Theory and History of Ontology

by Raul Corazzon | e-mail:

FEBRUARY 18th, 2018: THIS SITE WILL BE NO FURTHER UPDATED. PLEASE USE: Theory and History of Ontology

ebook: Ontology | Logic

Download site as a PDF or eBook


  • "History Logic" and "Bibliographia" are my other websites. "Table of Contents" gives the list of the pages, for other indexes see the "Sitemap". "Modern Ontologists" contains a table with links to the pages on the most important philosophers of the 19th and 20th centuries who have written on ontology. The "Search" function can be used to find a particular author or subject.


Selected Bibliography on The Neoplatonic Commentators


  1. Adamson, Peter, Baltussen, Han, and Stone, M.W.F., eds. 2004. Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries. London: Institute of Classical Studies - University of London.


    Volume One - Preface VII; Richard Sorabji: Poem VIII-IX; Silvia Fazzo: Aristotelianism as a commentary tradition 1; Han Baltussen: Plato Protagoras 340-48: commentary in the making? 21;

    Gabor Betegh: Exegesis in the Derveni Papyrus 37; R. W. Sharples: Alexander of Aphrodisias: what is a Mantissa? 51; Inna Kupreeva: Aristotelian dynamics in the 2nd century school debates: Galen and Alexander of Aphrodisias on organic powers and movements 71; George Karamanolis: Porphyry: the first Platonist commentator on Aristotle 97; Riccardo Chiaradonna: The categories and the status of the physical world: Plotinus and the Neo-Platonic commentators 121; Jan Opsomer: Plutarch's De animae procreatione in Timaeo: manipulation or search for consistency? 137; Peter Lautner: The koinè aisthesis in Proclus and Ps.-Simplicius 163; Harold Tarrant: Must commentators know their sources? Proclus in Timaeum and Numenius 175; R. M. van den Berg: Smoothing over the differences: Proclus and Ammonius on Plato's Cratylus and Aristotle's De Interpretatione 191; Anna Somfai: Calcidius' commentary on Plato's Timaeus and its place in the commentary tradition: the concept of analogia in text and diagrams 203; Katerina Ierodoakonou: Byzantine commentators on the epistemic status of ethics 221; John Sellars: The Aristotelian commentators: a bibliographical guide 239; Index locorum 269-280.

    Volume Two - Preface IX; Gotthard Strohmayer: Galen's not uncritical Commentary on Hippocrates' Airs, Waters, Places 1; Peter E. Pormann: The Alexandrian Summary (Jawami) of Galen's On the Sects fro Beginners: Commentary or abrdgment? 11; Marwan Rashed: The problem of the composition of the Heavens (529-1610) a new fragment of Philoponus and its readers 35; Peter Adamson: Correcting Plotinus: soul's relationship to body in Avicenna's Commentary on the Theology of Aristotle 59; Dimitri Gutas: Avicenna's marginal glosses on De anima and the Greek commentatorial tradition 77; Steven Harvey: The impact of Philoponus' Commentary on the Physics on Averroes' three Commentaries on the Physics 89; Richard C. Taylor: Improving on nature's exemplar: Averroes' completion of Aristotle's psychology of intellect 107; Dag Nikolaus Hasse: The attraction of Averroism in the Renaissance: Vernia, Achillini, Prassico 131; Robert Winowsky: The nature and scope of Arabic philosophical commentary in post-classical (ca. 1100-1900 AD) islamic intellectual history: some preliminary observations 149; Index Locorum 193-197.

    "This two volume Supplement to the Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies represents the proceedings of a conference held at the Institute on 27-29 June, 2002, in honour of Richard Sorabji. These volumes, which are intended to build on the massive achievement of Professor Sorabji's Ancient Commentators on Aristotle series, focus on the commentary as a vehicle of philosophical and scientific thought. Volume One deals with the Greek tradition, including one paper on Byzantine philosophy and one on the Latin author Calcidius, who is very close to the late Greek tradition in outlook. The volume begins with an overview of the tradition of commenting on Aristotle, and of the study of this tradition in the modern era. It concludes with an up-to-date bibliography of scholarship devoted to the commentators. Volume Two deals with commentaries in Arabic, including a paper on the reception of Arabic interpretations of Aristotle's De anima in Latin during the Renaissance." (From the Preface)

  2. Baltussen, Han. 2002. "Philology or Philosophy? Simplicius on the Use of Quotations." In Epea and Grammata. Oral and Written Communcation in Ancient Greece, edited by Worthington, Ian and Foley, John Miles, 173-189. Leiden: Brill.

  3. ———. 2007. "From Polemic to Exegesis: The Ancient Philosophical Commentary." Poetics Today no. 28:247-289.

