PHILOPONUS On Aristotle Posterior Analytics 1.1-8 This page intentionally left blank PHILOPONUS On Aristotle Posterior Analytics 1.1-8 Translated by Richard McKirahan Duckworth Ancient Commentators on Aristotle LONGDeOnNe(cid:2)(cid:222)r(cid:2)a(cid:48)l(cid:39) (cid:57)ed(cid:2)(cid:38)i(cid:39)to(cid:46)r(cid:42):(cid:43) (cid:2)R(cid:222)(cid:2)(cid:48)ic(cid:39)h(cid:57)a(cid:2)YrOd(cid:52) S(cid:45)o(cid:2)(cid:222)r(cid:2)SaYbDjiN(cid:39)(cid:59) Bloomsbury Academic An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published in 2008 by 50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway Gerald Duckworth & Co. Ltd. London New York WC1B9 30D-P93 Cowcross Street, London NEYC 110M01 86BF UK Tel: 020 7490 7300 USA Fax: 020 7490 0080 www.bloomsbury.com [email protected] Bloomsbury is a registered trwadwew m.daurkc konf eBtl.ocoom.uskbury Publishing Plc First published ©in 22000088 bbyy G Reriaclhda Drudc kMwcoKrtihr a&h Caon. Ltd. (cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:69)(cid:68)(cid:70)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:192)(cid:85)(cid:86)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:79)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:23)(cid:3) All rights reserved. No part of this publication © 2008 by Richard McKirahan may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or Richard McKirahan has atrssaenrstemd ihtitse rdig, hints aunndye fro trhme C oorp ybryig ahnt,y D mesieganns sa,n edl ePcattreonntsi cA,ct, 1988, to be mech(cid:76)a(cid:71)n(cid:72)(cid:81)ic(cid:87)(cid:76)a(cid:192)l(cid:72),(cid:71) p(cid:3)(cid:68)h(cid:86)o(cid:3)(cid:87)t(cid:75)o(cid:72)c(cid:3)(cid:36)op(cid:88)(cid:87)y(cid:75)i(cid:82)n(cid:85)g(cid:3)(cid:82),(cid:73) (cid:3)r(cid:87)e(cid:75)c(cid:76)(cid:86)o(cid:3)r(cid:90)d(cid:82)i(cid:85)n(cid:78)g(cid:17) or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval systemA, w citahtoaulto pgruioer rpeecromridss fioonr itnh wisr ibtionogk f riosm a tvhaei plaubbllieshers. from the British Library No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury Academic or the author. ISBN 9 78 07156 3667 1 British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Acknowledgements ISBN HB: 978-0-7156-3667-1 (cid:3) (cid:51)(cid:37)(cid:29)(cid:3) (cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:20)(cid:16)(cid:23)(cid:26)(cid:21)(cid:24)(cid:16)(cid:24)(cid:27)(cid:20)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:22) The present translations have been made possible by generous and (cid:3) (cid:72)(cid:51)(cid:39)(cid:41)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:20)(cid:16)(cid:23)(cid:26)(cid:21)(cid:24)(cid:16)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:24)(cid:20)(cid:16)(cid:25) imaginative funding from the following sources: the National En- dowmLiebnrta rfyo ro ft Cheo nHgruemssa Cnaittiaelso,g iDngiv-iinsi-oPnu bolfi cRateisoena Drcahta Programs, an Ai cnadtaelpoeg nredceonrdt ffoerd tehrisa lb oaogke ins cayv aoifla tbhlee fUroSmA t;h eth Leib Lraervye orfh Cuolnmgree sTsr.ust; the British Academy; the Jowett Copyright Trustees; the Royal Society (UK); Centro InternAazcikonnoawlele Ad.g Bemeletnrtasme di Storia dello Spazio e del TTehme pproe s(Penatd turaan)s;l Matiaorniso h Mavieg bneuecnc mi; aLdiev peorspsoibolle Ubyn giveneerrsoiutys ;a tnhde Leventis imFagoiunantdivaet fiuonnd; inthg efr Aomrt tsh ea nfodll oHwiunmg saonuirtcieess: tRhee sNeaatriocnha lC Eonudnowciml;e Gntresham for the Humanities, Division of Research Programs, an College; the Esmée Fairbairn Charitable Trust; the Henry Brown independent federal agency of the USA; the Leverhulme Trust; the Trust; Mr and Mrs N. Egon; the Netherlands Organisation for British Academy; the Jowett Copyright Trustees; the Royal Society Scientific Research (NWO/GW); Dr Victoria Solomonides, the Cul- (UK); Centro Internazionale