Keywords
De plantis
Aristotle
Nicolaus Damascenus
Kitab al-Nabat
How to Cite
Abstract
The reception of the translations of Aristotelian and pseudo-Aristotelian works at the University of Paris in the thirteenth century promoted a new understanding of the sciences as specialized fields of knowledge. The huge amount of translations required a new organization of knowledge, which included novel subjects and categories. Among these there is a very special case, namely the pseudo-Aristotelian De plantis, translated from Arabic into Latin and then back into Greek to be re-translated into Latin again. De plantis was included in the new curriculum in Ripoll 109 (1230–1240 BCE), and constituted the main source for botanical studies until the sixteenth century. Throughout this paper we will explore the reception and impact of De plantis in both the Arabic and the Latin traditions. We aim to show its foundational role in the development of botany as a theoretical discipline within the natural sciences.References
Adam of Bockenfield. Glossae super De vegetabilibus et plantis. Ed. Raymond James Long. Leiden: Brills, 2013.
Albertus Magnus. De vegetabilibus Libri VII. Eds. Ernst H. F. Meyer and Karl F. W. Jessen. Berlin: Georgii Reimeri, 1867.
Alfred of Sareshel. “Super librum de vegetabilibus.” Medieval Studies 47 (1985): 125–67.
Arberry, Arthur J. “An Early Translation from the Greek.” [= De plantis, first edition of the Arabic text] Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts of the Cairo University 1 (1933): 48–76.
Aristotle. De Anima with Translation, Introduction, and Notes. Trans. and ed. Robert D. Hicks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1907.
Averroes [Ibn Rushd] of Córdoba. Long Commentary on the De Anima of Aristotle. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009.
Badawi, Abdarrahman. Aristutalis fi-n-nafs. Cairo: Maktabat al-Nahḍah al-Misriyyah, 1954.
Bar-On, Yinon M., Rob Phillips, and Ron Milo, “The Biomass Distribution on Earth.” PNAS 115, no. 25, (2018): 6506–11. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1711842115.
Bianchi, Luca M. “‘Prophanae novitates’ et ‘doctrinae peregrinae’: la méfiance à l’égard des innovations théoriques aux XIIIe et XIVVVe siècles.” In Tradition, Innovation, Invention, ed. Hans-Joachim Schmidt, 211–229. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2005.
Bouyges, Maurice. “Sur le de Plantis d’ Aristote-Nicolas à propos d’un manuscrit arabe de Constantinople.” Mélanges de L’Université Saint-Joseph Beyrouth 9, no. 2 (1923): 71–89.
Brown, Stephen. “The Intellectual Context of Later Medieval Philosophy: Universities, Aristotle, Arts, Theology.” In Routledge History of Philosophy Volume III: Medieval Philosophy, ed. John Marenbon, 188–203. London: Routledge, 2004.
Denifle, Heinrich, and Émile Chatelain. Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, Vol. 1. Paris: A. Delalain, 1889. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107338500.002.
Diamond, Jared M. Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: Norton, 2005.
Dod, Bernard G. “Aristoteles latinus.” In The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy, eds. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg, 45–79. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Dominicus Gundissalinus. De divisione philosophiae. Ed. Ludwig Baur. Münster: Aschendorff, 1903.
Douglas Wingate, Sybil. The Mediaeval Latin Versions of the Aristotelian Scientific Corpus, with Special Reference to the Biological Works. Dubuque, IA: W. C. Brown Reprint Library, 1963.
Hardy, Frederick Gavin, and Laurence M. V. Totelin. Ancient Botany. New York: Routledge, 2016.
Hugo Sancti Victoris. “Didascalicon.” In Documenta Catholica Omnia. Accessed May 20, 2019. http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/04z/z_10961141__Hugo_De_S_Victore__Didascalicon__LT.pdf.html.
Ibrahim Bayyumi Madkur, Ibn Sina al-Šifa, al-TTTabiiyyat. Cairo: Dar al-Katib al-Arabi li-al-Tibaa wa-al-Našr, 1969.
Jordan, Mark D. “Theology and Philosophy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Aquinas, eds. Norman Kretzmann and Eleonore Stump, 232–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521431956.010.
Lafleur, Claude, and Joanne Carrier. Le “Guide de l’étudiant parisien” d’un maître anonyme de la Faculté des arts de Paris au XIIIIIe siècle. Québec: Publications du Laboratoire de philosophie ancienne et médiévale de la Faculté de philosophie de l’Université Laval, 1992.
Liddell, Henry G., and Robert Scott. Greek-English Lexicon. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1883.
Lohr, Charles H., “The Medieval Interpretation of Aristotle.” In The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy, eds. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg, 80–98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Long, Raymond James. “Botany.” In Medieval Latin. An Introduction and Bibliographical Guide, eds. Frank A. C. Mantello and Arthur G. Rigg, 401–5. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1999.
Marenbon, John. Medieval Philosophy. An Historical and Philosophical Introduction. New York: Routledge, 2010.
Nicolaus Damascenus. De plantis. Five Translations. Eds. Hendrik J. Drossaart Lulofs and Evert L. J. Poortman. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing, 1989.
Petrus de Alvernia. Sententia Super Librum De Vegetabilibus et Plantis. Ed. Evert L. J. Poortman. Leiden: Brill, 2003.
Polloni, Nicola. “Gundissalinus and the Application of al-Fārābī’s Metaphysical Programme. A Case of Philosophical Transfer.” Mediterranea. International Journal for the Transfer of Knowledge 1 (2016): 69–106. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521431956.010.
Roger Bacon. “Opus Tertium.” In Fr. Rogeri Bacon Opera quædam hactenus inedita, ed. John S. Brewer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Roger Bacon. “Quaestiones supra De plantis.” In Opera hactenus inedita Rogeri Baconi. Ed. Robert Steele. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1932.
Taylor, Jerome. The Didascalicon of Hugh of Saint Victorrr. New York: Columbia University Press, 1961.
Thomas Aquinas. “Sentencia libri De sensu et sensato, tract. 1 l. 11 n. 14.” In Corpus Thomisticum. Accessed May 20, 2019. http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/css01.html.
Thomas Aquinas. “Summa Theologiae, Iª, q. 1, a.1, ad 2.” In Corpus Thomisticum. Accessed May 20, 2019. http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/sth1001.html.
Yavuz, Mustafa, and Özlem Korkmaz. “Botánica en al-Ándalus: un estudio comparativo de trabajos ilustrados de botánica en el Magreb y Máshreq.” Awraq, no. 17–18 (2017): 169–86.
Catalogue of Life. Accessed May 30, 2019. http://www.catalogueoflife.org/col/browse/tree?befbfbb8a465d5f008cb605a3037ae63.
Since 2019, TEORIE VĚDY / THEORY OF SCIENCE journal provides open access to its content under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Authors who publish in this journal agree that:
- Authors retain copyright and publication rights without restrictions and guarantee the journal the right of first publishing. All published articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution license, which allows others to share this work under condition that its author and first publishing in this journal was acknowledged.
- Authors may enter into other agreements for non-exclusive dissemination of work in the version in which it was published in the journal (for example, publishing it in a book), but they have to acknowledge its first publication in this journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to make their work available online (for example, on their personal websites, social media accounts, and institutional repositories) as such a practice may lead to productive exchanges of views as well as earlier and higher citations of published work.
There are no author fees, no article processing charges, or submission charges.
The journal allows readers to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allows readers to use them for any other lawful purpose.
A summary of the open access policy is also available in the Sherpa Romeo database.