    "Commentary was an important vehicle for philosophical debate in late antiquity. Its antecedents lie in the rise of rational argumentation, polemical rivalry, literacy, and the canonization of texts. This essay aims to give a historical and typological outline of philosophical exegesis in antiquity, from the earliest allegorizing readings of Homer to the full-blown "running commentary" in the Platonic tradition (fourth to sixth centuries CE). Running commentaries are mostly on authoritative thinkers such as Plato and Aristotle. Yet they are never mere scholarly enterprises but, rather, springboards for syncretistic clarification, elaboration, and creative interpretation. Two case studies (Galen 129-219 CE, Simplicius ca. 530 CE) will illustrate the range of exegetical tools available at the end of a long tradition in medical science and in reading Aristotle through Neoplatonic eyes, respectively."

  4. ———. 2008. Philosophy and Exegesis in Simplicius. The Methodology of a Commentator. London: Duckworth.

  5. Barnes, Jonathan. 1992. "Metacommentary." Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy no. 10:267-281.

  6. Benakis, Linos. 1988. "Commentaires and Commentators on the Works of Aristotle (Except the Logical Ones) in Byzantium." In Historia philosophiae Medii Aevi. Studien zur Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters, edited by Mojsisch, Burkhard and Pluta, Olaf, 45-54. Amsterdam: B. R. Grüner.

  7. ———. 1988. "Commentaries and Commentators on the Logical Works of Aristotle in Byzantium." In Gedankenzeichen. Festschrift für Klaus Oehler zum 60. Geburtstag, edited by Claussen, Regina and Daube-Schakat, Roland, 3-12. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.

  8. Celluprica, Vincenza, and D'Ancona, Cristina, eds. 2004. Aristotele e i suoi esegeti neoplatonici. Logica e ontologia nelle interpretazioni greche e arabe. Napoli: Bibliopolis.

    Atti del Convegno internazionale, Roma, 19-20 ottobre 2001.

    Sommario: Vincenza Celluprica: Prefazione IX; Cristina D'Ancona: Introduzione XI-XXI; Riccardo Chiaradonna: Plotino e la teoria degli universali. Enn. VI 3 [44], 9 p. 1; Frans A. J. De Haas: Context and strategy of Plotinus' treatise On the Genera of Being (Enn. VI 1-3 [42-44]) 37; Henri Hugonnard-Roche: La constitution de la logique tardo-antique et l'élaboration d'une logique "matérielle" en syriaque 55; Cleophea Ferrari: Der Duft des Apfels. Abu 1-Farag 'Abdallah Ibn at-Tayyib und sein Kommentar zu den Kategorien des Aristoteles 85; Marwan Rashed: Ibn 'Adi et Avicenne: sur les types d'existants 107; Amos Bertolacci: La ricezione del libro Gamma della Metafisica nell 'Ilahiyyat del Kitab al-Sifà' di Avicenna 173; Cecilia Martini Bonadeo: Os éromenon:: alcune interpretazioni di Metaph. Lambda 7 211; Bibiografia 245; Indici 271-282.

  9. D'Ancona, Cristina, ed. 2007. The Libraries of the Neoplatonists. Leiden: Brill.

    Proceedings of the Meeting of the European Science Foundation Network "Late antiquity and Arabic thought: patterns in the constitution of European culture" held in Strasbourg, March 12-14, 2004 under the impulsion of the Scientific Committee of the Meeting, composed by Matthias Baltes, Michel Cacouros, Cristina D'Ancona, Tiziano Dorandi, Gerhard Endress, Philippe Hoffmann, Henri Hugonnard Roche.

  10. D'Ancona, Cristina, and Serra, Giuseppe, eds. 2002. Aristotele e Alessandro di Afrodisia nella tradizione Araba. Padova: Il Poligrafo.

    Atti del colloquio La ricezione araba ed ebraica della filosofia e della scienza greche Padova, 14-15 maggio 1999.

    Indice: Presentazione 7; Abbreviazioni 17; Gerhard Endress: Alexander Arabus on the First Cause. Aristotle's First Mover in an Arabic Treatise attributed to Alexander of Aphrodisias 19; Cecilia Martini: La tradizione araba della Metafisica di Aristotele. Libri α - A 75; Carmela Baffioni: Una citazione di De interpretatione, 9 in Abu Ma'sar? 113; Emma Gannagé: Matière et éléments dans le commentaire d'Alexandre d'Aphrodise In De generatione et corruptione 133; Silvia Fazzo: Alessandro di Afrodisia sulle 'contrarietà tangibili' ( De Gen corr. II 2); fonti greche e arabe a confronto 151; Marc Geoffroy: La tradition arabe du Peri nous d'Alexandre d'Aphrodise et les origines de la théorie farabienne des quatres dégrés de l'intellect 191; Paola Carusi: Filosofia greca e letteratura nel Ma' al-waraqi di Ibn Umail al-Tamimi (X secolo) 233; Marwan Rashed: La classification des lignes simples selon Proclus et sa transmission au monde islamique 257; Heidrun Eichner: Ibn Rusd's Middle Commentary and Alexander's Commentary in their relationship to the Arab commentary tradition on the De Generatione et corruptione 281; Mauro Zonta: Le traduzioni di Zerahyah Gracian e la versione ebraica del De Generatione et corruptione 299; Giuseppe Serra: Note in margine a M. Zonta, Le traduzioni di Zerahyah Gracian e la versione ebraica del De Generatione et corruptione 319; Indice dei manoscritti 325; Indice degli autori antichi 327; Indice degli autori moderni 331-334.

