Theory and History of Ontology

by Raul Corazzon | e-mail: rc@ontology.co

Download website 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.

 

If your Internet connection is slow you can try the site closest to you:

Selected Bibliography on the Ancient Greek Commentaries on Aristotle's Categories

CRITICAL EDITIONS OF THE ANCIENT COMMENTARIES TO ARISTOTLE'S CATEGORIES

Eight Neoplatonic commentaries are extant: seven in Greek by Porphyry, Dexippus, Ammonius, Philoponus, Olympiodorus, Simplicius, Pseudo-Elias (David), published in the series of Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca by the Berlin Academy (1882-1909, 23 volumes; this edition is reprinted by Walter de Gruyter) and one in Latin by Boethius.

  1. Porphyry. 1887. Porphyrii Isagoge Et in Aristotelis Categorias Commentarium. Berlin: Reimer.

    Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca: IV/1.

  2. Dexippus. 1887. Dexippi in Aristotelis Categorias Commentarium. Berlin: Reimer.

    Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca: IV/2.

  3. Boethius. 1887. Porphyrii Isagoge Et in Aristotelis Categorias Commentarium. Berlin: Reimer.

    Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca: IV/1.

  4. Ammonius. 1895. In Aristotelis Categorias Commentarius. Berlin: Reimer.

    Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca: IV/4.

  5. Philoponus. 1898. Philoponi (Olim Ammonii) in Aristotelis Categorias Commentarium. Berlin: Reimer.

    Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca: XIII/1.

  6. Olympiodorus. 1902. Olympiodori Prolegomena Et in Categorias Commentarium. Berlin: Reimer.

    Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca: XII/1.

  7. Simplicius. 1907. Simplicii in Aristotelis Categorias Commentarium. Berlin: Reimer.

    Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca: XXI.

  8. Pseudo-Elias, (David). 1900. Eliae in Porphyrii Isagogen Et Aristotelis Categorias Commentaria. Berlin: Reimer.

    Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca: IV/4.

  9. Porphyre. 2008. Commentaire Aux Catégories D'Aristote. Paris: Vrin.

    Édition critique, traduction française, introduction et notes par Richard Bodéüs.

MODERN TRANSLATIONS OF THE ANCIENT COMMENTARIES TO ARISTOTLE'S CATEGORIES

  1. Ammonius. 1991. On Aristotle Categories, Ancient Commentators on Aristotle. London: Duckworth.

    Translated by S. Marc Cohen and Gareth B. Matthews.

  2. Dexippus. 1990. On Aristotle Categories, Ancient Commentators on Aristotle. London: Duckworth.

    Translated by John Dillon.

  3. Porphyry. 1992. On Aristotle Categories, Ancient Commentators on Aristotle. London: Duckworth.

    Translated by Steven K. Strange.

  4. Simplicius. 2003. On Aristotle Categories 1-4, Ancient Commentators of Aristotle. London: Duckworth.

    Translated by Michael Chase.

  5. ———. 2001. On Aristotle Categories 5-6, Ancient Commentators of Aristotle. London: Duckworth.

    Translated by Frans A. J. de Haas and Barrie Fleet.

  6. ———. 2002. On Aristotle Categories 7-8, Ancient Commentators of Aristotle. London: Duckworth.

    Translated by Barrie Fleet.

  7. ———. 2000. On Aristotle Categories 9-15, Ancient Commentators of Aristotle. London: Duckworth.

    Translated by Richard Gaskin.

  8. ———. 1990. Commentaire Sur Les Catégories. Fascicule I. Introduction, Première Partie (P. 1-9,3 Kalbfleisch). Leiden: Brill.

    Traduction commentée sous la direction de Ilsetraut Hadot.

    Traduction de Philippe Hoffmann (avec la collaboration de Ilsetraut Hadot et Pierre Hadot).

    Commentaire et notes à la traduction par I. Hadot avec des appendices de P. Hadot et J.-P. Mahé.

