Dragos Calma

Heymeric de Campo († 1460) discusses the Trinity several times in a largely unpublished metaphysical treatise, the Colliget principiorum. This paper analyses only some of these references, especially in relation to the creation of the world, which Heymeric understands in two stages : first as a creation in thought by the Father in the Son, and then as an outflow from the Trinity through the participation of the Holy Spirit. To better situate this position in the medieval context, the paper shows that some authors associate the thesis of creation in the Word with the archetypal world of Plato’s Timaeus, while others reject it, such as Albert the Great. Heymeric de Campo chooses an intermediate path : he accepts that creation in the Son is the archetypal world, but he stresses that the latter neither exists nor acts outside the Trinity. This can be interpreted as a reaction against the Prague realists (Jerome of Prague and John Hus) condemned at the Council of Constance. Heymeric draws on Albert’s interpretation of Proposition IV of the Liber de causis to show that God’s going out from the Trinity is through a particular type of flow of the first created being. This first created being is a third kind of being, neither that of the Creator nor that of the creature, but creation. It is passage and becoming, that by which God manifests himself and allows himself to be known. Heymeric calls it quid neutrum and quo fit, an indeterminate being, simple but filled with forms, both finite and infinite, a form without form, but informing and transporting forms (in an inchoative manner). Yet it is the subject of metaphysics, and that opens a different perspective from that of the onto‑theology to which we are accustomed.

Nicolas d’Autrécourt (c. 1298-1369) est l’un des penseurs les plus audacieux de l’histoire de la philosophie, et Zénon Kaluza, qui lui a consacré près de trente ans d’études, nous le fait découvrir par ses sources, ses doctrines et ses manuscrits. Ce livre propose notamment des analyses sur des thèmes importants (tels que la perception, la causalité finale, les catégories ou l’éternité du monde) ainsi qu’une nouvelle édition des Prologues de l’Exigit ordo, enrichie d’un commentaire suivi. Les études—dont certaines sont parues mais difficiles d’accès et d’autres sont inédites—dévoilent la figure d’un philosophe désirant de libérer la philosophie des contraintes institutionnelles et de critiquer la métaphysique d’Aristote, au risque de bouleverser les traditions, de contredire les dogmes de la foi et se voir condamner par les autorités théologiques de son temps. Nicolas d'Autrécourt (c. 1298-1369) is one of the most daring thinkers in the history of philosophy, and Zénon Kaluza, who has devoted to him nearly thirty years of study, presents him to us through his sources, his doctrines and his manuscripts. The reader will find studies on some of the most relevant philosophical doctrines (such as perception, the final causality, the categories and the eternity of the world) as well as a new edition of the Prologues of the _Exigit ordo_, enriched with a running commentary. The texts gathered here—some of which have been published previously but are difficult to access and others which have been unpublished until now—reveal a philosopher who wished to free philosophy from institutional constraints and dared to criticize Aristotle's metaphysics, at the risk of upsetting traditions and contradicting the dogmas of the faith, and who was condemned by the theological authorities of his time.

One of the most important texts in the history of medieval philosophy, the Book of Causes was composed in Baghdad in the 9th century mainly from the Arabic translations of Proclus' Elements of Theology. In the 12th century, it was translated from Arabic into Latin, but its importance in the Latin tradition was not properly studied until now, because only 6 commentaries on it were known. Our exceptional discovery of over 70 unpublished Latin commentaries mainly on the Book of Causes, but also on the Elements of Theology, prove, for the first time, that the two texts where widely disseminated and commented on throughout many European universities (Paris, Oxford, Erfurt, Krakow, Prague), from the 13th to the 16th century. These two volumes provide 11 editions (partial or complete) of the newly-discovered commentaries, and yields, through historical and philosophical analyses, new and essential insights into the influence of Greek and Islamic Neoplatonism in the Latin philosophical traditions."--P. [4] of cover.

New perspectives on the various aspects of the theme of tradition in the Middle Ages.00The volume studies how philosophical traditions were understood and discussed in the middle ages and how they were used in formulating new ones. In addition, it analyzes the extent to which historians have reconstructed the subject. Bringing together seventeen case studies ranging from Hugues de Saint-Victor to Pietro Pomponazzi, the volume presents an all-encompassing perspective on the theme of "tradition".0.

Reading Proclus and the Book of Causes, published in three volumes, is a fresh, comprehensive understanding of Proclus' legacy in the Hellenic, Byzantine, Islamic, Latin and Hebrew traditions. The history of the Book of Causes, an Islamic adaptation of mainly Proclus' Elements of Theology and Plotinus' Enneads, is reconsidered on the basis of newly discovered manuscripts. This first volume enriches our understanding of the diverse reception of Proclus' Elements of Theology and of the Book of Causes in the Western tradition where universities and religious schools offered unparalleled conditions of diffusion. The volume sheds light on overlooked authors, texts, literary genres and libraries from all major European universities from the 12th to the 16th centuries.

L’article présente d’abord les débats concernant les commentaires sur la Physique attribués à Siger de Brabant et considère ensuite la possibilité de lui attribuer celui que nous éditons ici. L’examen de critique interne essaie de dégager les doctrines fondamentales et de les comparer avec plusieurs textes de la même période. Les fortes ressemblances littéraires et doctrinales entre cet inédit et les œuvres de Siger de Brabant constituent la preuve que ce commentaire a bien été composé par ce dernier. Ce commentaire apporte des éléments très importants contre l’hypothèse d’un changement doctrinal de Siger de Brabant.