A. Beltrame di Storia dello Spazio e del tTuermapl oA (Pttaadcuhaé); Mofa trhioe M Gigrneueckci ;E Lmivberapsosoyl Uinni vLeorsnidtyo; nth. eT Lheev eendtiistor wishes tFoo utnhdaantikon ;O thwee Anr tsG aonldd iHnu, mManaitriiejse RMeseaarrtcihjn B, oaMrdic ohf atheel BFreitrisehjohn, Don MAcoardreimsoyn; ,t haen Eds mWéiel lFiaaimrb aCirhna Crhltaornita fbolre Tthruesitr; tchoem Hmenerny tBsr, oJwonhn Sellars andT rMusat;r Mtinr aAncdh Marrsd N fo. rE pgorne;p tahrei Nnget thherel avnodlsu mOreg afonris patrieonss f,o arnd Deborah (cid:54)B(cid:70)(cid:76)l(cid:72)a(cid:81)k(cid:87)(cid:76)e(cid:192) (cid:70)a(cid:3)(cid:53)t (cid:72)D(cid:86)(cid:72)u(cid:68)(cid:85)c(cid:70)k(cid:75)w(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:49)or(cid:58)th(cid:50),(cid:18) (cid:42)w(cid:58)h(cid:12)o(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:39) h(cid:85)(cid:3)a(cid:57)s(cid:76) (cid:70)b(cid:87)(cid:82)e(cid:85)e(cid:76)(cid:68)n(cid:3)(cid:54) t(cid:82)h(cid:79)(cid:82)e(cid:80) p(cid:82)(cid:81)u(cid:76)b(cid:71)(cid:72)li(cid:86)s(cid:15)(cid:3)h(cid:87)(cid:75)e(cid:72)r(cid:3) (cid:38)r(cid:88)e(cid:79)s(cid:87)(cid:88)p(cid:85)o(cid:68)n(cid:79)sible for everAyt tvaochlué mof et hsei nGcree etkh Eem fibrassts.y in London. The editor wishes to thank Peter Lautner, Ian Mueller, Edward Hussey, and Mossman Roueché for their comments, John Sellars for preparing the volume for press, and DebToyrpahe sBelta kbey a Rt Dayuc Dkwaovritehs, who has been (cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:79)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:75)P(cid:72)(cid:85)r(cid:3)(cid:85)in(cid:72)(cid:86)t(cid:83)e(cid:82)d(cid:81) (cid:86)a(cid:76)(cid:69)n(cid:79)d(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:73)b(cid:82)o(cid:85)(cid:3)u(cid:72)(cid:89)n(cid:72)d(cid:85)(cid:92) i(cid:3)n(cid:89)(cid:82) G(cid:79)(cid:88)r(cid:80)e(cid:72)a(cid:3)(cid:86)t(cid:76) (cid:81)B(cid:70)r(cid:72)i(cid:3)(cid:87)t(cid:75)a(cid:72)i(cid:3)n(cid:192) (cid:85)b(cid:86)y(cid:87)(cid:17) MPG Books Limited, Bodmin, Cornwall Typeset by Ray Davies Printed and bound in Great Britain Contents Conventions vi Introduction 1 Textual Information 9 Translation 13 Notes 115 Appendix: Theorems from Euclid’s Elements 143 Bibliography 147 English-Greek Glossary 149 Greek-English Index 157 Index of Passages 179 Index of Names 182 Subject Index 183 Conventions [(cid:125)] Square brackets enclose words or phrases that have been added to the translation or the lemmata for purposes of clarity. <(cid:125)> Angle brackets enclose conjectures relating to the Greek text, i.e. additions to the transmitted text deriving from parallel sources and editorial conjecture, and transposition of words or phrases. Accompany- ing notes provide further details. ((cid:125)) Round brackets, besides being used for ordinary parentheses, contain transliterated Greek words. Introduction Philoponus’ work, the earliest surviving commentary on the Posterior Analytics, was not the first. Theophrastus wrote a commentary in seven books,1while Galen boasts of having composed six commentaries on the first book of the Posterior Analytics and five on the second,2 and Phi- loponus himself refers to Alexander’s commentary.3 We do not know the scale of these earlier works, but Philoponus’ commentary (333 CAG pages on Book 1 alone) can claim to be among the longest ever written. Maximilian Wallies’ edition, published in 1909, contains in addition to Philoponus’ commentary on Book 1, the commentary on Book 2 that is (by general agreement4 falsely) attributed to Philoponus, as well as an anonymous commentary on Book 2. The present volume is the first of a projected four which will present the first complete translation of Philoponus’ commentary on Book 1 and pseudo-Philoponus’ on Book 2 into any modern language.5 Interest in this commentary has waned