  9. ———. 2001. Commentaire Sur Les Catégories D'Aristote. [Fascicule Ii.] Chapitre 2-4. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.

    Traduction par Philippe Hoffmann avec la collaboration de Ilsetraut Hadot et Pierre Hadot.

    Commentaire par Concetta Luna.

  10. ———. 1990. Commentaire Sur Les Catégories. Fascicule Iii. Préambule Aux Catégories. Leiden: Brill.

    Commentaire au Premier Chapitre des Catégories (P. 21-40, 13 Kalbfleisch).

    Traduction de Philippe Hoffmann (avec la collaboration d'Ilsetraut Hadot, Pierre Hadot et Concetta Luna).

    Commentaire et notes à la traduction par C. Luna.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

For a general bibliography on the Greek Commentators on Aristotle see: The Neoplatonic Commentators on Aristotle's Metaphysics

  1. Anton, John Peter. 1969. "Ancient Interpretations of Aristotle's Doctrine of Homonyma." Journal of the History of Philosophy no. 7:1-18.

    "The main purpose of this paper is to offer an exposition and a critical examination of the ancient interpretations of Aristotle's doctrine of homonyma. A circumlocution of what Aristotle means

    by homonyma things is given in Categories, ch. 1, I a. The ancient interpretations with which we are concerned in this paper are to be found in the extant commentaries on this treatise. Evidently, more commentaries had been written on the Categories than the vicissitudes of time allowed to survive, but we have only those of the following writers: Porphyrius (c. 233-303), Dexippus (fl. c. 350), Ammonius (fl. c. 485), Philoponus (c. 490-530), Olympiodorus (fl. c. 535), Simplicius (fl. c. 533), Elias (ft. c. 550). One' might add here the relevant writings of John Damascene (675-749), Photius (820-91), and Michael Psellus (1018-79), which are useful paraphrases rather than full commentaries. For that reason, the interpretations they support are not discussed in this paper.

    The main body of this paper is given to a discussion of the interpretations which the ancient commentators offered and to an analysis of the assumptions which underlie them. It can be stated here in anticipation of what follows that the commentators often attached to Aristotle's meaning of homonyma aspects that were quite foreign to his views, and that by doing so these commentators were taking extensive liberties with the text at hand. As we hope to show, the commentators brought into their discussions of this particular portion of the Categories issues and

    views that were far more relevant to their own ontologies and logical theories than to Aristotle's doctrines. In order to show how this is the case, we must first give a summary of what we believe our text permits us to say about the meaning of homonyma, as given in the opening chapter of the Categories.1 Suffice it to add at this point that the interpretations of the doctrine of homonyma with which we are concerned here are only those that are discussed exclusively in the relevant commentaries on this work." pp. 1-2

  2. ———. 1981. "Aristotle's Theory of Categories and Post-Classical Ontologies." In Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle. Thessaloniki August 7-14, 1978, 214-220. Athens: Ministry of Culture and Sciences.

    Reprinted in: J. P. Anton - Categories and experience. Essays on Aristotelian themes - Oakdale, N.Y., Dowling College Press, 1996, pp. 203-213.

  3. Arpe, Curt. 1938. Das Ti En Einai Bei Aristoteles. Hamburg: Walter de Gruyter.

    Reprint:New York, Arno Press, 1976 with Logische Regeln der Platonischen Schule in der Aristotelischen Topik by Ernst Hambruch (1904).

  4. Asztalos, Monika. 1993. "Boethius as a Transmitter of Greek Logic to the Latin West: The Categories." Harvard Studies in Classical Philology no. 95:367-407.

  5. ———. 2003. "Boethius on the Categories." In Boèce Ou La Chaîne Des Savoirs. Actes Du Colloque International De La Fondation Singer-Polignac Paris, 8-12 Juin 1999, edited by Galonnier, Alain, 195-205. Louvain: Éditions Peeters.

