals. It will be resolved by the independant way algebra will take with mathematicians belonging to the tradition of al-Karajal from the 11th-12th centuries on. (shrink)

Although coherence has been widely studied in computer-mediated communication, insufficient attention has been paid to emergent multimodal forms. This study analyzes a popular commentary system on Chinese and Japanese video-sharing sites – known as danmu or danmaku – where anonymous comments are superimposed on and scroll across the video frame. Through content and multimodal discourse analysis, we unpack danmu-mediated communication analyzing the newest interface, the comments, the interpersonal interactions and the unusual use of the second-person pronoun. Results show (...) that despite the technological constraints, users construct order in interactions through repetition, danmu-specific expressions and multimodal references, while using playful language to make fun. This study provides an up-to-date analysis on an increasingly popular CMC medium beyond well-studied social networking sites, and broadens the understanding of coherence in contemporary CMC. (shrink)

Anonymous commentary on Brahmasūtra of Bādarāyaṇa, aphoristic work on Vedanta philosophy.

In this paper I shall discuss the relationship between the two known Arabic translations of Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics and Avicenna’s Kitāb al-Burhān. I shall argue that Avicenna relies on both (1) Abū Bishr Mattā’s translation and (2) the anonymous translation used by Averroes in the Long Commentary as well as in the Middle Commentary (and also indirectly preserved by Gerard of Cremona’s Latin translation of Aristotle’s work). Although, generally speaking, the problem is relevant to the history of (...) the transmission of the Posterior Analytics from Greek through Syriac into Arabic, I do not intend to give a systematic presentation of the historical setting in which Aristotle’s work became readily available to the Arabo-Islamic culture. My aim here is rather to isolate and discuss some pieces of evidence concerning the texts that seem to have been available to Avicenna. In addition to that, I shall also provide evidence concerning the relationship with the Greek commentary tradition (in particular Philoponus and Themistius) that is likely to have influenced Avicenna in his discussion of Aristotle’s theory of demonstration and scientific knowledge. (shrink)

This study appeared in full in the previous issue of Research Ethics Review (2008; 4 (3): 120). RB works in the field of substance abuse where his main expertise focuses on illicit drugs. He plans to investigate, in as many countries as possible, the extent to which dealers dilute or ‘cut’ drugs, in order to increase profit margins. His methodology is entirely internet based. An advertisement, placed on a number of internet forums, will include a link to a separate web (...) page containing an anonymous questionnaire that can be filled in on-line. On completion responses will be transferred, automatically, to a programme on a secure server which will then analyse the data and send it on to RB. (shrink)

This volume presents the first complete edition of Oxford, MS Marsh 539, a hitherto unpublished philosophy reader compiled anonymously in the eastern Islamic world in the eleventh century. The compilation consists of texts on metaphysics, physiology and ethics, providing excerpts from Arabic versions of Greek philosophical works and works by Arabic authors. It preserves fragments of Greek-Arabic translations lost today, including Galen's On My Own Opinions, the Summa Alexandrinorum, and Themistius on Aristotle's Book Lambda. The philosophy reader provides a unique (...) insight into philosophical activity of the place and time of the well-known philosopher Miskawayh, showing us which works had entered the mainstream and were considered necessary for philosophers to know. Elvira Wakelnig's volume includes a new facing-page English translation and a rich commentary which identifies the source texts and examines the historical and philosophical context of each passage. (shrink)

This article consists of critical editions of a selection of medieval commentaries on the chapter seven of Aristotle’s De sensu et sensato, which pertains to a particular philosophical problem, namely, the possibility of perceiving many perceptual qualities simultaneously. The commentaries included are written by Adam of Buckfield, Anonymous of Merton, Radulphus Brito, Anonymous of Paris, John Felmingham(?), Walter Burley, John of Jandun, and John Buridan. The most significant discovery made in the course of preparing the editions concerns Walter (...) Burley’s commentary. Previous studies indicate that he wrote only an exposition commentary on De sensu, but a more careful examination of the existing manuscripts shows that at least one of them contains a different work, here dubbed Quaestiones super librum De sensu et sensato. (shrink)

The study evaluates Paracelsus’s and Paracelsian-Weigelian microcosmogonies, i.e. theories concerning the nature and creation of human beings, especially their biblical underpinnings, and particularly in the light of Luther’s and Lutheran anthropological and biblical-exegetical stances. The Lutheran approach to the origin and components of human beings—as seen in Luther’s early Magnificat Commentary and the Genesis Commentary of his late career—relied on such magisterial principles as adherence to sola scriptura, literal biblical exegesis, and the hermeneutical standard to ‘let scripture interpret (...) scripture,’ whereas the Paracelsians, Weigelians, and Pseudo-Weigelians—in such works as Paracelus’s Astronomia Magna (1537/38) and the anonymous Astrologia Theologizata (1617)—employed such extra-biblical concepts as ‘sidereal bodies,’ the ‘light of nature,’ and a microcosm-macrocosm theory based on an alchemical interpretation of the limus terrae of Genesis 2:7. Seventeenth-century Orthodox Lutherans, including Nikolaus Hunnius and Ehregott Daniel Colberg, castigated the ‘heretical’ in Paracelsus and the Astrologia Theologizata. The study also addresses the authorship of several texts entitled Astrologia Theologizata and speculates on reasons for the tracts’ deviations from Paracelsus’s views. The case study of Paracelsian-Weigelian microcosmogonies underscores the centuries-long staying power of some of Paracelsus’s core theological concepts, which were both seconded by votaries and vituperatively criticized by opponents. (shrink)