Joan CADDEN PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS ON THE PLACE OF THE PROBLEMATA IN MEDIEVAL LEARNING Où se trouvèrent les Problemata dans la taxonomie des connaissances ...

The commentary of the Italian physician and philosopher Pietro d'Abano on Bartholomew of Messina's Latin translation of Pseudo-Aristotle's 'Problemata Physica', published in 1310, constitutes an important historical source. In a section of the corpus Aristotelicum that was not part of the standard curriculum at the medieval university, the commentary of Pietro d'Abano investigates the complex relationship between text, translation, and commentary. The eight articles in this volume provide valuable insights into the manner in which Pietro d'Abano deals with the problems (...) of a translated text. They emphasize the idiosyncrasy of his approach in comparison to his contemporaries and successors, the particularities of his commentary in light of the habitual exegetical practices applied in the teaching of curricular texts, as well as the influence of philosophical traditions outside the strict framework of the medieval arts faculty. (shrink)

This report is divided into two main parts, devoted to the Aristoteles Latinus and to the Editions of Latin Commentaries on Aristotle. The report on the Aristoteles Latinus sheds light on recent research on medieval Latin translations of Aristotle’s works. Among other things, it discusses the editions published in the context of the Aristoteles Latinus , and some recent studies and collective volumes on individual texts and translators. The report on Editions of Latin Commentaries on Aristotle gives information for each (...) edition of a commentary on Aristotle that has been published in the last five years and on those editions that are about to be published or are in preparation or are planned to start within the next five years. (shrink)

This article offers a general hypothesis on how Moerbeke’s translations of the Corpus Aristotelicum were disseminated at the University of Paris by means of exemplar and peciae. For each translation, two exemplaria appear to have circulated, one of which is older, of better quality, and more widely disseminated. It is argued that these original exemplaria are the ones mentioned in the 1304 list of exemplaria owned by the Paris University stationarius André de Sens. Moreover, it is not unlikely that some (...) of these original exemplaria were copied from Thomas Aquinas’ personal copy. The second exemplaria, on the other hand, which from a text critical point of view are related to the original ones, appear to be an attempt in the last decade of the thirteenth century to create a parallel dissemination of the translations in Paris. (shrink)