George Scholarios’ Abridgment of the Parva naturalia: Its Place in His Œuvre and in the History of Byzantine Aristotelianism

Abstract

George Gennadios II – Scholarios’ (ca. 1400–paulo post 1472) abridgment of the Parva naturalia forms part of his abridgment of Theodore Metochites’ (1270–1332) Paraphrasis of Aristotle’s natural works. Scholarios adds two Complementary Notes of his own, where, drawing directly upon Thomas Aquinas’ two Summae (in Demetrios Kydones’ Greek translation) and Albert the Great’s Paraphrasis of the Parva naturalia, he shows that Aristotle’s theory of dreams and prophecy is compatible with Christianity. In so doing, he deliberately refutes George Pachymeres’ (1242–post 1307) Complementary Note to his own Paraphrasis of Aristotle’s De divinatione per somnum (which is part of a full paraphrasis of Aristotle’s works), where it is argued that it is Platonic rather than Aristotelian anthropology that can provide Christian theology with a proper basis for accounting for God-sent dreams and prophecy. Το Scholarios, it is not man who renders himself a “matter” appropriate for receiving the “form” of revelation by setting his divine element free to receive God’s messages; rather, it is God Himself who provides not only “form” but even the “matter” itself. There follows a discussion of Scholarios’ Aristotelianism in the light of the above new findings. The article includes, in two Appendices, a re-edition of Scholarios’ abridgment of Metochites’ paraphrasis of Aristotle’s De divinatione per somnum along with a provisional editio princeps of Metochites’ paraphrasis, and a provisional editio princeps of Pachymeres’ paraphrasis of the same work.