Humanism and the Assessment of Averroes in the Renaissance

Martin, Craig

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5240-5_4

Craig Martin³

Part of the book series: International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées ((ARCH,volume 211))

1228 Accesses
6 Citations
3 Altmetric

Abstract

Despite Renaissance humanists’ polemics against Averroes, interest in his writings grew during the sixteenth century. This interest was related to humanism. As Aristotelians became increasingly aware of the Greek commentators on Aristotle, many saw Averroes as an heir to the ancient tradition. Thus they believed that by reading his works they could gain access to a purer form of Aristotelianism. As a result, a number of scholars wrote commentaries on Averroes’s natural philosophical works, and the Commentator became a subject for both philosophical and philological commentary.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 84.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Charles B. Schmitt, Aristotle and the Renaissance (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983), p. 25.
2.
On the multiplicity of Aristotelianisms, see Schmitt, Aristotle and the Renaissance, pp. 10–34.
3.
For an overview of the correspondences between Averroism and humanism see Dag Nikolaus Hasse, ‘Arabic Philosophy and Averroism’, in The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy, ed. James Hankins (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007), pp. 113–133 (129–130).
4.
Avicenna, Liber canonis (Venice: Giunta, 1562), fol. 3^r; translation from Edward Grant, A Sourcebook in Medieval Science (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974), p. 715.
5.
Coluccio Salutati, De nobilitate legum et medicina, ed. Eugenio Garin (Florence: Vallecchi, [1947]), pp. 22–24.
6.
Averroes, Colliget libri vii (Venice: Giunta, 1564), fol. 4^r; in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, 12 vols (Venice: Giunta, 1562; repr. Frankfurt: Minerva, 1962), Supplementum I, fol. 3^rE.
7.
Salutati, De nobilitate legum et medicina, p. 112.
8.
Ibid., p. 260.
9.
Andrea Carlino, ‘Petrarch and the Early Modern Critics of Medicine’, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, 35 (2005), pp. 559–582.
10.
Averroes, com. 14, bk 3 (De anima), in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, Supplementum II, fol. 159^v (trans. from David Knowles, Evolution of Medieval Thought [Baltimore: Helicon, 1962], p. 200); Id., Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis De anima libros, ed. F. Stuart Crawford (Cambridge, MA: The Medieval Academy of America, 1953), p. 433. See also: Averroes, ‘Prooemium in libros physicorum Aristotelis’, in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, IV, fol. 5^r.
11.
Josep Puig Montada, ‘El Proyecto vital de Averroes: Explicar e interpretar a Aristóteles’, al-Qanʿara, 32 (2002), pp. 11–52; Steven Harvey, ‘Averroes’ Use of Examples in his Middle Commentary on the Prior Analytics, and Some Remarks on his Role as Commentator’, Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, 7 (1997), pp. 91–113.
12.
Y. Tzvi Langermann, ‘Another Andalusian Revolt? Ibn Rushd’s Critique of Al-Kindi’s Pharmacological Computus’, in The Enterprise of Science: New Perspectives, ed. Jan P. Hogendijk and Abdelhamid I. Sabra (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003), pp. 351–372 (366).
13.
Averroes, com. 22, bk 2 (Physica), in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, IV, fol. 57^r.
14.
Averroes, com. 30, bk 3 (De anima), in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, Supplementum II, fol. 171^r; Id., Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis De anima libros, p. 470.
15.
Averroes, com. 67, bk 3 (De coelo), in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, V, fol. 227^r .
