Linked bibliography for the SEP article "
Medieval Theories of Demonstration" by John Longeway
This is an automatically generated and experimental page
If everything goes well, this page should display the bibliography of the aforementioned article as it appears in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, but with links added to PhilPapers records and Google Scholar for your convenience. Some bibliographies are not going to be represented correctly or fully up to date. In general, bibliographies of recent works are going to be much better linked than bibliographies of primary literature and older works. Entries with PhilPapers records have links on their titles. A green link indicates that the item is available online at least partially.
This experiment has been authorized by the editors of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The original article and bibliography can be found here.
- Albert the Great. Posteriorum Analyticorum. In Opera
Omnia. Edited by Augustus Borgnet. Vivès: 18909, Vol.
2, pp.1-232. (Scholar)
- Aristotle. Analytica posteriora: translationes Iacobi, Anonymi
sive ‘Ioannis’, Gerardi et recensio Guillelmi de
Moerbeke. Aristoteles Latinus, IV 1-4. Edited by Lorenzo
Minio-Paluello and Bernard G. Dod. Bruges-Paris: Desclée de
[Contains not only the
medieval translations, but also an extensive introductory discussion
by Minio-Paluello, in Latin, of the history of the
- Averroës. Aristotelis opera cum Averrois
commentatoris, with Magnis Commentariis in Posteriora
Resolutoria, in I Part 2a, and Expositionis Mediae in Librum
Demonstrationis Aristotelis, IX Quaesita Demonstrativa in Libros
Posteriorum, and Diversorum Arabum Quaesita, in I Part 2b. Ed.
Iuntina. Venetiis: Apud Iunctas, 1562-74. Reprint:
Frankfurt/Mainz: Minerva 1962. (Scholar)
- Buridan, John. Compendium Totius Logicae. Venice 1499.
Reprint Edition: Minerva, 1965. Tract VIII: De
demonstrationibus, with commentary by John Dorp. (Scholar)
- Burleigh, Walter. Habes accuratissime lector Aristotelis
posteriorum opus ac eius luculentissimum interpretum lincolniensem
burleumque... Venice: 1514. Reprint: Frankfurt/Mainz: Minerva,
[Translated on Longeway's
website. (See “Other Internet Resources,”
- –––. Quaestiones super librum Posteriorum. Edited by
Mary Catherine Sommers. Toronto, Canada: Pontifical Institute of
Medieval Studies, 1982.
[A good critical
edition. Portions translated on Longeway's website. (See “Other
Internet Resources,” below.)]
- Al Farabi. Catalogo de las Ciencias. Ed. A. Gonzales.
Madrid: Palencia, 1932. 2d ed. 1953.
is extant in two translations, one by Gerard of Cremona, and a more
abbreviated version by Dominicus Gundissalinus. The division of logic
in this work mentions five species of syllogism, one of which is
demonstrative syllogism, dealt with in the Posterior
Analytics. Demonstrative syllogism gives us the most certain
knowledge, and is the part of logic toward which the other parts are
directed. That is about all it says, but it is one of the earliest
sources avalable in the West mentioning the Posterior
Analytics. English translation on Longeway's website (see
“Other Internet Resources,” below).
- Ikhwan al-Safa. Liber Introductorius in Artem Logica
Demonstrationis. Edited by A. Nagy in Beiträge zur
Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters 2 no. 5
(1897) 41-64, ix-xii.
[Probably this is
Gundissalinus's translation. Nagy attributes it to Al Farabi, but
J.De Boer identified its correct source in Chapter 13 of the
Encyclopedia by the society Ikhwan al-Safa. The author is not fully
Aristotelian in his epistemology, holding to a Platonic view reducing
the natures of material things to mathematicals. But he has thought
through his material, and has a clear idea what a demonstration
is. English translation on Longeway's website (see “Other
Internet Resources,” below).]
- Al Ghazali. “Logica Algazelis: Introduction and Critical
Text.” Ed. Charles H. Lohr. Traditio 223-290.
