John Marenbon

This publication is intended to show the links between the philosophy written in the Middle Ages and that of today. Essays by over twenty medieval specialists, who are also familiar with contemporary discussions, explore areas in logic and philosophy of language, metaphysics, epistemology, moral psychology ethics, aesthetics, political philosophy, and philosophy of religion. Each topic has been chosen because it is of present philosophical interest, but a more-or-less-similar set of questions was also discussed in the Middle Ages. No party-line has been set about the extent of the similarity. Some writers (e.g. Panaccio on Universals and Cesalli on States of Affairs) argue that there are close continuities. Others (e.g. Thom on Logical Form and Pink on Freedom of the Will) stress the differences. All, however, share the aim of providing new analyses of medieval texts, and of writing in a manner that is clear and comprehensible to philosophers who are not medieval specialists. The volume, which begins with eleven articles looking at the history of medieval philosophy period by period, and region by region, constitutes a wide-ranging and up-to-date chronological survey of medieval philosophy. All four traditions—Greek, Latin, Islamic, and Jewish (in Arabic, and in Hebrew)—are considered, and the Latin tradition is traced from late antiquity through to the seventeenth century and beyond.

Magnanimity, especially as discussed by Aristotle, might seem to be one of the pagan virtues that would have been difficult to assimilate into a Christian ethical scheme. In fact, from the Fathers onwards, Christians welcomed _magnanimitas_ into their classifications of the virtues, basing their understanding of it, up until the thirteenth century, on Stoic sources. When they came, from the mid-1200s onwards, to read Aristotle’s discussion of magnanimity in his _Ethics_, the theologians—Aquinas above all—managed ingeniously to combine Aristotle’s description with the version of magnanimity that was already at home in Christian thought. In the fourteenth century, Giraut Ott and John Buridan, in different ways, came closer to Aristotle’s discussion, without suggesting that magnanimity should be suspect as a virtue for Christians. The one medieval writer who does seem to have had a strong sense of magnanimity as an attractive, but distinctively pagan virtue, cultivated by the damned rather than those destined for heaven, was Dante.

The philosophy discussed in this volume constitutes the intellectual and philosophical ideas of the medieval era, from Aquinas and Anselm, the intellectual philosophy of the Judaic and Arabic traditions, the Twelfth Century Renaissance and the philosophical ideas associated with the emergence of the universities. This volume provides a broad and scholarly introduction to the major authors and issues involved in the philosophical discourse of the medieval era, as well as some original interpretations of the philosophical writings addressed. It includes a glossary of technical terms and a chronological table of philosophical and other cultural events.

I was asked to contribute to this collection as an expert in mediaeval philosophy. But what help can a mere historian of mediaeval Latin philosophy give to understanding the problems surrounding Zär’a Ya‛ǝqob? This question should be regarded as the informal subtitle for my chapter, and the following pages are an attempt to answer it. The most obvious answer to the first question is linked to passages in the two Ḥatätas where a cosmological-type argument is proposed. How do these cosmological arguments compare with those put forward by mediaeval philosophers? The first part of this chapter (Section 1) undertakes this comparison: the results cast no direct light on the controversy about the authenticity of the Ḥatätas, but they help to limn the complexity of the issues involved. Mediaeval comparisons may help to show how such complexities should be treated. The second part begins (Section 2) by looking at the general questions of whether philosophy can be forged and what is the relationship between forgery and inauthenticity and then, using a selection of mediaeval examples (Section 3), especially the historiography of the dispute over the love letters of Abelard and Heloise-a dispute that presents some striking parallels with that over the Ḥatätas-investigates the complexity of the issues involved (Section 4). The final section (Section 5) shows how the methodological lessons learned from these mediaeval examples can be applied to the cases of Zär’a Ya‛ǝqob and Wäldä Ḥǝywät.

