The first study, along with edition and translation, of Chrysostomus Javelli’s epitome of the _Liber de bona fortuna_, a work permitting insight into the early modern understanding of fortune, fate, and free will.

For many areas of philosophy, we lack an understanding of their developments between the fourteenth and seventeenth centuries. One such area is the development of the notion of final causation. The rejection of final causation is often described as one of the distinguishing hallmarks of so called Early Modern philosophy in relation to the Scholastic philosophical tradition. Our lack of understanding of the development of this notion in philosophy therefore impedes our ability to write an adequate history of philosophy spanning (...) these centuries. In this article, the notion of final causation as treated in the works of Chrysostom Javellus (1472–1538) and Francis Silvestri (of Ferrara) (1474–1526) is presented. It is argued that the treatment of final causation in these thinkers is already shaped by concerns regarding finality that we find in Early Modern philosophy. (shrink)

Chrysostomus Javelli OP (c. 1470–1540) is remembered almost exclusively for his numerous scholarly works in the Thomist philosophical-theological tradition, which are easily accessible in the often-reprinted, massive opera omnia editions of the late sixteenth century (Lyon 1568, Venice 1577, Lyon 1580). In this revised biographical account, Javelli’s literary output is seen in the context of his entire life and its key aspects as observant Dominican friar, unenthusiastic inquisitor, prolific author and dedicated teacher. New light is cast on all these (...) facets by focusing on unexploited primary sources, in the first place the rich prosopographical material found in the multiple, and mostly now very rare, editiones principes of Javelli’s works. This material, in the form of dedicatory letters, colophons and incidental autobiographical remarks, was almost entirely omitted by the editors of all the posthumous editions of his works and hitherto has been overlooked by scholars. (shrink)

The volume provides the first book-length study of Chrysostomus Javelli’s philosophical works. An Italian university professor and a prominent figure in the intellectual landscape of sixteenth-century Europe, Javelli (ca. 1470-1540) was the author of insightful commentaries on both Plato and Aristotle as well as of original works in which he laid the foundations of a new Christian philosophy. In this volume, a group of leading scholars from around the world guide readers through the many facets of Javelli’s philosophical corpus, (...) showing the long-term impact of his ideas on Western philosophical thought. The twelve essays of this volume shed light on an understudied yet central figure of Renaissance culture, revealing new connections and unexplored influences. This book is a valuable tool for students and scholars of early modern philosophy, classical tradition, and Christian theology, contributing to the understanding of a neglected chapter of Western intellectual history. (shrink)

Vorliegendes Buch enthält die aktualisierte und leicht überarbeitete Fassung der 1998 von der Philosophischen Fakultät der Technischen Universität Dresden angenommenen Dissertation. Zentrales Anliegen dieser Arbeit ist es, den Gründen für das Scheitern der Bischofstätigkeit des Johannes Chrysostomus in Konstantinopel (398–404) nachzugehen. Gefragt wurde sowohl nach den Ursachen konkreter Konfliktsituationen als auch nach den Ursachen der in den Quellen bezeugten Aversionen grundsätzlicher Natur. Zugleich ging es darum, am Beispiel von Chrysosostmus gewisse Bedingtheiten bischöflichen Wirkens aufzuzeigen, die komplexe Struktur und damit (...) die Natur der Bischofsvollmacht in der Spätantike generell zu erfassen. Gab im Jahre 398 das nachhaltige Interesse höchster staatlicher Stellen den Ausschlag für die Ernennung des rhetorisch begabten Priesters aus Antiochia zum Bischof von Konstantinopel, stützte nur fünf Jahre später gleichfalls staatliches Interesse seine Entmachtung durch eine Bischofssynode. Im Jahr darauf verfügte ein kaiserliches Dekret die Ausweisung des Johannes Chrysostomus in eines der entlegensten Gebiete des Reiches. Das kaiserliche Interesse an der Absetzung wurde nachweislich von Vertretern mehrerer anderer Gruppierungen geteilt, Mönchen, Klerikern, Bischöfen und ebenso weltlichen Honoratioren. (shrink)

This chapter uncovers a less investigated aspect of the relationship between the two most important scholastic schools of the Renaissance, Thomism and Scotism: the influence of Scotist literature on distinctions as seen in some sixteenth-century Thomists. The chapter has a primary focus on Chrysostomus Javelli’s engagement in his discussion of divine attributes with the Scotist doctrine of distinctions, but also considers other Thomist sources. First, the beginnings of the highly specialised Scotist literature on distinctions are traced back to the (...) start of the fourteenth century; I show how some early followers of Duns Scotus, in particular Francis of Meyronnes and Petrus Thomae, systematised Scotus’ ontology of the various grades of being by compiling lists of subtle distinctions to be applied to various levels of reality. I give some indications as to the later reception of these models of distinctions in the Scotist school. Special attention is paid to Étienne Brulefer, since his summary of Petrus Thomae’s model of seven distinctions was Javelli’s source for the Scotist doctrine. I then investigate how Javelli worked with Brulefer’s summary, and how he sought to integrate the Scotist doctrine into his own discussion of divine attributes. Thomists traditionally allowed only a rational or mental kind of distinction among divine attributes, and between them and the divine essence. Javelli, however, endeavours to show how the Thomist position may be reconciled with the Scotist doctrine of a formal or ex natura rei distinction. He did not always endorse this conciliatory approach; I hypothesise that he changed his mind on the subject over time. Finally, I show how other Renaissance Thomists reacted to the Scotist system of distinctions; in particular, I draw attention to the Thomists Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt, Bartolomeo Manzoli, and Mattia Gibboni da Aquario, who all wrote treatises on Thomist distinction theory modelled on the Scotist system of distinctions. In some of this literature, lists of distinctions based on Thomist metaphysics were compiled in order to replace the Scotist system. I argue that Javelli’s approach is more conciliatory and, in fact, has some overlap with the concordist thought of Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, who himself considered Scotus and Aquinas to be in fundamental agreement as regards the distinction between divine attributes. (shrink)