  11. D'Ancona Costa, Cristina. 2002. "Commenting on Aristotle: from Late Antiquity to the Arab Aristotelianism." In Der Kommentar in Antike und Mittelalter. Beiträge zu seiner Erforschung. Band 1, edited by Geerlings, Wilhelm and Schulze, Christian, 201-251. Leiden: Brill.

    This paper is a detailed presentation of the transmission history of commentaries to Aristotle from Alexander of Aphrodisias to Ibn Rushd (Averroes) and contains a list of the Greek commentaries on Aristotle's works, including those mentioned in Arabic sources.

  12. Donini, Pierluigi. 1987. "Testi e commenti, manuali e insegnamento: la forma sistematica e i metodi della filosofia in età post-ellenistica." In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt (ANRW). Geschichte und Kultur Roms in Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, edited by Haase, Wolfgang, 5027-5094. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Band 36.7: Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. Teilband II: Systematische Themen; Indirekte Überlieferungen; Allgemeines; Nachträge.

  13. Drossaart Lulofs, Hendrik J. 1965. Nicolaus Damascenus on the Philosophy of Aristotle. Leiden: Brill.

    Fragments of the first five books translated from the Syriac witn an introduction and commentary.

    Photomechanical reprint with additions and corrections 1969.

  14. Dubois, Jean-Daniel, and Roussel, Bernard, eds. 1998. Entrer en matière. Les prologues. Paris: Cerf.

  15. Ebbesen, Sten. 2002. "Late-ancient ancestors of medieval philosophical Commentaries." In The Philosophical Commentary in the Latin West (13-15th centuries) / Il Commento filosofico nell'Occidente Latino (secoli XIII-XV), edited by Fioravanti, Gianfranco, Leonardi, Claudio and Perfetti, Stefano, 1-15. Turnhout: Brepols.

  16. Falcon, Andrea. 2008. "The Pre-History of the Commentary Tradition: Aristotelianism in the First Century BCE (Prolegomena to a Study of Xenarchus of Seleucia)." Laval Théologique et Philosophique no. 64:7-18.

    "In the first century BCE Aristotle was subject to an intense textual study. This study eventually led to the appropriation of the conceptual apparatus developed in his writings. In the case of Xenarchus, the relevant apparatus was Aristotle's theory of motion, with an emphasis on the concepts of natural place and natural motion. Xenarchus reworked Aristotle's theory of motion so as to make the celestial simple body expendable. While I do not deny that some of his views are best understood in light of the debates of late Hellenestic philosophy, I contend that his textual engagement presupposes the distance from Aristotle that is characteristic of Post-Hellenistic philosophy."

  17. ———, ed. 2016. Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity. Leiden: Brill.

    Contents: Acknowledgements IX; Notes on Contributors X; Andrea Falcon: Introduction 1;

    Part 1: The Hellenistic Reception of Aristotle

    1. David Lefebvre: Aristotle and the Hellenistic Peripatos: From Theophrastus to Critolaus 13; 2. Francesco Verde: Aristotle and the Garden 35; 3. Thomas Bénatouïl: Aristotle and the Stoa 56;

    Part 2: The Post-Hellenistic Engagement with Aristotle.

    The Peripatetic Tradition

    4. Myrto Hatzimichali: Andronicus of Rhodes and the Construction of the Aristotelian Corpus 81; 5. Andrea Falcon: Aristotelianism in the First Century BC 101; 6. Georgia Tsouni: Peripatetic Ethics in the First Century BC: The Summary of Didymus 120; 7. Inna Kupreeva: Aristotelianism in the Second Century AD: Before Alexander of Aphrodisias 138; 8. Cristina Cerami: Alexander of Aphrodisias 160;

    Cristina Cerami

    Beyond the Peripatetic Tradition

    9. John Dillon: The Reception of Aristotle in Antiochus and Cicero 183; 10. Angela Ulacco: The Appropriation of Aristotle in the Ps-Pythagorean Treatises 202; 11. Alexandra Michalewski: The Reception of Aristotle in Middle Platonism: From Eudorus of