[Translation by John
Longeway, of proemium and fifth maneria, on Longeway's website
English translation on Longeway's website (see “Other Internet
Resources,” below).] (Scholar)
- Giles of Rome. Egidius super libros Posteriorum
Aristotelis. Venice: Bonetus Locatellus, 1488.
- _______. “De medio demonstrationis.” Ed. Jan
Pinborg. Miscellanea Mediaevalia 10 (1976) 240-268. (Scholar)
- Grosseteste, Robert. Commentarius in Posteriorum Analyticorum
libros. Ed. Pietro Rossi. Florence: 1982.
[A good critical
- John of Cornwall = Pseudo-Scotus. In libris Posteriorum
Analyticorum Aristotelis quaestiones. In Duns Scotus, Opera
Omnia, Vivès, 1891-95, Vol. 1: 342-430. (Scholar)
- Ockham, William. Scriptum in librum primum Sententiarum
(Ordinatio). Prologus et Distinctio I. Eds. Gedeon
Gál and Stephen F. Brown. Opera Theologica, vol. 1. St.
Bonaventure, New York: Franciscan Institute, 1967. Prologue. Questions
2 through 6. (Scholar)
- –––. Summa Logicae. Eds. Gedeon Gál and
Stephen F. Brown. Opera Philosophica, vol. 1. St. Bonaventure,
New York: Franciscan Institute, 1974. Part III.II. (Scholar)
- Richard of Conington. Quodlibetal Questions I, Question 1, and
“Quaestio de medio in demonstratione potissima,”
ed. in Stephen Brown, “Sources for Ockham's Prologue to the
Sentences,” Franciscan Studies 26 (1966)
- Soto, Domingo de. Commentarii in Libros Posteriorum
Aristotelis. Salamanca: 1543.
- Themistius. “Themistius's Paraphrasis of the Posterior
Analytics in Gerard of Cremona's Translation.” Edited by J.
Reginald O'Donnell. Medieval Studies 20 (1958) 239-315. (Scholar)
- Thomas Aquinas. Commentarium in libros Posteriorum
Analyticorum. In Opera Omnia. (Leonine Edition), Vol. I.
Rome: Vatican Polyglot Press, 1882.
Primary Sources in English Translation
- Thomas Aquinas. Commentary on the Posterior Analytics of
Aristotle. Translated by Fabian R. Larcher. Albany, New York: Magi
Books, Inc., 1970.
- Simon of Faversham. Quaestions on the Posterior Analytics.
[Two sets, both translated on
Longeway's website. (See “Other Internet Resources,”
- Bennett, O. 1943.The Nature of Demonstrative Proof According to the
Principles of Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas. Washington, D.C:
The Catholic University of America Press. (Scholar)
- Crombie, Alistair C. 1953.Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science, 1100-1700. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[There is much of value in this detailed study, but Crombie insists on making Grosseteste a kind of skeptical Popperian, completely missing the place of divine illumination in his account of demonstrative science. For criticism, see Serene and Koyré.] (Scholar)
- Demange, Dominique. 2005. “Les Second analytiques aux
XIIIe siècle et la théorie de la connaisance de Jean Duns
Scot.” Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Ecole Pratique de
Hautes Etudes. (Scholar)
- Dod, Bernard G. 1970. “The Study of Aristotle's Posterior Analytics
in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries.” Unpublished B.Litt.
thesis. Oxford University.
[ An excellent survey of work
before Grosseteste, and a philologically oriented discussion of
Grosseteste's commentary.] (Scholar)
- Ebbeson, Sten. 1976. “Anonymus Aurelianensis II, Aristotle, Alexander, Porphyry and Boethius. Ancient Scholasticism and twelfth-century Western Europe.” Cahiers de l'Institut du moyen âge grec et latin 16, 1-128.
[ Contains the most complete list of fragments of the Alexander/Philoponus commentary.] (Scholar)
- –––. 1977. “Jacobus Veneticus on the Posterior Analytics and
Some Early Thirteenth-century Oxford Masters on the Elenchi.”
