Search

jamesgray2

A discussion of interesting books from my current stock A WordPress.com site

Tag

Aristotle

A Sammelband Of Aristotle commentaries . 1499-1509

253J   Aristotle, and Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495)                                 $18,000

  • IMG_0693Expositio magistri Petri Tatereti in Summulas Petri Hyspani cum textu, una cum additionibus in locis propriis summa accuratione, summaque animadversione impressa..

  • 0229_02_popup

With

  • Clarissima singularisq[ue] totius philosophie necnon methaphisice Aristotelis magistri Petri Tatareti expositio.IMG_0707

With

  • Expositio magistri Petri Tatereti super textu logices Aristotelis

IMG_0708

Ad1) [Lugduni] : [Claudii davost al’s de troys.],  8. August 1509  (Date in the colophon:IMG_0709
octaua mensis Augusti anno … M.ccccc.ix.)

 

 

 

 

Ad2) [Lyons] : Impressum cura & industria Claudij davost al[ia]s de troys, 13 July 1509

IMG_0705

Ad 3) Imprints suggested by ISTC [Lyons: Claude Davost, after 1500] or [Nicolaus Wolf ? about 1500] or [n.pr., about 1495].

IMG_0703

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a Very Large Octavo 9 x 5 inches.  Ad1) a-l8 m10.  Ad 2) A-I8, K10, L4, M-T8   Ad3) aa-pp8 qq8

IMG_0694
Front Board
IMG_0697
Rear Board

This copy is bound in its original full calf over wooden boards, as you can se above, much of the leather has been lost exposing all the structural features of the construction of the book. It is lacking clasps but retains the catches and remnants of the attachment points of the clasps.

IMG_0707Woodcut initials and quite a few schematic text woodcuts. Spaces and guide letters for large initials not filled in and individual marginalia by old hand. This copy is bound in its original full blind stamped calf over wooden boards. With the old ownership notes (including “Samuel Hoffmanns”, the other deleted) verso with contemporary note. Occasionally contemporary marginalia in red and black ink. With the clasps renewed.

This is a rare incunabula edition of the commentary on Aristotle’s Logic by Petrus Tartaretus, follower of Duns Scotus and rector of theUniversity of Paris in 1490. Here is a Memory device for Aristotle in this book.

IMG_0699
Aristotelian diagrams have a long and rich history in philosophical logic. Today, they are widely used in nearly all disciplines dealing with logical reasoning.

IMG_0698The most remarkable Scotist of his time, author of commentaries on the Physics and Ethics of Aristotle, on the Sentences of Peter Lombard and on the Quodlibeta of Duns Scotus.

Most of the bibliographers ascribe the printing of this work to the Lyonese printer Nicolaus Wolff,

 

classified as quarto volume, the dating ranges between 1495 and around or shortly after 1500.

 

 

IMG_0700
Representation of the Christian Aristotelian cosmos

Ad 1)  Panzer, VII,; p. 292, no. 141 Not in Adams or the BM STC, French Books..

Ad 2) USTC no.: 155038  Panzer, VII,; p. 292, no. 140

LIBRARY COPIES:  Universitat de Barcelona , Det Kongelige Bibliotek, Oxford (UK),  Wadham College Library      : Not in Adams or the BM STC, French Books..

Ad 3) Goff T43 = T40; R 758; Pell Ms 10941; IGI V p.153; IBE Post-incunables 249; Sajó-Soltész p.952; Olivar 391; Sack(Freiburg) 3337a; Walsh 3835a; ISTC it00043000

 

Now Back to a beginning !

Ad1) Aristotle ,Petrus Hispanus,Peter of Spain (Petrus Hispanicus Portugalensis)

This work, the first bound in this sammelband is Peter Tartareus’ explanation and direction of Peter Of Spains , Tractatus or Summaries, Tartareus’ follows the structure of Peter of Spain who naturally follows  “Porphry’s Tree”

IMG_0714
Arbor Porphyriana, “Expanding on Aristotle’s Categories and visually alluding to a tree’s trunk, Porphyry’s structure reveals the idea of a layered assembly in logic. It is made of three columns of words, where the central column contains a series of dichomatous divisions between genus and species, whcih derive from the supreme genus, Substance.

“For nearly four centuries, when logic was the heart of what we now call the “undergraduate curriculum,” Peter of Spain’s Summaries of Logic (c. 1230) was the basis for teaching that subject. Because Peter’s students were teenagers, he wrote simply and organized his book carefully. Since no book about logic was read by more people until the twentieth century, the Summaries has extensively and profoundly influenced the distinctly Western way of speaking formally and writing formal prose by constructing well-formed sentences, making valid arguments, and refuting and defending arguments in debate. ” (quoted from Peter of Spain: Summaries of Logic: Text, Translation, Introduction, and Notes 1st Edition by Brian P. Copenhaver, Calvin G. Normore and, Terence Parsons .Oxford University Press;  (December 16, 2014)

“It is still not possible to establish the date of origin of the Tractatus,( and their Summaries) the work that has enjoyed such enormous success. Recent scholarship
suggests that it could have been written any time between the 1220s and the 1250s (Ebbessen 2013, 68–69). It has universally been recognised as a work by Peter of Spain. Another work that has been identified as Peter of Spain’s is aSyncategoreumata (Treatise on Syncategorematic Words), which was probably written some years after the Tractatus.[2] Considering the fact that in all the thirteenth-century manuscripts the Syncategoreumata directly follow the Tractatus, and the number of similarities between doctrinal aspects of these two works on logic, it is almost certain that they were written by the same author. Both works seem to have originated from Southern France or Northern Spain, the region where we also find the earliest commentaries on these treatises.”

The Tractatus

The Tractatus can be divided into two main parts. One part deals with doctrines found in

IMG_0716
The square of opposition is a diagram representing the relations between the four basic categorical propositions.

the so-called logica antiquorum—i.e., the logica vetus (old logic) and logica nova (new logic)—and the other contains doctrines covered by the logica modernorum—viz. the tracts that discuss theproprietates terminorum (properties of terms).

The first main part of the Tractatus divides into five tracts. The first tract, De introductionibus(On introductory topics) explains the concepts used in traditional logic—nomen (noun), verbum(verb), oratio (phrase), propositio (proposition)—and presents the divisions of and the (logical) relationships between propositions. The second tract, De predicabilibus (On the predicables) covers matters dealt with in Boethius’s accounts of Porphyry’s Isagoge. It gives an account of the concept predicabile and the five predicables—genus, species, differentia, proprium, accidens—i.e., the common features of and differences between the predicables, as well as of the terms ’predicatio’ and ’denominativum’. Tract three, De predicamentis (On the categories), discusses the ten Aristotelian categories, as well as some items already dealt with in the previous treatise. The fourth tract, De sillogismis (On syllogisms) mainly goes back to Boethius’s De IMG_0718IMG_0718syllogismis categoricis (On categorical syllogisms). It gives an explanation of the basic element of the syllogism, i.e., propositio, and of the syllogism, and then goes into mood and figure, the proper forms of syllogisms, and briefly deals with what are called paralogisms. The fifth tract, De locis(On topical relationships), is derived from Boethius’s De topicis differentiis (On different topical relationships) I and II. This tract starts off with an explanation of the notions argumentum and argumentatio, and then proceeds to deal with the species of argumentation: syllogism, induction, enthymeme, and example. Next, it gives a definition of locus (the Latin translation of the Greek topos): a locus is the seat of an argument (i.e., the locus is supposed to warrant the inference by bringing it under some generic rule.) The intrinsic loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is derived from the substance of the thing involved) are covered first, followed by the extrinsic loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is derived from something that is completely separate from the substance of the thing involved) and intermediary loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is taken from the things that partly share in the terms of the problem and partly differ from it). Examples are: intrinsic—the locus “from definition”: ‘a rational animal is running; therefore a man is running’; extrinsic—the locus “from opposites”: ‘Socrates is black; therefore he is not white’; intermediary—‘the just is good; therefore justice is good’.

IMG_0722

The second part of the Tractatus comprises subjects that were of major importance in the doctrine of the properties of terms. In the sixth tract, De suppositionibus, the theory of supposition is dealt with. The treatise begins with an exposition of significatio. The definition of significatio runs: significatio is the respresentation of a thing by means of a word in accordance with convention. Next it gives a definition of the related terms suppositio and copulatio, and the differences between the terms significatio, suppositio and copulatio. Of these three suppositioand significatio are the most important in Peter’s semantics. Suppositio is defined as the acceptance of a substantive verb for some thing. Suppositio is dependent on significatio, because supposition can only occur via a term that already has some significatio. Put in other words,significatio pertains to a word by itself, and supposition to a term as actually used in some context.

The tract concludes with a division of suppositio. The first division is into suppositio communis(common supposition) and suppositio discreta (discrete supposition)—e.g., the terms homo(man) and Sortes (Socrates) respectively.

The second division, suppositio communis, is divided into naturalis (natural) and accidentalis(coincidental). Suppositio naturalis is described as the acceptance of a common term for all those things that can share in the common universal nature signified by the term in question—e.g., homo (‘man’) taken by itself by its very nature is able to stand for all men, whether in the past, present or future; suppositio accidentalis is the acceptance of a common term for those things for which the term in question requires an additional term—e.g., in homo est (‘A man is’) the term homo stands for present men, whereas in homo fuit (‘A man has been’) and in homo erit (‘A man will be’) it stands for past men and future men respectively, owing to the additional terms fuit and erit.

The third division, suppositio accidentalis, is divided into suppositio simplex (simple supposition) and suppositio personalis (personal supposition). Suppositio simplex is the acceptance of a term for the universal ‘thing’ it signifies, as in homo est species (‘Man is a species’, animal est genus (‘Animal is a genus’), in which the substantive terms homo and animal stand for the universal man and animal, and not any one of their particulars. Suppositio simplex can occur both in the subject- and in the predicate-term—e.g., homo est species (‘Man is a species’) and omnis homo est animal (‘Every man is an animal’) respectively. Suppositio personalis is the acceptance of a common term for one or more of its particulars, as in homo currit (‘A man is running’).

The fourth division, suppositio personalis, is subdivided into either derterminata (determinate = standing for a certain particular) or confusa (confused = standing for any IMG_0721individual falling under that name). Suppositio determinata occurs when a common term is taken indefinitely or in combination with a particular sign—e.g., homo currit (‘Man is running’) or aliquis homo currit(‘A /some man is running’). Suppositio confusa occurs when a common term is taken in combination with a universal sign (’Every man is running’).

The tract on supposition winds up with the discussion of a few questions regarding the attribution of supposition in a few cases.

The seventh tract of the Tractatus, on fallacies, which forms part of the Aristotelian-Boethian logic, is written in the tradition of the Fallacie maiores (Major fallacies). The eighth tract, De relativis (On relatives) deals with the relative pronouns as defined by Priscian in his Institutiones grammaticae. The relative pronouns are devided into: relatives of substance, such as qui (who), ille (he), alius (another), and relatives of accident, such as talis (of such a kind), qualis (of what kind), tantus (so much), quantus (how much). The former are subdivided into relatives of identity (qui and ille) and relatives of diversity (such as alter and reliquus, both of which can be translated as ‘the other’). The relative of identity is defined in terms of supposition as what refers to and stands for the same thing. These relatives are either reciprocal or non-reciprocal. With regard to the relatives of identity, Peter adds a dicussion of a number of questions about the rationale for using demonstrative pronouns, and some problems concerning how the fallacy of a relative having two diverse referents comes about.

