Aristoteles Latinus

From their website:

The critical edition of the Medieval Latin Aristotle is one of the main projects supervised and supported by the Union Academique Internationale / International Union of Academics. The most important objective of the project is to bring to scholarly attention the various forms in which Aristotle's texts came to be read in the West. The Latin versions of these texts constituted the main tools for the study of science and philosophy in the Middle Ages. They were considered as being the canonized littera to which all the commentaries on Aristotle's works referred. The role played by these translations in the development of the Western philosophical and scientific terminology can thus hardly be overestimated.

In the course of the last fifty years twenty-five volumes have already been published in the printed Aristoteles Latinus. They include the entire corpus of Aristotle's logical works, all the Medieval Greek-Latin translations of the Metaphysics and the Nicomachean Ethics, and several versions of the physical and technical works of the Aristotelian collection. The edition of the remaining parts of the program is in progress.

The texts included are prepared and supervised by the Aristoteles Latinus Centre of the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.

Published volumes

From the Leuven website:

• I 1-5 Categoriae vel Praedicamenta. Translatio Boethii, Editio Composite, Translatio Guillelmi de Moerbeka, Lemmata e Simplicii commentario decerpta, Pseudo-Augustini Paraphrasis Themistiana, ed.L. Minio-Paluello, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruges-Paris 1961. This volume contains five Latin versions of Aristotle's Categories. Numbers 1 and 2 both stem from Boethius, who is responsible for the Latin translations that were most widespread. One of them is more literal, the other more elegant. William of Moerbeke, on the other hand, was the author of a Latin version not only of Aristotle's work (3), but also of Simplicius' commentary, which contains the abbreviated lemmas of the Aristotelian text (4). Moreover, Aristotle's work was known by means of a Roman paraphrase attributed to Augustin and influenced by Themistius (5).
• I 6-7 Categoriarum supplementa. Porphyrii Isagoge, Translatio Boethii, et Anonymi Fragmentum vulgo vocatum "Liber sex principiorum", ed. L. Minio-Paluello adiuv. B.G. Dod, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruges-Paris 1966. This volume constitutes a supplement to the Latin versions of the Categories. It contains Porphyry's famous Introduction to Aristotle's Categories in Boethius' translation (6) and an extract of an anonymous twelfth century Latin writing, which was widespread under the title Liber sex principiorum (7): it deals mainly with the last six categories, treated more briefly in Aristotle's work. The volume also contains the fragments quoted by Boethius from an older Latin version of Porphyry's Introduction, done by Marius Victorinus.
• II 1-2 De interpretatione vel Periermenias. Translatio Boethii, ed. L. Minio-Paluello; Translatio Guillelmi de Moerbeka, ed. G. Verbeke, rev. L. Minio-Paluello, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruges-Paris 1965. This volume contains the vulgate text of the Perihermeneias, which goes back to Boethius (1), and the version composed with the lemmas of the Aristotelian text in William of Moerbeke's translation of Ammonius' commentary (2).
• III 1-4 Analytica priora. Translatio Boethii (recensiones duae), Translatio anonyma, Pseudo-Philoponi aliorumque Scholia, ed. L. Minio-Paluello, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruges-Paris, 1962 (Reprint with a supplement composed by J. Shiel, E.J. Brill, Leiden-New York-Köln 1998). Boethius composed a double Latin version not only of the Categories, but of the Prior Analytics as well (1-2). However, the two versions have not been edited separately except for certain parts, the second version having been displayed, for the other parts, in the critical apparatus. Apart from these widespread texts, a good, but not quite successful anonymous twelfth century translation of Aristotle's logic has come down to us (3). Special attention is paid to a set of Latin scholia to the Prior Analytics (4), the origin of which is disputed. According to L. Minio-Paluello and J. Shiel, they were translated by Boethius along with the Aristotelian text; according to recent research, however, they might go back to a translation by James of Venice.
• IV 1-4 (2 et 3 ed. alt.) Analytica posteriora. Translationes Iacobi, Anonymi sive 'Ioannis', Gerardi et Recensio Guillelmi de Moerbeka, edd. L. Minio-Paluello et B.G. Dod, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruges-Paris 1968 (First ed. Of IV 2 by L. Minio-Paluello in 1953, of IV 3 by L. Minio-Paluello in 1954). The authorship of James of Venice for the medieval vulgate text of the Posterior Analytics is undisputed (1). Curiously enough, the manuscript tradition of this text also reveals the presence of two versions, which present the same kind of variants as those of Boethius' translations. However, the two versions have not been edited separately. Secondly, an anonymous twelfth century translation has been preserved, which is attributed to a certain 'Ioannes' (2). Thirdly, the volume also contains, in accordance with the original - but rather ambitious - Aristoteles Latinus programme, the Arabic-Latin version by Gerard of Cremona (3), and finally, the revision of James' translation by William of Moerbeke is included (4).
