![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Interdisciplinary research into the history of philosophy and theology has shown that ‘Renaissance Aristotelianism’ is a complex, variegated, and contradictory phenomenon. One should rather speak of ‘Renaissance Aristotelianisms.’ In this article, I analyze Johannes Eck’s commentaries to the Corpus Aristotelicum. I show how Eck absorbs and reinterprets the transformations, which occurred in the Peripatetic tradition throughout the fifteenth century. The harmonization of Platonism and Aristotelianism and the belief that central aspects of Christian doctrine such as the immortality of the soul and creation ex nihilo can be demonstrated through philosophy emerge as distinctive features of these texts.
Acknowledgements
I gratefully acknowledge funding for this research received from the Fritz Thyssen Stiftung. I would like to thank Ms. Mary Rosato for her precious help in correcting the spelling of the article. For this article I use the following editions of Johannes Eck’s works: Eck, Aristotelis Acroases physicae: Libri 8, Joan Argyropilo interprete, adiectis Joan. Eckii adnotationibus et commentariis, Augusta Vindelicorum: Grimm et Wirsing, 1518; Eck, De Anima Libri 3. Per Argyropilum. De sensu et sensatu … De memoria et reminiscientia … De somno et vigilia … De longitudine et brevitate vitae … Ex antiqua traductione. Adiectis Eckij Commentariis, Augsburg: Grimm und Wirsung, 1520.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 Kristeller, La Tradizione Aristotelica nel Rinascimento, 16; Oberman, “Fourteenth Century Religious Thought,” 82–4.
2 It is well known, for instance, that in 1388 Peter of Ailly (1350–1420), then Chancellor of the University of Paris, argued that Aquinas, because of its excessive reliance on Aristotle’s thought, erred on many theological issues: Hoenen, “How the Thomists in Cologne Saved Aristotle,” 188.
3 In opposition to the Wittenberg Reformers, Eck argued that the authority of the Scripture has to be followed to the extent it is in agreement with the teachings of the Church: Mühlenberg, Scriptura non est authentica sine authoritate ecclesiae.” In the 1520s Eck was involved with Hieronymus Emser in the printing of a Catholic German version of the Bible: Stengel, “Sola Scriptura im Kontext,” 90–6.
4 Walter Moore investigated the influence of Augustine and pseudo-Augustine works in Eck’s first major work, the Chrysopassus praedestinationis (1514), in which Eck argues that human beings, despite original sin, have freedom to choose between good and evil, and, thus, human activity play a role in the soteriological process: Moore, “Doctor Maximus Lumen Ecclesiae.”
5 Heiko Oberman stated that among Luther’s early opponents, while Sylvester Prierias and Thomas de Vio were strong papalists, John Eck maintained conciliarist positions: Oberman, “Wittenberg’s War on Two Fronts,” 117–48.
6 Wurms, Johannes Eck und der oberdeutsche Zinnstreit.
7 Seifert, Logik zwischen Scholastik und Humanismus-
8 Charles Schmitt, pointing out the inappropriateness of the expression “Renaissance Aristotelianism,” emphasized that “a closer investigation reveals to us that there were, in fact, many ‘Renaissance Aristotelianisms’. Cfr.: Schmitt, “Towards a Reassessment of Renaissance Aristotelianism,” 170. I draw the expression “Renaissance Aristotelianisms” from Schmitt.