The tract on relatives continues with a brief discussion on the relatives of diversity, accompanied by a rule about the supposition of the relative when it is added to a superior and an inferior in a premiss and a conclusion, as in aliud ab animali; ergo aliud ab homine (‘Something other than an animal; therefore something other than a man’). IMG_0721With regard to relatives of identity a rule of the “ancients”, who deny that a proposition introduced by a relative can have a contradictory opposite, is discussed and rejected. Another rule is given about the identity of supposition of a non-reciprocal relative and what it refers to. The tract concludes with short accounts of relatives of accident.

The ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth tracts of the Tractatus, i.e., the short tracts De ampliationibus (On ampliation), De appellationibus (On appellation), De restrictionibus (On restriction) and De distributionibus (On distribution) are in fact elaborations of the theory of supposition. Ampliation is an extension of the supposition of a term. It occurs when an expression is combined with a modal term—e.g. homo potest esse Antichristus (‘A man can be the Antichrist’), and homo necessario est animal (‘A man is necessarily an animal’)—in which case the supposition of the term ‘man’ is extended to more than just individuals existing in the present. The tract on appellationes is very short: appellation is considered no more than a special case of restriction, i.e., the restricted supposition brought about by a present-tense verb. In this tract the rules of appellation are in fact specific kinds of rules of restriction. The subject of restriction in general is discussed in the eleventh tract. The rules of restriction are the same ones as were presented in the early Parisian textbooks on logic (see de Libera 1982, pp. 176–177). The final tract, on distribution, deals with the multiplication of common terms as a result of their being combined with universal signs. These universal signs are either distributive of substance (such as omnis, nullus), or of accidents (such as qualiscumque, quantuscumque). In this description ‘substance’ is defined as substistent modes of being, and ‘accident’ as accidental modes of being. Separate attention is given to the universal sign omnis (‘all’ or ‘every’) along with a discussion of the common rule that the use of omnis requires three appellata (particular things). The most frequently cited example in these discussions in the thirteenth century was the sophisma omnis phenix est (‘Every phoenix is’). According to Peter of Spain, the use of omnisdoes not call for at least three appellata; an exception to this rule is found in cases in which there is only one appellatum, as is the phoenix-case. The tract also pays attention to a number of tongue-twisting sophisma-sentences.

 

Author and Citation Information for “Peter of Spain”
The latest version of the entry “Peter of Spain” may be cited via the earliest archive in which this version appears:  Spruyt, Joke, “Peter of Spain”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),

URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/peter-spain/&gt; .The citation above refers to the version in the following archive edition:

Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495)

PETRUS TARTARETUS (1494),Known for the concept of Pons asinorum (asses’ bridge ). Although of earlier origin, in philosophy this term was applied to the diagram that Peter Tartaretus constructed to assist the student of logic in the discovery of the middle term of a syllogism. The expression suggests that getting students of logic to find the middle term of a syllogism was as difficult as getting asses to cross a bridge.  Hi is also known as the most remarkable Scotist of his time, *Peter Tartaretus (Tataretus) one of the most eminent of the later Scotists, taught at Paris 1490. Edited commentaries on Aristotle 1494, Expositio in Summulas Petri Hispani, first ed. without date, then 1501 and 1503, commentary on Scotus Quodlibetica 1519, and on Scotus’ commentary on the Sentences 1520. “Wetzer und Weltes: Kirchenlexicon, s. v.”

Ad 2) Petrus Tartaretus commentary of the entirety of Aristotle. 

Tartaretus, begins this book by reminding us that he will be following Duns Scotus  or as he says “doctoris subtilis” And dives in to The Phisicorum of Aristotle, followed by De Celo & Mundo, De Generatione & coruptione, Metheororum with some very interesting diagrams,De anima, De Sensu & Sensato, De Memoria, and finally Methaphisice.

 

IMG_0725

 

Ad 3) Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495) on the Logic of Aristotle . Here Tartaretus comments on Aristotles Organon.    

“In fact, the title Organon reflects a much later controversy about whether logic is a part of philosophy (as the Stoics maintained) or merely a tool used by philosophy (as the later Peripatetics thought); calling the logical works “The Instrument” is a way of taking sides on this point. Aristotle himself never uses this term, nor does he give much indication that these particular treatises form some kind of group, though there are frequent cross-references between the Topics and the Analytics. On the other hand, Aristotle treats the Prior and Posterior Analyticsas one work, and On Sophistical Refutations is a final section, or an appendix, to the Topics). To these works should be added the Rhetoric, which explicitly declares its reliance on the Topics.”

IMG_0702
Aristotelian hexagon a conceptual model of the relationships between the truth values of six statements. It is an extension of Aristotle’s square of opposition.

Quoted from The latest version of the entry “Aristotle’s Logic” may be cited via the earliest archive in which this version appears: Smith, Robin, “Aristotle’s Logic”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/aristotle-logic/&gt;.

 

IMG_0700
Representation of the Christian Aristotelian cosmos

 

C.H. Lohr, ‘Latin Aristotle Commentaries, I, Medieval Authors’, Traditio, XXIII, 1967

Parsons, T.: The traditional square of opposition. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philos- ophy. CSLI (2006)

Khomskii, Y.: William of Sherwood, singular propositions and the hexagon of opposition. In: Be ́ziau, J.Y., Payette, G. (eds.) The Square of Opposition. A General Framework for Cognition, pp. 43–60. Peter Lang (2012)

Read, S.: John Buridan’s theory of consequence and his octagons of opposition. In: Be ́ziau, J.Y., Jacquette, D. (eds.) Around and Beyond the Square of Opposition, pp. 93–110. Springer (2012)

A Sammelband Of Aristotle commentaries . 1499-1509

253J   Aristotle, and Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495)                                 $18,000

  • IMG_0693Expositio magistri Petri Tatereti in Summulas Petri Hyspani cum textu, una cum additionibus in locis propriis summa accuratione, summaque animadversione impressa..

  • 0229_02_popup

With

  • Clarissima singularisq[ue] totius philosophie necnon methaphisice Aristotelis magistri Petri Tatareti expositio.IMG_0707

With

  • Expositio magistri Petri Tatereti super textu logices Aristotelis

IMG_0708

Ad1) [Lugduni] : [Claudii davost al’s de troys.],  8. August 1509  (Date in the colophon:IMG_0709
octaua mensis Augusti anno … M.ccccc.ix.)

 

 

 

 

Ad2) [Lyons] : Impressum cura & industria Claudij davost al[ia]s de troys, 13 July 1509

IMG_0705

Ad 3) Imprints suggested by ISTC [Lyons: Claude Davost, after 1500] or [Nicolaus Wolf ? about 1500] or [n.pr., about 1495].

IMG_0703

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a Very Large Octavo 9 x 5 inches.  Ad1) a-l8 m10.  Ad 2) A-I8, K10, L4, M-T8   Ad3) aa-pp8 qq8

IMG_0694
Front Board
IMG_0697
Rear Board

This copy is bound in its original full calf over wooden boards, as you can se above, much of the leather has been lost exposing all the structural features of the construction of the book. It is lacking clasps but retains the catches and remnants of the attachment points of the clasps.

IMG_0707Woodcut initials and quite a few schematic text woodcuts. Spaces and guide letters for large initials not filled in and individual marginalia by old hand. This copy is bound in its original full blind stamped calf over wooden boards. With the old ownership notes (including “Samuel Hoffmanns”, the other deleted) verso with contemporary note. Occasionally contemporary marginalia in red and black ink. With the clasps renewed.

This is a rare incunabula edition of the commentary on Aristotle’s Logic by Petrus Tartaretus, follower of Duns Scotus and rector of theUniversity of Paris in 1490. Here is a Memory device for Aristotle in this book.

IMG_0699
Aristotelian diagrams have a long and rich history in philosophical logic. Today, they are widely used in nearly all disciplines dealing with logical reasoning.

The most remarkable Scotist of his time, author of commentaries on the Physics and Ethics of Aristotle, on the Sentences of Peter Lombard and on the Quodlibeta of Duns Scotus.

Most of the bibliographers ascribe the printing of this work to the Lyonese printer Nicolaus Wolff,

IMG_0698

classified as quarto volume, the dating ranges between 1495 and around or shortly after 1500.

 

IMG_0700

Ad 1)  Panzer, VII,; p. 292, no. 141 Not in Adams or the BM STC, French Books..

Ad 2) USTC no.: 155038  Panzer, VII,; p. 292, no. 140

LIBRARY COPIES:  Universitat de Barcelona , Det Kongelige Bibliotek, Oxford (UK),  Wadham College Library      : Not in Adams or the BM STC, French Books..

Ad 3) Goff T43 = T40; R 758; Pell Ms 10941; IGI V p.153; IBE Post-incunables 249; Sajó-Soltész p.952; Olivar 391; Sack(Freiburg) 3337a; Walsh 3835a; ISTC it00043000

 

Now Back to a beginning !

Ad1) Aristotle ,Petrus Hispanus,Peter of Spain (Petrus Hispanicus Portugalensis)

This work, the first bound in this sammelband is Peter Tartareus’ explanation and direction of Peter Of Spains , Tractatus or Summaries, Tartareus’ follows the structure of Peter of Spain who naturally follows  “Porphry’s Tree”

IMG_0714
Arbor Porphyriana, “Expanding on Aristotle’s Categories and visually alluding to a tree’s trunk, Porphyry’s structure reveals the idea of a layered assembly in logic. It is made of three columns of words, where the central column contains a series of dichomatous divisions between genus and species, whcih derive from the supreme genus, Substance.

“For nearly four centuries, when logic was the heart of what we now call the “undergraduate curriculum,” Peter of Spain’s Summaries of Logic (c. 1230) was the basis for teaching that subject. Because Peter’s students were teenagers, he wrote simply and organized his book carefully. Since no book about logic was read by more people until the twentieth century, the Summaries has extensively and profoundly influenced the distinctly Western way of speaking formally and writing formal prose by constructing well-formed sentences, making valid arguments, and refuting and defending arguments in debate. ” (quoted from Peter of Spain: Summaries of Logic: Text, Translation, Introduction, and Notes 1st Edition by Brian P. Copenhaver, Calvin G. Normore and, Terence Parsons .Oxford University Press;  (December 16, 2014)

“It is still not possible to establish the date of origin of the Tractatus,( and their Summaries) the work that has enjoyed such enormous success. Recent scholarship
suggests that it could have been written any time between the 1220s and the 1250s (Ebbessen 2013, 68–69). It has universally been recognised as a work by Peter of Spain. Another work that has been identified as Peter of Spain’s is aSyncategoreumata (Treatise on Syncategorematic Words), which was probably written some years after the Tractatus.[2] Considering the fact that in all the thirteenth-century manuscripts the Syncategoreumata directly follow the Tractatus, and the number of similarities between doctrinal aspects of these two works on logic, it is almost certain that they were written by the same author. Both works seem to have originated from Southern France or Northern Spain, the region where we also find the earliest commentaries on these treatises.”

The Tractatus

The Tractatus can be divided into two main parts. One part deals with doctrines found in

IMG_0716
The square of opposition is a diagram representing the relations between the four basic categorical propositions.

the so-called logica antiquorum—i.e., the logica vetus (old logic) and logica nova (new logic)—and the other contains doctrines covered by the logica modernorum—viz. the tracts that discuss theproprietates terminorum (properties of terms).