  6. Aubenque, Pierre. 1985. "Plotin Et Dexippe, Exégètes Des Catégories D'Aristote." In Aristotelica. Mélanges Offerts À Marcel De Corte, 7-40. Bruxelles: Ousia.

    Repris dans: P. Aubenque - Problèmes aristotéliciens. I. Philosophie théorique - Paris, Vrin 2009 pp. 281-304

  7. Baltussen, Han. 2008. Philosopy and Exegesis in Simplicius. The Methodology of a Commentator. London: Duckworth.

  8. Barnes, Jonathan. 2005. "Les Catégories Et Les Catégories." In Les Catégories Et Leur Histoire, edited by Bruun, Otto and Corti, Lorenzo, 11-80. Paris: Vrin.

  9. Bärthlein, Karl. 1990. "Zur Kategorienforschung in Der Antike." In Kategorie Und Kategorialität. Historisch-Systematische Untersuchungen Zum Begriff Der Kategorie Im Philosophischen Denken. Festschrift Für Klaus Hartmann Zum 65. Geburtstag, edited by Koch, Dietmer and Bort, Klaus, 13-48. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.

  10. Blumenthal, Henry. 1981. "Pseudo-Elias and the Isagoge Commentaries Again." Rheinisches Museum no. 124:188-192.

  11. Bodéüs, Richard. 1997. "Le Texte Grec Des Catégories D'Aristote Et Le Témoignage Du Commentaire De Porphyre." Documenti e Studi sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale no. 8:121-141.

  12. ———. 2001. "Les Interlocuteurs Fictifs Dans Le Commentaire De Porphyre Aux Catégories D'Aristote. Une Mise Au Point." Revue des Sciences Philosophiques et Théologiques no. 85:669-678.

    "Contrairement à l'opinion reçue, les questions que soulève Porphyre dans son Commentaire aux Catégories d'Aristote ne sont pas posées par un maître, mais par un disciple en quête du savoir. Les indices probants qui le suggèrent sont nombreux et, consultant les manuscrits, on peut même, dans un passage précis (p. 74-75), découvrir la bévue éditoriale qui, dans le chef de Busse, est à l'origine du malentendu. La rectification qui s'impose permet de comparer Porphyre avec le Commentaire de Dexippe et de tirer une conclusion sur l'apprentissage de la philosophie dans les premières écoles néoplatoniciennes."

  13. Cardullo, Loredana. 1997. "La Noera Theoria Di Giamblico, Come Chiave Di Lettura Delle Categorie Di Aristotele: Alcuni Esempi." Syllecta Classica no. 8:79-94.

  14. Chiaradonna, Riccardo. 2009. "Autour D'eudore. Les Débuts De L'exégèse Des Catégories Dans Le Moyen Platonisme." In The Origins of the Platonic System. Platonisms of the Early Empire and Their Philosophical Contexts, edited by Bonazzi, Mauro and Opsomer, Jan, 89-111. Louvain: Peeters.

    "Eudorus' criticisms are directed to the details, but never question the doctrine of the Categories as such. He intended to link the categories to Pythagoreanizing Platonism while correcting points of detail. Thus it is not absurd to suppose that he was behind various Middle Platonic attempts to incorporate the categories into Platonism. This position is manifestly different from that of Atticus, and is also not identical to the polemical positions of other philosophers, according to Simplicius ( in Cat. 1, 18-2, 5). Furthermore, Eudorus' exegesis has nothing to do with the critical discussion of the categories developed by Plotinus. We should probably conclude that the earliest reception of Aristotle's categories in the Platonism of Eudorus' time should be seen entirely within its precise context in the period between the 1st cent. B.C. and the 1st cent. A.D."

  15. Chiesa, Curzio. 2005. "Porphyre Et Le Problème De La Substance Des Catégories." In Les Catégories Et Leur Histoire, edited by Bruun, Otto and Corti, Lorenzo, 81-101. Paris: Vrin.