Cahiers de l'Institut du moyen âge grec et latin 2, 1-9.
[On the commentary on the
Posterior Analytics translated by James of Venice. The
medieval scholars thought this was by Alexander of Aphrodisias, but
it is nearly identical to Philoponus's commentary on Book I. It did
not circulate long after its translation, but was so thoroughly mined
for glosses that its contents entered into the stream of commentary
literature anyway.] (Scholar)
- Goldin, Owen. 1996. Explaining an Eclipse. Aristotle's Posterior Analytics 2.1-10. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. (Scholar)
- Guelluy, R. 1947. Philosophie et Theologie chez Guillaume
d'Ockham. Louvain: E. Nauwelaerts.
[Useful for the treatment of
scientific knowledge in connection with theology in the
- Koyré, Alexander. 1956. “The Origins of Modern Science: a New Interpretation.” Diogenes 16, 1-22.
[A critique of Crombie.] (Scholar)
- Longeway, John L. 1977. “Simon of Faversham's Questions on the
Posterior Analytics: a Thirteenth-century View of Science.”
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Cornell University.
[A thorough and accurate
discussion of the commentary in its own right, but errs in its claim
that Simon was not influenced significantly by Thomas.] (Scholar)
- –––. 2002. “Aegidius Romanus and Albertus Magnus vs. Thomas
Aquinas on the Highest Sort of Demonstration (demonstratio
potissima).” Documenti e Studi Sulla Tradizione
Filosofica Medievale 13, 373-434. (Scholar)
- McEvoy, James. 1982. The Philosophy of Robert Grosseteste. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
[Chapter 5, 320-350, is especially pertinent to the Posterior Analytics commentary, but it deals only with knowledge of forms, not of those first principles that are propositions or conclusions.] (Scholar)
- Marrone, Steven P. 1983. William of Auvergne and Robert Grosseteste. New ideas of Truth in the Early Thirteenth Century. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
[The most extensive recent discussion of Grosseteste's Posterior Analytics commentary. Thorough and intelligent, though Marrone does hold that Grosseteste abandoned the illuminationism of the De Veritate in his later scientific works, a view I find scarcely defensible.] (Scholar)
- Mathews, P.L. 1958-1959. “A Study of the Literary Background
and the methodology of St. Thomas's commentary on the Posterior
Analytics of Aristotle.” Dissertation. Dissertation Abstracts
19, 2980 ff. (Scholar)
- Minio-Paluello, L. 1951. “Note sull'Aristotle latino
medievale. IV: La tradizione semitico-latina del testo dei
‘secondo analitici.’” Rivista di filosofia
neoscolastica, p. 97-124.
[Hunain ibn Ishaq (809-876)
and his son produced a literal Syrian translation of the
Posterior Analytics from a good manuscript about 910, which
was translated very literally into Arabic by Abu Bishr Matta in
940. This excellent translation was used by Al Farabi, Al Gazali, and
Ibn Sina.] (Scholar)
- –––. 1952. “Note sull'Aristotle latino medievale. V:
L'ignota versone Moerbekana dei ‘secondi analitici’ usata
da S. Tomaso.” Rivista di filosofia
neoscolastica, p. 389-411. (Scholar)
- –––. 1952. “Jacobus Veneticus Graecus: Canonist and
Translator of Aristotle.” Traditio. 8, 265-304.
[Establishes, by stylistic
analysis, that James of Venice is responsible for the vulgate version
of the Posterior Analytics in the Middle Ages. The article
ended a long-standing dispute whether the vulgate version is James's
or Boethius's, and established the importance of stylistic analysis
as a technique for establishing authorship.] (Scholar)
- –––. 1954. “Note sull'Aristotle latino medievale. XIV: Frammenti del commento perduto di Alessando d'Afrodisia ai ‘secondi analitici’ tradotto da Giacomo Veneto in un codice di Goffredo di Fontaines, Parigi B.N. lat. 16080.” Rivista di filosofia neoscolastica, p. 131-147.
