SGA 6 (2016)

Prof. Victoria Arroche
yosoyvictoria[at]hotmail.com
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Universidad de Buenos Aires
Puán 480, 1420 CABA, Buenos Aires (Argentina)
___
Dr. Elisa Coda
elisa.coda[at]cfs.unipi.it
Dipartimento di Civiltà e Forme del Sapere
Università di Pisa
Via P. Paoli 15, 56126 Pisa (Italy)
___
Prof. Cristina D ’Ancona
cristina.dancona[at]unipi.it
Dipartimento di Civiltà e Forme del Sapere
Università di Pisa
Via P. Paoli 15, 56126 Pisa (Italy)
___
Dr. Marion Dapsens
mariondaps[at]gmail.com
Thomas-Institut der Universität zu Köln
Albertus-Magnus-Platz, 50923 Köln (Germany)
___
Dr. Marco Di Branco
marco.dibranco[at]gmail.com
Deutsches Historisches Institut in Rom
Via Aurelia Antica 391, I-00165, Roma (Italy)
___
Prof. Tiziano Dorandi
tiziano.dorandi[at]orange.fr
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
(UMR 8230, Centre Jean Pépin)
7, rue Guy Môquet BP N°8
94801 Villejuif Cedex, Paris (France)
___
Prof. Emma Gannagé
epg23[at]georgetown.edu
Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies
Georgetown University
2 Poulton – North Wing, Washington, D.C. (U.S.A.)
___
Dr. Giulia Guidara
giulia.guidara[at]unitn.it
Università di Trento
Via Tommaso Gar 14, 38122 Trento (Italy)
___
Prof. Veysel Kaya
veysel.kaya[at]istanbul.edu.tr
İstanbul Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi
İskenderpaşa Mahallesi Kavalalı Sokak
A Blok Horhor Fatih, Istanbul (Turkey)
___
Dr. Issam Marjani
issam.marjani[at]cli.unipi.it
Dipartimento di Filologia, Letteratura e Linguistica
Università di Pisa
Via Santa Maria 36, 56126 Pisa (Italy)
___
Prof. Cecilia Martini Bonadeo
cecilia.martini[at]unipd.it
Dip.to di Scienze Storiche Geografiche e dell’Antichità
Università di Padova
Via del Vescovado 6, 35141 Padova (Italy)
___
Dr. Lucrezia Iris Martone
lucreziairis.martone[at]libero.it
Istituto Comprensivo “Giovanni Pascoli”
Via Roma 31, 55051 Barga, Lucca (Italy)
___
Dr.Hossain Mottaqi
hosseinmottaghi[at]yahoo.com
University of Religion and Denominations
Post box 37185-178, Pardisan – Qom (Iran)
___
Oliver Overwien
oliver.overwien[at]hu-berlin.de
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
Institut für Klassische Philologie
Unter den Linden 6, D-10099 Berlin (Germany)
___
Marco Zambon
marco.zambon.2[at]unipd.it
Dip.to di Scienze Storiche Geografiche e dell’Antichità
Università di Padova
Via del Vescovado 6, 35141 Padova (Italy)

This paper is devoted to the manuscript tradition of the Divisiones quae dicuntur Aristoteleae (DA), and in particular to two discoveries that shed new light on it. The collection of DA is transmitted in four different versions, that should be investigated and edited individually. The editor should also resist the temptation to reconstruct a imaginary Urtext. The focus of this study is on the three versions independent of the Recensio Laertiana (Diog. Laert. III 80-109): the Recensiones Marciana, Florentina and Leidensis. These versions are reconstructed on the basis of six Byzantine manuscripts dated between the 10th and the 15th/16th century. Then, the new edition of the Recensio Marciana and the editiones principes of the Recensiones Florentina, and Leidensis are presented.

In his treatises, Plotinus quotes several δόξαι to explain his theories or to refute others’ ideas. Even if they are often quoted anonymously, these δόξαι can be attributed to Presocratic philosophers because they match fragments and testimonia collected in Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker by H. Diels and W. Kranz. It is however unclear how Plotinus (as other authors of this period) got acquainted with such δόξαι and, for this reason, three hypothesis have been advanced: Plotinus might have taken his quotations (i) from the works of the Presocratics, or (ii) from doxographies (also known as Placita), a literary genre where δόξαι of many ancient thinkers about a given topic are collected together, or again (iii)  from other authors reporting them. This hypothesis is very interesting: as it is known, the starting point of Plotinus’ lectures was the reading of excertps from philosophical works like those by Severus, Cronius, Numenius, Gaius, Atticus, Aspasius, Alexander, Adrastus, and others. The possibility exists that Plotinus made use of these texts not only as an opportunity to discuss philosophical questions, but also as a source of information about ancient thinkers. This paper deals with the quotations reported in II 4 [12], 7.20-28, III 6 [26], 12.22-25, and IV 4 [28], 29.32-39 and advances the hypothesis that other sources unknown to us for the moment provided Plotinus with information about the Presocratics.

