The Libraries ofthe NeoplatonistsPhilosophiaAntiquaA Series ofStudies onAncient PhilosophyPrevious EditorsJ. H.WaszinkW.J. VerdeniusJ.C.M.Van WindenEdited byK.A.AlgraF.A.J.de HaasJ. MansfeldC.J.RoweD. T. Runia Ch.WildbergVOLUME 107The Libraries ofthe NeoplatonistsProceedingsof theMeetingoftheEuropean ScienceFoundationNetworkLateAntiquityand Arabic Thought.PatternsintheConstitutionofEuropean Cultureheld inStrasbourg, March 1214, 2004 under the impulsion ofthe ScienticCommittee ofthe meeting, composed by Matthias Baltes, Michel Cacouros,CristinaDAncona, TizianoDorandi, GerhardEndre,PhilippeHoffmann, HenriHugonnardRocheEdited byCristinaDAnconaLEIDENBOSTON2007Thisbookisprintedonacid-freepaper.Libraryof CongressCataloging-in-PublicationdataISSN 0079-1687ISBN978-90-04-15641-8Copyright2007byKoninklijkeBrillNV,Leiden,TheNetherlands.KoninklijkeBrillNVincorporatestheimprintsBrill,HoteiPublishing,IDCPublishers,MartinusNijhoff PublishersandVSP.All rightsreserved.Nopartof thispublication maybereproduced,translated, storedina retrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic, mechanical,photocopying,recordingorotherwise,withoutpriorwrittenpermission fromthepublisher.Authorizationtophotocopyitemsforinternalorpersonaluseisgrantedby KoninklijkeBrillNVprovidedthattheappropriatefeesarepaiddirectlyto TheCopyrightClearanceCenter,222RosewoodDrive,Suite910, Danvers,MA01923,USA.Feesaresubjecttochange.printed inthenetherlandsThis volume is dedicated to the memory ofMatthias BaltesCONTENTSAcknowledgments ........................................................................xiThe Librariesofthe Neoplatonists. An IntroductionCristinaDAncona........................................................................xiiiPARTONEPLATO,ARISTOTLE ANDTHEIR NEOPLATONIC READINGS: THE GREEK TRADITIONRetoursurle Parisinus graecus 1807,le manuscrit A dePlaton .........................................................................................3Henri Dominique SaffreyLaconservation et la transmission des textes philosophiquesgrecs .........................................................................................29 RichardGouletDeuxtraitsplotiniens chez Eusbe de Csare ........................63 Marie-Odile Goulet-CazCurriculavixmutantur. Zur Vorgeschichte der neuplatonischen Lektreprogramme ..................................................................99BurkhardReisMiseenpageet transmission textuelle du commentaire deSyrianussur la Mtaphysique ................................................121ConcettaLunaLesbibliothques philosophiques daprs le tmoignage delalittrature noplatonicienne desV e et VIesicles ..........135 PhilippeHoffmannQualche riessione sulla collezione losoca ..........................155 GuglielmoCavalloLe Corpusgographique de Heidelberg (Palat.Heidelb. gr. 398)etlesorigines de la collection philosophique .........167DidierMarcotteSurvie culturelle et rmanence textuelle du noplatonisme Byzance.lments gnraux, lments portant sur lalogique ..................................................................................177Michel CacourosEntre compilation et originalit. Le corps pneumatique dans luvre de Michel Psellos ...................................................... 211Eudoxie DelliLchellenoplatoniciennedes vertus chez Psellus et chez Eustrate de Nice ................................................................... 231ArisPapamanolakisNicphore Blemmyde lecteur du commentaire de Simplicius la Physique dAristote ......................................... 243PantlisGolitsisPARTTWOTHE TRANSMISSION OF TEXTS AND THE CREATION OF THE PHILOSOPHICAL CORPUS IN ARMENIAN, SYRIAC, ARABIC AND HEBREWAuxoriginesde laformation du corpus philosophique en Armnie : quelques remarques sur les versions armniennes descommentairesgrecs de David ......................................... 259Valentina CalzolariLe Corpusphilosophique syriaque aux VIe VIIe sicles ......... 279HenriHugonnard-RocheA SyriacIntermediary for the Arabic Theology of Aristotle? In Search ofa Chimera ........................................................ 293Sebastian P. BrockLibriebiblioteche cristiane nellIraq dellVIIIsecolo. Una testimonianza dellepistolario del patriarca siro-orientale TimoteoI (727823) .............................................................. 307VittorioBertiBuildingthe Library ofArabic Philosophy. Platonism and Aristotelianism in the Sources ofal-Kind ........................... 319Gerhard EndreTheKindian Tradition. The Structure ofPhilosophy in Arabic Neoplatonism ............................................................. 351PeterAdamsonTheText ofthe Arabic Plotinus. Prolegomena toa Critical Edition .................................................................................... 371DimitriGutasviiicontentsPalladiusonthe Hippocratic Aphorisms ..................................... 385Hinrich BiesterfeldtUnecopieinconnue dune paraphrase anonymeconserve enarabedu De animadAristote: le MS Ayasoa4156 ........ 399 MeryemSebtiLAnonymedOxford (Bodleian Or. Marsh 539): bibliothque ou commentaire ? ........................................................................ 415 Emily CottrellAl-Gahiz andHellenizing Philosophy ....................................... 443James E. MontgomeryAl-AmirsParaphrase ofthe Proclean Elements ofTheology. A SearchforPossible Sources and ParallelTexts ................. 457Elvira WakelnigDieKategorieder Relation in der griechischenund arabischenAristoteles-Kommentierung ................................ 471CleopheaFerrariLes Bibliothques ismaliennes et la question du noplatonisme ismalien ........................................................ 481Daniel De SmetTheGreekLibrary ofthe Medieval Jewish Philosophers ........ 493StevenHarveyListof Contributors................................................................... 507Indexof Manuscripts and Papyri ............................................. 509Indexof Ancient Names ........................................................... 512Indexof Modern Names .......................................................... 522contentsixACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe meeting on The Libraries ofthe Neoplatonists, whose proceedings are gatheredinthisvolume,wasmadepossiblewithinthecontextof the NetworkLateAntiquityandArabicThought,approvedbytheEuropean ScienceFoundationNetworkGroupinMay2001forathree-year period. The Coordination Committee ofthe Network Late Antiquity and Arabic Thought, composed by Matthias Baltes, Riccardo Chiaradonna, John M. Dillon, Eylfur K. Emilsson, Gerhard Endre, Michael Frede, HenriHugonnard-Roche,PavlosKalligas,FilipKark,RemkeKruk, Dominic J. OMeara, David T. Runia, plus the present writer, entrusted toaScienticCommitteethepreparationof thismeeting.Tothe EuropeanScienceFoundationgothesincerethanksof theScientic Committee ofthe meeting for supporting this project. We also wish to express our gratitude to Mrs Madelise Blumenroeder, European Science Foundation, for the organization ofthe meeting in Strasbourg and for theassistancetotheactivitiesof theNetwork.Myowndeepthanks gotothescholarswhoacceptedtojointheScienticCommitteeofthemeetingandtogivetothisprojecttheinvaluablesupportoftheirknowledge and experience.TheEditorialBoardof PhilosophiaAntiquahasacceptedthe volume:weallwishtoexpresstoitsmembersandtotheanonymous referee our gratitude. Concetta Luna was so kind to read Section One ofthis volume: may she nd here our warmest thanks for all the remarks andimprovements.Foralltheshortcomingsof thevolumetheeditor issolelyresponsible.THELIBRARIES OF THE NEOPLATONISTS AN INTRODUCTION*In 2001 the Standing Committee for the Humanities ofthe European ScienceFoundationapprovedtheproposalforaNetworkonthe transmission ofGreek philosophy to the Arab world: Late Antiquity and Arabic Thought Patterns in the Constitution ofEuropean Culture. The broader assumptionof theproponentswasthatfalsafatheArabphilosophi-cal thought played an important role in the European culture ofthe Latin Middle Ages from the early XIIIth century onwards and, thanks tothis,inthecultureof themodernage.Thenarrowerassumption was not only the self-evident truth that falsafa arose from the inuence of Greekphilosophicalandscienticliteratureontheautochthonous culture grounded in the Quran, but also the less trivial point that the GreekheritagebecameavailabletotheArabreadersmostlyinthe form itwas shaped by the schools ofLate Antiquity.Thisassumption,asobviousasitmightbeonhistoricalandgeo-graphicalgrounds,provestodeservecarefulstudy,if onewantsto grasp what Late Ancient version ofGreek classical thought precisely means and also inuence ofGreek philosophy on the culture issuing fromtheQuran.Theproblemstobetakenintoaccounttoreacha full-edged account ofthe Late Ancient interpretations ofPlatos and Aristotlesdoctrinesaresomanythatthisisinitself awideeldofresearch.Nodoubt,thescholarsgatheredinStrasbourgforthenal meeting ofthe Network silently smiled on hearing such a generic head-ingasLateAncientversionof Greekclassicalthoughtasif Late Antiquitymightbeunderstoodasaunitaryphenomenonandasifthere might be some koinon genos under which one might range all the interpretations ofPlatos and Aristotles thought and their relationship, say,fromPlotinus to John Philoponus.Inuenceof Greekphilosophyonthecultureissuingfromthe Quran is no less a generic formula and countenances similar scepti-cism. The variety ofsources, the different times, contexts and purposes of theirtranslations,thetransformationsthattheGreekdoctrines *My warmest thanks go to Concetta Luna for reading the rst draft ofthis paper andsavingmefromsomeglaringmistakes.xivthe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionunderwent in the hands ofArab philosophers, all this is oftoo desper-ateacomplexitytothinkthatonemayllthatgenericformulawith aclear-cutaccount.Still,abetterperspectiveisobtainedunderthe assumption that what the Arab readers had in front ofthem were not PlatoandAristotleastheyappearinXXthcenturyscholarship,but the Plato and the Aristotle that an uninterrupted chain ofphilosophy professorscommenteduponinthecenturiesandareasneartothe Arabic-speaking world.Tosumup,theeldof researchIhavetriedtooutlineinsuchan impressionisticwaydeservesanambidexterousinquiry,asRichard Walzer used to say, and to this research we wanted to contribute with our Network. On one hand, we studied together the transformations ofthe main philosophical topics ofthe classical heritage in Late Antiquity, focusing on the Platonic tradition. We did so, during the three years ofthe Network, thanks to the meetings ofthe Plotinus reading group and tothoseof theAcademiaPlatonicaSeptimaMonasteriensisfounded by our late lamented friend and teacher Matthias Baltes. On the other hand,westudiedtogetherthetransmissionof LateAncientGreek thoughttotheSyriac-speakingandArabic-speakingareas,gathering rst in Rome at the beginning ofthe Network (October 2001) around thetopicAristoteleeisuoiesegetineoplatonici:logicaeontologianelleinterpre-tazioni greche e arabe,1 and then in Strasbourg, at the end ofthe Network (March2004)aroundthetopicTheLibrariesof theNeoplatonists.The meeting was organised by a Scientic Committee composed by Matthias Baltes, Michel Cacouros, Tiziano Dorandi, Gerhard Endre, Philippe Hoffmann, Henri Hugonnard-Roche plus