  16. Conti, Alessandro Domenico. 1983. "La Teoria Della Relazione Nei Commentatori Neoplatonici Delle Categorie Di Aristotele." Rivista Critica di Storia della Filosofia no. 38:259-283.

  17. Dillon, John. 1997. "Iamblichus' Noerà Theoria of Aristotle's Categories." Syllecta Classica no. 8:65-77.

    "An examination of Simplicius In Cat. 2, 5-9ff ; 3, 10-17 ; 13, 4ff ; and 13, 13-16 shows that Iamblichus applied his allegorical technique of interpretation to the Categories, which he read as a coherent description of the Neoplatonic intelligible world. Two important features of his noerà theoria were the search for ontological rather than merely logical explanations, and discreteness and continuity as manifestations of the power of the One."

  18. Ebbesen, Sten. 1981. "The Contribution of the Greek Commentators on the Organon to the Formation of Western Scholasticism." In Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle. Thessaloniki August 7-14, 1978 (Vol. 1 of Four), 183-186. Athens: Publication of the Ministry of Culture and Science.

  19. ———. 1987. "Boethius as an Aristotelian Commentator." In Aristoteles. Werk Und Wirkung. (Vol. Ii), edited by Wiesner, Jürgen, 266-311. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Reprinted in: R. Sorabji (ed.) - Aristotle transformed - Lodn, Duckworth, 1990, pp- 373-391.

  20. Ellis, John. 1994. "Alexander's Defense of Aristotle's Categories." Phronesis.A Journal for Ancient Philosophy no. 39:69-89.

  21. Evangeliou, Christos. 1985. "Aristotle's Doctrine of Predicables and Porphyry's Isagoge." Journal of the History of Philosophy no. 23:15-34.

    "Porphyry has recently been criticized for "muddling" Aristotle's doctrine of predicables by adding species to the list. I argue that a careful comparison of the two lists shows that they differ more profoundly than Porphyry's critics suspect, and that these modern critics, unlike the ancient commentators, have been mislead by the title of Isagoge which they interpret as "Introduction" to Topics or Categories exclusively. it is shown that this is not the case."

  22. ———. 1988. Aristotle's Categories and Porphyry. Leiden: Brill.

  23. Flannery, Kevin. 1999. "The Synonymy of Homonyms." Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie no. 81:268-289.

    "Simplicius reports in his commentary on Aristotle's Categories that Claudius Nicostratus and a certain Lucius argued that there is a problem with Aristotle's definition of homonyms in the first chapter of the Categories. If homonyms fall under that definition, they, qua homonyms, are not homonyms at all but synonyms, since they share the name 'homonym' and also the definition of homonyms. The author of the present article discusses a number of ancient and modern attempts to resolve this paradox, arguing that none of them is fully satisfactory. He proposes, rather, the elimination of the words 'of being' from lines 1a2 and 1a4, a solution that finds support in some of the oldest evidence regarding manuscripts that exists in Aristotelian studies."

  24. Gaskin, Richard. 1998. "Simplicius on the Meaning of Sentences: A Commentary on ' in Cat. 396,30 - 397,28'." Phronesis.A Journal for Ancient Philosophy no. 43:42-62.

    "At Categories 12b5-16 Aristotle appears to regard the referents of declarative sentences, such as 'Socrates is sitting,' as what later writers were to call ' complexe significabilia', i.e., items such as 'that Socrates is sitting'. Simplicius's discussion of this passage in his commentary on the Categories clearly shows the influence of Stoic philosophy of language; but, if we follow the text printed by Kalbfleisch, Simplicius's commentary is seen to be a muddle of Stoic and Aristotelian elements, neither properly understood. It is possible, however, by making a crucial emendation. On that line Simplicius would be adopting the view that a declarative sentence refers to a thought in the first instance and a ' complexe significabile' in the second instance. This view is plausibly the upshot of combining the Categories text with the first chapter of De Interpretatione."