    Alexandria to Ammonius Saccas 218; 12. R. J. Hankinson: Galen’s Reception of Aristotle 238; 13. Sara Magrin: Plotinus’ Reception of Aristotle 258; 14. Tiziano Dorandi: The Ancient Biographical Tradition on Aristotle 277; 15. Jaap Mansfeld: Aristotle in the Aëtian Placita 299;

    Part 3: Aristotle in Late Antiquity

    16. Riccardo Chiaradonna: Porphyry and the Aristotelian Tradition 321; 17. Jan Opsomer: An Intellective Perspective on Aristotle: Iamblichus the Divine 341; 18. Arnaud Zucker: Themistius 358; 19. Pieter d’Hoine: Syrianus and Proclus on Aristotle 374; 20. Michael Griffin: Ammonius and the Alexandrian School 394; 21. Pantelis Gollitsis: Simplicius and Philoponus on the Authority of Aristotle 419; 22. Christophe Erismann: Aristoteles Latinus: The Reception of Aristotle in the Latin World 439; 23. George Karamanolis: Early Christian Philosophers on Aristotle 460;

    Index of Ancient Names 481; Index of Passages 484-512.

  18. Fazzo, Silvia. 2004. "Aristotelianism as a Commentary Tradition." In Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries (Vol. One), edited by Adamson, Peter, Baltussen, Han and Stone, M.W.F., 1-19. London: Institute of Classical Studies, University of London.

  19. Fioravanti, Gianfranco, Leonardi, Claudio, and Perfetti, Stefano, eds. 2002. Il commento filosofico nell'Occidente Latino (secoli XIII -XV) / The Philosophical Commentary in the Latin West (13-15th century). Turnhout: Brepols.

  20. Geerlings, Wilhelm, and Schulze, Christian, eds. 2002. Der Kommentar in Antike und Mittelalter. I: Beiträge zu seiner Erforschung. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

  21. ———, eds. 2004. Der Kommentar in Antike und Mittelalter. II: Neue Beiträge zu seiner Erforschung. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

  22. Gerson, Lloyd P. 2006. Aristotle and Other Platonists. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

  23. Golitsis, Pantelis. 2008. Les Commentaires de Simplicius et de Jean Philopon à la Physique d'Aristote: tradition et innovation. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

  24. Gottschalk, Hans B. 1987. "Aristotelian philosophy in the Roman world from the time of Cicero to the end of the Second century AD." In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt (ANRW). Geschichte und Kultur Roms in Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, edited by Haase, Wolfgang, 1079-1174. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Band 36.2: Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. Teilband II: Philosophie (Platonismus [Forts.]; Aristotelismus.

  25. Goulet-Cazé, Marie-Odile, ed. 2000. Le commentaire entre tradition et innovation. Paris: Vrin.

    Actes du colloque international de l'Institut des traditions textuelles (Paris et Villejuif, 22-25 septembre 1999).

  26. Griffin, Michael J. 2013. "Which 'Athenodorus' Commented on Aristotle's Categories?" Classical Quarterly no. 63:199-208.

    "The principate of Augustus coincided with a surge of interest in the short Aristotelian treatise which we now entitle Categories, contributing to its later installation at the outset of the philosophical curriculum and its traditional function as an introduction to logic. Thanks in part to remarks made by Plutarch and Porphyry, the origin of this interest has often been traced to Andronicus of Rhodes: his catalogue and publication of the Aristotelian corpus began with the Categories and may have drawn fresh attention to a previously obscure treatise. But the later Neoplatonic sources name several other philosophers who also discussed the Categories and played an important role in crafting its interpretation during the first centuries of our era. For example, the Neoplatonist Simplicius discusses the views of Stoics and Platonists who questioned the Categories' value as a treatment of grammar or ontology, while others defended its usefulness as an introduction to logic. These early debates, as these later sources suggest, exercised a lasting influence on the shape of subsequent philosophy and philosophical education within and beyond the Aristotelian tradition ."

  27. Hadot, Ilsetraut. 1987. "La division néoplatonicienne des écrits d'Aristote." In Aristoteles. Werk und Wirkung (Mélanges Paul Moraux), edited by Wiesner, Jürgen, 249-285. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

  28. ———. 1987. "Les introductions aux commentaires exégétiques chez les auteurs néoplatoniciens et le auteurs chrétiens." In Les règles de l'interprétation, edited by Tardieu, Michel, 99-122. Paris: Cerf.

    "Le présent article décrit les différents types de schémas introductifs contenus dans les commentaires des néoplatoniciens tardifs sur les ceuvres d'Aristote et de Platon, en essayant de déterminer leur signification exégétique ainsi que l'origine de plusieurs d'entre eux. Il apparaît que les deux schémas en dix points qui introduisent respectivement à la philosophie d'Aristote et à celle de Platon ont de toute vraisemblance été codifiés par Proclus au V siècle de notre ère, tandis que certains points des schémas en six points introduisant aux différents traités d'Aristote ou aux divers dialogues de Platon apparaissent déjà au III siècle chez Origène qui a dû s'inspirer des commentaires platoniciens de son temps." p. 99

  29. ———. 1991. "The role of the commentaries on Aristotle in the teaching of philosophy according to the prefaces of the neoplatonic commentaries on the Categories." Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy no. Supplementary volume: Aristotle and Later Tradition:175-189.

