Some uncertainty has always surrounded the translation of Thucydides made by Laurentius Valla in 1452 at the desire of the Humanist Pope, Nicolas V., because its source was unknown. It is recognized that the translation is of unequal value, because, excellent Latinist as Valla was, he was less at home in Greek, and often fails, even when the Greek is not particularly difficult; but his text, whatever its origin and history, is a primary authority. In the Oxford text of (...) Thucydides, edited by Principal Stuart Jones, I have counted sixteen places for which Valla is the only authority, and there are a few more which might perhaps well be added. The view both of the Principal and of Hude is that Valla's readings in these places were due to his own ingenuity. (shrink)

This research note is the eighth instalment in our series of preliminary findings on the census and study of the reception of De iure belli ac pacis. The note presents a bibliographical description of Laurentius’ 1647 re-issue of the 1631 edition by Blaeu, considers Laurentius’ motivation and methods of production, lists and maps the currently known twenty-three surviving copies, and briefly describes two notable exemplars.

In a general account of this Livian MS. given in the Classical Review of 1904 I dealt more especially with the text of the first decade; now that my study of its text of the third decade is completed, it is possible to give a brief estimate of its importance and interest in this portion also.

_ Source: _Volume 55, Issue 4, pp 307 - 339 This article puts forward an analysis of the theory of signs contained in the _Prodidagmata ad logicam Aristotelis_, a compendium on logic written by the Flemish philosopher and Louvain professor Laurentius Ghiffene. Focusing on Ghiffene’s definition and division of a sign and his account of the problem of self-reference, the author argues that Ghiffene positioned himself in the tradition of the Conimbricenses and relied extensively on their influential commentary on (...) Aristotle’s _Organon_, published in 1606. The aim of the present contribution is to shed new light on the teaching of logic at Louvain during the years immediately preceding the rise of modern philosophy, an episode in the university’s history which remains almost entirely unstudied. (shrink)

This issue was discussed with regard to chosen commentaries to Aristotle’s treatise De anima, formed in the so-called via moderna mainstream, in particular those of John Buridan, Nicole Oresme and Laurentius of Lindores. In such a context, the Cracovian commentaries referring to Parisian nominalists were presented by those of Benedict Hesse and Anonymus. The analyses carried out above allow one to ascertain that although William of Ockham’s opinion questioning the possibility of knowledge of the soul in the field of (...) philosophy, nominalists of the late Middle Ages did not resign from speculation on the beginning and the separation from the body of the soul, also the fate of the soul after death. They focused on the nature of the matter – human body and his relation with the soul – in the moment of birth. In the aspect of death 14th century scholars undertook the struggle, which was one with the justification of the psycho-physical unity of the human being existing after death solely as an immortal soul. In both thems, they tried to find their solutions, while if they could not solve these aporeticals questions – they had the courage to admit, that is not possible by solely relying on the natural forces of reason. They had to refer to the teaching of christianity, without however falling prey to fideism. This was a methodical endeavour based on the experience that natural reason in searching for the truth is not capable of its own efforts to attain to certain concepts and might on occasion err, it is then that faith becomes its guide and supplies it with more acceptable solutions. This is the courage of one of the greatest philosophers – Plato, who said that you have to have this “great courage” to undertake only probable knowledge, when another is not possible. (shrink)

Excerpt from Die Metaphysik und Ethik des Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita: Im Systematischen Zusammenhange DargestelBis auf den heutigen Tag ist die sogenannte areopagitische Frage noch nicht gelost, obwohl die Litteratur uber dieselbe bereits eine betrachtliche ist. Die erste Erwahnung der areopagitischen Schriften fand auf einer Zusammenkunft der monophysitischen Severianer und der Katholiker zu Konstantinopel im Jahre 532 statt. Bei dieser Konferenz beriefen sich die ersteren auf dieselben, wahrend die letzteren ihre Echtheit bestritten. Aber der Protest hielt nicht lange an; vielmehr hielt man (...) bis zum funfzehnten Jahrhundert an der Authentie dieser Schriften fest, und sowohl in der romischen wie in der syrischen und giechischen Kirche galten sie fur "wunderbare und fast gottliche Schriften." Da begann endlich im funfzehnten Jahrhundert der gelehrte und scharfsinnige Kritiker Laurentius Valla von neuem den Kampf gegen ihre Echtheit, ein Kampf, der bis auf unsere Zeit noch nicht entschieden ist. Die einen suchten mit allen erlaubten und unerlaubten Mitteln die Echtheit der areopagitischen Schriften nachzuweisen, wahrend die anderen im Gegensatz zu ihnen die Unechtheit derselben darzulegen sich bemuhten. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.". (shrink)