Résumé L'article propose une première approche systématique de la tradition manuscrite du Liber de causis, en étudiant à la fois les variantes manuscrites et les difficultés doctrinales suscitées par la translittération de l'arabe al-ʿaql conservée dans la traduction latine. Certains médiévaux (tel Albert le Grand) l'entendent comme un concept sans équivalent en latin, forgé par des philosophes arabes dont on ignore tout. D'autres médiévaux (tels Thomas d'Aquin et Gilles de Rome), qui ont probablement connu une branche différente de la tradition manuscrite du Liber de causis, n'en font aucune mention. En examinant cent dix manuscrits latins du Liber de causis (sur deux cent soixantecinq actuellement connus), on constate de nombreuses variations tant pour la présence de cette translittération dans les propositions du texte que pour les formes et les graphies (alatyr, alachili, adlahic, etc.). Cette analyse permet de comprendre tant la position d'Albert que la grande diversité, jusqu’à présent insoupçonnée, de la transmission du Liber de causis dans le monde latin.

Pierre Hadot famously claimed that, between Antiquity and German Idealism, Western philosophy had lost its practical role of guiding the life of the practitioner. Scholars who challenged this view focused on two medieval models. This article argues that the overlooked work Colliget principiorum iuris naturalis, divini et humani philosophice doctrinalium by Heymericus de Campo postulates a third model. On the basis of St. Paul’s teaching about the “inner man,” Heymericus reconsiders the Aristotelian doctrines of abstraction and of being as such in relation to the Neoplatonic model of intellectual progression and interior conversion. In a realist conceptual framework, he holds that only metaphysics reflects the true nature of the human being inasmuch as it presupposes a way of life that assumes both the interaction with and withdrawal from the sensible world. However, Heymericus’ theory is neither limited to nor conditioned by Christian principles, but by Peripatetic philosophy.

An unpublished Latin commentary, never mentioned in the secondary literature, is in Augbsburg, Staats- und Stadtbibliothek, 4° Cod 68 ff. 272va-278ra. The same hand copies the text of the Liber de causis (which precedes it), the interlinear glosses (sometimes used in the exegesis) and the commentary. This is most likely the result of an oral teaching, as the author refers to a previous lectio. The article discusses the explicit quotations of Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas and Proclus, and shows that the anonymous author offers an original hypothesis about the author of the Liber de causis, that he openly criticizes Thomas Aquinas’ theory of substantial forms, but he often uses Thomas to quote Proclus.

L’article décrit et publie la première et la deuxième partie du Colliget principiorum iuris naturalis, divini et humani philosophice doctrinalium, écrit par Heymeric de Campo en 1434 à la demande de Nicolas de Cues. Le texte est conservé dans le codex Cusanus 106 à Bernkastel-Kues et représente un des très rares traités de métaphysique écrit durant le Moyen Âge latin indépendamment de la tradition des commentaires à Aristote. Le Colliget cherche, de manière originale, à combiner l’idée d’une science de tout connaissable, reprise de Raymond Lulle, avec la tradition métaphysique aristotélicienne et sa réinterprétation par Albert le Grand.

Ce livre est consacré aux auteurs qui ont repris la pensée d’Averroès dans le monde latin entre 1250 et 1350. De nouvelles remarques sur la polysémie du terme averroista précèdent les grands thèmes abordés : le retour numériquement identique au corps corrompu, le rapport entre matière et puissance, la nécessité et la contingence, l’intellect agent et possible. Des manuscrits et des textes inédits jusqu’à ce jour sont au coeur des discussions qui apportent la preuve que des doctrines puisées dans l’œuvre d’Averroès circulaient entre les Universités de Paris, Oxford, Bologne et Padoue. Sans prétendre aborder tous les aspects de l'averroïsme latin de cette période, le livre reprend sur nouveaux frais des questions considérées comme résolues et propose de nouvelles perspectives de recherche.

The article presents the unknown tradition of the Latin commentaries on the Liber de causis from the thirteenth to the sixteenth century. On the basis of recent research, a new list of 56 commentaries has been established: 40 of them are unpublished, others are either lost or published in post-incunabula editions; researchers knew and cited most often only 6 commentaries (Roger Bacon Albert the Great, Siger of Brabant, Thomas Aquinas, ps.-Henry of Ghent and Giles of Rome). The new commentaries allow us to discuss certain historical hypothesis, especially the issue that the medieval authors neglected the metaphysics of Proclus. The manuscripts are held in various libraries of Europe (especially Erfurt, Krakow and Prague, but also Uppsala, Paris and Vienna) which demonstrates a wide distribution of the text. Indeed, the Liber de causis was taught not only at the Faculty of Arts in Paris around 1255, but also in the Dominican convent in the South of France in the first decades of the fourteenth century and at the Faculty of Arts in Krakow at the turn of the sixteenth century. First attributed by Latin authors to Aristotle, the Liber de causis was considered, after Thomas Aquinas’ commentary, an epitome of Proclus’ Elementatio Theologica, and has aroused great interest among the realist authors from the school of Albert the Great.