Schmitt C.B. (ed.) The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
The
availability
of ancient works
787
Plato but the corpus
of
Neoplatonic
interpretations
of
him, above all those
of
Plotinus, which he also
translated,
and those
of
Proclus.
He took these as
authoritative expositions, which imparted to the dialogues an orderliness
and coherence
that
they would otherwise have lacked. To be sure, his own
interpretations
of
the dialogues made original use
of
the elements he found
in the tradition; yet without the previous efforts of the Neoplatonists,
Ficino
would never have been able to bring off his feat of making the
Phaedrus
a formal account of
theology.
At the same time, Ficino accepted
from the Byzantines the notion
that
Plato himself, for all his literary artistry,
occupied
only an intermediate position in the chain of philosophers
stretching back towards the creation. Where Plato and Hermes Tris-
megistus agreed, Hermes was to be taken as Plato's source. These
assumptions,
given
currency by the wide circulation of Ficino's Plato, did
much to ensure
that
the Plato of the Renaissance was very far from the
original.
71
PLINY
the Elder (first century
AD)
provided in his
Naturalis historia
an
enormous encyclopaedia of ancient science, philosophy and pseudo-
science.
This circulated (in some 200 manuscripts) throughout the Middle
Ages,
serving as a
standard
reference work on ancient science and much else.
But
with the rise
of
humanism the text took on a new importance. It began
to
attract
formal commentaries, as it had not in the Middle
Ages.
The
earliest of these, by Giovanni de Matociis early in the fourteenth century,
simply
sorted out the difference between the Pliny of the
naturalis historia
and the younger Pliny
of
the
Letters.
But from the later fifteenth century on
the
Naturalis historia
attracted
a degree of
attention
rarely equalled. Printed
texts multiplied
—
twenty-two between the
editio
princeps
of
1469
and 1489.
Philologists
attempted to improve the texts, philosophers to reprove Pliny
by
showing
that
he had misunderstood either the
data
or his Greek sources.
The
Plinian commentary — more
than
forty appeared — became a
characteristic scientific genre of the Renaissance. And the work continued
to be a
standard
reference book and an object of scholarly dissection until
well
into the seventeenth century. Efforts were even made in
Protestant
universities to make Pliny take Aristotle's place as the basic text for
instruction in
natural
philosophy. And though these bore little fruit, the text
remained basic for anyone interested in the development
of
ancient
natural
philosophy.
72
PLOTINUS
(third
century
AD),
the founder of Neoplatonism, gave in his
71.
Kristeller 1979, pp. 50-65; M.J. B.
Allen
1984a.
72.
Catalogus translationum i960-, iv, pp. 297-422.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
788
Appendices
Enneads
a systematic but immensely difficult account of the order of the
universe and the relations between unity and multiplicity.
Argyropulos
used
him. More influential work was done by Ficino, who mastered his difficult
terminology and produced a
standard
edition and translation. The Latin text
reached
print
in 1492, the Greek in 1580. No work did more to ensure the
perpetuation of a Neoplatonic reading of Plato
than
this powerful and
attractive treatise, which appeared with the authoritative recommendation
of
Ficino as absolutely faithful to the original: 'Principio vos omnes
admoneo, qui divinum
audituri
Plotinum hue acceditis, ut Platonem ipsum
sub Plotini persona loquentem vos audituros existimetis.'
73
PLUTARCH
(d. c.
AD
120) assembled a vast series of
essays,
known as the
Moralia,
which deal with ethical, religious and pedagogical problems and
collect
the
views
of many thinkers (like Posidonius) whose own works do
not survive. As early as the fourteenth century, individual works began to
be sought out and
translated.
The
entire
Greek text was
printed
by Aldus in
1509,
and some of the most influential of the humanists
—
like Francesco
Bárbaro in the fifteenth century, and Erasmus in the sixteenth
—
translated,
adapted and plagiarised individual books. In vernacular translation he
provided a model of the loose philosophical essay which was imitated by
Montaigne and others.
74
PORPHYRY
(third
century
AD),
a vastly productive Neoplatonist, wrote
an introduction to Aristotle's
Organon
which was a staple of the medieval
arts
course (in a Latin version by Boethius). This work and the
commentaries on it remained very popular throughout the Renaissance
(eighteen editions, and thirty-two commentaries, appeared before 1500).