This Handbook is intended to show the links between the philosophy written in the Middle Ages and that being done today. Essays by over twenty medieval specialists, who are also familiar with contemporary discussions, explore areas in logic and philosophy of language, metaphysics, epistemology, moral psychology ethics, aesthetics, political philosophy and philosophy of religion. Each topic has been chosen because it is of present philosophical interest, but a more or less similar set of questions was also discussed in the Middle Ages. No party-line has been set about the extent of the similarity. Some writers (e.g. Panaccio on Universals; Cesalli on States of Affairs) argue that there are the closest continuities. Others (e.g. Thom on Logical Form; Pink on Freedom of the Will) stress the differences. All, however, share the aim of providing new analyses of medieval texts and of writing in a manner that is clear and comprehensible to philosophers who are not medieval specialists. The Handbook begins with eleven chapters looking at the history of medieval philosophy period by period, and region by region. They constitute the fullest, most wide-ranging and up-to-date chronological survey of medieval philosophy available. All four traditions - Greek, Latin, Islamic and Jewish (in Arabic, and in Hebrew) - are considered, and the Latin tradition is traced from late antiquity through to the seventeenth century and beyond.

The philosophy discussed in this volume constitutes the intellectual and philosophical ideas of the medieval era, from Aquinas and Anselm, the intellectual philosophy of the Judaic and Arabic traditions, the Twelfth Century Renaissance and the philosophical ideas associated with the emergence of the universities. This volume provides a broad and scholarly introduction to the major authors and issues involved in the philosophical discourse of the medieval era, as well as some original interpretations of the philosophical writings addressed. It includes a glossary of technical terms and a chronological table of philosophical and other cultural events.

This paper aims to show that the wellknown date of Medieval Philosophy, which stretches from 500 to 1500, hides its richness and influences (from previous thought and to posterior thought) and, at the same time, applies extremely rigid boundaries. Facing this theory here is defended the idea of a Long Middle Ages in the Philosophy of the broad Western tradition, which stretches from 200 to 1700. Along these pages, this thesis will be justified, and some objections will be faced, such as that it homogenizes different types of philosophy, that it underestimates the importance of modern science, or that it overlooks Renaissance Philosophy

Duns Scotus’s claim that the will, both human and divine, has a capacity for opposites at a single instant has been seen as a turning point in the history of modality. But historians have discovered anticipations of Scotus’s position in Robert Grosseteste and Peter John Olivi. I argue that none of these three authors focuses on modality or has a new modal theory, but that the discussions do show the development of a new view about freedom of the will and what is required for it. The discussions also raise the question of whether immutability (the impossibility of changing) is sufficient for God’s simplicity, or whether it must also be impossible for God to be in any way otherwise, as Grosseteste, but not Scotus, holds.

Peter Abelard (1079–1142 ce) was the most wide‐ranging philosopher of the twelfth century. He quickly established himself as a leading teacher of logic in and near Paris shortly after 1100. After his affair with Heloise, and his subsequent castration, Abelard became a monk, but he returned to teaching in the Paris schools until 1140, when his work was condemned by a Church Council at Sens. His logical writings were based around discussion of the “Old Logic”: Porphyry's Isagoge, aristotle'S Categories and On Interpretation and boethius'S textbook on topical inference. They comprise a freestanding Dialectica (“Logic”; probably c.1116), a set of commentaries (known as the Logica [Ingredientibus], c. 1119) and a later (c. 1125) commentary on the Isagoge (Logica Nostrorum Petititoni Sociorum or Glossulae). In a work Abelard called his Theologia, issued in three main versions (between 1120 and c.1134), he attempted a logical analysis of trinitarian relations and explored the philosophical problems surrounding God's claims to omnipotence and omniscience. The Collationes (“Debates,” also known as “Dialogue between a Christian, a Philosopher and a Jew”; probably c.1130) present a rational investigation into the nature of the highest good, in which the Christian and the Philosopher (who seems to be modeled on a philosopher of pagan antiquity) are remarkably in agreement. The unfinished Scito teipsum (“Know thyself,” also known as the “Ethics”; c.1138) analyses moral action.