Artistarium ART 5 John of Holland, Four Tracts on Logic (Suppositiones, Fallacie, Obligationes, Insolubilia) 9070419114, 9789070419110

Citation preview

JOHN OF HOLLAND

ARTISTARIUM A Series of Texts on Mediaeval Logic, Grammar & Semantics EDITORS L. M. de RIJK

H. A. G. BRAAKHUIS

&

&

E. P. BOS Leiden

C.H.KNEEPKENS Nijmegen

Vol. 1: L. M. de Rijk, Anonymi auctoris franciscani Logica ,,Ad rudium" (edited from the MS Vat. lat. 946), Nijmegen 1981 Vol. 2: Ralph of Beauvais, Glose super Donatum, ed. C. H. Kneepkens, Nijmegen 1982 Vol. 3: L. M. de Rijk, Some 14th Century Tracts on the Probationes terminorum (Martin of Alnwick O.F.M., Richard Billingham, Edward Upton and others), Nijmegen 1982 Vol. 4: Johannes Buridanus, Questiones longe super Librum Perihermeneias, ed. Ria van der Lecq, Nijmegen 1983 Vol. 5: John of Holland, Four Tracts on Logic (Suppositiones, Fallacie, Obligationes, Insolubilia), ed. E. P. Bos, Nijmegen 1985

in preparation: H. A. G. Braakhuis, Nicholas of Paris (?), Summe Metenses: A Complete Edition C. H. Kneepkens, Ralph of Beauvais, Liber yYtan R. van der Lecq, Johannes Buridanus: Questiones super Sophisticos Elenchos, A Critical Edition E. P. Bos, Anonymi Introductiones Montane Maiores SUPPLEMENTA to ARTISTARIUM: Vol. I: English Logic and Semantics, from the End of the Twelfth Century to the Time of Ockham and Burleigh, Nijmegen 1981 Vol. II: Mediaeval Semantics and Metaphysics. Studies dedicated to L. M. de Rijk, Nijmegen 1985

ARTISTARIUM 5

JOHN OF HOLLAND

FOUR TRACTS ON LOGIC (SUPPOSITIONES, FALLACIE, OBLIGATIONES, INSOLUBILIA) First Critical Edition from the Manuscripts with an Introduction and Indices by E. P. Bos (University of Leiden, Department of Philosophy)

Nijmegen lngenium Publishers 1985

ISBN 90 70419 11 4 Copyright 1985 by Ingenium Publishers, P.O. Box 1342, 6501 BH Nijmegen, The N"therlands. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or translated in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, microfiche or any other means without written permission from the publisher. PRINTED by KRIPS REPRO l\IEPPEL, THE NETHERLANDS.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

For the present edition I am indebted to: Professor L.M. de Rijk (University of Leiden) for his information about manuscripts and for his helpful comments; The late Professor J. Pinborg (University of Copenhagen) for his comments on an earlier draft of the text (notably of the Suppositiones); Professor Paul V. Spade (Bloomington, Indiana University) for his information about manuscripts and his comments on my version of John's Insolubilia; Professor Eleonore Stump (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University) for her comments on my version of John's Obligationes; Professor

H.

Schepers

(Westfalische

Wilhelmus-Universitat,

Leibniz-For-

schungsstelle), who provided me with a copy of an early printed edition (with commentary) (Vienna 1509) of John of Holland's Obligationes and Insolubilia; Dr. Fr. Smahel (Prague) and Professor M. Markowski (Cracow) for their information about some manuscripts; Mr. J. Deahl, M. Litt., (Leiden) both for his information about some manuscripts and for his correction of my English; The Centrale Interfaculteit (that is: the Department of Philosophy), University of Leiden, who has generously made available the financial means for the publication of this edition.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.

INTRODUCTION A. PRELIMINARY REMARKS

B. JOHN OF HOLLAND, LIFE AND WORKS 1

John's Life

'"13'"

1.1 2

John and Contemporary Scholars John's Works

*18"'

2. 1

John's Works on Physics

2.2 2.2.1

John's Works on Logic The Suppositiones

2.2.2

The Fallacie

2.2.2.1 2.2.3

The Authenticity of the Fallacie The Obligationes

'"24"' '"26'"

'"14'"

"'19"' '"20'" '"21'"

2.2.4

The Insolubilia

2.2.5

The Consequentie

*28*

2.2.6

The Sophismata

"'31"'

2.2.7

An Unproved Ascription of Tracts to John of Holland

c. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PRESENT EDITION 1

The Basis of the Edition

'"33*

2

The Tracts

"'33'"

2.1

The Suppositiones

i'33'"

2.2

The Fallacie, the Obligationes and the Insolubilia

D. THE ORTHOGRAPHY E. THE APPARATUS CRITICUS F. BIBLIOGRAPHY

II.