The first main part of the Tractatus divides into five tracts. The first tract, De introductionibus(On introductory topics) explains the concepts used in traditional logic—nomen (noun), verbum(verb), oratio (phrase), propositio (proposition)—and presents the divisions of and the (logical) relationships between propositions. The second tract, De predicabilibus (On the predicables) covers matters dealt with in Boethius’s accounts of Porphyry’s Isagoge. It gives an account of the concept predicabile and the five predicables—genus, species, differentia, proprium, accidens—i.e., the common features of and differences between the predicables, as well as of the terms ’predicatio’ and ’denominativum’. Tract three, De predicamentis (On the categories), discusses the ten Aristotelian categories, as well as some items already dealt with in the previous treatise. The fourth tract, De sillogismis (On syllogisms) mainly goes back to Boethius’s De IMG_0718IMG_0718syllogismis categoricis (On categorical syllogisms). It gives an explanation of the basic element of the syllogism, i.e., propositio, and of the syllogism, and then goes into mood and figure, the proper forms of syllogisms, and briefly deals with what are called paralogisms. The fifth tract, De locis(On topical relationships), is derived from Boethius’s De topicis differentiis (On different topical relationships) I and II. This tract starts off with an explanation of the notions argumentum and argumentatio, and then proceeds to deal with the species of argumentation: syllogism, induction, enthymeme, and example. Next, it gives a definition of locus (the Latin translation of the Greek topos): a locus is the seat of an argument (i.e., the locus is supposed to warrant the inference by bringing it under some generic rule.) The intrinsic loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is derived from the substance of the thing involved) are covered first, followed by the extrinsic loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is derived from something that is completely separate from the substance of the thing involved) and intermediary loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is taken from the things that partly share in the terms of the problem and partly differ from it). Examples are: intrinsic—the locus “from definition”: ‘a rational animal is running; therefore a man is running’; extrinsic—the locus “from opposites”: ‘Socrates is black; therefore he is not white’; intermediary—‘the just is good; therefore justice is good’.

IMG_0722

The second part of the Tractatus comprises subjects that were of major importance in the doctrine of the properties of terms. In the sixth tract, De suppositionibus, the theory of supposition is dealt with. The treatise begins with an exposition of significatio. The definition of significatio runs: significatio is the respresentation of a thing by means of a word in accordance with convention. Next it gives a definition of the related terms suppositio and copulatio, and the differences between the terms significatio, suppositio and copulatio. Of these three suppositioand significatio are the most important in Peter’s semantics. Suppositio is defined as the acceptance of a substantive verb for some thing. Suppositio is dependent on significatio, because supposition can only occur via a term that already has some significatio. Put in other words,significatio pertains to a word by itself, and supposition to a term as actually used in some context.

The tract concludes with a division of suppositio. The first division is into suppositio communis(common supposition) and suppositio discreta (discrete supposition)—e.g., the terms homo(man) and Sortes (Socrates) respectively.

The second division, suppositio communis, is divided into naturalis (natural) and accidentalis(coincidental). Suppositio naturalis is described as the acceptance of a common term for all those things that can share in the common universal nature signified by the term in question—e.g., homo (‘man’) taken by itself by its very nature is able to stand for all men, whether in the past, present or future; suppositio accidentalis is the acceptance of a common term for those things for which the term in question requires an additional term—e.g., in homo est (‘A man is’) the term homo stands for present men, whereas in homo fuit (‘A man has been’) and in homo erit (‘A man will be’) it stands for past men and future men respectively, owing to the additional terms fuit and erit.

The third division, suppositio accidentalis, is divided into suppositio simplex (simple supposition) and suppositio personalis (personal supposition). Suppositio simplex is the acceptance of a term for the universal ‘thing’ it signifies, as in homo est species (‘Man is a species’, animal est genus (‘Animal is a genus’), in which the substantive terms homo and animal stand for the universal man and animal, and not any one of their particulars. Suppositio simplex can occur both in the subject- and in the predicate-term—e.g., homo est species (‘Man is a species’) and omnis homo est animal (‘Every man is an animal’) respectively. Suppositio personalis is the acceptance of a common term for one or more of its particulars, as in homo currit (‘A man is running’).

The fourth division, suppositio personalis, is subdivided into either derterminata (determinate = standing for a certain particular) or confusa (confused = standing for any IMG_0721individual falling under that name). Suppositio determinata occurs when a common term is taken indefinitely or in combination with a particular sign—e.g., homo currit (‘Man is running’) or aliquis homo currit(‘A /some man is running’). Suppositio confusa occurs when a common term is taken in combination with a universal sign (’Every man is running’).

The tract on supposition winds up with the discussion of a few questions regarding the attribution of supposition in a few cases.

The seventh tract of the Tractatus, on fallacies, which forms part of the Aristotelian-Boethian logic, is written in the tradition of the Fallacie maiores (Major fallacies). The eighth tract, De relativis (On relatives) deals with the relative pronouns as defined by Priscian in his Institutiones grammaticae. The relative pronouns are devided into: relatives of substance, such as qui (who), ille (he), alius (another), and relatives of accident, such as talis (of such a kind), qualis (of what kind), tantus (so much), quantus (how much). The former are subdivided into relatives of identity (qui and ille) and relatives of diversity (such as alter and reliquus, both of which can be translated as ‘the other’). The relative of identity is defined in terms of supposition as what refers to and stands for the same thing. These relatives are either reciprocal or non-reciprocal. With regard to the relatives of identity, Peter adds a dicussion of a number of questions about the rationale for using demonstrative pronouns, and some problems concerning how the fallacy of a relative having two diverse referents comes about.

The tract on relatives continues with a brief discussion on the relatives of diversity, accompanied by a rule about the supposition of the relative when it is added to a superior and an inferior in a premiss and a conclusion, as in aliud ab animali; ergo aliud ab homine (‘Something other than an animal; therefore something other than a man’). IMG_0721With regard to relatives of identity a rule of the “ancients”, who deny that a proposition introduced by a relative can have a contradictory opposite, is discussed and rejected. Another rule is given about the identity of supposition of a non-reciprocal relative and what it refers to. The tract concludes with short accounts of relatives of accident.

The ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth tracts of the Tractatus, i.e., the short tracts De ampliationibus (On ampliation), De appellationibus (On appellation), De restrictionibus (On restriction) and De distributionibus (On distribution) are in fact elaborations of the theory of supposition. Ampliation is an extension of the supposition of a term. It occurs when an expression is combined with a modal term—e.g. homo potest esse Antichristus (‘A man can be the Antichrist’), and homo necessario est animal (‘A man is necessarily an animal’)—in which case the supposition of the term ‘man’ is extended to more than just individuals existing in the present. The tract on appellationes is very short: appellation is considered no more than a special case of restriction, i.e., the restricted supposition brought about by a present-tense verb. In this tract the rules of appellation are in fact specific kinds of rules of restriction. The subject of restriction in general is discussed in the eleventh tract. The rules of restriction are the same ones as were presented in the early Parisian textbooks on logic (see de Libera 1982, pp. 176–177). The final tract, on distribution, deals with the multiplication of common terms as a result of their being combined with universal signs. These universal signs are either distributive of substance (such as omnis, nullus), or of accidents (such as qualiscumque, quantuscumque). In this description ‘substance’ is defined as substistent modes of being, and ‘accident’ as accidental modes of being. Separate attention is given to the universal sign omnis (‘all’ or ‘every’) along with a discussion of the common rule that the use of omnis requires three appellata (particular things). The most frequently cited example in these discussions in the thirteenth century was the sophisma omnis phenix est (‘Every phoenix is’). According to Peter of Spain, the use of omnisdoes not call for at least three appellata; an exception to this rule is found in cases in which there is only one appellatum, as is the phoenix-case. The tract also pays attention to a number of tongue-twisting sophisma-sentences.

 

Author and Citation Information for “Peter of Spain”
The latest version of the entry “Peter of Spain” may be cited via the earliest archive in which this version appears:  Spruyt, Joke, “Peter of Spain”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),

URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/peter-spain/&gt; .The citation above refers to the version in the following archive edition:

Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495)

PETRUS TARTARETUS (1494),Known for the concept of Pons asinorum (asses’ bridge ). Although of earlier origin, in philosophy this term was applied to the diagram that Peter Tartaretus constructed to assist the student of logic in the discovery of the middle term of a syllogism. The expression suggests that getting students of logic to find the middle term of a syllogism was as difficult as getting asses to cross a bridge.  Hi is also known as the most remarkable Scotist of his time, *Peter Tartaretus (Tataretus) one of the most eminent of the later Scotists, taught at Paris 1490. Edited commentaries on Aristotle 1494, Expositio in Summulas Petri Hispani, first ed. without date, then 1501 and 1503, commentary on Scotus Quodlibetica 1519, and on Scotus’ commentary on the Sentences 1520. “Wetzer und Weltes: Kirchenlexicon, s. v.”

Ad 2) Petrus Tartaretus commentary of the entirety of Aristotle. 

Tartaretus, begins this book by reminding us that he will be following Duns Scotus  or as he says “doctoris subtilis” And dives in to The Phisicorum of Aristotle, followed by De Celo & Mundo, De Generatione & coruptione, Metheororum with some very interesting diagrams,De anima, De Sensu & Sensato, De Memoria, and finally Methaphisice.

 

IMG_0725

 

Ad 3) Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495) on the Logic of Aristotle . Here Tartaretus comments on Aristotles Organon.    

“In fact, the title Organon reflects a much later controversy about whether logic is a part of philosophy (as the Stoics maintained) or merely a tool used by philosophy (as the later Peripatetics thought); calling the logical works “The Instrument” is a way of taking sides on this point. Aristotle himself never uses this term, nor does he give much indication that these particular treatises form some kind of group, though there are frequent cross-references between the Topics and the Analytics. On the other hand, Aristotle treats the Prior and Posterior Analyticsas one work, and On Sophistical Refutations is a final section, or an appendix, to the Topics). To these works should be added the Rhetoric, which explicitly declares its reliance on the Topics.”

IMG_0702
Aristotelian hexagon a conceptual model of the relationships between the truth values of six statements. It is an extension of Aristotle’s square of opposition.

Quoted from The latest version of the entry “Aristotle’s Logic” may be cited via the earliest archive in which this version appears: Smith, Robin, “Aristotle’s Logic”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/aristotle-logic/&gt;.

 

IMG_0700
Representation of the Christian Aristotelian cosmos

 

C.H. Lohr, ‘Latin Aristotle Commentaries, I, Medieval Authors’, Traditio, XXIII, 1967

Parsons, T.: The traditional square of opposition. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philos- ophy. CSLI (2006)

Khomskii, Y.: William of Sherwood, singular propositions and the hexagon of opposition. In: Be ́ziau, J.Y., Payette, G. (eds.) The Square of Opposition. A General Framework for Cognition, pp. 43–60. Peter Lang (2012)

Read, S.: John Buridan’s theory of consequence and his octagons of opposition. In: Be ́ziau, J.Y., Jacquette, D. (eds.) Around and Beyond the Square of Opposition, pp. 93–110. Springer (2012)

A most satisfying book: Boethius ,a Consolation of Philosophy

Boethius 1501
Boethius 1501

Boetius de philosophico consolatu, siue, De consolatio[n]e philosophi[a]e

Edward Gibbon  in The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire  stated that  A consolation of Philosophy  is  “A golden volume not unworthy of the leisure of Plato or Tully.” And C. S. Lewis, in “The Discarded Image: An Introduction to Medieval and Renaissance Literature, 1964, rightly tells us “To acquire a taste for it is almost to become naturalised in the Middle Ages.”. The Consolation of Philosophy was the most copied and circulated secular text in the European middlDSC_0084e ages, the influence of Boethius’s Consolatio Philosophiae should not be under-estimated — some four hundred copies survive in manuscript form, making it one of the most widely disseminated pieces of writing during the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Even today, this would serve as a good starting point for someone unfamiliar with the history of philosophy, and wanted to take a first plunge in the
company of a great mind from the past.  The Copy I currently have Was Printed in Straßburg Per Iohannem Grüninger, 1501

DSC_0103

This Wonderful copy is bound in its original full calf covered wooden boards, it was blind stamped and had clasps to hold it safely closed, these are now  long gone but their presence can be  traced by the indentations carved in the boards and the remaining brass brads.

