Ancient and Medieval Philosophy, Series 1 - Böcker

The questions on Aristotle's De Caelo by Peter of Auvergne (d. 1304) contain a wealth of material for the study of the reception of De Caelo in the 13th century and Peter's own views in cosmology and natural philosophy. The book contains a critical edition of these questions (part II) along with an extensive introduction to the text (part I). The first section of part I deals with Peter of Auvergne's life and work, the reception of De Caelo in the 13th century, the different treatises on De Caelo that are attributed to Peter, and the composition and sources of Peter's questions on De Caelo. The second section of the introduction contains an interpretative study of these questions. Here, the book discusses Peter's division of the sciences, his cosmological theories concerning the universe, the heavens, the earth and the sublunary world, and some general topics in medieval natural philosophy. The third section of part I provides an introduction to the critical edition.Part II contains the critical edition of two different sets of questions on De Caelo attributed to Peter of Auvergne. One set is preserved in the manuscripts Vienna, Dominikanerkonvent 150/120, fols. 47ra-68vb and Paris, Bibliothèque Mazarine 3493, fols. 95ra-136rb; the other set is preserved in the manuscripts Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek 1386, fols. 91va-102vb and Prague, Knihovny Metropolitní 1320 (L. LXXIV), fols. 43rb-52vb.

In the first part about the specific Stoic doctrine on moral progress (prokope) attention is first given to the subtle view developed by the early Stoics, who categorically denied the existence of any mean between vice and virtue, and yet succeeded in giving moral progress a logical and meaningful place within their ethical thinking. Subsequently, the position of later Stoics (Panaetius, Hecato, Posidonius, Seneca, Musonius Rufus, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius) is examined. Most of them appear to adopt a basically 'orthodox' view, although each one of them lays his own accents and deals with Chrysippus' tenets from his own personal perspective. Occasionally, the 'heterodox' position of Aristo of Chios proves to have remained influential too. The second part of the study deals with the polemical reception of the Stoic doctrine of moral progress in (Middle-)Platonism. The first author who is discussed is Philo of Alexandria. Philo deals with the Stoic doctrine in a very ideosyncratical way. He never explicitly attacked the Stoic view on moral progress, although it is clear from various passages in his work that he favoured the Platonic-Peripatetic position rather than the Stoic one.Next, Plutarch's position is examined, through a detailed analysis of his treatise 'De profectibus in virtute'.Finally, attention is given to two school handbooks dating from the period of Middle-Platonism (Alcinous and Apuleius). In both of them, the Stoic doctrine is rejected without many arguments, which shows that a correct (and anti-Stoic) conception of moral progress was regarded in Platonic circles as a basic knowledge for beginning students.The whole discussion is placed into a broader philosophical-historical perspective by the introduction (on the philosophical tradition before the Stoa) and the epilogue (about later discussions in Neo-Platonism and early Christianity).

This book examines the important but largely neglected issue of the interrelation between Platonism and Stoicism in Ancient Philosophy. Several renowned specialists in the fields of Stoic and Platonic analyse the intricate mutual influences between Stoic and Platonic philosophers in the Hellenistic period, the Imperial Age, and after. Although it has been repeatedly claimed that the phenomenon addressed in this book could best be labelled eclecticism, it emerges from the various articles collected here that the situation is much more complicated. Far from being eclectics, most Stoics and Platonists consciously appropriated their material in order to integrate it into their own philosophical system. The dialogue between Platonists and Stoics testifies to active debate and controversy on central topics such as psychology, epistemology, physics, and ethics. This book will deepen our understanding of the dialogue between different philosophical schools in Antiquity. The results presented here teach one clear lesson: Platonism and Stoicism were by no means monolithic blocks, but were continuously moulded by mutual influence and interaction.