• V 1-3 Topica. Translatio Boethii, Fragmentum Recensionis Alterius et Translatio Anonyma, ed. L. Minio-Paluello adiuv. B.G. Dod, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruxelles-Paris 1969 Boethius' rendering of the Topics has been carried out, once more, in two versions (1-2), one of which has not been preserved but partly. Moreover, a 12th century version is extant: it stems from the anonymous translator of the Prior analytics (3)
• VI 1-3 De sophisticis elenchis. Translatio Boethii, Fragmenta Translationis Iacobi et Recensio Guillelmi de Moerbeke, ed. B.G. Dod, E.J. Brill-Desclée De Brouwer, Leiden-Bruxelles 1975. The vulgate text of the De sophisticis elenchis stems from Boethius (1). Fragments of another version have been attributed to James of Venice (2), and William of Moerbeke did a revision of Boethius' translation (3).
• VII 1-2 (2 ed. Alt.) Physica. Translatio Vetus, edd. F. Bossier et J. Brams; Translatio Vaticana, ed. A. Mansion, E.J. Brill, Leiden-New York 1990, 2 vols. (First ed. Of VII 2 by A. Mansion, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruges-Paris 1957). The first Latin translation of the Physics stems from James of Venice (1). As in the case of the Posterior Analytics, the manuscript tradition of the text reveals the presence of two versions, which again have not been edited separately, the second version having been displayed in the critical apparatus. The first volume of the edition, which contains the preface, includes a reprint of the edition of the so-called Translatio Vaticana (2). The provenience of this anonymous and fragmentary version is puzzling: as has been suggested recently, it might have had its origins in the circle of Stephen of Antioch.
• IX 1 De generatione et corruption. Translatio Vetus, ed. J. Judycka, E.J. Brill, Leiden 1986. The first Latin translation of the De generatione et corruptione has been edited anonymously. The presence of two versions within the manuscript tradition of this text is clearly attested in the critical apparatus of the edition. Recent research, however, has demonstrated that both versions stem from the same translator, i.e. Burgundio of Pisa. Moreover, the translator's Greek model has been identified in the present manuscript Laurentianus graecus 87.7.
• X 2 Meteorologica. Translatio Guillelmi de Morbeka, ed. G. Vuillemin-Diem, 2008, 2 vol.. As is the case with the De caelo, three redactions of William’s translation of the Meteorology are extant. The first redaction, made before 1260, is preserved in a few manuscripts; it is based on Moerbeke’s Greek manuscript Vindobonensis phil. gr. 100 (J). For the second redaction (ca. 1260?), which differs on a few instances only (mainly in Book III, 5) from the first, Moerbeke had access to another Greek manuscript. This redaction was widely diffused at the University of Paris: the editor convincingly argues that the Paris tradition has its origins in Thomas Aquinas’s manuscript of the translation. At a later moment, after 1270, Moerbeke revised his translation in a more thorough way: to do so, he used again J as well as his translation of Alexander Aphrodisias’s commentary on the Meteorology (and perhaps also the Greek text of it). It is this third redaction, essentially preserved in ms. Toletanus, bibl. Capituli, 47.11 (Tk), of which a critical edition is provided: the variants of the previous redactions are found in the critical apparatus.
• XI 1-2 (ed. alt.) De mundo. Translationes Bartholomaei et Nicholai, ed. W.L. Lorimer, rev. L. Minio-Paluello, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruges-Paris 1965 (First ed. by W.L. Lorimer, La Libreria dello Stato, Roma 1951). This is the only Pseudo-Aristotelian work thus far making part of the Aristoteles Latinus edition. Curiously enough, the volume was the first to have been published in that series. It contains two medieval translations, one by Bartholomew, the famous translator working at the court of Palermo (1), and one by Nicholas of Sicily, probably the scholar who helped Robert Grosseteste with his translations of Greek texts (2). The chronological order of both versions, however, is uncertain.
• XVII 2.I.1 De historia animalium. Translatio Guillelmi de Morbeka. Pars prima : lib. I-V, edd. P. Beullens et F. Bossier, E.J. Brill, Leiden-Boston-Köln 2000. The serial number XVII 2 refers to the whole collection of Aristotle's Books on Animals in William of Moerbeke's translation. It consists of 21 books, the first 10 of which are known under the title History of animals (I). The first part (1 = books I-V) of this extensive zoological encyclopaedia, with a general introduction to the entire text, has been published recently.
• XVII 2.V De generatione animalium. Translatio Guillelmi de Moerbeka, ed. H.J. Drossaart-Lulofs, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruges-Paris 1966. This volume contains the fifth part (V) of Aristotle's Books on Animals in William of Moerbeke's translation. It comprises books XVII-XXI of the collection, and deals with generation of animals. The editor has revealed the existence of two chronologically distinct versions of this text. The variant readings of the earlier version are displayed in the critical apparatus.
