Aristotle’s De anima at the Faculties of Arts: 13th–14th Centuries, by Paola Bernardini

:<i>Aristotle’s “De anima” at the Faculties of Arts (13th–14th Centuries)</i>

John Wenck is best known for his polemical writing against Cusanus and is therefore mostly portrayed in critical literature as a conservative scholastic who adheres to Thomistic theses. His philosophical and theological works remain still unedited and his adherence to Parisian Albertism has been downplayed. This paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of John Wenck's thought by investigating the Albertist elements present in his commentary on the third book of De Anima, probably used for lectures at the Faculty of Arts in Paris. This paper is divided into three parts: the first consists in an analysis of the structure and sources of Wenck's commentary on De Anima, the second is a doctrinal exploration of the theory of the intellectual soul, highlighting Albertist aspects such as self-­knowledge and the possibility of knowledge without sensory images and the third is an investigation of the commentary's reception at the University of Krakow in the late 15th century, showing the lasting influence of Wenck's work.

While a student at the Universities of Heidelberg and Tübingen, Philip Melanchthon (b. 1497–d. 1560) had won recognition for his abilities as a promulgator of the reforms of the biblical humanistic movement. That reputation propelled him into a professorship at the infant University of Wittenberg in 1518. His primary assignment was to teach Greek and other courses in the Arts faculty, but in 1519 he received the first theology degree, which expanded his responsibilities to include lecturing on the Bible. As a key member of that university, he taught theology and also lectured on several texts and topics in the liberal arts (including Aristotle’s De anima), which continued until his death in 1560. His contributions to the liberal arts, especially in rhetoric and dialectic, but also in refining methods of text analysis and teaching in all branches of learning, were more than equaled by his achievements in biblical interpretation and in the formulation of the dogmatic system that prepared his students for preaching and teaching the faith through the topical method of organizing knowledge of scripture and the Christian tradition. He composed The Augsburg Confession, The Apology of the Augsburg Confession, and The Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, which became part of the secondary authority for public teaching in the Lutheran churches. He also served as an ecclesiastical diplomat and counselor on public policy for the electors of Saxony and for the Smalcald League. His later years were marred by criticism from former students, including those to whom he had been very close, whom he disappointed by working with Moritz of Saxony, who had aided the Habsburgs in the defeat of Melanchthon’s former elector, Johann Friedrich, in the Smalcald War (1546–1547). They felt betrayed by his involvement in formulating a compromise policy that was intended to simulate electoral Saxon compliance with imperial commands to return to submission to the papacy while preserving what Luther and Melanchthon had taught in the 1520s, 1530s, and 1540s. His disputed reputation perhaps contributed to the relative dearth of larger scholarly studies of his thought or his multifaceted public career. Much of the scholarship published in what might be called a modest “Melanchthon Renaissance” of the last half century has taken form in essays rather than books, as this bibliography indicates.

The Aristotelian commentaries by Petrus de Rivo (†1499/1500), still unedited, represent a valuable instrument for our understanding of the major trends in the teaching of Aristotle at the fifteenth-century Faculty of Arts at Louvain. We published a preliminary survey of the manuscript material in last year's issue of this journal, together with an account of the status quaestionis concerning Peter's biography, works and the historical context of his thought. In the present article, we consider more closely a selection of his commentaries on logic and natural philosophy. First, we offer an overview of Peter's division of the sciences as expressed in his tractatus prohemiales, particularly those introducing his commentaries on Porphyry's Isagoge and Aristotle's Physics. Next, we considers Peter's explanation of De interpretatione chapter 9, and his exposition of specific parts of Aristotle's Physics and De anima.

The Aristotelian commentaries by Petrus de Rivo (†1499/1500), still unedited, represent a valuable instrument for our understanding of the major trends in the teaching of Aristotle at the fifteenth-century Faculty of Arts at Louvain. We published a preliminary survey of the manuscript material in last year’s issue of this journal, together with an account of the status quaestionis concerning Peter’s biography, works and the historical context of his thought. In the present article, we consider more closely a selection of his commentaries on logic and natural philosophy. First, we offer an overview of Peter’s division of the sciences as expressed in his tractatus prohemiales, particularly those introducing his commentaries on Porphyry’s Isagoge and Aristotle’s Physics. Next, we considers Peter’s explanation of De interpretatione chapter 9, and his exposition of specific parts of Aristotle’s Physics and De anima.

Historian of science Edward Grant believed that, by counting and classifying the uses of theological terms in commentaries on some of Aristotle’s natural books, he could show that medieval natural philosophy had no theological agenda. But his broad-brush approach may not reveal differences in the way individual authors used theological terms. A census of such terms in the De anima commentaries of John Buridan and Nicole Oresme undertaken in this paper suggests that Buridan was more mindful of theological scrutiny of the Arts faculty than Oresme, perhaps because Buridan’s career began when the effects of the Condemnation of 1277 were more strongly felt than they were a generation later when Oresme began to teach.