His
life
of Pythagoras, which would have found a ready market in the
Renaissance, in fact did not reach
print
in Greek or Latin until the
seventeenth century.
75
PROCLUS
(fifth century
AD)
wrote elaborate commentaries on Plato and
on Euclid,
Elements
1. Though his formidably difficult
Platonic
Theology
did
not reach
print
in Greek until
1618,
Ficino worked through it in manuscript
and gave some diffusion to its systematic reordering of Plato's gods in his
Phaedrus
commentary. The Euclid commentary, published in Greek in
1533,
and made far more accessible by the careful Latin translation (1560) by
F.
Barozzi,
offered an influential set of arguments about the existence of
a
single
scientia
which provided the basic theorems and principles
of
all
forms
of
mathematics, and attractive material about the history of Greek
73.
Ficino 1937, 1, pp.
exxvi-viii;
M.J. B.
Allen
1984a; quotation from Prefaces 1861, p. 603.
74.
Hirzel 1912. 75. Flodr 1973 s.v. Porphyry.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
The
availability
of ancient works
789
mathematics as
well.
This text played a vital role in the widespread late
sixteenth-century debates about the
nature
and foundations of mathemat-
ics.
Finally, a treatise on the sphere (actually consisting of extracts from
Geminus
(first century)), was
printed
in Greek in 1536 and in a Latin
translation by Linacre in the same year. This became one of the basic
sixteenth-century manuals of elementary astronomy.
76
Claudius
PTOLEMY
(second century
AD)
wrote elaborate manuals of
astrology
and astronomy. The former, the
Tetrabiblos,
had long been
available
in the Latin translation of Plato of
Tivoli,
and reached
print
in
1484.
It found a wide readership throughout the sixteenth century, both
within and outside the profession. The
latter,
the
Almagest,
was perhaps the
most imposing single scientific work to survive from antiquity. It offered
both a powerful set of arguments in favour of a geocentric world picture
and an elaborate and profound mathematical account
of
the movements of
the sun, the moon and the planets from Mercury to Saturn. Gerard of
Cremona's translation had long circulated in manuscript and reached
print
in
1515,
while a new translation by George of Trebizond, with commen-
tary, was prepared in 1451 and found ten manuscript copies and four
printed
editions, the first in
1528.
The Greek text was first
printed
in 1538,
with
Theon's commentary. But all this activity was in a sense secondary, for
neither Latin translation offered a reliable (or even a usable) guide through
the formidable technical problems
of
the text.
All
Renaissance astronomers
approached the
Almagest
through the so-called
Epitome
—
in fact a brilliant
critical
résumé with much supplementary
matter
—
prepared by Peurbach
and finished by Regiomontanus in the early 1460s. The inaccurate
Venice
1496
edition of this text was Ptolemy's astronomy, for all practical
purposes, for the sixteenth century.
77
PYTHAGORAS
(sixth century
BC),
the founder of an ancient philo-
sophico-religious
sect, was all too
well
known to Renaissance readers
through the distorting medium
of
forged
and secondary books: the
Golden
Verses
attributed
to him, which went through more
than
100 editions
because they were used in teaching, and won a translation from Ficino and a
commentary from the elder
Beroaldo;
the
life
of
him by Diogenes Laertius;
and book xv of Ovid's
Metamorphoses,
another
schoolroom standby. He
was
widely
held to have glimpsed some basic Christian
truths
in advance,
and many Renaissance scholars took a
hand
in the pleasant game
of
tracing
Plato's doctrines back to him.
78
76.
Saffrey
1959; Crapulli 1969.
77.
George of Trebizond 1984, pp. 748-50; Swerdlow 1973. 78. Heninger 1974.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
790
Appendices
SENECA
(AD
4-65) provided the Middle
Ages
and the Renaissance not
only
with their
chief
store of tragedies but with a long series of
essays
on
philosophical
topics ranging from ethics to
natural
philosophy. His
dialogues
survive in more
than
100 manuscripts; his letters were a popular
source for the precepts
of
the
Stoics
in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
His works enjoyed a
lively
printed
tradition (six complete editions between
1475
and 1492) and received commentaries and other editorial work from
Erasmus and Lipsius. From late in the sixteenth century Seneca became
more and more popular as the model
of
a philosopher living
under
tyrants
and teaching a Stoic morality
that
would promote survival. Curiously,
though, at no point in the Renaissance did the renewed interest in Seneca's
work
and
life
or the efforts of the best philologists prevent most readers
from
thinking him a good Christian.