  30. ———. 1997. "Le commentaire philosophique continu dans l'Antiquité." Antiquité Tardive no. 5:169-176.

  31. ———. 2002. "Der fortlaufende philosophische Kommentar." In Der Kommentar in Antike und Mittelalter. Beiträge zu seiner Erforschung. Band 1, edited by Geerlings, Wilhelm and Schulze, Christian, 183-199. Leiden: Brill.

    "[The essay] lucidly presents continuous commentaries on philosophical works focusing on their Sitz im Leben in the instruction of a circle of students with a specific level of knowledge. She briefly discusses formal aspects, and then focuses on the syncretistic tendencies regarding the philosophical schools, the educational function of the introductions to single treatises, the gradually increasing level of difficulty as challenge for the developing student, and the act of interpretation as religious deed." Frm the review by Daniel Stökl Ben Ezra (Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2004.03.46).

  32. ———. 2015. Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato. Leiden: Brill.

  33. Hadot, Pierre. 1968. "Philosophie, exégèse et contresens." In Akten des XIV. Internationalen Kongress für Philosophie. Vol I, 333-339. Wien: Herder.

    Repris dans P. Hadot, Études de philosophie ancienne, Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1998, pp. 3-11.

  34. Hoffmann, Philippe. 1997. "La problématique du titre des traités d'Aristote selon le commentateurs grecs. Quelques exemples." In Titres et articulations du texte dans les œuvres antiques, edited by Jean-Claude, Fredouille, Goulet-Cazé, Marie-Odile, Hoffmann, Philippe and Petitmengin, Pierre, 75-103. Paris: Institut d'Études Augustiniennes.

  35. ———. 1998. "La fonction des prologues exégétiques dans la pensée Pédagogique néoplatonicienne." In Entrer en matière. Les prologues, edited by Dubois, Jean-Daniel and Roussel, Bernard, 209-245. Paris: Cerf.

  36. ———. 2006. "What was Commentary in Late Antiquity? The example of the Neoplatonic Commentators." In A Companion in Ancient Philosophy, edited by Gill, Mary Louise and Pellegrin, Pierre, 597-622. Malden: Blackwell.

    "Neoplatonic thought at the end of antiquity -- like that of most of the schools of the Hellenistic and Roman period -- has an essentially exegetical and scholastic dimension. Beginning with the classical and Hellenistic period, philosophy in Greece is inseparable from the existence of schools (private or public), often organized as places of communal life (sunousia), in which the explication of the texts of the school's founders came to be one of the main activities.(1) The practice of exegesis of written texts supplanted the ancient practice of dialogue. It was sustained through its application to canonical texts, and was put to everyday use in the framework of courses in the explication of texts. The social reality of the school as an institution, with its hierarchy, its diadochos (i.e., the successor to the school's founder), its structure as a conventicle in which communal life was practiced, its library, its regulation of time, and its programs organized around the reading of canonical texts, constitutes a concrete context into which we should reinsert the practice of exegesis, which is the heart of philosophical pedagogy and the matrix of doctrinal and dogmatic works." p. 597

    (1) See Thomas Bénatouil, Philosophic Schools in Hellenistic and Roman times, in this volume. [pp. 415-429]

  37. ———. 2007. "Les bibliothèques philosophiques d'après le témoignage de la littérature néoplatonicienne des Ve et VIe siècles " In The Libraries of the Neoplatonists, edited by D'Ancona Costa, Cristina, 135-153. Leiden: Brill.

    Première pubblication: "Bibliothèques et formes du livre à la fin de l’Antiquité. Le témoignage de la littérature néoplatonicienne des Ve et VIe siècles", Manoscritti greci tra riflessione e dibattito. Atti del V Colloquio Internazionale di Paleografia Greca (Cremona, 4-10 ottobre 1998), a cura di Giancarlo Prato, Firenze: Gonnelli, 2000, p. 601-632 (repris partiellement avec quelque addictions).

  38. Karamanolis, George. 2004. "Porphyry: the first Platonist commentator on Aristotle." In Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries, edited by Adamson, Peter, Baltussen, Han and Stone, M.W.F., 97-120. London: Institute of Classical Studies - University of London.

  39. ———. 2006. Plato and Aristotle in Agreement? Platonists on Aristotle from Antiochus to Porphyry. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  40. Longo, Angela, ed. 2009. Syrianus et la métaphysique de l'Antiquité tardive. Napoli: Bibliopolis.