the present writer, and took theformof aseriesof discussionsaroundthePhilosophicLibrariesin Greek Late Antiquity, chaired by Philippe Hoffmann, the Circulation ofthe Texts, chaired by Tiziano Dorandi, the Philosophical Literature in Byzantium, chairedbyMichelCacouros,theTransmissionandAssimilationofGreek PhilosophicalTextsinSyriacandArmenian,chairedbyHenriHugonnard-Roche,andTheNeoplatonicLibrariesintoArabicandHebrew:Sourcesand Assimilation, chairedbyGerhard Endre.The reason for focusing on the Libraries lies in that it seemed to us that a major desideratum in this eld ofresearch was represented by a 1 V. Celluprica R. Chiaradonna C. DAncona (eds), Aristotele e i suoi esegeti neopla-tonici. Logica e ontologia nelle interpretazioni greche e arabe, Bibliopolis, Napoli 2004 (Elenchos. Collanaditestiestudisulpensieroantico,40).the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxvsystematic inquiry into the conditions ofthe circulation ofthe written heritage ofGreek philosophy. Our wish was to begin exploring topicssuchasthecreationandcontinuityof thecanon(orcanons)of the philosophicalreadings,disseminationof theNeoplatonictextsinthe Syriac-speaking and Arabic-speaking areas and traces oftheir reading and interpretation. Such points (even dreaming that the inquiry would besuccessfullyaccomplished)obviouslydonotsufceinthemselves toaccountforthedoctrinalfeaturesof thisorthatinterpretationofPlatoandAristotleatworkinoneorotherMedievalthinkerwriting inArabic.Still,ourpointwasthatphilosophicalinterpretationsand originaldevelopmentsarebetterunderstoodagainstthebackground of thecanonof thephilosophicalreadingsconceivedof asauthori-tative,aswellasagainstthebackgroundof theinterpretationsthat accompanied them.The mention ofLibraries should not be taken in the literal sense ofplaces and/or physical collections ofbooks, or at least not only so. Evenwhenthisprojectwassocrudethatinasensewefeltentitled tobenaive,weneverthoughtthataquotationequalsaproof of the directacquaintancewiththeworkitcomesfrom:modernwritersare by no means the sole agents ofsecond-hand quotations and this point was raised in many exchanges among us. It would be too restrictive to relyonlyonevidencesuchasadatablemanuscriptinordertoadmit thatagiventextwasreadinagivenareaatagiventime;conversely, itwouldbetoooptimistictorelyonthelistof quotationsbylater authorsandinferfromsuchalistthatthisorthatworkof anearlier age was read at a given time. As well as in the original project, also in theconcreteteamworkwhichculminatedintheStrasbourgmeeting, severalapproachesdidintermingle:scholarsworkingintheeldofthehistoryof philosophy,philologyandcodicologyinthelinguistic areasof Greek,Armenian,Syriac,ArabicandHebrewbegantogive aseriesof answersfromtheirownpointof viewtothequestionofthecirculationofthe philosophical texts.Asanintroductiontothewrittenoutcomeof ourteamwork,it seemstomethatthebestistoputatthedisposalof thereadersthe preliminaryresearchdoneforthismeetingbyoneof theproponents ofthe Network, Matthias Baltes. I would like to take issue by recalling thespectacularaccomplishmentrepresentedbyDerPlatonismusinder Antike, an enterprise that reached under his guidance the VIth volume andcountsasthestartingpointforvirtuallyeachandeveryresearch in our eld. Such a scholar not only honoured us by accepting to join the Coordination Committee ofthe Network, but also, xvithe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introduction as a real follower ofNumenius,2 was directly involved in the preparation ofthe Strasbourg workshop. In the last year ofhis lifesomeof usrepeatedlydiscussedwithhimhowtocarryonthe research on the Libraries ofthe Neoplatonists. I hope not to be too unfaithfultohisintentionsinpresentingherewhatheconcretelydid tothisend.3 The authors and works taken into account by Matthias Baltes are the following, chronologically arranged: Themistius paraphrases ofthe De anima, Physics, De caelo and Metaphysics Lambda; Proclus Platonic Theology andthecommentaryontheTimaeus;Hermiascommentaryonthe Phaedrus; Ammonius commentary on the Categories, De interpretatione and Porphyrys Isagoge; Damascius De principiis and In Parmenidem; Priscianus Solutiones ad Chosroem; Simplicius commentaries on the Categories, De caelo andPhysics;Simplicius( ?)commentaryontheDeanima;Philoponus De aeternitate mundi contra Proclum and his commentaries on the Categories, PhysicsandtoNichomacusIntroductiontoArithmetics;Olympiodorus commentariesontheCategories,FirstAlcibiadesandPhaedo;AeneasofGazas Theophrastus and nally John Lydus De mensibus.InexaminingthelestakenbyMatthiasBaltes,Irealizedthatin mostcaseshelimitedhimself torecordingthenominalquotationsofauthorsfromAlexanderof AphrodisiastoPorphyryandIamblichus that he had found in the writings listed above. For instance, Themistius mentionsinhisparaphrasisof theDeanimaabyPorphyry ofAristotles doctrines about movement ( ):4 one may then infer that Porphyrys work,losttous,rapidlytraveledtoByzantium.Anotherexampleofaworkwhichhascomedowntousonlyviadoxography,butwas widelyknownandhighlyappreciatedbylaterNeoplatonists,isIam-blichusDeanima.5ItisquotedbyPriscianusLydusintheSolutionesad 2Numenius, an author Matthias Baltes had a predilection for, had recourse to this expression (clearly echoing Resp. VI, 503 C 4) in his description ofPlatos (fr. 2Leemans=fr.11desPlaces). 3Iowetheknowledgeof thelestakenbyMatthiasBaltestothekindnessofMarie-Luise Lakmann, Westflische Wilhelms-Universitt, Institut fr Altertumskunde, project Der Platonismus in der Antike. May Dr. Lakmann nd here the expression ofmy deepgratitude.4Them.InDean.,p.16.30Heinze.5Iamblichus work has come down to us through John Stobaeus anthology, and has been brought to the attention ofscholars chiey by A. J. Festugire, La Rvlation dHerms Trismgiste. III. Les doctrines de lme, Gabalda, Paris 1950 (repr. Les Belles Lettres, Paris the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxviiChosroem,6bytheauthorof thecommentaryonAristotlesDeanima attributedtoSimplicius(whomentionsIamblichustenetsheld . . . ),7 by Damascius (under the title )8andevenbyJohnLydus,who was not a philosopher, but was acquainted with it and quoted it under the title .9Proclus extreme generosity ofnominal quotations in the commentary on the Timaeus famously contrasts with the policy ofrefraining from them in the commentary on the Parmenides.10 Among the many les taken by Matthias Baltes from the commentary on the Timaeus,11 we can nd ancient authors like Aristoxenus ofTarentum12 or Strato ofLampsacus,13 as well as authors 1990).IthasbeenrecentlytranslatedintoEnglishbyJ.F.FinamoreJ.M.Dillon, Iamblichus De Anima. Text, translation and commentary, Brill, Leiden Boston Kln 2002(PhilosophiaAntiqua,92).6Prisc. Lyd.Sol.adChosr.,p.42.17Bywater. 7Simpl. ( ?) In De an., p. 1.19 Hayduck; see also p. 240.37: . 8Damascius. Commentaire du Parmnide de Platon. IV, Texte tabli par L. G. Westerink, introduit, traduit et annot par J. Combs avec la collaboration de A.-Ph. Segonds et C. Luna, Les Belles Lettres, Paris 2003 (Collection des Universits de France), p. 24.3 (whichBaltesquotedaccordingtotheoldedition,II,p.259.13Ruelle:hecouldnot seetheIVthvolumeof theBudedition).9Joh.Lyd.Demens.,p.167.23Wuensch.J.Dillon, IamblichosdeChalcis ,in R.Goulet(ed.),DictionnairedesPhilosophesAntiques.III,CNRSditions,Paris2000, p.82436,esp.p.832,thinksthattheworkalludedtobyJohnLyduswasdifferent fromtheDeanima,becauseJohnLydusmentionsa rstbook .However,theDe animaistransmittedonlythroughadoxographicalsource,sothatwedonotknowits originalstructure:itmaywellhavebeensubdivided,soitseemstome,intotwoor morebooks.10Whatever reason may account for this, the difference between the two commenta-ries in this respect is striking. For instance, one ofthe major doctrinal points raised in the commentary on the Parmenides, namely, number and purpose ofthe hypotheses ofthe second part ofthe dialogue, does not contain any explicit attribution ofthe various positions, with the exception ofPlutarch ofAthens: we owe the knowledge ofthe fact thatitwasAmeliuswhosubdividedthesecondpartintoeighthypotheses,Porphyry into nine etc. either to marginal glosses or to other authors, e.g. Damascius. See Proclus. ThologiePlatonicienne.I.TextetabliettraduitparH.D.SaffreyetL.G.Westerink, LesBellesLettres,Paris1968(CollectiondesUniversitsdeFrance),p.lxxxlxxxiii.11Theentiresecondpartof BaltescapitalworkDieWeltenstehungdesplatonischen TimaiosnachdenantikenInterpreten,Brill,Leiden1976and1978(PhilosophiaAntiqua, 30and35)is devotedtoProcluscommentaryonthe Timaeus. 12Procl. In Tim., II, p. 169.1626 Diehl: this is a quotation from the Ist book ofthe Harmonics, introducedby and .Seealso ibid.,p.170.7.13Procl. In Tim., III, p. 15.89 Diehl (crediting Strato with the idea that being, , is the cause ofpermanence, ) and p. 16.14, mentioning Stratos writing OnBeing( ).xviiithe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionrelatively nearer to him like the anonymous author ofOn the nature ofcosmos andsoulattributedtoTimaeusLocrus,14Plutarch,15Albinus,16Atticus17 14Procl. In Tim., I, p. 1.816 Diehl mentions and claims that following in his footsteps ( ) Plato begins towritethedialogueaccordingtoTimaeusmodel:.Onthe compositiondateof theseeTimaiosLokrosberdie Natur des Kosmos und der Seele kommentiert von M. Baltes, Brill, Leiden 1972 (Philosophia Antiqua,21),p.2026.15Procl. In Tim., I, p. 276.31277.3 Diehl. Plutarch is ranged, together with Atticus, amongthosewhobelievedthataccordingtoPlatothegenesisof thecosmoswas .Seealso,inthesamevein,I,p.325.30326.2;II,p.153.29;together withSeverus,III,p.212.89.Procluscreatesalsoasortof schoolof Plutarchand Atticus: , I, p. 381.2627 Diehl, ,I,p.384.4.Balteshascommentedatlengthupon this expression: see DieWeltentstehung,I,p.3863.16Proclus mentions Albinus only few times, but the doctrinal points raised are always crucial.Therstmentionoccursapropostheinterpretationof 27C5, .FromI,p.219.23welearnthataccordingtoAlbinusthephysical universe, albeit ungenerated, had a principle ofits coming-to-be: (see onthisBaltes,DieWeltentstehung,I,p.96100).AnotherallusiontoAlbinusposition occursapropos41D12,,. Proclusliststheopinionsof thePlatonistsconcerningtheimmortalandmortalparts of soulandsaysthatthefollowersof AtticusandAlbinusareasmanyexamplesofthatancient,litteralistexegesiswhichgrantstheimmortalityonlytotherationalpart of soul:, ,, (Procl.InTim.,III,p.234.1517).Thispassageanditsbroadercontext,namely, p.234.8235.9Diehl,isBst.167.1of DerPlatonismusinderAntike:M.Baltes,Der PlatonismusinderAntike.GrundlagenSystemEntwicklung,begrndetvonH.Dr rie, Band 6.1: Die philosophische Lehre des Platonismus. Von der Seele als der Ursache aller sinnvollen Ablufe, Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart Bad Cann statt 2002, p. 130 (text and transl.) andp.40715(commentary).17Procl.InTim.,III,p.247.1215Diehl.Atticus,called,is mentioned in relationship with the exegesis ofthe expression ofTim. 