79
SEXTUS
EMPIRICUS (second century
AD)
wrote the most systematic
treatments
of ancient scepticism
—
and many aspects of ancient logic
—
to
survive.
Though a partial translation was made during the Middle
Ages
and
Greek
manuscripts circulated in Italy from the early fifteenth century,
systematic study of him seems to have begun in the circle of Savonarola,
who
saw him as a useful tool for confuting the claims to wisdom of the
pagans and asked two friends to
translate
him. Gianfrancesco Pico della
Mirandola actually used Sextus heavily in his
Examen
vanitatis
doctrinae
gentium
(1520).
But full texts only became available in the wake
of
the mid-
century religious crisis, when many came to see dogmatism as a destructive
force
in human affairs. Henri Estienne and Gentian Hervet made Sextus
available
in
Latin
(Outlines
of
Pyrrhonism,
1562; Adversus mathematicos,
1569).
And
within little more
than
ten years Montaigne was making brilliant use
of
this new material in his
Apologie
de
Raimond Sebond.
Many philosophers
followed
his lead in the next half-century. The case is a revealing one.
Though
no Greek text became available until
1621,
Pico's summary and the
Latin
translations provided ample fodder for thought about the sceptical
tradition at the time when it was central to European culture.
80
SIMPLICIUS
(sixth century AD) wrote elaborate commentaries on
Aristotle's
Physics, Categories, De anima and De caelo. The
Greek
text
of the
Categories
reached
print
in 1499, the rest in 1527. The De
anima
commentary, discovered by Giovanni
Pico,
was used by
Nifo
even before
the text was available in
print,
and played an
important
role in the rich
sixteenth-century controversies on Averroes'
interpretation
of Aristotle's
79.
Ettinghausen 1972; Texts and Transmission 1983, pp.
357-81.
80. Schmitt
1983c;
cf.
Cavini
1977.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
The
availability
of ancient works
doctrine on the intellect. The De
caelo
commentary played a vital role later
in the century, as the richest source available for the history of the
homocentric astronomy of Eudoxus and Callippus.
81
STOBAEUS
(fifth century
AD)
left an anthology of some 500 Greek
authors, including many fragments not elsewhere preserved. The Greek
text and a translation, edited by Willem Canter, were published by Plantin
in
1575.
Canter's careful comparison of those sections of Stobaeus' work
that
derived from the
Deplacitisphilosophorum
ascribed to Plutarch with the
original
is one of the earliest serious efforts to study the Greek
doxographical
tradition.
82
THEMISTIUS
(c. 317-88) wrote
important
commentaries on Aristotle.
That on the De
anima
in particular proved vital, since
Averroes
and Thomas
Aquinas
drew opposed conclusions from it on the vital question
of
the unity
of
the intellect. William of Moerbeke had
translated
it in 1267; Ermolao
Barbaro produced a new version in 1481 and L. Nogarola (who
complained: 'Hermolai interpretationem,
praeter
vates et ariolos, intelliget
nemo')
another
in 1559, of book in.
83
THEOPHRASTUS
(372/0-288/6
BC),
Aristotle's successor as head of
the Peripatetic School, wrote voluminously on many subjects, and some of
his work circulated in Latin,
under
Aristotle's name, during the Middle
Ages.
But real knowledge of him became possible only in the fifteenth
century, after Giovanni Aurispa brought manuscripts of his botanical and
other works from Constantinople to Italy. Theodore Gaza
translated
his
works
on plants for Nicholas V; these versions, which went through many
printings, were themselves fundamental to the sixteenth-century renova-
tion of botany. The first edition of the Greek text of most of his works
appeared in 1497, in
Aldus'
Aristotle. Two great Greek-Latin editions, the
latter
the work of Daniel Heinsius
(1613),
added other works, such as the
Characters.
84
81.
Nardi 1958, ch. 13; N.
Jardine
1984. 82. Prefaces 1861, pp. 584-90.
83.
Nardi 1958, ch. 13; quotation at p. 367. 84. Catalogus translationum i960-,
11,
pp. 239-322.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
23
THE
NATURE
OF THE
PHILOSOPHICAL
TEXTBOOK
We
must
start
by defining what is meant by 'textbook', a modern
term
more or less equivalent to other formulations such as manual,
cursus,
or
systema.
