Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/108045
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBaltussen, J.en
dc.date.issued2014en
dc.identifier.citationThe Routledge Handbook of Neoplatonism, 2014 / Slaveva-Griffin, S., Remes, P. (ed./s), Ch.7, pp.106-114en
dc.identifier.isbn1844656268en
dc.identifier.isbn9781844656264en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/108045-
dc.description.abstractIt is fundamental to our understanding of commentary as a genre that they respond to another text, often called the ‘base text’. Ancient commentaries have sometimes been characterized as “secondary texts”, but the label is likely to cause some misconceptions about how we should understand the nature of commentary (Sluiter 2000). It is preferable to read “secondary” as “using another text as its starting point” rather than as “unimportant”, “subservient” or “unoriginal”. 1 In what follows I hope to show that the commentary in late antiquity defies such facile descriptions. Philosophical commentary required certain conditions for it to develop and thrive. And instead of being a philological activity, like most modern commentaries tend to be (producing a set of disparate notes to a text), philosophers would comment within a specific ideological setting and almost always to serve a higher purpose (understanding and truth); in other words, they were created in response to the school founder’s writings (a “canon”) and were didactic in purpose. Given the peculiar nature of the works it will be helpful to spend some time clarifying the background of philosophical exegesis, especially among the Peripatetics. After that I turn to the main part of the analysis, in which I clarify the methodology and evolution of the commentaries on Aristotle.en
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityHan Baltussenen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherRoutledgeen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesRoutledge Handbooks in Philosophyen
dc.rights© 2014 Pauliina Remes and Svetla Slaveva-Griffin, selection and editorial matter; individual chapters, the contributorsen
dc.source.urihttps://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315744186.ch7en
dc.titleAristotelian commentary traditionen
dc.typeBook chapteren
dc.identifier.rmid0030027115en
dc.identifier.doi10.4324/9781315744186.ch7en
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen
dc.identifier.pubid144276-
pubs.library.collectionClassics publicationsen
pubs.library.teamDS03en
pubs.verification-statusVerifieden
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden
Appears in Collections:Classics publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.