Abstract

The teacher of the University of Salamanca Pedro de Osma wrote a comment on the Nichomachean Ethics, following the Latin Tanslation by Leonardo Bruni, and despising the text used by St. Thomas. Due to the respect with what Pedro de Osma himself quotes the "Theological Summa" and the "Comment on the Sentences", it is about to verify how far he has also taken on account the Aquinas' Comment on the "Ethics". The comparison of the introductions written by both authors to their respective comments shows such a divergence, both on the structure and method as well as on the planning and contents, that they lead us to think of the independence of the Salmantinian respect to the Aquinas. His introduction stands out for the exegetical exercise applied to the aristotelian texts; for the opening to the rest of the work by the Philosopher; for the planning of the difficulties and the discussion of different opinions. Comparatively, the text of the Angelicus is offered to us more concise and dogmatic, without dialectical eagerness and with a certain touch of theoretical elevation.