In the most general way a textbook can be said to be a book
specifically
designated for classroom use. As the universities developed
from the twelfth century onwards, it was the writings of Aristotle which
dominated in most scientific and philosophical subjects. In general for the
Middle
Ages
and Renaissance down to the end of the sixteenth century,
classroom instruction in philosophy was based upon a direct reading of
Aristotle's
works in Latin translation, though
there
were some exceptions.
The
one branch of philosophy where a manual derived from Aristotle
replaced a reading
of
the master's works quite early was in the field
of
logic.
Thus,
Porphyry's
Isagoge
and the De
sexprincipiis
had both become a
part
of
the Aristotelian
logic
corpus by the high Middle
Ages.
In the
thirteenth
century other manuals came into play, the most famous example being
Peter of Spain's
Summule
logicales.
Though not entirely absent from the
Middle
Ages
and early Renaissance, textbooks covering other branches of
philosophy were not nearly so common.
The
philosophical textbook during the period with which we are
concerned was nearly always a summary, exposition or expansion based on
Aristotle.
These often took the form of compendia, i.e., brief, simplified
treatments
of an Aristotelian text or group of texts. They could also,
however,
be
of
a more inclusive
nature,
expanding upon what was available
in the
corpus
Aristotelicum.
This form became increasingly popular during
the late sixteenth century and dominated for the next
hundred
years. Such a
cursus
(the
term
seems to have been used in this sense first at the end of the
sixteenth century)
filled
various gaps in the Aristotelian writings. This is
evident, for example, in the textbooks of
natural
philosophy, where
technical astronomy, optics, botany and discussions of metals and stones
were added to the traditional subjects contained in the
libri
naturales.
These
792
THE
RISE
OF THE
PHILOSOPHICAL
TEXTBOOK
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
The
rise of the philosophical textbook
793
textbooks
often incorporated the characteristics
of
summary and expansion
at the same time, by
giving
either more or
less
attention to a given topic
than
was
available in the extant works of Aristotle. As time went on and the
criticisms
of Peripatetic philosophy grew - especially in the course of the
seventeenth century
—
certain manuals came to be quite un-Aristotelian and
even
anti-Aristotelian.
The
need for a synthetic manual to replace the materials contained in the
corpus
Aristotelicum
arose where those works came to be considered
unsatisfactory in one of several
ways,
such as (i) a dissatisfaction with the
philosophical
content
of
the works; (2) a realisation
that
Aristotle's mode of
exposition
was not ideal for pedagogical purposes; and (3) a recognition
that,
even if Aristotelian philosophy was valid, it did not cover all areas of
knowledge
it was desirable to include. From these and other considerations,
there
grew an increasing impetus towards preparing more adequate
pedagogical
tools.
TEXTBOOKS
FROM
THE
MIDDLE
AGES
TO THE
REFORMATION
The
primary function
of
the textbook
is
as a teaching tool. This applies to all
branches of learning and not merely to philosophy. Some subjects are
naturally more suitable to the use
of
the textbook
than
others. As medieval
university education was organised, instruction was drawn from certain 'set
books',
if
not specifically textbooks in all instances. While philosophy and
geometry
instruction were largely based on ancient texts, in certain other
subjects manuals compiled in the Middle
Ages
were favoured. Sacrobosco's
Sphaera
in astronomy, Peter Lombard's
Sententiae
in theology and
Avicenna's
Canon
in medicine are good examples of'new' books serving as
the instruments
of
instruction. Many
of
these books continued to dominate
their respective fields until much later: the
Canon,
for example, remained in
use until the end of the sixteenth century in spite of many attempts to
promote a humanistic reform of medical education.
1
Philosophy
teaching was for the most
part
based directly on a reading of
Aristotle
rather
than
on textbooks. Summarising manuals of one sort or
another were, however, used, probably occasionally in the classroom, but
more frequently as guides to private study. The best medieval example of
such a work is Albert
of
Orlamunde's
Summa naturalium,
which frequently
passed under the name of Albertus Magnus. This thirteenth-century
1.
Siraisi 1984.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
794
Appendices
compendium prevailed
well
into the sixteenth century, especially in
Central and Eastern Europe. It survives in some hundred manuscripts and
was
printed about twenty-five times before
1525
and three times later in the
century at Cracow.
