Ammonius Hermiae

Ammonius Hermeiou (Greek Ἀμμώνιος τοῦ Ἑρμείου Ammonios tou Hermeíou, also Ammonius of Alexandria, latin Ammonius Hermiae; * 435-450 in Alexandria, † probably after 517) was an influential late ancient philosopher. He belonged to the then dominant in philosophy Neoplatonic direction. His eponymous philosopher to distinguish it from serving epithet Hermeiou means son of Hermias.

Ammonius was studying in Athens. After completing his training, he returned to his hometown of Alexandria, where he gave lessons and a tradition of Aristotle reasoned commentary, which was continued by his students. He also commented on the Isagoge, a very widespread introduction of the Neo-Platonist Porphyry to the categories, a basic writing of Aristotle for logic. Since Ammonius not known to the Christian state religion, he was involved in a conflict of pagan Neoplatonists with the Patriarch of Alexandria, but he was able to settle for himself and his school through an agreement with the Patriarch.

3.1 Metaphysics and Cosmology
3.2 Logic and Determinismusfrage

5.1 editions of the works of Ammonius
5.2 Translation of works of Ammonius
5.3 Other sources

Life

Background, education and teaching

The birth of Ammonius is dated by an earlier opinion research 435-445, for a newer approach 437-450. He was a son of the Neoplatonist Hermias of Alexandria and the Aidesia, a relative of the philosopher Syrianos, had studied at the Hermeias in Athens. Syrianos was from about 432 to about 437 of the conductor ( Scholarch ) of the Neo-Platonic school of philosophy in Athens, which continued the tradition of the Platonic Academy and at that time was the main center of Platonism.

Later Hermeias returned to his hometown of Alexandria; where he apparently spent the rest of his life as a publicly salaried teacher of philosophy. After his death the widow Aidesia moved with their two young sons, Ammonius and his younger brother, Heliodorus, to Athens, to give them the best possible philosophical training. The brothers were pupils of the famous Neoplatonist Proclus, who had become the successor of Syrianos.

After the study period, which should have lasted five to six years to Aidesia, Ammonius and Heliodorus went back to Alexandria. While Heliodorus worked as an astronomer - from a philosophical activity is not known -, Ammonius probably like his father in the civil service was philosophy teacher. The focus of his teaching the doctrines of Plato and Aristotle were. In addition, Ammonius involved in the astronomical researches of his brother. He treated in his courses, the astronomy of Ptolemy.

Very young then - - For his students, the philosopher Damascius, who was one in a closer relationship came to his family; apparently he was close to Ammonius ' mother Aidesia, for he held the grave speech, which he adorned with verses. Later Damascius wrote the Philosophical History (formerly Vita Isidori called ), which is a valuable source for the life of Ammonius; it is, however, not completely preserved.

That Ammonios 517 was still alive, it is assumed usually in the research, but a proof does not exist. Even for those in the research literature sometimes reproduced assumption that he was 526 had already died, lacks a clear proof. One indication offered by the fact that his pupil Olympiodorus the Younger 565 was still active; this suggests that Ammonius has not yet given lessons at least in the second decade of the 6th century.

Religion Political attitude

Between the Christian majority population of Alexandria and the followers of traditional religions, which included the Neoplatonists were serious tensions that erupted violently and also led to official action against the philosophers. Ammonius was one of the house to the religious minority. As a prominent teacher of philosophy, he became involved in the conflict, although he had not been exposed to religious and Christians accepted as a student. The history of the dispute is unclear in the details; understanding the processes is aggravated that the obtained fragments of Damascius ' Philosophical history partly difficult to classify and interpret are Damascius and the character of his former teacher, in which he saw a traitor, very negatively regarded.