9 Schmitt, “The Rise of the Philosophical Textbook,” 792.
10 Hankins, “Humanism, Scholasticism, and Renaissance Philosophy,” 33–36.
11 Bianchi, “Continuity and Change in the Aristotelian Tradition,” 51.
12 Ibid., 55; Kraye, “Philologists and Philosophers,” 143–4.
13 Bianchi, “Continuity and Change in the Aristotelian Tradition,” 59–60, Kraye, “Philologists and Philosophers,” 144.
14 Kuhn, “Aristotelianism in the Renaissance,” last access: 25/03/2023.
15 Celenza, “The Revival of Platonic Philosophy,” 73–5.
16 See ibid., 81-90.
17 Keßler, “The Intellective Soul,” 494–5.
18 Kuhn, “Aristotelianism in the Renaissance.”
19 Ibid.
20 Before Schmidt, this aspect was already emphasized by Kristeller, La Tradizione Aristotelica nel Rinascimento, 16.
21 Sgarbi, “What Does a Renaissance Aristotelian Look Like?” 233–36.
22 Seifert, Logik zwischen Scholastik und Humanismus, 10.
23 Iserloh, Johannes Eck, 15.
24 Ibid., 16–20.
25 Seifert, Logik zwischen Scholastik und Humanismus, 10–13.
26 Hoenen, “Nominalism in Cologne,” 127.
27 Seifert, Logik zwischen Scholastik und Humanismus, 17.
28 Kraye, “The Printing History of Aristotle,” 194.
29 Eck, Aristotelis physicae Eckii commentariis, Aiiij v.
30 Seifert, Logik zwischen Scholastik und Humanismus, 33.
31 Ibid., 40–1.
32 Meier-Oser, Die Präsenz des Vergessenen, 71–80.
33 Tortoriello, Scala Christus est, 184–98. In this work, I emphasized Cusanus' influence on Eck. However, I failed to quote Meier-Oser's work. I would like to thank one of the two anonymous reviewers for pointing out to me the relevance of Meier-Oser's scholarship.
34 Dales, “The Origins of the Doctrine of the Double Truth,” 169–70.
35 Bianchi, “From Pope Urban VIII to Bishop Etienne Tempier,” 8–9.
36 Ibid.
37 Dales, “The Origin of the Doctrine of the Double Truth,” 170–3
38 Hoenen, “How the Thomists in Cologne Saved Aristotle,” 186–7.
39 Monfasani, “Aristotelians, Platonists, and the Missing Ockhamists,” 253–6.
40 Kraye, “Aristotle’s God and the Authenticity of De Mundo,” 342–3.
41 Monfasani, “Aristotelians, Platonists, and the Missing Ockhamists,” 258–68.
42 Blum, “The Immortality of the Soul,” 217–8.
43 Monfasani, “Aristotelians, Platonists, and the Missing Ockhamists,“ 258–9.
44 Ibid., 264.
45 As reported by Constant, “A Reinterpretation of the Fifth Lateran Council,” 354.
46 Ibid., 357–60.
47 Eck, De Anima Eckii commentariis, A ij.
48 Ibid., Hij v: Per corpus humanum intelligi hic materiam organisatam pro receptione animae humanae.
49 Ibid.: Istam opinionem imponit Averroys Alexandro Aphrodysae: sed iam translato Alexandro videmus Aver. falsum ei imponuisse: quod prius ante nos etiam Nicoletus vidit.
50 Mahoney, “Nicoletto Vernia and Agostino Nifo,” 279–81.
51 Eck, De Anima Eckii commentariis, Hij v: quia nec ipse nec aliquis eius sequax potuit explicare illam vnionem intellectus cum phantasmatibus omnium hominum.
52 Edelheit, “A Philosopher at the Crossroad,” 188.
53 Eck, De Anima Eckii commentariis, Hij v : Tertia sententia vera et catholica, Animam esse formam corporis non eductam de potentia materiae / sed a deo ex tempore creatam, & corpusculo infusam.
54 Ibid.: Anima intellectiua est forma corporis humani: Constat ex fide nostra et probatur hodie in cle. vni de summa trinitate & fide catholica.
55 Ibid.: porro: patet etiam ex diffinitione anmae / quae debet conuenire omni contento sub diffinito: Adiecto eo quod intelligere est propria operatio hominis: igitur sequitur propriam formam.
56 Ibid. Fol. XLII r–v.
57 Keßler, “The Intellective Soul,” 499–500.
58 Eck, De Anima Eckii commentariis, H iij r: Aliquos intellexisse Aristot. posuerit animam mortalem / sicut Democcritus et Lucretius ac Plinius posuerunt: Ita cum intellexit S. Iustinus christianus philosophus & & G. de Ocham q. x. quarti.
59 Ibid.
60 Ibid.: Secundo plures amicitius de Aristo. sentientes eum intelligent animum posuisse immortalem: id quod S. Thom Albertus, & alii ei ascribunt: Cicero quoque in eo ordine statuit Aristot. vt animam sentiat immortalem : quod & bessario astruit, Richard. lib. 2 dist. 19.
61 Ibid.: Tertio quia haec dicta visa sunt Ioanni Duns Scoto inuicem pugnare: ideo concludit dubium esse quid senserit philosophus: varie enim loquii in diversis locis: & habuit diuersa principia.