Rear Cover
Rear Cover
Front board
Front board

This Edition is illustrated with woodcuts,many of which were colored at the time of printing, making this a visual treat on every page. The type faces and the layout of the pages themselves are exotic to the modern eye and transport us back to a tradition of textual exegesis whix=ch is all but forgotten.DSC_0096 (1)

 

667G Anicius Manlius Torquatus Severinus Boethius  a.d.480-525

Boetius de Philosophico consolatu siue de consolatio[n]e philosophi[a]e: cu[m] figur ornatissimis nouit expoli

Straßbourg: J. Gruninger, 8 September 1501.                         $Sold

Small folio 11 ¼ x 7 inches. [ ]6, A4, B-X6,Y8. First illustrated edition. In this copy many of the seventy eight woodcuts  have very nice original color, it is bound in full blind stamped calf over wooden boards. It is also rubicated throughout. There are two library stamps and a release Endorsement ‘Dupl. ” Wiener K.K. Theres. It is a large and lovely copy of an important and beautiful book.DSC_0089 (1)

“Boethius is known as author of the Consolation of Philosophy and of several theological treatises. From them no theory of knowledge emerges clearly, for the concern is not primarily there with knowing, although distinctions and differentiations relevant to it are frequent.  The Consolation of Philosophy is committed (by way of Proclus’ commentary on the Timaeus, it has been suggested) to a platonic doctrine of ideas and of reminiscence: the soul is of divine elements on which its knowledge depends; it is in need only of the quickening power of sense perception to arouse it to a knowledge of ideas at rest within it. The developments of that notion bring echoes, one after the other, of pythagoreanism, neoplatonism, stoicism, and augustinism. Yet, as if these came too near to a dereliction from aristotelian principles, Boethius expounds the Trinity, in the work which shows most clearly the augustinian influence, by applying the ten categories to the persons and their relations. At the bottom of these diversified philosophic affiliations is the conviction, often explicit, that there was a single philosophy of the Greeks, to be grasped best in the reconciliation of Plato and Aristotle. That, however, was a lesson Boethius had learned from pagan roman philosophers; even before the coming of Christianity a change in the attitude toward philosophy had instituted a metaphysical conservatism. The distinctions by which the greeks thought to have divided themselves into opposed schools are needless subtleties when abstract thought is to be invoked (as it is in the very title of four works of Seneca and one work of Boethius) for refuge, or salvation, or relief, or consolation” (quoted from Selections from Medieval Philosophers I, by Richard McKeon, page 68-69).

The”Consolation of Philosophie” was written while Boethius was in prison and deprived of the use of his library, on false charges of treason against Theodoric, the Ostrogoth, then ruler of Rome. “Within a year he was a solitary prisoner at Pavia, stripped of honours, wealth, and friends, with death hanging over him, and a terror worse than death, in the fear lest those dearest to him should be involved in the worst results of his downfall. It is in this situation that the opening of the ‘Consolation of Philosophy’ brings Boethius before us. He represents himself as seated in his prison distraught with grief, indignant at the injustice of his misfortunes, and seeking relief for his melancholy in writing verses descriptive of his condition. Suddenly there appears to him the Divine figure of Philosophy, in the guise of a woman of superhuman dignity and beauty, who by a succession of discourses convinces him of the vanity of regret for the lost gifts of fortune, raises his mind once more to the contemplation of the true good, and makes clear to him the mystery of the world’s moral government.”(H.R. JAMES, M.A.,

  1. CH. OXFORD 1897.)

 

In this prosimetrical apocalyptic dialogue, Boethius our narrator encounters Lady-Philosophy , who appears in his time of need, the muse of poetry has in short failed him.  Philosophy  dresses  among great protest Boethius’ bad interpretations and misunderstandings of fate and free will…. One thousand five hundred years later It is still fair to ask, the same questions which Boethius asks..DSC_0100

 

 

And  Philosophy answers:“The judgment of most people is based not on the merits of a case but on the fortune of its outcome; they think that only things which turn out happily are good.”

“You have merely discovered the two-faced nature of this blind goddess [Fortune] … For now she has deserted you, and no man can ever be secure until he has been deserted by Fortune.”

“I [Fortune] spin my wheel and find pleasure in raising the low to a high place and lowering those who were on top. Go up, if you like, but only on condition that you will not feel abused when my sport requires your fall.”DSC_0092 (1)

 

Proctor 9886; Schmidt vol. I, 57; Chrisman C1.1.4,2; Adams B-2283; VD16 B6404; Hind, History of the Woodcut II,339-340; Redgrave Bibliographica II, 53; Not in OCLC. See also Chadwick: ‘Boethius’ 1981 Oxford, and Pelikan, The Reformation of the Bible 1996, p 88, I.8.

 

How Blest Is He

How blest is he who could discern

The bright source of the good,

How blest, for he could slip the chains

Of earth, which weigh men down!

 

— Boethius, Consolation of Philosophy (3:12)

 

It is not that often that a book of medieval philosophy has so much direct connection to contemporary situations, yet remains so strange, alas there is a golden chain of being (scala naturae) to be found in this most satisfying book.

 

Two more Rare incunabula ! Medical and Spiritual

834G Moses Maimonides [also .; John, of Damascus Saint.; `Abd al-Malik ibn Abi al-`Ala Ibn Zuhr ]

Hoc in volumine hec Continent’. Aphorismi Rabi moysi.  Aphorismi Io Damasceni. Liber secreto⁄¿ Hipocratis. Liber Pnosticationum bm lunazin signis et aspectu planetarum Hipoc. Liber Q dicit’ capsula eburnea Hipo. Liber de elements siue de humana natura Hipocratis. Liber de aere r aqua r regioin9 Hip. Liber de pharmacijs Hipocratis. Liber de insomnijs Hipocratis. Liber zoar de cura lapidis.

dsc_0015

[Venice] : Bonetus Locatellus for Octavianus Scotus’ (i.e. Johannes Hamman),1497 SOLD

Folio 12 x 8 1/4 inches A6,B6 C4 D6 E4 F-G6 H4 I6. (48 leaves complete) Second edition ( this is a close reprint of Locatellus’s Rhasis (Goff R-176) This copy is bound in later vellum boards. (very rare only two copies in the US)

Originally written  in Arabic between 1187 and 1190 the Aphorisms of Maimonides, a digest of the teachings of Galen organized in 25 “particulae”, are in an anonymous thirteenth-century translation from the Arabic. They provides tantalizing insights into the work of Galen, as it draws on treatises of Galen that no longer exist and shines a light into the world of medieval and ancient medicine .

This “Book is based almost entirely on rational medicine, independant observation and the scientific method” (The Medical Legacy of Moses Maimonides. Fred Rosner 1998)

Maimonides, like his Arab precursors and contemporaries, considered himself one of the inheritors of classical Greek learning. Like some of them, eg, al Farabi and Razi among the Arabs, and Rabbi Schem Tov among the Jews, Maimonides did not accept this inheritance uncritically, and much space is given to showing the inconsistencies in Galen’s writings and in making a plea for rational observation. (These preceded the similar plea by Roger Bacon by half a century. Both were ignored.)dsc_0017Part II consists of Johannes Damascenus, Aphorismi; Mohammed Rhasis, De secretis in medicinis; and pseudo-Hippocrates, Capsula eburnea. This last is a brief treatise on the external signs of impending death. According to its introduction, Hippocrates asked his servants to bury with him an ivory chest in which he had placed certain medical secrets. Learning of this, Caesar ordered the tomb to be opened and the chest removed, revealing this treatise. It is printed in the Latin translation made from an Arabic version by Gerard of Cremona in the twelfth century. It had already been printed in Milan, 1481,(Goff R175) in the supplement of miscellaneous medical tractates added to the first edition Rhasis, Liber ad Almansorem ..

This edition includes the aphorisms of Johannes Damascenus or Mesue, a ninth-century Baghdad physician responsible for the translation of Greek medical works into Arabic. Ibn Zuhr (Avenzohar)’s short treatise De curatione lapidis appears here in print for the first time.

Maimonides was born in Cordova but when driven out of Spain for refusing to convert to Islam he settled permanently in Cairo. His erudition and medical skill earned him the appointment of physician to the court of Saladin, the sultan of Egypt. His medical writings deeply influenced not only Muslim and Jewish but also Christian doctors, for example Henry of Mondeville and Guy de Chauliac. From 1177, Maimonides was head of the Jewish community of Egypt. This work, created towards the end of his life, was originally written in Arabic, then translated into Hebrew in the thirteenth century, and into Latin to be published in print.  It is the most important and influential work of the most revered early Jewish physician.

Goff; M79;BM 15th cent.; V 429 ISTC; im00079000; Reichling (Suppl.); 1257; Klebs; 644.2 var. & 836.3 (note); IGI; 6745;  IBP; 4758;Proctor; 5200;

ISTC U.S.A: 2 copies: New York Academy of Medicine; Stanford Univ. Medical Center (no change from Goff)

dsc_0016(For Goff R-176:U.S.A: Univ. of Michigan, Univ.  National Library of Medicine; Boston MA, Harvard Univ.,; Harvard College ; Hebrew Union College Library;  Case Western Reserve Univ.,  Detroit Public Library (-a1); , Duke Univ.,  Univ. of Iowa, The Univ. Libraries; Los Angeles, Biomedical Library;  Yale Univ.,  Jewish Theological Seminary of America;  College of Physicians of Philadelphia;  Univ. of Pennsylvania, ; The Huntington Library; , Stanford Univ. , Stanford Univ. Medical Center,)

______________) )( (______________

835G   Bernard of Clairvaux, Saint (1090 or 1091-1153).

Florum S. Bernardi nobiliorum libri X (auctore Guillelmo, S. Martini Tornacensis monacho). De quibusdam sermonibus venerabilis patris Bernardi.

Cologne : Johann Koelhoff, the Elder, 1482 (In this copy and in many copies, the arabic figures 82 have been added to the printed date ‘M.cccc.’, probably in the printing-shop ) SOLD

dsc_0069-2

Folio 11 1/4 x 8 inches {j.6} a2-q8, r-s6, t-v8 v8 blank(.j.1, a1,blank ).This copy lacks 5 leaves of index and 2 blanks. Second edition, the  first  was printed in 1470.

ISTC 4 copies listed in the US The Newberry Library; Western Michigan Univ., Free Library of Philadelphia (-8 leaves); Library of Congress.

This is a very nicely rubricated copy with many large lombard initials in red and the capital stroked in red and each chapter has a leather tab, This copy is bound in original quarter dsc_0064calf over Oak Boards, the clasp has been lost but the remains of the leather flap and the brass catch remains. Compiled from the works of Saint Bernard by Guilelmus Tornacensis, Benedictine monk.