• XXV 1-1a Metaphysica, lib. I-IV.4. Translatio Iacobi sive 'Vetustissima' cum Scholiis et Translatio Composita sive 'Vetus', ed. G. Vuillemin-Diem, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruxelles-Paris 1970. This volume contains two closely related versions of the Metaphysics, both partially preserved (books I-IV.4). The first version, called Translatio Vetustissima, is ascribed to James of Venice (1), whereas the second, called Translatio Vetus, is presented as being a revision of the former translation (1a). The volume also contains some scholia which accompany James of Venice's text; at least some of them must go back to marginal notes in the manuscript used by the translator.
• XXV 2 Metaphysica, lib. I-X, XII-XIV. Translatio Anonyma sive 'Media', ed. G. Vuillemin-Diem, E.J. Brill, Leiden 1976. This almost complete Translatio Media of the Metaphysics is anonymous; it has been demonstrated, however, that it stems from the same translator as the Translatio Vaticana of the Physics.
• XXV 3 Metaphysica, lib. I-XIV. Recensio et Translatio Guillelmi de Moerbeka, ed. G. Vuillemin-Diem, E.J. Brill, Leiden-New York-Köln 1995, 2 vols. The only complete Medieval Latin text of the Metaphysics has been composed by William of Moerbeke, partly as a revision of the Translatio Media (books I-X and XII-XIII.2) and partly as an original translation (books XI and XIII.2-XIV). In both parts of the text, the editor has revealed the existence of two chronologically distinct versions. As in the edition of the De generatione animalium, the variant readings of the earlier version are displayed in the critical apparatus. The preface to the edition covers the entire first volume of the publication: it clears up the intricate situation of the manuscript tradition, describes the translation process and method, and discusses the translator's Greek copies of - and other information on - Aristotle's text. It should be mentioned, in particular, that the present manuscript Vindobonensis graecus 100 has been identified as one of Moerbeke's Greek models for his translation of the Metaphysics.
• XXVI 1-3 Ethica Nicomachea. Translatio Antiquissima libr. II-III sive 'Ethica Vetus', Translationis Antiquioris quae supersunt sive 'Ethica Nova', 'Hoferiana', 'Borghesiana', Translatio Roberti Grosseteste Lincolniensis sive 'Liber Ethicorum' (Recensio Pura et Recensio Recognita), ed. R.A. Gauthier, Brill-Desclée De Brouwer, Leiden-Bruxelles 1972-1974, 5 vols. The edition of the Nicomachean Ethics is published in five volumes, the first of which contains a general preface, and the fifth the comprehensive indexes. The second volume contains two early fragmentary versions, which are presented as anonymous, but chronologically distinct: the so-called Ethica Vetus, consisting of only books II and III (1), and the Ethica Nova, comprising book I as well as some excerpts from the other books (2). The third and fourth volumes contain two closely related versions of the entire work, presented as the pure text and the revised version of the Liber Ethicorum by Robert Grosseteste (3). The revision is attributed, once more, to an unknown translator. However, recent research has identified the anonymous authors of the translations of the Nicomachean Ethics: both the two early versions are the work of Burgundio of Pisa, and the revisor of Grosseteste's Liber Ethicorum is William of Moerbeke. It has to be mentioned, moreover, that Burgundio's Greek model has been identified in the present Laurentianus graecus 81.18.
• XXIX 1 Politica (libri I-II.11). Translatio prior imperfecta interprete Guillelmo de Moerbeka ( ?), ed. P. Michaud-Quantin, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruges-Paris 1961. This volume contains a partial version of the Politics (books I-II.11), which precedes William of Moerbeke's translation of the entire work. The editor's guess about its author has been confirmed by recent scholarship: this partial version is Moerbeke's first rendering of the beginning of Aristotle's work, which was all he could find in the Greek manuscripts available to him at the moment; when he afterwards came across a copy of the entire text, he revised his version of the first two books and proceeded translating the rest of the work as well.
• XXXI 1-2 Rhetorica. Translatio Anonyma sive Vetus et Translatio Guillelmi de Moerbeka, ed. B. Schneider, E.J. Brill, Leiden 1978. This volume contains the two medieval translations of Aristotle's Rhetoric. The Translatio Vetus is anonymous (1); it seems, however, that its author belonged to the circle of Bartholomew of Messina. The most widespread translation of this work stems from William of Moerbeke (2). Once more, the editor has revealed the existence of two chronologically distinct versions in William's text, and the variant readings of the earlier version are displayed in the critical apparatus.
• XXXIII (ed. alt) De arte poetica. Translatio Guillelmi de Moerbeka, ed. L. Minio-Paluello, Desclée De Brouwer, Bruxelles-Paris 1968 (First ed. By E. Valgimigli, rev. by Ae. Franceschini and L. Minio-Paluello, Bruges-Paris 1953). The only medieval version of the Poetics stems from William of Moerbeke. However, it seems to have been unknown throughout the whole Middle Ages. Instead, Aristotle's work was known through Herman the German's version of Averroes' paraphrase. The text of this Arabic-Latin Poetria is also included in the volume.

Links

• Website
• List of published works
• Leuven list