62 Ibid.: Intellectus a deo creatus est perpetuus et immortalis: hoc fide creditum: de quo pulchre A. Augustinus ait lib. 13 de trinitate cap. 9. Humanis quippe argumentationibus haec inuenire conantes: vix pauci magno praediti ingenio / abundantes otio / doctrinis subtilissimis / eruditi ad indagandam solius animae immortalitatem peruenire potuerunt: Ita Socrates, Plato, Cleantes, Chrysippus & Cato voluerunt / vt renarrat Lactantius lib. 3 cap. 18 suarum institutionum: & B. Hieronymus super Daniele Zenonem testatur inferos & immortales animas concessisse.
63 Ibid.: Vnde sapiens inter impios reponit animam dicentes mortalem.
64 Hoenen, “How the Thomists in Cologne Saved Aristotle,” 184 and note 11.
65 See Dales, Medieval Discussions of the Eternity of the World, 39–42.
66 Ibid., 50.
67 Ibid., 51–85.
68 Hoenen, “How the Thomists in Cologne Saved Aristotle,” 189–93.
69 Ibid., 195–99.
70 Eck, Aristotelis physicae Eckii commentariis,R ii v.
71 Dales, “Medieval Discussions of the Eternity of the World,” 4–9.
72 Ibid., 28–35.
73 Eck, Aristotelis physicae Eckii commentariis: R ii v: Et principia naturalis rationis & lumis non repugnant principijs Theologicis, ideo quod verum est in Theologia etiam verum est in philosophia.
74 Ibid.: Quare nullum falsum debet concedi in philosophia, quae est studium veritatis, alias constaret ex falsis, Et qua aliqui principia Aristotelica sunt falsa, ideo non sunt principia philosophiae, sed rationis errantis.
75 Ibid., R iij r.
76 Dales, “Medieval Discussions of the Eternity of the Word,” 68–70.
77 Eck, Aristotelis physicae Eckii commentariis, R iij r: Quarto posita causa totali ponitur et effectus, sed voluntas antiqua dei requiritur et sufficit pro motus productione igitur mutum fecit ab aeterno.
78 Ibid.: Ad quarto maior est vera in causa naturali, sed non in causa libera.
79 For this discussion of Bonaventure’s thought, I follow: Dales, “Medieval Discussions of the Eternity of the World,” 87–96.
80 Eck, Aristotelis physicae Eckii commentariis, R iij r.
81 Ibid., r iij v: dico mundum incepisse in nunc primo initiatiuo, pro tanto, quia prius non fuit, hoc idem de aliis consequevis. Ad primam replicam, licet nun non succedat alteri priori, tamen alia succedunt ei.
82 Ibid. r iij r: Secundo replicant captiunculatores, si tempus incepit, igitur verum est dicere, nunc est, et immediate ante hoc non erat, sed cum ante sit temporis differentia, oportet tempus aliud ponere ante initium temporis.
83 This terminology is part of the anti-scholastic discourse of the early sixteenth century. As noted by John Murdoch, Agostino Nifo employs the term captiunculatores, drawn from Cicero, to deride earlier generations of Aristotle’s commentators. Eck uses also the term Sorticulae, with whom Nifo labels scholastic thinkers as sophists. For Nifo’s use of these terms, see: Murdoch, “A Skewed View,” 177–78.
84 Eck, Aristotelis physicae Eckii commentariis, R iij v: Ad sorticolas dicit quod ante importat durationem imaginariam, quae tamen hic negat, ideo parum refert.
85 Dales, “Medieval Discussions of the Eternity of the World,” 41
86 Ibid., 68.
87 Eck, Aristotelis physicae Eckii commentariis, R iij r.
88 Ibid. R iij v: Negando suppositum quia mundus incepit non per motum, sed per mutationem Aristoteli incognitam. s. per creationem, seu per simplicem emanationem. Vnde de hoc ait Nyphus. 1. phys. Mundus anteque fieret erat possibilis, non possibilitate in materia, sed potentia contenta in agente deo, qui eum ex nihilo produxit, & ita mundus habet dispositionem, non quam prehabuit in potentia materiae, sed in potentia primo agentis.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Giovanni Tortoriello
Giovanni Tortoriello earned his Ph.D. in Romance Studies at Martin Luther University in Halle-Wittenberg in 2020. From 2016 to 2019 he has been an Early Stage Researcher in the Marie Curie ITN Proect ‘The History of Human Dignity and Freedom in Western Civilization.’ From October 2021 to September 2022 he held a Postdoctoral fellowship funded by the Fritz Thyssen Foundation at MLU. His first monograph is an investigation of the historical context of Martin Luther’s theology of the cross: Scala Christus Est: Reassessing the Historical Context of Martin Luther’s Theology of the Cross (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2023).