Im 4. Jahrhundert gewinnt das Askeseideal im Christentum deutlich an Bedeutung: Es entwickelt sich zu einem entscheidenden Kriterium bei der Bewertung christlichen Lebens. Bischöfe wie Ambrosius, Basilius und Johannes Chrysostomus verfassen Werbeschriften für das Ideal vor allem sexueller Enthaltsamkeit und wollen es so in ihren Gemeinden und bei ihren Lesern propagieren. Einzelne Gruppen innerhalb des Christentums radikalisieren dieses Ideal und erheben die Jungfräulichkeit zum eigentlichen Heilskriterium, d.h. nur wer jungfräulich lebt, kann aus ihrer Sicht überhaupt gerettet werden. Diese asketischen (...) Bewegungen, die sich u.a. in Kleinasien, Syrien und Ägypten finden, werden in der vorliegenden Studie erstmals systematisch untersucht, auf ihre Motive hin befragt und im Kontext ihrer Auseinandersetzung mit der Großkirche eingeordnet. Dabei ist auf Seiten der Kirche neben der theologischen Opposition einzelner Bischöfe und einer disziplinären Verurteilung etwa auf dem Konzil von Gangra auch das Bemühen um eine Reintegration der exklusiven Asketen erkennbar. Diese Entwicklung führt schließlich zu einer Hierarchisierung christlicher Lebensform, an deren Spitze die jungfräulich lebenden Christen stehen. (shrink)

Die Beschäftigung mit der Hand des Theodoros Skutariotes wird durch das Fehlen eines von ihm subskribierten Exemplars erschwert. Über seine Tätigkeit als Patriarchatsbeamter, Metropolit von Kyzikos und Chronist hinaus ist Theodoros der Forschung jedoch als Handschriftensammler und -besitzer bekannt. Ausgangspunkt jeder Untersuchung zu seinem Schriftstil sind deshalb die Marginalien der Kodizes, die sich in seinem Besitz befanden. Durch seinen autographen, monokondylischen Besitzervermerk †σϰουταϱϊώτου λευίτου θεοδώϱου† konnten bisher sechs Kodizes seiner Bibliothek zugeordnet werden: 1. Marcianus gr. 450, 9./10. Jh., Photius, Bibliotheca. (...) 2. Parisinus gr. 1741, 10. Jh., Sammlung rhetorischer Traktate. 3. Oxoniensis Cromwell 19, 11. Jh. 2. H., Ioannes Chrysostomus, Homiliae 1–45 in Matthaeum. 4. Athous, Kutlumusiu 15 , 12. Jh., Gregorius Nazianzenus; Ioannes Chrysostomus. 5. Parisinus gr. 1234, 13. Jh. 2. H., Nicetas Choniates, Panoplia Dogmatica. 6. Vaticanus gr. 636, 13. Jh. 2. H., Euthymius Zigabenus, In s. Pauli epistulas. (shrink)

A sequel to Gracia’s Introduction to the Problem of Individuation in the Early Middle Ages prepared by sixteen well-known historians of medieval philosophy, one advantage offered by this collection of essays is the broad coverage it provides: Avicenna and Averroes ; Maimonides, Gersonides, Bedersi ; Albert the Great and Roger Bacon ; Bonaventure and Buridan ; Aquinas ; Henry of Ghent ; Godfrey of Fontaines, Peter of Auvergne, John Baconthorpe and James of Viterbo ; Scotus ; Hervaeus Natalis, Richard of (...) Mediavilla, Durand of Saint Pourçain ; Walter of Burley ; William of Ockham ; Cajetan and Giles of Rome ; Javellus and Francis Sylvester Ferrar ; Francis Suárez ; John of Saint Thomas ; Leibniz. (shrink)

A sequel to Gracia’s Introduction to the Problem of Individuation in the Early Middle Ages prepared by sixteen well-known historians of medieval philosophy, one advantage offered by this collection of essays is the broad coverage it provides: Avicenna and Averroes ; Maimonides, Gersonides, Bedersi ; Albert the Great and Roger Bacon ; Bonaventure and Buridan ; Aquinas ; Henry of Ghent ; Godfrey of Fontaines, Peter of Auvergne, John Baconthorpe and James of Viterbo ; Scotus ; Hervaeus Natalis, Richard of (...) Mediavilla, Durand of Saint Pourçain ; Walter of Burley ; William of Ockham ; Cajetan and Giles of Rome ; Javellus and Francis Sylvester Ferrar ; Francis Suárez ; John of Saint Thomas ; Leibniz. (shrink)