  25. Gerson, Lloyd P. 2005. Aristotle and Other Platonists. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    See in particular Chapter 3: The Categories of Reality pp. 76-100.

  26. Gottschalk, Hans B. 1990. "The Earliest Aristotelian Commentators." In Aristotle Transformed. The Ancient Commentators and Their Influence, edited by Sorabji, Richard, 55-81. London: Duckworth.

  27. Haas, Frans A.J.de. 1997. John Philoponus' New Definition of Prime Matter. Aspects of His Background in Neoplatonism and the Ancient Commentary Tradition. Leiden: Brill.

    Chpater four: Second objection: a category mistake pp. 165-250.

  28. ———. 1997. John Philoponus' New Definiton of Prime Matter. Leiden: Brill.

  29. Hadot, Ilsetraut. 1987. "Les Introductions Aux Commentaires Exégetiques Chez Les Auteurs Néoplatoniciens Et Les Auteurs Chrétiens." In Les Règles De L'interprétation, edited by Tardieu, Michel, 99-122. Cerf.

    "Le present article décrit les différents types de schémas introductifs contenus dans les commentaires des néoplatoniciens tardifs sur les œuvres d'Aristote et de Platon, en essayant de determiner leur signification exégétique ainsi que l'origine de plusieurs d'entre eux. Il apparait que les deux schémas en dix points qui introduisent respectivement à la philosophie d'Aristote et à celle de Platon ont de toute vraisemblance eté 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."

  30. ———. 1991. "The Role of the Commentaries on Aristotle in the Teaching of Philosophy According to the Prefaces of the Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories." In Aristotle and the Later Tradition, edited by Blumenthal, Henry and Robinson, Howard, 175-189. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Oxford studies in ancient philosophy. Supplementary volume

  31. ———. 1992. "Aristote Dans L'enseignement Philosophique Neo-Platonicien: Les Préfaces Des Commentaires Sur Les Catégories." Revue de Théologie et de Philosophie no. 124:407-426.

    "Cet article répresente une contribution de plus à ma critique générale des thèses de Praechter selon lesquelles l'école neo-Platonicienne dite "d'Alexandrie" se distinguerait, non seulement par le lieu de son enseignement, de celle dite "d'Athènes", mais encore et surtout par ses doctrines philosophiques et par son attitude envers l'œuvre d'Aristote. La comparison entre elles des Prefaces des cinq commentaires neo-Platoniciens des Catégories d'Aristote, dont l'un, celui de Simplicius, appartiendrait, selon Praechter, a l'école d'Alexandrie, fait apparaítre la concordance fondamentale de la philosophie neo-Platonicienne qui était enseignée à Athènes avec celle qui était enseignée à Alexandrie: toutes deux interprètent la philosophie d'Aristote dans la même perspective neo-Platonicienne et la même volonté d'harmoniser Platon et Aristote."

  32. Hadot, Pierre. 1959. "Un Fragment Du Commentaire Perdu De Boèce Sur Les Catégories D'Aristote Dans Le Codex Bernensis 363." Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge no. 26:11-27.

    Reprinted in: P. Hadot - Plotin, Porphyre. Études néoplatoniciennes - Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1999, pp. 383-410.

  33. ———. 1974. "The Harmony of Plotinus and Aristotle According to Porphyry." In Aristotle Transformed. The Ancient Commentators and Their Influence, edited by Sorabji, Richard, 125-140. London: Duckworth.

    English translation of: L'armonie des philosophies de Plotin et d'Aristote selon Porphyre dans le commentaire de Dexippe sur les Catégories - in: Atti del Convegno Internazionale su tema: Plotino ed il Neoplatonismo in Oriente e in Occidente - Roma, Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1974, pp. 31-47.