41 D 4: Proclus remarks that, on the basis ofthis phrasing, Atticus (as well as Theodorus ofAsyne) distinguishes two mixing bowls in Platos account; according to Proclus testimony, Atticus mentions this also in his commentary on the Phaedrus ( ). Atticusinterpretationsarementionedfromthebeginningtotheendof Proclus commentary (which has come down to us, in Greek, only till 44 D): I, p. 20.21 Diehl, p.97.30,p.272.1,p.276.31277.3;p.283.2730;p.284.56;p.366.9;p.425.13; p. 431,1415; II, p. 100.2; p. 115.1; p. 306.1; III, p. 37.1113. Many ofthese mentions refer to Atticus interpretation ofthe createdness vs uncreatedness ofthe cosmos; still, Proclus knows ofAtticus interpretation from the beginning ofthe dialogue onwards, and this creates a drift towards the conclusion that he had at his disposal a commentary on the Timaeus by Atticus. However,a passage like I, p. 391.57 Diehl leaves room also tothepossibilitythatAtticusexegeseswereavailabletoProclusthroughPorphyrys discussion ofthem. One ofthe main points in Baltes account ofthe ancient exegetical the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxixand Harpocration,18 Numenius,19 Severus,20 Alexander ofAphrodisias,21 nottomentiontheobvioussources:Plotinus,Amelius,Porphyry, Iamblichus and Syrianus. In one ofthe entries on Amelius,22 Matthias traditionconcerningtheTimaeusisthatithasbeenshapedchieybyPorphyryand Proclus.IntheprefacetohisDieWeltentstehung,I,helabelsProclusas einzweiter Porphyrios andclaims:Mankannsagen,dadieGeschichtederFragenachder WeltentstehungbiszuProkloshindurchPorphyriosbestimmtist,danachaberwei-tergehend durch Proklos selbst. Wie die Werke des Porphyrios, so bilden auch die des ProkloseinenMeilenstein(. . .)undzwardenletztenMeilensteininderausgehenden Antikeberhaupt (p.ix).18ItisfromProclusthatwelearnthatHarpocrationwasthepupilof Atticus:the passage from Procl. In Tim., I, p. 305.616 Diehl, is Bst. 128.2 ofDer Platonismus in der Antike:M. Baltes, Der Platonismus in der Antike. GrundlagenSystemEntwicklung, begrndet von H. Drrie, Band 5: Die philosophische Lehre des Platonismus. Platonische Physik (im antiken Verstndnis)II,Frommann-Holzboog,StuttgartBadCann statt1998,p.3233(text andtransl.)andp.26970(commentary).19Procl. In Tim., II, p. 153.24 mentions Numenius, together with a certain Aristander (seeonhimR.Goulet, Aristandros ,inR.Goulet[d.],DictionnairedesPhilosophes Antiques, I, CNRS ditions, Paris 1989, p. 355), as having explained Platos tenet that soulisintermediatebetweentheindivisibleanddivisibleessencethroughitsmathe-matical nature: . . . (lines1724).Theentirepassage(lines1725)is Numeniusfr.39 desPlaces.20FromProcl.InTim.,I,p.204.1718DiehlwelearnthatSeverusdidnotjudge thePrologueof thedialogueworthcommentingupon.Severusismentionedalsoin connectionwith27D67,ashavingmaintainedthattheisthecommongenus of bothbeingandbecoming(I,p.227.1416);othermentionsincludeI,p.255.56 (onand);p.289.79(ontheeternityvscreatednessof thecosmos);II, p.95.2930,inacriticalvein;andagain,II,p.152.28;p.153.25;p.170.3;p.171.9 (togetherwithPorphyry);p.191.1;p.192.11and26;III,p.212.8(togetherwith PlutarchandAtticus).21Proclus sumsupAlexandersdoctrineof fatewithoutmentioningexplicitlythe work he is referring to, but his phrasing is clear enough to let Diehl direct the reader totherelevantpassageintheDefatoadImperatores.Procl.InTim.,III,p.272.68 Diehl,says:,, , . Alexander, De fato ad Imp., p. 169.1819 Bruns,hadclaimedthat , .22Procl.InTim.,I,p.306.13Diehl.Proclusiscommentingon28C35( Now to nd the maker and father ofthis universe is hard enough, and even ifI succeeded, todeclarehimtoeveryoneisimpossible ,transl.D.J.Zeyl)andraisesthequestion whoisthisDemiurgeandwhere,inthedivinehierarchy,shouldhebelocated (p. 303.2526). A series ofopinions follows (Numenius, Harpocration, Atticus, Plotinus); then Amelius comes, with his doctrine ofthe tripartition ofthe Demiurge: , , , , . Damascius, in his turn, discusses (De Princ., II, p. 74.2022 Westerink-Combs) in what sense one can speak ofan and claims that this is meaning ofxxthe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionBaltesmadeacursorynote,remindinghimself thatwhenAmelius reappears in Damascius De principiis, this is in all likelihood a second-handquotationfromProcluscommentaryontheTimaeus:itwould thenbeamistaketoinferfromDamasciusmentionof Ameliusthat the former was acquainted with the latter.This is just an example ofthe problems that Baltes thought thisresearch had to face.Once completed, such research would provide the historians ofphi-losophy with a complete picture ofthe range ofthe texts available to the philosophy professors and students in the Greek schools at the end ofAntiquity. They obviously had at their disposal the corpus ofPlatos and Aristotles writings: more than a hundred years ofscholarship on the commentaries during the Imperial Age and Late Antiquity produced a full-edged account ofthis literary genre, its form and contents. The impact ofpost-classical authors on the last Greek philosophical circles is comparatively less known. To what extent was Alexander ofAphrodisias usedbylatercommentatorsof Aristotlescorpus,workingwithinthe contextof thisorthatschoolinLateAntiquity?23Towhatextentdid John Philoponus make use ofPlotinus Enneads in his writings, be they the reportationes ofAmmonius lectures or his personal works? The two questions are but random samples ofthe problems whose solution would provide,bythesametoken,alsoaroadmapfromAthensorRometo Alexandria, and then to Baghdad.InXthcenturyBaghdad,theeruditeandcourtierAbul-Farag MuhammadibnIshaqal-Warraqal-Bagdad,knownasIbnAb Yaqubal-Nadm(d.995),thesonof animportantbooksellerinthe capital,wroteanimpressivesurveyof thescienticandphilosophical titles known to Arab readers, the Book ofthe Catalogue, Kitb al-Fihrist.24 Amelius(*): Cestpourquoionleproclameaussiintellectsubstantiel,en lecaractrisantnonpasselonlintelliger,maisselonltre;etsiAmliusveutparler dunintellectquiest,cestdecetintellectquildoit[ncessairement]parler ,transl. Combs).But,asCombsexplainsinhisnote(p.248),isacorrectionfrom Procluspassagementionedabove:Damasciusmshas. 23Foradetailedstudyof theusemadebySyrianusof Alexanderof Aphrodisias seeC.Luna, TroistudessurlatraditiondescommentairesancienslaMtaphysiquedAristote, Brill,LeidenBostonKln2001(PhilosophiaAntiqua,88);onthedifferencesin therespectivewaysof quotingthelemmataof AristotlestextseeEad. Alessandro diAfrodisiaeSirianosullibroBdellaMetasica:tecnicaestrutturadelcommento , Documenti e studi sulla tradizione losoca medievale15(2004),p. 3979.24Kitbal-Fihrist,mitAnmerkungenhrsg.vonG.Flgel,J.Roediger,A.Mller, III,F.C.W.Vogel,Leipzig187172;Kitbal-Fihristli-n-Nadm,ed.R.Tagaddud, Mervi Offset, Tehran 1971; English transl.: B. Dodge, The Fihrist ofal-Nadm, A Tenth-the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxxiI shall say from the outset that not every title which is mentioned in the Kitb al-Fihrist does correspond to a work which was actually available to theArabreaders,letalonetoaworkthathascomedowntousand whose effectiveness on the creation ofthe Arab philosophical thought can be evaluated.25 Still, a survey ofthe post-classical authors mentioned centurysurveyof Muslimculture,ColumbiaUniversityPress,NewYork1970(RecordofCivilization: Sources and Studies, 83). Other bio-bibliographical accounts include the Tabaqt al-atibb wa-l-/ukamby Ibn Gulgul (written in 987; ed F. Sayyid, Cairo 1955, repr.Publicationsof theInst.FortheHistoryof Arabic-IslamicScience,Frankfurt a.M.1996),theTabaqtal-UmambySaidal-Andalus(d.1070;ed.L.Cheikho, ImprimerieCatholique,Beirut1912),theIr`dal-arbbyYaqut(d.1229;ed.D.S. Margoliouth, Brill-Luzac, Leiden London 192331), the Tar al-/ukam by al-Qift (d. 1248; this Chronicle ofLearned Men has come down to us in the edition ofQifts pupil al-Zawzan: Ibn al-Qift, Tar al-/ukam, aufGrund der Vorarbeiten A. Mllers hrsg. von J. Lippert, Dieterichsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Leipzig 1903), the Uyn al-anb f tabaqt al-atibb by Ibn Ab Usaybia (d. 1270; ed. A. Mller, al-Matbaa al-wahbiyya, Cairo-Knigsberg188284,repr.Daral-Fikr,Beirut195556;GreggInternational Publishers,Farnborough1972),andtheKaf al-_unnanasmil-kutubwa-l-funnby Haggi Halfa (Katib Celeb, d. 1656; ed. S. Yaltakaya K. R. Bilge, Milli ejtim basi-mevi,Istanbul194143;repr.1971).25The entry on Plato in the K. al-Fihrist (p. 245.27246.24 Flgel = p. 306.13307.8 Tagaddud)isacaseinpoint.Firstcomesabiographicalaccountbasedinparton thepseudo-PlutarchsPlacitaPhilosophorum(availabletoIbnal-NadminArabic:see H.Daiber,AetiusArabus.DieVorsokratikerinarabischerberlieferung,Steiner,Wiesbaden 1980[AkademiederWissenschaftenundderLiteratur,Verffentlichungenderorien-talischen Kommission, 33] and compare p. 245.28 Flgel = p. 306.14 Tagaddud with p. 106.1 Daiber), in part on Theo ofSmyrna (the latter is known to Ibn al-Nadm as a zealous partisan ofPlato and as the author ofthe Sequence ofReading Platos Books and Titles ofhis compositions, p. 255.1213 Flgel = p. 315.17 Tagaddud, transl. Dodge, p.614)aswellasonothersources(IshaqibnHunayn).Thenalistof thebookshe composed follows, which is said to be taken from Theo and which is remarkably akin toourowncorpusof Platosworks.Thenagaincomesthementionof thoseamong theworksbyPlatothatIbnal-Nadmhasseen,orwhoseArabicversionheknows fromareliablesource( FromwhatImyself haveseenandfromtheinformationofareliablepersonaboutwhathehasseen ,transl.Dodge,p.593):thislistincludes unambiguous titles like the Timaeus and Laws, but also several highly ambiguous titles, opentovariousinterpretations;mostimportant,of allthisnothinghascomedown tous.However,wehavetracesof PlatosdialoguesinArabic,whosetranslationwas notknowntoIbnal-Nadm,e.g.thePhaedo(seeH.H.Biesterfeldt, PhaedoArabus: ElementegriechischerTraditioninderSeelenlehreislamischerPhilosophendes10. und11.Jahrhunderts ,inG.BinderB.Effe[eds],TodundJenseitsimAltertum,Wiss. Verlag Trier, Trier 1991, p. 180202) or the Symposium (see D. Gutas, Platos Symposion in the Arabic Tradition , Oriens 31 [1988], p. 3660). For a detailed account see below in this volume the study by G. Endre, p. 31950. F. Rosenthal has tried to account for this state ofaffairs in an important article: On the Knowledge ofPlatos Philosophy intheIslamicWorld ,IslamicCulture14(1940),p.387422.G.Endreinterstingly suggeststhat moreof PlatosauthenticworkswereavailableinKindsgeneration than were preserved beyond the next century (mainly through the philosophical tradi-tionof medicalauthorsthetraditionof GalenthePlatonist) :seebelow,p.328. xxiithe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductioninthiswell-knowncataloguewillserveasaninventoryof theprob-lemsthattheresearchinitiatedbytheEuropeanScienceFoundation Networkismeanttoraiseandwhosesolutionmightdriveusnearer tothehistoricalrealityof thetransmissionof theGreekheritageto the Arabworld.To what extent were the interpretations ofPlato and Aristotle inuential ontheArabreceptionof theirphilosophicalideas ?AlookatIbnal-Nadms acquaintance with post-classical and late ancient authors will showtheimportanceand,atoneandthesametime,thedifcultyofsuch an inquiry. The Xth century erudite often mentions the title ofa workwhichisextantinGreek;ontheotherhand,itisoftenthecase that he mentions a work whose Greek antecedent is impossible to nd, either because it simply does not exist as such (like the pseudo-Theology ofAristotle, the well-known Arabic version ofPlotinus Enneads IVVI) orbecauseanerroroccurredatsomepointinthechainof transmis-sion ofthis or that list oftitles an eventuality which is all too likely, inconsiderationof thechangeof language.Still,itcanbethecase that a work known to Ibn al-Nadm and available also to