2
The tradition of natural philosophy manuals
continued into the early fifteenth century with volumes such as Peter of
Dresden's
Parvulus philosophiae naturalis,
which frequently circulated with
Albert
of Orlamunde's work. Peter's compendium is extant in many
manuscripts and was printed about twenty-five times between 1495 and
1521.
3
An Italian example
of
the same genre datable to about 1408 is Paul of
Venice's
Summa naturalium,
which contains summaries not only of major
natural philosophical works but also of Aristotle's
Metaphysics.
It had a
broad manuscript diffusion and was repeatedly printed until about 1525,
though its influence did not end there.
4
Of
a different
nature
were the two compendia from the late fifteenth
century prepared by Ermolao Barbaro, a humanist active in the circle of
Giovanni
Pico and
Angelo
Poliziano. His
Compendium librorum ethicorum
and
Compendium scientiae naturalis
are very brief outlines of Peripatetic
philosophy obviously meant for beginners in these subjects. The former
follows
the order and arrangement
of
the first six books
of
the
Nicomachean
Ethics,
while the latter incorporates material from several Aristotelian
works.
Though they apparently had no significant fifteenth-century
manuscript diffusion, both achieved popularity for a generation or so after
their first publication by Daniele Barbaro in the 1540s.
5
About
the same time the compendia ad
mentem Scoti
of Nicolaus de
Orbellis
(d.
1475)
6
enjoyed a certain diffusion from Paris, but they did not
gain
the same attention as the abbreviations
of
the central Aristotelian texts
made by Thomas Bricot (d.
1516).
7
Both Bricot and Nicolaus, along with
innumerable others, were targets
of
Rabelaisian
satire.
8
Bricot's works were
not textbooks in the normal sense, but somewhat shortened versions
of
the
set texts. They came just at the time when printing was beginning to matter
in the diffusion
of
philosophical
works.
Along
with the additions made by
George
of
Brussels
(d.
1510),
they were frequently reprinted between i486
and
1520.
9
More influential, however, was Petrus Tartaretus, another
2. Lohr 1967, pp.
345-8,
who
cites
the
earlier
literature.
In
general
see
also
Grabmann 1939.
Another
early
author
of a
general
philosophical
textbook
was
Nicolaus
Bonetus,
on
whom
see Lohr 1972a,
pp.
284-6.
3. Lohr 1972a, pp.
352-4.
4- Lohr 1972a, pp.
314-20.
5. Lohr 1968, pp.
236-7.
6. Lohr 1972a, pp.
288-90.
7. Lohr 1973, pp. 173-8.
8.
Rabelais
1912-31,111,
p. 80 (Pantagruel, ch. 7). In the
same
passage
a
number
of
other
philosophers
are
also
mentioned,
including
Petrus
Tartaretus
and
John
Mair. See
also
Erasmus
1906-58,
v, p. 102 for
criticism
of
Bricot.
9. Lohr 1968, pp. 155-8.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
The
rise of the philosophical textbook
795
Scotist
active at Paris, whose expositions
of
Aristotle's
logic (and also
that
of
Peter of Spain), natural philosophy, metaphysics and ethics maintained a
popularity from the 1490s until
well
into the seventeenth century.
10
While
a
part
of
the same flowering of
Scotism
at Paris at the
turn
of
the sixteenth
century as the works of Bricot and George of Brussels, Tartaretus'
expositions
gained renewed attention much later through the Venetian
editions printed during the half-century around 1600.
11
Parallel
with this development, in which late medieval Scotism and
nominalism were being revived in Paris, a new movement was emerging
which
also produced its own versions of compendious introductions to
Aristotle.
Humanism came to Paris at the end of the fifteenth century, and
the first to champion
that
approach in Aristotelian studies was Jacques
Lefevre
d'Etaples. His
Introductiones
to a large number of required
philosophical
texts were widely read and deeply influential on various
levels
of
intellectual
life,
setting the
trend
for many later developments in
Aristotelian
studies. Frequently accompanied by one or more Latin versions
of
the Aristotelian text itself, as
well
as a commentary, his introductions
gave
a framework of interpretation which presented for the first time to
Northern European audiences the elements of the humanistic
Aristotelianism
which had developed in Italy during the past half-century
and more. Using Platonic and Hermetic themes freely to supplement
Aristotle,
Lefevre's introductions were added to by his associate Josse
Clichtove
and sometimes modified by another
colleague,
Francois Vatable.
