19
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Notes and discussions

A note on Francesco Patrizi's use of Cleomedes

Pages 311-314 | Received 29 Nov 1980, Published online: 23 Aug 2006

  • The manuscript is No. 291 (Y. III. 21) in de Andres G. Catalogo de los codices griegos de la Real Biblioteca de El Escorial Madrid 1965 II 174 176 The confirmatory evidence that this belonged to Patrizi can be found in E. Jacobs, ‘Francesco Pratizi und seine Sammlung griechischer Handschriften in der Bibliothek des Escorial’, Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen, 25 (1908), 19–47, at p. 39 n. 42, and 41 n. 59. Pediasimus' commentary is unedited, most of te manuscripts are listed by D. Bassi, ‘I Manoscritti di Giovanni Pediasimo,’ Rendiconti di Reale Istituto Lombardo di Scienze e Lettere, 2nd series, 31 (1899) 1399–1418, at pp. 1415–18. For basic information on Pediasimus, see A. Turyn, Dated Manuscripts of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries in the Libraries of Italy (Urbana, Illinois, 1972), I, 75.
  • The modern edition is by Ziegler H. Cleomedis de motu circulari corporum caelestium Leipzig, Teubner 1891 I shall refer to its page and line numbers. There has been a recent study, and French translation, of this work by R. Goulet, Cléomède: Théorie élémentaire (Paris, 1980). In deference to Goulet's discussion (p. 35) I refer to Cleomedes' treatise by its Greek title (The Elementary [or Comprehensive] Discussion) which has been misinterpreted in the traditional Latin title. Strong linguistic evidence for the date of the work given here is presented by W. Schumacher, Untersuchungen zur Datierung des Astronomen Kleomedes (Diss., Köln, 1975); for further discussion of the dating see Goulet, pp. 5–8.
  • I have used the edition of the Nova de universis Philosophia published at Ferrara in 1591; I cite the work as N.P., and refer to folio page and column letters of this edition. Unless otherwise noted, I use the English translation of the ‘De Spacio Physico’, by Brickman B. On Physical Space: Francesco Patrizi Journal of the History of Ideas 1943 4 224 225 Patrizi's theory of space has recently been fully discussed in J. Henry, ‘Francesco Patrizi da Cherso's Concept of Space, and its later Influence,’ Annals of Science, 36 (1979), 549–75.
  • Patrizi probably had access to a printed edition of Cleomedes; the first was published at Paris in 1539, and the text of this edition along with Giorgio Valla's Latin translation (originally published in Venice in 1499) was reprinted on four occasions in the sixteenth century: Basel, 1547, 1561, 1585, and Antwerp, 1553. I shall be giving full details of the Renaissance editions and translations of Cleomedes in an article to be published in the Catalogus Translationum et Commentariorum
  • I shall mention only some of the evidence in Cleomedes for the Stoic theory of void; this author is not exploited fully enough in standard accounts of the Stoic theory of void: see, for example Bréheir E. La Théorie des incorporels dans l'ancien stoïcisme , 3rd edn Paris 1962 44 53 and D. Hahm, The Origins of Stoic Cosmology (Columbus, Ohio, 1977), 103–7.
  • Cf. Cleomedes. 16.13–16 and Aristotle Physics IV 215a6-14 See Goulet (footnote 2), p. 186, n. 53.
  • N.P. 64c. See Henry Francesco Patrizi da Cherso's Concept of Space, and its later Influence Annals of Science 1979 36 565 565 on the weaknesses of this reasoning.
  • At N.P. 63a–c Patrizi denies that there is a large void space in the world, but admits minute empty spaces and thinks that experiments can create larger vacua. See Henry Francesco Patrizi da Cherso's Concept of Space, and its later Influence Annals of Science 1979 36 563 563
  • N.P. 63c–d, summarized by Henry Francesco Patrizi da Cherso's Concept of Space, and its later Influence Annals of Science 1979 36 564 564
  • In the continuation of this sentence Patrizi refers to the imaginary case of someone at the edge of the heaven stretching his arm out. Simplicius, In de caelo (at Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca Heiberg J. Berlin 1894 VII 284.28 284.30 cites this as a Stoic proof for the existence of extra-cosmic void. On the place of this argument in medieval and early modern thought, see E. Grant, ‘Medieval and Seventeenth Century Conceptions of an Infinite Void Space beyond the Cosmos’, Isis, 60 (1969), 39–60.
  • At N.P. 64a, Patrizi refers to the contrast between the Stoics who believed in infinite extra-cosmic void, and Posidonius who reportedly thought that that void should only be large enough to contain the expanded volume of the cosmos at the time of the ekpyrôsis (the conflagration terminating a cosmogonical cycle). This contrast goes back to the Greek doxography; see Diels H. Doxographi Graeci Berlin 1965 338 338 reprinted and was, for example, known to Giorgio Valla, De expetendis et fugiendis Rebus (Venice, 1500), Bk XXI.ix. Cleomedes combines both these views: the cosmos is infinite, and a fortiori large enough to accommodate an expanded world.
  • Cleomedes 14.2–13, and 14.25–15.12. The principle that finite things are externally bounded was used by Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus, 41–2) and Lucretius (I.958–67 with 988–1007) to prove the infinity of the universe; earlier it was known to, and criticised by, Aristotle as an argument for the existence of the infinite Physics III.4 203b20 203b22 and III.8, 208a11–14). Cleomedes used this argument only with reference to the void; the finitude of the cosmos is assumed. Patrizi would undoubtedly have been familiar with the antecedents of Cleomedes' argument.
  • For another example of this sort of argument, see Alexander of Aphrodisias’ claim that the void must be occupied by an infinite body at Quaestiones, III.12 (at Supplementum Aristotelicum Bruns I. Berlin 1892 II.2 103.34 104.4 (cf. 104.12–13); cf. also Alexander as cited by Simplicius, In de caelo (at Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, IX, edited by J. Heiberg [Berlin, 1893]), 285.32–286.2.
  • There is a full discussion of the influences on Patrizi's concept of space from both Platonist and Aristotelian sources in Henry's article Brickman B. On Physical Space: Francesco Patrizi Journal of the History of Ideas 1943 4 554 566

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.