[Establishes a stylistic resemblance between James's work and certain commentaries on the Posterior Analytics and the Elenchi, cited in medieval works, hitherto attributed to Alexander of Aphrodisias.] (Scholar)
- Owens, J. 1964. “The Analytics and Thomistic metaphysical procedure.” Medieval Studies. 26, 83-108. (Scholar)
- Serene, Eileen F. 1979.“Robert Grosseteste on Induction and Demonstrative Science.” Synthese. 40, 97-115.
[A criticism of Crombie on Grosseteste's account of induction.] (Scholar)
- –––. 1982. “Demonstrative Science.” Chapter 24 of The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy. Ed. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[Necessarily somewhat superficial, given the format of the volume, but accurate.] (Scholar)
- Vier, Peter C. 1951. Evidence and its Function According to
John Duns Scotus. St. Bonaventure, New York: Franciscan
- Wallace, William A. 1972. Causality and Scientific Explanation. Vol. I: Medieval and Early Classical Science. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America.
[Includes discussions of a number of themes in the Posterior Analytics tradition, involving Grosseteste, Albert, Thomas and others.] (Scholar)
- ––– . 1974. “Aquinas on the Temporal Relation Between Cause and Effect.” The Review of Metaphysics. 27, 569-84. (Scholar)
- –––. 1980. “Albertus Magnus on Suppositional Necessity
in the Natural Sciences.” In Albertus Magnus and the
Sciences, edited by James A. Weisheipl. Toronto: Pontifical
Institute of Mediaeval Studies, p. 103-28.
[Traces Thomas's views on the
matter to his teacher.] (Scholar)
- –––. 1980. “The Scientific Methodology of St. Albert the
Great.” In Albertus Magnus Doctor Universalis,
1280-1980, edited by Gerbert Meyer and Albert Zimmermann. Mainz:
Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, p. 385-407. (Scholar)
- –––. 1981. “The Uses of Hypothesis (Suppositio) in
Scientific Reasoning.” In Studies in Aristotle, edited
by Dominic J. O'Meara. Washington D.C. (Scholar)
- Walton, William M. 1952. “The Second Mode of Necessary or Per Se Propositions According to St. Thomas Aquinas.” The Modern Schoolman, 29, 293-306.
[Concerns not only the second way of saying per se but also the fourth. A useful survey of material outside the Posterior Analytics commentary.] (Scholar)
- Webering, Damascene. 1953. Theory of Demonstration According to William of Ockham. St. Bonaventure, New York: The Franciscan Institute. (Scholar)
- Weinberg, Julius R. 1965. “Historical Remarks on Some
Medieval Views of Induction.” In Abstraction, Relation and
Induction. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, p.
- –––. 1977. “Ockham's Theory of Scientific Method.” In
Ockham, Descartes and Hume. Self-knowledge, Substance and
Causality. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press (Scholar)
- Weisheipl, James A. 1958. “Albertus Magnus and the Oxford Platonists.” Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 32, p. 124-39.
[On Albert's relation to Grosseteste, Kilwardby and Bacon on the nature of subalternation of one science to another, and the metaphysical background of the discussion.] (Scholar)
- –––. 1965. “Classification of the Sciences in Medieval Thought.” Medieval Studies 27, p. 54-90. (Scholar)
- Wolter, Allan B. 1947 “The ‘Theology’ of Duns
Scotus.” Franciscan Studies 7, 257-273,
367-398. Reprinted, with minor revisions, in The Philosophical
Theology of Duns Scotus. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University
Press, 1990, 209-253.
contention that demonstration quia, just as much as demonstration
propter quid, arises from evident and necessary truths, and thus
produces knowledge in the strictest sense.] (Scholar)
- Wood, Rega. 1996. “Causality and Demonstration: An Early
Scholastic Posterior Analytics Commentary.”
Monist 99, 325-356.
[For the commentary of
Richard Rufus.] (Scholar)