It is certain that there was a persecution of philosophers, who belonged to the religious minority. The religious conflict in Alexandria had worsened over the course of the eighties, intervened to 488/89 Emperor Zeno. At the behest of the Patriarch Petros III. Mongos of Alexandria was named Nicomedes sent to investigate allegations against the philosophy teacher to Alexandria an Imperial Special Representative, to which some scholars went into hiding; others were arrested and tortured. This meant that the previously thriving diverse teaching operation of the Neoplatonists largely came to a standstill. Ammonius was the only non-Christian philosophy teacher who survived the crisis unharmed. He was able to continue his teaching successfully, after he had reached an agreement with the church. The fact that he showed by itself no religious zeal, facilitated the understanding. The religious dimension of neo-Platonism, which played a central role, for example, his teacher, Proclus and Damascius for his pupil, he seems to have been foreign.

Damascius claimed that Ammonius was an opportunist interested only in personal gain; he had met through covetousness an agreement with the Patriarch. In research, the possibility has been considered that Ammonius told where escaped philosophers were hiding. This is but from the surviving fragments of Damascius ' work is not produced and is unlikely. Possibly refers to the accusation of greed to a tendency of the philosophy teacher, not to lose his public salary. The financial ratios reported Damascius in another context, that Ammonius ' mother Aidesia who was known for her generosity, her sons left a debt burden.

The content of the agreement between Ammonius and the patriarch is unknown; the only certainty is that they henceforth allowed the philosophy teacher teaching an undisturbed operation. Previously found in research, the hypothesis appeal, Ammonius had agreed to concentrate in class on Aristotle, whose teachings have since the Christians offered less than the stronger attack surfaces associated with the ancient religion Platonism. In fact, all surviving works of Ammonius treat Aristotelian philosophy. However, the assumption that this was due to the agreement is speculative and according to the current state of research is not convincing. In the research has even suggested that Ammonius converted to Christianity, but this hypothesis has not proven to be plausible. Richard Sorabji believes that Ammonius primarily appealed to a waiver of cult practices in his school.

In the earlier research was emphasized that in Alexandria, where Christians could attend classes of a Neo-Platonist, in educated circles, the relationship between religions was generally more relaxed than in Athens, where the Neoplatonists took a militant anti-Christian attitude. In Athens, you have the philosophy closely associated with pagan theology and worship practices, maintained primarily religiously neutral topics in Alexandria and operated less metaphysical speculation. This difference also served as a declaration that the school in Athens was finally closed by the authorities, while the teaching of philosophy in Alexandria survived the sinking of the remnants of the old religion. Today the complex relationships are, however, considered differentiated. The two centers were ideologically and personally in a lively exchange, a number of philosophers were studying or teaching active throughout her life in both places. Consistent opponents of Christianity, among the philosophers in Alexandria as well as in Athens, as described in the sources of tension and conflict show.

Played a crucial role in any case in Alexandria set the course, performed the Ammonius from the standpoint of his personal priorities. He was apparently not guided by strong religious convictions, but was primarily a scholar. Therefore, he could easily come to terms than other Neoplatonists with existing conditions and thus ensure the survival of the classroom instruction.

Works

Reported comments are to De interpretatione to the category, at the Analytica priora ( incomplete) and Isagoge, one written by the Neoplatonist Porphyry Introduction to Aristotle's Categories. The comment about De interpretatione edited and published Ammonius himself; at the other comments are records of his students from his classes that were circulated under his name. In addition, his students John Philoponus and Asclepius of Tralles published comments on the works of Aristotle and an introduction to the arithmetic of Nicomachus of Gerasa, whose raw materials were transcripts of his courses under their own names. This also the basics of Ammonius ' commentary on other writings of Aristotle have survived: metaphysics, physics, Meteorologica, Analytica posteriora, De anima and De generatione et corruptione.

Except for short fragments are lost, some mentioned in later works of literature Ammonius, including a commentary on Aristotle Topik and a record of the hypothetical conclusions. A treatise dealt with the concept of God of Aristotle, in another Ammonius touched on a point in Plato's dialogue Phaedo, in which he argued against the claim that Plato was a skeptic. Olympiodorus the Younger reported that Ammonius treated in teaching Plato's Gorgias; but this is no evidence that he wrote a comment to this dialogue.