Al-Kindī’s classification of mathematics as an intermediary science between theology, on the one hand, and physics on the other, that is reiterated in several of his treatises, has been so far generally traced back to Proclus. Based on the introduction of al-Kindī’s treatise On the Great Art (Fī l-Ṣināʿa l-ʿuẓmā), as well as on other works of his, this article shows the rather structural influence of Ptolemy’s philosophy on al-Kindī. From Ptolemy al-Kindī draws not only the division of theoretical sciences, but also a philosophical program that gives mathematics a central position as a full theoretical science. This paper tries to reconcile between the thesis of the intermediary position of mathematics held in these treatises and its role as a propaedeutic to the study of philosophy in al-Kindī’s Epistle On the Quantity of Aristotle’s Books and What is Necessary for the Attainment of Philosophy. It shows that the quadripartition of mathematics al-Kindī laid out in this epistle is drawn from an ‘altered’ version of Nicomachus of Gerasa’s Introduction to Arithmetic. The reading he found in that version seems to have bolstered al-Kindī’s argument aimed at promoting the science of quality and quantity, namely mathematics, as the leading path towards the knowledge of the first and secondary substances, hence elevating this science as the best guide to reality. Such description mirrors the conception of mathematics provided by Ptolemy in the Almagest.

This article briefly addresses the content of Saʿīd b. Dādhurmuz’s Risāla fī l-Nafs wa-l-rūḥ, an epistle which was written as a complementary section to the author’s Risāla fī Faḍl al-āḫira ʿalā l-dunyā (Epistle on the Superiority of the Hereafter over This World). In these epistles, the author aims to posit the superiority and substantiality of the Hereafter as opposed to the inferiority and imperfection of the worldly life. The author regards an investigation about the essence of soul/spirit (nafs/rūḥ) as a necessary task, because one cannot truly understand the issue of the Hereafter without knowing what the human soul is. Typically, Saʿīd b. Dādhurmuz attempts here an amalgamation of philosophical and religious discourses while quoting from several philosophical works available to him. Hence, after close examination, the Arabic Aristotle, Arabic Plato, al-Kindī, Miskawayh and especially the Epistles of the Brethren of Purity appear to be among his sources. Besides, a part of the Epistle on Soul and spirit which addresses certain sayings of the past prophets before Muḥammad about spirit attracts special attention.

This article aims to present a status quaestionis on the studies about the De Compositione alchemiae by Morienus. It brings forward a new perspective on the Latin traditions of this text, enabled by the recent discovery of Arabic manuscripts, and challenges some points made previously by Lee Stavenhagen (1970 and 1974). It tries to define which parts of the Latin text are likely to be a direct translation from the Arabic, and discusses some of the considerations of another scholar, Ahmad Al-Hassan. The article also examines the attribution of the Risāla to Ḫālid ibn Yazīd and proposes an overview of all the Arabic and Latin manuscripts of it known to date, including new findings.

The library Āyatullāh Marʿāšī was founded in the year 1966 in Qom by Āyatullāh Sayyid Šihāb-ul-Dīn-i Marʿāšī Naǧafī (1897-1990), with further expansion in 1974 and 1988. Initially started as the private library of the Āyatullāh Marʿāšī, it is now a significant public collection of more than 75,000 works, mostly in Arabic and Persian. The manuscript housed in this library under the shelfmark 286 reaches back to the 11th/17th century; it features an anthology (maǧmuʿa) of some 100 treatises, sixty-two of which are of philosophical nature. Most of them are works by Ibn Sīnā, but there are also treatises by al-Kindī, al-Fārābī, al-Suhrawardī, and other items of special interest from the viewpoint of the spread of Greek philosophy in Persia: Ps.-Aristotle, Alexander of Aphrodisias, the Placita Philosophorum. The present article describes the manuscript, and lists its contents.

Moses Alatino (d. 1605) was the translator from Hebrew into Latin of Themistius’ paraphrase of the De Caelo, lost in Greek as well as in the Arabic version out of which the Hebrew translation was made in the Middle Ages. To his translation a preface is added, where Alatino declares a great deal of his methodology and aims. Themistius was praised by the learned men of Alatino’s age: a comparison with Ermolao Barbaro Jr. (1454-1493)
shows Alatino’s views about the relationship between veritas and eloquentia, as well as the refinement of his textual emendations. The portrait of a learned translator emerges from the analysis of his Preface, something that must alert the readers: not only does Alatino draw attention on the intrinsic difficulty of a work that is the outcome of a two-steps translation, but he also openly declares that he did not hesitate to correct the text.

Studia graeco-arabica initiates the transcription of the manuscript Notebooks of the eminent Arabist Paul Kraus (1904-1944). Thanks to the kindness of Prof. Jenny Strauss Clay, and in accordance with the Special Collections Research Center of the University of Chicago Library, Kraus’ Notes on the pseudo-Theology of Aristotle are transcribed and annotated.