    "Le présent volume constitue les Actes du colloque "Syrianus et la métaphysique de l'Antiquité tardive", qui a eu lieu à l'Université de Genève du 29 septembre au 1er octobre 2006.

    Il s'agit du premier colloque international de philosophie antique à avoir été consacré intégralement au philosophe Syrianus (Ve siècle après J.-C.), maître de Proclus et diadoque de l'École platonicienne d'Athènes. Syrianus est un philosophe important pour la force de sa pensée et pour la grande influence qu'il a eue dans la tradition platonicienne de l'Antiquité tardive Malgré cela, il reste encore trop peu connu et étudié. Son Commentaire sur la Métaphysique d'Aristote, dans lequel il développe une défense rigoureuse des réalités intelligibles et de leur connaissance scientifique, en réaction contre Aristote et la tradition péripatéticienne, est particulièrement important. En effet, il est l'un des rares platoniciens de l'époque à ne pas vouloir réaliser à tout prix une conciliation entre les doctrines de Platon et celles d'Aristote, et à critiquer de façon âpre ce dernier en matière de métaphysique, tout en gardant les apports aristotéliciens en matière de logique.

    Cette initiative s'inscrit dans un projet scientifique plus large (commencé en avril 2004) concernant l'étude systématique de la notion de dialectique et son emploi dans les Écoles platoniciennes d'Athènes et d'Alexandrie du Ve au vie siècle après J.-C. Ce projet, dont j'assure la coordination, est soutenu par le Fonds national suisse de la recherche scientifique.

    Les contributions des spécialistes de la tradition platonicienne, réunis à cette occasion, ont traité des différents aspects du projet philosophique de Syrianus ainsi que de son savoir littéraire et rhétorique, sans négliger la question de l'état de la tradition manuscrite de ses ouvrages.

    Les multiples articles du présent volume ont été rassemblés en deux parties selon les thèmes suivants: la première partie, après un aperçu général et un bilan critique concernant l'apport des différents manuscrits du Commentaire sur la Métaphysique d'Aristote (dont certains sont pris en compte pour la première fois), traite de l'astronomie, de la matière et des nombres, de l'âme et du monde intelligible; dans la deuxième partie il est question de l'éventuelle harmonisation entre Platon et Aristote, de la logique, de la conception de la science, ainsi que du mythe et du savoir rhétorique. En outre, deux contributions qui n'ont pas fait l'objet d'une présentation orale lors du Colloque ont été ajoutées au volume, car elles apportent des approfondissements complémentaires sur la théologie et la logique de Syrianus." pp. 15-16

  41. Mansfeld, Jaap. 1994. Prolegomena. Questions to Be Settled Before the Study of an Author Or a Text. Leiden: Brill.

    See in particular Chapter I.1 Commentaries on Aristotle and Christian Commentaries, pp. 10-19.

  42. Matthews, Gareth B. 1992. "Container Metaphysics according to Aristotle's Greek Commentators." In Aristotle and His Medieval Interpreters, edited by Bosley, Richard and Tweedale, Martin, 7-23. Calgary: University of Calgary Press.

    Supplementary volume 17 to the Canadian Journal of Philosophy.

    "The neo-Platonism of Aristotle's Greek Commentators leaves them unable to take with full seriousness the Categories doctrine that individual organisms like this human being or that horse are the primary realities. Yet these Commentators stand with Michael Frede and G. E. L. Owen against john Ackrill in reading 1a24-5 in such a way that Aristotle can really mean what he says when he maintains that all other things besides primary substances are either said of them, or in them, as subjects. not only are this grey and this color in the old grey mare, grey and color are there, too."

  43. Militello, Chiara. 2010. I commentari all'Isagoge di Porfirio tra V e VI secolo. Acireale: Bonanno.

  44. Minio-Paluello, Lorenzo. 1972. Opuscola. The Latin Aristotle. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert.

  45. Moraux, Paul. 1973. Der Aristotelismus bei den Griechen, Von Andronikos bis Alexander von Aphrodisias. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Vol. I: Die Renaissance des Aristotelismus im I. Jh.v. Chr. (1973); Vol. II: Der Aristotelismus im I. und II. Jh.n. Chr. (1984); Vol. III: Alexander von Aphrodisias (2001), edited by Jürgen Wiesner, with a chapter on Ethics by Robert W. Sharples.

    In the third volume see the Fourth Chapter: Kommentar zur Aristotelischen Metaphysik, pp. 423-510.

  46. ———. 1991. "Les commentateurs grecs." In Penser avec Aristote, edited by Sinaceur, Mohammed Allal, 745-756. Paris: Éditions érès.

  47. Muckle, Joseph Thomas. 1942. "Greek Works translated directly into Latin before 1350. Part I: Before 1000." Mediaeval Studies no. 4:33-42.