A lost, mentioned by John Philoponus signature of Ammonius on the astrolabe is apparently emerged in the 20th century; Christos Soliotis thinks it were dealing with a text that he has discovered in two manuscripts in the Austrian National Library and published in 1987.

Teaching

Ammonius for his independence. He notes one commentator did not keep a priori everything he says, to be true, but should examine critically all the allegations and, if necessary, turn against them.

Metaphysics and cosmology

After since Porphyry prevailing in Neuplatonikerkreisen view the history of philosophy, there is a fundamental agreement between Plato and Aristotle. Of this also assumes Ammonius. He considers the differences between the doctrines of these two senior authorities for apparently; Aristotle was not the ontology of Plato fought, but only their erroneous interpretation of some Platonists. The Metaphysics of Ammonius is consistent with the core beliefs of late antiquity Neoplatonists. According to the Neo-Platonic doctrine of the intelligible world and their division into hypostases ( levels of existence ), it differs in contrast to the Christians between the One ( supreme deity, supreme principle ) and the Demiurge ( Creator ), he for the ( indirect ) author of sensual keeps sensible things. Although he used for both the term " God ", where the context so requires no differentiation, but this does not mean that he equates. In the deity of Aristotle, the " unmoved mover ", Ammonius sees both the final cause and the efficient cause of the cosmos. With this assumption, he tried to show a line of Aristotle's theology with the Platonic. The existence of the world he regarded as a necessary consequence of the goodness of the demiurge. Because of the time independence of this necessity, he holds the world for ever, that rejects the Christian idea of a world creation in time. If the universe originated at a specific time, so God had passed a resolution in time and, thus completing a change of mind, which is impossible, since it would be contrary to the immutability of his nature. From a creation could only speak in terms of causality, not in the sense of a particular process in time. The creation of transitory things not write Ammonios direct exposure to the Demiurge, but he takes it to competent intermediaries; only for the existence of eternal entities in the cosmos of the demiurge was the immediate cause.

Logic and Determinismusfrage

In the logic of Ammonius is strongly influenced by his teacher Proclus; his commentary on De interpretatione based, as he himself announces to recordings from Proclus ' teaching, which he supplemented with your own designs. In this commentary, he talks about the dispute over determinism. He refers in particular to that of Aristotle in the ninth chapter of De interpretatione put forward and rejected " sea battle " argument position. The often -discussed argument starts from the consideration that the statement "Tomorrow is a naval battle take place," if it is true, is true regardless of time and therefore zutreffe today; their truth is therefore positioning itself already before the event. It is concluded that the incident is determined. Ammonius rejected as Aristotle determinism from; he tries to find a solution by distinguishing between definite (required) and indefinite (simple, not necessary) true statements. In the earlier research, he was counted among the adherents of the traditional " standard interpretation ", who believe that, for Aristotle, statements about future events are neither true nor false, as long as the event is still contingent. This is the principle of bivalence, the only truth values "true" and "false" and allows each statement accurately assigns one of these truth values , limited. Without this restriction, a deterministic understanding would have to be accepted. According to the current state of research is likely, however, that Aristotle ascribes to Ammonius, a divalent non-standard position and this also represents itself. After this position you can hold on to a non-deterministic doctrine, without having to restrict the bivalence; Although statements about Future are always true, but not now necessarily true. In addition, Ammonius still looks at two other deterministic arguments that do not occur in Aristotle. One of these is the " reaper " argument, which I thought statements directed against the logical admissibility of forward-looking, the other for Providence. Ammonius says that one can ascribe a precise knowledge about time the entire future of the gods, without that this position would lead to determinism. However, future events are, by their own nature contingent, from the perspective of the timeless divine knowledge fixed. For the gods there is indeed a knowledge of the chronological order of events, but no distinction between past and future. Because the gods out of time were, they were contingent events of the future known, but not so that they appear to men like them as the future.