us provides a decisive hint for understanding this or that Medieval Arabic interpreta-tionof PlatoorAristotle:thisisforinstancethecaseof Themistius paraphrasis ofBook Lambda ofthe Metaphysics, lost in Greek and recov-ered thanks to the Arabic and Hebrew versions.26 The following list ofauthors from Alexander ofAphrodisias to Stephanus ofAlexandria in Ibnal-Nadmsreportwillgiveanideaof howpromisingandatone andthesame time uncertain such researchis.Within the corpus ofAlexanders writings, some are preserved also inArabicandsomeareextantonlyinArabic.27Undertheheading Someremnantsof PlatosdialoguesinArabictranslationhavebeenpublishedby A. Badaw, Platon en pays dIslam. Textes publis et annots, Mc Gill University, Mon-trealInstituteof IslamicStudies,TehranBranch,Tehran1974.26See below,note92.27RecentsurveysincludeA.Dietrich, DiearabischeVersioneinerunbekannter SchriftdesAlexandervonAphrodisiasberdieDifferentiaSpecica ,Nachrichtender Akademie der Wissenschaften in Gttingen, philologisch-historische Klasse, 1964, p. 85148, esp. p.93100;J.vanEss, bereinigeneueFragmentedesAlexandervonAphrodisias und des Proklos in arabischer bersetzung , Der Islam 42 (1966), p. 4868; H. Gtje, Zur arabischen berlieferung des Alexander von Aphrodisias , Zeitschrift der Deutschen MorgenlndischenGesellschaft116(1966),p.25578;G.Endre,ProclusArabus.Zwanzig AbschnitteausderInstitutioTheologicainarabischerbersetzung,ImprimerieCatholique, Wiesbaden-Beirut 1973 (Beiruter Texte und Studien, 10), p. 3340, 51, 5761, 6467; R. Goulet M. Aouad, Alexandros dAphrodisias , in R. Goulet (ed.), Dictionnaire des the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxxiiiAristotle, in the K. al-Fihrist are mentioned the following commentar-ies: Categories;28 De interpretatione;29 Prior Analytics30 and Posterior Analytics;31 Topics;32 Sophistici Elenchi;33 Physics;34 De caelo;35 De gen. corr.;36 Meteorologica;37 Book Lambda ofthe Metaphysics.38 The K. al-Fihrist has also a separate entry PhilosophesAntiques,I,CNRSditions,Paris1989,p.12539;S.Fazzo, Alexandros dAphrodisias ,inR.Goulet(ed.),DictionnairedesPhilosophesAntiques.Supplment, CNRSditions,Paris2003,p.6170.28Lost in Greek; the commentary is mentioned in the K. al-Fihrist, p. 248.25 Flgel = p. 309.8 Tagaddud). The Arabic version is no longer extant but was known to Abu Sulaymanal-Sigistan:seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.12930 andH.Hugonnard-RocheA.ElamraniJamal, LOrganon.Traditionsyriaqueet arabe ,in Goulet(ed.), DictionnairedesPhilosophesAntiques.I,p.50228,esp.p.511.29K. al-Fihrist, p. 249.2 Flgel = p. 309.12 Tagaddud; lost in Greek, Ibn al-Nadm remarksthatitisnotextant;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias , p.130.30K.al-Fihrist,p.249.78Flgel=p.309.18Tagaddud;seeHugonnard-Roche Elamrani Jamal, LOrganon. Tradition syriaque et arabe , p. 518 and Goulet Aouad AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.128.31K. al-Fihrist, p. 249.13 Flgel = p. 309.24 Tagaddud; only fragmentarily extant in Greek,Ibnal-Nadmremarksthatitisnotextant;seeGouletAouad, Alexandros dAphrodisias ,p.130.32K.al-Fihrist,p.249.18Flgel=p.310.2Tagaddud;seeHugonnard-Roche Elamrani-Jamal, LOrganon.Traditionsyriaqueetarabe ,p.5256andGoulet Aouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.129.33K. al-Fihrist, p. 249.29 Flgel = p. 310.11 Tagaddud; lost in Greek, see Goulet Aouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.130.34K. al-Fihrist, p. 250.7 Flgel = p. 310.19 Tagaddud; only fragmentarily extant in Greek, seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.130.35Partial; see K. al-Fihrist, p. 250.2930 Flgel = p. 311.13 Tagaddud and p. 264.12Flgel=p.322.15TagaddudonthetranslationbyAbuBirMattaandtherevision byYahyaibnAd;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.130and H. Hugonnard-Roche, De caelo. Tradition syriaque et arabe , in Goulet (ed.), Diction-nairedesPhilosophesAntiques.Supplment,p.287.36K.al-Fihrist,p.251.4Flgel=p.311.18Tagaddud;lostinGreek,ithasbeen translatedintoArabicbyQustaibnLuqa(asfortherstbook)andAbuBirMatta: see Fazzo, Alexandros dAphrodisias , p. 63 and M. Rashed, De generatione et corrup-tione. Tradition arabe , in Goulet (ed.), Dictionnaire des Philosophes Antiques. Supplment, p.30414,esp.p.31214. 37K.al-Fihrist,p.251.9Flgel=p.311.22Tagaddud;seeP.L.Schoonheim, Mtorologiques.Traditionsyriaque,arabeetlatine ,inGoulet(ed.),Dictionnairedes Philosophes Antiques.Supplment,p.32428,esp.p.326.38K.al-Fihrist,p.251.28Flgel=p.312.1415Tagaddud;lostinGreek,itissaid tohavebeentranslatedintoSyriacbyHunaynibnIshaq(althoughitisnotclearifIbnal-NadmreferstoBookLambdaitself ortoitslemmataincludedinAlexanders commentary)andintoArabicbyAbuBirMatta;seeJ.Freudenthal, Diedurch Averroes erhaltenen Fragmente Alexanders zur Metaphysik des Aristoteles, mit Beitrgen zurErluterungdesarabischenTextesvonS.Frnkel ,AbhndlungenderKnigl.Preu. Akad. der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Verlag der Kniglichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin1885forthefragmentsof thiscommentaryavailablethroughAverroesGreat xxivthe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionon him,39 falling into two: an account on Alexanders works by Yahya ibn Ad 40 and a list ofhis writings. The list includes On soul;41 Refutation ofGalen aboutpossibility;42Refutationof Galenontime;43OnSight;44Onthefoundationsofprovidence;45 On the conversion ofthe premises;46 On the Principles of the Universe;47 Being is not homogeneous with the ten categories;48 On Providence;49 The difference betweenmatterandgenus;50Refutationof thosewhosaythatsighthappensonly CommentaryontheMetaphysics;A.Martin, LaMtaphysique.Traditionsyriaqueet arabe ,inGoulet(ed.),DictionnairedesPhilosophesAntiques.I,p.52834,esp.p.5323 andC.MartiniBonadeo, LaMtaphysique.Traditionsyriaqueetarabe.Misejour bibliographique ,inGoulet(ed.),DictionnairedesPhilosophesAntiques.Supplment, p. 263; Ibn al-Nadm also mentions Book Ny with Alexanders commentary (p. 251.27 Flgel = p.312.1314Tagaddud).39K. al-Fihrist,p.252.24253.11Flgel=p.313.719Tagaddud.40Onthisleadingpersonalityof XthcenturyAristotelianisminBaghdadsee G. Endre, The Works ofYa/y ibn Ad. An Analytical Inventory, Reichert, Wiesbaden 1977 and E. Platti, Ya/y ibn Ad thologien chrtien et philosophe arabe, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, Leuven1983(OrientaliaLovaniensiaAnalecta,14).41This work might be the De anima that has come down to us: Alexandri De anima cum mantissa ed. I. Bruns, Reimer, Berlin 1887 (Supplementum Aristotelicum, II 1); see H. Gtje, Studien zur berlieferung der aristotelischen Psychologie im Islam, C. Winter, Heidelberg 1971,p. 6970andGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.131.42LostinGreek;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.136.43LostinGreek;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.135and 139.44I.e., treatise 15 ofthe Mantissa (see above, n. 41); cf. Gtje, Studien zur berlieferung, p.14074andGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.135.45Perhapsanotherversionof thetreatise OnProvidence(seebelow,n.49).46LostinGreek;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.136.The Arabic text has been edited by A. Badaw, Sur/ al Arist mafqda f l-ynniyya wa-rasil u/r.CommentairessurAristoteperdusengrecetautresptres,DarEl-Machreq,Beirut1972 (Recherches publies sous la direction de lInstitut de Lettres Orientales de Beyrouth. NouvelleSrie.Languearabeetpenseislamique,1),p.5580.47LostinGreek;seeCh.Genequand,Alexanderof AphrodisiasOntheCosmos,Brill, LeidenBostonKln2001(IslamicPhilosophy,TheologyandScience,44)and G.Endre, AlexanderArabusontheFirstCause.AristotlesFirstMoverinan ArabictreatiseattributedtoAlexanderof Aphrodisias ,inC.DAnconaG.Serra (eds),AristoteleeAlessandrodiAfrodisianellatradizionearaba.Attidelcolloquio . . . Padova, 1415maggio1999,IlPoligrafo,Padova2002[SubsidiaMediaevaliaPatavina,3], p.1974;EndredealsalsowiththeVIthcenturySyriactranslationbySergiusofResayna).48LostinGreek;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.139.49LostinGreek;thisworkhasbeentranslatedbyAbuBirMatta:seeP.Thillet, Trait de la providence, . Version arabe de Ab Bir Matt ibn Ynus, introduction, ditionettraduction,Verdier,Paris2003;anearlierversionof thesametreatisewas produced within Kinds circle: see S. Fazzo H. Wiesner, Alexander ofAphrodisias in the Kind circle and in al-Kinds cosmology , Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 3 (1993), p.11953.50I.e.,Quaest.II28;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.133. the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxxvthrough rays;51 On Colours;52 De differentia.53 Other works have been found inArabic,thatarenotrecordedintheK.al-Fihrist:Quaest.I11a, I5,I12,II15,II11,I16,I24,II3,I8,II19,III3,I22,I21;54 On Intellect;55 On Self-determination;56 The qualities are incorporeal;57 Refutation of Galenscritiqueof Aristotle;58Refutationof Xenocrates;59Onvoice;60Onthe factthataccordingtoAristotleformistheperfectionof movement;61Onthedif-ferences;62OnAristotlesremarksonpoetry;63OntheFirstCause,theeffectand its movements.64BesidesthegenuineAlexander,alsothepseudo-Alexanderplaysan importantrole.Earlyinthehistoryof translationsfromGreek,some propositions ofProclus Elements ofTheology began to circulate under his TheArabictexthasbeeneditedbyBadaw,ur/alAristmafqdafl-ynniyya, p.5255.51I.e., treatise 9 ofthe Mantissa; see Goulet Aouad, Alexandros dAphrodisias , p.135.52I.e., Quaest.I2;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.133.53LostinGreek;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.13637.54SeeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.13233,andFazzo, Alexandros dAphrodisias , p. 6467; on Quaest. II 3 and II 19 see Fazzo Wiesner, Alexanderof AphrodisiasintheKindcircle .55I.e., treatise 2 ofthe Mantissa; see Goulet Aouad, Alexandros dAphrodisias , p.134; see also M. Geoffroy, La tradition arabe du dAlexandre dAphro-diseetlesoriginesdelathoriefarabiennedesquatredegrsdelintellect ,in DAnconaSerra(eds), AristoteleeAlessandrodiAfrodisia,p.191231.56I.e., treatise 23 ofthe Mantissa; see Goulet Aouad, Alexandros dAphrodisias , p. 135.57I.e., treatise 6 ofthe Mantissa; see Goulet Aouad, Alexandros dAphrodisias , p.135.58Lost in Greek; see Goulet Aouad, Alexandros dAphrodisias , p. 136. Among Galens philosophical works, only a commentary on theDe Interpretatione is mentioned (K.al-Fihrist,p.249.23Flgel=p.309.13Tagaddud);lostinGreek(seeV.Boudon, Galien de Pergame , in R. Goulet [ed.], Dictionnaire des Philosophes Antiques. III, CNRS ditions, Paris 2002, p. 44066, esp. p. 463, nr 98), it is said to be rare and not found (Flgel)or difcultto nd (Tagaddud).59LostinGreek;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.136.60I.e., Quaest. I 2; see A. Hasnaoui, Alexandre dAphrodise vs Jean Philopon: notes sur quelques traits dAlexandre perdus en grec, conservs en arabe , Arabic Sciences andPhilosophy4(1994),p.53109,esp.p.5568,andCh.Hasnaoui, Latradition descommentairesgrecssurleDeinterpretatione(PH )dAristotejusquauVIIes. ,in Goulet(ed.),DictionnairedesPhilosophesAntiques.Supplment,p.12273,esp.p.147, on the possibility that this treatise traces back to Alexanders lost commentary on the