Aristotle was a systematic writer who often cross-referred to the definitions of terms given elsewhere in his work. Book 5 of the Metaphysics is important because it consists of definitions of the main uses of key terms in Aristotle's philosophy, and it is extremely valuable to have a commentary on this important text by Alexander of Aphrodisias, the leading commentator of his school. Alexander provides a detailed commentary on all of the thirty terms analysed in Book 5, weighing alternative interpretations of what Aristotle says one against another, defending Peripatetic views against actual and possible criticisms, and attempting to integrate what is said in Book 5 into the context of the Metaphysics as a whole.

Aristotle was a systematic writer who often cross-referred to the definitions of terms given elsewhere in his work. Book 5 of the Metaphysics is important because it consists of definitions of the main uses of key terms in Aristotle's philosophy, and it is extremely valuable to have a commentary on this important text by Alexander of Aphrodisias, the leading commentator of his school. Alexander provides a detailed commentary on all of the thirty terms analysed in Book 5, weighing alternative interpretations of what Aristotle says one against another, defending Peripatetic views against actual and possible criticisms, and attempting to integrate what is said in Book 5 into the context of the Metaphysics as a whole.

"Aristotle was a systematic writer who often cross-referred to the definitions of terms given elsewhere in his work. Book 5 of the Metaphysics is important because it consists of definitions of the main uses of key terms in Aristotle's philosophy, and it is extremely valuable to have a commentary on this important text by Alexander of Aphrodisias, the leading commentator of his school. Alexander provides a detailed commentary on all of the thirty terms analysed in Book 5, weighing alternative interpretations of what Aristotle says one against another, defending Peripatetic views against actual and possible criticisms, and attempting to integrate what is said in Book 5 into the context of the Metaphysics as a whole."--Bloomsbury Publishing

Alexander of Aphrodisias was the greatest exponent of Aristotelianism after Aristotle, and his commentary on Metaphysics 1-5 is the most substantial commentary on the Metaphysics to have survived from antiquity. The commentary on book 1 has the further interest that over half of it is devoted to Aristotle's discussion of Plato. Aristotle's battery of objectives to the theory of Ideas is spelled out with fragmentary quotations and paraphrases from four of Aristotle's lost works, and we are given an extended account of Plato's 'unwritten doctrines' according to which the Ideas are numbers, namely the One and Indefinite Dyad. The deliberations for and against the theory of Ideas recorded by Alexander are more detailed than anything in Plato's dialogues and tell us more than any other source how they were conceived in Plato's most developed theory.

Alexander of Aphrodisias's commentary (about AD 200) is the earliest extant commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics and the most important indirect witness to the Metaphysics text. In this study, Mirjam Kotwick demonstrates how to reconstruct from Alexander's commentary the Metaphysics text Alexander used and how to make use of this ancient version of the Metaphysics for improving the text of our direct manuscript tradition. Moreover, Kotwick investigates how Alexander's commentary may have influenced the transmission of the Metaphysics at various stages. Kotwick's study is the first book-length examination of a commentary as a witness to an ancient philosophical text. This blend of textual criticism and philosophical analysis both expands on existing methodologies in classical scholarship and develops new ones.

This is the first of a two-volume edition of Alexander of Aphrodisias’ commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics. The new edition, which includes a philosophical and philological introduction, as well as notes to textcritical issues, is based on a critical evaluation of the entire manuscript tradition of the commentary. It also takes into account its indirect tradition and the Latin translation of Juan Ginès Sepúlveda.

No Marketing Blurb

Translation of: In Aristotelis Metaphysica commentaria.