16.
Averroes, Commentary on Plato’s Republic, trans. by Erwin I. J. Rosenthal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1956), p. 112.
17.
Robert Wisnovsky, ‘Avicenna and the Avicennian Tradition’, in The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy, ed. Peter Adamson and Richard C. Taylor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 92–136 (96–105).
18.
For his attacks on kalām, see Averroes, com. 18, bk 12; com. 14, bk 2; com. 15, bk 2; com. 32, bk 7, (Metaphysica), in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, VIII, fols 305^r; 34^v; 35^r; 181^v; 34^v; 35^r; 181^v.
19.
Averroes, ‘Prooemium in libros physicorum Aristotelis’, in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, IV, fol. 1^r. For the fourteenth-century Hebrew translation and an English translation of this work see Steven Harvey, ‘The Hebrew Translation of Averroes’ Prooemium to his Long Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics’, Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, 52 (1985), pp. 55–84.
20.
F. Edward Cranz, ‘Alexander Aphrodisensis’, in Catalogus translationum et commenta-riorum:Medieval and Renaissance Latin Translations and Commentaries, ed. Paul Oskar Kristeller, 8 vols (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1960), I, pp. 77–135.
21.
Eugene F. Rice, Jr., ‘Humanist Aristotelianism in France: Jacques Lefèvre and his Circle’, in Humanism in France at the End of the Middle Ages and in the Early Renaissance, ed. Anthony H. T. Levi (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1970), pp. 132–149. For Barbaro and his role in the growth of interest in the Greek commentators see: Jill Kraye, ‘Philologists and Philosophers’, in The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Humanism, ed. Jill Kraye (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 142–160 (144–147).
22.
Charles Burnett, ‘The Second Revelation of Arabic Philosophy and Science: 1492–1562’, in Islam and the Italian Renaissance, ed. Charles Burnett and Anna Contadini (London: The Warburg Institute, 1999), pp. 185–198; Harry A. Wolfson, ‘The Twice-revealed Averroes’, Speculum, 36 (1961), pp. 373–392.
23.
Bruno Nardi, ‘Il commento di Simplicio al De anima nelle controversie della fine del secolo XV e del secolo XVI’, in Saggi sull’aristotelismo padovano dal secolo XIV al XVI (Florence: Sansoni, 1958), pp. 365–442 (383–394); Paul J. J. M. Bakker, ‘Natural Philosophy, Metaphysics, or Something in Between? Agostino Nifo, Pietro Pomponazzi, and Marcantonio Genua on the Nature and Place of Science of the Soul’ in Mind, Cognition and Representation: The Tradition of Commentaries on Aristotle’s De anima, ed. Paul J. J. M. Bakker and Johannes M. M. H. Thijssen (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007), pp. 151–177 (169–175).
24.
Girolamo Balduini, Expositio aurea in libros aliquot Physicorum Aristotelis, et Averrois super eiusdem commentationem; et in prologum Physicorum eiusdem Averrois (Venice: [s.n.], 1573), p. 4.
25.
Konrad Gesner, Bibliotheca universalis: sive Catalogus omnium scriptorum locupletissimus (Zurich: Froschauer, 1545), fols. 100^r–102^r.
26.
F. Edward Cranz, ‘The Prefaces to the Greek Editions and Latin Translations of Alexander of Aphrodisias, 1450–1575’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 102 (1958), pp. 510–556 (517–520).
27.
Statuti delle università e dei collegi dello studio bolognese, ed. Carlo Malagola (Bologna: Zanichelli, 1888), pp. 274–275.
28.
Pietro Mainardi, Colliget Averois cum explanationes super V, VI, VII libri, Ferrara, Biblioteca Ariostea, ms. II 84, fols 2^v–287^v; Matteo Corti, Recollectae in septimum colliget Averrois, Venice, Biblioteca Marciana, ms. Lat. VII, 50 (=3570), fols 1^r–65^r.
29.
