• Home
  • Theology
  • Theological Quodlibeta in the Middle Ages: The Fourteenth Century (Brill's Companions to the Christian Tradition)

Theological Quodlibeta in the Middle Ages: The Fourteenth Century (Brill's Companions to the Christian Tradition)

This can be the second one of 2 volumes on theological quodlibeta, documents of distinctive disputations held prior to Christmas and Easter ca. 1230-1330, usually on the collage of Paris, during which viewers individuals requested the good masters of theology the questions for debate, questions de quolibet, approximately something. the range of the cloth and the authors stature make the style uniquely attention-grabbing. In quantity II, chapters by way of said specialists conceal the quodlibeta of John Duns Scotus, Peter Auriol, John of Pouilly, Peter of Auvergne, and Thomas Wylton; research the pertinent writings of the non secular orders, together with the clergymen, canons standard, and mendicants; revise our realizing of significant manuscripts containing quodlibeta; provide serious variants of important texts; and reveal how those writings are the most important for our wisdom of the historical past of issues in metaphysics and common philosophy. For all these drawn to medieval reports, specially highbrow history."

Show description

Quick preview of Theological Quodlibeta in the Middle Ages: The Fourteenth Century (Brill's Companions to the Christian Tradition) PDF

Show sample text content

Eight, 1151a16–17): “In actionibus autem quod cuius gratia principium, quemadmodum in mathematicis suppositiones. ” five Henricus Gand. , Summa. a. forty seven q. five (II f. 27v V): “quoniam secundum Philosophum et in Physicis et in Ethicis, finis in operandis se habet advert voluntatem sicut principium in speculandis advert intellectum: et ea quae sunt advert finem, sicut conclusiones. Sed in speculativis intellectus de necessitate assentit principiis, licet non conclusionibus; ergo et fini de necessitate aequiescit voluntas, licet non eis quae sunt advert finem.

F three illius] huius B || saltem] tamen B || certum videtur] videtur certum CDJ four divina] dei H || simpliciter om. F || simpliciter necessitatur] n. s. G || necessitatur] necessitetur H 6 necessario … eo] velit aliquod obiectum aliud ab illo necessario B || aliquod] aliud J || obiectum aliud] a. o. F || eo] illo CHJ isto DI 7 quod] quia? I || necessitate coactionis] c. n. AF || de … sermo] dub. D || qua] quo H eight posse om. C 8–9 posse oppositum] oppositum posse DI nine inest] est F’ non (lin. ) est F || alia] upload.

V: the former variants, except for Hentschel’s, have proven that manuscript V isn't sturdy. In those 3 questions it really is via a long way the worst when it comes to small error and massive omissions, of 25, thirteen, thirteen, thirteen, 10, and six phrases. W: even supposing Pattin did use witness W, he didn't document its variations, and Cannizzo didn't hire it. In those 3 questions it proves to be an the QUODLIBETA of peter of auvergne a hundred and five commonplace witness by way of small unshared blunders, however it has huge omissions of 25, sixteen, 10, and eight phrases.

22 sicut] ut AEFG n. 22 tactum est supra] e. t. EG est tractatum F n. 23 sic om. CIJ n. 23 Maior—inest] om. AEFH n. 24 dici potest] potest dici DI n. 24 volendi] volendi Ànem A voluntas B voluntatis Ànem C voluntatis DHI n. 24 nolle ] velle C upload. nisi ABC n. 24 velle . . . nolle] nolle . . . velle BCI n. 24 Àeri om. ABCDHIJ n. 24 nunc—nolibilis] = BE nunc autem Ànis non habet aliquam rationem nolibilis H Ànis autem non habet aliquam rationem nolibilis ACIJ Ànis autem non habet aliam rationem nolibilis DG si autem non habet rationem nolibilis F n.

The one awesome distinction among those witnesses is the best wording with which they finish the textual content; a few (namely, Padova, Biblioteca Universitaria 1125, and Paris, BnF, lat. 3062) finish the textual content with out copying “Tertium membrum,” whereas Padova, Biblioteca Capitolare C. 37, breaks off a lot in advance of the remaining, finishing the textual content in the midst of the answer to the query with those phrases: “. . . de primo habetur succincte . . . ”55 A moment workforce of manuscripts reproduces exclusively the opposite kind of the textual content, particularly, the reporter’s textual content, with none indication of fifty four fifty five Scotus, Quodlibet, q.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.09 of 5 – based on 40 votes