Entitled
paraphrases, introductiones
and
dialogi,
these explanatory works,
along
with his voluminous commentaries, served to introduce many a
reader to a range
of
Peripatetic philosophical themes. Their printed history
spanned about
half
a century from the 1490s, with several
of
the works still
being
printed until the end of the sixteenth century. His
Artificialis
introductio
in X
libros Ethicorum,
for instance, was printed about thirty-five
times between 1494 and
1596.
12
Lefevre's
vast output of Aristotelian works dates from before 1508,
though he was active in revising them until much later. A younger
contemporary, Frans Titelmans, fused the humanist approach of Erasmus
and Lefevre with a traditional Franciscan religiosity to produce another set
of
compendia in the 1530s.
13
These appeared on the scene just as the
10.
Lohr
1972a,
pp. 372-6.
11.
For Paris at this period see Renaudet 1953; Garcia Villoslada 1938.
12.
Besides Renaudet 1953, see Lohr
1976a,
pp. 726-32 and the material collected in Lefevre d' Etaples
1972.
13. Lohr 1982, pp. 196-8.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
796
Appendices
Reformation reached
a
crisis state,
but
before Jesuit textbook-writing
got
under
way and
before
there was a
concerted effort
to
revivify
Protestant
education. Titelmans' works, which all have
the
title
Compendium,
enjoyed
a remarkable/oritwd into
the
seventeenth century.
In the
prefatory epistle
to
his
Compendium naturalisphilosophiae
the
author
gives
us full information
on
his reasons
for
writing
the
book. Besides emphasising
its
utility
for
introducing
his
fellow-Franciscans
to
natural philosophy,
he
also stresses
the need
for
something beyond
the
'difficult
and
prolix commentaries'
generally
available
at the
time. While
there are
dialectic books ad
nauseam,
he continues,
to the
best
of
his knowledge
no
one before
him had
attempted
a similar work
in
physics.
14
Strictly speaking his assertion is
not
correct,
but
his effort
did
mark
a new
type
of
compendium which pointed
the way to
the future.
Very
different from
the
works
of
either Lefevre
or
Titelmans
is
Gregor
Reisch's
Margarita philosophica
(Freiburg,
1503),
which both harks back
to
Albert
of
Orlamunde
and
looks forward
to the
comprehensive manuals
of
later times. Encyclopaedic
in
scope
but
compendious
in
execution, this
work
gives
a
statement
of
the general
level
of
Northern European learning
before
the
influence
of
either humanism
or
religious reform.
It
covers
not
only
the
trivium
and
quadrivium,
but
also
the
principal branches
of
philosophy (including moral philosophy).
The
Margarita
is
unusual
for its
time
in
presenting such
a
wide range
of
topics
in
such a
brief
compass,
and it
had
a
deserved success, being reprinted many times, primarily
at
Strasburg
and Basle,
and
even appearing
in an
Italian version
as
late
as
1599.
15
TEXTBOOKS
FROM
THE
REFORMATION
TO 1600
The
age of the
philosophical textbook,
in
Protestant
as
well
as
Catholic
Europe, begins with
the
Reformation. While
the
roots
of
such manuals lie
in
the sort
of
works
we
have just discussed,
there
was
a
renewed emphasis
on
providing compendious
and
up-to-date surveys
of the
basic fields
of
14.
Titelmans 1542, sig.
AA
iii
v
: 'Sic enim simplicium fratrum conditioni iudicavi utilius, utpote quibus
bona diei noctisque pars divinis hymnis declarandis sacris pars agendis mysteriis, et circa próximos
exercendis hierarchicis actibus, foret impendenda, ita ut ad philosophiae studia minimum temporis
superesset, neque vacaret eorum qui plenius ilia tractarunt prolixos et difficilles
[sic]
commentaries
evolvere.
Ad physicam autem disciplinam in compendium contrahendam meum desiderium
peculiariter etiam illud accendit, quod hanc rem a nemine hactenus tentatam conspicerem. Nam in
dialecticis vel usque ad nauseam
abunde multos invenías, qui totam librorum seriem per ordinem
sunt prosequuiti.' Titelmans' De
consideration? dialéctica
is mentioned by the
early
Jesuits for possible
use in their schools. See
Monumenta paedagogica Societatis Iesu 1965-,
1, p. 177.
15.
Lohr
1980, pp.
685-6.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008