Horst Schmieja, ‘Urbanus Averroista und die mittelalterlichen Handschriften des Physikkom-mentars von Averroes’, Bulletin de philosophie médiévale, 42 (2000), pp. 133–153; Charles J. Ermatinger, ‘Urbanus Averroista and Some Early Fourteenth Century Philosophers’, Manuscripta, 11 (1967), pp. 3–38.
30.
J. P. Etzwiler, ‘John Baconthorpe, “Prince of the Averroists”’, Franciscan Studies, 36 (1977 for 1976), pp. 148–176.
31.
Agostino Nifo, Commentationes in librum de substantia orbis (Venice: Heirs of Ottaviano Scoto, 1508), fol. 2^r.
32.
Giovanni Battista Confalonieri, Averrois libellus de substantia orbis nuper castigatus et duobus capitulis auctus diligentique studio expositus (Venice: Benali, Bindoni & Pasini, 1525); Giovanni Francesco Beati, Quaesitum in quo Averois ostendit quomodo verificatur corpora coelestia cum finita sint, et possibilia ex se acquirant aeternitatem ab alio ([Padua; s.n.1542]); Mainetto Mainetti, Commentarii in librum I. Aristotelis de coelo. Necnon librum Averrois de substantia orbis (Bologna: Rossi, 1570); Nicolò Vito di Gozze, In sermonem Averrois de substantia orbis, et in propositiones de causis (Bologna: Giunta, 1580).
33.
Nifo, In librum de substantia orbis, fol. 2^r.
34.
Pietro Pomponazzi, ‘Super libello de substantia orbis expositio et questiones quattuor’, in Corsi inediti dell’insegnamento padovano, ed. Antonino Poppi, 2 vols (Padua: Antenore, 1966), I, pp. 3–5. For Averroes’s view that Aristotle wrote a book De substantia orbis, see p. 96.
35.
Confalonieri, De substantia, fols. 2^r; 64^v.
36.
John Jandun, Quaestiones super Parvis naturalibus, cum Marci Antonii Zimarae de movente et moto, ad Aristotelis et Averrois intentionem, absolutissima quaestione (Venice: Scoto, 1589); Id., In libros Aristotelis de coelo et mundo quae extant quaestiones subtilissimae: quibus nuper consulto adiecimus Averrois sermonem De substantia orbis cum eiusdem Ioannis commentario ac quaestionibus (Venice: Giunta, 1552); Id., Subtilissime quaestiones in octo libros Aristotelis de physico auditu nunc recens post omnes omnium excusiones accuratissime recognite cum triplici tabula his annectuntur quaestiones Helie Hebrei Cretensis (Venice: Giunta, 1544).
37.
Agostino Nifo, Expositio super octo Aristotelis Stagiritae libros de physico auditu… Averrois etiam Cordubensis in eosdem libros prooemium, ac commentaria (Venice: Giunta, 1552), sigs. ***ii^v–***iii^r.
38.
Agostino Nifo, In duodecimum Metaphysices Aristotelis [et] Auerrois volumen… Commentarij in lucem castigatissimi nuperrime prodeuntes (Venice: Heirs of Ottaviano Scoto, 1518), fols. 1^v–2^r.
39.
Agostino Nifo, Averroys de mixtione defensio (Venice: Heirs of Ottaviano Scoto, 1505); Nifo, In duodecimum metaphysices volumen, fol. 1^v.
40.
Agostino Nifo, In libris Aristotelis Meteorologicis commentaria (Venice: Heirs of Ottaviano Scoto, 1547). Averroes, Meteorologica, in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, V, fols. 400^r–487^v.
41.
Nifo, Averroys de mixtione defensio; Vittore Trincavelli, Quaestio de reactione iuxta Aristotelis sententiam et commentatoris (Venice: Heirs of Ottaviano Scoto, 1520).
42.
Simone Porzio, Prologus Averrois super primum phisicorum Aristotelis, Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, ms. A 153 inf., fol. 2^r.
43.
Balduini, In libros Physicorum, pp. 1–4.
44.
Giovanni Bernardino Longo, Dilucida expositio in prologum Averrois in Posteriora Aristotelis (Naples: Cancer, 1551), sig. A1^r.
45.
Annibale Balsamo, Dubia aliquot in Posteriora circa mentem Averrois, Milan, BA, ms. D 129 inf., fols 7^r–16^r.
46.
Ermolao Barbaro, Epistolae, orationes et carmina, ed. Vittore Branca, 2 vols (Florence: Bibliopolis, 1943), I, p. 92.
47.
Barbaro, Epistolae, I, p. 45.
48.
Symphorien Champier, Cribratio, lima et annotamenta in Galeni, Avicennae et Consiliatoris opera, ([Paris]: Officina Ascensiana), fol. 3^r.
49.
Ludovico Boccadiferro, Explanatio libri I physicorum Aristotelis (Venice: Academia Veneta, 1558), fol. 53^v.