Reception

Late Antiquity

Among the pupils of Ammonius were famous philosophers such as Damascius, Simplicius, Olympiodorus the Younger and John Philoponus, as well as lesser-known scholars such as Asclepius of Tralles, also later Bishop Zacharias of Mytilene ( Zacharias Scholasticus or Zacharias Rhetor called ) and the prominent doctor Gessios ( Gesios ) of Petra. Although Damascius blamed in his " Philosophical History " the character of his teacher violently, but he paid tribute to his extraordinary diligence and knowledge - especially in astronomy and geometry - recognition. The strong influence of Ammonius on the philosophy of late antiquity was based primarily on his Aristotle commentaries and also went up on the commentaries on Aristotle of his students claimed that the recycled their records from his courses. His comment to Isagoge of Porphyry had an impact on the subsequent commentary of this work. In the 6th century the Neo-Platonists had David ( " David the Invincible "), a likely derived from Armenia student Olympiodorus the Younger and Aristotle commentator, on doctrines of Ammonius back and took over some of its ideas. So there was an Armenian Ammonios reception, because David works were disseminated not only in the original Greek versions, but have been translated into Old Armenian.

Zacharias of Mytilene wrote a dialogue " about the creation of the world " ( De mundi opificio ), in which he was Ammonius occur. The existing five dialogues actually work is often called shortly Ammonius. The frame story is a conversation between the author and one influenced by the teachings of Ammonius the Christian youth, whom he disparages this tendency. It succeeds Ammonios not to defend the doctrine of the eternity of the world convincing. Zacharias claimed his presentation to the foot real conversations he had led in Alexandria with his teacher Ammonius.

An influence of Ammonius on the Latin commentaries on Aristotle Boethius and even a study visit of Boethius in Alexandria has been suggested in the earlier research, but could not enforce this view. Jean -Yves Guillaumin argued the hypothesis Boethius had for his work De institutione arithmetica the foot on Ammonius ' teaching Alexandrian commentary on the Introduction used in the Arithmetic of Nicomachus of Gerasa.

Middle Ages

In the Arabic-speaking world of the Middle Ages Ammonius was known as Aristotle commentator. His comment to Isagoge of Porphyry was translated into Syriac and into Arabic. The philosopher al -Farabi pointed to his argument for the doctrine of creation. Wrongly Ammonius was the doxographic writing "over the views of the philosophers " attributed. Although this traditional only in a single manuscript work is based on ancient sources, but comes from an Arabian philosopher of the 9th century (Pseudo- Ammonius ).

Well in the 12th century, the comments of Ammonius to categories and Isagoge were translated into Georgian; the oldest surviving manuscript dates from the 13th century.

William of Moerbeke translated in 1268 the comment of Ammonius to De interpretatione into Latin. In this Latin version the work of Thomas Aquinas was accessible, the recycled it for his own commentary.

Modern Times

The first edition of Ammonius ' commentary on Isagoge appeared in 1500 at the Venetian publisher Nikolaos Vlastos; the editor was a native of Crete scholar Zacharias Kalliergis. The humanist Pomponio Gaurico prepared a Latin translation of this work, which was first published in Venice in 1504 and was reprinted several times in the 16th century. 1503 Aldus Manutius in Venice appeared in the first edition of the Commentary on De interpretatione.

In modern research is acknowledged that Ammonius helped shape accents by not followed the rugged anti-Christian course of his Athenian colleagues and Aristotle studies particularly emphasized. Koenraad Verrycken concludes, Ammonius had practiced against the very complex metaphysics of the Athenian Neoplatonists restraint and a simplified, more oriented to the Aristotelian way of thinking system preferred. He had one hand Aristotle's Metaphysics " neuplatonisiert ", but on the other hand, " aristotelisiert " also Neo-Platonism. Similarly, judges Matthias Perkams that of a " neo-Platonic Aristotelianism " speaks in the Ammonios school. Perkams thinks the philosophical achievement of Ammonius was indeed " integrative rather than original," but he had also been to create original reinterpretations able and have consequently " reaches a systematic rather complete theory ". In this case, it was his ability to skillfully combine different aspects of a problem with each other, come in good stead.