It’s hard to know how to characterize Bernard of Clairvaux. On the one hand, he is called the “honey-tongued doctor” for his eloquent writings on the love of God. On the other hand, he rallied soldiers to kill Muslims. He wrote eloquently on humility; then again, he loved being close to the seat of power and was an adviser to five popes. What Bernard is remembered for today, more than his reforming zeal and crusade preaching, is his mystical writings. His best known work is On Loving God, in which he states his purpose at the beginning: “You wish me to tell you why and how God should be loved. My answer is that God himself is the reason he is to be loved.”

dsc_0068His other great literary legacy is Sermons on the Song of Songs, 86 sermons on the spiritual life that, in fact, only tangentially touch on the biblical text. One passage in particular speaks aptly to Bernard’s lifelong passion to know God (and, likely, the temptations that troubled him):dsc_0066dsc_0067

Goff B389 ; Bod-inc,; B-178; GW; 3929; Hain-Copinger; 2926*; ISTC,; ib00389000; O


			

Todays Rare incunabula ! To know God

835G   Bernard of Clairvaux, Saint (1090 or 1091-1153).

Florum S. Bernardi nobiliorum libri X (auctore Guillelmo, S. Martini Tornacensis monacho). De quibusdam sermonibus venerabilis patris Bernardi.

Cologne : Johann Koelhoff, the Elder, 1482 (In this copy and in many copies, the arabic figures 82 have been added to the printed date ‘M.cccc.’, probably in the printing-shop ) $11,000

dsc_0069-2

Folio 11 1/4 x 8 inches {j.6} a2-q8, r-s6, t-v8 v8 blank(.j.1, a1,blank ).This copy lacks 5 leaves of index and 2 blanks. Second edition, the  first  was printed in 1470.

ISTC 4 copies listed in the US The Newberry Library; Western Michigan Univ., Free Library of Philadelphia (-8 leaves); Library of Congress.

This is a very nicely rubricated copy with many large lombard initials in red and the capital stroked in red and each chapter has a leather tab, This copy is bound in original quarter dsc_0064calf over Oak Boards, the clasp has been lost but the remains of the leather flap and the brass catch remains. Compiled from the works of Saint Bernard by Guilelmus Tornacensis, Benedictine monk.

It’s hard to know how to characterize Bernard of Clairvaux. On the one hand, he is called the “honey-tongued doctor” for his eloquent writings on the love of God. On the other hand, he rallied soldiers to kill Muslims. He wrote eloquently on humility; then again, he loved being close to the seat of power and was an adviser to five popes. What Bernard is remembered for today, more than his reforming zeal and crusade preaching, is his mystical writings. His best known work is On Loving God, in which he states his purpose at the beginning: “You wish me to tell you why and how God should be loved. My answer is that God himself is the reason he is to be loved.”

dsc_0068His other great literary legacy is Sermons on the Song of Songs, 86 sermons on the spiritual life that, in fact, only tangentially touch on the biblical text. One passage in particular speaks aptly to Bernard’s lifelong passion to know God (and, likely, the temptations that troubled him):dsc_0066dsc_0067

Goff B389 ; Bod-inc,; B-178; GW; 3929; Hain-Copinger; 2926*; ISTC,; ib00389000; O


			

Two more Rare incunabula ! Medical and Spiritual

834G Moses Maimonides [also .; John, of Damascus Saint.; `Abd al-Malik ibn Abi al-`Ala Ibn Zuhr ]

Hoc in volumine hec Continent’. Aphorismi Rabi moysi.  Aphorismi Io Damasceni. Liber secreto⁄¿ Hipocratis. Liber Pnosticationum bm lunazin signis et aspectu planetarum Hipoc. Liber Q dicit’ capsula eburnea Hipo. Liber de elements siue de humana natura Hipocratis. Liber de aere r aqua r regioin9 Hip. Liber de pharmacijs Hipocratis. Liber de insomnijs Hipocratis. Liber zoar de cura lapidis.

dsc_0015

[Venice] : Bonetus Locatellus for Octavianus Scotus’ (i.e. Johannes Hamman),1497 $25,000

Folio 12 x 8 1/4 inches A6,B6 C4 D6 E4 F-G6 H4 I6. (48 leaves complete) Second edition ( this is a close reprint of Locatellus’s Rhasis (Goff R-176) This copy is bound in later vellum boards. (very rare only two copies in the US)

Originally written  in Arabic between 1187 and 1190 the Aphorisms of Maimonides, a digest of the teachings of Galen organized in 25 “particulae”, are in an anonymous thirteenth-century translation from the Arabic. They provides tantalizing insights into the work of Galen, as it draws on treatises of Galen that no longer exist and shines a light into the world of medieval and ancient medicine .
This “Book is based almost entirely on rational medicine, independant observation and the scientific method” (The Medical Legacy of Moses Maimonides. Fred Rosner 1998)

Maimonides, like his Arab precursors and contemporaries, considered himself one of the inheritors of classical Greek learning. Like some of them, eg, al Farabi and Razi among the Arabs, and Rabbi Schem Tov among the Jews, Maimonides did not accept this inheritance uncritically, and much space is given to showing the inconsistencies in Galen’s writings and in making a plea for rational observation. (These preceded the similar plea by Roger Bacon by half a century. Both were ignored.)dsc_0017Part II consists of Johannes Damascenus, Aphorismi; Mohammed Rhasis, De secretis in medicinis; and pseudo-Hippocrates, Capsula eburnea. This last is a brief treatise on the external signs of impending death. According to its introduction, Hippocrates asked his servants to bury with him an ivory chest in which he had placed certain medical secrets. Learning of this, Caesar ordered the tomb to be opened and the chest removed, revealing this treatise. It is printed in the Latin translation made from an Arabic version by Gerard of Cremona in the twelfth century. It had already been printed in Milan, 1481,(Goff R175) in the supplement of miscellaneous medical tractates added to the first edition Rhasis, Liber ad Almansorem ..

This edition includes the aphorisms of Johannes Damascenus or Mesue, a ninth-century Baghdad physician responsible for the translation of Greek medical works into Arabic. Ibn Zuhr (Avenzohar)’s short treatise De curatione lapidis appears here in print for the first time.

Maimonides was born in Cordova but when driven out of Spain for refusing to convert to Islam he settled permanently in Cairo. His erudition and medical skill earned him the appointment of physician to the court of Saladin, the sultan of Egypt. His medical writings deeply influenced not only Muslim and Jewish but also Christian doctors, for example Henry of Mondeville and Guy de Chauliac. From 1177, Maimonides was head of the Jewish community of Egypt. This work, created towards the end of his life, was originally written in Arabic, then translated into Hebrew in the thirteenth century, and into Latin to be published in print.  It is the most important and influential work of the most revered early Jewish physician.

Goff; M79;BM 15th cent.; V 429 ISTC; im00079000; Reichling (Suppl.); 1257; Klebs; 644.2 var. & 836.3 (note); IGI; 6745;  IBP; 4758;Proctor; 5200;

ISTC U.S.A: 2 copies: New York Academy of Medicine; Stanford Univ. Medical Center (no change from Goff)

dsc_0016(For Goff R-176:U.S.A: Univ. of Michigan, Univ.  National Library of Medicine; Boston MA, Harvard Univ.,; Harvard College ; Hebrew Union College Library;  Case Western Reserve Univ.,  Detroit Public Library (-a1); , Duke Univ.,  Univ. of Iowa, The Univ. Libraries; Los Angeles, Biomedical Library;  Yale Univ.,  Jewish Theological Seminary of America;  College of Physicians of Philadelphia;  Univ. of Pennsylvania, ; The Huntington Library; , Stanford Univ. , Stanford Univ. Medical Center,)

______________) )( (______________

835G   Bernard of Clairvaux, Saint (1090 or 1091-1153).

Florum S. Bernardi nobiliorum libri X (auctore Guillelmo, S. Martini Tornacensis monacho). De quibusdam sermonibus venerabilis patris Bernardi.

Cologne : Johann Koelhoff, the Elder, 1482 (In this copy and in many copies, the arabic figures 82 have been added to the printed date ‘M.cccc.’, probably in the printing-shop ) $11,000

dsc_0069-2

Folio 11 1/4 x 8 inches {j.6} a2-q8, r-s6, t-v8 v8 blank(.j.1, a1,blank ).This copy lacks 5 leaves of index and 2 blanks. Second edition, the  first  was printed in 1470.

ISTC 4 copies listed in the US The Newberry Library; Western Michigan Univ., Free Library of Philadelphia (-8 leaves); Library of Congress.

This is a very nicely rubricated copy with many large lombard initials in red and the capital stroked in red and each chapter has a leather tab, This copy is bound in original quarter dsc_0064calf over Oak Boards, the clasp has been lost but the remains of the leather flap and the brass catch remains. Compiled from the works of Saint Bernard by Guilelmus Tornacensis, Benedictine monk.

It’s hard to know how to characterize Bernard of Clairvaux. On the one hand, he is called the “honey-tongued doctor” for his eloquent writings on the love of God. On the other hand, he rallied soldiers to kill Muslims. He wrote eloquently on humility; then again, he loved being close to the seat of power and was an adviser to five popes. What Bernard is remembered for today, more than his reforming zeal and crusade preaching, is his mystical writings. His best known work is On Loving God, in which he states his purpose at the beginning: “You wish me to tell you why and how God should be loved. My answer is that God himself is the reason he is to be loved.”

dsc_0068His other great literary legacy is Sermons on the Song of Songs, 86 sermons on the spiritual life that, in fact, only tangentially touch on the biblical text. One passage in particular speaks aptly to Bernard’s lifelong passion to know God (and, likely, the temptations that troubled him):dsc_0066dsc_0067

Goff B389 ; Bod-inc,; B-178; GW; 3929; Hain-Copinger; 2926*; ISTC,; ib00389000; O


			

Two more Rare incunabula !

834G Moses [also .; John, of Damascus Saint.; `Abd al-Malik ibn Abi al-`Ala Ibn Zuhr ]

Hoc in volumine hec Continent’. Aphorismi Rabi moysi.  Aphorismi Io Damasceni. Liber secreto⁄¿ Hipocratis. Liber Pnosticationum bm lunazin signis et aspectu planetarum Hipoc. Liber Q dicit’ capsula eburnea Hipo. Liber de elements siue de humana natura Hipocratis. Liber de aere r aqua r regioin9 Hip. Liber de pharmacijs Hipocratis. Liber de insomnijs Hipocratis. Liber zoar de cura lapidis.

dsc_0015

[Venice] : Bonetus Locatellus for Octavianus Scotus’ (i.e. Johannes Hamman),1497 $25,000

Folio 12 x 8 1/4 inches A6,B6 C4 D6 E4 F-G6 H4 I6. (48 leaves complete) Second edition ( this is a close reprint of Locatellus’s Rhasis (Goff R-176) This copy is bound in later vellum boards.

The Aphorisms of Maimonides, a digest of the teachings of Galen organized in 25 “particulae”, are in an anonymous thirteenth-century translation from the Arabic. dsc_0017Part II consists of Johannes Damascenus, Aphorismi; Mohammed Rhasis, De secretis in medicinis; and pseudo-Hippocrates, Capsula eburnea. This last is a brief treatise on the external signs of impending death. According to its introduction, Hippocrates asked his servants to bury with him an ivory chest in which he had placed certain medical secrets. Learning of this, Caesar ordered the tomb to be opened and the chest removed, revealing this treatise. It is printed in the Latin translation made from an Arabic version by Gerard of Cremona in the twelfth century. It had already been printed in Milan, 1481,(Goff R175) in the supplement of miscellaneous medical tractates added to the first edition Rhasis, Liber ad Almansorem ..