  48. ———. 1943. "Greek Works translated directly into Latin before 1350 (Continuation)." Mediaeval Studies no. 5:102-114.

  49. Rashed, Marwan. 2007. Essentialisme. Alexandre d'Aphrodise entre logique, physique et cosmologie. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

  50. Sedley, David. 1997. "Plato's auctoritas and the rebirth of the Commentary tradition." In Philosophia togata II. Plato and Aristotle at Rome, edited by Barnes, Jonathan and Griffin, Miriam, 110-129. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    "In this paper I shall be considering the emergence, or rather re-emergence, of Platonic commentary around the end of the Hellenistic age. That is the period which forms the essential background to our chief surviving specimens of the genre, the great fifth-century Platonic commentaries of Proclus. Specifically, I intend to examine why Platonic philosophy came to such a large extent to take the form of commentary, and how the resources of the commentary format were deployed for the task of establishing, preserving, and exploiting Plato's philosophical authority.

    I have explored this theme, mainly with reference to the Epicureans, in [226] 97-119. The present paper tries to take the same discussion further, with occasional modifications to what I said there.

    For three reasons, Rome provides a peculiarly apt vantage-point from which to observe the process. First, the philosophical centre of gravity having shifted away from Athens, Rome had now become more of a magnet to philosophers than at any previous time. Both Philo of Larissa and Antiochus of Ascalon, who fought for Plato's mantle in the Academy's dying phase, were known at Rome, and each had close links with a network of influential Roman figures. Second, by far our most voluminous and eloquent witness to that battle is a Roman, Cicero. And third, the Romans had one unusual advantage over the Greeks. They had the right word: auctoritas. As the Greeks themselves admitted, auctoritas was a concept inexpressible in their own language Yet it is this Latin word which, by combining the notions of leadership, ownership, prestige, and validation, most informatively conveys the commanding status that the founder (the auctor) of a Greek philosophical system held in the eyes of its subsequent adherents. Such a linguistic advantage, along with his lifetime adhesion to the Academy, makes Cicero a uniquely valuable witness to, and commentator on, the refurbishment of Plato's auctoritas among first-century BC Academics. (Just because the Greek language could not express the notion of auctoritas, it does not follow that the phenomenon which it describes was absent from Greek philosophical schools.) And without an understanding of that background, there is no hope of seeing how and why, in the immediate aftermath, Platonists turned to the writing of commentaries.

    To illuminate the renaissance of Platonic commentary, I can make no use of the numerous indirect reports of Middle Platonist commentators. Nor can I do much with our considerable evidence for the interpretations of Plato which held the field from the late first century BC to the late second century AD. Most of it comes from epitomes, treatises, and indirect reports which do not directly display the process of textual exegesis, even though this undoubtedly lies just below their surface. It is only when we have the actual words of the commentators in front of us that we can examine their exegetical techniques in adequate depth." pp. 110-111

  51. Sellars, John. 2004. "The Aristotelian Commentators: a bibliographical guide." In Philosophy, science and exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries (Vol. One), edited by Adamson, Peter, Baltussen, Han and Stone, M.W.F., 239-268. London: Institute of Classical Studies, University of London.

  52. Sorabji, Richard, ed. 1990. Aristotle Transformed. The Ancient Commentators and Their Influence. London: Duckworth.

    Contents: Preface VII; Acknowledgments IX; List of contributors X; 1. Richard Sorabji: The ancient commentators on Aristotle 1; 2. Karl Praechter: Review of the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca (1909) 31; 3. Hans B. Gottschalk: The earliest Aristotelian commentators (1987) 55; 4. Robert W. Sharples: The school of Alexander? 83; 5. Henry J. Blumenthal: Themistius: the last Peripatetic commentator on Aristotle? (1979) 113; 6. Pierre Hadot: The harmony of Plotinus and Aristotle according to Porphyry (1974) 125; 7 . Sten Ebbesen: Porphyry's legacy to logic: a reconstruction (1981) 141; 8. H. D. Saffrey: How did Syrianus regard Aristotle? (1987) 173; 9. Richard Sorabji: Infinite power impressed: the transformation of Aristotle's physics and theology (1989) 181; 10. Koenrad Verrycken: The metaphysics of Ammonius son of Hermeias 199; 11. Koenrad Verrycken: The development of Philoponus' thought and its chronology 233; 12. Ilsetraut Hadot: The life and work of Simplicius in Greek and Arabic sources (1987) 275; 13. Henry J. Blumenthal: Neoplatonic elements in the de Anima commentaries (1976) 305; 14.Leendert Gerrit Westerink: The Alexandrian commentators and the introductions to their commentaries (1962) 325; 15. James Shiel: Boethius' commentaries on Aristotle (1958) 349; 16. Sten Ebbesen: Boethius as an Aristotelian commentator (1987) 373; 17. Robert Browning: An unpublished funeral oration on Anna Comnena (1962) 393; 18. H. P. F. Mercken: The Greek commentators on Aristotle's Ethics (1973) 407; 19. Sten Ebbesen: Philoponus, 'Alexander' and the origins of medieval logic 445; 20. Ian Mueller: Aristotle's doctrine of abstraction in the commentators 463; Donald R. Morrison: Note on the frontispiece: 'Aristotle and Alexander of Aphrodisias' by Ulocrino 481; Select bibliography 485; Index locorum 525; General index 535-545.