1976, the lunar crater Ammonius was named after the ancient scholars.

Editions and translations

Editions of the works of Ammonius

Adolf Busse ( eds.): Ammonius: In Porphyrii isagogen immersive V voces ( = Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca vol 4 part 3). Georg Reimer, Berlin 1891 ( critical edition )
Adolf Busse ( eds.): Ammonius: In Aristotelis categorias commentarius ( = Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca Vol 4 Part 4). Georg Reimer, Berlin 1895 ( critical edition )
Adolf Busse ( eds.): Ammonius: In Aristotelis de interpretatione commentarius ( = Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca vol 4, part 5). Georg Reimer, Berlin 1897 ( critical edition )
Max Wallies (ed.): Ammonii in Aristotelis analyticorum priorum Librum I Commentarium ( = Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca vol 4, part 6). Georg Reimer, Berlin 1899 ( critical edition )
Christos Soliotis (eds ): Unpublished Greek texts on the use and construction of Astrolabe. In: Internships tes Akademias Athenon 61/1 (1986 ), 1987, pp. 423-454 (pp. 430-434 critical edition of Ammonius ascribed treatise on the astrolabe; introduction by the editor Greek with English summary )

Translations of the works of Ammonius

English

Ammonius: On Aristotle On Interpretation 1-8, translated by David Blankenhorn, Duckworth, London 1996, ISBN 0-7156-2657-4
Ammonius: On Aristotle On Interpretation 9, translated by David Blankenhorn, Duckworth, London 1998, ISBN 0-7156-2691-4
Ammonius: On Aristotle Categories, translated by Marc Cohen and Gareth B. Matthews, Duckworth, London, 1991, ISBN 0-7156-2253-6

Les Attributions ( Catégories ): le texte et les aristotélicien prolégomènes d' d' Ammonius Hermias, translated by Yvan Pelletier, Bellarmine, Montréal 1983, ISBN 2-89007-473-0

Georgian ( medieval )

Maïa Rapava (ed.): T'xzulebebi k'art'ul mcerlobaši: Amonios Ermisis t'xzulebebi k'art'ul mcerlobaši ( " The works of Ammonius Hermeiou in the Georgian literature "). Tbilisi 1983 ( critical edition of the Georgian translations)

Latin ( medieval )

Gérard Verbeke (eds.): Ammonius: Commentaire sur le Peri Hermeneias d' Aristote. Traduction de Guillaume de Moerbeke ( = Corpus Latinum commentariorum in Aristotelem Graecorum 2). Publications Universitaires de Louvain, Louvain 1961

Latin ( humanistic )

Rainer Thiel, Charles Lohr ( Eds.): Ammonius Hermeae: Commentaria in quinque voces Porphyrii, translated by Pomponius Gauricus; In Aristotelis categorias (extended transcript of John Philoponus = CAG XIII / i), translated by Ioannes Baptista Rasarius. From man - Holzboog, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 2002, ISBN 3-7728-1229-5 ( reprint of expenditure Venice in 1539 and Venice in 1562 with an introduction by the editors )
Rainer Thiel, Gyburg Radke, Charles Lohr ( Eds.): Ammonius Hermeae: Commentaria in Peri hermeneias Aristotelis, translated by Bartholomaeus Sylvanus. From man - Holzboog, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 2005, ISBN 3-7728-1232-5 ( reprint of the 1549 Venice edition with an introduction by the editors )

Other sources

Polymnia Athanassiadi ( eds): Damascius: The Philosophical History. Apamea Cultural Association, Athens 1999, ISBN 960-85325-2-3 ( critical edition with English translation)
Maria Minniti Colonna (ed.): Zacaria Scholastic: ammonio, Napoli 1973 ( critical edition with Italian translation and commentary )

57846