  34. Hadot, Pierre. 1985. "Les Commentaires De Boèce Et De Porphyre Sur Les Catégories D'Aristote." nnuaire de l'Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes.V Section, Sciences Religieuses no. 93:335-337.

  35. Hoffmann, Philippe. 1980. "Les Catégories Pou Et Pote Chez Aristote Et Simplicius." In Concepts Et Catégories Dans La Pensée Antique, edited by Aubenque, Pierre, 217-245. Paris: Vrin.

  36. ———. 1985. "Sens Et Dénomination. Homonymie, Analogie, Métaphore Selon Le Commentaire De Simplicius Sur Les Catégories D'Aristote." Annuaire de l'École Pratique des Hautes Études.Section des Sciences Religieuses no. 93:343-356.

  37. ———. 1987. "Catégories Et Langage Selon Simplicius. La Question Du Skopos Du Traité Aristotelicien Des Catégories." In Simplicius. Sa Vie, Son œuvre, Sa Survie. Actes Du Colloque International De Paris (28 Septembre -1 Octobre 1985), edited by Hadot, Ilsetraut, 61-90. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

  38. ———. 1987. "Le Prologue Du Commentaire De Porphyre Par Questions Et Réponses Sur Les Catégories D'Aristote." Annuaire de l'École Pratique des Hautes Études.Section des Sciences Religieuses no. 95:295-305.

  39. ———. 1988. "Recherches Sur Les Introductions Néoplatoniciennes Aux Catégories D'Aristote." Annuaire de l'École Pratique des Hautes Études.Section des Sciences Religieuses no. 96:272-281.

  40. ———. 1992. "Le Commentaire De Dexippe Sur Les Catégories D'Aristote." Annuaire de l'École Pratique des Hautes Études.Section des Sciences Religieuses no. 100:299-305.

  41. ———. 2000. "Les Catégories Aristotéliciennes Pote Et Pou D'après Le Commentaire De Simplicius. Méthode D'exégèse Et Aspects Doctrinaux." In Le Commentaire Entre Tradition Et Innovation, 355-376. Paris: Vrin.

    Actes du Colloque International de l'Institut des Traditions Textuelles (Paris et Villejuif, 22-25 septembre 1999)

  42. Karamanolis, George. 2004. "Porphyry: The First Platonist Commentator on Aristotle." In Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries (Vol. One), edited by Peter, Adamson, Baltussen, Han and Stone, M.W.F., 97-120. London: Institute of Classical Studies, University of London.

  43. ———. 2006. Plato and Aristotle in Agreement?: Platonists on Aristotle from Antiochus to Porphyry. New York: Oxford University Press.

    See in particular Chapters 6. Plotinus pp. 216-242 and 7. Porphyry pp. 243-330.

  44. Kustas, George L. 1973. "The Commentators on Aristotle's Categories and on Porphyry's Isagoge." In Studies in Byzantine Rhetoric, edited by Kustas, George L., 101-126. Thessaloniki: Studies in Byzantine rhetoric.

  45. Libera, Alain de. 1999. "Entre Aristote Et Plotin: L' isagoge De Porphyre Et Le Problème Des Catégories." Cahiers de la Revue de Théolgie et de Philosophie no. 20:7-27.

    Métaphysiques Médiévales. Études en l'Honneur d'André de Muralt - Éditées par Curzio Chiesa et Léo Freuler.

  46. ———. 2005. "L'onto-Théo-Logique De Boèce: Doctrine Des Catégoreies Et Théorie De La Predication Dans Le De Trinitate." In Les Catégories Et Leur Histoire, edited by Bruun, Otto and Corti, Lorenzo, 175-222. Paris: Vrin.

  47. Luna, Concetta. 1987. "La Relation Chez Simplicius." In Simplicius, Sa Vie, Son œuvre, Sa Survie, edited by Hadot, Ilsetraut, 113-147. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

  48. Mahé, Jean-Pierre. 1990. "David L'invincible Dans La Tradition Arménienne." In Simplicius, Commentaire Sur Les Catégories. Fascicule 1, edited by Hadot, Ilsetraut, 189-207. Leiden: Brill.