Deinterpretatione.61LostinGreek;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.137.62LostinGreek;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.137.63LostinGreek;seeGouletAouad, AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.137.64LostinGreek,editedbyEndre, AlexanderArabusontheFirstCause .xxvithe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionname, bearing various titles (On the First Cause, On the existence ofspiritual Formswithoutmatter,Onthedifferencebetweeneternityandtime,Oncoming-to-be,Onthebody).65Insomemssthiscollectionof Procluspropositions bearsthetitleAccountof whatAlexanderhasextractedfromAristotlesbook calledTheology.66UnderAlexandersnamealsofragmentsof anearly translationandadaptationof partsof PhiloponusDeaeternitatemundi contraProclum circulated.67PlotinusisknowntoIbnal-Nadm,butheisrangedamongthe Aristoteliancommentatorsandisnothingif notanametohim;68as pointed to by Franz Rosenthal, Plotinus immense inuence on Arabic philosophywasanonymous,69concealedasitwasunderthepseudo-Theology ofAristotle put together within the circle ofal-Kind. At variance with Plotinus, Porphyry is well known: a commentary on the Categories isrecordedintheK.al-Fihrist,70andothercommentariesmentioned include those on the De interpretatione,71 Physics72 and Nicomachean Ethics.73 65SeevanEss, bereinigeneueFragmentedesAlexandervonAphrodisiasund desProklos ;Endre,ProclusArabus,p.3340;F.W.Zimmermann, ProclusArabus RidesAgain ,ArabicSciencesandPhilosophy4(1994),pp.951.66The entry recorded in the K. al-Fihrist(p. 253.11 Flgel = p. 313.19 Tagaddud) as Alexanders book On Melancholy (K. al-Mlliy) and by al-Qift as Book on Theology mighthintatthiscollection:seeEndre,ProclusArabus,p.53,and,followinginhis footsteps,F.W.Zimmermann, TheOriginsof theso-calledTheologyof Aristotle ,in J. Kraye, W. F. Ryan, C.-B. Schmitt (eds), Pseudo-Aristotle in the Middle Ages. The Theology andOtherTexts,TheWarburgInstitute,London1986(WarburgInstituteSurveysand Texts, 11), p. 110240, esp. p. 18990; Goulet Aouad, Alexandros dAphrodisias , p. 133;Fazzo AlexandrosdAphrodisias ,p.6465.67Theybearthefollowingtitles:Refutationof thosewhosaythatathingcancomeonly fromanotherthing,tracingbacktoPhiloponusargumentIVof theDeaet.mundi(see A.Hasnaoui, AlexandredAphrodisevsJeanPhilopon );Onthefactthataccordingto Aristotletheactismoregeneralthanmovement,tracingbacktoPhiloponusargumentIX (seeA.Hasnaoui,ibid.).68K.al-Fihrist,p.255.16Flgel=p.315.20Tagaddud.69F.Rosenthal, PlotinusinIslam:thePowerof Anonymity ,inPlotinoeil Neoplatonismo in Oriente e in Occidente.Atti del convegno internazionale Roma, 59 ottobre 1970,AccademiaNazionaledeiLincei,Roma1974(Problemiattualidiscienzaedi cultura,198),p.43746.70K. al-Fihrist, p. 248.20 Flgel = p. 309.4 Tagaddud. It served as a source for Ibn Suwars edition ofthe translation made by Hunayn: see Hugonnard-Roche Elamrani-Jamal, LOrganon.Traditionsyriaqueetarabe ,p.511.71K. al-Fihrist, p. 249.2 Flgel = 309.13 Tagaddud. This work is only fragmentarily extantinGreek.72K. al-Fihrist, p. 250.2122 Flgel = 311.67 Tagaddud. It is lost in Greek; accord-ingto the K.al-Fihrist,itwastranslatedbyacertainBasl.73K. al-Fihrist, p. 252.2 Flgel = 312.18 Tagaddud. Lost in Greek, it was translated intoArabicbyIshaqibnHunayn;seeM.Zonta, Lesthiques.Traditionsyriaqueet the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxxviiTheK.al-Fihristhasalsoaseparateentry,74whichaftersomegeneral information lists Porphyrys works other than commentaries: the Isagoge,75 an Introduction to the categorical syllogisms;76 the Letter to Anebo; a treatise On intellect and the intelligibles and a Refutation ofLonginus on the same topic; the Philosophical History, named K. abr al-falsifa.77 Also a K. al-Ustqst in Syriac is mentioned:78 one might wonder ifthis title could point to PorphyrysSentences,awritingsubdividedintopropositionsexactlyas Proclus(=Ustqss).Inaddition, a short treatise On soul attributed to Porphyry, which is not mentioned inthe K.al-Fihrist, has been discovered and edited.79 IamblichuscommentaryontheCategories,lostinGreekbutwidely witnessedinSimpliciusowncommentary,ismentionedintheK. al- Fihrist.80AlsoacommentaryontheDeinterpretatione81isknown;to IamblichusboththeK.al-Fihrist(somehowconfusely)andanArabic msattribute acommentary on Pythagoras Golden Verses.82arabe , in Goulet (ed.), Dictionnaire des Philosophes Antiques. Supplment, p. 19198, esp. p. 19294. Also, it has been surmised that Porphyrys commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics lies in the background ofthe so-called Summaria Alexandrinorum: see D. M. Dunlop, ObservationsontheMedievalArabicVersionof AristotlesNicomacheanEthics ,in Oriente e Occidente nel Medioevo: losoa e scienze, Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Roma 1971 (AccademiaNazionaledeiLincei.AttideiConvegni,13),p.22950.74K.al-Fihrist,p.253.1218Flgel=313.2025Tagaddud. 75Extant and edited: A. Badaw, Mantiq Arist. IIII. K. Is, Wikalat al-Matbuat Daral-qalam,al-KuwaytBeirut1980,p.102168.76Thiswork,otherwiseunknown,issaidtohavebeentranslatedbyAbuUjman al-Dimasq.77Ibn al-Nadm, p. 253.18 Flgel = p. 313.25 Tagaddud, says he has seen in Syriac the fourth chapter ofthis work (which is only fragmentarily extant in Greek). Elsewhere heclaimsthattwochaptersweretranslatedalsointoArabic:p.245.1314Flgel= p.306.12 Tagaddud.78K.al-Fihrist,p.253.17Flgel=p.313.25Tagaddud.79W.Kutsch, EinarabischesBruchstuckausPorphyrios( ?)unddie Frage des Verfassers der Theologie des Aristoteles , Mlanges de lUniversit Saint-Joseph 31(1954), p.26586. 80K. al-Fihrist, p. 248.23 Flgel = p. 309.6 Tagaddud: Ibn al-Nadm says that among theuncommon( arb)commentaries,apartisattributed(Tagaddudreads:pertinent) to Iamblichus; see F. E. Peters, Aristoteles Arabus. The Oriental Translations and Commentaries on the Aristotelian corpus, Brill, Leiden 1968 (Monographs on Mediterranean Antiquity), p. 9, informing that Iamblichus commentary is mentioned in Ibn Suwars notes on the Organon,and remarkingthatthereferencecanbesecond-handfromSimplicius.81K. al-Fihrist, p. 249.2 Flgel = 309.13 Tagaddud: see Ch. Hasnaoui, La tradition descommentairesgrecssurle Deinterpretatione ,p.15254.82Edited by H. Daiber, Neuplatonische Pythagorica in arabischem Gewande. Der Kommentar desIamblichuszudenCarminaAurea.EinverlorenergriechischerTextinarabischerberlieferung, North-Holland, Amsterdam New York Oxford Tokyo 1995. Due to the moral xxviiithe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionTheK.al-FihristlistsThemistiusamongthosewhocommentedon the Categories.83 It also mentions his commentary on the Prior Analytics,84 PosteriorAnalytics 85andontheTopics.86AkalmbyThemistiusonthe Rhetoricisalsomentioned,87aswellasacommentarybyhimonthe Physics 88 and the De caelo.89 The K. al-Fihrist credits Themistius also with acommentaryontheDegen.corr.90TheArabicversionof hispara-phrasisof theDeanima91isextant,aswellastheoneof BookLambda ofthe Metaphysics.92 Themistius is also credited with a commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics.93 In the separate entry on him,94 the K. al-Fihrist mentions also a Letter to Julian on government (tadbr), a treatise On Soul in twobooksand anotherLetter to King Julian.95platitudes containedinthiscommentaryandtothelackof anyprominentfeature of Iamblichusgenuinethought,D.J.OMeara,PythagorasRevived.Mathematicsand Philosophy in Late Antiquity, Clarendon, Oxford 1989, p. 2331 is cautious on the alleged Iamblichean authoriship. A commentary by Iamblichus on the Golden Verses is mentioned by Jerome, Contra RunumIII39:seeDillon, IamblichosdeChalcis ,p.834. 83K.al-Fihrist,p.248.21Flgel=p.309.5Tagaddud.84LostinGreek:K.al-Fihrist,p.249.8Flgel=p.309.19Tagaddud.85K.al-Fihrist,p.249.13Flgel=p.309.24Tagaddud. 86K.al-Fihrist,p.249.23Flgel=p.310.6Tagaddud. 87K.al-Fihrist,p.250.5Flgel=p.310.1617Tagaddud. 88K. al-Fihrist, p. 250.2223 Flgel = p. 311.7 Tagaddud. Al-Qift claims that Yahya ibnAd commentedonit:seeEndre, TheWorksof Ya/yibnAd,p.35.89Lost in Greek; K. al-Fihrist, p. 250.30 Flgel = p.311.13 Tagaddud. It has been translated by Yahya ibn Ad, and an Hebrew translation ofthe lost Arabic version is publishedintheCAGseries(V5,Landauer1902),accompaniedbyaLatinversion; forfurtherdetailsseeH.Hugonnard-Roche, Decaelo.Traditionsyriaqueetarabe , esp.p.287.90LostinGreek;K.al-Fihrist,p.251.6Flgel=p.311.19Tagaddud.SeeRashed, Degenerationeetcorruptione.Traditionarabe ,p.312.91K.al-Fihrist,p.251.12Flgel=311.25Tagaddud.SeeM.C.Lyons,AnArabic Translationof ThemistiusCommentaryonAristotlesDeAnima,Cassirer,Oxford1973; A. Elamrani Jamal, De anima. Tradition arabe , in Goulet (ed.), Dictionnaire des Philosophes Antiques.Supplment,p.34658,esp.p.35253.92TranslatedbyAbuBirMatta(K.al-Fihrist,p.251.2930Flgel=p.312.1516 Tagaddud): see Thmistius. Paraphrase de la Mtaphysique dAristote (livre Lambda), traduit de lhbreu et de larabe, intr., noteset indices par R. Brague, Vrin, Paris 1999 (Tradition delapenseclassique)andMartiniBonadeo, La Mtaphysique.Traditionsyriaqueet arabe.Misejourbibliographique ,p.263.93K.al-Fihrist,p.252.3Flgel=p.312.19Tagaddud;seeZonta, Lesthiques. Traditionsyriaqueetarabe ,p.191.94K. al-Fihrist,p.253.2427Flgel=p.314.58Tagaddud.95ALetterbyThemistiusOnGovernment(siysa)isextant(msIstanbul,Kprl I1608);thetranslationisattributedtoAbuUjmanal-Dimaq:seeD.Gutas,Greek WisdomLiteratureinArabicTranslation.AStudyof theGraeco-ArabicGnomologia,American OrientalSociety,NewHaven1975(AmericanOrientalSeries,60),p.47.the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxxixSyrianuscommentaryonBookBetaof theMetaphysicsisknownto Ibn al-Nadm, who claims that it exists in Arabic.96 Also Syrianus pupil Proclus is well known to him.97 According to Ibn al-Nadm, Proclus is the author ofa Denition ofthe origins ofnatural phaenomena,98 ofthe Eighteen questions which were refuted by John Philoponus,99 ofthe Explanation ofPlatostenetthatsoulisimmortal,100of aTheology,101of acommentaryon PythagorasGoldenVerses102(whichmaytracebackeithertoacertain Proclus ofLaodicaea103 or to Hierocles ofAlexandria),104 ofthe Sublime Substances105 and ofthe De decem dubitationibus.106 Proclus is also credited withabookOntheFirstGood,107awritingOntheIndivisibleatom,108a 96K.al-Fihrist,p.251.30252.1Flgel=p.312.17Tagaddud. 