This edition includes the aphorisms of Johannes Damascenus or Mesue, a ninth-century Baghdad physician responsible for the translation of Greek medical works into Arabic. Ibn Zuhr (Avenzohar)’s short treatise De curatione lapidis appears here in print for the first time.

Maimonides was born in Cordova but when driven out of Spain for refusing to convert to Islam he settled permanently in Cairo. His erudition and medical skill earned him the appointment of physician to the court of Saladin, the sultan of Egypt. His medical writings deeply influenced not only Muslim and Jewish but also Christian doctors, for example Henry of Mondeville and Guy de Chauliac. From 1177, Maimonides was head of the Jewish community of Egypt. This work, created towards the end of his life, was originally written in Arabic, then translated into Hebrew in the thirteenth century, and into Latin to be published in print.  It is the most important and influential work of the most revered early Jewish physician.

Goff; M79;BM 15th cent.; V 429 ISTC; im00079000; Reichling (Suppl.); 1257; Klebs; 644.2 var. & 836.3 (note); IGI; 6745;  IBP; 4758;Proctor; 5200;

 

ISTC U.S.A:  New York Academy of Medicine; Stanford Univ. Medical Center (no change from Goff0

dsc_0016(For Goff R-176:U.S.A: Univ. of Michigan, Univ.  National Library of Medicine; Boston MA, Harvard Univ.,; Harvard College ; Hebrew Union College Library;  Case Western Reserve Univ.,  Detroit Public Library (-a1); , Duke Univ.,  Univ. of Iowa, The Univ. Libraries; Los Angeles, Biomedical Library;  Yale Univ.,  Jewish Theological Seminary of America;  College of Physicians of Philadelphia;  Univ. of Pennsylvania, ; The Huntington Library; , Stanford Univ. , Stanford Univ. Medical Center,)

______________) )( (______________

835G   Bernard of Clairvaux, Saint (1090 or 1091-1153).

Florum S. Bernardi nobiliorum libri X (auctore Guillelmo, S. Martini Tornacensis monacho). De quibusdam sermonibus venerabilis patris Bernardi.

Cologne : Johann Koelhoff, the Elder, 1482 (In this copy and in many copies, the arabic figures 82 have been added to the printed date ‘M.cccc.’, probably in the printing-shop ) $11,000

dsc_0069-2

Folio 11 1/4 x 8 inches {j.6} a2-q8, r-s6, t-v8 v8 blank(.j.1, a1,blank ).This copy lacks 5 leaves of index and 2 blanks. Second edition, the  first  was printed in 1470.

4 copies listed in the US The Newberry Library; Western Michigan Univ., Free Library of Philadelphia (-8 leaves); Library of Congress.

This is a very nicely rubricated copy with many large lombard initials in red and the capital stroked in red and each chapter has a leather tab, This copy is bound in original quarter dsc_0064calf over Oak Boards, the clasp has been lost but the remains of the leather flap and the brass catch remains. Compiled from the works of Saint Bernard by Guilelmus Tornacensis, Benedictine monk.

It’s hard to know how to characterize Bernard of Clairvaux. On the one hand, he is called the “honey-tongued doctor” for his eloquent writings on the love of God. On the other hand, he rallied soldiers to kill Muslims. He wrote eloquently on humility; then again, he loved being close to the seat of power and was an adviser to five popes. What Bernard is remembered for today, more than his reforming zeal and crusade preaching, is his mystical writings. His best known work is On Loving God, in which he states his purpose at the beginning: “You wish me to tell you why and how God should be loved. My answer is that God himself is the reason he is to be loved.”

dsc_0068His other great literary legacy is Sermons on the Song of Songs, 86 sermons on the spiritual life that, in fact, only tangentially touch on the biblical text. One passage in particular speaks aptly to Bernard’s lifelong passion to know God (and, likely, the temptations that troubled him):dsc_0066dsc_0067

Goff B389 ; Bod-inc,; B-178; GW; 3929; Hain-Copinger; 2926*; ISTC,; ib00389000; O

ISTC: U.S.A: (three copies) The Newberry Library; Western Michigan Univ.;Free Library of Philadelphia(-8 leaves);Library of Congress.

Back from the Bookbinder!

back from the bookbinder 7/26/2016
back from the bookbinder 7/26/2016

From Left to Right :

781G Gassendi,  820G Descartes,  695G The Earl of Rochester,  154F Thomas Browne, 904F Pseudo Aristotle, 815G John Fisher.

 

781G Pierre Gassendi 1592-1655

Petri Gassendi Disquisitio metaphysica seu dubitationes et instantiae: adversus Renati Cartessi metaphysicam & responsa.

DSC_0032

Amsterodami : Apud Iohannem Blaev ;1644              ON HOLD

DSC_0029 Quarto *4, **4, A-Z4, Aa-Rr4    First Edition Bound in original full sheep skin with gilt spine and label.This is a nice clean copy.       For many commentators, Gassendi’s empiricist theory of knowledge and objections to Descartes’s Meditations count as his paramount philosophical contributions. In his core epistemology, he offers the first modern model of knowledge from the senses to be integrated with a physiological account of perception. In his objections to Descartes, he rejects the clarity and distinctness criterion, seeks to undermine the reasoning behind the cogito, and assails the ontological argument. Each of these views represents a battle Gassendi has taken up against the Aristotelian tradition or the Cartesian stance; his thoroughgoing empiricism poses an alternative to both of these competing perspectives.One cornerstone of Gassendi’s anti-Aristotelianism is the suggestion that there is nothing necessary about the way the world is. God, he proposes, could have made the world work in any number of ways, and the contingent history and character of Creation means that there is nothing immutable about the essence of a material thing. (That a ‘substance’, in either the Aristotelian or Cartesian sense, might have an immutable essence, is a different matter, and insofar as Gassendi has such a notion (for example, with respect to space, time, matter, and void) he agrees that such things feature unchangeable sine qua non characteristics.) Moreover, Gassendi maintains, regardless of whether there are any essences and whether they might be mutable, there are none to which we have any epistemic access. The sole originating source of our knowledge is the information the senses provide, such that what we know is closely linked to what we can perceive. However, as Descartes notes, we can perceive only appearances. Gassendi draws from this point the very uncartesian lesson that appearances are all we can know about, too—thereby ruling out knowledge of unperceivable essences. One line of this reasoning can be found in his discussion of classical skeptical tropes concerning the relativity of evidence from the senses to individual experience—that honey tastes sweet to me, though bitter to you; and that fire seems hot to us, though not so to insects that live near fire (O III (DM) 388b; R 535). Since different people have distinct experiences, our knowledge of honey’s taste or fire’s heat differs from person to person and thus is not a reliable guide to invariable characteristics of, for example, the honey or fire. In cases like these we know a thing’s qualities only as we record them on a subjective basis. Such sensory information, based on experiences which vary intersubjectively, cannot yield judgments about a thing’s qualities which do not vary in that (or any other) way. Hence we lack knowledge of the thing’s essence, if indeed there is one. More broadly, from our principal source of ideas—the senses—we know only how things appear to us (O III (DM) 311b-312a; R 184). (If we are to have knowledge of an object’s essence, Gassendi proposes, such requires a “perfect interior examination” of that object, which is apparently not something we may gain from empirical study.)

______________________________________________________

820G Descartes Renati

Descartes Epistolæ, partim ab auctore latino sermone conscriptæ, partim ex gallico translatæ. In quibus omnis generis quæstiones philosophicæ tractantur, & explicantur plurimæ difficultates quæ in reliquis ejus operibus occurunt .

Amstelodami: ex typographia Blaviana, 1682      $ON HOLDDSC_0028 (1)

Three Quarto volumes vol I :*4, A-Z4, Aa-Zz4, Aaa-Bbb4/vol II :*2, A-Z4, Aa-Zz4, Aaa-Ddd4, Eee-Fff2/vol III : *-**4, A-Z4, Aa-Zz4, Aaa-Ggg4, Hhh2v. 1: *4, A-Z, Aa-ZZ, Aaa-Bbb4 ; v. 2: *2, A-Z, Aa-Zz, Aaa-Ddd4, Eee-Fff2 ; v. 3: *-**4, A-Z, Aa-Zz, Aaa-Ggg4, Hhh2 edited by Claude Clerselier, with portions translated by Johannes de Raei tanslated by Johannes de Raei Tít. en port. de la pars tertia: Renati Descartes Epistolae partim Latino sermone conscriptae partim è Gallico in Latinum versae : in quibus respondet ad plures difficultates ipsi propositas in dioptrica, geometria, variisque aliarum scientiarum subjectis Otegem, M. Bibliography Descartes, S. 647-651: A.J. Guibert, “Bibliographie des oeuvres de René Descartes publiées au XVIIe siècle”, Paris, 1976, p. 91-94

659G John. Earl of Rochester Wilmot 1647-1680 Poems, (&c.) on several occasions: with Valentinian: a tragedy. Written by the right honourable John late earl of Rochester. London: Printed for Jacob Tonson, 1696 4600 Octavo 11 x 17.5 cm A8,a8, B-R8 Second edition. This copy is rebound in a full cald cambridge panneled style, with new endpapers. There is worming and damp staining yet is is a solid usable copy “During Rochester’s lifetime only a few of his writings were printed as broadsides or in miscellanies, but many of his works were known widely from manuscript copies, a considerable number of which seem to have existed. […] In February of 1690/91, Jacob Tonson, the most reputable publisher of the day, produced a volume entitled ‘Poems On Several Occasions.’ The appearance of the author’s name and title on the title-page is significant. It may indicate that this edition was produced with the approval of the Earl’s family and friends, and it is possible that they may have intervened to prevent the publication of Saunders’s projected edition [license obtained from the Stationer’s Company by Saunders in November of 1690, no edition was ever produced]. Tonson’s edition is introduced by a laudatory preface written by Thomas Rymer which states that the book contains ‘such Pieces only, as may be receiv’d in a vertuous Court’ and is therefore to be regarded only as a selection of Rochester’s writings. Nevertheless it contains, in addition to twenty-three genuine poems which had appeared in the [pirated] Antwerp editions of 1680, sixteen others, including some of Rochester’s best lyrics. No spurious material seems to have been admitted to this collection, but there is a possibility that salacious passages may have been toned down to suit the taste of a ‘virtuous Court.’”“[Wilmot] is one of these English poets who deserve to be called ‘great’ as daring and original explorers of reality; his place is with such memorable spiritual adventurers as Marlowe, Blake, Byron, Wilfred Owen and D. H. Lawrence. Like Byron and Lawrence, he was denounced as licentious, because he was a devastating critic of conventional morality. Alone among the English poets of his day, he perceived the full significance of the intellectual and spiritual crisis of that age. His poetry expresses individual experience in a way that no other poetry does till the time of Blake. It makes us feel what it was like to live in a world which had been suddenly transformed by the scientists into a vast machine governed by mathematical laws, where God has become a remote first cause and man an insignificant ‘reas’ning Engine.’ [See ‘A Satyr Against Mankind] In his time there was beginning the great Augustan attempt to found a new orthodoxy on the Cartesian-Newtonian world-picture, a civilized city of good taste, common sense and reason. Rochester’s achievement was to reject this new orthodoxy at the very outset. He made three attempts to solve the problem of man’s position in the new mathematical universe. The first was the adoption of the ideal of the purely aesthetic hero, the ‘Strephon’ of his lyrics and the brilliant and fascinating Dorimant of Etherege’s comedy. It was a purely selfish ideal of the ethical hero, the disillusioned and penetrating observer of the satires. This ideal was related to truth, but its relationship was purely negative. The third was the ideal of the religious hero, who bore a positive relation to truth. This was the hero who rejected the ‘Fools-Coat’ of the world and lived by an absolute passion for reality. In his short life Rochester may be said to have anticipated the Augustan Age and the Romantic Movement and passed beyond both. In the history of English thought his poetry is an event of the highest significance. Much of it remains alive in its own right in the twentieth century, because it is what D.H. Lawrence called ‘poetry of this immediate present, instant poetry … the soul and the mind and body surging at once, nothing left out.” (Quoted from Vivian de Sola Pinto’s edition of Wilmot’s Poems published by ‘The Muses Library’) Wing 1757; Prinz XIV;Grolier’s Wither to Prior #987; O’Donnell A 16 (Prologue), BB 4.1c.