since the Renaissance, when it was the first of Philoponus’ major philosophical works to be edited.6 It was twice translated into Latin in the sixteenth century, with the translations being reprinted frequently from 1534 to 1569.7 In it Phi- loponus sets himself the task of expounding the meaning of the Aristotelian text rather than raising objections and presenting alterna- tive theories in the ways that make some of his later commentaries (notably the Physics commentary) important philosophical works in their own right. Here, he is in the main content to follow the run of the text, clarifying difficulties and explaining Aristotle’s statements in the light of other passages in the Posterior Analytics or of other works of Aristotle. Among these, he tends to limit his references to the other logical works (the Categories, De Interpretatione, Prior Analytics, and Topics), and to the Physics,Metaphysics, and De Anima. His practice of explaining Aristotle through Aristotle has been standard ever since. The opening words of the work, ‘John of Alexandria’s lecture notes from the meetings of Ammonius, son of Hermeias, on the first book of Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics, together with some observations of his own’, indicate that it contains some original contributions of Phi- loponus, but that it is largely a record of Ammonius’ views. The absence of other testimony about Ammonius’ lectures on the Posterior Analytics makes it impossible to determine how much is due to Philoponus. That 2 Introduction Philoponus does not follow his teacher slavishly, however, is shown by a passage in the section translated in the present volume in which he rejects Ammonius’ explanation of 72b23-4 in favour of Themistius’, which ‘seems to explain the thought of the present words more natu- rally and in a way that naturally fits the passage’ (48,7-8). Criticisms of Theophrastus (71,5-19) and Alexander (3,32-4,4; 41,1-6; 62,2-22) may also display his originality, but they could equally well be due to Ammonius. Philoponus presumably decided to offer this sort of exposition of Aristotle’s work because he thought that the Posterior Analytics is difficult (and so, in need of a detailed guide and explanation), and also because he thought that it is important. Whatever our view of its importance, at least we may agree that it is difficult and in need of clarification. It is neither a systematic exposition of its subject (the theory of demonstration) nor does it proceed in the main by examining earlier opinions on the subject, as is Aristotle’s frequent practice in other works. Its train of thought from chapter to chapter, from para- graph to paragraph, and even from sentence to sentence is frequently obscure. The expression is also more condensed and opaque than is usual for Aristotle, and there is relatively little argument, much of the burden of the discussion being carried by examples (a practice which Philoponus continues, adding additional examples of his own to the many already in Aristotle). And he makes it clear that he considers the Posterior Analytics important. It is ‘the culmination of the treatment of logic. For it is for the sake of demonstration that Aristotle gave us his other logical works’ (1,5-7). Also, since ‘there are several kinds of deductions – sophistical, dialectical, and demonstrative – he teaches us demonstrative deduc- tions here and dialectical ones in the Topics(cid:125) [and] in the Sophistical Refutations he teaches us about sophistical deductions’ (2,1-7). Further, ‘philosophers needed demonstration as an instrument for the correct pursuit of the parts of philosophy – I mean the theoretical and the practical parts’ (2,24-5). So for Philoponus, the importance of the Poste- rior Analytics resides in the fact that it is the crown jewel of Aristotle’s logic, containing Aristotle’s account of demonstration (which is one of the three basic types of deductions), and in the fact that a knowledge of demonstration is useful (perhaps necessary) for anyone who would study philosophy and possibly for anyone who would put philosophy to correct use. Characteristic of the commentary is a tendency to supplement Aris- totle’s discussion, sometimes by working out Aristotle’s arguments and examples in greater detail, sometimes by showing how Aristotle’s claims apply to cases which he does not discuss, sometimes by drawing distinctions not found in the Aristotelian text and exploring their implications for the theory of demonstration. The first of these features is found in the discussion of the law of alternating proportions. Aristotle Introduction 3 says that there is a single proof that holds for all the things to which the law applies: numbers, magnitudes, times, etc. Philoponus argues that the subject of this proof is nameless. It is not ‘quantity’ because there are kinds of quantity to which the law does not apply; and it is not a subclass of quantity because it applies to certain qualities (74,3-75,3). It is noticeable also in the detailed discussion (55,31-57,13) of the brief statement ‘it has also been proved that in the other figures either there is no deduction or [that there is a deduction] but not about what has been assumed’ (73a15-16), in which Philoponus works out Aristotle’s claim in terms of all three syllogistic figures. The second feature is exemplified where Philoponus identifies ways in which it is possible to know something in one way but not another that are not mentioned by Aristotle (16,15-25; 18,4-20,2). Another case is the treatment of inseparable accidents at 63,8-20. Also where he employs snubness as an example of the second kind of per se relation – an example not found in Aristotle’s discussion – and goes on to show how it raises a problem for the interpretation (which Philoponus adopts) that attributes that are per se in this way come in contradictory pairs (like even and odd, for number), and offers a solution to the problem (67,21-7). An instance of the last-mentioned feature is his recognition of dem- onstrations that fall short of Aristotle’s strict requirements. One kind is exemplified by the proof that isosceles triangles have angles equal to two right angles (which is not a strict demonstration because the predicate belongs to triangle, not to isosceles triangle) (72,1-19). An- other kind is proofs that genera and differentiae belong to a subject (70,2-29). Still another is what he calls proofs by infallible signs (tek- mêria), which proceed in the opposite direction from strict demonstrations, from effects to causes, from what is better known to us to what is better known in nature.8 An example of such a proof is the inference from the pattern of the moon’s phases to the conclusion that the moon’s shape is spherical (31,19-32,7). (Philoponus recognizes that some signs are not infallible: having milk is a sign that a woman has given birth, but, he says, it is not infallible (21,12-15).) Also noteworthy is the prominence of mathematical and astronomi- cal examples.9 In this practice Philoponus is following Aristotle’s lead, but he employs them even more frequently than Aristotle does, and on some occasions his comments are far more extensive than would be required to explicate the text. The long treatment of the problem of duplicating the cube (102,12-105,4) is the most extreme case. With the exception of this last-mentioned case, the geometrical examples mostly come from Euclid’s Elements and are of an elementary character. Some of the discussions of properties of numbers probably come from Ni- comachus’ Introductio Arithmetica, on which Philoponus wrote a commentary.10 In this connection it is interesting that Philoponus is guilty of a number of mathematical errors (see notes 94, 354, 355, 461,