97The account ofthe K. al-Fihrist, 252.1223 Flgel = p. 312.28313.7 Tagaddud, isdiscussedbyEndre,ProclusArabus,p.1314.98K.al-Fihrist,p.252.13Flgel=p.312.28Tagaddud;seeEndre,ProclusArabus, p.27.99K.al-Fihrist,p.252.1314Flgel=p.312.28313.1Tagaddud;seeEndre, Proclus Arabus,p.1518.100K.al-Fihrist,p.252.1516Flgel=p.313.1Tagaddud;seeL.G.Westerink, Proclus on Platos Three Proofs ofImmortality , in Zetesis. Album Amicorum door vrienden en collegas aangeboden an prof. Dr. E. De Strycker, Nederlandsche Boekhandel, Antwerpen Utrecht1973,p.296306andA.Hasnaoui, Deuxtextesenarabesurlespreuves platoniciennesdelimmortalitdelme , Medioevo23(1997),p.395408.101K.al-Fihrist,p.252.16Flgel=p.313.1Tagaddud;seeEndre,ProclusArabus, p.5254.102K.al-Fihrist,p.252.1617Flgel=p.313.23Tagaddud;seeEndre,Proclus Arabus, p. 2627, and N. Linley, Ibn at-Tayyib: Proclus Commentary on the Pythagorean Golden Verses, State University ofNew York at Buffalo, New York 1984 (Arethusa Monographs, 10), suggesting that the attribution to Proclus might originate from the misreading ofthelessknownnameof Hieroclesof Alexandria.103AssuggesteddubitativelybyL.G.Westerink, ProcluscommentateurdesVers dOr ,inG.BossG.Seel(eds),Proclusetsoninuence,d.duGrandMidi,Zurich 1987, p. 6278.104H. S. Schibli, Hierocles ofAlexandria, Oxford U.P., Oxford 2002, provides an English translationof HieroclescommentaryontheGoldenVersesandaccountsforthesimi-larities between this commentary and the Arabic work edited by Linley; however, the Greek commentary is much more complex and articulated with respect to the Arabic oneandSchibliisrightlycautious.105K. al-Fihrist, p. 252.18 Flgel = p. 313.12 Tagaddud; see Endre, Proclus Arabus, p. 30.106K. al-Fihrist, p. 252.1819 Flgel = p. 313.3 Tagaddud; see Endre, Proclus Arabus, p.2728.107K.al-Fihrist,p.252.19Flgel=p.313.4Tagaddud;seeEndre,ProclusArabus, p.1823.108K.al-Fihrist,p.252.20Flgel=p.313.4Tagaddud;seeEndre,ProclusArabus, p.30.xxxthe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductioncommentary on the Gorgias109 and on the tenth section ofa writing On Destiny.110 Finally, he is mentioned as the author ofa Little Stoicheiosis111 andof acommentary on the Phaedo.112As for Ammonius son ofHermias, within the entry on Aristotle the K.al-FihristmentionshiscommentaryontheCategories113andcredits him with a partial commentary on the Topics.114 In the separate entry,115 Ibn al-Nadm claims to rely on the Chronicle by Ishaq ibn Hunayn and liststhreetitles:aCommentaryonthedoctrines(ma_hib)of Aristotleabout theCreator(ni),atreatiseOnAristotlesaimsinhisbooksandaProof by Aristotle on Gods uniqueness (taw/d). Four centuries before, Simplicius had mentioned a treatise by Ammonius (lost to us) on the fact that Aristotles FirstPrincipleisnotonlythenalcauseof theuniversebutalsothe efcient one,116 and since al-Farab (d. 950 C.E.) claims that Ammonius wrote a treatise on the existence ofthe Creator,117 it has been surmised that the work mentioned by Simplicius, the one alluded to by al-Farab and the one mentioned in the K. al-Fihrist were one and the same; this work has also been identied with a treatise by Ammonius preserved in an Istanbul manuscript.118 However, the work attributed to Ammonius inthemanuscriptjustmentionedisbynomeansAmmoniuslost treatise; instead, it is the so-called Doxography ofthe pseudo-Ammonius,119 a 109K.al-Fihrist,p.252.2021Flgel=p.313.45Tagaddud;seeEndre,Proclus Arabus,p.28.110K.al-Fihrist,p.252.21Flgel=p.313.5Tagaddud;seeEndre,ProclusArabus, p.28.111K.al-Fihrist,p.252.2122Flgel=p.313.56Tagaddud;seeEndre,Proclus Arabus,p.2324.112K. al-Fihrist, p. 252.22 Flgel = p. 313.67 Tagaddud; see Endre, Proclus Arabus, p.2829.113K.al-Fihrist,p.248.21Flgel=p.309.5Tagaddud. 114Lost in Greek; on the mention ofthe two writings see K. al-Fihrist, p. 249.19 and 2021Flgel=p.310.23and5Tagaddud. 115K.al-Fihrist,p.253.1923Flgel=p.314.14Tagaddud. 116SeeSimpl. InDecaelo,p.271.1321Heibergand InPhys.,p.1363.812Diels.117AbuNasral-Farab,LHarmonieentrelesopinionsdePlatonetdAristote.Textearabe et traduction par F. M. Najjar D. Mallet, Institut Franais de Damas, Damas 1999, p. 135.14.118SeeM.Mahdi, AlfarabiagainstPhiloponus ,Journalof NearEasternStudies 26(1967),p.23360,esp.p.236;Id., TheArabicTextof AlfarabisAgainstJohnthe Grammarian ,inS.A.Hanna(ed.),MedievalandMiddleEasternStudiesinHonorof Aziz SuryalAtiya,Brill,Leiden1972,p.26884,esp.p.26869.ThemsisIstanbul,Aya Sofya2450.119EditedbyU.Rudolph,DieDoxographiedespseudo-Ammonios.EinBeitragzurneupla-the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxxxiNeoplatonizing reworking ofHippolytus Refutatio omnium haeresium,120 so that any attempt at extending the inuence ofthe genuine Ammonius thoughtonfalsafafarbeyondthetraditionof commentaryonthe Organon seemsto be on thinice. Philoponus is known to Arab readers as John the Grammarian (Yahya al-Nahw); the K. al-Fihrist mentions his commentaries under the heading Aristotleandhasalsoaseparateentryonhim.Thefollowingcom-mentariesarementioned:ontheCategories,121Deinterpretatione,122Prior Analytics,123PosteriorAnalytics;124Physics,125Degen.corr.126Intheseparate entry,127 Ibn al-Nadm provides rst an account on Philoponus life and religious allegiance, then a list ofhis works other than the commentaries: Refutationof Proclusineighteenarguments,namely,theDeaeternitatemundi contra Proclum;128 a treatise On the fact that bodies have only a limited power;129 tonischenberlieferungimIslam,Steiner,Stuttgart1989(AbhandlungenfrdieKunde des Morgenlandes,49,1).120The adaptation ofHippolytus work was produced within Kinds circle, as shown by Rudolph, Die Doxographie des pseudo-Ammonius, passim in his running commentary. On this work and its role in shaping the views ofthe Arab readers about Greek philosophy, see also D. De Smet, Empedocles Arabus. Une lecture noplatonicienne tardive, Brepols, Bruxelles 1998 (Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten vanBelgi.KlassederLetteren.Jaargang60,1998,Nr.165).121K.al-Fihrist,p.248.21Flgel=p.309.4Tagaddud. 122Lost inGreek;K.al-Fihrist,p.249.2Flgel=p.309.12Tagaddud. 123K.al-Fihrist,p.249.9Flgel=p.309.19Tagaddud;seeHugonnard-Roche Elamrani Jamal, LOrganon.Traditionsyriaqueetarabe ,p.518.124K.al-Fihrist,p.249.13Flgel=p.309.24Tagaddud;seeHugonnard-Roche ElamraniJamal, LOrganon.Traditionsyriaqueetarabe ,p.523.125Translated partly by Ibn Naima al-Hims and partly by Qusta ibn Luqa (K. al-Fihrist,p.250.18Flgel=p.311.1Tagaddud).TothisworkaPh.D.Diss.hasbeen devoted: E. Giannakis, Philoponus in the Arabic Tradition ofAristotles Physics, St. Antonys College, Oxford 1992.See further S. Harvey, The Impact ofPhiloponus Commentary onthePhysicsonAverroesthreecommentariesonthePhysics ,inP.Adamson H.BaltussenM.W.F.Stone(eds),Philosophy,ScienceandExegesisinGreek,Arabicand LatinCommentaries,Instituteof ClassicalStudies,Universityof London,London2004 (Bulletin of theInstituteof ClassicalStudies,Supplement83,2),p.89105.126K.al-Fihrist,p.251.7Flgel=p.311.20Tagaddud;seeRashed, Degeneratione etcorruptione.Traditionarabe ,p.312.127K.al-Fihrist,p.254.19255.5Flgel=p.314.27315.10Tagaddud.128As recalled above, n. 67, remnants ofan early translation ofthis work have been found by A. Hasnaoui, Alexandre dAphrodise vs Jean Philopon . Proclus arguments have beentranslatedintoArabictwice:seeEndre, ProclusArabus,p.1518.129This title is reminiscent ofPhiloponus axiom omnis corporis potentia est nita, worked out mostly in the writing against Aristotle; cf. S. Pines, An Arabic Summary ofa Lost Workof JohnPhiloponus ,IsraelOrientalStudies2(1972),p.32052(repr.inStudies inArabicVersionsof GreekTextsandinMediaevalScience,TheMagnesPressBrill,Jeru-salem Leiden 1986[TheCollectedWorksof ShlomoPines,2],p.294326).xxxiithe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionaRefutationof Aristotleinsixchapters;130acommentaryonAristotles ProblemataPhysica;131aRefutationof Nestorius(spurious);aRefutationofthosewhodonotunderstandandanExpositionof somebooksbyGalen.An epitome ofa treatise On the contingency ofthe world (or createdness: /adaj), which is both unknown in Greek and not mentioned in the Arab bio-bibliographies,hasbeenfoundinArabic.132Finally,notethateven thoughPhiloponuscommentaryontheDeanimawasnotknown,a Neoplatonic compendium ofthis Aristotelian work translated into Arabic at the beginnnins offalsafa133 conveys many distinctive ideas held in it.134SimpliciuscommentaryontheCategoriesismentionedintheK.al-Fihrist.135 We are also told that Simplicius is credited with a commentary ontheDeanima,whichhadbeenwrittenforacertainAjawalsand wasextantbothinSyriacandArabic.136TheK.al-Fihristmentions 130Only fragmentarily extant in Greek (see Philoponus, Against Aristotle, On the Eternity of theWorld,transl.byCh.Wildberg,CornellUniversityPress,Ithaca1987);onthe Arabic testimony see Mahdi, Alfarabi against Philoponus ; Id., The Arabic Text ofAlfarabis Against John the Grammarian ; Pines, An Arabic Summary ofa Lost Work . See also M. Rashed, The Problem ofthe Composition ofthe Heavens (5291610): ANewFragmentof PhiloponusanditsReaders ,inAdamsonBaltussenStone (eds), Philosophy,ScienceandExegesis,p.3557.131TheK.al-FihristmentionsthisworkasthebookonAristotlesMblquestions (=howisitthat . . .?)seeM.Steinschneider,Al-Farabi(Alpharabius)desarabischen PhilosophenLebenundSchriftenmitbesondererRcksichtauf dieGeschichtedergriechischen WissenschaftunterdenArabern,nebstAnhngenJoh.PhiloponusbeidenArabern;Lebenund Testament des Aristoteles von Ptolemaeus, Darstellung der Philosophie Platos, Grsstentheils nach HandschriftlichenQuellen,MmoiresdelAcadmieImprialedesSciencesdeSt. Petersbourg,VIIIesrie,tomeXIII,n.4,1869(repr.PhiloPress,Amsterdam1966), p.161;seealsoL.S.Filius, LatraditionorientaledesProblemataPhysica ,inGoulet (ed.), DictionnairedesPhilosophesAntiques.Supplment,p.59398,esp.p.594.132See Pines, An Arabic Summary ofa Lost Work and G. Troupeau, Un pi-tom arabe du De contingentia mundi de Jean Philopon , in E. Lucchesi H. D. Saffrey (eds), Antiquit paenne et chrtienne, Mmorial Andr-Jean Festugire, P. Cramer, Genve 1984, p.7788.133Edited by R. Arnzen, Aristoteles De Anima. Eine verlorene sptantike Paraphrase in arabi-scher und persischer berlieferung. Arabischer Text nebst Kommentar, Quellengeschichtlichen StudienundGlossaren,Brill,LeidenNewYorkKln1998(AristotelesSemitico-Latinus,9);foranothermsof thesamecompendiumseeinthisvolumetheessayby M.Sebti.134See R. Arnzen, De anima. Paraphrase arabe anonyme , in Goulet (ed.), Diction-nairedesPhilosophesAntiques,Supplment,p.35965,andElamraniJamal, Deanima. Tradition arabe ,p.35354.135K. al-Fihrist, p. 248.21 Flgel = p. 309.5 Tagaddud. It seems that a certain Theo madetheSyriacandArabicversions(p.248.21Flgel=p.309.5Tagaddud:see F. W. Zimmermann, Al-Farabis Commentary and Short Treatise on Aristotles De interpretatione, OxfordU.P.,London1981,p.ciin.1).136According to M. Tardieu, Les calendriers en usage Harran daprs les sour-the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxxxiiiOlympiodoruscommentaryontheMeteorologica137andDegen.corr.;138 acommentaryontheDeanima,unknowninGreek,isalsosaidtobe extantinSyriacandavailabletoIbnal-NadminthehandwritingofYahya ibn Ad.139 Elias, the Alexandrian commentator, may or may not be the person hinted at under the name Alnus, who is credited with a commentary on the Categories.140 Finally, a commentary by Stephanus ofAlexandriaontheCategoriesismentioned,141aswellasacommentary onthe Deinterpretatione.142 Even bearing in mind that a mention in the K. al-Fihrist does not equal proofofthe knowledge ofa given work, and even taking into account thatthecasesof Greekworkswhicharesaidtohavebeentranslated and have been actually found are comparatively few with regard to the considerableamountof thetitlesquoted,attheendof thissurveyit cesarabesetlecommentairedeSimpliciuslaPhysiquedAristote ,dansI.Hadot (ed.)Simplicius.Savie,sonuvre,sasurvie.ActesducolloqueinternationaldeParis,28 sept.1er oct. 1985, de Gruyter, Berlin New York 1987 (Peripatoi, 15), p. 4057, and I.Hadot,Simplicius.CommentairesurleManueldEpictte.ChapitresIXXIX,LesBelles Lettres, Paris 2001 (Collection des Universits de France), p. viixxxiii, esp. p. xxii, the factthatthecommentarywaswrittenforthisAjawalssupportsthehypothesisthat SimpliciuswrotethiscommentaryatHarran;seeM.Aouad, Ajawals ,inGoulet (ed.), Dictionnaire des Philosophes Antiques, I, p. 63739; on the commentary attributed to Simplicius see Elamrani Jamal, De anima. Tradition arabe , p. 353; on