    "The story of the ancient commentators on Aristotle has not previously been told at book length. Here it is assembled for the first time by drawing both on some of the classic articles translated into English or revised and on the very latest research. Some of the chapters will be making revisionary suggestions unfamiliar even to specialists in the field. The philosophical interest of the commentators has been illustrated elsewhere. (1) The aim here is not so much to do this again as to set out the background of the commentary tradition against which further philosophical discussion and discussions of other kinds can take place.

    The importance of the commentators lies partly in their representing the thought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools, partly in the panorama they provide of the 1100 years of Ancient Greek philosophy, preserving as they do many original quotations from lost philosophical works. Still more significant is their profound influence, uncovered in some of the chapters below, on subsequent philosophy, Islamic and European. This was due partly to their preserving anti-Aristotelian material which helped to inspire medieval and Renaissance science, but still more to their presenting an Aristotle transformed in ways which happened to make him acceptable to the Christian Church. It is not just Aristotle, but this Aristotle transformed and embedded in the philosophy of the commentators, that lies behind the views of later thinkers.

    Many of the commentaries are being translated in the series 'The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle', published by Duckworth and Cornell University Press from 1987 onwards (general editor: Richard Sorabji). The present book will also serve as an introduction to them.

    (Chapters 1, 4, 10, 11, 19 and 20 are new; 2, 6, 8 and 12 are translated; 5, 9, 14, 15 and 18 are substantially revised. Others are revised in more minor ways; Greek and Latin passages are translated throughout." (from the Preface)

  53. ———. 1991. "Aristote et les commentateurs anciens." In Penser avec Aristote, edited by Sinaceur, Mohammed Allal, 75-91. Paris: Éditions érès.

  54. ———, ed. 2004. The Philosophy of the Commentators 200-600 AD. A Sourcebook. London: Duckworth.

    Vol. I: Psychology; Vol. II: Physics; Vol. III: Logic and Metaphysics.

  55. Tuominen, Miira. 2009. The Ancient Commentators on Plato and Aristotle. Stocksfield: Acumen.

    Contents: Acknowledgements VI; Abbreviations VII; Chronology IX-X; 1. Introduction; 2. Epistemology 41; 3. Science and logic 70; 4. Physics 118; 5. Psychology: perception and intellect 158; 6. Metaphysics 200; 7. Ethics 237; 8. Conclusion 280; Notes 288; Further reading 301; Bibliography 306; Index 320-324.

    "The aim and organization of this book.

    The main objective of this book is to offer a philosophically focused introduction to the ancient commentators.


    There is a wealth of material in the commentaries themselves but no general introduction comparable to this one exists. During the past twenty years, more and more texts by the commentators have become available to English-speaking students and scholars in the translation series led by Sorabji. Sorabji has also edited a sourcebook (2004) that contains a selection of translated texts with brief introductions. Scholars working in continental Europe (such as Hadot's group at the National Centre for Scientific Research [CNRS] in France) have produced considerable research, as well as new editions, on the commentaries. All these works make the commentaries much more accessible than they used to be. However, none of these works serves exactly as an introduction to the topic.

    In order to introduce the commentators as philosophers, some restrictions have been necessary. Anything like a complete overview of the commentators' thought would be unimaginable. The text material is simply too large, not to mention the fact that the group that could justifiably be called "ancient commentators" would include many more than the authors studied in this volume. The selection of material concentrates on themes that have been found philosophically inspiring during most periods of the history of Western philosophy. They also are themes that were central in the commentaries themselves. Methodologically speaking, the discussions in

    this book start from generally recognized philosophical problems or themes (such as the nature and possibility of knowledge, explanatory principles of nature, the nature of reality, the content of a good human life and so forth) and ask how the commentators formulated questions related to these themes and how they answered them. The most important reason for choosing this approach is that it helps integrate the commentators into the continuum of thinkers who work in different historical periods, employ different methods and follow divergent meta-philosophical guidelines." (pp. 14-16)

  56. Wiberding, James. 2014. "The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle." In The Routledge Companion to Ancient Philosophy, edited by Warren, James and Sheffield, Frisbee, 643-658. New York: Routledge.

  57. Wildberg, Christian. 1991. "Three Neoplatonic Introductions to Philosophy: Ammonius, David and Elias." Hermathena no. 149:33-51.