THE FOUR TRACTS

- 146

List of signs and abbreviations

3 -

4

1. The Suppositiones

5 -

32

Table of contents

7 -

8

Text

9 -

30

-

32

35 -

85

-

39

Apparatus criticus Notes 2. The Fallacie Table of contents

31 32

37

Text

41 -

73

Apparatus criticus

74 -

85

Notes

85

3. The Obligationes

87 - 121

Table of contents

89 -

90

Text

91

-

110

Apparatus criticus

111

Notes

121

4. The Insolubilia

121

123 - 146

Table of contents

125 - 126

Text

127

-

141

Apparatus criticus

142 - 146

Notes

146

III. APPENDICES

149 - 165

1. Additions

to John of Holland's Obligationes from the Early Printed Edition Vienna 1509

151 - 160

2. John of Holland's Suppositiones and Albert of Saxony's

Perutilis logica

161 - 165

IV.

INDICES

167

1. Index of manuscripts used

169

2. Index of ancient and medieval texts ref erred to

170

3. Index of names

170

3.1 Index of ancient and medieval names

170

3.2 Index of modern names

171

3.3 Indes of places

172

4. Index of subjects 5. Index of examples, cious arguments

173 sophisms and conclusions of falla185

-

194

-

173

I.

INTRODUCTION

A.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS

In the present study I intend to present an edition of four tracts on logic composed by Johannes Hollandrinus. The four tracts of this master of arts (who lived in the second half of the fourteenth century) are: the Supposi-

tiones, Fallacie, Obligationes and Insolubilia. In my introduction I shall first discuss John's biography and give a survey of his philosophical works. In the list of his works on logic I shall include a survey of the manuscripts. With the evidence gathered from them I shall try to establish the dates of composition of John's tracts on logic. The next chapter will be concerned with the edition itself. First, I shall give some information about the manuscripts on which the edition is based; secondly, the establishment of the text. Some remarks on orthography and on the apparatus criticus will conclude this section.

B.

JOHN OF HOLLAND, LIFE AND WORKS

1.

John's life

The Johannes Hollandrinus (other forms are: Holandrinus, de Hollandri(n)a, de Hol(l)andi(y)a, de Hal(l)andria, spelled with or without the letters in brackets)

to whom a number of tracts on logic and physics are ascribed,

should most probably be identified with the man about whom the Liber deca-

norum universitatis Pragensis (1830) informs us (the only source, it seems, cf. Emdem, 1958: 951). John of Holland's biography is still very obscure. From the Liber deca-

norum (1830: 140) we learn that John was born in Monickedam (the modern orthography of this little town, which lies about 15 kilometers northeast of Amsterdam, is: Monnickendam); when exactly he was born, we do not know. On August 20th, 1367, he determined under the guidance of one master Henry of Oyta. This master Henry is, according to Lang (1927: 14), master Henry Tot-

ting of Ogta (ca. 1330 - february 11th, 1397). Henry was active as a master in Prague from 1366 (perhaps even from 1363) onwards. On January 11th, 1369, Peter of Straconicz (a Crutched Friar of St. John) and John of Frysia (called Styllincolch) made their determinationes under the guidance of John of Holland, who was, it appears, then a master of arts. In 1369 (June 7th) John

became Dean of the faculty of arts 1 . Six pupils (whose names are not recorded) obtained their degrees during the period in which John was Dean. On June 21st, 1370, Hermannus Roghenspylrer determined, and on December 21st of the same year a certain Clemens obtained the degree of baccalaureus 2

1.1.

,

both under John's guidance.

John and Contemporary Scholars

Though John's tracts (both those on logic and those on physics) have received scant attention, some additional data about John's life can be gathered from the few notes made by scholars about his theories. These conclusions are of special relevance to John's doctrinal relationship to contemporary scholars. Without offering details Emden says (1958: 951) that John, though primarily active in Prague, also studied at Oxford as he is familiar with the works

of William Heytesbury

(ca.

1313 - 1372/3), Thomas Bradwardine (ca.

1295 - 1349), Walter Burley (ca. 1275 - after 1344), John Dumbleton (d. probably 1349) and Richard Swineshead (ca. 1350). He adds that he obtained this information from J.A. Weisheipl. Emden goes on to say, that it is possible that John was personally acquainted with Heytesbury. This latter note is based,

he says, on a remark by Anneliese Maier (1952: 267). However, Miss

Maier does not say so in this work: she notes that the anonymous author of the tract De sex inconvenientibus was probably a pupil of Heytesbury. Weisheipl (1966: 166) notes about our master: "John of Holland, it would seem, studied for\ some time at Oxford, before incepting at Prague" (Weisheipl refers to Emden's notes cited above). In his very stimulating book on Heytesbury, Curtis Wilson (1960) discusses John's physics as part of the historical setting of Heytesbury's Regule

solvendi sophismata. On p.

26 of Wilson's study, we learn that in his De

primo et ultimo instanti John quotes one of the rules from the fifth chapter 1.

In the Liber Decanorum (1830: 18) there is a list of deans of the University of Prague. For 1367 five names are listed, among whom Joannes de Holandia de Monickedam. This is probably a mistake. The reason could be that the list as a whole is later addition, as the editor of the Liber Decanorum points out in a note (ib.): Seriem hanc decanorum serius esse insertam recentiores literarum ductus et orthographiae ratio ostendunt.

2.

Perhaps they obtained different degrees in this case, normally, however, a determinatio and a promotio ad baccalaureatum are closely associated.

of Heytesbury's Regule. A little later (p. 33) Wilson concludes that in the same tract John directly refers to Burley's De instanti; John's work is, according to Wilson, essentially an amplification of the treatise. But we may also be sure, Wilson goes on to say, that at the time of writing this work John of Holland was familiar with the fourth and fifth chapters of Heytesbury' s Regule as well as with the Liber calculationum of Suiseth (this is: Richard Swineshead, who composed his Liber calculationum about 1350; see Anneliese Maier, 1952: 270; see also Weisheipl, 1968: 212) 3 . Wilson establishes that John was acquainted with the works of Burley, Heytesbury and Richard Swineshead. Concerning his relation to Bradwardine and Dumbleton to which Emden refers (see above), we find no confirmation in Wilson's study. In the tracts edited here, four philosophers emerge to fill out the picture of John's position in fourteenth-century philosophy.

a.

Thomas Manlevelt

In three out of the five manuscripts which contain what is probably John's

Fallacie, there is a reference to a master Thomas Manlevelt (other forms of this name as they occur in the manuscripts used for this study are: Maulfeld, Mawlfelt, Maufelt, Manlevel). I interpret this particular reference as an interpolation (see the apparatus criticus ad locum; p.81, ad 64, 19). Nevertheless, it points to a medieval interpretation indicating a doctrinal relationship between our author and this master Thomas. For a discussion of this problem (which is related to the problem of the authenticity of the

Fallacie) I refer to my paragraph 2.2.2.1. b. Henry of Hopton or Edward Upton In the Consequentie two philosophers are mentioned. First, on f. 30v, John says: 'Tamen inter ceteras michi placet dicere sicut Hapton (Haptor MS). Ne-

gat enim Hapton propter resolutionem etc.'. To whom does John refer? There seem to be two possible candidates:

bl. Henry of Hopton From this individual, two tracts have dome down to us, as far as I know, which are preserved in MS Rome, Bibl. Angelica, 1017 (R 6. 32):

3.

On the confusion between Roger and Richard Swyneshead, see also Weisheipl' s study (1968: 207-8). *15*

1.

On ff. 7vb-14ra we find a sophisma disputatum with the following inci-

pit:

'Omnis propositio est vera vel falsa. Quod sophisma sit falsum, probatur sic: hec propositio Deus est nee est est (sic) vera nee falsa. Igitur etc. Secundo sic: null a propositio ampliati va affirmativa ubi verbum principale est ampliativum, est vera (in the margin is added bg another hand: vel falsa). Igitur etc. Tertio sic: nulla propositio affirmativa est vera ubi predicatur superius de inferiori vel econverso. Igitur etc.' The tract concludes as follows: 'Ad aliud argumentum contra modum probandi expositionem predictam primi termini dicitur quod in sola propositione categorica debet propositio probari per expositionem primi termini quia alioquin esset consequentia formalis ab inferiori ad superius et a superiori ad inferius particulari ter sine negatione et sine distributione, sic arguendo: homo currit, igitur iste homo currit. Et ita patet quod hec sit vera: animal est, si animal currit, nee requiritur tales duas veras: homo est, si animal est, et hoc est animal, igitur etc. Explicit sophisma disputatum a magistro Henrico de Hopton' Unlike the explicit states, the tract is a collection of sophismata. The same tract is preserved under the title Determinatio Haptonis in MS Cracow,

Bibl. Jag., 621, ff. 14ra-22vb. The explicit here runs: 'Explicit determinatio Haptonis anno domini MCCCLXXXV 0

'

The year 1385 may serve as a terminus ante quem of the composition of the tract. 2.

In the Rome manuscript this tract is followed by a tract on insolubles

(ff. 14rb-19vb) (cf. Spade, 1975: 56-7). The incipit runs: 'Insolubile est difficilis paralogismus secundum quid et simpliciter ex reflexione alicuius actus supra se cum determinatione privativa proveniens. Hee est diffinitio insolubilis. Et nota quod idem est diffinitio rei et illa res. Et sciendum quod 'insolubile' accipitur dupliciter, secundum quod 'solubile' sive 'solutio'. Solutio vero quae est corporalis ( ... )' Spade correctly notes that after this start, the manuscript leaves half a column blank. Then the text starts afresh: 'Insolubile simplex affirmativum est tale ut 'Sortes dicit falsum'. Et pono quod Sortes dicit istam et nullam aliam, et quod ista sic significat quod Sortes