the hypothesis thatSimpliciussettleddownatHarranafterhavingleftChosroescourtseethetwo up-to-date papers (both critical) by C. Luna, review ofR. Thiel, Simplikios und das Ende derneuplatonischenSchuleinAthen,publishedinMnemosyne54(2001),p.482504,and R.LaneFox, Harran,TheSabiansandthelatePlatonistmovers ,inA.Smith (ed.), The Philosopher and Society in Late Antiquity. Essays in Honour ofPeter Brown, The Classical Pressof WalesCambridgeU.P.,Cambridge2005,p.23144.137K.al-Fihrist,p.251.8Flgel=311.22Tagaddud;theworkwastranslatedby Abu Bir Matta and annotated by Abu Amr al-Tabar (see A. Hasnaoui, Un lve d Abu Bir Matta ibn Yunus: Abu Amr al-Tabar , Bulletin dtudes Orientales 48 [1996], p.3555,esp.p.412).Thecommentaryisextant;seeSchoonheim, Mtorologiques. Tradition syriaque,arabeetlatine ,p.326.138K. al-Fihrist, p. 251.5 Flgel = p. 311.18 Tagaddud. The work was translated by Abu Bir Matta and revised by Yahya ibn Ad, but an ancient translation by Ustaj is alsomentioned:seeRashed, Degenerationeetcorruptione.Traditionarabe ,p.312.139K.al-Fihrist,p.251.1314Flgel=p.311.26Tagaddud;seeElamraniJamal, Deanima.Traditionarabe ,p.354.140K.al-Fihrist,p.248.21Flgel=p.309.4Tagaddud;however,otheridentica-tions have been proposed: see A. Elamrani Jamal, Alnus (Allnus) , in Goulet (ed.), DictionnairedesPhilosophesAntiques.I,p.15152.141Lost inGreek;K.al-Fihrist,p.248.2021Flgel=p.309.4Tagaddud.142K.al-Fihrist,p.249.2Flgel=p.309.13Tagaddud;thiswork,accordingto Zimmermann,Al-FarabisCommentaryandShortTreatise,p.xciii,mighthavebeennot unknowntoal-Farab.xxxivthe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionseemstomethatitisfairtoassumethattheknowledgeof theLate Ancient philosophical tradition counts as a necessary step in the knowl-edgeof theArab reception ofGreek philosophical heritage.Therstpartof thisvolumeexplorestheriseof thecorpusof the philosophicalreadingsinLateAntiquity,andthankstothedeep, all-embracingsurveybyRichardGoulet,aswellastothestudieson theMiddlePlatonicforerunnersof theLateAncientcurriculumby BurkhardReisandonthePlotiniancorpusavailabletoEusebiusofCaesarea by Marie-Odile Goulet-Caz it allows the reader to see at work those processes ofdissemination ofphilosophical texts and organi-sation ofthe curriculum, which ended in the transmission to later ages of theheritageof Greekclassicalthought.Theso-calledcollection philosophique, i.e., a Byzantine corpus ofphilosophical texts mostly related to the Neoplatonic tradition coming from Alexandria is a case in point ofsuch a transmission: several essays gathered in the rst part of thisvolumeupdatetheresearchonthislivingexampleof translatio studiorum. Father Henri Dominique Saffrey O.P. has honoured our vol-umewiththeastonishinghistoryof oneof themostillustriousitems ofthis collection, the Paris manuscript A ofPlato, whose model went fromAlexandriatoByzantium,andwhichtravelledfromByzantium toArmenia,andthentothelibraryof FrancescoPetrarca.Philippe Hoffmann, Guglielmo Cavallo and Didier Marcotte explore the nature, constitution and problems ofthis collection, whose nucleus traces back to the library of a Neoplatonic circle in Alexandria.Theroleof Neoplatonisminthetransmissionof thephilosophi-calheritagewasdecisive,andonecangetaneloquentexamplefrom Concetta Lunas examination ofthe textual tradition ofSyrianus com-mentaryontheMetaphysics:thearchetypestemsfromXIVthcentury Byzantium, but the lemmata (quoted in extenso by Syrianus) might trace backtotheAristoteliantextreadbySyrianushimself,inVthcentury AthensfourcenturiesearlierthantheearliestGreekmanuscriptoftheMetaphysicsknowntous.Also,theinuenceinByzantiumof the Neoplatonicorderingandinterpretationof Aristotleslogicalwritings studiedbyMichelCacouros,theomnipresenceof theNeoplatonic commentariesandtreatisesSimplicius,studiedbyPantlisGolitsis; Philoponus and Proclus, examined by Eudoxie Delli; Iamblichus, Proclus andMarinus,dealtwithbyArisPapamanolakisshowtherelevance of theNeoplatonictraditioninshapingtheancientheritageinthe Byzantine world. It comes as no surprise that the Armenian, Syriac and Arabic philosophical traditions bear more than traces ofthe Neoplatonic approach to readingand interpreting Plato and Aristotle.the libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionxxxvThesecondpartof thisvolumeisdevotedtothetransmissionoftheGreekheritage.ThetranslationsintoArmenianof theso-called Hellenizingschool(VIthVIIIthcenturies)showastrikingsimilarity withthecoevalSyriaccorpus:bothappearintrinsicallyrelatedtothe traditionsof learninginAlexandriaattheendof Antiquity,andthe essaybyValentinaCalzolarishowshowinstructivetherecourseto theArmeniantranslationscanbe.AsfortheSyriactradition,Henri Hugonnard-Roches survey ofthe extant philosophical corpus counts as an inventory ofthe extant material and shows the intrinsic relationship betweenthelogicalcorpusof Sergiusof ResaynaandtheschoolofAmmonius son ofHermias. Sebastian Brock, as sceptic as he might be on the alleged existence ofa Syriac Vorlage for the Theology ofAristotle, points to the Christian Neoplatonic circles ofVIth century Syria as to the milieu which can explain the adaptations ofPlotinus thought and wordingexhibitedbytheArabicTheology.VittorioBertidirectsour attention to the testimony ofthe Alexandrian logical corpus present in letter19of PatriarchTimothy(VIIIthcentury),whoaskedforbooks from the library ofa monastery in possession ofAristotles logical texts (plusthe Poetics)andtheir Neoplatonic commentaries.Many contributions ofthe second part ofthis volume focus on the Abbasid era, its translations from Greek and the arising ofthe philo-sophicalliteratureinArabic.ThePlatonic,Aristotelian,Peripatetic, NeophythagoreanandNeoplatonictextsatthedisposalof al-Kind, thefaylasf al-arab,areexaminedbyGerhardEndreagainstthe background ofthe competing literary and intellectual schools ofearly Abbasidsociety:al-Kindrevealshimself asaconsciouscontinuator ofthe learned traditions ofthe Neoplatonic schools ofLate Antiquity, aimingatasynthesisbetweentheethicalandmathematicalpropae-deuticsagainstthebackgroundof theNeoplatonic,Neopythagorean andPeripateticmodels.TheAlexandrianpatternisanalyzedby PeterAdamsoninhisstudyof Kindsselectionandorderingof the Aristotelianbooks,rootedinlaterNeoplatonicviewsabouttheparts of Aristotlesphilosophy.ThefactthatNeoplatonismwasamajor source in Kinds intellectual milieu becomes even more evident ifone takesintoaccounthisinvolvementinthepseudo-Theologyof Aristotle, the writing which the study by Dimitri Gutas deals with, describing its textual tradition and making comparisons with the Greek ofPlotinus. The close relationship to Alexandria and its scholarly tradition is indeed aprominentfeatureof theformativeperiodof thephilosophicaland scienticliteratureinArabic:inHinrichBiesterfeldtsessay,weare xxxvithe libraries of the neoplatonists. an introductionpresentedwiththecommentaryontheHippocraticaphorismsbythe Alexandrian iatrosophist Palladius, lost in Greek. A polemical work by the famous man ofletters al-Gahz, examined by James Montgomery, shows to what extent the rst, seminal version ofte thought (raism orproto-imamism)wasinuencedbytheNeoplatonicmaterialsjust translated.BothMontgomerysessayandthefar-reaching,detailed survey by Daniel De Smet on Ismal literature and its problems show thewidespreadinuenceof Neoplatonismfarbeyondtheboundaries offalsafa.The Neoplatonic and Aristotelian corpus translated into Arabic under the auspices ofal-Kind continued to be read even in later ages. Two manuscripts,containingrespectivelysomeexcerptafromtheArabic Plotinusplusanimpressiveseriesof GreekandArabicphilosophical texts,andaNeoplatonicparaphraseof theDeanima,arestudiedby Emily Cottrell and Meryem Sebti: both essays vividly show how many textscanstillbediscoveredinWesternandOrientallibraries.Not onlytheArabicPlotinus,butalsotheArabicProcluscontinuedtobe inuential thanks to the Kindian corpus: Elvira Wakelnigs analysis ofal-Amirs Book ofthe Chapters on Metaphysical Topics presents the reader withafreeparaphraseof ProclusElementsof Theologygivingthetes-timony ofthe (anonymous) circulation, in the Xth century Khurasan, ofmore Proclean propositions in Arabic than those which have come downtous.The tradition oflearning rooted in the Neoplatonic schools ofLate Antiquitycontinuedtoshapethefalsafaof laterages,accompanying andfosteringphilosophicalthinkingforcenturies.Itisinstructiveto seehowclosearetheinterpretationsof AristotlesCategoriesof the Alexandriancommentatorsof VIthcenturyandthoseof theXIth centuryBaghdadAristotelianIbnal-Tayyib,examinedbyCleophea Ferrari:thisisnotonlyamatterof Quellenforschung,butthetestimony ofan intellectual sharing among scholars who did not feel the linguistic andreligiousdifferencesaswalls,letaloneimpassableones.Thelast studyinthisvolume,StevenHarveysanalysisof thelibraryof the MedievalJewishphilosophers,bringsinasensethisadventuretoits conclusion: an uninterrupted chain ofadaptations and translations into variouslanguagesputatthedisposalof scholarsatworkinboththe ArabicandLatinMedievaloikoumeneacorpusof readingswhichhas nourished the thought ofthe philosophers and granted the survival ofGreekclassical philosophy.Cristina DAncona, Pisa, July 2006PARTONEPLATO,ARISTOTLE ANDTHEIR NEOPLATONIC READINGS: THE GREEK TRADITIONRETOUR SUR LE PARISINUS GRAECUS 1807LE MANUSCRIT A DE PLATONHenri Dominique Saffrey*Ce nouvel article voudrait revenir sur celui qui constitue ma contribution aux Mlanges John Whittaker : Nouvelles observations sur le manuscrit Parisinusgraecus1807 envuedelerectieretdelecomplter.1Pour tenterdereconstituerlhistoiredumanuscritAdePlaton,leParisinus graecus1807,nousnedisposonsquedepeudindices.Outreletexte lui-mme et les scholies anciennes qui ne nous apprennent rien sur la postritdumanuscrit,nousnepouvonsnousappuyerquesurdeux notesmanuscrites,luneenlatindanslamargesuprieureduf.128r, lautreunenotedepossessionengrecauf.344v.Ilfaudradoncfaire appeldesconsidrations plus gnrales.Cestverslanne850quecemanuscritatconfectionn.2Ilne contientquelesttralogiesVIIIetIXdePlaton,lesDnitionsetles Spuria.IlsembledoncquelondoiveleconsidrercommeletomeII dunPlatoncompletdontletomeI,contenantlesttralogiesIVII, seraitlarchtypeduMarcianusapp.gr.IV1(sigleT).Cesdeuxtomes constituantluvrecompletdePlatonpourraienttrelacopiedun modledatantduVIesicle,selonJeanIrigoin.3Ilestprobableque le manuscrit de Paris est un manuscrit de translittration. Il aurait t *Je remercie Antonio Carlini, Concetta Luna, Jean-Pierre Mah, Marwan Rashed et Alain-Ph. Segonds, dont les avis mont t prcieux dans llaboration et la rdaction decet article.1M.Joyal(d.),StudiesinPlatoandthePlatonicTradition.EssayspresentedtoJohn Whittaker,Ashgate,AldershotBrookeld1997,p.293307,reproduitdansH.D. Saffrey, Le noplatonisme aprs Plotin II, Vrin, Paris 2000 (Histoire des doctrines de lAn-tiquitclassique,24),p.25566.2La description la plus soigne de ce manuscrit se trouve dans larticle de L. Perria, ScritturaeornamentazioneneicodicidellaCollezionelosoca ,Rivistadistudi bizantinieneoellenicin.s.28(1991),p.45111,enpart.p.5662.SurLidiaPerria (13.12.03),voirlarticlencrologiquedans ByzantinischeZeitschrift97(2004),p.51820 (F. DAiuto).3Cf.J.Irigoin,dansAnnuaireduCollgedeFrance,Rsumdescoursettravaux, 19851986,p.68586,reproduitdansJ.Irigoin,Traditionetcritiquedestextesgrecs,Les