DSC_0031 DSC_0031

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

____________________________________________________________________

682F Anne, Countess of Winchilsea Finch 1661-1720

The Spleen, A Pindarique Ode. By a Lady. Together with A Prospect of Death: A Pindarique Essay.

DSC_0043

London: Printed and Sold by H. Hills, in Black-fryars, near the Water-side, 1709 $1,800

Octavo 7 x 4.25 inches A8. 16 pp. First separate edition. This copy bound in full modern vellum, DSC_0042it is quite a lovely copy. .

“The physical disability and psychological perturbations of melancholy were well known to one of the foremost women poets of the eighteenth century, Anne Finch, Countess of Winchilsea. As a victim of the malady, her description of its effects were firsthand and specific, with none of the generalities born of vague knowledge […] Lady Winchilsea begins her best-known poem on the subject, ‘The Spleen’ (1701), by describing the malady as ‘Proteus to abus’d Mankind.’ No one can find the cause of the affliction, she writes, nor can one ‘fix thee to remain in one continued Shape.’ By speaking of melancholy in these terms, Lady Winchilsea is echoing the sentiments of contemporary physicians who frequently compared the disease to Proteus, the shape-changing god of the sea, because its manifestations were always changing, continuously shifting from one part of the body to another, while constantly mimicking other diseases. Underlying its various forms, however, was the notion expounded by the Countess and contemporary physicians alike that melancholy was a mixed malady of body and mind, causing the sufferer physical pain and the psychological disorders of anxiety, grief, and fear without cause.” (Melancholy in Anne Finch and Elizabeth Carter, by John F. Sena)“‘Spleen’ is for Finch both triumph and failure. It is only once the spleen has affected the speaker that she describes her poetry as fallen, decayed failure. But, at the same time, the spleen allows her to assert that she does not wish to be a genteel woman artist, one who makes safe, insipid domestic arts or uncritically draws the monarch’s ‘undistinguish’d Face.’ ‘The Spleen’ returns to the overlap of political religious, and emotional failure in its closing lines with a description of Richard Lower, a physician to Charles II who supported the Whigs in the Popish Plot, sinking beneath the weight of the spleen.” (English Women’s Poetry, 1649-1714, by Carol Barash) Foxon F141; ESTC 006421564.

_______________________________________________________________

 

145F Thomas Browne 1605-1682

Religio Medici. The sixth edition, corrected and amended. With Annnotations Never before published, upon all the obscure passages therein. Also Observations by sir Kenelm Digby, Newly added.

DSC_0041

London: Printed by Tho. Milbourn For Andrew Crook, 1659 $1,600

Octavo 6 x 3.75 inches A,A-T8, A-E8. Fifth/sixth edition. This copy is bound in later smooth calf, gilt ruled edges, all edges gilt. gilt spine with a red. leather label.recently expertly rebacked. Hand marbled end sheets, gilt dentelles, quite a nice copy.

It is far from clear that Thomas Browne ever considered publishing Religio Medici, his first and most influential work. Written during his medical apprenticeship in the mid-1630s, this essay on the religion of a doctor was (in typical fashion) circulated in multiple manuscripts among friends for seven years until 1642, when Andrew Crooke, an enterprising publisher of controversialist writing, obtained it and printed it anonymously, without the author’s permission or knowledge. What Browne would later describe as “a private exercise directed to myself” was an immediate commercial success, and Crooke quickly brought out a second edition. Browne, meanwhile, had wind of a work about to be published by the colourful savant Sir Kenelm Digby, apparently responding to Browne’s essay. He immediately set about revising the pirated text for authorised publication in 1643. Together with Digby’s Observations upon Religio Medici, the 1643 edition, now with Browne’s name on it, established his reputation in English and Continental writing.DSC_0040

Religio Medici has been described as spiritual autobiography, but it has in fact only occasional resemblance to the true seventeenth-century exponents of the form like Lucy Hutchinson and John Aubrey. Although Browne’s subject is his own beliefs, the essay is better understood as a manifesto (a very modest and retiring one, it is true), a proclamation of tolerant Anglicanism in a period of repressive Laudian intervention and rising sectarian dissent. He uses his own history of theological discovery and devotional meditation to propose a generous conception of religious practice and belief. This generosity was received with mixed enthusiasm in some quarters: the book was placed on the Vatican’s Index Expurgatorius in 1645 (where it apparently remained until the mid-twentieth-century), while the most vocal English critics suspected Browne of Papistry and atheism; the Quakers, on the other hand, invited him to become a member of their church.Religio Medici is divided into two unequal parts, each comprising short numbered considerations of a large variety of doctrinal and devotional questions. It is impossible to give a categorical label to the range of discussion to be found in Religio Medici, but among its most important topics are the contention and reconciliation of faith and reason (especially aptly discussed by the scientifically-trained Browne), the absolute credit of Scripture on points of faith and the human condition after the fall of man, and the consequent responsibilities of the Christian. Within these great matters, Browne has room to tell of his own early flirtation with various minor heresies, and of his attitudes toward church-music, sex, and medicine. The overall effect is the portrait of a particular personality and background, a deliberating and open mind tenaciously investigating the conditions of faith, equivocal in some points, absolute in others. It is the work of a young, and to a large extent untried, man (although its vocal youthfulness is consciously disguised), and it displays, along with its prodigious learning and mature phrasing, the inexperienced optimism of youth. The structure of thought suggests a sensibility in process, a Montaigne-like fluidity and latitude of conclusion within which he can establish the philosophical registers of significance. For example, he believes absolutely in the last judgement, but he doubts the literal likelihood of “any such judicial proceeding or calling to the bar as, indeed, the Scriptures seem to imply”; he approves of any sort of music, including that of the tavern, as long as it puts him in mind of his Maker, and he therefore “distrust[s] the symmetry of those heads which declaim against all church music.” “I would not perish upon a ceremony, politic point, or indifferency,” he concludes, as if specifically remonstrating with those intransigents on both sides whose quarrel had initiated the violence which began in 1642 as Religio Medici appeared. Indeed, the sometimes casual-seeming ebb and flow of proposition and consideration, almost none of which is emphatic enough to preclude debate, is itself an enactment of the moderation and more relaxed postures he advocates, postures which if adopted more widely might forestall the threatened chaos of civil war, disestablishment and social disruption.Coleridge described Religio Medici as “a portrait of man in his best clothes”. If best clothes may be taken to be fine apparel, Browne’s meaning has been occluded by its astonishing expressive grace in the past four centuries. Always recognised as among the finest prose monuments in the language, its style – full of extended periods, easy qualifications, and memorable aphorisms – was widely imitated from the start; moreover, the simplistic notion of a professional framework for the discussion of personal philosophy issued in a spate of mostly undistinguished religio tracts – Religio Clerici, Religio Bibliopolae, Religio Jurisprudentis, Religio Militis, and so on. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the essay was often regarded as a source of fine remarks rendered in stunningly majestic phrases which were subject to extensive quotation but rarely to analysis. For example, “I love to lose myself in a mystery and pursue my reason to an O altitudo”; and “there is a nobility without heraldry, a natural dignity whereby one man is ranked with anothDSC_0028 (1)er, another filed before him, according to the quality of his desert, and the pre-eminence of his good parts.”Because he presents himself in Religio Medici as anything but an antagonist in the wars of religion of his own time, the essay attracted, until recently, far less rigorous scholarly and critical attention than it deserved, as if its cool eirenic message was somehow ignoble and thus licensed critical negligence. Even its most vociferous admirers – among them Johnson, Coleridge, and Emerson – allowed themselves to revel in the doctor’s
delightful formulations and mannerisms without deeply considering their basis in thought and belief. Thus, Religio Medici (together with several other works) has never been out of print, and yet it has never been truly in the centre of critical enquiry. Although this is not likely to change, recent work has attended with welcome precision to its relationship with the developing Montaignean essay format, with meditational practice, and with the rise of modern prose style.Despite the absence of biographical evidence about Browne’s life between 1630 and 1640, and whatever his tolerationist pronouncements in Religio Medici , there is good reason to think that Browne held well-developed political views about the mid-century constitutional and ecclesiastical crisis engulfing England. This is partly indicated by the prefatory letter to the reader which Browne appended to the 1643 edition, a piece of writing contemporary with the year’s events rather than with the essay’s origin. Moreover, his home city, Norwich, was a Parliamentary stronghold which nevertheless harboured – as all the major metropolises did – a significant number of staunch Royalists and political moderates, to which latter group Browne almost certainly belonged. Religio Medici, written and published in the midst of the turmoil, must therefore be read first and foremost as a political tract, an oblique one to be sure, but one whose pacifism, leniency, and common sense are probably more truly representative of the tenor of thought among the great English “silent majority” than many of its more tendentious contemporaries.Claire Preston, University of Cambridge 16 June 2003 Wing B-5174; Keynes 8.

 

_______________________________________________________________

904F  pseudo Aristotle  Possibly by William Salmon 1644-1713

Aristotle’s master-piece: or the secrets of generation display’d in all the parts thereof; Containing 1. The Signs of Barrenness. 2. The way of getting a Boy or Girl. 3. Of the likeness of Children to Parents. 4. Of the Infusion of the Soul into the Infant. 5. Of monstrous Births and the Reasons thereof. 6. Of the benefit of Marriage to both Sexes. 7. The Prejudice of unequal Matches. 8. The discovery of Insufficiency. 9. The cause and cure of the Green-Sickness. 10 A Discourse of Virginity. 11. How a Midwise ought to be qualified. 12. Directions and Cantions to Midwives. 13. Of the Organs of Generation in Women. 14. The Fabrick of the Womb. 15 The use and action of the Genitals. 16. Signs of Conception, and whether of a Male or Female, 17. To discover false Conception. 18. Instructions for Women with Child. 19. For preventing Misoarriage 20. For Women in Childbed, 21. Of ordering new-born Infants; and many other very useful Particulars, To which is added, A word of Advice to both Sexes in the Act of Copulation, and the Pictures of several Monstrens Births. Very necessary for all midwives, nurses and young-married-women.