  49. Marenbon, John. 1993. "Medieval Latin Commentaries and Glosses on Aristotelian Logical Texts, before C. 1150 A.D." In Glosses and Commentaries on Aristotelian Logical Texts: The Syriac, Arabic and Medieval Latin Traditions, edited by Burnett, Charles, 77-127. London: The Warburg Institute, University of London.

    Reprinted as Chapter II in: John Marenbon - Aristotelian logic, Platonism, and the context of early medieval philosophy in the West - Aldershot - Ashgate, 2000.

  50. ———. 1997. "Glosses and Commentaries on the Categories and De Interpretatione before Abelard." In Dialektik Und Rhetorik Im Früheren Und Hohen Mittelalter. Rezeption, Überlieferung Und Gesellschaftliche Wirkung Antiker Gelehrsamkeit Vornehmlich Im 9. Und 12. Jahrhundert, edited by Fried, Johannes, 21-49. München: Oldenbourg.

    Reprinted as Chapter IX in: John Marenbon - Aristotelian logic, Platonism, and the context of early medieval philosophy in the West - Aldershot - Ashgate, 2000.

  51. Merlan, Philip. 1934. "Beitrage Zur Geschichte Des Antiken Platonismus: I. Zur Erklarung Der Dem Aristoteles Zugeschriebenen Kategorienschrift." Philologus.Zeitschrift für das klassische Altertum no. 89:35-53.

  52. Minio-Paluello, Lorenzo. 1942. "The Genuine Text of Boethius' Translation of Aristotle's Categories." Medieval and Renaissance Studies no. 1:151-177.

    Reprinted in: L. Minio-Paluello - Opuscola: the Latin Aristotle - Amsterdam, Adolf M. Hakkert, 1972, pp. 1-27.

  53. ———. 1945. "The Text of the Categories: The Latin Tradition." Classical Quarterly no. 39:63-74.

    Reprinted in: L. Minio-Paluello - Opuscola: the Latin Aristotle - Amsterdam, Adolf M. Hakkert, 1972, pp. 28-39.

  54. Morison, Benjamin. 2005. "Les Catégories D'Aristote Comme Introduction È La Logique." In Les Catégories Et Leur Histoire, edited by Bruun, Otto and Corti, Lorenzo, 103-119. Paris: Vrin.

  55. Narbonne, Jean-Marc. 1987. "Définition Et Description: Le Problème De La Saisie Des Genres Premiers Et Des Individus Chez Aristote Dans L'exégèse De Simplicius." Archives de Philosophie no. 50:529-554.

  56. Narcy, Michel. 1981. "L'homonymie Entre Aristote Et Ses Commentateurs Néoplatoniciens." Les Études Philosophiques no. 35:35-52.

  57. Reinhardt, Tobias. 2007. "Andronicus of Rhodes and Boethus of Sidon on Aristotle's Categories." In Greek and Roman Philosophy 100 Bc - 200 Ad. Vol. Ii, edited by Sharples, Robert W. and Sorabji, Richard, 513-529. London: Institute of Classical Studies.

  58. Sellars, John. 2004. "The Aristotelian Commentators: A Bibliographical Guide." In Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries (Vol. One), edited by Peter, Adamson, Baltussen, Han and Stone, M.W.F., 239-268. London: Institute of Classical Studies, University of London.

  59. Sharples, Robert W. 2008. "Habent Sua Fata Libelli: Aristotle's Categories in the First Century Bc." Acta Antiqua.Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae no. 48:273-287.