BellesLettres,Paris1997,p.15152.4henri dominique saffreydestin,avecdautreslivresissusdummescriptorium,quiconstituent la Collection philosophique,4 la bibliothque du palais imprial de la Magnaure dans la rorganisation des tudes suprieures mene par le futur csar Bardas, comme la propos Marwan Rashed.5 Le copiste la pourvu de scholies anciennes quil a trouves, semble-t-il, dans son modle.Ilnyapasdesouscriptionetledernierquaternionaperdu son dernier feuillet. Au dbut du Xe sicle, il a t partiellement6 copi par le copiste du Vaticanus graecus 1 (sigle O) pour raliser le tome II dun autre Platon complet dont le tome I serait le Bodleianus, Clarke 39 (sigle B), copi en 895 pour Arthas et achet par E. D. Clarke en 1801 au monastre de Patmos. Dans le courant du Xe sicle, deux correcteurs ont relu le Parisinus graecus 1807 en ajoutant de nouvelles scholies sur le texte des Lois : lun crit avec une encre noire depuis le f. 184r jusqu la n, lautre avec une encre blonde et une criture trs ne depuis le f. 161v jusqu la n. Encore dans le Xe sicle, deux normes lacunes dceles dans les Lois, dune part au livre V (f. 201r = 745 A 2-C 3), dautre part aulivreVI(f.215r=783B2-D4),onttrparespardeuxlongs 4Cf. dabord, T. W. Allen, A Group ofNinth-Century Greek Manuscripts , Journal of Philology21(1893),p.4865,puis,entreautres,J.Irigoin, Survieetrenouveau delalittratureantiqueConstantinople(IXesicle) ,Cahiersdecivilisationmdivale5 (1952), p. 299, reproduit dans La tradition des textes grecs, Les Belles Lettres, Paris 2003, p.21617;B.L.Fonkitch, Scriptoriabizantini,risultatieprospettivedellaricerca , Rivistadistudibizantinieneoellenicin.s.1719(19801982),p.73118,enparticulier p.9399;L.G.Westerink,Damascius,TraitdesPremiersPrincipesI,LesBellesLettres, Paris1986(CollectiondesUniversitsdeFrance),p.lxxiiilxxx,etId., DasRtsel desuntergrndigenNeuplatonismus ,dans.FestschriftfrMartin Sicherl,Schning,Paderborn1990,p.10523.Endernierlieu,voirA.CataldiPalau, UnnuovocodicedellaCollezioneFilosoca,ilpalinsestoParisinusgraecus2575 , Scriptorium55(2001),p.24974.Enfait,cesontdeuxmanuscritsdelaCollection philosophique qui sont ainsi retrouvs, le Commentaire de Simplicius sur les Catgories et celui dAmmonius sur le De interpretatione. Le manuscrit Paris. gr. 2575 a t copi par Georges Baiophoros Constantinople en 1424, il est intressant de constater qu cette datecesdeuxmanuscritsdelaCollectionphilosophiquentaientplusconsidrs comme particulirement prcieux ! On connaissait dj le cas du manuscrit Paris. Suppl. gr. 921 (XIV e s.) qui est palimpseste et dont le premier texte donne des fragments du CommentairedeProclussurleTime,cf.C.AstrucetM.-L.Concasty,Cataloguedes manuscrits grecs, Troisime Partie, Le supplment grec, t. III, Bibliothque Nationale, Paris 1960,p.1921.5Cf.M.Rashed, NicolasdOtrante,GuillaumedeMoerbekeetlaCollection philosophique ,StudiMedievali,3a s.,43(2002),p.693717,etL.D.Reynoldsand N.G.Wilson,ScribesandScholars.AGuidetotheTransmissionof GreekandLatinLiterature, OxfordU.P.,Oxford1968,p.5053,trad.fran.parC.BertrandetP.Petitmengin, DHomrerasme,d.duCNRS,Paris1988,p.3941.6 partir de Lois V 746 B 8 (f. 201r) et jusqu la n, le manuscrit O est copi sur lemanuscritA.retour sur le PARISINUS GRAECUS 18075supplmentscritsenminusculesdanslesmargesinfrieures.Notons ds maintenant que le second supplment est prcd de lavertissement suivant : (dans certaines copies, ontrouveaussicequisuit).Nouscomprenonsdoncquececorrecteurne proposecesupplmentqutoutesnsutilesetnonpascommeun complment ncessaire. Nous constatons aussi que ce correcteur avait sa disposition plusieurs manuscrits vraisemblablement crits en onciale contenant le texte des Lois de Platon. Daprs Jean Irigoin, ces lacunes sont dues lomission de deux feuillets du modle.7 Nous pensons que lesmanuscritsA,OetBsetrouvaientalorsConstantinopleoils ontputreconservsjusquauXIesicleetmmebienau-delpour lesmanuscrits O et B, nous le verrons. Iciunehypothsesrieusedoittreconsidre.Noussavonsque leclbreGrgoireMagistros(ca9901058),a,auXIesicle,traduit dugrecenarmnienplusieursdialoguesdePlaton.Cefaitdemande uneexplicationquipourraittrelasuivante.Princearmniendela famille des Pahlavides, Grgoire avait reu une ducation soigne Ani, capitaledelArmnieBagratide.8Iljouaunrlepolitiqueetmilitaire importantauprsduroiGagikII.En1045,ilaccompagnaceroi Constantinople o ce dernier devait rencontrer lempereur Constantin IX Monomaque pour concder lannexion du royaume dAni lEmpire byzantin.9 En mme temps, Grgoire cdait lempereur son domaine de Bjni et recevait en change des territoires situs en Armnie du Sud etenMsopotamie,aveclestitreshonoriquesdeMagistrosetdedux de Tarn, de Vaspourakan et de Msopotamie. Lempereur Constantin IX Monomaque rgna de 1042 1055. Sous son rgne taient apparus 7Cf. J. Irigoin, Accidents matriels et critique des textes , Revue dHistoire des Textes 16(1986),p.136,enpart.p.1214,reproduitdansId.,Latraditiondestextesgrecs, p. 79131, en part. p. 9394, et Annuaire du Collge de France, Rsum des cours et tra-vaux,19851986,p.685,reproduitdansId., Tradition etcritique,p.152.8Cf.K.H.Maksoudian, GrigorMagistros ,Dictionaryof theMiddleAges,vol.5, Scribner,NewYork1985,p.675,etengnral,voirG.Schlumberger, Lpopebyzan-tinelanduX esicle,t.III,Hachette,Paris1905,p.48395,etsurtoutJ.-P.Mah, Lglisearmniennede6111066 ,dansHistoireduChristianismedesoriginesnos jours, IV, Descle, Paris 1993, p. 457547. On possde encore une icne (bois sculpt) reprsentant une descente de croix, qui a t offerte, en 1031, par Grgoire Magistros aucouventdeHawuctar,actuellementconserveaumusedEjmiacin ;cetteicne ainuencplusieurskhatchkarsauXIIIesicle,cf.J.-M.ThierryetP.Donabdian, Lesartsarmniens,Mazenod,Paris1987,p.128,389(g.292)etp.206,408(g.107, 361,363).9Voir la carte de lEmpire byzantin agrandi des royaumes armniens dans C. Muta-anet .Van Lauwe, Atlashistorique delArmnie,Autrement,Paris 2001,p. 51.6henri dominique saffreyde nouveaux ennemis, en Orient, les Turcs Seldjoukides, en Occident, lesNormands.EntablissantlafrontiredelempireenArmnie,la puissanceimprialevoulaitcontenirlapressionseldjoukide.En1049, cest Grgoire Magistros qui repoussa une invasion des Seldjoukides. En 1045, lanne mme o le roi Gagik et le prince Grgoire sjournaient Constantinople,lempereurConstantinIXMonomaquedcidait larouverturedelcoleimprialeoMichaelPsellus(10181078) taitofciellementconstituhypatosdesphilosophes.10Psellusranima Constantinopleuneferveurphilosophiqueplatonicienne.11Onpeut envisagercommeunequasicertitudequeGrgoireetPsellussesont rencontrs alors, et la concidence des dates laisse penser que linuence dePsellusapufairenatredanslecurdeGrgoireledsirdetra-duirePlatonpourlefaireconnatresescompatriotesarmniens.12 Cest la n de sa vie, lorsque Grgoire se retira dans ses terres, quil se livra, pensons-nous, aux tudes littraires qui font sa rputation, en particulier la traduction de plusieurs dialogues de Platon, parmi eux le TimeetlesLois.13Ilfautdoncquilaiteuenmainunmanuscritgrec contenant ces dialogues : le Parisinus graecus 1807 remplit cette condition ncessaire mais non sufsante. LatraductionarmniennedePlatonattudieparFrdricC. Conybeare,landuXIXesicle,dansquatrearticlesfondamen-tauxsurcettequestion.14IltablitdabordqueGrgoireMagistros 10Cf.F.Fuchs,DiehherenSchulenvonKonstantinopelimMittelalter,Teubner,Leipzig 1926,p.29.NousavonsunportraitdelempereurConstantinIXMonomaquesur une splendide mosaque de la cathdrale Sainte Sophie, dans la gallerie sud, o il est reprsent avec limpratrice Zo et un Christ en majest, cf. T. Whittemore, The Mosaics ofHaghia Sophia at Istanbul. Third preliminary Report, Work done in 19351938 : The Imperial PortraitsoftheSouthGallery,OxfordU.P.,Boston1942,p.920etpl.319.11Cf.J.Duffy, HellenicPhilosophyinByzantiumandthelonelyMissionofMichael Psellos , dans K. Ierodiakonou (d.), Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources, Clarendon, Oxford 2002, p. 13956, en part. p. 154 : No one will deny that a huge seachangecamewithPsellosintheeleventhcentury.Herewas,forthersttimein ages,aphilosopherwhotookthetroubletogivethesubjectamoresubstantialrole in intellectual life and who actively re-established contact with the exegetical tradition of thelateantiqueandearlyByzantinecenturies .12Cf.H.Alline,HistoiredutextedePlaton,Champion,Paris1915,p.28284.Une autre inuence de Psellus sur Grgoire peut tre aussi dcele dans le fait que Grgoire a traduit, non seulement des dialogues de Platon, mais aussi les lments de Thologie de ProclusquilaprobablementconnusparPsellus.13Cf. M. Leroy, Grgoire Magistros et les traductions armniennes dauteurs grecs , AnnuairedelInstitutdePhilologieetdHistoireOrientales(MlangesJ.Capart)III(1935), p. 163294, et J.-P. Mah, Quadrivium et cursus dtudes au VIIe sicle en Armnie etdanslemondebyzantin ,TravauxetMmoires.Centrederecherchedhistoireetcivilisation byzantines10(1987),p.159206,enpart.p.199,no6.14Cf. F. C. Conybeare, On the Ancient Armenian Version ofPlato , American Journal retour sur le PARISINUS GRAECUS 18077atraduitenarmniencinqdialoguesdePlaton,lEuthyphron,lApo-logiedeSocrate,leTime,lesLoisetleMinos.Ilprciseensuitequeces traductionssuiventmot--motlegrec,respectentlordredesmots etmmenefontparfoisquetranscrirelegrec.PourlEuthyphronet lApologie,ilmontrequelaversionarmnienneprsenteunetroite connexion avec un texte grec qui pourrait tre larchtype des manus-crits V (= Vat. gr. 225, XIVe s., cf. A. Carlini, RFIC 24 [1986], p. 371) etW(=Vind.Suppl.gr.7,XIes.)etdevraitremonterauXeoumme IXe s.15 Cela pourrait nous orienter vers le tome I de ldition complte de Platon dont le Paris. gr. 1807 serait le tome II (celle de la Collection philosophique).QuantauxdeuxarticlesqueConybeareaconsacrs latraductiondesLois,sonverdictestquellesuitengnralletexte duParis.gr.1807.Ilcrit :16 Inourexaminationof BooksIIII,we have shown that the Armenian adheres to the text ofthe Paris Codex 1807 in almost all cases where other MSS really apographs ofit, show deviations . Nous savons aujourdhui que les autres manuscrits ne sont pasdesapographesdeAmaisdeO.AudbutdulivreV,Conybeare compare la version armnienne au texte du Parisinus et celui de Sto-be qui est un tmoin indirect. Il trouve 17 cas o ces deux traditions diffrent,etilconclut :17 Inalltheseseventeencases,theArmenian version takes side with the Paris MS against Stobaeus . Pouvons-nous croire que Grgoire Magistros a effectivement traduit Platon sur les deux tomes qui contenaient les neufttralogies, le tome II tant le Parisinus graecus 1807 ? Mon ignorance de larmnien ne me permet pas de rien ajouterauxconclusionsde Conybeare.Il faut cependant rpondre une objection qui a t faite par A. C. Clark18etreleveparlePredesPlaces.19Siletraducteurarmnien suitletextedumanuscritAdePlaton,ilfautquilintgredansson texte les bonnes leons et les supplments fournis par les correcteurs du ofPhilology 12 (1891), p. 193210, Id., A Collation ofthe Old Armenian Version ofPlatosLaws,BookIV ,ibid.14(1893),p.33549,Id., ACollationof theAncient ArmenianVersionof PlatosLaws,BooksVandVI ,ibid.15(1894),p.3150,Id., OntheOldArmenianVersionof Platos Apology ,ibid.16(1895),p.30025.15Dans la nouvelle dition des Platonis Opera, Clarendon, Oxford 1995, les diteurs placentlaversionarmniennedanslafamille,larchtypeperdupourraittrele modle commun aux deux familles T et. Ce modle commun pourrait tre le tome I duPlatondontle Paris.gr.1807estletomeII.16Cf.Am.Jo