50.
Charles B. Schmitt, ‘Girolamo Borro’s Multae sunt nostrarum ignorationum causae (Ms. Vat. Ross. 1009)’, in Studies in Renaissance Philosophy and Science (London: Variorum, 1981), article XI, p. 475.
51.
Girolamo Borro, De motu gravium, et levium (Florence: Marescotti, 1575), p. 5.
52.
Charles Burnett, ‘Arabic into Latin: The Reception of Arabic Philosophy into Western Europe’, in The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy, ed. Peter Adamson and Richard C. Taylor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 370–404 (397–400).
53.
Francesco Storella, Animadversionum in Averroem, pars prima logicales locos comprehendens, Milan, BA, ms. I 166 inf., fols 123^r–156^r; Francesco Storella, Observationum in Averroem liber secundus locos ad naturalem, medicinam, atque super naturalem philosophiam attinensque amplectens, Milan, BA, ms. 166 inf., fols 158^r–214^v.
54.
Ruth Glasner, ‘Levi ben Gershom and the Study of Ibn Rushd in the Fourtheenth Century’, Jewish Quarterly Review, 86 (1995), pp. 51–90; Steven Harvey, ‘Arabic into Hebrew: The Hebrew Translation Movement and the Influence of Averroes upon Medieval Jewish Thought’, in The Cambridge Companion to Medieval Jewish Philosophy, eds Daniel H. Frank and Oliver Leaman (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 258–280.
55.
Francesco Patrizi, Discussiones peripateticae (Basel: Perna, 1581; repr. Cologne: Böhlau, 1999), p. 66; p. 162.
56.
Jacopo Zabarella, De propositionis necessariis, II, 2, in Opera logica, (Cologne: Zetzner, 1597; repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1966), p. 380.
57.
Rita Sturlese, ‘“Averroè quantumque arabo et ignorante di lingua greca . . .” Note sull’averroismo di Giordano Bruno’, in Averroismus im Mittelalter und in der Renaissance, ed. Rita Sturlese and Friedrich Niewöhner (Zürich: Spur Verlag, 1994), pp. 319–348; Eugenio Canone, ‘Giordano Bruno lettore di Averroè’, in Averroes and the Aristotelian Heritage, ed. Carmela Baffioni (Naples: Guida, 2004), pp. 211–247.
58.
For the attraction of specific philosophical arguments see Dag Nikolaus Hasse, ‘Aufstieg und Niedergang des Averroismus in der Renaissance: Niccolò Tignosi, Agostino Nifo, Francesco Vimercato’, in Herbst des Mittelalters?: Fragen zur Bewertung des 14. und 15. Jahrhunderts, ed. Jan A. Aertsen and Martin Pickavé (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2004), pp. 447–473; Id., ‘The Attraction of Averroism in the Renaissance: Vernia, Achillini, Prassicio’, in Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries, ed. Peter Adamson, Han Baltussen and M. W. F. Stone, 2 vols (London: Institute of Classical Studies, 2004), II, pp. 131–147.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

History Department, Oakland University, 416,Varner Hall, 48309, Rochester, MI, USA
Craig Martin

Authors

Craig Martin
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Craig Martin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Auf der Papenburg 14, Bochum, 44801, Germany
Anna Akasoy
Warburg Institute, Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0AB, United Kingdom
Guido Giglioni

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Martin, C. (2013). Humanism and the Assessment of Averroes in the Renaissance. In: Akasoy, A., Giglioni, G. (eds) Renaissance Averroism and Its Aftermath: Arabic Philosophy in Early Modern Europe. International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées, vol 211. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5240-5_4

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5240-5_4
Published: 06 September 2012
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5239-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5240-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics