5 ms·

Yes they produced no new commentaries... Byzantiums were extremely conservative, they disdained innovation, so why would they write new commentaries where there

by iorrus 9y ago

Yes they produced no new commentaries... Byzantiums were extremely conservative, they disdained innovation, so why would they write new commentaries where there were already several hundred years worth of commentaries? We have also lost a lot of Byzantium primary sources but it is obvious from reading the remaining primary sources that knowledge of Aristotle was assumed. It is not stated anywhere that Aristotle was "forgotten", in all the primary documents including Neoplatonic Aristotle is frequently mentioned. Where do you get the idea that Byzantium and Islam were in philosophic discourse? Also see this article: https://books.google.com/books?id=uU8Sgwge6NsC&pg=PA15&lpg=P.. https://books.google.com/books?id=uU8Sgwge6NsC&pg=PA15&lpg=P....

boomboomsubban 9y ago
Your first post mentioned the Bibliotheca, a review of many books written during thi period about things that already had commentaries. Aristotle was neglected for centuries. What primary sources are you using? As none of the plethora you keep bringing up are primary. And why would something's state it had forgotten Aristotle? If you don't value something, it's just largely ignored. Many of the philosophers brought up in this discussion recorded contact with the Abbasid Caliphate in some manner. They shared a border and the Mediterranean, it would be hard not to be in contact. That one says the same as the rest.
- iorrus 9y ago
  have you read Byzantine history? They were sworn enemies of Islam throughout this entire period not discussing the nuances of philosophy. I can keep citing articles claiming Aristotle was not forgotten but it seems pointless at this stage. Many of the early church fathers mention Aristotle. Aristotle was considered a minor philosopher throughout this time but his work was still available. Another article for you: https://books.google.ie/books?id=Hkf6n9oKFmYC&pg=PA159&lpg=PA159&dq=organon+byzantium&source=bl&ots=Cka5QjLhg7&sig=exm_U33pIz_XTEvTxwR869kxKzw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiw1PTitsvXAhVFBcAKHX4RA5UQ6AEIMDAB#v=onepage&q=organon%20byzantium&f=false https://books.google.ie/books?id=Hkf6n9oKFmYC&pg=PA159&lpg=P...
  - boomboomsubban 9y ago
    They weren't "sworn enemies," they were rival empires sharing a border. This led to frequent clashes, but there was also regular trade and diplomatic emissaries. That enables books to travel and ideas to spread. All of your articles say the same thing, quoting again, "It deserves to be noted that before the 12th century, the whole Byzantine output of Aristotelian commentaries dealt exclusively with the works on logic." That's basically my point, his philosophical work was ignored. All of your sources have supported this, you even seem to be searching specifically for sources saying this now judging by that link. What you haven't shown is any serious thought put into his philosophical work during that period, or given any other cause for his sudden resurgence besides Islamic influence. You're trying to disprove my argument that he was ignored until the Islamic works by saying "see they said Aristotle in 750, he wasn't forgotten."
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - iorrus 9y ago
      Looking into this further it appears you are correct in that Al-Farabi for instance actually studied in Byzantium for 8 years according to the preface in this book: https://www.amazon.com/Political-Writings-Regime-Summary-Editions/dp/0801453801/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1511194253&sr=8-6&keywords=Al-farabi#reader_0801453801 https://www.amazon.com/Political-Writings-Regime-Summary-Edi...
      - mkempe 9y ago
        All biographies indicate that Al-Farabi studied in Baghdad under a Christian teacher, not in Constantinople.
      - boomboomsubban 9y ago
        His actual biography is unclear, much of it coming from sources hundreds of years later. What's clear is that he wrote commentaries on Aristotle's works beyond the Organon, something that is missing from Byzantine history. As the other poster notes, he does have strong connections to Nestorian Christians of the time. They're the group that translated Aristotle from Syriac to Arabic that later led to the Latin translations bring made. And they had little to do with the Romans/Byzantines, having been condemned as heretical by the Roman church in the fifth century.

by iorrus 9y ago

boomboomsubban 9y ago

Your first post mentioned the Bibliotheca, a review of many books written during thi period about things that already had commentaries. Aristotle was neglected for centuries. What primary sources are you using? As none of the plethora you keep bringing up are primary. And why would something's state it had forgotten Aristotle? If you don't value something, it's just largely ignored. Many of the philosophers brought up in this discussion recorded contact with the Abbasid Caliphate in some manner. They shared a border and the Mediterranean, it would be hard not to be in contact. That one says the same as the rest.

iorrus 9y ago
have you read Byzantine history? They were sworn enemies of Islam throughout this entire period not discussing the nuances of philosophy. I can keep citing articles claiming Aristotle was not forgotten but it seems pointless at this stage. Many of the early church fathers mention Aristotle. Aristotle was considered a minor philosopher throughout this time but his work was still available. Another article for you: https://books.google.ie/books?id=Hkf6n9oKFmYC&pg=PA159&lpg=PA159&dq=organon+byzantium&source=bl&ots=Cka5QjLhg7&sig=exm_U33pIz_XTEvTxwR869kxKzw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiw1PTitsvXAhVFBcAKHX4RA5UQ6AEIMDAB#v=onepage&q=organon%20byzantium&f=false https://books.google.ie/books?id=Hkf6n9oKFmYC&pg=PA159&lpg=P...
- boomboomsubban 9y ago
  They weren't "sworn enemies," they were rival empires sharing a border. This led to frequent clashes, but there was also regular trade and diplomatic emissaries. That enables books to travel and ideas to spread. All of your articles say the same thing, quoting again, "It deserves to be noted that before the 12th century, the whole Byzantine output of Aristotelian commentaries dealt exclusively with the works on logic." That's basically my point, his philosophical work was ignored. All of your sources have supported this, you even seem to be searching specifically for sources saying this now judging by that link. What you haven't shown is any serious thought put into his philosophical work during that period, or given any other cause for his sudden resurgence besides Islamic influence. You're trying to disprove my argument that he was ignored until the Islamic works by saying "see they said Aristotle in 750, he wasn't forgotten."
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - iorrus 9y ago
    Looking into this further it appears you are correct in that Al-Farabi for instance actually studied in Byzantium for 8 years according to the preface in this book: https://www.amazon.com/Political-Writings-Regime-Summary-Editions/dp/0801453801/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1511194253&sr=8-6&keywords=Al-farabi#reader_0801453801 https://www.amazon.com/Political-Writings-Regime-Summary-Edi...
    - mkempe 9y ago
      All biographies indicate that Al-Farabi studied in Baghdad under a Christian teacher, not in Constantinople.
    - boomboomsubban 9y ago
      His actual biography is unclear, much of it coming from sources hundreds of years later. What's clear is that he wrote commentaries on Aristotle's works beyond the Organon, something that is missing from Byzantine history. As the other poster notes, he does have strong connections to Nestorian Christians of the time. They're the group that translated Aristotle from Syriac to Arabic that later led to the Latin translations bring made. And they had little to do with the Romans/Byzantines, having been condemned as heretical by the Roman church in the fifth century.