    "A re-examination of the question why, in the revival of interest, in the first century BC in Aristotle's esoteric works, as opposed to his doctrines, the work Categories played so large a part. The answers suggested are that the work aroused interest just because it did not easily fit into the standard Hellenistic divisions of philosophy and their usual agendas, and that, more than Aristotle's other works with the possible exception of the Metaphysics, it revealed aspects of Aristotle's thought that had become unfamiliar during the Hellenistic period."

  60. Shiel, James. 1958. "Boethius Commentaries on Aristotle." Mediaeval and Renaissance Studies no. 4:217-244.

    Reprinted in: Richard Sorabji (ed.) - Aristotle transformed. The Ancient commentators and their influence - London, Duckworth, 1990 and in: Manfred Fuhrmann and Joachim Gruber (eds.) - Boethius - Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1984 pp. 155-181 with a Postscript (1983) pp. 182-183.

  61. ———. 1987. "The Greek Copy of Porphyrios' Isagoge Used by Boethius." In Aristoteles. Werk Und Wirkung. Paul Moraux Zum 65 Geburtstag Gewidmet - Band 2: Kommentierung, Uberlieferung, Nachleben, edited by Wiesner, Jürgen, 312-340. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

  62. Solmsen, Friedrich. 1944. "Boethius and the History of the Organon." American Journal of Philology no. 65:69-74.

    Reprinted in: F. Solmsen - Kleine Schriften II. Hildesheim,. Olms, 1967 pp. 38-43 and in: Manfred Fuhrmann and Joachim Gruber (eds.) Boethius -- Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1984 pp. 127-132

  63. Stump, Eleonore. 1988. "Categories and Predicables." In Boethius's in Ciceronis Topica, 244-255. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Translated with notes and an introduction by Eleonore Stump

  64. Szlezak, Thomas Alexander. 1972. Pseudo-Archytas Uber Die Kategorien. Texte Zur Griechischen Aristotelesexegese. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Edition, translation an commentary.

  65. Taormina, Daniela. 1997. "Giamblico Contro Plotino E Porfirio: Il Dibattito Sull' Atto E Sul Movimento (Apud Simplicio, in Categorias 301, 20-308, 10)." Syllecta Classica no. 8:95-112.

    "On Iamblichus' exposition of the categories poiein kai paschein and his new theory about act, action, and entelechy based on his criticism of Porphyry's treatment of active and passive movement, and Plotinus' assimilation of act and movement."

  66. Tarrant, Harold. 2008. "Eudorus and the Early Platonist Interpretation of the Categories." Laval Théologique et Philosophique no. 64:583-595.

    "The hermeneutic tradition concerning Aristotle's Categories goes back to Eudorus and his contemporaries in the 1st cent. B.C. Initially a perplexing text, it forces the Platonist to consider a variety of new dialectical questions. The criticisms of Eudorus demonstrate the desire for orderly arrangements and pose questions that the hermeneutic tradition, culminating in the commentary of Simplicius, would try to answer. His pursuit of a critical agenda does not warrant the labels "anti-Aristotelian" or "polemical", but it does show why he preferred to be known as an Academic rather than a Peripatetic."

  67. Thiel, Rainer. 2004. Aristoteles Kategorienschrift in Ihrer Antiken Kommentierung. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

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

    Contents: Acknowledgements; 1. Introduction; 2. Epistemology; 3. Science and logic; 4. Physics; 5. Psychology: perception and intellect; 6. Metaphysics; 7. Ethics; Chronology; Glossary of names; Guide to further reading; Bibliography; Index

  69. Vamvoukakis, Nicolas. 1980. "Les Catégories Aristotéliciennes D'action Et De Passion Vues Par Simplicius." In Concepts Et Catégories Dans La Pensée Antique, edited by Aubenque, Pierre, 253-269. Paris: Vrin.

  70. Verbeke, Gérard. 1972. "Le Commentaire De Simplicius Sur Les Catégories." Revue Philosophique de Louvain no. 70:279-282.

RELATED PAGES

PAGES IN PDF FORMAT