DSC_0037London : printed for W.B. and to be sold by most booksellers in London and Westminster, 1704. $ ON HOLD Duodecimo 134X85 cm A1-G12 H9 (lacking final three leaves) This copy is rebound in full sheep binding, This is a book which has expirenced heavy use.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Originally (first) published in 1684, this extremely popular work on generation and sexual reproduction was still being printed well into the 19th century. Despite it’s popularity or because of it it turns out that all early editions are rare, and there are very few pre 1741 editions in this country. English Short Title Catalog, T83424. Listing only one copy, of the 1704 at the University of Minnesota with the note “MATCHERS BEWARE! another issue without hyphen between “married “and “women”. Also, end of title reads…sexes in the act of copulation. Very necessary for all…” There is another 1704 edition at Ohio State listing 135 pages (this edn is 183) . This book has often been attributed to the popular medical writer William Salmon because a prefatory poem to the 2nd version (first published 1697) bears the initials “W.S.”. However, there is no evidence that Salmon had any role in the book’s composition 13 years earlier . The work was in fact assembled from Levinus Lemnius’s The Secret Miracles of Nature (1564) and Jakob Rüff’s midwifery manual De conceptu et generatione hominis (1554). The attribution to Aristotle is totally spurious and was probably a vain attempt to give the work some measure of DSC_0028 (2)respectability; but although it was effectively banned until the mid-twentieth century, the prohibition didn’t keep it from circulating: it was reprinted endlessly until the early twentieth century and became one of the most notorious and widely distributed sex books in the English language, right up to the 1960s. Such enduring popularity was partly due to the practical advice on pregnancy and the care of infants, and partly to its rather sensationalised descriptions of the sexual act and forms of monstrosity.

More than a Guide for the Delivery of children, this is a true HOW-TO book on conception, as you can see from the image excerpted below it is quite graphic even by standards three hundred years advanced.

“Aristotle’s Masterpiece was the most popular book about women’s bodies, sex, pregnancy, and childbirth in Britain and America from its first appearance in 1684 up to at least the 1870s. More than 250 editions are known, but all are very rare… It was sold furtively by country peddlers and in general stores and taverns; regular booksellers seldom advertised it, though they usually had it under the counter” (The Library Company of Philadeplphia, ‘Treasures’, online catalogue).

” Aristotle’s Masterpiece, a manual of sex and pregnancy, first saw the light of day about 1680. It is not, of course, the work of the ancient Greek philosopher, but its true authorship is unclear. Other works by the same or other hands were accreted to the original “Masterpiece” until by about 1735 the four parts here published made up the canon. Banned in Britain until the 1960’s, it nonetheless has had a long but mostly clandestine career as a quasi-pornographic book. Grubby copies were produced in back-street printers, sold in rubber-goods shops or Holywell Street, and passed from hand to hand until they disintegrated. Many young boys got their first inklings of sex from it. It was also sometimes given by their mothers to women about to get married; the effect it had on the mind of a virgin bride can only be conjectured. It has been read (or at any rate mentioned) by James Joyce, William Carleton, Evelyn Waugh, Anthony Burgess and many others, and probably has had more influence than is realized.”

DSC_0029

There is a wonderful article by Fissell, Mary E. (2007). “Hairy Women and Naked Truths: Gender and the Politics of Knowledge in Aristotle’s Masterpiece”. The William and Mary Quarterly 60 (1): 43–74. JSTOR 3491495., available on Jstore follow the link.

“Although little-known today, Aristotle’s Masterpiece was the go-to book for generations of British and American readers, male and female, who wanted to know about sex and making babies. Long after medical theories about reproduction and childbirth had changed, the book continued to promise readers access to hidden secrets and titillating details, a promise whose luster seems to have remained bright until almost yesterday.”

Mary Fissell teaches the history of medicine at Johns Hopkins and edits the Bulletin of the History of Medicine. She writes about the ways that ordinary people in the past understood the natural world and their bodies. Vernacular Bodies (Oxford, 2004) explored how everyday ideas about making babies mediated large scale social changes. She is currently writing a cultural history of Aristotle’s Masterpiece.”

The publication history of the work is discussed in some detail in Roy Porter and Lesley Hall’s The Facts of Life (pp. 54-64) and Mary Fissell’s “Hairy Women and Naked Truths” (p. 47).
The Facts of Life
The Creation of Sexual Knowledge in Britain, 1650-1950
Roy Porter and Lesley Hall
03/20/95, Cloth
$65.00
ISBN: 9780300062212
Vernacular Bodies: The Politics of Reproduction in Early Modern England
Mary E. Fissell (2007-01-18) Paperback

____________________________________________

 

815G John Fisher 1469-1535

Sacri sacerdotij defensio cõtra Lutherum, per Reuerendissimu Dominum, dominum Johannem Roffeñ. Episcopum, virum singulari eruditione omnifariam doctissimum, iam primum ab Archetypo euulgata. Cum tabula et repertorio tractatorum.

DSC_0033

Colonie : Petri Quentel, 1525.                                                       $3,000

DSC_0034

A8B4,a-G8. This copy is bound in modern full calf.

Octavo A8B4,a-G8. One of three eds. printed by Quentel in 1525. One of the others is in 4to (Kuczynski 821)–and the other, in 8vo, has title 1st line: “Sacri sacerdotij defensio” (Kuczynski 823)./ Ed. by “frater Johãnes Romberch” (leaf [2]). Marginal notes printed throughout./ Includes index, leaves A3–B1.

“Sacri sacerdotii defensio contra Lutherum” is a defense of the priesthood by arguments in favor of tradition against innovation and a divine sanction of the priesthood. Kuczynski, A. Thesaurus libellorum historiam Reformationis,; 822; BM STC German, 1465-1600,; p. 458; Pegg, M. Pamphlets in Swiss libraries,; 2493; VD-16,; F-1238; Adams,; F-547

DSC_0035

DSC_0038

 

A most satisfying book: Boethius ,a Consolation of Philosophy

Boethius 1501
Boethius 1501

Boetius de philosophico consolatu, siue, De consolatio[n]e philosophi[a]e

Edward Gibbon  in The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire  stated that  A consolation of Philosophy  is  “A golden volume not unworthy of the leisure of Plato or Tully.” And C. S. Lewis, in “The Discarded Image: An Introduction to Medieval and Renaissance Literature, 1964, rightly tells us “To acquire a taste for it is almost to become naturalised in the Middle Ages.”. The Consolation of Philosophy was the most copied and circulated secular text in the European middlDSC_0084e ages, the influence of Boethius’s Consolatio Philosophiae should not be under-estimated — some four hundred copies survive in manuscript form, making it one of the most widely disseminated pieces of writing during the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Even today, this would serve as a good starting point for someone unfamiliar with the history of philosophy, and wanted to take a first plunge in the
company of a great mind from the past.  The Copy I currently have Was Printed in Straßburg Per Iohannem Grüninger, 1501

DSC_0103

This Wonderful copy is bound in its original full calf covered wooden boards, it was blind stamped and had clasps to hold it safely closed, these are now  long gone but their presence can be  traced by the indentations carved in the boards and the remaining brass brads.

Rear Cover
Rear Cover
Front board
Front board

This Edition is illustrated with woodcuts,many of which were colored at the time of printing, making this a visual treat on every page. The type faces and the layout of the pages themselves are exotic to the modern eye and transport us back to a tradition of textual exegesis whix=ch is all but forgotten.DSC_0096 (1)

 

667G Anicius Manlius Torquatus Severinus Boethius  a.d.480-525

Boetius de Philosophico consolatu siue de consolatio[n]e philosophi[a]e: cu[m] figur ornatissimis nouit expoli

Straßbourg: J. Gruninger, 8 September 1501.                         $Sold

Small folio 11 ¼ x 7 inches. [ ]6, A4, B-X6,Y8. First illustrated edition. In this copy many of the seventy eight woodcuts  have very nice original color, it is bound in full blind stamped calf over wooden boards. It is also rubicated throughout. There are two library stamps and a release Endorsement ‘Dupl. ” Wiener K.K. Theres. It is a large and lovely copy of an important and beautiful book.DSC_0089 (1)

“Boethius is known as author of the Consolation of Philosophy and of several theological treatises. From them no theory of knowledge emerges clearly, for the concern is not primarily there with knowing, although distinctions and differentiations relevant to it are frequent.  The Consolation of Philosophy is committed (by way of Proclus’ commentary on the Timaeus, it has been suggested) to a platonic doctrine of ideas and of reminiscence: the soul is of divine elements on which its knowledge depends; it is in need only of the quickening power of sense perception to arouse it to a knowledge of ideas at rest within it. The developments of that notion bring echoes, one after the other, of pythagoreanism, neoplatonism, stoicism, and augustinism. Yet, as if these came too near to a dereliction from aristotelian principles, Boethius expounds the Trinity, in the work which shows most clearly the augustinian influence, by applying the ten categories to the persons and their relations. At the bottom of these diversified philosophic affiliations is the conviction, often explicit, that there was a single philosophy of the Greeks, to be grasped best in the reconciliation of Plato and Aristotle. That, however, was a lesson Boethius had learned from pagan roman philosophers; even before the coming of Christianity a change in the attitude toward philosophy had instituted a metaphysical conservatism. The distinctions by which the greeks thought to have divided themselves into opposed schools are needless subtleties when abstract thought is to be invoked (as it is in the very title of four works of Seneca and one work of Boethius) for refuge, or salvation, or relief, or consolation” (quoted from Selections from Medieval Philosophers I, by Richard McKeon, page 68-69).

The”Consolation of Philosophie” was written while Boethius was in prison and deprived of the use of his library, on false charges of treason against Theodoric, the Ostrogoth, then ruler of Rome. “Within a year he was a solitary prisoner at Pavia, stripped of honours, wealth, and friends, with death hanging over him, and a terror worse than death, in the fear lest those dearest to him should be involved in the worst results of his downfall. It is in this situation that the opening of the ‘Consolation of Philosophy’ brings Boethius before us. He represents himself as seated in his prison distraught with grief, indignant at the injustice of his misfortunes, and seeking relief for his melancholy in writing verses descriptive of his condition. Suddenly there appears to him the Divine figure of Philosophy, in the guise of a woman of superhuman dignity and beauty, who by a succession of discourses convinces him of the vanity of regret for the lost gifts of fortune, raises his mind once more to the contemplation of the true good, and makes clear to him the mystery of the world’s moral government.”(H.R. JAMES, M.A.,

  1. CH. OXFORD 1897.)

 

In this prosimetrical apocalyptic dialogue, Boethius our narrator encounters Lady-Philosophy , who appears in his time of need, the muse of poetry has in short failed him.  Philosophy  dresses  among great protest Boethius’ bad interpretations and misunderstandings of fate and free will…. One thousand five hundred years later It is still fair to ask, the same questions which Boethius asks..DSC_0100

 

 

And  Philosophy answers:“The judgment of most people is based not on the merits of a case but on the fortune of its outcome; they think that only things which turn out happily are good.”

“You have merely discovered the two-faced nature of this blind goddess [Fortune] … For now she has deserted you, and no man can ever be secure until he has been deserted by Fortune.”

“I [Fortune] spin my wheel and find pleasure in raising the low to a high place and lowering those who were on top. Go up, if you like, but only on condition that you will not feel abused when my sport requires your fall.”DSC_0092 (1)

 

Proctor 9886; Schmidt vol. I, 57; Chrisman C1.1.4,2; Adams B-2283; VD16 B6404; Hind, History of the Woodcut II,339-340; Redgrave Bibliographica II, 53; Not in OCLC. See also Chadwick: ‘Boethius’ 1981 Oxford, and Pelikan, The Reformation of the Bible 1996, p 88, I.8.

 

How Blest Is He

How blest is he who could discern

The bright source of the good,

How blest, for he could slip the chains

Of earth, which weigh men down!

 

— Boethius, Consolation of Philosophy (3:12)

 

It is not that often that a book of medieval philosophy has so much direct connection to contemporary situations, yet remains so strange, alas there is a golden chain of being (scala naturae) to be found in this most satisfying book.

 

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: