Prehistory of Modern Skepticism

The Prehistory of Modern Scepticism: Sextus Empiricus in Fifteenth-Century Italy Author(s): Gian Mario Cao Reviewed work(s): Source:
Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 64 (2001), pp. 229-280 Published by: The Warburg Institute Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/751563 . Accessed: 06/03/2013 22:21
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Warburg Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Mar 2013 22:21:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE PREHISTORYOF MODERN SCEPTICISM: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURYITALY

Gian Mario Cao
, memoriam for Lucia CesariniMartinelli,in
he chronological and geographical boundaries of this study do not call for any particular justification. The historiographical prominence of the Italian Quattrocento may, however, appear to weaken my thesis that this period belongs, not to the history, but rather the prehistory, of modern scepticism - a thesis premised on the indisputable value of the textual revival of Sextus Empiricus in fifteenth-century Italy and the undeniable failure of the philosophical perspective propagandised by him. This premise, which forms the foundation of the following study, represents both my starting point and a consistent feature of my interpretation. That said, it is also necessary to add that one of my main aims has been to put aside - and therefore, implicitly, to oppose - two alternative positions: first, the identification of the return of ancient philosophy (in this case, scepticism) with the birth of modern thought; and second, the historiographical tendency to dismiss a problem which has been made unattractive to philosophers by the need to deal with non-philosophical issues of a philological nature.1 Research of this kind, moreover, confers general validity on what has been stated specifically in relation to literary history: that up to the end of the fifteenth century it consists above all of paleography.2 If, however, erudition is to be established as the norm of scholarship, the negative results of this decision must be pointed out, whether they result from the incorrect use of the tools of specialised research or from losing sight of the merely ancillary nature of such investigations. New evidence regarding the humanistic recovery of Sextus Empiricus will also need to be considered from this perspective. Recent studies offer us a richer and clearer picture of Sextus's presence in the fifteenth century. Nevertheless, the variety of information now available does not in itself constitute proof of its importance: if anything, it increases the need for historical judgement. Determining the diffusion of Sextus's writings can no longer be the same as producing a history of the manuscript tradition carried out solely
1. Research into the recovery of ancient scepticism in medieval times has always been conditioned by a philological emphasis which is technically rigorous but unpromising on the philosophical level. While the few known facts regarding these events have recently been given some kind of order, the area of origin and precise Latin translation of the dating of the 13th/14th-century Outlines of Pyrrhonism still need to be defined and, in particular, the unity of the tradition established. The relationship between surviving exemplars of the translatio latina has been deduced more than demonstrated. Moreover, the uncertainty regarding the genealogical
relations between the manuscripts cannot be resolved without a critical edition of the text. For an evaluation of the available data and for earlier bibliography see P. Eleuteri, 'Note su alcuni manoscritti di Sesto Empirico', Orpheus, vi, 1985, pp. 432-36; P. Porro, 'I1 Sextus Latinus e l'immagine dello scetticismo antico nel medioevo', Elenchos, xv, 1994, PP. 229-532. C. Dionisotti, 'Dante nel Quattrocento', in Atti del Congresso Internazionale di Studi Danteschi (1965), 2 vols, Florence 1965-66, I, pp. 333-78 (352: 'Fino a tutto il Quattrocento, la storia letteraria, prima d'esser storia della lingua, e paleografia.').
JOURNAL
OF THE WARBURG
AND COURTAULD
INSTITUTES,
LXIV,
2001
230
GIANMARIOCAO
for the purposes of textual criticism. The presence of the OutlinesofPyrrhonism (Pyrrhoniae
hypotyposes) and Against the Professors (Adversus mathematicos) on the shelves of humanist
libraries has long ago been deduced by research developed in the field of classical philology and carried out according to the laws of stemmatics. In our own times, however, the establishment of humanistic philology as an independent branch of learning has given respectability to a different objective, one which treats the importance of a manuscript in terms of the wealth of history behind it rather than its contribution to a recension of the text. Looked at from this new vantage point, it is not paradoxical for an autograph or archetype which had no later influence to take second place to a distant or mechanically descendent which has no role to play in producing a critical edition of a text but descriptus which nevertheless enabled that text to survive.
I. SEXTUS IN RENAISSANCE BOOK INVENTORIES
Luciano Floridi's research into the diffusion of Sextus Empiricus's works in the Renaissance, especially in the sixteenth century, has added some new dimensions to this picture: he has brought to light or clarified a number of episodes; and his up-dating of the list of the Sextus manuscripts (both Greek and Latin) has produced a picture which differs from the one outlined at the beginning of the last century.3 Nevertheless, studies of this type, based mainly on the examination of modern printed catalogues (whose summary nature and frequent unreliability need to be taken into account), are inevitably limited by the fact that they cover only surviving manuscripts. A valuable contribution to this enterprise can be obtained from the exploration of ancient library inventories - as well, of course, as from information gleaned from any other kind of historical source. Such an approach, however, is by no means free from difficulty. This is due, above all, to the backwardness of Italian research in this field, first signalled by Giorgio Pasquali at the beginning of the 1930oswhen he pointed out the need for a collection of medieval catalogues, work on which is only now being carried out.4 Furthermore, while the documentary evidence found in ancient inventories helps to verify the
presence of a text in a given library collection, it tells us nothing about the ways in which
the text itself was approached.5

3. See L. Floridi, 'The Diffusion of Sextus Empiricus's Works in the Renaissance', Journal of the History of Ideas, I.VI, 1995, pp. 63-85; for additions and corrections to his list of Sextus manuscripts see G. M. Cao, 'Nota sul recupero umanistico di Sesto Empirico', Rinascimento, xxxv, 1995, PP. 319-25 (319-2o). Floridi is also the author of the long-awaited entry on 'Sextus Empiricus', forthcoming in vol. viii of the Catalogus Translationum et Commentariorum: Medieval and Renaissance Latin Translation and Commentaries. See also G. ovvero De Gregorio, 'Costantinopoli-Tubinga-Roma, la "duplice conversione" di un manoscritto bizantino
(Vat. Gr. 738)', Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xcIII, 2ooo, pp.
37-1o7. 4. G. Pasquali, 'Per una raccolta dei cataloghi medievali delle biblioteche d'Italia', Pegaso, iII, 1931, pp.
93-96 (repr. in idem, Pagine stravaganti di unfilologo, ed. But C. F. Russo, 2 vols, Florence 1994, I, PP. 118-22). see now G. Savino, 'Per una raccolta dei cataloghi medievali delle biblioteche d'Italia', Studi Medievali, xxxi, 1990, pp. 789-803; D. Nebbiai-Dalla Guarda, I documenti per la storia delle biblioteche medievali (secoli IX-XV), Rome 1992; eadem, 'La description du livre au XVe siecle: pratiques et modeles', in Pratiques de la culture ecrite en France au XVe sicle (actes du colloque international du C.N.R.S., Paris 1992), ed. M. Onorato and N. Pons, Louvain-la-Neuve 1995, PP. 473-97. 5. See, in general, P. Kibre, 'The Intellectual Interests Reflected in Libraries of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Century', Journal of the History of Ideas, vii, 1946, pp. 257-97; G. Billanovich, 'Biblioteche di dotti e letteratura italiana tra il Trecento e il Quattrocento',
SEXTUSEMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY
231
With regard to Sextus Empiricus, the survey I have made of ancient catalogues, although unsystematic and statistically unreliable (since it has been limited to published sources), probably gives us a fairly accurate picture of the rarity of his works. Copies found their way only into wealthy, organised institutions such as the Medici and Vatican libraries, or into the private collections of leading figures in Greek studies such as Francesco Filelfo and Cardinal Bessarion. A glance at the main fifteenth-century Italian collections will provide sufficient proof of this. There is no trace of Sextus Empiricus in documents describing the history of the Visconti and Sforza library.6 Nor is there any reference to him in the records of the Gonzaga library in Mantua,7 the collection of the dukes of Urbino," or other libraries, including those of the Malatesta,9 Savoyl' and Aragon.1" Whether one looks at private,12
in Studi e Problemi di Critica Testuale (Convegno di Studi di Filologia italiana, g196o), Bologna 1961, pp. 33548; A. Petrucci, 'Le biblioteche antiche', in Letteratura italiana, ed. A. Asor Rosa, II, Produzione e consumo, Turin 1982, pp. 527-54; A. Taylor, Book Catalogues: Their Varieties and Uses, 2nd revd edn, Winchester 1986; C. in L'epoque humanistes', Csapodi, 'Les bibliotheques de la Renaissance 14oo-i6oo, I, L'avenement de l'esprit ed. T. Klaniczay et al., Budapest nouveau (14oo-I48o), 1988, pp. 126-36; L. Gargan, 'Gli umanisti e la biblioteca pubblica', in Le bibliotechenel mondo antico e medievale, ed. G. Cavallo, Rome and Bari 1993, pp. 163-86; E. Canone, 'Nota introduttiva. Le biblioteche private di eruditi, filosofi e scienziati dell'eta moderna', in Bibliothecae selectae. Da Cusano a Leopardi, ed. E. Canone, Florence 1993, pp. IX-XXXII. 6. See E. Pellegrin, La bibliotheque des Visconti et des Sforza ducs de Milan au XVe sibcle, Paris 1955, which contains the 1426 inventory ordered by Filippo Maria Visconti (pp. 75-289); that of 1459, made after restoration work to Pavia castle (pp. 290-328); and that of 1469, concerning the transfer to Pavia of the manuSee also scripts of Galeazzo Maria Sforza (pp. 328-52). M. G. Albertini Ottolenghi, 'La biblioteca dei Visconti e degli Sforza: gli inventari del 1488 e del 1490', Studi Petrarcheschi, viII, 1991, pp. 1-238, which includes and analyses two inventories carried out in March 1488 (pp. Further docu1) and April 1490o (pp. 152-238). 22-15 mentation regarding the library is given by the list of books on loan or not in the library premises which were returned to Pavia in 1491, published by E. Fumagalli, 'Appunti sulla biblioteca dei Visconti e degli Sforza nel castello di Pavia', ibid., VII, 199o, pp. 93-211. See also the contributions by S. Cerrini, 'Libri dei ViscontiSforza. Schede per una nuova edizione degli inventari', ibid., vIII, 1991, pp. 239-81; and F. Petrucci Nardelli, 'La biblioteca Visconteo Sforzesca. Ubicazione e disposizione del materiale librario', La Bibliofilia, xcvII, g1995, pp. 2 1-33. 7. See P. Girolla, 'La biblioteca di Francesco Gonzaga secondo l'inventario del 14o7', Atti e memorie della reale Accademia virgiliana di Mantova, xiv-xvi, 1921-23, pp. 3o-72; and also D. S. Chambers, A Renaissance Cardinal and His Worldly Goods: The Will and Inventory London 1992, pp. of Francesco Gonzaga (1444-1483), 166-85. 8. The so-called Indice vecchio, compiled largely in about 1487, with additions by the librarian Agapito in around 1496-98, is published in Codices Urbinates Graeci Bibliothecae Vaticanae, ed. C. Stornajolo, Rome 1895, pp. LIX-CLXXV; a second inventory, probably drawn up in 1520, was published by C. Guasti, 'Inventario della libreria urbinate compilato nel secolo XV da Federigo Veterano bibliotecario di Federigo I da Montefeltro duca di Urbino', Giornale Storico degli Archivi Toscani, vI, 1862, pp. 133-47; VII, 1863, pp. 46-55, 130-54. See also G. Franceschini, 'Per la storia della biblioteca di Federico da Montefeltro duca di Urbino', Atti e memorie della DI)eputazionedi storia patria per le Marche, xII, 1959, pp. 41-77; L. Michelini Tocci, 'Agapito, bibliotecario "docto, acorto et diligente" della Biblioteca Urbinate in Collectanea Vaticana in alla fine del Quattrocento', honorem Anselmi M. Card. Albareda, 2 vols, Vatican City 1962, II, pp. 245-80; idem, 'La formazione della biblioteca di Federico da Montefeltro: codici contemporanei e libri a stampa', in Federico di Montefeltro. Lo stato le arti la cultura, ed. G. Cerboni Baiardi et al., III, La cultura, Rome 1986, pp. 9-179. See A. Campana, Origine, formazione e vicende della Malatestiana, Rome 1953; La Biblioteca Malatestiana di Cesena, ed. L. Baldacchini, Rome 1992; Libraria Domini. I manoscritti della Biblioteca Malatestiana: testi e decorazioni, ed. F. Lollini and P. Lucchi, Bologna 1995. See also La biblioteca di un medico del Quattrocento: I codici di Giovanni di Marco da Rimini nella Biblioteca Malatestiana, ed. A. Manfron, Cesena and Turin 1998. io. See S. Edmunds, 'The Medieval Library of Savoy', Scriptorium, xxiv, 197o, pp. 318-27; xxV, 1971, pp. 253-84; xxvi, 1972, pp. 269-93; Les manuscrits enlumines des Comtes et Ducs de Savoie, ed. A. Paravicini Bagliani, Turin 1989. 11. See G. Mazzatinti, La Biblioteca dei re d'Aragona in
232
GIAN MARIO CAO
'state', or church collections, the results of this survey remain unchanged: Sextus's works are absent from the libraries of bishops and cardinals,'" from monastery and cathedral library collections, in Florence and Tuscany,1" Padua and the Veneto,'5 as well as other parts of Italy.16
Napoli, Rocca S. Casciano 1897; and esp. T. De Marinis, La Biblioteca napoletana dei re d'Aragona, 4 vols, Milan 1945-52. See also G. Bresciano, 'Inventari inediti del libri a stampa e manoscritti', secolo XV contenenti Archivio Storico per le Province Napoletane, xxvi, I 9)o 1, pp. 1-32; C. De Frede, 'Biblioteche e cultura di signori napoletani del '4oo', Bibliotheque d'Humanisme et Renaissance, xxv, 1963, pp. 187-97. The Biblioteca Nazionale of Naples currently holds a significant collection of Greek manuscripts originating mainly from the Farnese library (see L. Pernot, 'La collection de manuscrits grecs de la maison Farnese', Melanges d'archeologie et d'histoire de l'Ecole Fran(aise de Rome, xcI, 1979, pp. 457-5o6; manuscrits grecs farn&siens', ibid., in E. Mioni, 'Prolegomena', 1815, goaeorum Bibliothecae Nationalis Neapolicodicunm Catalogeus tana, i. , ed. idem, Rome 1992, pp. V-VI) and from the library of S. Giovanni a Carbonara, which was enlarged over time thanks to the efforts of figures such as Demetrio Calcondila, Aulo Giano Parrasio, and Antonio and Girolamo Seripando (see D. Gutierrez, 'La biblioteca di S. Giovanni a Carbonara di Napoli', Analecla idem, 'Nouveau
xcIlI,
Wiesbaden 1997; (;. Rebecd'Aragona (i456-1485), chini, 'The Book Collection and Other Possessions of Baldassarre Castiglione', this Journal, I.xI, 1i)8, pp. 17-52. See also A. Petrucci, 'I libri della porpora', in I luoghi della miemoriascritta. Manoscritti, incunaboli, libri a stampa di Biblioteche Statali Italiane, ed. G. Cavallo, Rome PP- 3o3-o9. 14. See F. Baldasseroni and P. D'Ancona, La Biblioteca della Basilica fiorentina di S. Lorenzo nei secoli XIV e XV, Prato and Florence Igo6; S. Orlandi, La Bibliotera di S. Maria Novella in Firenze dal sec. XIV al sec. XIX, Florence 1952; F. Mattesini, 'La biblioteca friancescana di S. Croce e Fra Tedaldo Della Casa', Studi Francescani, I.vi, 196o, pp. 254-316; D. Gutierrez, 'La biblioteca di Santo Spirito in Firenze nella met6i del secolo XV',
1994,
pp. 685-711;
Analecta Augustiniana, xxv, 1962, pp. 5-88 (and again, idem, 'De antiquis Ordinis Eremitarurm Sancti AugusC. T. tini bibliothecis', ibid., xxIII, 1954, PP. 163-374); Davis, 'The Early Collection of Books ol S. CrIoce in Florence', Proceeding of the American Philosophical Society, evii, 1963, pp. 399-414; K. W. Humphreys, The Library of the Carimelites of Ilorence at the End of the lFoureenuh Century, Amsterdam 1964; L. Perini, 'L'inventario dei codici di S. Maria del Carmine di Firenze del 1461', in A Giuseppe Ermini, 3 vols, Spoleto 197o, 111, pp. 4i 1-561 (= Studi Medievali, x, 1969). For other Tuscan libraries see D. Corsi, 'La Biblioteca dei frati domenicani di S. Romiano di Lucca nel sec. XV', in Miscellanea di scritti di Alfbnso Gallo, Florence 1i956, pp. 293vari in menmoria 'Libri pistoiesi in un inventario del G. Savino, 31o; XV secolo', Bullettino Storico Pistoiese, ixix, 6(7, pp. 1i 1 25-28; K. W. Humphreys, The Library of the Franciscans 1 MI. of Siena in the Late Fifteenth Cenlury, Amsterdam i978; E. Magheri Cataluccio and A. U. Fossa, Biblioteca e cultura a Camaldoli. Dal mnedioevo all'umnanesimo, Rome 1979; ;. Savino, 'La libreria della Cattedrale di San Zenone in Pistoia nell'inventario sozomeniano del 1432', in 7ra libri e carte. Studi in onore di Luciana Mosiici, ed. G. Savino and T. De Robertis, Florence 1998, pp. 421-3515. Cf. P. Sambin, 'La formazione quattrocentesca della biblioteca di S. Giovanni di Verdara in Padova', Atti dell'Istituto veneto di scienze, lettereed arti, (:xIv, 195556, pp. 263-80; K. W. Humphreys, The Library of the Franciscans of the Convent oqfSt.Antony, Padua at the Beginning of the Fifteenth Century,Amsterdam 19 66; G. Cantoni Alzati, La Biblioteca di S. Giustina di Padova. Libri e cultura presso i benedettini padovani in eta umanistica, Padua 1982, 'Sulla biblioteca di S. Bernardinello, pp. 35-142; Gaetano da Thiene, lettore allo Studio e canonico della Cattedrale di Padova', in Viridarium floridum: Studi di
Augustiniana, xxlx, 1966, pp. 99-212). 12. Private collections also, of course, include humanistic and family libraries; see e.g. C. Bec, Les livres Florence 1984; A. Cataldi des Florentins (I413-60o8), Palau, 'La biblioteca Pandolfini. Storia della sua formazione e successiva dispersione: identificazione di alcuni manoscritti', Italia medioevale e umanistica, xxxi, 1988, PP- 259-39513. See e.g. A. Paredi, La biblioteca del PizoIpasso, Milan 1961; R. Avesani, 'Per la biblioteca di Agostino Patrizi Piccolomini vescovo di Pienza', in Melanges Eugene Tisserant, 7 vols, Vatican City 1964, vI, pp. 1-87; A. V. Antonovics, 'The Library of Cardinal Domenico Capranica', in Cultural Aspects of the Italian Renaissance. Essays in Honour of Paul Oskar Kristeller, ed. C. H. Clough, Manchester and New York 1976, pp. 141-59; G. Lombardi and F. Onofri, 'La biblioteca di Giordano Orsini in Scrittura, biblioteche e stampa a Roma (c. 1360-1438)', nel Quattrocento (atti del seminario, 1979), ed. C. Bianca et al., Vatican City i98o, pp. 371-82; D. Norman, 'The Library of Cardinal Oliviero Carafa, parts 1 and 2', The 'Pro bibliotheca Book Collector, xxxvi, 1987, pp. [i-38]; erigenda': Mostra di manoscritti ed incunaboli del vescovo Trent 1989; di Trento Johannes Hinderbach (1465-1486), A. Cataldi Palau, 'La biblioteca del cardinale Giovanni Salviati. Alcuni nuovi manoscritti greci in biblioteche diverse dalla Vaticana', Scriptorium, xILIX, 1995, PP. 6oT. Haffner, Die Bibliothek des Kardinals Giovanni 95;
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY
233
There is, however, one exception. In 1459 Guarino da Verona, already in his nineties and close to death, wrote to Piero de' Medici asking to borrow a copy of Sextus's works,
which were apparently unavailable to him in the Este library in Ferrara:'7 I hear that you have that noble author, Sextus Empiricus, with you. I am desperate to get hold of him. If you very kindly put me in possession of him, you will lay me under such an everlasting obligation
that I will owe everything to you ...s8
I have been unable to find a reply to this letter in Piero's correspondence
from this period. belief
Nor is there any reference to Sextus's works in surviving documents concerning Guarino's
personal library or in his own writings.'9 All this seems to confirm the longstanding
storia veneta offerti dagli allievi a Paolo Sambin, Padua
1984, PP. 337-53.

16. See A. Sorbelli, 'La Biblioteca Capitolare della Cattedrale di Bologna nel sec. XV: notizie e catalogo', Atti e Memorie della Deputazione di Storia Patria per la Romagna, xxI, 1903, PP- 439-616; G. Borghezio, 'Inventarii e notizie della Biblioteca Capitolare d'Ivrea nel secolo XV', in Miscellanea Francesco Ehrle, 5 vols, Rome 1924, v, pp. 423-54; D. M. Inguanez, Catalogi codicum Casinensium antiqui (saec. VIII-XV), Montecassino 1941; M.-H. Laurent, Fabio Vigili et les bibliotheques de Bologne au debut du XVIe siecle d'apres le ms. Barb. Lat. 3185, Vatican City 1943; G. Gullotta, Gli antichi cataloghi e i codici della Abbazia di Nonantola, Vatican City 1955; G. Pistarino, 'Libri e cultura nella cattedrale di Genova tra Medioevo e Rinascimento', Atti della Societa ligure di storia patria, II, 1961, pp. 1-117; V. Alce and A. D'Amato, La biblioteca di S. Domenico in Bologna, Florence 1961; T. Kaeppeli, Inventari di libri di San Domenico di Perugia (i43o-80), Rome 1962; A. Belloni and M. Ferrari, La Biblioteca Capitolare di Monza, Padua 1974; M. Ferrari, 'Per una storia delle biblioteche francescane a Milano nel Medioevo e nell'Umanesimo', Archivum Franciscanum Historicum, LXXII, 1979, pp. 429-64; A. Franceschini, Inventari inediti di bibliotecheferraresi del sec. XV. B. La biblioteca del Capitolo dei canonici della Cattedrale, Ferrara 1982 (= Atti e Memorie della Deputazione prov. Ferraresedi storia patria, II); La biblioteca di Pomposa, ed. G. Billanovich, Padua 1994; M. Ferrari, 'Due inventari quattrocenteschi della Biblioteca Capitolare di S. Ambrogio in Milano', in Filologia umanistica per Gianvito Resta, ed. V. Fera and G. Ferrafi, 3 vols, Padua 1997, II, pp. 771-814; A. Riva, La Biblioteca Capitolare di S. Antonino di Piacenza (secoli XII-XV), Piacenza 1997; L. Gargan, L'antica biblioteca della Certosa di Pavia, Rome 1998. 17. The presence of a substantial nucleus of manuscripts at the court of Ferrara is revealed in the inventory of Niccol6 III d'Este's books drawn up inJanuary 1436; a second list was compiled in 1467, during Borso's reign, and has no relation to the first. From then until the end of the 15th century other inventories were made, the last of which dates to 1495 and bears witness
to the conditions of the library under Ercole I. Despite Guarino's long period of teaching, it appears that the collection contains no Greek texts; this is confirmed by the solitary presence of a codex by Diodorus Siculus in the list of 1495 (item 464: 'Teodoro siculo in greco coperto de montanina rossa'). For the texts of the various inventories see G. Bertoni, La Biblioteca Estense e la coltura ferrarese ai tempi del duca Ercole I (i471-1505), Turin 1903, pp. 211-71. See also A. Quondam, 'Le biblioteche della corte estense a Ferrara', in I luoghi (as in n. 13), pp. 207-15; A. Grafton, 'Comment creer une bibliotheque humaniste: le cas de Ferrare', in Lepouvoir des bibliotheques: La mimoire des livres en Occident, ed. M. Baratin and C. Jacob, Paris 1996, pp. 189-203; on private libraries in Ferrara see e.g. D. Mugnai Carrara, La biblioteca di Nicolo Leoniceno. Tra Aristotele e Galeno: cultura e libri di un medico umanista, Florence 1991; C. Andreasi, 'La biblioteca di frate Giovanni Battista Panetti carmelitano', Medioevo e Rinascimento, XIV, 2000, pp. 183-231. 18. L. Capra, 'Contributo a Guarino Veronese', Italia medioevale e umanistica, Xiv, 1971, pp. 193-247 (247): 'Audio Sextum Empiricum auctorem nobilem apud te esse, cuius habendi mirum me tenet desiderium. Eius autem si me compotem benignitate tua reddideris, adeo me tibi perpetuo devinxeris ut nihil quod tibi non debeam ...' The letter is published on the basis of San Gimignano, Biblioteca Comunale MS 137 (A V 7) (noted by P. O. Kristeller, Iter Italicum, 7 vols, London and Leiden 1963-97, 11, p. 142), which differs from a similar collection of letters also addressed to Piero de' Medici - preserved in Urbino, Biblioteca Universitaria MS 135 (see A. Campana, 'Una lettera inedita di Guarino Veronese e il Plutarco mediceo della bottega di Vespasiano', Italia medioevale e umanistica, v, 1962, pp. 171-78) - precisely because it contains the letter concerning Sextus. 19. My research on Piero's correspondence was conducted in the Mediceo avanti il Principato collection (hereafter MAP) and the Carte Strozziane of Archivio di Stato of Florence (hereafter ASF), starting from Archivio Mediceo avanti il Principato. Inventario, ed. A.
234
GIANMARIOCAO
that the formation of a collection of Greek manuscripts in the Mediceaprivata, that is, the Medici private library, did not take place until the time of Piero's son, Lorenzo the Magnificent. Clear traces of a Sextus manuscript can be found in the various inventories of the Vatican Library, including those compiled by Sixtus IV's librarian, Bartolomeo Sacchi (known as Platina), in 147520 and 1481,21 and a further three subsequently carried out in 1484 under the papacy of Innocent VIII,22in 1518 by Zanobi Acciaiuoli,2" and finally in 1517-18 by the librarian Girolamo Aleandro together with Giovanni Severos, which, unlike the others, was written in Greek.24 Further evidence that there was a manuscript of Sextus in the Vatican Library is provided by the loans register, which records that a codex was returned to the library in November 1494 'by the Greek scribe Demetrius' ('per Dimetrium scriptorem grecum'), having been borrowed in January of that year by Gioacchino Torriano, General of the Dominican Order.25 The subsequent catalogue,
D'Addario and F. Morandini, 4 vols, Rome 1951-63; Le Carte Strozziane del R. Archivio di Stato in Firenze. Inventario, 2 vols, Florence 1884-92; I also consulted Kristeller, Iter Italicum (as in n. 18), vii. On Guarino's library see H. Omont, 'Les manuscrits grecs de Guarino de Verone et la bibliotheque de Ferrare', Revue des Bibliotheques, II, 1892, pp. 78-81; A. Diller, 'The Greek Codices of Palla Strozzi and Guarino Veronese', this journal, xxIv, 1961, now in idem, Studies in Greek (317-21), PP. 313-21 Manuscript Tradition, Amsterdam 1983, PP- 4o5-13 (409-13); I. Thomson, 'Some Notes on the Contents of Guarino's Library', Renaissance Quarterly, xxIx, 1976, pp. 169-77. I found nothing relevant in the Epistolario di Guarino Veronese, ed. R. Sabbadini, 3 vols, Venice 1915-19. to 'Sexti Heberici opus. 20. Item 245 corresponded Ex membr. in pavonazio'. The inventory, contained in Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (hereafter BAV) MS Vat. lat. 3954 is published in full by E. Mfintz and P. Fabre, La bibliothequedu Vatican au XVe siecle, Paris (232); the Greek section is repro1887, pp. 159-250 duced in R. Devreesse, Le fonds grec de la Bibliotheque Vaticane des origines t Paul V, Vatican City 1965, pp. 45-80 (55). Note that the manuscript does not appear in the list of Greek codices of Nicholas V (t 1455) nor in the book loans approved by Callixtus III (t 1458) compiled by Cosimo di Monserrat (see A. M. Albareda, 'I1 bibliotecario di Callisto III', in Miscellanea Giovanni Mercati, 6 vols, Vatican City 1946, Iv, pp. 178-208), published for the first time by Milntz and Fabre (as above), pp. 316-44, and again by Devreesse, Le fonds (as above), pp. 11-42. On the papal collection in the second half of the 15th century see J. Bignami Odier, La Bibliotheque Vaticane de Sixte IV t Pie XI, Vatican City 1973, PP. 9-43; on the Greek collection in particular see R. Devreesse, 'Pour l'histoire des manuscrits du fonds vatican grec', in Collectanea Vaticana (as in n. 8), I, PP. 315-36. 21. The inventory was compiled with the collaboration of Demetrio Guazzelli and is contained in BAV MS Vat. lat. 3947; see item 209, 'Sextus Empiricus, ex membranis in rubeo'. It is published in Devreesse, Le Fonds (as in n. 20), pp. 82-120 (91). 22. It appears in BAV MS Vat. lat. 3949. The Greek section is published in Devreesse, ibid., pp. 122-51 (129, item 2o8: 'Sextus Empiricus'). 23. The inventory is published ibid., pp. 186-235 (197), on the basis of BAV MS Vat. lat. 3955, an autograph of the keeper of manuscripts, Lorenzo Parmenio; the note referring to Sextus, '241. Sextus Empiricus', appears in the margin. Between this inventory and the preceding one, there is a description made strictly for personal use c. 1510o by Fabio Vigili (BAV MS Vat. lat. 7135), listing 408 of the total of about 850 Greek codices held at that time in the Vatican Library; this list, reproduced ibid., pp. 153-80, does not include the manuscript of Sextus Empiricus. 24. Different dates (July 1519 to December 1521) are proposed in Bignami Odier (as in n. 20), p. 3o, relying on a hypothesis first put forward by Devreesse, 'Pour l'histoire' (as in n. 20), p. 327 n. 1. The inventory is contained in BAV MS Vat. gr. 1483 and published in Devreesse, Le Fonds (as in n. 20), pp. 237-63 (251); a complete transcription of the note regarding Sextus Empiricus (item 237) is given by P. Canart, 'D6metrius Damilas, alias le librarius Florentinus', Rivista di Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici, xxIv-xxvI, 1977-79, pp. 281-347
(307 'P3tXiov IK' 'ob5 atroi aetqOratXtuco1);: / n. 2: /
1 tTCiEptpoC XYl'ou nTpbgd; / Zo) npTCEi ypxtpxaat?cig;:
)roi tpo;g yEOwzrpiav: aTobio Tt~Pi ptrqpoptui;: / 'oi ab / to) abcTo itpog ; ptOp'ztucog;: / 'ob a(czoi Ttpog / pt~pi / 'ob aetrob itpo;g iovctoKog: (&Trpo67yog;: ixptrpto~o- / zo6v z&x iErzov ox [rt6 86Erepov eTx tc6)v ;'] / [zoo cabzoi i~oopvrRcXzov t6 fiov 1K<cpaatov> ) / jov] / 6ecxa tEpi QXya0o) cai ~totVfilcaarC X67yo;g cacob.').
235
this time in Latin again, was compiled in 1533 by Nicola Maiorano. From this document, it appears that losses from the Greek collection due to the Sack of Rome in 1527 were not particularly severe - 859 codices are recorded, compared to 889 in the 1518 inventory. Sextus Empiricus, however, had disappeared from the catalogue.26 According to information contained in the Greek catalogue of 1517-18, the lost manuscript preserved and the anonymous Ataooi k6yot, but not the Outlines of Pyrrhonism, Against the Professors, renamed Atiaketq; (the titles mean 'Contrasting Arguments' and 'Arguments' respectively) by Henri Estienne in his 1570 edition of Diogenes Laertius.27The lost Vatican codex is believed to have belonged to the family of manuscripts assigned the siglum Wby Arthur Kochalsky and g by Hermann Mutschmann.28 On that basis, together with the information regarding the return of the book in 1494, Paul Canart has argued that some of the Sextus codices which can be ascribed to this manuscript family may have descended from a scribe of Greek origin, Demetrius Damilas, the supposed 'librarius Florentinus',"29 and from the lost Vatican codex.30 Among these manuscripts, one long-missing codex stands out in particular: MS Regimontanus S. 35. 8' (also recorded as 16 b 12, and referred to as 'K' and later 'R' by philologists) of the Stadtbibliothek in K6nigsberg, later Kaliningrad.:-
25. M. Bert6la, I due primi registri di prestito della Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican City 1942, p. 84: 'Ego frater loakinus Turrianus, generalis ordinis predicatorum, recepi mutuo a domino loanne Fonsalitas bibliotecario S. domini nostri libros duos in greco in papiro super libros Ethicorum Eustracium et Elenchorum coopertum nigro et Sextum Empiricum in membranis, restituendos ad eius beneplacitum, die XXVII ianuarii 1494 et manu propria in fide huius Restituit per scripsi. - Restituit die X novembris. Demetrium scribam,. - Restituit Sestum Embiricum die XVII michi Io<hanni, custode per Dimetrium scriptorem grecum'. The text is also transcribed by Canart (as in n. 24), p. 317 (appx 1, no. 5). On Torriano see also S. Marcon, 'I libri del generale domenicano Gioachino Torriano (t 1550) nel convento veneziano di San Zanipolo', Miscellanea Marciana, II-Iv, 1987-89, pp. 81-116. 26. The list is contained in BAV MS Vat. lat. 3951 and the Greek part alone is published by Devreesse, Le Fonds (as in n. 20), pp. 266-312 (see also Librorum Graecorum Bibliothecae Vaticanae Index a Nicolao De Maioranis compositus et Fausto Saboeo collatus Anno 1533, ed. M. R. Dilts et al., Vatican City 1998). Canart (as in n. 24), p. 307, also suggests that the Sextus codex may have been destroyed by Conestabile di Borbone's troops during their assault on Rome. 27. Cf. T. Bergk, 'Uber die Echtheit der At0,kE'tg', in idem, Fiinf Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der griechischen Philosophie und Astronomie, ed. G. Hinrichs, Leipzig 1883, pp. 117-38; M. Schanz, 'Zu den sogenannten AIAAEEEII', Hermes, xIx, 1884, pp. 369-84; C. Trieber, 'Die AIAAEEEII', E. Hermes, xxvii, 1892, pp. 210-48; Weber, 'Ueber den Dialect der sogenannten Dialexeis
des Sextus Empiricus', Philologus, W. Nestle, Von Mythos zum Logos. 1898, pp. 64-102; Ivii, Die Selbstentfaltung des griechischen Denkens von Homer bis auf die Sophistik und Sokrates, Stuttgart 1940, pp. 437-47; M. Untersteiner, Problemi difilologiafilosofica, Milan 1980, pp. 137-38. Editions of the text in Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, ed. H. Diels and W. Kranz, 6th edn, 3 vols, Dublin and Zurich 1951-52, II, pp. 405-16, and especially T. M. Robinson, Contrasting Arguments: An Edition of the Dissoi Logoi, New York 1979 (repr. Salem 1984). 28. A. Kochalsky, De Sexti Empirici adversus logicos libris quaestiones criticae, Marburg 191 1, p. 32; H. Mutschmann, 'Praefatio', in Sextus Empiricus, Opera, II, ed. idem, Leipzig 1914, p. V. 29. The 'librarius Florentinus' was first discussed by D. Harlfinger, Die Textgeschichte der pseudo-aristotelischen N Schrift HEPI ATOMO2 FPAMMQ2N, Amsterdam 1971, pp. 201, 222-26, 228, 232-33, 417. 30. See Canart (as in n. 24), pp. 307-14 (? 3: 'Damilas et Sextus Empiricus'); see also Repertorium der aus (1. Handschriften Griechischen Kopisten 8oo-i6oo Bibliotheken 2. Handschriften aus GroBbritanniens; Bibliotheken Frankreichs und Nachtrige zu den Bibliotheken aus GroBbritanniens; 3. Handschriften Bibliotheken Roms mit dem Vatikan), ed. E. Gamill1 no. 93, 2 no. scheg et al., 9 vols, Vienna 1981-97, 127, 3 no. 16o. A reference to Damilas is also found in J. Irigoin, 'La circulation des fontes grecques en Italie de 1476 i 1525', in Le livre et l'historien. Etudes offerts en l'honneur du Professeur Henri-Jean Martin, ed. F. Barbier et al., Geneva 1997, pp. 69-74 (70). 31. Handschriften-Katalog der Stadtbibliothek Kinigsberg i. Pr., ed. P. Rhode and A. Seraphim, K6nigsberg 19o9,
und die Handschriften
236
GIAN MARIO CAO
But, following Mutschmann,32 its identification with the lost Vatican codex would have to be excluded if it is considered to be the exemplar of Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana (hereafter Marc.) MS Gr. Z. 262 (408). Generally speaking, however, we cannot totally exclude the possibility that the Regimontanus codex might be the lost Vatican manuscript. Its close kinship to the Marciana manuscript suggests that they were produced at roughly the same time, that is, towards the end of 146os; and this fits with the fact that there are clear indications of a Sextus manuscript in the Vatican inventories from as early as 1475. Therefore, the first part of Canart's hypothesis, that Damilas's copy might be identified with MS Regimontanus S. 35. 80, is improbable; while the second part, that it might be one of the copies made by the 'librarius Florentinus' (Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana [hereafter Laur.] MS Plut. 85-24; and MS Marc. Gr. IV 26 [1442]), remains unproven.33 Yet one must acknowledge these conjectures are extremely tenuous, largely on account of the impoverishment of the surviving tradition. Thus, the responsibility assigned in the stemma to the lost Vatican codex is, in reality, another way of expressing the absence of definite information; and the legitimacy of the competing hypotheses is indicative of their merely supplementary nature rather than their ability to produce a coherent picture of the data.34
II. THE
SEXTUS MANUSCRIPTS OF FILELFO AND BESSARION
As for Florence, mention has already been made of the formation of a collection of Greek books in the private Medici library at the time of Lorenzo the Magnificent. Even in the first half of the fifteenth century, however, Florentine humanists had access to a number of Greek codices - those of Niccolo Niccoli and Antonio Corbinelli, which later became part of the libraries of the convent of San Marco and of the Badia Fiorentina respectively.35 We know a great deal about Niccoli's collection, which, thanks above all to the efforts of Cosimo de' Medici, was transferred to San Marco and became a 'public library'.36
p. 302. Note that prior to this Weber (as in n. 27), p. 65, had mentioned the possibility of an earlier dating ('14. oder 15. Jahrh.'); see also G. M. Cao, 'L'ereditA Pico tra Sesto Empirico e pichiana: Gianfrancesco Savonarola', in Pico, Poliziano e l'Umanesimo di fine Quattrocento, exhib. cat. (Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana 1994), ed. P. Viti, Florence 1994, pp. 231-45 (238-39). 32. Mutschmann, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), p. VI: 16 b 12 (olim K a me nuncupatus), 'Regimontanus Veneti Marciani V ambitu specie fide plane gemellus'. It was also given this position in the stemma byJ. Mau, 'Praefatio', in Sextus Empiricus, Opera, III, ed. H. Mutschmann andJ. Mau, Leipzig 1961, p. XIII. On the Marciana codex, copied before 1468, see below, p. 245. 33. Canart (as in n. 24), p. 314 . mention the Vatican collection, 34. Regarding should also be made of the Latin version of the first four books of Against the Professors made in 1485 by the papal librarian Giovanni Lorenzi and preserved in BAV MS Vat. lat. 2990 (fols 266r-38 1v). A study of this with a partial transcription - excerpta from fols 266r-68r, 273v-75r, 331V-32V, 353r-55r, 279r-80ov, 328v-29r, 357r-58r, 375v, 381r-v - can be found in C. B. Schmitt, 'An Unstudied Fifteenth-Century Latin Translation of Sextus Empiricus by Giovanni Lorenzi (Vat. Lat. 2990)', in Cultural Aspects (as in n. 13), pp. 244-61 (250-57), of which the following passages should be corrected as follows: 21 latentur: latenter I 26 denuntiverat: denuntiaverat I 74 dulcidini: dulcedini I 79 elatus: elatis I 96 artificior: artificiosior I 125 its: ita I 131 suscipiere: suscipere I 155 quadem: quadam I 172 phylosophis: I 177 pluraque: pleraque I 206 si: sin I philosophis 225 pervenimus: percurrimus I 233 suppositionem: I 233 ut ea: rei I 234 propositionem: suppositiones I I 252 posteriorem: posterioremque preparationem 270 additio <non,: additionem. A partial copy of this translation (Against the Professors, I-III) has recently been identified in Turin, Biblioteca Nazionale MS C.II. 11, datable to the first half of the 16th century: see Floridi, 'The Diffusion' (as in n. 3), pp. 64-65, 70-75, 83-84-
SEXTUSEMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY
237
The initial nucleus of the Medici private library was formed by Cosimo (who should also be remembered for his work to promote the library of the Badia Fiesolana).7 According to the 1417-18 inventory, it numbered little more than sixty manuscripts, all of them either in Latin or in the vernacular.38 Evidence for the progressive enlargement of the collection can be found in the lists of Piero di Cosimo's books compiled in 145639 and 1465.40 None of the Medici or Florentine library collections from this period, however, seems to have contained any Sextus Empiricus manuscripts. The inventory of the Medici library compiled on 20 October 1495 byJanus Lascaris and Bartolomeo de' Ciai at the request of the Florentine Signoria records the state of the collection at the end of the Laurentian period.41 It appears from this list that the library
35. R. Blum, La biblioteca della Badia Fiorentina e i codici di Antonio Corbinelli, Vatican City 1951. 36. B. L. Ullman and P. A. Stadter, The Public Library of Renaissance Florence: Niccolb Niccoli, Cosimo de' Medici and the Library of San Marco, Padua 1972, pp. 3-15; see also E. Garin, La biblioteca di San Marco, Florence 1999 (previously published in La Chiesa e il Convento di San Marco a Firenze, I, Florence 1989, pp. 79-148). 37. A. C. de la Mare, 'New Research on Humanistic Scribes in Florence', in Miniatura fiorentina del Rinascimento 1440o-525, ed. A. Garzelli, 2 vols, Florence 1985, I, pp. 440-44, 555-64; A. Garzelli, 'Note su artisti nell'orbita dei primi Medici: individuazioni e congetture dei libri di pagamento della Badia fiesolana (1440-1485)', Studi Medievali, xxvI, 1985, PP- 435-82. 38. Cosimo's books are known thanks to an Inventario di tutte cose trovate in casa di Giovanni de' Medici (ASF, MAP, filza CXXIX), partly available in F. Pintor, 'Per la storia della libreria medicea nel Rinascimento. Appunti d'archivio', Italia medioevale e umanistica, III, 1960, pp. and now, in a complete form, in 190-210 (197-99), Giovanni di Bicci. Cosimo e Inventari medicei 1417-i465. Lorenzo di Giovanni. Piero di Cosimo, ed. M. Spallanzani, Florence 1996, pp. 3-72 (concerning the books see pp. 6, 20-23, 72), where the dating of the inventory is also re-examined (Introduction, pp. XIV-XV). For a detailed analysis of the inventory and numerous identifications of manuscripts see A. C. de la Mare, 'Cosimo and his Books', in Cosimo 'il Vecchio' de' Medici, 1389-1464: Essays in Commemoration of the 6ooth Anniversary of Cosimo de' Medici's Birth, ed. F. Ames-Lewis, Oxford 1992, pp. i15-56. 39. There are actually two separate inventories, drawn up in 1456 and 1463, but contained in the same codex (ASF, MAP, filza CLXII). The section concerning books, which appears only in the 1456 list, is published in E. Piccolomini, Ricerche intorno alle condizioni ed alle vicende della libreria medicea privata, Florence 1875, pp. 115-22 (but the manuscript is referred to by the previous shelf-mark, filza III); more recently in F. AmesLewis, The Library and Manuscripts of Piero di Cosimo de' Medici, New York and London 1984, pp. 365-79 (on the books see pp. 367-76); and, in full, in Inventari medicei (as in n. 38), pp. 87-136 (regarding the books see pp. 107-17). 40. See ASF, MAP, filza CLXIII. An edition of the text is found in Inventari medicei (as in n. 38), pp. 139-61 (on the books see pp. 151-57); a transcription of the ASF copy, Carte Strozziane, ser. I, filza io, can be found in Ames-Lewis, The Library (as in n. 39), PP- 391-96; for the text according to ASF, MAP, filza CLXIII, see ibid., pp. 381-go. 41. The inventory (ASF, MAP, filza LXXXVII) was (as in n. 39), pp. 65-1o8. published by Piccolomini The 1512 copy (ASF, MAP, filza CLXV) is partially transcribed by Ames-Lewis, The Library (as in n. 39), PP398-401; and in its entirety in Libro d'inventario dei beni di Lorenzo il Magnifico, ed. M. Spallanzani and G. Gaeta Berteli, Florence 1992 (for the books see pp. 41-50, 152-53). On the history of the Medici private library see also K. K. Miller, 'Neue Mittheilungen fiber Janos Laskaris und die Mediceische Bibliothek', Centralblatt fiir Bibliothekswesen, I, 1884, pp. 333-412; P. Moreaux, 'Florenz, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana', in Aristoteles graecus: Die griechischen Manuskripte des Aristoteles, I, Alexandrien-London, ed. P. Moreaux et al., Berlin and New York 1976, pp. 184-90; V. Branca, Poliziano e l'umanesimo della parola, Turin 1983, pp. 108-56; E. B. Fryde, 'The Library of Lorenzo de' Medici', in idem, Studies in Humanism and Renaissance Historiography, London 1983, pp. 159-227; S. Gentile, 'Lorenzo e Giano Lascaris: il fondo greco della biblioteca medicea privata', in Lorenzo il Magnifico e il suo mondo (convegno Florence 1992), ed. G. C. Garfagnini, internazionale, Florence 1994, pp. 177-94; idem, 'Pico e la biblioteca medicea privata', in Pico, Poliziano (as in n. 31), pp. 85-101; idem, 'I codici greci della biblioteca medicea privata', in I luoghi (as in n. 13), pp. 115-21; E. B. Fryde, 'Lorenzo's Greek Manuscripts, and in particular his own Commissions', in Lorenzo the Magnificent: Culture and Politics, ed. M. Mallett and N. Mann, London 1996, pp. 93-104; idem, GreekManuscripts in the Private Library 2 vols, Aberystwyth 1996. of the Medici, 1469-1510,
238
GIAN MARIO CAO
included only one Sextus Empiricus manuscript, which had originally belonged to Francesco Filelfo.42 It was probably acquired by the Medici library in the summer of 1482, together with other Filelfo manuscripts which Lorenzo had redeemed from the usurer with whom the humanist had pawned them - they were later held for some time at the Milanese branch of the Medici bank and, finally, after Filelfo's death in 1481, moved to Florence.43 The item is recorded as '174 Sexti Embyrici pars, in papyro. - Gre'.44 It can be identified as Filelfo's manuscript on the grounds that it is written on paper and, above all, that the text preserved is incomplete.45 Since, however, this identification has been contested by E. B. Fryde, who believed the manuscript to belong to the personal library of Angelo Poliziano,46 a re-examination of the whole issue is called for. To begin with, Filelfo seems to have been the first Renaissance reader of Sextus's works. It is difficult to determine exactly when and under what circumstances he came to know about these writings. It was definitely not during the years he spent in Constantinople (1420-27), if we consider the evidence that appears in his letter of June 1428 to Ambrogio Traversari.47It was certainly by the beginning of the 1440s, if we evaluate the
42. On this manuscript see p. 239 and ff. below. 43. We learn this from a note concerning a loan made in 1482: 'A M. Agnolo da Monte Pulciano si prest6 a' di primo di agosto detto: Plutarcho, in membrana, in colonne, coperto di rosso, de' libri del Filelfo, greco.' The Ricordi di arienti, libri et altre cose prestate, cominciato questo di 3o di maggio 1480 (ASF, MAP, filza LXII) are published in Piccolomini (as in n. 39), PP. 124-26; and in Protocolli del Carteggio di Lorenzo il Magnifico per gli anni 1473-74, 1477-92, ed. M. Del Piazzo, Florence 1956, pp. 226-29 (229). On the Filelfo manuscripts purchased by Lorenzo see Gentile, 'I codici greci' (as in n. 41), p. 1 16; but above all the statement by the librarista of San Marco, Zanobi Acciaiuoli, in an addition made in January 1496 to the 1495 inventory the books that were recuperati per fratres: concerning 'Item, a quodam amico nostro ego frater Zenobius Acciaiolus habui: 7 Isaac Argyrum et lulium Pollucem, in papiro, in greco, in 4.- folio; et quia scriptum est in tabulis: liber Francisci Philelphi; sciens ego quia omnes fere libros Philelphi emit Laurentius de Medicis post eius mortem ...' (ASF, MAP, filza LXXXIV, published by Piccolomini, as in n. 39, p. 95). There is no useful information on this in F. Ruggeri, 'I1 testamento di Francesco Filelfo', Italia medioevale e umanistica, xxxv, 1992, pp. 345-66. 44. Piccolomini (as in n. 39), p. 83 (no. 400). 45. This conclusion is neither contradicted nor confirmed by the hurried notes which Lascaris made in his brief inventory of Lorenzo's Greek manuscripts, which was drawn up during his second journey to Greece in search of books for the Medici private (1491-92) collection, but perhaps also with the aim of spying; see Gentile, 'Lorenzo' (as in n. 41), pp. 181-82. The inventory is included in BAV MS Vat. gr. 1412, which
preserves travel notes, lists of manuscripts inspected, epigrams, Latin translations of Greek writings and other texts of various kinds, published by Milller (as in n. 41), pp. 367-411: in two different, but related passages of the inventory of manuscripts, in the section 'E"( Inrl'optic Kai iotoptic&', Lascaris noted 'E(4to) 'EniEtptuoiJP.' (fol. 37r), and in the section '(ptk6oo(px ii5', he wrote first 'Yi4tou H1ppOm<Eioi)(pEctcob P.' (fol. 39r) and just afterwards 'iYEtou I Hppmov<Eio)p.' (fol. 39v). What is striking about these notes is not Lascaris'suse of the epithets H)ppbvEtogand 'pE)cctic6gq referring to Sextus (adjectives whose prevalence in the Outlines of Pyrrhonism, at the beginning of Book I for example - see K.JaniEek, SextiEmpiriciindices,3rd revd edn, Florence 2000, pp. 102, 261 -might suggest that this was the text noted by Lascaris), but the inclusion of his works in a section of rhetorical and historical writings. This suggests that in the Medici private collection there was a manuscript containing at least Book II of Against the Professors, entitled FHp6bg qilopuq, a book that is, moreover, absent from Filelfo's codex, which (= Against theProfespreserves only Against theDogmatists sors, vii-xI). It is impossible to say how well Lascaris knew Sextus's works or to what extent his memory assisted him in his drawing up of the disorderly notes concerning Lorenzo's Greek codices. He must have had a certain amount of curiosity regarding Sextus's writings, however, since, during his travels, on a visit to the Greek scribe Demetrios Sguropoulos, he made an entry in the same notebook concerning a codex of the Outlines of Pyrrhonism:'EK TobP' T6)v Eig t& y' T6)v t Kpt piol) p6KEtuca Hi)<p>pov<E>iovv )T(oYE(mvJEEpi no'Cno 6E (fol. 79v). For the quoted passages see Mfiller iliv' (as in n. 41), pp. 373, 375, 402. 46. Fryde, Greek Manuscripts(as in n. 41), p. 807.
IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY SEXTUSEMPIRICUS ITALY
239
Florentinaede lengthy (but unacknowledged) citations from Sextus in his Commentationes his The on events Commentaries exilio ('Florentine Exile').48 acquisition of surrounding the Sextus manuscript are completely unknown, as is the history leading up to it. Indeed, the identification of his codex with MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, reached through hard-won philological research, was not made until fairly recent times;49and the composite nature of this codex has created many problems for those studying the textual tradition of Sextus's works. In the catalogue compiled at the end of the 17oos by Angelo Maria Bandini, librarian of the Laurenziana, it was stated that the volume contained an ancient central section (probably dating from the early decades of the fourteenth century)50 and sixteenth-century additions.5' Mutschmann, in the prolegomena to his Teubner edition of Sextus, failed to recognise the antiquity of the manuscript, which he had only superficially examined, and its central importance for the history of the tradition.52 This point was immediately taken up by August Nebe,53 and in a more detailed manner by Kochalsky.54Mutschmann, following an initial, summary amendment to his article (which was made possible by Girolamo
Traversari et al., Latinae epistolae, 47. Ambrogio Florence 1759, xxiv, ep. XXXII: 'Qui mihi nostri in Italiam libri gesti sint horum nomina ad te scribo, alios autem nonnullos per primas ex Byzantio Venetorum naves opperior. Hi autem sunt Plotinus, Aelianus, Aristides, Dionysius Halicarnasseus, Strabo Geographus, Aristotelis Rethorice, Dionysius HaliHermogenes, carnasseus de numeris et characteribus, Thucydides, Plutarchi Moralia, Proclus in Platonem, Philo Iudaeus, Herodotus, Dio Chrysostomus, Apollonius Pergaeus, Ethica Aristotelis, eius Magna Moralia et Eudemia et Oeconomica et Politica, quaedam Theophrasti de Homeri Ilias, Odyssea; Philostratus Opuscula, Vita Apollonii, Orationes Libanii et aliqui sermones Luciani, Pindarus, Aratus, Euripidis Tragoediae septem, Theocritus, Hesiodus, Suidas; Phalaridis, Hippocratis, Platonis et multorum ex veteribus Philosophis Epistolae; Demosthenes, Aeschinis Orationes et Epistolae pleraque Xenophontis Opera, una Lysiae Oratio, Orphei Argonautica et Hymni, Callimachus, Aristoteles de historiis Animalium, Phisica, et Metaphysica, et de Anima, de Partibus Animalium, et alia quaedam, Polybius, nonnulli sermones Chrysostomi, Dionysiaca, et alii Poetae plurimi.' See also Cao, 'Nota' (as in n. 3), p. 321 n. 8. 48. Regarding the problematic chronology of the Commentationes Florentinae and the work in general see G. M. Cao, 'Tra politica fiorentina e filosofia ellenistica: il dibattito sulla ricchezza nelle Commentationes di Francesco Filelfo', Archivio Storico Italiano, civ, 1997, n. 4). pp. 99-126 (103-04 was put forward by Teresa 49. The identification Lodi, director of the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana from 1933 to 1955, in a handwritten annotation to item 174 of the 1495 Medici inventory published by Piccolomini ('=85.19 [Filelfo]'), added to the offprint
belonging to the library. This identification was later pointed out and discussed by L. Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico e una dispersa enciclopedia delle arti e delle scienze di Angelo Poliziano', Rinascimento, xx, PP. 327-58 (353). to Paolo who kindly Eleuteri, 5o. According informed me of his view. 51. A. M. Bandini, Catalogus codicum graecorum Bibliothecae Laurentianae, 3 vols, Florence 1764-70, III, col. 278: 'Codex Graecus chartaceus Ms. in 4. Saeculi partim XIII. partim XVI. cum notulis quibusdam marginalibus.' 'Die Uberlieferung der 52. See H. Mutschmann, Schriften des Sextus Empiricus', Rheinisches Museum fiir Philologie, LXiv, 1909, pp. 244-83 (245: 'f = Laur. 85.19. Papier. 23,5 x 18 cm 354 ff. Von zwei Handen 1. Hand: Hypotyposen, letztes Blatt von geschrieben: adv. Math. und Dialexeis. 23 Zeilen auf der Seite. XVI. Jahrh. 2. Hand: Adv. Math., sehr lifckenhaft und nach24-27 Zeilen auf der Seite. XV. fissig geschrieben.
1980,
Jahrh.'). 53. A. Nebe,
'Zu Sextus Empiricus', Berliner philoBut logische Wochenschrift, xxIx, 1909, cols 1453-54. already in 1889, while examining the important Sextan codex which belonged to Cardinal Bessarion (the current MS Marc. Gr. Z. 262 [408], about which see below, p. 245), in the Annotazioni to the Elenco dei Lettori che hanno studiato il seguente Manoscritto preserved by the same Venetian library, so that Nebe had compiled the results of his own work: 'Esamin6 diverse lezioni per vedere se il presente codice sia migliore del Laurenziano. Secondo me, il Laurenziano e migliore'. 54. Kochalsky (as in n. 28), pp. 10-11. Regarding this research, aided by the availability of the documentation gathered by Nebe (later passed on to K. see the intervention Kalbfleisch), by Mutschmann
240
GIAN
MARIO
CAO
Vitelli's examination of the codex),55 returned to consult the manuscript in 1909 and 191 1, which led him, finally, to acknowledge its unquestioned value: in the introduction to the second volume of the edition, he even referred to 'the remarkable condition and excellence' of this manuscript, 'which surpasses the others by a long way'.56 Returning to Filelfo, there are numerous indications that there was a copy of Sextus Empiricus's works among his books. In addition to the long passages from Sextus he Florentinaede exilio (and translated at the beginning of the 1440osin the Commentationes which appear here in Appendix I), attention should be given to a number of episodes which provide evidence for his possession of a Sextus codex and which, in particular, reveal its identifying characteristics. In the first place, there is the letter which he sent to Giovanni Aurispa in June 1441, in which, despite reproaching him for his unwillingness to exchange manuscripts, Filelfo agrees to lend him his own Sextus codex.57 Leaving aside a supposed quotation from Sextus regarding Empedocles in Filelfo's ConviviaMediolanensia('Milanese Banquets', completed between 1443 and 1444),58 there is an explicit, though hardly significant, reference to Sextus in a letter to Sassolo da Prato
in Berliner philologische Wochenschrift, xxxIII, cols 197-98. (as in n. 52), 55. Mutschmann, 'Die Uberlieferung' undetected amendment This passed important 478. p. by Floridi, 'The Diffusion' (as in n. 3), p. 84: '5. Laur. 85.19, s. XV-XVI'. 56. Mutschmann, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), p. VI: 'de codicis N mira condicione atque de praestantia eius, qua ceteros longe superat'. Note how, unlike in the article of 19o9, where it was indicated with the siglum 'f', in the critical edition it is referred to as 'N', in honour of Nebe: 'nunc Arthurum Kochalsky secutus himself
1913,
malo "ad Nebei huius codicis optimi investigatoris honorem siglo N ornare"' (p. V). We should remember, nevertheless, the ill-concealed dissatisfaction evident in Giorgio Pasquali's statement that 'il Mutschmann, tener conto di quel avvertito, pote poi nell'edizione frammento, come la sua eta e il suo valore esigevano: se egli non ne abbia fatto ancora troppo poco caso, non importa qui stabilire': see G. Pasquali, Storia della tradizione e critica del testo, 2nd edn, Florence 1952, pp. 37-38. But see also idem, Filologia e storia, Florence 1920, p. 18: 'Sesto Empirico, fonte importantissima per gli studi di filosofia greca, era svisato qua e lA da lacune piccole ma non facili a supplire: ne ha colmate pur ieri gran parte uno studioso tedesco, morto in questa guerra, il Mutschmann, valendosi di una versione medievale. Un altro tedesco, il Nebe, ha trovato qui a Firenze in Laurenziana un manoscritto del medesimo autore sfuggito anche al Mutschmann, che per certe parti del testo presenta lezioni nuove e giuste: vergogna per noi Italiani di non averlo trovato noi.' 57. Milan, Biblioteca Trivulziana (hereafter Triv.) MS 873, fol. 69r: 'Nemo te uno accipiendo facilior. Te rursus nemo difficilior dando. Tu me liberalitatis
plurimum laudas, et hanc virtutem extollis oratione, ac recte tu quidem. Caeterum quam ipse virtutem tanti facere videris, cur eam minus amplecteris? Es tu sane librorum officina. Sed ex tua ista taberna libraria nullus unquam prodit codex, nisi cum quaestu. Quid tandem adeo te libris ingurgitas? Quibus utinam, ut par est, utereris. Ego petij abs te Strabonem geographum excribendi gratia, cum mihi librarius esset domi. Reddita mihi sunt a te verba cum assentatione permulta. Ad rem autem nihil. Petis a me nunc Sextum Empericum eius excribendi gratia. Gero tibi morem, sed ea condicione ne commodatum tibi iure doni ascribas. Quare fac ut ad me meus redeat codex cum suo apud te officio functus fuerit. Vale. Ex Mediolano IIII Idus lunias MCCCCXII.' The letter is also published, with slight differences, in Francesco Filelfo, Epistolarum familiarium libri XXXVII, Venice 1502, fols 31v-32r (and partially in Carteggio di Giovanni Aurispa, ed. R. Sabbadini, Rome 1931, p. 7). This episode, already pointed out by A. Calderini, 'Ricerche intorno alla biblioteca e alla cultura greca di Francesco Filelfo', Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica, xx, by A. (389), was misinterpreted 1913, pp. 204-424 Franceschini, Giovanni Aurispa e la sua biblioteca. Notizie e documenti, Padua 1976, p. 49 ('il codice di Sesto Empirico, inviato al Filelfo nel 1441'), and his misinterpretation was later echoed by C. Bianca, "'Auctoritas" e "veritas": il Filelfo e le dispute tra platonici e aristotelici', in Francesco Filelfo nel quinto centenario della morte (atti del convegno, Tolentino 1981), Padua 1986, pp. 207-47 (213 n. 20o). 58. This hypothesis was put forward by Calderini (as in n. 57), P- 389 n. 6, who failed to notice that Filelfo could not have cited this passage of Sextus because of the large gap in his codex, in which the text of Book I of Against the Logicians is missing the initial pages
241
in August 1444, in which Filelfo discusses the difference between t6 WEO6og ;i7yetyv (to t (to lie).59 The same theme was taken up again almost twenty speak lies) and t6 oei0e1oa years later, in 1462, in a letter from Filelfo to Alberto Zancario.60 Other letters also contain important information regarding the manuscript which serve to confirm its identification. In 1452 Filelfo wrote from Milan to his son Senofonte: See to it that you go on my behalf to Cardinal Bessarion and ask him to loan me for a month Sextus Empiricus, that sharp-witted and learned philosopher of the Peripatetic school. I have a manuscript in my possession, but in many places it is, so to speak,fenestratus.61 Therefore, I want to use his codex, if it is better, to emend mine. If, by chance, his is worse, it will return to its owner more correct. But if he is perhaps unwilling for his codex to travel, I will immediately send mine to him, if he prefers, provided he gets someone to emend it in this way.62 It seems likely that the failure of this attempt prompted years later, in May 1462, this time to Palla Strozzi: Filelfo to repeat his request ten
... I have the five books which Sextus Empiricus committed to writing, with no less learning than
subtlety. In many places, however, they suffer defects caused by the ravages of time, on account of
(Against the Professors, vIi.1-41; see Sextus Empiricus, ed. I. Bekker, Berlin 1842 [hereafter cited as Bekker], pp. 191, 1. 1-198, 1. 23) which contain the information regarding Empedocles and Zeno. 59. MS Triv. 873, fol. 72r: 'Non idem esse to6 y~,og; uto Sextus Empericus libro primo k-yEtv ticX yEi0cmt de grammatica apertissime docet. Nam e{68E0ut, hoc est mentiri, turn existimamur cum id dedita opera facimus in alterius fraudem atque detrimentum cui mentimur. At eib6og ; keyEtv, hoc est mendacium dicere, etiam ad eius utilitatem cui dicimus mendacium fieri a nobis potest, id quod et parentes in filios et medici in aegrotos observare plaerunque consuerunt. Multa enim quandoque dicunt quae norunt non esse vera et dicunt tamen ut illis vel admonitione vel exemplo vel spe aliqua prosint. Praeterea mentiendo non ipsi fallimur sed studemus alterum fallere in eius detrimentum. At durn mendacium dicimus tum etiam secundum grammaticos nostros ipsi fallimur dum nos vera loqui arbitramur. Vale. Ex Mediolano Nonis Augustis MCCCCXLIIII.' The letter is also published in Filelfo, Epistolarum familiarium libri (as in n. 57), fol. 34r. According to Calderini (as in n. 57), P- 389 n. 7, the reference here is to Against the Professors, vI.379; in actual fact, the reasoning is closer to that of Against the Professors, VII.43-44, from which the examples of the doctor and the grammarian appear to be taken (MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, fol. i 16r). 6o. MS Triv. 873, fol. 229V: 'Mendaciorum tria esse genera omnis erudita docet antiquitas. Nam et mentiri aliud est quam mendacium dicere et vanum esse alium quam alterutrum. Qui enim mentitur id agit ut alterum fallat cum eius detrimento cum se ipse non fallit. Loquitur enim ex animi sententia et quod loquitur etiam intelligit. At vanus dum mendacium loquitur, delectandi dumtaxat gratia loquitur cum aliud praeterea curet nihil. Mendacium vero dicimus dupliciter: aut credentes verum a nobis dici quod falsum sit et ita ipsi potius fallimur quam fallamus; aut ad illius commodum cui mendacium dicimus, id quod ut Sextus docet Empericus de medicis adversus aegrotantis saepenumero usu venit. Medici enim permulta aegrotantibus dicunt quae ab omni veritate sunt aliena et ea tamen ut aegrotantibus prosint ...' The letter is also published in Filelfo, Epistolarum familiarium libri (as in n. 57),
fol. 127r.
61. For this term see S. Rizzo, II lessico filologico degli umanisti, Rome 1973, p. 237; and S. Bernardinello, Autografi greci e greco-latini in occidente, Padua 1979, PP. 2-3 (and n. 17). 62. MS Triv. 873, fol. 128r-v: 'Facito quamprimum adeas meo nomine cardinalem Nicaenum Bessarionem atque ab eo petas mihi ut commodet in mensem unum Sextum Empericum ex peripatetica disciplina philosophum et acutum et eruditum. Nam is etiam mihi est, sed pluribus in locis, ut ita loquar, fenestratus. Itaque ex eius codice si melior fuerit cupio meum emendare, sin fortasse deterior suus emendatior redibit ad dominum. Quod si suum codicem peregrinari fortasse noluerit meum istuc, si ita maluerit, propediem mittam, modo ipse eiusmodi emendandi provinciam Vale. Ex Mediolano X Kal. cuipiam delegaverit. Februarias MCCCCLII.' The letter is also published in Filelfo, Epistolarumfamiliarium libri (as in n. 57), fol. 71 r This episode was described in detail by Calderini (as in n. 57), P- 389; and has been dealt with most recently by N. G. Wilson, From Byzantium to Italy: Greek Studies in the Italian Renaissance, London 1992, PP. 51-52.
242
GIAN MARIO CAO
which much is unintelligibleto the reader.Therefore,if you havea manuscript of this kind, I askyou to send it to me at once. It willbe returnedto you witha month.63 Unfortunately, Filelfo received no reply, since it was at this time that Palla died. Nevertheless, this document - with its explicit reference to the 'five books which Sextus Empiricus committed to writing' corresponding to the ancient part of the manuscript which contains vii-xi) - confirms that only the five books of Against theDogmatists (Against theProfessors, Filelfo's copy was MS Laur. Plut. 85.19. This identification was, in any case, probable, given his description of the manuscript asfenestratusin the letter to his son Senofonte. The fact that the fenestraeor lacunae have not been filled and that they are easily identifiable in the manuscript even now64 is a strong argument against the hypothesis that Filelfo obtained Bessarion's codex on loan and even annotated it.65This is illogical when we consider that compared to the fenestrae in Filelfo's codex, Bessarion's copy was, and still is, perfectly intact. 66The strictly paleographical issue, raised by the attribution of some marginalia in Bessarion's copy of Sextus to the hand of Filelfo, is more complex and can only be solved by means of a general consideration of the history and characteristics of the manuscript.
63. MS Triv. 873, fol. 226v: ' ... mihi sunt ii libri quinque quos Sextus Empericus reliquit scriptos non minus docte quam subtiliter. Verum multis in locis temporum calamitate defectus patiuntur, quibus fit ut multa legenti ignoratio offeratur. Quare si huiusmodi codex tibi est ut eum ad me illico mittas rogo. Redibit enim ad te intra mensem. ... Ex Mediolano VI Idus Maias MCCCCLXII.' The letter is also published in Filelfo, Epistolarum familiarium libri (as in n. 57), fol. 125r. No trace remains of a Sextus manuscript belonging to Palla Strozzi; on his library and particularly on the Greek manuscripts see Diller (as in n. 19), pp. 313-17; G. Fiocco, 'La Biblioteca di Palla Strozzi', in Studi di bibliografia e di storia in onore di Tammaro De H. Marinis, 4 vols, Verona 1964, II, pp. 289-31o; Gregory, 'A Further Note on the Greek Manuscripts of Palla Strozzi', this Journal, xLiv, 1981, pp. 183-85; Cantoni Alzati (as in n. 15), PP. 113-15, 183-86; M. L. Sosower, 'Seven Manuscripts Palla Strozzi gave to the S. Giustina Library', this Journal, xLviI, 1984, pp. 190-9 1; idem, 'Palla Strozzi's Greek Manuscripts', Studi italiani difilologia classica, Iv, 1986, pp. 140-51. 64. The following is a complete list of the sections missing from the text: fol. 221r (Fig. 149), 'T'68 Itp6; ~t i.. Tnov Pl biTndtpyEtv6 tp6; (Against 6 dXXccTct(t ... "t' the Professors, viIi.456-57; Bekker p. 386, 11. 10-21 ); fol.
... 'COgtwOekEig ;6yog ini ytkiv ecitv' (Against Bekker p. 390, 11. 2-14); fol. the Professors, VlII.473-76; 224v (Fig. 150), 'vov'?t(X; to; l I o6iSo ... k7yoaot T;g 8k tiKcx;' (Against the Professors, IX.3-4; Bekker p. 392, 11. 6-17); fol. 225r, ... 866at 8' '<ppoveiv"KarowErdtovreg iv, c;g npopeinov' (Against the Professors, Ix.7-1o; Bekker PP. 392, 1. 30-393, 1. 8). In addition, the fenestra at fol. 345r-v (Fig. 151), ''ycae6v [T6 KacKvOED.] Kai &(popgL ... 223r-v,
Ei oLl ov i 6t16cx~cK'rat'(Against the Professors, xI.21 1-20; tr Bekker pp. 587, 1. 18-589, 1. 3), was filled in during the 16th century by the scribe - perhaps Zacharias Callierges, as Paolo Eleuteri has suggested (on Callierges see Repertorium der GriechischenKopisten, as in n. 3o, 1 no. 1 19, 2 no. 156, 3 no. 197) -who completed the final part of the codex (including the Atcoi k6yot); the oldest text finishes definitively at the end of fol. 348v and lacks the concluding pages 'Tcapov, if K~Xct Lvackoyicv ... aig cFenutcig 6ywy;ig 8t'4oovov ncapciSotEv' (Against the Professors,XI.251-57; Bekker pp. 594, 1. 31-596, 1. 5). According to Mutschmann, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), pp. V-VI, the exemplar for these additions was MS Laur. Plut. 85.24, while he presumes that the initial integration of the three books of the Outlines of Pyrrhonism derived from MS Laur. Plut. 85.11. 65. An hypothesis put forward, but unsupported by documentary evidence, by D. Robin, Filelfo in Milan: Princeton 1991, p. 252: 'Marc. Writings 1451-1477, Grec. Z. 262: Sextus Empiricus, Filelfo's marginalia'. Likewise unproven is the statement of Wilson (as in n. 62), pp. 51-52: '... if his hope of obtaining a more intelligible text is disappointed, then at least there will be the consolation of offering some improvements to Bessarion for his copy (no doubt Marc. Gr. 262)'. 66. The passages missing from MS Laur. Plut. 85.19 (for which see above, n. 64) correspond to the following passages in MS Marc. Gr. Z. 262 (408): Laur., fol. 221r = Marc., fol. 255r, 11. 5-16 I Laur., fol. 223r-v = Marc., fol. 257v, 11.8-19 I Laur., fol. 224v = Marc., fol. 259r, 11. 8-18 I Laur., fol. 225r = Marc., fol. 259V, 11.8-15 I Laur., fol. 345r-v = Marc., fols 395v, 1. 16-396', 1. 19 (but in this manuscript and g there is a gap here due to a saut du mime au mime).
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS
IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY
ITALY
243
-n af XX
i-i
Kc~s
o
04-~
A.#,tvov
li
7^
CA40
vo*7cm*Zo
VI
#t
:~~~i.......
i !i
iAi
:~i!
z :_-. ,,,g
:Tip
i-?:i14"
:ik
.....
...... :.
"M?~
149. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, fol. 221 r
244
GIAN MARIO CAO
St
n
tI
~Towapr
NJ Kr9~si~C x9171;v~~olp
i~
~k
T\zu 'rvZr
'Zi~
%OL
ttept"~t~r
IP4
,w7744 144J Ur C kKfCE ~~irX
'~~y
JTae
'
1PI~u.11~
m** # @ 'K w
~4t ljtlnsuv>W
cs~c~tc
L Slll~)(W 4lylU
1~12ccr
t.6Tcsv01V.
1
7n~~U;7~a
/ bl..44
~
I ~i~: 1
u~Jt
k I
D*j;~
~lto7
IMPr,4 by&?pyn jd4r r

vv
411
tfJAwh#er
-
0"Trr
tir-rrw
a*
v
Myrw-
gg
150. Florence,
Biblioteca
Medicea Laurenziana
MS Laur. Plut. 85-19, fol. 224v
IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY SEXTUSEMPIRICUS
245
The inventories made at the time of Bessarion's bequest of his library to the Venetian Republic and in the decades which followed show that the cardinal possessed two manuscripts containing works by Sextus Empiricus: the first, item 75 in his library and item 408 in the inventory drawn up in 1468 (and appended to the letter of donation to the
Venetian
Republic);67
the second, item 12 in the inventory of 1474, a few years after his
death. While the latter appears to have gone missing during subsequent decades,68 the first is easily identifiable with MS Marc. Gr. Z. 262 (408).69 The autograph note allows us to determine the period in which Bessarion came into possession of the codex, since he refers to himself as the 'Cardinal of Tusculum', 70an office which he held from April 1449 to October 1468 (when he became bishop of Sabina).71 Nevertheless, it has been pointed out that many of Bessarion's annotations to the books in his library were made late in his life, at the time of the bequest.72 What this means is that any chronological indications given by the cardinal which are not securely contemporary may be the result of an attempt to provide an historical record for the books in the collection or may simply correspond to the date on which the annotations were made. Given the lack of detailed research on the subject, an important contribution to the dating of the codex is provided by a number of external circumstances. Although its value was long underestimated, the inclusion of the codex in the 1468 inventory constitutes an unequivocal fact. 73 A further and equally precise piece of evidence is found in a letter sent by Bessarion to Michael Apostolis requesting the works of Quintus Smyrnaeus and
67. The most recent publication of the letter and inventory is found in L. Labowsky, Bessarion's Library and the Biblioteca Marciana: Six Early Inventories, Rome 1979, PP. 147-89 (174, item 408: 'Item Sexti akademici philosophi, in pergameno'), together with an edition of the later inventories and a survey of events surrounding the donation. It is important to observe that, although the shelf-mark of the Sextus manuscript changes, it appears in the inventories made in 1474 (item 616: in 1524 (item 'Sextus academaicus, in pergameno'), in 135: 'Sexti Academici complura, in pergameno'), in 1543 (item 158: 'Sestus Empiricus academicus, in 1545/46 (item 8B: 'Sexti academici pergameno'), and in 1575 (item 309: philosophi, in pergameno') et astrologos et 'Sextus Empiricus ad mathematicos alia, in pergameno, in 4"'). There is no evidence of the presence of Sextus's writings in other Venetian libraries of the time: see e.g. S. Connell, 'Books and this Journal, xxxV, their Owners in Venice 1345-1480', 1972, pp. 163-86; M. Zorzi, 'I Barbaro e i libri', in Una famiglia veneziana nella storia: i Barbaro (atti del convegno, Venezia 1993), ed. M. Marangoni and M. Pastore Stocchi, Venice 1996, pp. 363-96. 68. It does not appear in the 1524 inventory or in subsequent ones. It is also missing from the 1468 list: see Labowsky (as in n. 67), p. 45469. See the tables published by Labowsky (as in n. 67), pp. 174, 225, 438, 468; see also the description of the manuscript in Bibliothecae D. Marci Venetiarum Codices graeci manuscripti, ed. E. Mioni, Thesaurus antiquus, I: codices 1-299, Rome 1981, pp. 377-78. For further indications see Cao, 'L'erediti' (as in n. 31), pp. 236-38, no. 85. 70. 'Locus 75 Sexti academaici liber meus b<essarionis, car<dinalis> tusculani ... rfilv &(ia(v iapqpalv'Xeog rob T'Ov ou-)(KXCv.' 71. See L. Mohler, Kardinal Bessarion als Theologe, Humanist und Staatsmann, 3 vols, Paderborn 1923-42, I, p. 260; R. Loenertz, 'Bessarione', in Enciclopedia Cattolica, ii, Florence 1949, cols 1492-98 (1494, 1497); L. in Dizionario biografico degli Labowsky, 'Bessarione', Italiani, Ix, Rome 1967, pp. 686-96 (689, 692); E. Mioni, 'Vita del cardinale Bessarione', Miscellanea Marciana, vI, 1991, pp. 11-219 (o00); M. Zorzi, 'Cenni sulla vita e sulla figura di Bessarione', in Bessarione e l'Umanesimo, ed. G. Fiaccadori et al., Naples 1994, PP. 1-19
(2,6).
72. E. Mioni, 'Bessarione scriba e alcuni suoi collaboratori', in Miscellanea Marciana di studi Bessarionei, Padua 1976, pp. 263-318 (278: 'Questi ex-libris, molti dei quali ritengo scritti quando fu necessario redigere l'inventario, mostrano talvolta la scrittura calligrafica, tal'altra quella corsiva e trasandata degli ultimi anni'). See also idem, 'Vita' (as in n. 71), p. 185(as in n. 52), 73. Mutschmann, 'Die Uberlieferung' p. 247 ('Ende des XV. Jahrh.'), and idem, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), p. VI ('s. XV ex.'). The broad indication ('saec. XV') proposed by Mioni in Codicesgraeci (as in n.
246
GIAN MARIO CAO
Sextus Empiricus.74This letter has been dated to 1454;75 so it is reasonable to set aside any conjecture regarding Bessarion's possession of the Sextus manuscript prior to this date,76 since he must have acquired it some time during the following fifteen years. Let us return now to the problem of the marginalia supposedly entered in Bessarion's copy of Sextus by Filelfo. The fact that these annotations have not been assigned to Filelfo in the main reference works for the study of Greek handwriting in the Renaissance is by no means conclusive.77 More significant is the complete absence of any discussion of this issue in contributions devoted to identifying the scribe of the Bessarion codex (the hand has been variously attributed to Caesar Strategos,78 to the so-called 'Anonymus Ly'7"and
69), p. 377, is probably due to his cautious approach. Attention has rightly been drawn to this significant fact by Eleuteri, 'Note' (as in n. 1), p. 433. 74. Mohler (as in n. 71), III, p. 484 (no. 34): 'KItvTov 6' K&ad "r& HIppc0ve~t 6xbgro ye7yp&ovat, cooi
75. Labowsky, Bessarion 's Library (as in n. 67), p. I1; see also P. Eleuteri's entry in Bessarione e l'Umanesimo (as in n. 71), p. 502 (no. 112). 76. See Cao, 'L'eredita' (as in n. 31), pp. 236-39 (no. 85), where I suggest that Filelfo's detailed request to consult the Sextus codex, conveyed by his son Senofonte to Bessarion in 1452, might support this further backdating. 77. I present here a list (mainly drawn from P. Canart, Paleografia e codicologia greca. Una rassegna bibliografica, Vatican City g991) of repertories and studies of Greek script in the Renaissance in general and more specifically on Filelfo's Greek hand: H. Omont, 'Un nouveau manuscrit de la Rhetorique d'Aristote et la bibliotheque grecque de Francesco Filelfo', La Bibliofilia, ii,
19goo-1,
Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten (as in n. 30), 2 no. 520, 3 no. 5o6; P. Eleuteri, 'Francesco Filelfo copista e possessore di codici greci', in Paleografia e codicologia greca (atti del colloquio internazionale, Berlino, Wolfenbfittel 1983), ed. D. Harlfinger and G. Prato, Alessandria 1991, , pp. 163-79; P. Eleuteri and P. Canart, Scrittura greca nell'umanesimo italiano, Milan 1991, pp. 181-84; C. Brockmann, Die handschriftliche Uberlieferung von Platons Wiesbaden 1992, pp. 22, 146-47; M. Cortesi, Symnposion, 'Libri greci letti e scritti alla scuola di Vittorino da Feltre: fra mito e realta', in I manoscritti greci tra riflessione e dibattito (atti del colloquio internazionale, Cremona I, pp. 4011998), ed. G. Prato, 3 vols, Florence 2000,
16.
pp.
136-40;
M. Vogel
and V. Gardt-
hausen, Die griechischen Schreiber des Mittelalters und der Renaissance, Leipzig 1909, pp. 440-41; X. F. I~aptvilXk,
iov "E'E qveFSg r?ig&vayevviGlo(g',, cwmSt6oyp6pot Xpovmyv 1958'EireZTpig 2rob MeaiwovIcofb "ApZeiov, VIII-IX, 59, pp. 63-124; P. Canart, 'Scribes grecs de la Renaissance: Additions et corrections aux repertoires de et de Patrinelis', Scriptorium, xvII, Vogel-Gardthausen 1963, PP- 56-82; K. A. De Meyier, 'Scribes grecs de la Renaissance: Additions et corrections aux reperPatrinelis et de Canart', toires de Vogel-Gardthausen, Scriptorium, xvIII, 1964, pp. 258-66; J. Wiesner and Schreiber der Renaissance. U. Victor, 'Griechische Nachtrfge zu den Repertorien von Vogel-Gardthausen, Patrinelis, Canart, de Meyier', Rivista di Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici, xvIII-XIX, 1971-72, pp. 51-66; Bernardinello, Autografi (as in n. 61), p. 55, ill. 30; R. Barbour, Greek Literary Hands A.D. 4oo-16oo, 2nd edn, Oxford 1981, p. 29, ill. 106; S. Rizzo, 'Gli umanisti, i testi classici e le scritture maiuscole', in Atti del Convegno internazionale 'II Libro e ii Testo' (Urbino 1982), ed. C. Questa and R. Raffaelli, Urbino 1984, pp. 225-41;
78. On the basis of a comparison with Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale (hereafter BnF) MS graec. 2159, dated 1492 and containing texts by Galen (see Inventaire sommaire des manuscrits grecs de la Bibliotheque Nationale, ed. H. Omont, II, Paris 1888, p. 207), the following theory is put forward by Mutschmann, 'Die Uberlieferung' (as in n. 52), p. 280: 'Der Marcianus Ve, der aus der Bibliothek Bessarions stammt, ist von der Hand der Caesar Strategos geschrieben, etwa am Ende des XV. [correxi ex XVI.] Jahrh., wahrscheinlich auch in Venedig'; on Strategos, in addition to the collection of Fac-similes de manuscrits grecs des XVe et XVIe siecles, ed. H. Omront, Paris 1887; repr. Hildesheim 1974, p. lo, ill. 7, which Mutschmann very likely knew, see the more recent Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten (as in n. 3o), 2 no. 291. 79. D. Harlfinger, Specimina griechischer Kopisten der Renaissance, I, Griechen des 15. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 1974, p. 30, no. 64, where he proposes that MS Marc. Z. 262 (4o8) and other Greek codices in the Biblioteca MarciMS Z. 243; MS Z. 522; ana (MS Z. 215, fols 211r-99r; MS Z. 527, fols 1or-v, 15r-v, 4or-44v) are the work of the same scribe, whose handwriting seems to be so closely linked - but 'auch Identitfit wfire denkbar' - to that of Michael Lygizos (on whom see Album de paleographie grecque, ed. M. Wittek, Ghent 1967, pp. 24-25, ill. 36, and especially Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten, as in n. 30, 1 no. 282, 2 no. 386, 3 no. 465) that he merits the epithet 'Anonymus Ly'. This proposal has been
247
~OF
otfQ
dv LtXktq1Mfl$\
O r C
e kai4vowoo44o
Xe
(Iv
m
o'TlC-
0V
xopow
a4* $4Ao 'rc

',*
n' arb.OPIC64AM VrvOuGhw 'os/&CtO

4X.fv
W4
A7
&\r0&eb
reor -vZ
i rtw4 EJcf
?71?p4WW.
a
0
(9
as
.
asof .
',?
4
5vr414.M.A,44 o~?EO~ob Aiecyb,;i

trm
1.x@,.40.o.. pstyg4
t.esJi5*sn l
, .
.
A.
f4' *pC
Wuc*r s"n lrSZ Ii ?'veiewl tr4A..
9n7Jvr.-yi444
*eau**eitM,
p.vell
ar
/$44W4V;.n4;i t*,
*ef
tt
r7
#SVAe4ss
OW
ALA 4"IW7.0.
~ 4r4na,~v
-1.44r^r1
*evi
*~,49L
)d'VQ*704ee
151. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, fol. 345r
248
GIAN MARIOCAO
to an unspecified collaborator of Bessarion),80 as well as in paleographical studies of the manuscript.8' As for Filelfo, since the request he made to Bessarion through his son Senofonte dates from February 1452, any annotations in the codex would have been made by a man of nearly fifty-five (Filelfo was born in 1398).82 It has been said that the mature phase of the development of his Greek handwriting is marked by a 'fossilisation and hardening'. In other words, his later works are distinguished by a series of characteristic features and by a stylistic quirkiness such as one would expect to find in the 'hand of an old man'.83 Needless to say, none of this is found in the Marciana codex. With only a few exceptions, the marginal notes are limited to the correction or addition of terms and sometimes of rubrics written in the same ink as the headings. These additions are distributed in a uniform manner throughout the more than four hundred folios that make up the manuscript - which, as we have already seen, contains the eleven books comprising Against the while Filelfo's codex (that is, the ancient part of what is now MS Laur. Plut. Professors, 85.19) contained only the five books of Against theDogmatists(Against theProfessors, vII-xI). Nor are there any changes in the handwriting, which remains the same throughout and which bears a close relation to the text. For all these reasons, the hypothesis that Bessarion lent Filelfo a Sextus manuscript, which he then proceeded to annotate, must be rejected. There is no doubt, none the less, that on the basis of what we know - including, of Florentinae de exilio course, the translations from Sextus which appear in the Commentationes - some definite conclusions can be drawn regarding Filelfo's possession and use of the works of Sextus preserved in MS Laur. Plut. 85. 19. I have attempted in a separate study to make a detailed analysis of the ideological importance of Filelfo's reading of Sextus.84 Here it is only necessary to emphasise that although his Latin versions are marked by correctness and literalness, as attested elsewhere,85 he shows no interest whatever in the philosophy of scepticism and an absolute incomprehension of its historical position. Instead of dwelling on the most obvious proof of this - his reference in 1452, more than
taken up by Canart, 'Demetrius Damilas' (as in n. 24), p. 309, and more recently by P. Eleuteri, 'XXXII. Sesto Empirico', in I Greci in Occidente, ed. G. Fiaccadori et al., Venice 1996, pp. 39-40 (no. 44). 8o. Mioni, who only partly accepts the proposal made by Harlfinger, states in Codices graeci (as in n. 69), p. 377: 'Librarius unus, idem qui Marc. Gr. 215 (ff. 243 et 527 (partim) descripsit, etiam hoc 211-299), volumen exaravit.' 81. Eleuteri, 'Note' (as in n. 1), p. 43382. See the entries on Filelfo by V. R. Giustiniani, in Lexicon des Mittelalters, Iv, Munich and Zurich 1989, cols 444-45; and H.-V. Beyer, in Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit, ed. E. Trapp et al., 12 Faszikel:
(no. 1994, pp. 101-03 TopkTxiav - 'Qp"ivtog, Vienna 29803). 83. Eleuteri, 'Francesco Filelfo' (as in n. 77), p. 166 Eleuteri and e sclerotizzazione'); ('cristallizzazione Canart, Scrittura greca (as in n. 77), p. 182 ('mano di un vecchio'). Filelfo's handwriting has been associated with
the so-called 'Chrysokokkes-Schrift' by D. Harlfinger, 'Zu griechischen Kopisten und Schriftstilen des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts', in La Paleographie grecque et byzantine (colloque du C.N.R.S., Paris 1974), Paris 1977, pp. 327I would like to thank Paolo Eleuteri and 43 (333-34). Sebastiano Gentile for discussing this question with me. 84. Some brief indications regarding passages of Against the Ethicists by Sextus Empiricus translated in the Commentationes Florentinae de exilio by Filelfo are found in Cao, 'Nota' (as in n. 3), pp. 319-25; and for analysis of the main passages see idem, 'Tra politica' (as in n. 48), pp. 108-26. 85. See e.g. D. Marsh, 'Francesco Filelfo's Translation of the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum', in Peripatetic Rhetoric after Aristotle, ed. W. W. Fortenbaugh and D. C. Mirhady, New Brunswick and London 1994, PP- 349-64 (esp. 355, referring to the classification by R. Sabbadini, La scuola e gli studi di Guarino Guarini veronese,Catania 1896, p. 135: 'traduzione strettamente letterale col Filelfo').
IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY SEXTUSEMPIRICUS
249
ten years after acquiring the manuscript, to Sextus Empiricus as a 'sharp-witted and learned philosopher of the Peripatetic school'86 - my aim is to point out his rather shallow, unconscious return to themes that were critical of the ancient philosophical tradition, a tradition which was enthusiastically revived at this time in the intellectual milieu of humanism to which Filelfo himself belonged. Furthermore, Filelfo's interest in Sextus cannot be defined as merely doxographical, since his recourse to the authority of the ancients took different forms and had different Florenobjectives. The fact that Sextus's name is never mentioned in the Commentationes tinae, while many of his statements about Timon, Xenocrates, Crantor, Zeno, Cleanthes and Chrysippus are translated into Latin, does not permit us to conclude that Filelfo considered the book Against theEthicists (from which all the citations are taken) to be merely an anthology of useful quotations. The passages which Filelfo took from Sextus are far the most significant borrowings, in both length and complexity, in the whole of the Commentationes Florentinae;and they concern problems of an ethical nature, such as the classification of things into good, bad and indifferent, and the definition of each of these
categories (Against the Professors, XI.3-4 1). In Filelfo's literal Latin versions of these texts,
his propensity towards gnomic pronouncements gives way to displays of conceptual virtuosity, so that the contrast between dogmatic assertions (mainly Stoic) and sceptical refutations leaves the reader with neither certainties nor doubts, but merely the impression of a sterile technical facility. Florentinae can be found in the The underlying purpose of the Commentationes succession and alternation of themes, genres and languages. From this perspective, philosophy plays a significant role since it broadens the expressive possibilities of a text which moves from the lowest and most vulgar registers used in the invectives against the Medici to the abstract discussions of ethical classifications taken from Sextus. The latter, accurately translated by Filelfo, are occasionally relevant to passages in the Commentationes Florentinae.Nevertheless, his merits as a Hellenist reveal themselves, in this context, as limitations: in the end, his precision did little service to the cause of scepticism, which would not establish itself within the 'Republic of Letters' until well into the following century.
III. MORE ON FILELFO'S SEXTUS MANUSCRIPT
It now seems clear that item 174 of the 1495 Medici inventory can be identified with Filelfo's codex fenestratus. But this only goes part of the way to answering Fryde's denial that Filelfo owned the manuscript in question, since his view is based directly on its possession by Angelo Poliziano. It is therefore worth summarising the main points surrounding the issue. Poliziano's ownership of MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, which Fryde reaffirmed several times with varying degrees of certainty,s7 is based on the identification of the humanist's annotations in the central and oldest part of the codex. According to Fryde: 'He annotated
86. See p. 241 above. 87. Fryde, GreekManuscripts (as in n. 41), pp. 23, 233, 239, 294, 308, 719, 807.
250
GIAN MARIO CAO
very fully this part of the manuscript', although his 'marginal notes in it have been much damaged by damp and are now often illegible.'88 In actual fact, the only support for this two-fold hypothesis - that Poliziano copiously annotated the manuscript and that it suffered serious damage from damp - is found in a few passages previously pointed out by Lucia Cesarini Martinelli in her exemplary reconstruction of Poliziano's notebooks or zibaldoni.89 Despite having inspected the manuscript several times,90 Fryde was unable to find further traces of Poliziano's reading of the codex - which in any case would not imply ownership ipsofacto- apart from one additional annotation.91 And this, after having denied Filelfo's possession of the manuscript solely on the grounds that it lacks any arms or ownership notes,92 a criterion which his own account is equally incapable of satisfying. Fryde's account is further undermined by his incorrect references to Against the As is well known, this work is composed of eleven books: six under the heading Professors. of Against theProfessors and five entitled Against theDogmatists(Against theProfessors, vii-xI), written first.9very probably Fryde, however, states that the work is composed ofjust eight books,94 the first six of which are supposedly transmitted in the oldest part of MS Laur. Plut. 85.19,9:5 except, that is, for the last book, Against theEthicists(Against theProfessors, xi), which is 'a later addition'96- a fact which was overlooked in what he refers to as Angelo Maria Bandini's 'slovenly' and misleading description.97 In reality, this last book is not a later addition at all, as is apparent from the many studies of the codex, as well, of course, as a careful examination of it. Not by chance do the long passages from Sextus translated and paraphrased by Filelfo (set out in the Appendix below) come precisely from Against the Ethicists,which is preserved almost entirely in MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, apart from the concluding page (Against theProfessors, XI.251-57; Bekker pp. 594, 1. 31-596, 1. 5). All this confusion probably derives from Fryde's reliance on information from the inventory which Fabio Vigili drew up between 1508 and 15 o of the Greek and Latin manuscripts returned to Cardinal Giovanni de' Medici, the son of Lorenzo the Magnificent and later to become Pope Leo X, following events subsequent to the fall of the Medici regime in 1494.98 In the Greek list, transmitted in BAV MS Barb. lat. 3185, item 138 reads: 'Six books of Commentaries on the Professors by Sextus Empiricus',"''on the basis of which Fryde maintained that it was necessary to rearrange all other information and reject all previous accounts.'() It is exactly this point, however, which betrays the fragility of
88. Ibid., pp. 718, 308. 89. Cesarini Martinelli (as in n. 49), PP. 353-54. Manuscripts(as in n. 41), p. 322 n.. 9o. Fiyde, Greek 246. 9 1. 'Cum omnia quae fiunt ex eo fieri quod non est', on fol. 117r (Fryde, ibid., p. 322 n. 246a). g)2. Fryde, ibid., p. 294. 93. W. Kroll, 'Sextus [4]', in Paulys Real-Encyclopddie ed. G. Wissowa, 11.4, derclassischen Altertunmswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1923, cols 2057-61 (20o57); J. Allen, 'The Skepticism of Sextus Empiricus', in Aufstiegand Niedered. W. Haase and H. Temporini, Welt, gang derRiimischen II.36/4, Berlin and New York 199o, pp. 2582-607 (2583). J. Barnes, Introduction to Sextus Empiricus, ed. J. Annas and J. Barnes, 2nd Outlines of Scepticrism,
revd edn, sceptical works. Cambridge 2000, pp. XIII-XIV, is more regarding the possibility of dating Sextus's
94. Fryde, GreekManuscripts (as in n. 41), p. 293. 95. Ibid., p. 294 (repeated also on pp. 3o8, 719,
807).
96. Ibid.
97. Ibid.
98. On this Vigili inventory (not to be confused with
the other Vatican inventory made by Vigili for Julius II; published by Devreesse, Le Fonds, as in n. `2o, pp. 15380; see n. '3 above) see esp. Fryde, 'The Library' (as in
1. 41).
99. 'Sexti Empirici Commentariorumr maticos libri sex' (fol. 28r).
in
mnathe-
251
his own account; for how was it possible for Poliziano to transcribe or translate in his notebooks passages from both the Outlines of Pyrrhonism and Against the Professors, when he had at his disposal a codex containing only the five books of Against the Dogmatists (Against the Professors, vII-xI)? Moreover, Poliziano believed that Sextus's works were divided into ten
books, returning to a problematic suggestion made by Diogenes Laertius (Ix. 1 16)101 but,
above all, following what he found in the Greek manuscript which he used in his study of Sextus Empiricus. These facts provide indisputable proof that this manuscript could not have been MS Laur. Plut. 85.19.102 Yet another difficulty arises from the Vigili inventory itself. Entry 138, mentioned above, is not the only reference to this work of Sextus. A little further on Vigili registered a second Sextus manuscript, which he describes in more detail: 152. Ten books of Commentaries on the Professors by Sextus Empiricus, at the end of which the by Sextus Empiricus. The end of the ten books of following is written: The tenth book of Commentaries It is doubtful whether the book written from Commentaries accordingto contradiction bySextustheSceptic. beginning to end in Doric dialect is by Sextus. It concerns, so it seems, moral philosophy, for in it the good and bad, the ugly and the beautiful, the just and the unjust, truth and falsehood are discussed in various chapters; and it is incomplete." 3
This description is not as helpful as one might have hoped. The combination of the Greek colophon copied by Vigili and the clear allusion to a work in Doric dialect made up of contrasting arguments does not lead us directly to a known manuscript with Against
the Professors in ten books and the Atocot X6yot. As for the Greek colophon, it is also found in other Sextus manuscripts containing the Outlines of Pyrrhonism at the beginning.104 Additional difficulties in Vigili's description arise from the division of Sextus's work into ten books, whether or not this includes the Outlines of Pyrrhonism. Consequently, the of item 152 with MS Laur. Plut. 85.24 suggested by Fryde,105 although identification of the Greek colophon and the presence of the the exact correspondence supported by in this ends codex, Atocoi X6yot up decidedly weakened. Besides, Fryde's claim that 'the Medici library possessed ... a complete version of the works of Sextus'"(6 rules out MS
in the posthumously Soo. But see the comments E. B. volume: published Fryde, The Early Palaeologan Renaissance (2 6zi-c. 136o), Leiden, Boston and Cologne 2000, p. 201, referring to Cao, 'L'eredita' (as in n. 31), pp. 234-35, no. 84. ilou6F' coiea lo1. Hpo66o zog; 6 'EutpEptc6g;, o' ' a tz 8Kca tzv XKE'ntr&Wv K-a KhtXXtra'. Diogenes Laertius, Vitae philosophorum, 2 vols, ed. M. Marcovich, Stuttgart and Leipzig 1999,1, p. 7o8, 11. 12-13. 102. See also D. F.Jackson, 'Fabio Vigili's Inventory of Medici Greek Manuscripts', Scriptorium, I1II, 1998, pp. esp. 200. 103. '152. Sexti Empirici in Mathematicos commentariorum libri decem. In quorum fine ita scriptum est:
199-204,
Y'Xtoij
tcOv tob
iO Vtj'vrt&v t"6 KOarov. TC2og; 'ElnetpuobnO &v'ripprlotv 86CK (Cro) "rcovnp6g KCn'et1Cob1 jnogtvrltOrwmv. Liber qui an Sexti Empirici sit, dubitatur,
dorica lingua scriptus ex principio ad finem, de morali ut videtur philosophia. In eo enim de bono et malo, de turpi et pulchro, de iusto et iniusto, de veritate et mendacio variis capitibus disputatur, et est imperfectus'. BAV MS Barb. lat. 3185, fol. I would like to thank 2V. Giorgio Piras for checking the transcription of this passage in the manuscript. 104. E.g. Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (hereafter BSB) MS gr. 79 (fol. 341r), where Against the Professors and the Atoooti 6yot are preceded by the Outlines ofPrrhonism; for descriptions of this and other Sextus manuscripts see Sextus Empiricus, HPOE MOYEIKOYZ. Against the Musicians (Adversus musicos), ed. D. Davidson Greaves, Lincoln and London 1986, p. 77. lo5. Fryde, Greek Manuscripts (as in n. 41), pp. 294950o6. Ibid.
252
GIAN MARIOCAO
Laur. Plut. 85-24 as a possible candidate for identification with Vigili's entry, since the composite nature of this manuscript was shown by both Mutschmann and Kochalsky, while its dual paternity was demonstrated by Canart.107 So, even if, for the sake of argument, we grant Fryde's hypothesis that MS Laur. Plut. 85.19 was owned by Poliziano, Vigili's inventory provides no resolution to the problems involved in such an identification. Furthermore, the inventory carried out by Lascaris confirms that at least until 1495 Filelfo's codex was the only Sextus manuscript in the Medici private library;08s while Poliziano's death in 1494 requires us to search for older manuscripts and sources of evidence. Nor should we overlook the fact that Poliziano's notebooks contain no trace of the Atooi X6yot and that, despite his problematic division of Sextus's writings into ten books, he distinguishes clearly between the Outlinesof Pyrrhonism and Against theProfessors.
IV. SEXTUS IN SAN MARCO
It will be useful here to recall that, while Filelfo's Sextus manuscript was the only one in the Medici private library,'09the other Florentine library linked to the Medici family the library of the Dominican Convent of San Marco, known as the Medici public library or Medicea pubblica - contained another important exemplar of Sextus Empiricus, MS Laur. Plut. 85.11.110 This codex was probably acquired by the San Marco library around 1499, when its owner, Giorgio Antonio Vespucci, entered the convent bringing with him as donations about ten Greek manuscripts, a large number of Latin ones and several incunabula."' His will, drawn up in May 1497, clearly shows the importance which he attributed to the volume containing Sextus's works:
107. Kochalsky (as in n. 28), p. o0; Mutschmann, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), pp. XI-XII, in which MS Laur. Plut. 85.11 is said to be the exemplar of the Outlines (to be distinguished, therefore, from the of Pyrrhonism manuscript which has controversially been identified as the exemplar of the books comprising Against the More recently Canart, 'Demetrius Damilas' Professors). (as in n. 24), p. 311, has attributed the oldest section of MS Laur. Plut. 85.24 (fols 102r-o9v, 11 r-352r, according to the recent numbering in pencil found in the lower right-hand margin) to the 'librarius Florentinus', while ascribing the execution of the 16th-centurypart to the hand of Camillo Zanetti (fols 3r-g99v,101r-v, 1 Ior-v; as in der Griechischen on Zanetti see Repertorium Kopisten, n. 3o, 1 no. 212, 2 no. 299, 3 no. 351). o08.See above, p. 238. 109. The Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana now holds a number of manuscripts of Sextus's works datable to the 15th century (see Floridi, 'The Diffusion', as in n. 3, pp. 84-85) but which did not become part of its collection until the following century. It was only because he failed to take account of this fact that R. H. Popkin, 'Introduzione all'edizione italiana', in idem, La storia Da Erasmoa Spinoza,Milan 1995, P. XIV, delloscetticismo. could maintain that, at the time of Savonarola (t 1498),
there were five Greek manuscripts of Sextus in the library of San Marco. Equally flawed is the statement in R. R. Bolgar, The Classical Heritage and its Beneficiaries, 2nd edn, Cambridge 1977, p. 489: 'Before 1492. Three MSS of Sextus Empiricus (one perhaps Cod. Laur. LXXXV, 1i) in the catalogue of the library of Lorenzo dei Medici.' 1io. See Bandini (as in n. 51), III, cols 270-71; Mutschmann, 'Die Uberlieferung' (as in n. 52), p. 248; Kochalsky (as in n. 28), p. o; Mutschmann, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), pp. V-IX; D. Harlfinger andJ. Harlfinger, Wasserzeichenaus griechischen Handschriften, I, Berlin 1974, no. 46; W. Cavini, 'Appunti sulla prima diffusione in occidente delle opere di Sesto Empirico', Medioevo, III, 1977, pp. 1-20 (16-17); Cao, 'L'eredit6' (as in n. 31), pp. 239-40, no. 86; L. Cesarini Martinelli and A. Daneloni, 'Manoscritti e edizioni', in Pico, Poliziano (as in n. 31), pp. 305-43 (337-38, no. 142). 1 1 i. See Ullman and Stadter (as in n. 36), pp. 38-43, and the important review of their book by F. Di Benedetto, Studi Medievali, xiv, 1973, PP- 947-6o (949-50); A. C. de la Mare, The Handwriting of Italian Humanists, I, Oxford 1973, pp. 106-38; A. F. Verde, 'La Congregazione di San Marco dell'Ordine dei Frati Predicatori: Memorie il "reale" della predicazione savonaroliana',
253
And because the testator himself has stated and affirmed that among those very books of his are two ancient Greek books which are precious because they are greatly esteemed and similar ones are very rarely found. One is called 'Pironia', the other Ammonius with other Aristotelian commentators, treating logic and philosophy. The testator himself wanted and ordered that within one month after his death they should be consigned to the said brothers of San Marco and chained in their own library, since in this way they cannot be removed from the said library nor will anyone be permitted to remove them from there unless an accurate copy has previously been made from the books themselves and has been carefully edited."2 The colophon shows, furthermore, that the copying of the text was completed on 8
September 1464 (year 6973 of the Byzantine era) by the Greek scribe Thomas Prodromites (Fig. 152)."1- Carlo Vecce has recently argued that the manuscript can be traced to the abbey of San Nicola di Casole at Otranto,"14 where Prodromites stayed towards the mid-146os following the fall of Constantinople. Vecce cites as evidence the colophon to a codex of Francesco Barbaro's letters, MS Vat. lat. 3440, dating from July 1467.-15 He also claims that it is certain that the abbey's library contained a manuscript of Sextus Empiricus's works, because Antonio Galateo stated in his Esposizione del Pater Noster (1504o8) that he recalled having read, as a young man, a very ancient but fragmentary Greek manuscript entitled Outlines of Pyrrhonism which was found in the Terra di Otranto.1"6 A more important testimony is Galateo's letter to Pietro Summonte De suo scribendi genere (ep. XXXIV), datable to 1512-13:
Domenicane, xiv, 1983, pp. 151-237 (162-63, 194-95). On Vespucci's library see also the recent articles by F. Gallori, 'Un inventario inedito dei libri di Giorgio Antonio Vespucci', Medioevo e Rinascimento, Ix, 1995, pp. 215-31 (esp. 227, item 123: 'Pironii Sexti philosophica, in papiro, in corio rubro', not identified by the author); and F. Gallori and S. Nencioni, 'I libri greci e latini dello scrittoio e della biblioteca di Giorgio Antonio Vespucci. Introduzione e catalogo', Memorie Domenicane, (in which, again, the Sextus 1997, pp. 155-359 xxvIII, codex is not identified: p. 191). 112. De la Mare, The Handwriting (as in n. i11), p. 114: 'Et quia ipse testator dixit et affirmavit quod inter ipsos eius libros sunt duo libri graeci antiqui et pretiosi eo quod magno estimentur et rarissime [rarissimi ED.] eorum similes reperiuntur quorum unus Pironia, alter Ammonius cum aliis commentatoribus Aristotelis nuncupatur, de logica ac philosophia tractantes, hos duos libros voluit ac mandavit ipse testator quod infra unum mensem tunc proxime futurum post eius mortem consignentur fratribus Sancti Marci predicti et in ipsa eorum libreria incatenentur, cum hoc quod extra dictam libreriam extrahi non possint nec ulli extrahere inde liceat, nisi prius ex ipsis libris emendata copia extrahatur ac recognita diligenter.'
manuscript have followed Bandini's erroneous dating of 1465; some exceptions include Vogel and Gardthausen (as in n. 77), P. 150; Harlfinger, Specimina(as in n. 79), p. 32, no. 69; C. Vecce, 'Esercizi di traduzione nella Napoli del Rinascimento. II: Alessandro d'Afrodisia, Altilio e Galateo', Annali. SezioneRomanza.Istituto Universitario Orientate, xxxII, 1990o,pp. 103-37 (135)On Thomas Prodromites see Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten(as in n. 30), 2 no. 188, 3 no. 237. 114. See Vecce (as in n. 113), pp. 128-37 (? 3: 'Sesto Empirico a Casole'). 1 15. Francesco Barbaro, Epistolario, I, La tradizione manoscrittae a stampa, ed. C. Griggio, Florence 1991, pp. 162-66 (163, fol. 46': 'Expliciunt foeliciter per me Thomam Constantinopolitanum in civitate Ydronti in ede divi Nicholai de Casulis. Anno domini M"CCCC?LXVIII? XV? indictione XXI? Iulii'). See also Vecce (as in n. 113), p. 136, and Kristeller, IterItalicum (as in n. 18), vi, p. 332.
116. Vecce (as in n. 113), p.
129,
who draws, with
noVhoi Sionota coXp Pipfou XpovoiX 113- 'E'T)XEt LV 6 't)og 6 tamba ypdycag Om oaw 6 npo6poitrlg. 660( X0E6g 6 rl" cen6rtLJ3pipw ty' iltACv Xpptor6 ,g-qoy' iv&ttWvog (fol. 345v). The great majority of studies devoted to the
some changes, on the text printed in La Giapiga e varii opuscolidi Antonio deFerrariis dettoil Galateo, 4 vols, Lecce 1867-71, III, p. 213 (which I have not been able to consult): 'ed io me ricordo, essendo iovane, averlo letto in un libro antiquissimo greco, in certi fragmenti da persone trovati in terra de Otranto, soprascripto nufhiv'to v iunorun6rocmv'.
254
GIAN MARIO CAO
vi ?4 .gC4t4'
i*
#
i
* r
F. ad
'06)44%.
:, :.....
Is. il
a t
.....k i. . ......... . .......
P..
*i * * | :
-:;40
..:
:i
.....
r
.......
_r
'44*
*clr
...
... .
..
i '.
A..-
$ ;' .... .... ....
...
...... . ......
....
: +
152. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, fol. 345v
255
When Pyrrho of Elis wrote against logic, physics, ethics, that is, against good morals, he gained more fame than others who dealt most diligently with these subjects. Our friend Sergius, a most diligent investigator of ancient books, found some fragments of this commentary here in the Salentine and I peninsula in a certain ancient and ruined casula. The work is entitled the Outlinesof Pyrrhonism; have discovered that Cicero repeated many things verbatim from it.117 The 'ancient and ruined casula' was actually the abbey of San Nicola di Casole after the sack of Otranto in 1480 (while it is easy to identify 'our friend Sergius' as Sergio Stiso da Zollino).11s Our main source for the events surrounding the fate of Sextus's works in Otranto is, however, a request made in a letter of September 1230 from the metropolitan of Corfu, Giorgio Bardanes, to Giovanni Grasso, notary to Frederick II and a poet who travelled in the circle of abbot Nicola Nettario: and If it so pleases God that we may be together, bring two books for me: that is, Homer's Odyssey something of those philosophical works which you have published, that is, the 'Pyrrhonia'. Since you, on the other hand, desire to learn from my books, I give [them] to you with a ready and extended hand.119 According to Vecce, if the 'Pyrrhonia' mentioned here correspond to Sextus Empiricus's works ('the notary could have had a transcription of it made from a manuscript rescued by Nettario in the East'),120 then it is likely that MS Laur. Plut. 85.11, completed by Thomas Prodromites in September 1464, was indeed copied at San Nicola di Casole. This theory certainly deserves serious consideration, and it is not difficult to imagine how the manuscript might subsequently have come to Florence. Nevertheless, it does not take sufficient account of the timing of Prodromites's movements; for while it is not certain that he was at Casole in July 1467,121 we know for sure that he was in Constantinople during the summer of 1466 - according to the colophon of BAV MS Ottob. gr. 395, dated
117. Antonio De Ferrariis Galateo, Epistole, ed. A. Altamura, Lecce 1959, p. 217: 'Pyrro eliensis plus famae adeptus est cum contra logicam, physicam, ethicam, hoc est contra bonos mores scripsit, quam tractaverunt: plerique alii, qui de his diligentissime cuius commentariorum fragmenta aliqua Sergius noster librorum veterum indagator hic apud diligentissimus Salentinos in quadam antiqua casula et ruinosa reperit, Et ab hoc quorum titulus est Hi le5vi' v ionoriunoemv. Ciceronem multa retulisse ad verbum deprehendi.' 118. See A. Jacob, 'Sergio Stiso de Zollino et Nicola Petreio de Curzola. A propos d'une lettre du Vaticanus Gr. 1o 19', in Bisanzio e 17talia. Raccolta di studi in memoria di Agostino Pertusi, Milan 1982, pp. 154-68 (165-66). 119. J. M. Hoeck and R. J. Loenertz, Nikolaos-Nektarios von Otranto Abt von Casole, Ettal 1965, p. i86, 11.47-51: 'Si ita Deo placuerit, ut una simus, duos nobis affer libros, Homeri videlicet Odysseam et aliquid eorum quae philosophica edidisti operum, Pyrrhonia videlicet. Siquidem vero tu ex nostris libris econtra accipere cupis, dabo tibi veloci et extensa manu.' But see also G. Cavallo, 'Libri greci e resistenza etnica in Terra
d'Otranto', in Libri e lettori nel mondo bizantino. Guida storicae critica,ed. G. Cavallo, Rome and Bari 1982, pp.
155-78. 120. Vecce (as in n. 113), P. 134: 'del quale il notaio
poteva aver curato una trascrizione da un codice salvato da Nettario in Oriente'. The 'Pyrrhonia' is attributed instead to Giovanni Grasso in Poeti bizantini di terra d'Otranto nel secolo XIII,ed. M. Gigante, 2nd edn, Naples 1979, PP. 46-4712 1. Note the doubts raised by C. Griggio concerning the identification of 'Thomas Constantinopolitanus' of BAV MS Vat. lat. 3440 with 6 emlt;o Hpo6popirlG of MS Laur. Plut. 85.1 1 and m0ot&a 6 Hpo6p61wto; of BAV MS Vat. Ottob. gr. 395: both KctzpopX~6,t because up until that time the activity of writing at the monastery of Casole was confined to Greek texts, and because a paleographical comparison between the colophons of MSS Vat. lat. 3440 and Vat. Ottob. gr. 395 suggested to Guglielmo Cavallo that 'le mani siano differenti' (Barbaro, Epistolario,as in n. l 15, p. 163). The speculative nature of the identification was, however, recognised by Vecce (as in n. 1 13), p. 136 n. 72.
256
GIAN MARIO CAO
at Constantinople on 20oJuly 1466 and signed 'Em[t<&>f, Hpo8p6[ttog6 Kca(popiaXc'.122 So if the different pieces of evidence taken from Thomas's autograph notes are to be used in order to date his scribal activity, then he must have written the Sextus manuscript at the time of his stay in Constantinople, which lasted at least until the end of the summer of 1466. Even if these colophons are not taken to imply a strict chronology, Prodromites's (possible) presence at San Nicola di Casole in 1467 cannot be used to support the theory that the Sextus codex was written in the Otranto abbey three years earlier. Added to these difficulties is the insuperable obstacle raised by Galateo's various statements regarding the fragmentary state of the Sextus codex.l23These show that he cannot have been referring to MS Laur. Plut. 85.1 1, a codex which is completely intact. V. THE HUMANISTIC SEXTUS: FICINO,PICO, POIIZIANO It appears, in any case, that MS Laur. Plut. 85.1 1 was the text of reference in Laurentian Florence, presumably by virtue of its completeness. In fact, unlike Filelfo's codex, which contained only the five books of Against the Dogmatists,this exemplar included both the Outlines of Pyrrhonismand all the books of Against the Professors. Paleographical analyses of the manuscript confirm this hypothesis: besides the ownership notes made, first, by Giorgio Antonio Vespucci and, later, by the Convent of San Marco,124they have also brought to light some autograph annotations, cross-reference marks and corrections in the handwriting of some of the most prominent figures in Lorenzo's circle: Angelo Poliziano, Giovanni Pico della Mirandola and, probably, Marsilio Ficino. As far as Ficino is concerned, he is quite likely to have been aware of ancient sceptical currents of thought. This is an assumption based more on the intellectual climate of his times - we need only think of Ambrogio Traversari's Latin translation of the Lives of Eminent Philosophersby Diogenes Laertius, containing a 'Life of Pyrrho',125or Cicero's Academica'6 - than on the annotation probably added by him to the verso of the front flyleaf of the Laurenziana manuscript: 'Sextus the Pyrrhonian of the sceptical sect';'97 or
122. Codices manuscripti graeci Ottoboniani Bibliothecae Vaticanae, ed. E. Feron and F. Battaglini, Rome 1893, pp. 207-08; Vogel and Gardthausen (as in n. 77), p. 15o; Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten (as in n. 30), 2 no. 188 (ill. 104 ). 123. See above, nn. 116, 117. See also Vecce (as in n. 113), p. 29 n. 53, where he proposes that '... da persone potrebbe essere emendato, come vedremo, in de Pirrone'. 124. Thanks to the restoration of the codex in 1972, the recto of the front flyleaf, which was previously stuck down to the inside cover and consequently inaccessible, has revealed some valuable annotations: 'Liber [interlinear olim] Georgii Antonii Vespucci Kxai (pikwv'; 6o the change of ownership following its donation to the convent is demonstrated by the note 'Conventus Sancti Marci de Florentia ordinis predicatorum habitus a fratre Giorgio Antonio Vespuccio filio eiusdem conventus' and by the indication, in the same hand, of its position
in the library, 'In bancho Graecae Latinae ex parte 2 occidentis' - also confirmed by the Este inventory, which lists as item 1142: 'Sexti Empyrici Piromorum dogmatum libri decem': see Ullman and Stadter (as in n. 36), p. 257; Branca (as in n. 41), pp. 118-19. 125. See M. Gigante, 'Ambrogio Traversari interprete di Diogene Laerzio', in Ambrogio Traversari nel 17 centenario della nascita (convegno internazionale, Camaldoli and Florence 1986), ed. G. C. Garfagnini, Florence 1988, pp. 143-75126. See C. B. Schmitt, Cicero Scepticus: A Study of the Influence of the Academica in the Renaissance, The Hague 1972. 127. Cao, 'L'erediti' (as in n. 31), p. 239, 'sextus pyrronius de secta sceptica'. On the relationship between Giorgio Antonio Vespucci and Ficino see Marsilio Ficino e il ritorno di Platone, exhib. cat. (Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana 1984), ed. S. Gentile et al., Florence 1984, pp. 86-87, 118, 132-34-
257
the various references to the sceptics present in his works.128 Mention of the Academic philosophers in his youthful tract De quatuor sectis philosophorum ('On the Four Sects of 1457) should be understood as an allusion to the ancient Academy, that Philosophers', More relevant, though still quite general, references are found in his Liber is, to Plato."9de voluptate ('A Book on Pleasure', 1457), particularly in the preface: There are three styles of philosophical discourse. The first is when, in disputing, we defend and approve a certain side of a question, as the Peripatetics and Stoics did. In the second, which was used by almost all Academics and Socratics, after setting out a question, we relate diverse views and arguments regarding the issue at stake, so that having put forward many positions and compared them with each other, we may select from among them the most probable and likely. The third style was especially suited to the sceptics, who were rejected by all the more excellent philosophers, since they think that everything is a matter of indifference, nor did they have anything certain or probable to follow, for they mingled and mixed together things which are separate and distinct in the order of nature. Therefore, from all these styles, I have decided at this time that the method of discourse I should propose for myself is that of the Academics and Socratics.l'3 An explicit reference to the sceptics is also found in Ficino's commentary on the Philebus (1469), chapter XXIX: 'when [Protarchus] said that the goal of a discussion is discovery, not uncertainty, he is making it obvious that Plato proposes to pass on doctrine, not ambiguities. When the sceptics and Arcesilas and Carneades pursued ambiguities, they fell away from Plato."'I Just before this, in chapter XXVIII, Ficino mentions Pyrrho of Elis:
Recorded in detail in the 'Indice degli autori negli scritti del Ficino', compiled by P. O. Kristeller, II pensiero filosofico di Marsilio Ficino, revd edn, Florence 1988, p. 489. For an interesting analysis of Ficino's attitude to scepticism see M. A. Granada, 'Apologetique platonicienne et apologetique sceptique: Ficin, Savonarole,Jean-FranCois Pic de la Mirandole', in Le scepticisme au XVIe et aui XVIie siecle, ed. P.-F. Moreau,
128.
citati
(15-19). Academicorum he discipline veterum, Peripateticorum, Stoicorum, Epicureorum. autem veterum princeps extitit Plato Academicorum Atheniensis': the tract is published in P. O. Kristeller, Supplementum ficinianum, 2 vols, Florence 1937, II, pp. 7-11 (7); see also Marsilio Ficino (as in n. 127), pp. no. 19 (and also pp. 11-12, no. io, where a 22-23, connection with his reading of Diogenes Laertius is assumed); and also G. Santinello, 'Note sulla storiografia filosofica nell'etia moderna', in La storiografiafilosofica e la sua storia, Padua 1982, pp. i03-27 (1o07-12). 130. Marsilio Ficino, Opera ... omnia, 2 vols, Basle 1576; facs. repr. Turin 1983, I, p. 986: 'Tria vero sunt disserendi genera. Unum quo ... apud Philosophos certam aliquam quaestionis partem disputando defendimus, atque approbamus, ut Peripatetici, ac Stoici effecere. Alterum quo quaestione proposita diversas ad id, quod quaeritur sententias, rationesque referimus, ut propositis pluribus, invicemque collatis, quid ex iis
Paris 2001, pp. 11-47 129. 'Sunt autern
probabilius, verisimiliusque appareat eligamus, quo Academici, ac Socratici pene omnes utebantur. Tertium vero genus Scepticorum maxime proprium est, qui curn omnia indifferentia esse putent, nec certum, aut probabile habebant quicquam quod sequantur, ea enim, quae naturae ordine seiuncta distinctaque sunt ab excellentioribus, confundunt atque permiscent quibusque Philosophis reiiciuntur. Ego igitur ex iis omnibus Academicorum, in disseSocraticorumque rendo rationern hoc tempore proponendam inihi decrevi.' Again, in chapter XVI entitled 'Quid de voluptate Sceptici senserint, quid Dionysius, quid Theodorus': 'Piro [sic] quoque Eliensis, atque omnes, qui ab eo fluxerunt Philosophi Sceptici nominati, hoc uno cum Aristippo Cyrenaicorum principe consenserunt, quod nihil ex omnibus rebus natura iucundum, aut asperum esse queat, voluptatemque, ac doloremque aut ab hominum opinione, aut usu fieri, aut certa nostrorum nam quod modo iucundum affectione, corporum appareat, cras contra molestum futurum, quodque alteri asperum, alteri aliter affecto suavissimum, quia verum eiusmodi varietatem recipit, negat suapte natura quale videatur existere, verum pro diversitate hominum, quae sensibus admonentur, varia quoque videri putant' (ibid., pp. 1008-09). ed. and 131. Marsilio Ficino, The Philebus Comnmentary, tr. M. J. B. Allen, Berkeley, Los Angeles and London 1975, P. 280 and Latin text on p. 281.
258
GIAN MARIO CAO
'Protagoras, Pyrrho and Herillus consider nothing is more one thing in itself than another, but there are innumerable aspects to things according to each man's judgement. So they never come upon the one, but claim eventually that the one exists simply as a term in everyday conversation.'132
Chapter VII of Book xI of Ficino's Platonic Theology (1470-74),'13 entitled 'Objection of the sceptics and reply: that something certain can be known','34 has been compared to
the ContraAcademicosand other writings by St Augustine, as well as to Cicero's Tusculan 15 while the allusion to Pythagoras and Empedocles contained in a passage Disputations, from chapter XIV of Book v is said to derive from Sextus Empiricus, among others.'36 But neither this passage nor another one from chapter IV of Book xvii, where the sceptics are once more named, appear to come from Sextus.'137 The sceptics are referred to again in a letter of January 1478 to Cardinal Raffaele Riario: 'the sceptic philosophers and many others falsely slander me'.138 Lastly, when mentioning a statement regarding the Pythagoreans in his commentary of Plotinus's Enneads (1486-90), Ficino refers directly to Sextus Empiricus: 'The Pythagoreans, according to Sextus the Pyrrhonian, say that this [i.e. common force] is a spirit infused into all things, in the manner of a soul, which unites humans to other animate beings, after they have been united to divine beings from a different source.'139 This citation is probably taken from a passage in the first book of Sextus's Against the
Physicists (Against the Professors,
IX. 1 27)
140
132. Ibid., p. 262 and Latin text on p. 263. 133. Ficino, however, continued to revise the text until it was printed in November 1482: see Marsilio Fi~ino (as in n. 127), pp. 111-13, nos 87-88. 134. Marsilio Ficino, Theologie Platonicienne de l'immortalite des imes, ed. R. Marcel, 3 vols, Paris 1964-70, II, pp. 145-46: 'Obiectio scepticorum et responsio. Quod aliquod certum sciatur.' 135. See the critical apparatus, ibid. 136. Ibid., I, p. 213: 'Sed meminisse oportet eos qui animas nostras inferiores esse sempiternas existimant, etiam plantarum animas, secutos esse Aegyptios animas humanas esse existimantes Pythagoreosque, mentes delapsas in rationem atque sensum, animas vero brutorum esse nostras in sensum generationemque omnino prolapsas, plantarurn denique animas esse easdem lapsas omnino in generandi potentiam, posseque omnes iterum ad superiora converti. Quod quidem Timaeus Plotinus Locrus, Origenes, Empedocles, significasse videntur.' In the critical apparatus, Marcel compares the passage to a Pythagorean testimony transmitted by Sextus (Against the Professors, Ix. 127), which, however, is certainly the source of another text by Ficino concerning Pythagoras found in his commentary on Plotinus's Enneads: see nn. 139, 140 below. 137. Ibid., II, pp. 165-66: 'Academiae vero quatuor iis antiquiores in hoc ab iis discrepabant inter se
congruentes, quod scripta Platonis omnino poetica esse arbitrabantur. Sed inter se differebant, quod Carneades Platonem et putavisse et tractavisse omnia opinabatur Scepticorum more velut ambigua, neque ullum in rebus ullis habuisse delectum ...' 138. Ficino, Opera (as in n. 130), 1, p. 796: 'falso me Philosophi Sceptici aliique permulti calumniantur ... See also The Letters of Marsilio Ficino, iv, London 1988, pp. 37-42. , 1736: 'Hunc 139. Ficino, Opera (as in n. 13Vo), Ip. vim] Pythagorici, referente Sexto [scil. communem Pyrronio, esse dicunt spiriturn in modum animae rebus cunctis infusumn, qui homines conciliet caeteris animantibus, conciliatos aliunde numinibus.' Note that in this passage Sextus is referred to as 'Sextus Pyrronius' as in the note on fol. IF of the Vespucci codex quoted earlier (see n. 127 above). ai to6v ntEpi tovy Hua)Oy6pav K trv 'TIzuhXvirXfOo; <pactiRil ,otnor6v RO6vovTIiV ipo'rp6g Tobg EOobg E'val &XlkXi)g uiiapo;
140. 'oi 0Vy oOV 'ERnE6SoeKXa Kati zo uXXu iaix rpo6T t& &Xoya t6v 5jyv. v nyva Kotvoviav, y&p bilrapyXEt Irv~pbat o66t& rtavT6og ob K6c~Lpo) 68t1iov
xciEva' (MS Laur. WUXfgTp6tnov,t,6 ai ~iKvo{bvipa& rrp6og Plut. 85.11, fol. 262'). See Granada (as in n. 128), pp. 18-19, who suggests that Ficino's knowledge of Sextus came through Poliziano.
259
It is clear from these passages that such value as Sextus Empiricus had for Ficino lay in the doxographical information he provided. The radical nature of Sextus's arguments does not seem to have aroused any particular interest or curiosity in him, nor did he feel that they required confutation. Given his indifference towards scepticism as a philosophical position, Ficino merits no further attention here. Of greater interest are the cross-reference marks which appear in the margins of some folios in Vespucci's manuscript. These marks were formerly attributed to Poliziano.141 Recently, however, they have been connected to those employed by Giovanni Pico della In contrast to the situation with Ficino, the paleoMirandola in other manuscripts.142 in this confirms the assumption that Pico made a careful study of evidence case graphical Sextus Empiricus's Against the Astrologers (Against the Professors,v) as part of his preparation for writing the Disputationes adversus astrologiam divinatricem ('Disputations against Divinatory Astrology').143 Yet the parallel passages which have been identified do not appear to be conclusive, except for a short section of the Disputationes, which, however, came to Pico via Angelo Poliziano.144 This passage (Against the Professors, v.2) concerns the different names of astrology and of astrologers according to the Chaldeans. It was first recorded in Poliziano's notebooks and later taken up again by him in his Panepistemon (where, however, genethliologia, 'casting nativities', replaces the mistaken reading yevEahoyia, 'genealogy', found in his manuscript of Sextus):145 r iyv ... 6 tcp6g yEvEakoya(xv, ov6tacytv oi Kaxka&ot mOrlrtoitog K?ai cqtvoTpotg oKocYtoovtsg ... (MS Laur. Plut. 85.1 1, fol. 144v) aoxrobg &cy'pox6yoiug MvayopEacountv cyqpcxg is rather (It genealogy, which the Chaldeans adorn with more high-sounding titles, describing themselves as 'mathematicians' and 'astrologers' ...) '46 Pico seems to be referring to the same passage in the following text: ... those things which [astrology] predicts will happen in the future on the basis of the stars are fraudulent lies told in order to gain money; they are prohibited by civil and pontifical laws, kept in place by mankind's excessive eagerness for knowledge, ridiculed by philosophers, practised by charlatans and held in suspicion by all the best and wisest men. In olden times those who profess it were called Chaldeans, from the national origin, or genethliaci['nativity-casters'], from the profession itself. Recently, in order to gain respectability through a shared name, they call themselves mathematicians and astrologers.'47
141. Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. Ancient Books and Renaissance Readers, Ann Arbor 1997, chap. 3, esp. pp. 126-31. 145. See below, Appendix II, ? I; also the critical apparatus of Sextus Empiricus, Contro gli astrologi, ed. E. Spinelli, Naples 2000, p. 54. 146. Sextus Empiricus (Loeb edn), ed. and tr. R. G. Bury, 4 vols, Cambridge, Mass. and London 1933-49, IV, p. 323 (with slight modification). 147. Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Disputationes adversus astrologiam divinatricem, ed. E. Garin, 2 vols, Florence 1946-52, I, p. 40: ' ... quae [scil. astrologia] de sideribus eventura pronunciat, fiaudem mercenariae
49), P. 353.
142. Gentile, 'Pico' (as in n. 41), p. 96, compares these marks to those found in MS Laur. Plut. 5.9, which includes the Greek text of the four major Prophets. 143. S. Gentile, 'Pico filologo', in Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (convegno internazionale, Mirandola 1994), ed. G. C. Garfagnini, 2 vols, Florence 1997, II, pp. 46590 (479 n. 47), draws attention to 'alcuni "paralleli" tra l'opuscolo di Sesto Empirico e le Disputationes del Pico'. between Pico and 144. On the close collaboration Poliziano see A. Grafton, Commerce with the Classics:
260
GIAN MARIO CAO
It is also worth pointing
out that in his Quaestio de falsitate astrologiae (151o),
Giovanni
Pico's nephew, Gianfrancesco, who edited the Disputationesfor publication in 1496, two years after his uncle's death, implies that his own use of Sextus for the refutation of astrology is an innovation.148Furthermore, although the 'Tractatus contra arithmeticos et contra astrologos' listed in the inventory of Pico's books'49 can be identified in principle
with Sextus's Against the Arithmeticians and Against the Astrologers (Against the Professors, Iv-v), there is nothing in the manuscript tradition which corresponds to such a codex.151)
332); Sextus diagnoses the difficulty, or rather the impossibility, of distinguishing the parts of the zodiac from each other, since they are not continuous bodies but composed of separate stars whose precise distances escape the terrestrial observer (Against the Professor:s, v.74, 78-79). In the third passage Pico objects that 'solent autem astrologi, sicut omnis ars prodigiosa, experientiae plurinmumtitulo se defendere', but that 'fieri tamen experimentia super caelestibus libro praesenti nulla posse monstrabimus', noting above all that 'eadem vero constellatio aut numquam, ut probant doctiores, aut quod veteres crediderunt, non nisi post multa milia saeculorum eadem est reditura'; and he observes, secondly, that 'particularis eadem constellatio in alio toto aliud operatur' (Pico, Disputationles, II, pp. 456-60); Sextus insists only on the fact that the necessity of repeating the operation clashes with the impossibility of finding the same configuration, except after a long interval of time - that is, according to the recurrence of the 'great year', every 9,177 years (Against the Professors, v. lo3-o5). In the fourth passage Pico the Chaldeans, who 'ad stellas libenter attacks generally omnia referebant', believing that 'corpora inferiora moveri ab superioribus' and that 'quaecumque acciderent hominibus, sive corporis sortes, sive animi, sive fortunae, de caelestibus causis crederent provenire' (Pico, Disputationes, II, p. 50oo); Sextus is more precise in stating that according to the Chaldeans themselves there is a relation between the seven major planets - Sun, Moon, Mars,Jupiter, Venus, Saturn and Mercury- and the efficient causes of every event in life (Against the Professors, v.5). 148. W. Cavini, 'Un inedito di Giovan Francesco Pico della Mirandola:la Quaestio Rinascidefalsitateastrologiae', mento,xIII, 1973, PP. 133-71 (148: 'Initia quoque non hominum modo, sed regnorum et urbium, ex quibus divinare volunt, aut nullo pacto noscunt aut si quicquam de eis sciunt est rarissimum, quoniamnsuper hoc magna astrologorum dissensio, de qua agit in nono adversus astrologosloannes Picus patruus. Illud tamen afferam quod apud Sextum Ephecticum legitur astrologos confutantem, cum parilem horoscopum geniturae moliuntur dicere.'). 149. See the inventory transmitted by BAV MS Vat. lat. 3436, in P. Kibre, TheLibrary of Pico dellaMirandola, New York 1936, pp. 210 (no. 673), 258 (no. 1044); a
interdictam et civilibus et legibus pontificiis, humana curiositate retentam, irrisam a cultam a circolatoribus, optimo cuique philosophis, prudentissimoque suspectam, cuius olim professores gentilicio vocabulo Chaldei, vel ab ipsa professione genethliaci dicebantur; mox, ut nominis communione se dixerunt et astromathernaticos honestarentur, logos ...' As for the other putative similarities pointed out by Gentile, 'Pico filologo' (as in n. 143), p. 479 n. 47, while it is true that the themes are the same, the sequence of arguments is different; moreover, the examples are taken up only in part (and sometimes superficially) and, once again, in a different order. In the first passage Pico discusses the astrologers' claim to determine everyone's 'hora fatalis'. He maintains that if 'non igitur de hora qua fieri, sed qua esse incipiunt res, fata rerum rationabiliter auspicabimur'. Then regarding man, 'multa et inextricabilis necessario ambiguitas nascitur. Quid enim potius statuernmus,cumr tanta multa eius principia eaque omnia digna principatu conspiciantur?' The astrologers' conclusion that 'ex hora nativitatis nascentis hominis fata dependeant' is arbitrary, as is the fact that they place birth before conception ('genituram conceptui et fetus animationi') - anyway 'momentum quo quis nascitur exploratum habere astrologus non potest' - and this despite the 'hora extimata sive suspecta' devised to compensate for the imprecision of the observer and of the instruments of observation (Pico, Disputationes, Ii, pp. 154-60, 28892). Sextus examines analogous positions, attributing them to the Chaldeans, whose claim to have discovered the zodiacal sign is demolished by the impossibility of establishing the exact time of birth - whether in terms of the ejaculation of semen, of fertilisation or of childbirth, of having reliable indicators of time ('6)po(~6xntov') or of observing precisely the rise of the the indiscernible nature of the zodiacal sign-given different parts (even using the system of the hydriae), the variation in places of observation and in the acuity of the observers, and finally the inevitable partiality of every observation from whatever viewpoint (Against the Professors, v.5o-87). In the second passage Pico asks the rhetorical question: 'ex hac autem caelestium motuum incertitudine quis non totam labefactari videt divinatricem astrologiam? quarn si labatur uno gradu, cadere tota veritate sit necessarium' (Pico, Disputationes, 11, p. mendacitatis,
261
When we turn to Angelo Poliziano, however, there is no doubt that he made use of the Sextus manuscript belonging to Vespucci. Evidence for this comes from the extensive
excerpts from the Suda, Macrobius, Sextus Empiricus and other classical writers which he
brought together in various notebooks, presumed to have been eighteen in number, some of which are preserved in BSB MS lat. 798 and in Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale (hereafter BNCF) MS Magl. VIII. 1420. This activity was begun in his youth and revived just before the courses he gave at the Florentine studio at the beginning of the 1490s.151 A detailed paleographical analysis has revealed an apparent kinship between the texts copied during the first phase of this work (the Suda and Macrobius, but not Sextus) and the older autographs written by Poliziano before 1480.152 Moreover, the presence of similar excerpts from Sextus in a fascicle of BnF MS graec. 3o69 - copied in 1488, according to indications left by Poliziano himself'53 - enables us to give a precise date to the Sextus transcriptions found in the Munich and Florence notebooks, since they were presumably made at the same time.154
transcription of the copy of the catalogue preserved in the Archivio di Stato of Modena (Archivio segreto estense, Cancelleria, raccolte e miscellanee, Archivio per materie, Letterati, busta 55) was published by F. Calori Cesis, 'Giovanni Pico della Mirandola detto La Fenice degli ingegni', Memorie storiche della citta e dell'antico ducato della Mirandola, xI, 1897, PP- 32-76 (33: 'Tractatus contra arithmeticos et contra astrologos manuscriptus in papiro sine numero'); but see also the criticism of this edition by E. Garin, Giovanni Pico della Mirandola: vita e dottrina, Florence 1937, pp. i06-16. 15o. For doubts regarding the identification of this entry in the inventory with the works of Sextus see P. O. Kristeller, 'Giovanni Pico della Mirandola and His Sources', in L'opera e il pensiero di Giovanni Pico della Mirandola nella storia dell'umanesimo (convegno internazionale, Mirandola 1963), 2 vols, Florence 1965, I, was, however, (55); the identification PP. 35-133 treated as certain by Schmitt, 'An Unstudied ... Translation' (as in n. 34), PP. 246, 258; and more recently by P. Zambelli, L'apprendista stregone: astrologia, cabala e arte lulliana in Pico della Mirandola e seguaci, Venice circulation of Ipo6g 1995, P. 14. On the independent on its own (MSS Laur. Plut. 9.32 and Laur. 6doYpoX6,youg Plut. 59-17) see A. Nebe, 'Textkritisches zu dem Buch des Sextus Empiricus nppo6g tcvpoX6youg', Rheinisches Museum there is fiir Philologgie,L.xxi, 1916, pp. 102-16; no mention of this in Sextus Empiricus, Contro gli astrologi (as in n. 145). of the complex events 151. The reconstruction surrounding Poliziano's notebooks, starting from the identification of BSB MS Lat. 798 (though BNCF MS Magl. VIII 1420o was described by I. MaYer, Les manuscrits d'Ange Politien, Geneva 1965, PP- 117-23), was carried out by Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), and taken up again in Cesarini Martinelli and Daneloni (as in n. 1o10), pp. 329-30, 337-39152. See Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), P- 338; the reference comes from autograph letters dating from the period 1475-79 and recorded by A. Perosa, 'Due lettere inedite del Poliziano', Italia (now in medioevale e umanistica, x, 1967, pp. 345-74 idem, Studi difilologia umanistica, ed. P. Viti, 3 vols, Rome
I, pp. 155-84)153. See Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), P- 338; the date is obtained from the intestation (fol. 181r) '1488 die 22 septembris hora diei 24', and from the colophon (fol. 193r) 'in fine die 8 octobris hora circiter 18'. A description of the codex is found in Mostra del Poliziano nella Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana. Catalogo, [ed. A. Perosa], Florence 1955, PP. 84-85, no. 84; Maler (as in n. 151), pp. 227-32; see also L. Cesarini Martinelli, 'Grammatiche greche e bizantine nello scrittoio del Poliziano', in Dotti bizantini e libri greci nell'Italia del secolo XV (atti del convegno internazionale, Trento 1990o), ed. M. Cortesi and E. V. Maltese, Naples 1992,
2000,
pp. 257-90 (258). 154. As S. Rizzo, 'I1 latino del Poliziano', in Angelo Poliziano poeta scrittorefilologo (atti del convegno internazionale, Montepulciano 1994), ed. V. Fera and M. Martelli, Florence 1998, pp. 83-125 (96-97), has pointed out, in the 'Praefatio' to the Miscellaneorum centuria prima, which can be dated to September 1489, Poliziano described future readers of the work as 'agrestes', 'delicati' and 'medii inter hos', drawing on a fragment from Aristophanes (Poetae comici Graeci, ed. R. Kassel and C. Austin, 111.2, Berlin and New York 1984, no. 70o6) transmitted in Sextus's Against the Grammarians (Against the Professors, 1.228; Bekker p. 650, 11.30-32), which he had transcribed in BSB MS Lat. 798 (fols 69r-7oV), on the basis of MS Laur. Plut. 85.11 (fol. io8v), a short time earlier.
262
GIANMARIOCAO
As already noted, it seems probable that Poliziano used MS Laur. Plut. 85.11 in compiling his excerpts from Sextus Empiricus. This is partly based on the fact that, is divided into ten in both the manuscript and Poliziano's notebooks, Against theProfessors these between is the excerpts and the correspondence books.'55 More important, however, text transmitted in the Laurenziana manuscript. Final confirmation is provided by two marginal notes, undoubtedly in Poliziano's hand, which fill gaps in this codex.156 Cesarini Martinelli's reconstruction of Poliziano's notebooks has brought to light their strongly traditional structure, modelled on the system of the liberal arts and owing much to the great medieval encyclopedias, especially that of Isidore of Seville. 57 This shows that although his compilation of excerpts from Sextus Empiricus was completed when he was a mature scholar, it was inserted into a scheme adopted at a much earlier stage of his intellectual career. In order to avoid modifying this youthful scheme, Poliziano took pains to collect together a number of texts which did not fit into his original plans and place them in a separate notebook (which later became part of BnF MS graec. This unwillingness to abandon his initial project can be explained by his incli30o69).158 nation towards encyclopedism, which can be seen not only in his notebooks but also in his early work 'Pro quodam adolescente in gymnasio pisano',-59 and in the praelectioto his
course on the Nicomachean Ethics at the Florentine studio for the academic year 1490-91, which was published under the title Panepistemon in February 1492.160
While not overlooking recent findings concerning the astrological section of the
Panepistemon and its indebtedness to Sextus's Against the Astrologers (Against the Professors, v),16'i I do not want to reopen the debate over the importance of this short piece1""or the
155. See p. 251 above, n. 101. and analysed by identified 156. The additions, Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), PP. 352-53, were made in the upper left-hand margin at ' ; t tob fol. 18or ('torb6 Xpto v aTT,ob oinv v repetgviou' [Against the Professors,v11.2o7]) and fol. 203'v ;ro ? Otvt' pi 6xpxov xw pil &v'tKEijEv6v Yeb8og ('-Kaid [ibid., vii.i.o]) respectively. In all likelihood Poliziano which obtained these texts from Filelfo's codexfernestratus, formed a part of the Medici private collection from 1482 and the text of which corresponds exactly to that transcribed by Poliziano (fols 137r and 167r). 1 7. Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), PP- 348-49. 158. Ibid., p. 354. This work, published by I. Maier, 'Un inedit de 159. Politien: la classification des Arts', Bibliotheque d'humanisme et Renaissance, xxii, 196o, pp. 338-55 (343-44), and entitled 'Angelus Politianus pro quodam adolescente in ginnasio Pisano de laudibus artium liberalium an verba', reveals his youthful interest in philosophyinterest which is usually assigned to his mature years and credited to the influence of Giovanni Pico. For further evidence of the young Poliziano's engagement with philosophy see J. Kraye, 'L'interpretation platonicienne de l'Enchiridion d'Epictete proposee par Politien:
dans la Florence du XVc Philologie et philosophie siecle, Ila fin des annees 70', in Penser entre les lignes: Philologie et philosophie au Quattrocento, ed. F. MarianiZini, Villeneuve d'Ascq 2001oo, pp. 161-77. 16o. Angelo Poliziano, Praelectio cui titulus Panepistemon, Florence 1492; for the date of publication see S. Meltzoff, Botticelli, Siginorelli and Savonarola, Florence 1987, p. 27 -. 43. See also Branca (as in n. 41), pp. (86 n. 22); A. F. Verde, Lo Studio Fiorentino, 147373-90 1503: ricerche e documenti, IV.2, Florence 1985, pp.
945-47161. See J.-M. Mandosio, 'Filosofia, arti e scienze: di Angelo Poliziano', in Poliziano nel I'enciclopedismo del internazionale, Chianciano, (atti convegno suo tempo 1994), ed. L. Secchi Tarugi, Florence Montepulciano 1996, pp. 135-64 (150o), and Gentile, 'Pico filologo' (as in n. 143), p. 478 n. 46, where it is suggested that Poliziano drew on Sextus's Against the Astrologers (Against the Professors,v.2, 5-7, 12, 21-22, 32, 50-53) in his description of the zodiac in the Panepistemon. For a comparison between these passages from Poliziano's Panepistemon and the corresponding texts from Sextus see Appendix II below. See C. Dionisotti, GCi umanisti e il volgare fra 162. Quattro e Cinquecento, Florence 1.968, pp. 42-44, for a favourable assessment of the Panepistemon, revising the
263
significance of Poliziano's borrowings from Sextus in the various sections of this work.163 I would like to suggest, however, that Poliziano's faithfulness to his youthful encyclopedic intentions has some bearing on the emphasis which he himself (and, later on, other interpreters) gave to his supposed conversion to philosophy in the 1490s.164 It is not my aim to simplify his intellectual development in terms of a schematic opposition between continuity and discontinuity.165 I merely want to highlight Poliziano's awareness that the kind of encyclopedic project he had in mind must take into account the Western philosophical tradition. Not that this means he should now be ranked among the philosophers. As Carlo Dionisotti has rightly pointed out: 'the only encyclopedia which Poliziano ever conceived of was one based on the philological discussion of Greek and Latin sources'.166 In relation to Sextus, it is true to say that the fifteenth century witnessed a revival not of sceptical philosophy but rather of sceptical texts. This holds for Poliziano as well. No one since antiquity could claim as wide and as accurate a knowledge of Sextus's works. Yet Poliziano's humanistic interpretation of Sextus was limited because he ignored the polemical and revolutionary importance of sceptical arguments. This can be seen in the way that his excerpts from Sextus's writings break off whenever the descriptive and doxographical material gives way to more strictly confutative sections.17 We cannot, therefore, attribute philosophical scepticism to Poliziano, even in a concealed form. Only in an
extremely weak sense could he be called a sceptic; but this would be an inaccurate use of the term and one which, because of its naivety, it would be highly inappropriate to
of V. Cian, Contributo alla Storia severe judgement dell'enciclopedismo nell'eti della Rinascita, Lucca 1915, pp. 13-14. See also E. Garin, Medioevo e Rinascimento, 2nd edn, Bari 1973, P- 245; Maier, 'Un inedit (as in n. 159), pp. 338-42; C. Dionisotti, 'Leonardo uomo di lettere', Italia medioevale e umanistica, v, 1962, pp. 1883-2 16 (2o6); I. Maier, Ange Politien. La formation d'un poete humaniste (1469-148o), Geneva 1966, p. 46; V. Juien, des arts figurativs', Bibliotheque 'Politien et la th)orie d'humanisme et Renaissance, xxvII, 1975, PP. 131-40; A. Serrai, Le classificazioni. Idee e materiali per una teoria e per una storia, Florence 1977, pp. 48-5o0; idem, Storia della bibliografia, I, Bibliografia e Cabala. Le Enciclopedie rinascimentali (I), Rome 1982, pp. 171-75; Mandosio (as in n. 161), pp. 143-64; and M. Pereira, 'L'uso del "Panepistemnon" del Poliziano nella Isagoge in rhetoricam Physis, xvi, 1974, PP. 223-33. Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), P 356, suggested that the writings of Sextus Empiricus were one of the main sources for the Panepistemon; this suggestion was repeated by Serrai, Storia (as in n. 162), p. 172. A different view, however, has been put forward regarding the musical section by F. Brancacci, umanistica e la musica. II Panepistemon 'L'enciclopedia di Angelo Poliziano', Rinascimento, xxxiII, 1993, PP. 93lo9 (106-o7), and eadem, 'Ie fonti musicali classiche nell'opera di Poliziano', Interpres,xii, , 1992, pp. 135-49; pseudolulliana', 163. Cesarini
and regarding the section on the arts of the trivium by A. Wesseling, 'Poliziano and Ancient Rhetoric: Theory and Practice', Rinascimento, xxx, 199o, pp. 191204 (194). There is also a reference to the presence of Sextus in the Panepistemon in A. Bettinzoli, Daedaleum Iter: studi sulla poesia e la poetica di Angelo Poliziano, Florence 1995, p. 137 n. 174164. Branca (as in n. 41), pp. 248-5 1, who recalls the in the Coronis of the Miscellaneorum acknowledgment centuria prima of the influence exerted on Poliziano by Giovanni Pico: 'is me instituit ad philosophiam, non ut antea somniculosis, sed vegetis, vigilantibusque oculis explorandam ...' (Poliziano, Opera omnia, ed. I. Maier, I, Scripta in editione basilensi anno MDLIII collecta, Turin 1971, p. 310). 165. Regarding the '... programma enciclopedico che, con intensiti sempre maggiore, torna ciclicamente ad affacciarsi dalle carte del Poliziano' see, e.g., A. Bettinzoli, 'Rassegna di studi sul Poliziano (19721986)', Letterel taliane, xxix, 1987, pp. 53-125 (77). 166. Dionisotti, 'Leonardo' (as in n. 162), p. 20(6: 'i Poliziano non concepi mai altra enciclopedia che quella fondata sulla discussione filologica delle fonti greche e latine'. 167. See Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), P. 354-
264
GIAN MARIO CAO
apply to the systematic and punctilious reader of Sextus revealed by his notebooks. This
distinction is not the same as Poliziano's famous claim to be a grammaticus rather than a philosophus.168 The word grammaticus implies a personality genuinely open to all the intellectual experiences of antiquity. Poliziano was not, however, the type to wander with
reckless abandon along the dangerous path of sceptical arguments, which undermine every belief and result in the suspension of judgement. His encyclopedic inclinations are evidence, if anything, of a contrary impulse: the need to set things down, and to do so systematically.
It was not the cautious Poliziano but rather Fra Girolamo Savonarola, more accus-
tomed to living close to the edge, who seems to have approached the vertiginous precipice of philosophical scepticism - at least according to the biography of him by Gianfrancesco
Pico: ... shortly before his death [Savonarola], hearing that certain Greek writings of the philosopher Sextus had been preserved, in which all learning discovered by human means was refuted, ordered that they should be translated from Greek into Latin, since he loathed the ignorance of many people who boasted that they knew something. He delegated this task to Giorgio Antonio Vespucci, an expert in both languages from his Order; he also wanted Zanobi Acciaiuoli, who belonged to the same Order and had command of both languages, to take on this work. And they would have fuilfilled his hopes had sudden death not seized him."''1
This passage, which has featured prominently in the scholarly literature, is a significant
testimony, whether one chooses to accept the account - together with the claim that Savo-
narola wanted to co-opt Sextus for his polemic against pagan learning (doctrinagentium)
- or instead decides to challenge its authority. Something of that authority is no doubt owed to what Gianfrancesco himself undertook in his Examen vanitatis doctrinae gentium
('An Examination of the Vanity of Pagan Learning'), published in 1520, a work which was guaranteed a posthumous investiture by Savonarola's plan to translate the writings of
Sextus Empiricus.1'7 Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa
168. He makes this claim in the Lamia, his inaugural lecture for the course he gave on Aristotelian logic in the 1492-93 academic year: see Angelo Poliziano, Lamia. Praelectio in Priora Aristotelis Analytica, ed. A. Wesseling, Leiden 1986, esp. the concluding section where, as the editor suggests, he may be drawing on Sextus's Against the Grammarians (p. 16, 11. 30-32: 'Grammaticorum enim sunt hae partes, ut omne scriptorum genus, poetas, historicos, oratores, philosophos, medicos, iureconsultos excutiant atque enarrent'; cf. Against the Professors, 1.59, 'napoc Ka' oi Xapi~vaeg it ~to xvroo a)Vciv nEpt~ nohxcAv inpayCta oyypacqpOv, TO V Kat ij61r 'to roptxpvK itLv io'roptK(Gv 68P p11 "toito ptpooo'6pcv' [MS Laur. Plut. 85.11, fol. 92r]). Pico della Vita 16q. Gianfrancesco Mirandola, Hieronymi Savonarolae, ed. E. Schisto, Florence 1999, 11. 35-43: '... quippe qui audiens Graeca pp. 112-13,
quaepiam Sexti Philosophi monumenta asservari, in quibus universae doctrinae humanitus inventae confutatae essent, ea e graeco transferri in latinum, paululum antequam moreretur, mandaverat, perosus multorum, Idque ipsum qui se scire iactabant, ignorantiam. muneris Georgio Antonio Vespuccio utriusque linguae gnaro, qui ex eius erat sodalitate, delegarat, volebatque eidem operi Zenobium etiam Acciaiolum, utriusque linguae compotem eiusdemque virum sodalitatis, incumbere, fecissentque votis satis ni mors ipsum violenta rapuisset' ('confutatae' is the editor's conjecture). The first half of the translation is adapted from D. P. Walker, The Ancient Theology, London 1972, p. 59. 170. See Cavini, 'Appunti' (as in n. 1 lo), pp. 19-20, who suggests that Gianfrancesco Pico had read Sextus's writings in the Vespucci manuscript held in the library of San Marco. Cavini identifies the first signs of this
265
Appendix I
This Appendix presents selections from the three books of Francesco Filelfo's Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, based on BNCF MS II.I.70o.7' Facing the Latin text are the relevant passages from Against the Ethicists (Against the Professors,xi) by Sextus Empiricus, as they appear in the Greek manuscript which belonged to Filelfo: MS Laur. Plut. 85.19. The one exception is ? VI, which was inspired by De divisione liberof Boethius. The transcriptions are faithful reproductions of the original texts. I have, however: followed modern usage regarding punctuation and capitalisation; restored the iota subscript; and inserted inverted commas for examples (but not for citations). While my transcription of the Greek passages does not constitute a philological contribution to the establishment of the text of Sextus, I have indicated in square brackets, followed by 'ED', the variant readings accepted in Hermann Mutschmann's Teubner edition (as in n. 28) which differ from those found in Filelfo's manuscript. I have not provided a critical apparatus, nor have I specified in each case whether textual differences depend on the testimony of other manuscripts, on necessary corrections (additions or deletions), on the conjectures of Mutschmann or previous editors. The Greek text also contains, in round brackets, brief bibliographical references,172 identifying testimonies transmitted by Sextus.
? I.A-E:
[PALLAS]:
FRANCESCO
FILELFO,
Commentationes
Florentinaede exilio, book I

Quo fit ut eadem saepe res apud
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, xl.43 (Bekker p. 554, 11. 22-28)
g I.A:
alios laudi, apud alios vituperationi danda existimetur, apud alios in precio habeatur, contemnatur apud alios. Aethiopes pulcherrimam mulierem putant, quae maxime et sima et nigra sit. Persae vero quae sit tum naso maxime adunco tum etiam albissima. Alii vero neutram probant, sed eam omnibus forma praestare dicunt, quae media quaedam sit et figura et colore. Zeno autem ille citieus quem in stoica disciplina unice admirantur, in disputationibus de instituendis pueris nihil differre ait vel uti puerorum amoribus vel
T ouTcp ei 'ai 8v zp6nov vove;g, FzTot, nept Tou c-vci twva o cyawtxTtKi1v e~64oppiav trpi tfig a et)6ppo c( ycvatcog
ot;7ouvctKotv, acig ; iTv ottoldrlv cat Attionog t\v gelvzozUTzrlv [thcXvzT&TrlvED.] JtpolpivovTog, toi TFTT\a\ 6b FI\pooTu v lOrT& AXKoTuyTlv ypuano Tob no6EXoou, t ivo,
Xapacc,,Tip
&ou
t
v 6i tlTlv -
m~ Iv cCxta& o6v
KoavKao [acr3v Xp.aV iaxxiova TCCV. [fol. 323'] Xiyovto; ...
reading in a brief text written in 1510, the Quaestio de falsitate astrologiae, in which Pico explicitly cites Sextus Empiricus in three different passages ('Un inedito', as in n. 148, pp. 140, 147-48). This issue was recently raised again in M. di Loreto, 'La fortuna di Sesto Empirico tra Cinque e Seicento', Elenchos, xvI, 1995, PP- 331-74 Note, finally, the innovative contribution of (334-37). S. Ioli, 'Sextus Latinus: Sesto Empirico nelle traduzioni latine moderne', Dianoia. Annali di Storia della Filosofia. Dipartimento di Filosofia, Universiti di Bologna, iv, 1999, PP. 57-97. 171. On the manuscript n. 48), pp. 100-02 n. 2. see Cao, 'Tra politica' (as in
172. I have used the following abbreviations, preceded by the number of the fragment: Isnardi Parente = Senocrate and Ermodoro, Frammenti, ed. M. Isnardi Parente, Naples 1982; Mette = H. J. Mette, 'Zwei Akademiker heute: Krantor von Soloi und Arkesilaos von Pitane', Lustrum, xxvi,
1984, PP. 7-94; Nauck = 7TragicorumGraecorum Frag-menta, ed. A. Nauck, 2nd edn, Leipzig 1889; SVF = Stoicorum VeterumFragmenta, ed. H. von Arnim, 3 vols, Leipzig 19o3-05.
266
GIAN MARIO CAO
non uti, eodemque modo interesse nihil aut pueris aut puellis congredi, haec enim non diversa, sed eadem esse, et itidem decere eadem esseque decora. Ad haec quae Oedipus in fabulis cum Iocasta matre perpetrasse dicitur, nullam afferre turpitudinem probare argumentatur. At haec nos non turpia et foeda modo, sed scelerata et impia non iniuria censemus. POGGIUS:At non omnes Pallas sententiam tuam istam admittant. PALLAS:Non hic Poggi vel de Cosmo et Medicibus quibus omne vetitum licet, vel de bambalione quopiam, cui nihil sanctum est, habetur sermo, sed de viro et severo et pudico. Longeque melius et gravius et illustrius christianos philosophatos puto, quam vel Zenonem vel reliquam omnem illam antiquitatem, quae veri dei legem praeceptaque ignorabat. Quid enim Chrysippo stultius, qui in libro de iusticia ita scripserit: 'Quod si membrorum pars aliqua abscidatur, quae ad alimentum usui sit, neque ea defodienda est, neque aliter iacienda, sed esu absumenda potius, quo pars altera in nobis fiat'. Hoc illi turpe non videbatur, at nobis immanitatis plenum. Aitque idem Chrysippus in libro de officio de parentibus sepelliendis loquens ita ad verbum: 'Cum autem parentes diem obierint, sepulturis utendum est iis, quae maxime simplices sint, quasi corpus sicuti unguis aut capilli nihil nostra intersit nec curiosiore nobis diligentia huiusmodi in rebus opus sit. Quare etiam si carnes fuerint ad alendum utiles, iis utentur quemadmodum propriis partibus. Sin autem inutiles, aut iis defossis monumentum imponent, aut concrematis cinerem dimittent, aut aeminus proiectis non magis eas curabunt quam vel praesegmina vel capillos'. Nec turpia Chrysippo stoico haec prodigia nec mala videbantur. Apud nos vero non modo hominum sed ipsius naturae et institutis et legibus habentur inhumana, dira, tetra, horrenda. Sed quo nostra tendit oratio? Ut intelligamus nonnihil esse natura et turpe et malum, quod apud aliquos neque turpitudini est neque malo cuipiam obnoxium. Nonnulla etiam turpia et mala duci, quae natura non sunt.
? I.B: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors,

xI.19o (Bekker p. 582, 11.20-25) Ka gi tv rtpt tai6xmv & ymyf;ig v t~i gtIiv 6 6taxptpai[g dapEotd&px1g; Z?ilvv (fr. I 250 v ctva SVF) cotauOm 6i tie'tatv't"StoarpitEtv
i" ItrlSkv altkov tr18i: Ifooov JOat8tKx ?til 11 o OileaF if JatUtl&, grS &Xh3a y7&p &ppeva-" if oit 8 e01"xatl 1i l atStKo0tg, ?lrat8tOlcog -irl &d E iac ?pFiTcovTd at Is( TEEEt &ppeatv, &Xk(x p FoYtv'. [fol. 342r] ? I.C: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors,
xI. 191 (Bekker p. 582, 1. 31-p. 583, 1. 2) Zivov (fr. I 256 SVF) Zt& xnpi zTig 'IoKYazrTg ;ca Oi6SiixoSog Oei itopouelva 1v 6Ftvov tp~Ptat "tilvprTipa. q(piotv,0-Mto [fol. 342v]
EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, ? I.D: SEXTUS xI.193 (Bekker p. 583, 11. 14-18) C Av 'T ibn p 8Stcatooabvil III 'icai (fr. SVF) 748 Xp'toixou Taotiiav ztiv npo; iv Tpopqilv & Zt IFipoS ItFkov knocotfi Fa XplolIov, .LTe:T Icawop'OettV avToT tre1T 6_ ab'ot, 6ngo [roo;g ~i p5int-tv, vakiaietyv ED.] vti6v~ pipo; yivrl'at'. [fol. iv'Tpiv -Tcpov 342v] M'yerat 8' - 0iv 6 ye yoai
? I.E: SEXTUSEMPIRICUS, Against theProfessors, xI.194 (Bekker p. 583, 11. 18-30).
Av
\ 'T6 nepi zomo maOi'xovro',Tn i z nEpt

Plc;
To zv
yovieOv Tma?;pfg 8t eppx6levog, III 752 SVF)
'Tdxoyevotivov ov XpIxi; 'aTo dt"X taTocpo g ox Cat( iSXg, (0g (v Tos 06lxatog;, ,KtOx~ep 6voog ; i pptpXOv,o0S6v 1v1og spog igga, c-taepo6ig oS' ai1 zotaobzo ztva pooSe06opvov ED.]. 6t fi-iv Kai X1poioyMv ptiv tv6; [TrotaG(Tln;g OVT(ovt ov peCov Tpoq~pf Xpialovzat ab'ot;g, aX ztov i6iov eprwPv, oTov xo66; 1cacxiEtp K doxlonivzog i~npahke Xpi(alot a6zro, cat 'Toi 6 OvzTvW napa(x 5aiotog aUt)ov in ;(XXPiv [o~xaoountv intoiaoutv Katopotavztg to v9iVLa ED.], niKaWcKact1avC tzg ztiyv Ti(ppav WpYioaoutv, toumopia;
if Cxaxp6tEpov
6F' TCv yov'ov
(fr. qploaiv"
not?ioovtat, KaOxwEp abUTov avuog [fols 342v'-43r]
iptVZTEg oThS*ELiavinterpoiPrv
nii "ptpXov'.
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY Et idem esse apud alios turpe ac malum, quod apud alios et honestum et bonum iudicetur. Dandam igitur operam puto, ut aut quae honesta et bona natura sunt, aut quae secus nequaquam nos fugiant. Nam siquid in his deliquerimus, etiam si nulla nos afficiamur ignominia, dedecorosi sumus. At illa quae hominum duntaxat opinione talia esse iudicantur, contemnenda nobis omnino non sunt. Id enim et fastidiosi esset et intemperantis ingenii. Sed quorum opinio iudicium faciat, consyderandum est etiam atque etiam. Non enim quid insipientes et improbi, sed quid probi et sapientes de nobis sentiant, movere nos debet [...]. [PALLAS]: Quamobrem huiusmodi ignominia sua natura mala non est. [fols 43r-44r]
267
? II: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinaede exilio, book ii

[PALLAS]: Et quam Stoici magnum quiddam in philosophia mihi profiteri visi sunt, ii primi quid sentiant, audiendi sunt, qui sequentes communis notiones bonum utilitatem esse definiunt, aut non aliud ab utilitate. Et utilitatem quidem virtutem dicunt bonamque actionem. Non aliud ab utilitate esse volunt bonum hominem et amicum. Virtus enim imperitantem rationis vim repraesentans quomodo habeat, et bona actio quae operatio quaedam sit secundum virtutem manifesto prodest. Bonus autem homo atque amicus qui et ipsi e numero bonorum sint, neque utilitas esse dicendi sunt, neque alii ab utilitate. Idque ob huiusmodi causam. Sectatores enim Stoicorum partem dicunt neque eandem esse cum toto nec aliam a toto, veluti pes neque idem est cum toto homine. Non enim totus homo est pes, nec alius a toto. Nam toto cum pede totus ipse homo intelligitur homo. Sic igitur quam boni hominis et amici pars est virtus, pars autem neque eadem esse cum toto possit nec alia a toto, dicebatur bonus homo et amicus non esse alius ab utilitate. Itaque omne bonum ea definitione compraehendi putant, sive continuo utilitas sit sive non sit ab utilitate aliud. Qua quidem ex re consequenter bonum tripliciter dicunt appellari. Nam uno
? II: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, (Bekker p. 550, 1. 4-P- 553, 1. 26) XI.22-38 ot p~v oiv lomcotoi (fr. III 75 SVF) t6ov cotvtov
0;g gnietv gvvotcov x6evot Tdya0ov 6opi,ovrat i'c~pov zp6xonz6 'dyaO6v oztyv 6iheta i"oy
bOpiReFtav
cOgpelFtha;',
?I'v
kE*yov7egE
T'lv
apeTylv
'Kai triv anout0aiav np7tpV, o( bX Vepov 6*: ce4eia;g t6v ano-uaiov &'vOpaoov Ialc t6v lv y xp peT n( pikov. t; xov fyer ovtuov caX rI anou6aia npatt;, 'vtpyEtM KaOeuTTwKrnia, T1 ooua K1a' xapeXpViv, avTtIKp-u cTiTV oqpi*)ta- 6 piko;, xn htv tz~v ;al SanotouSaiog&vOpoixog 6g -kEta kEXO1EFv ayaOCOvoVTEgKaX au'oit, o01TEOTp av xupyxetv i0Epot oiO' p0eei1ag St' aiXav Ta 7p Ezotlcov na6FESg, (pao zotabla'zvIFtpQ, t1 & abtm 'Toi; 6kot~;w tiv oie Rzepoia 'tCv oiie c r~ TO) Xci 6"kov, olov ri lEip a)Ti obce mtv o0 avOpn6O, y7p 6lo; 6jvOpolo; hoxTiv XFEip, o o v y&p X?tpi Tob 6o, t~if ot 6og; oi: tpa 6 avOpxogn voTiat XvvOpaoog;. nE'i oiv iai toi Kat Tooqiov Ipog i~civ oanouo6aoiou voponou II apecrT1, a) 6T -cxo6)et )pr) a6"Tx[Ta"Tx'ED.] TOi; 6Xot; 5omat [&Gtiv ED.] oi'TE FTEpa Tt6v 6'ov, ei'prTat 6 anouoSao;g&vOpxog Iac 6 (pOtog o; c dyaeov z'TO tp -empog c"eOag. aoE ndav
T6v o)tatvo
~iaoov six6vzeg dya96v xpoaayope6eo0aut, y K ' Tt 6i(aV n i1v iaO v imntpokTlv
E'4 O i5 Eag cq}ta ?(pat, epu-txfptEt Oav zUe uyX~Mvn,(xv eE [TE?1 ED.] I et1pov t EXetO*a. KokZOU0tiav EvOEv [EVOevKaOED.] KOIMT& "ptpogi
268
GIAN MARIO CAO
modo id bonum dici ex quo aut a quo fit utilitas, quod certe principalissimum est et virtus. Ab hac enim tanquam a fonte quopiam omnis naturaliter manat utilitas. Secundo autem modo id per quod utilitas contingit. Sic enim non solum virtutes dicentur bona, sed etiam quae secundum virtutes actiones proficiscuntur, siquidem per hasce utilitas contingit. Ultimo vero modo bonum dicitur illud, quod utilitatem afferre potest. Et haec quidem assignatio complectebatur tum virtutes tum actiones secundum virtutes, tumrn amicos tum probos viros, tum etiam et deum et bonos angelos (interpretor enim bonos angelos quos gentilitas nTouSa6oug; 6ai4lova; vocabat). Atqui ob eam causam aliter atque aliter tum apud Platonem et Xenocratem tum apud Stoicos bonum nominatur. Nam Academici cum dicunt aliter nominari bonum secundum speciem et aliter secundum participationem speciei, non quid sit bonum ostendunt, sed boni significata multis modis exponere videntur, et quam invicem plurimum discrepent nec habeant quicquam inter se commune, quemadmodum licet intueri in hac voce 'canis'. Ut enim ex hac ipsa voce prolatio quidem significatur, sub quam et animal latrabile cadit et aquatile et astrum, nihil autem huiusmodi prolationes habent invicem communem. Neque secunda prolatione prima continetur, nec tertia secundam complectitur, sic etiam cum dicitur bonum secundum ideam et bonum quod est particeps ideae, expositio quidem eorum bonorum est quae significantur verum et separatorum et quibus nullum omnino huiusmodi bonum contineatur. Et hi quidem hoc pacto de bono locuti sunt de quorum celebri subtilique sententia quod meum iudicium sit non multopost ut spero disseram. Nam neque Stoicis neque ipsi peripateticorum principi Aristoteli maximo in philosophia et gravissimo viro in iis assentior, quae contra huiusmodi bonum subtiliter magis quam vere disseruit. Sed ut redeam ad Stoicos, volunt ii quidem in ipsius boni appellatione secundum significatum complecti primum et tertio quoque duo contineri. Fuerunt autem qui dicerent id esse bonum
Extypatpo~)tv oi
Eaztv
[ U7Coypa(ppoXotv ED.].
(JAekd2ao0at,
vEyEat yp
i-v 0 6i c( pXtKcTzXTov al p zao, t6i7CEP ztn ztvo; %rnfipy-dpTKl" art6 T(yn qu(X u ev aviXoaEtvdi~iEta. Iam' ncx nmyig n~aa Tetpov 6E zT Ica' 8 alutpaivet 0gie:iooa0at" ( oiztg; ol i6vov at peza ei X0iovzat tya6, xT at iawc'aizt Kaic npttg, FitCEp cat Kazx 6Xh&t ov (jepetoeat. cax 6E 8 ttx; o5xtpaivet Tpitov iai zTFeeatov -p6ioov hyezat dyao0v T6 ot6v z:e p(Aekiv, lcCeptkatpt0avo0o)5g ; [inptka.tpavoGar g; ED.] ti;g io66Eo TaXz)Tg xTg E apEzxa Iai t &;g vapEzoug qui oug KaI Toibg orouaxtoug (p'4est Ka' poikg eOoF -S; K-T atnou&aiou;g 6xaiovag. avOp&itoug,
6p' Tnap'iyv aidayv oxK Ev i~o k'yeTat Totg cnapO.1E TEpti Evolpazr (fr. 97 Isnardi T6vFIh&av Kaic Parente) ntokkaXAg6vod O4a at TyaO6v at
,va xya06v,qaa i, cKa0'
o0 if p6xov t6 ix(p'
nap~x zoi;g XIt1oi;. eEvot gti v y p, 6zav ~ipq hikyo0aot ya 0'v i'v '6'av Ica' TiaOtv 'To etzXov tac, oa5tatvbteva ip; Tifg 8 -z 8teunwra K -TieevIat Kai KC nohk a0klkoyv CKai 1iEtqiav FXovTaIolvviav, ot6v Ze icai ~it 17 yXp K ZTazg Tfg; 'Xcmyv'q(pmvFig Adg epo-Pev. 0 iv t6o biatcov iP' oltatwiveTat tv tCtG (^OV, cKaii'Tt il()' ij'v ED.] [rxialctlcov iE'tnTCE To ED.], Kai cnpog Tzotot; i0p' Evv6pov[EvWypov 'xkk) Icati ip' iyv t6 iv 6 (ptk6o,(po;, o0 itv ~ Klotvv o Xooutv 1otpov, oi6v adtTota~tat 0toE'tg, o68' 'tsepti,eXFt "tf SemuziUpa cf?npoki [iF GEmitpa ED.], oi0zT zT Tpiztr 8Emzi-pa ta Icxv Tzi0 Ica z6 zizov q&xvat yaeo0v ziv i6 tav 6 zfg tikaOPOEVOVat6g itv oaz&t atatvoptivv, 66E ait o tepav -eCX6ptati0v v n-picplwtv o 61X' titv t(opatv6vTmov. Xp1at6"tepot, 1g) f; xpodeov, zotozTot Ztveg av" o6 8' 67o Tfig i~ni ITzoCS OXountv zTig zos Tya0o npoo5yopiaP To Elivat o(%tatv6tevov i-?mepthknztcov _EbUepov Tob np6Too Kat To zptzov nFEptkljn:tKov Tv 60i6v. iaav 6- oi qcp6mcovzue(fr. III 73 SVF) -t 6 St' abT6o axipeov. oi 8' pyyx yaeovtv-i WO ';ya66v oztgo zt ' GuTa4a3v6tevov zt6 tpo;g eF6atioviav', ztvi~g 't6 outkrqporzubov Ei6tba ovtia'. (fr. I 184, 554; III 73 SVF) obSatiovia 68 iortv, g ooimE itpt t6v Zilvova Icai Xpixotutov KhEvOrvv irn6tocav,eipota Iai
Piom.
yivo; tif toi &yxeoi zotottovExno860ssq%art Ei66aot 8' %vtot,

nhilyv
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY quod sit propter se expetendum. Alii vero id esse bonum definiunt quod ad felicitatem adiuvat. Aliqui vero quod felicitatem compleret bonum esse volebant. Felicitatem autem esse secundum Zenonis et Cleanthae et Chrysippi assignationem vitae facilem ac prosperum decursum. Verumtamen quo bonum assignatur genus est huiusmodi. Consueverunt autem nonnulli cum tripliciter dicatur bonum, continuo ad definitionem primi significati inquirere quo ad id quod dicitur bonum est illud ex quo aut a quo utilitas proficiscitur, ut si vero bonum est illud a quo utilitas fit, solam generalem virtutem dicere oporteat bonum esse. Ab hac enim sola utilitas fit. Excidit autem ab ea definitione quaeque virtus particularis, ut prudentia, ut temperantia reliquaeque virtutes. Nam a nulla ipsarum haec ista utilitas proficiscitur. Sed a prudentia proficiscitur sapere et non quod communis est prodesse. Nam si hoc ipsum prodesse contingat, non erit secundum definitionem prudentia sed generalis virtus. Et a temperantia quod de ipsa praedicatur temperantem esse non quod commune est prodesse. Et eodem modo de reliquis dici potest. Contra ii cupientes quam definitionem posuerant sustinere ita respondent. Cum a nobis dicatur id esse bonum ab quo utilitas proficiscitur, idem est ac si dicatur bonum id esse ab quo ad aliquid eorum quae in vita sunt utilitas proficiscitur. Sic enim quaelibet etiam particularis virtus bonum erit quae quidem nequaquam communiter utilitatem afferat, sed eorum aliquid praebeat quibus utilitas fit, harum enim virtutum alia ut sapiamus praestat sicuti prudentia, alia ut temperantes simus sicut temperantia. At hi quidem Stoici cum volunt huiusmodi responsione primum crimen effugere in alterum sunt crimen devoluti. Si enim horum alterum est quod dicitur bonum id esse ab quo utilitas ad eorum aliquid proficiscitur quae in vita sunt, generalis virtus quae bonum sit sub definitionem minime cadet. Non enim ab ipsa utilitas ad eorum aliquid proficiscitur quae in vita sunt, quam una e particularibus fiet sed simpliciter utilitas. Et alia in hanc sententiam multo plura quae non versute minus quam
269
zpty6gekyoplvou T&yaxoi, rpobg zov Tob rp)Tzou

t z6 i' o0 if o( 'zT6 yao6v ~atz aztv &q' ;&Xkeiatg dya06v AEct aig cb Ei 'Ta c6ELdaea0oat', oi Eaztv 1)XPeekooat,i6vlrv pIcziEovzTlv Tz 6dM'
(XPEiyV yevtClydya66,vv y7p ta6zrlng ~z ED.] T6 tativt i Spo0 Elcc~ar 0iPAEheoa0at, cxCnCtn atv 8zoE E OtOV ED.] [icKxoYrv T6)V itC6CV, Tfiv(pp6v1otV KaacU Tv o)(PPOo%)VIv K~a( Txg Xotnx;g. oi6r oiSE6qtg y'p aXzTi6v ouLipativet t abzo zotzo T6 6(PF-v, XXL' ndn6 Zfg (PpovicEo;g Z6 -tv Ei y&p o ) Kotv6zepov (ppoveiv KCaX To6 6)(iv, toTio aipaivot, To axiro 6'x(PEiv, oliicx rat
T1] [TzaOUzg
(olo-vatvoltvolu 6pov E~b0g intrE e0iv, , Kca0 Xi~yet
in7pXEtv, (x6n I06vqq
alt, &nb 6)ptaihvwog qp6vflntg, yEvtKi 86'apEZ1, aonppoo6v1g rig t icaz' atfilv icazry6pula, ao(ppowive, o' to6 'otv6v, ~9(hpoPv,iai n1ri zT)v
t zt io5ztv (9' o0 oup5alvo '-ya06v Fyo01tEv" Av '~o? [Av ED.] i'o? zoz'T(O zoTzo 09ekhe~ia0at', t ' ' ya06v ~actv q o0 a0lt[aivet' zT6)v kMyot-LEviv To 1ito 6 )PEko at'. o0btzoyp iat iKcrz ,T6v 'n7'E'iSotugpE'ITv yae0v yevia~oeat, xotv)g 6xpEiv 1PtiFntp-povu((, ti v ev 'T) t6)v IitkvTo6 [AVTo) Pi(O ED.] ((PEke(O(at a OlOV p7OEXOpLkVl, fi (PpovEiV [To (PPOVEV ED.], fi KaCExEp -LV 1166 t6 ocnppovgv, 6)q ;1of~ ppooovl. (p6v;otg, Oelhicave6g 8- olzot 6G 67nokoyo~ltFvot zTO Cp6Tepov yklm a ReFpov qouyeiv, eig y(p EzEpov Eozt zT Ei exCKultoOloumv. Evov ZTO)Tov ED.]: ' yaO6V i-aztv L-Y6Y [ZotoZTO (cp'0 oaqupatvet - t 6)v v Pit 6)c(ekeo9at', 11ye~vtacil oau o)X 1O7on7Ea(5ixat cyaOov &pETzl T Tt v v o) y&p 6ni' aitfjg au 6p?'o pftivwt T To iot 6)p~ePdoat, in itia T6)v e7toug n' (X(X wn ED.] T6 7)g [Xk' &nd!k)g yevilerat, 6' o coE0 kyeaeat tpbg Spoug, Tobg TotomTouqg 8oymanttiSg iEX6etva ED.]. ll &iv 'I n7eptepyetag [nIepte~pyiag On67pf drnoSdeat, 6ztc6 0yov Wxya66v tz6 b~ePoiv if ouvepyoiv z6 St' aizb6 aipezv i zT6 npog Tzlv FS6atuitovitv [rnp6bg e68aGtoviav ED.], i oico co;g 6noutSo6og, ob% 8 i~rtv dyaO6v
KaFi iEpa
8tShouKEt, && 6 o' appeLPtnbg oat nsEpitlorgtv
To oi 6' xv(tKrato?lmc Evot ,otiur6v v6~,oyov. , tpog ozToT6 yEcqlta zozTo qaxciv 6tzav
[napi~ozr-tv ED.]. 6 t)6 YPfP[TK() ztwyaOG naptokxp oi axb'b 6EiKvvot ztyaO6v. e8Otgw ti piv h ePOEti Zb dyaO6v [zTayaeov yovv
270
GIAN MARIO CAO
acute inventa sunt, ab iis dici solent qui de verbo potius quam de re disceptare consuerunt. Nobis autem satis sit si ostendimus
ED.] Kai [KOCt aipt E 6v iayt, To ED.] nt trap6 WE6-t [r6t eip'rcat oTov 6o tyaxo6v, Tya0bv ED.]" 'kV' Too(PFov npoo~5exFrTlatX, Ti notoECoat toTo ,To Kai St' ab6 aXipe,6v Fi~at&tovixg notolytK6v, ali o CLto(ppovilo)ot, Kxait7Ep ,ict outgdoivog rtp6t) pov aht6 :yovTEg tO6 ogEiov Kai t6
ED.] Eiat?tovia; nTavEg [nTav,-g
qui definit bonum id esse quod prodest vel quod per se expetendum est vel quod ad felicitatem comitetur aut huiusmodi aliam
assignationem affert eum non quid bonum
6,1 TotKOtl6tKov, o(yXmpo0ot

oa5)Xmpo5otv E' V
sit docere sed quod bono accidit declarare.

Qui vero quod bono accidit ostendit haud is mihi bonum ipsum videtur ostendere. Con-
tinuo igitur quod et conducit bonum et quod expetendum esse secundum quod bonum dicitur videlicet bonum et quod felicitatis est effectivum, nemo est qui dissentiat. Verum si rursus quaeratur quid tandem est hoc prodesse et quod per se sit expetendum et quod felicitatem efficiat non modo non consentient sed dissentient maxime. Et quamobrem ita dissentiant Pallas POGGIUS:
cum prius consenserint id esse bonum quod
aipeT6v, xa ' Eitg &ntorov -4~wZvex0OIVat U Yovkog, S- [8' nT6 EI?tov, 0To Itgv apFty Fo0
6tag&pp6vmov.
TOb 6 ED.] 1)6OVT'V, ~'i~v7itV, Ei 6S ~i7 y~
6' W0o TO%
t T6v 6p0v
A6eiivco,
i t~FaaYia-ov
esset utile, et quod expetendum foret, et quod felicitatem efficeret.

PALLAS: Quoniam Poggi de substantia non Nam alii bonum de accidente. quaeritur dicent virtutem, alii indolentiam, alii voluptatem et eam quidem tum mentis bene compositae rectaeque rationis, tum quam ipse tantopere persequeris dissoluti sensus petulantisque appetitus, alii vero aliud quippiam vel simplex vel coniunctum. Quod si ex superioribus definitionibus patuisset quid esset bonum, haudquaquam dissentirent proindeatque ignorata natura boni. Non igitur eae definitiones quid sit bonum, sed quid bono accidat, omnes docent. Itaque non solum ob hanc causam reiciendae sunt, verumetiam quia rem quam esse nequeat, videntur appetere. Nam qui aliquid eorum quae sunt ignorat, is neque illius accidens potest cognoscere, uti siquis ad eum qui quid sit equus ignoret, dixerit 'equus est animal hinnibile', is quod est equus minime docet. Nam qui equum ignorat, quid etiam sit hinnire, quod equo accidit, ignoret necesse est. Et qui audiat bovem esse animal mugibile, nec teneat quid sit bos huic bos haud monstratur. Neque enim mugire, quod bovi accidit, is compraehendat qui bovem ignorarit.
[fols 65v-68r]
173
' ayvoobvTa, T gy i.T7og i'o tv t"nnog, o, v" ?4ov Xpq-t rtulctK6v' o0 8t606K 5 t, 0(rtyV i rro;gov a tO6 y7p P1 y7tvxov-t tinovt Tov v &yvoetzaot, aeFp Av To0 Yinnoo Xpe*ty;tV Ti Kai 6 itp6ogbTv pl ovPtpFlKq6g. aTctkcip6zTa, Uont po0g, npocpp6btevog- 'PoSg tot ?6pov pvlcrltn6v' o0t napiztrlot T6v pov-" Tw7y&'p pil
vaKaVakrlniameat CKa t6 ytvxiOKovzt Tobrov OucaaOat, PEPf-0t1oC6g iit6pxov Tob Po6;. [fols
0 &g yvoougivrlg tijg ,0yaOoC 0 otv Toivuv oi X Tyya6Ov [-azt t6 (p0omg;. ED.] oi 6pth66KOottyv, SpOt 7yaeov CKKEiEtVOt 6l 6h&h to apFptllCldTrog *yaAO. 8t6eT-p o0' wa, & Cai iae6o6ov atoxOppot, 6) To0To it6vov eai gpievtrat rp&ay'iaTog; 6 y6p 66tuvvtov Ttvo;g o6 6 oTp(p5t TiOv dyvoCv 6vtmv, o'Tog; 1rolgC inc ivw y7tvvocEtv 86vacat. oiov 6 tp6og T6v
6 %oat t6 oii &Tya6v,
t6vTpoetprivtvv
Aiv
32or-22v]
271
? III: FRANCESCOFILELFO, Commentationes Florentinaede exilio, book II

PALLAS: Revocemus igitur nostram orationem, unde nescio quo pacto defluxerat. Et id quod erat in manu resumamus absolvamusque breviter. Itidem igitur cui quid est ipsum bonum obscurum sit, ei frustra et inutiliter dixero bonum id esse, quod expetendum est, aut quod utilitatem affert. Nam primum quae sit ipsius boni natura discendum est, deinde intelligendum quod et expetendum est et felicitatem efficit. Natura vero ignorata boni, huiusmodi definitiones quid bonum sit docere non possunt. Et de his quidem satis. Non enim longiores esse possumus. Ex his autem quae brevi oratione perstrinximus, quid huiusmodi philosophi malum esse definiant abunde patere censeo. Malum est enim ea ratione quod bono contrarium aut detrimentum affert aut non aliud a detrimento. Et detrimentum quidem est quemadmodum vitium et mala actio. Sed non aliud a detrimento quemadmodum malus homo et inimicus. Inter haec autem duo bonum et malum, id esse Stoici volunt quod &6tp(popov nominant, nos indifferens recte appellemus. Id autem est quod neutrum habet. Nam quod indifferens est neque in malis est nec in bonis numerandum. [fols 68v-69r]
? IV: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes
? III: SEXTUsEMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, XI.39-41 (Bekker p. 553, 1. 26-p. 554, 1. 9)
po; t6ov avev6rvcov ocob~v iai [vwvv6rymov ED.] OVTX (xfo0o0 [Trty0eo0 ED.] tr6vTcV Ke Xyezat, 6it &'ya06v iot Toaipe~ov i vpceXh6Xg ipaeZiv Tiv abToi t6b0(pEXof)v. tp6-Iov y7p 6gE ~ To dao y o pl")atv, 'Tma m6mTE oivvat, iOm ep-Xdi iac 6ir axipe~6v o5t ial e-8atioviax notrlutc6v. it' &0yvoOZ4VO)U [&yvooUbt'vI ED.] 6' TaTin Ka1 oGi otob) ot v 6po o)V v to? 6t66K0cov TO6 rmobtEvov. TX ;~v odv Xdptv dTEnaplcKo za)T AEIyltaTog t E ex p ;tig mtyaOoi voYomg;. 4v,)lg eipfoa Ot t& (x pt caX oac(pi coi KoKOcw ) otoat, mzyYxvegt x oig Lt~po8660tg. aicwbv a nxap TEvohoyo)eva )yaO4-" 7ep pX6pr[ y7p ~not T6 Evavtiov 'T6o i tv 6)5~iEp o1) axi ize:pov OX6fl,3g, 13X6013 :omtiv tada K Kail upa 7cp4ttg, o iETpov 8E ax 6 dnl;g aO~Oxp 6 q(a o; &'vOpono;og 6E, 6E Tob' kyep6;. txaia Tolamov, plpti E dyaxOo0 KaKxo, O"TEp Ka &x6StWxapopov ovo~md(To Ka. [(1vo0 ot ei6pq E0Xov. [fols tc 0oED.], i ast6T S 32 2V-23r]
Florentinaede exilio, book iii tu quidem sentis cum Crantore, qui philosophus non ignobilis in theatro graecorum omnium ita divitias loquentes inducat: 'Nos quidem, o Graeci universi, ornamentum omnibus praebemus hominibus. A nobis vestiuntur calcianturque ac reliquum fructum capiunt. Usui sumus et valitudinariis et valentibus. Atque in pace quidem delectamus, in bellis vero nervi sumus rerum gerendarum. [fol. 83v]
LEONARDUS: Nequaquam
173. Between the passages transcribed here and indicated as II and III, Filelfo inserted a lengthy invective, in which Sextus's serious philosophical point about the definition of an ox is used as the springboard for a personal attack on Filelfo's enemy Lorenzo de' Medici:
Against the Professors, ? IV: SEXTUSEMPIRICUS, XI.51-53 (Bekker p. 556, 1. 24-P- 557, 1. 4) 6 Kp6&vmp (fr. 7a Mette) Egig q pamtv mos Eyo7Ltvoupo-OX 0tFvog tcaSg&Tetv ~navu ouvexpiloa'o napaftiyp[at. Ei yxp oapiEvmt ED.], KOtV6V Tt T6v vo0ototgev, q(pXo[(PYo7t OaTpov, Etig ToiTo T icxaoTov HawvXX1voyv tOv cyaOojv Taptbov ai mtv tpwTridv etv, Et0b;gKad Egig Avrtuotot~tvov ilqt Evvotav SvatiOj6lEOa Tfg v Toig yaOoig 8taqpopSg. tv y&p o6 txobtog nxapantl6Slaaxg np6imov pd." '76, 1iv6peSg Havi-lvXvesg, K6o5ov 7tapiXO
FivOvKac
'Bos est Laurentius Medices. Num habes quicquam quod huic definitioni obiicias? Aspice Laurentii latera, Nonne cum aspice palearia. Incessum consydera. loquitur mugit? ...'
272
GIAN MARIO CAO
[7tXap~~ovED.] ?ci&(v v'Op(brotg Kaizxg ;Oiftzag Kat zT&g Kat ZTivXrkllv dx6cr0auotv EToSGioeStg vooobot Kai ytaivolot, Kat Ev e6iq Xpet1S)g Sk eipivn Trapee za ZepTva, tvvvnrokLEvotg yivotat'. [fols 324v-25r] veipa z6)v 7rpXemyOV
? V: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Florentinaede exilio, book III
Commentationes
Against the Professors, 1. 1. xI-3-17 (Bekker p. 546, 8-p. 549, 3)

? V: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS,
Dicunt enim illi eorum quae [LEONARDUS]: sunt (sic enim t& 6vza quandoque interpretari malo quam entia, quamquam ita etiam utar, si videbitur), alia esse bona, alia mala et alia esse quaedam inter haec, quae nec bona sint nec mala censenda, quae quidem ipsa indifferentia nominant. Verum ex his vir gravissimus Xenocrates utens singularis numeri casibus ita dicere consuevit: 'Omne quod est, aut bonum est aut malum aut nec bonum nec malum, quod ipsum etiam est indifferens, separatum scilicet quoddam genus quod neque in bonorum nec in malorum sit ratione reponendum'. Quam quidem rerum partitionem, etsi veteres illi omnes videntur amplexi omnesque consentiunt rerum differentiam esse in tris partes distributam, nihilo tamen minus in contentionem prodeunt cum dicant definitionem ab universali parum differre, quippe quae idem sit potestate. Nam qui dicit verbi causa 'orator est - ut Cato definiebat vir bonus dicendi peritus', hic vi plane idem dicit quod ille quicunque ita definiat 'siquid est orator, id est vir bonus dicendi peritus', sed differentiam facit in voce idque sophistice. Quamobrem quod etiam ita dicitur eorum quae sunt, alia sunt bona, alia mala, alia neque bona neque mala', id tale secundum Chrysippum universale vi est ac si dicatur 'siqua sunt entia, ea vel bona sunt vel mala vel indifferentia'. Atqui huiusmodi universale mendatio subiacet quandocunque mendacium ullum subiunctum habet. Nam subiectis duabus rebus - alia bona alia mala, aut alia quidem bona alia indifferenti, vel bona etiam et indifferenti - siquidem dixeris 'hoc est entium bonorum' verum sit; quod si dicas 'haec sunt bona' sit mendacium. Non enim sunt bona, sed hoc quidem est bonum,
oi oKizc zp67tov ozotoetoiv H6*vzg giv v Kaciit7pavoTzaza 6oicovzeg zT qptkoo06qmov, oF 7rxap& irvzTag ze Ir6to ztig pX(tag 'Aimca6iiag Kat oi anorzob -eptxrzou, izt 6 S Tifg Izodg, vT e~i0aot 8tapo ievot k~7yetv zTv vzwv t& v 6 Icalc, zT 6'tEza b zoTzov, Evat WyaO6, z C&rp iaA &St6i(popaouatv 6Utazepov 6 lo-g o6 z -Evoicpzrflg (fr. 231 Isnardi nrap& robg k Parente) c zamiqg Lvtucxag szaoeot Xp01tFevog T iv i yaO6v Ka"ic6v &oztv tov i C6 'nv v 0 qxace" dTyaO6v o5ztvo0ze Icac6v oztv.' K?ai zTCv io o aZe 0otur6v qptoo6p`ov ... [qrtkoo6ayov )opig ED.]
xoSe6ieo zFilv g zota(l)zv 6taipeotv ... [6taipewtv
6 cc 7rpoote~EivWv Kai abhzO;ED.] E661Ct 68E1ttV [ou ounrapakaltp .tcgapaoax.Ptp3vetv.ei y&p .... v ED.] E(Z-t -t VeVptoPIUtov Irpay, ayUZ yaC6v C ... [1nptya zv ya66iv KaK Ka KaxK&v EaD.] Icalcov, EcEvo ilTot 7mya F Pt TzOvgiTE " Ov i~ oic tOv tXyae6v. pK Kai ei v (7ya6v oztyv ic ED.] [Ev 7yaO6v Zptv yevioeVzat ZTCV ioztv, ei 8' olt FaZrtv ya9a6v, iizot Iac6v 5oztv?i1 obse 6' KaK6v Kax v cartv oizTe yaO6v ei aztv" v nx p et, ei E1 zpt ooZe yaO6v inatv, v UOv ~ v zptOv a rOv t v oztv o0bZeKaCK6VoZt, v &pa zo6 fizot cyaO6v artv Icra(aTiaerzat. x&cv K aK6v i if obze cya'O6v i~ctv obzTe tYv iKa-6v w 6FKa noztv. uvaxvet olzog XOpi;g dxoSetteugo npooyi~accto i'v 6tadpetv, tEintep 6 eigZFiv
ED.] ltbig [Eit KarZTKEriV K1CaoKeTFv

EP;F-aztv EXep6g o ncapak(q0eVg 760og awifg"v xV 7zaf cepti~onrKe z ilv nicsztv 6ev E Ei i E at Trat 11 4 awzpig dx66et;tg, 6taipoeot; ntorZi RIl 8tail pov)ea zifg xkoSetiemc. 'AXX' g4w;, cxainep oup~gvoI 60Kobvrog
zoJ Ozt zpta77il iazrtv a6vz'c( )7cXcpetyV aKcvrZX 6vtv ctacpop&,-tvig o06v fczzov i1 zt6v tivvv zoig etpeothoyoixtv 6ooloyobvteg pobot tacpopxv6St zotarz zig tiozt, ooptoztKic g t Kai pfv &z9eetpoc totatpvoet. opooetho6tCevot roto eio6pe~a Avoaeevupohap6vzeg. ,tKwpov
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY hoc autem malum. Et eodem modo si dicas 'haec sunt mala' falsum sit; nam mala certe non sunt sed ipsorum alterum. Idem quoque de indifferentibus accidat: falsum est enim 'haec sunt indifferentia' quemadmodum de bonis malisque ostendimus. Leonarde MANETTUS: At mihi videtur Xenocrates in sua illa partitione prudentior, qui singularis numeri usus sit casibus. Nam si pluralibus casibus esset usus, eius omnis partitio monstratis diversi generis rebus, necessario mentiretur. Manette LEONARDUS: Mones tu quidem subtiliter ac docte.
MANETTUS:
273
(fr. II T6v y&p 8pov qctoiv oi 'rEvoyp6C(pot SVF) 224 ~WthrfTii ouvrZSEt 6tacpiepstv to KaccOoXtiob, 68v&ctEt t6v aiIrov 6vca. Kaic '&vOp EiCo'mg 6 y0p Ot6g d;Ot ?Cov it6vv XoytK6v Ovrl'6v' tO sit6v'rt '(E Ti h'ttv k 6oj6v &vOpmorog, iort Xoyt-cv vrllr6v'tfi ?Eivo tv 86vd'tet
' h6 pXvf6 ab 8o it,
Ad haec cum omnis sana generis
partitio ea sit, quae propinquas dividit atque coniunctas species, nonne siquis ita partiatur 'homines alii sunt Latini, alii Scythae, alii Turci, alii Aegyptii, alii Persae', idcirco is erret quoniam aliarum propinquarum specierum non coniunctam et propinquam speciem disiungit, sed huius speciei species. LEONARDUS: Certe Manette ut dicis. Itaque rectior ea fuerit partitio, id quod te video intelligere, cum dicitur 'homines alii sunt Latini, alii barbari' et per subdivisionem 'barbari quorum alii sunt Scythae, alii Turci, alii Aegyptii, alii Persae'. Idem rursus dicendum fuerat in eorum quae sunt partitione. Nam quecunque bona et mala sunt, differentiam apud nos habent. Quecunque vero inter bona malaque sunt, non differunt quo ad nos. Itaque longe subtilius partiamur si dixerimus eorum quae sunt alia non differunt, alia differunt. Et differentium quidem alia sunt bona, alia mala'. Talis enim partitio eius partitionis est similis qua modo dicebatur 'homines alii sunt Latini, alii barbari. At barbari alii Scythae sunt, alii Turci, alii Aegyptii, alii Persae'. [fols 85v-86v]
Kcai t Tot'to, autqpavv;g iK To) til 68t6popov. 6tovov t ov Eti titpolg {vact IKaccoXotKlciv rcx ineptxhrlprtKt6v, Kccad 6v 6pov iti t6cxvca 6,XX&6 otov ei61] ro Ino6t6oStovou t phyttcaog 8t6luKEtv, t6v k v toJ avvp6xo u it wVTCSg Toug KaC rob iTin E6Sog v vOpwtnou;,Zov 86F ~itnnot t Ivrwg o; ,ob;g itTnoug.iv6g rFToxoaiFvrog ieS6oUg t, v 6 KcaoxtKHvacc iKcWCrepov tox0rlp6v, 7ivact 6 &X7 y&p );g taDca (Pwva(Xg (i; 9po;. ~layIva
KWCzcr 68)vagtiv
"
6i1 [06E ED.] KCailr iXe-to;, qpao, 8taipecig, uvvrcaet rob 6bvattv X~ouO KsaeooXljiv,
KceOoXtKob 6tEvi"vo~EV.
(0Tkrat [i('zt
ED.]
'It
0WcTc
, Wg
oi eiotv 8tatpowtEvog 'trov C&vOptrwmv otiv 6E oi 'ei Xi'yet rt fioov Pd(ppapot' "EX1iveg, AKEivot i ztvi;g stotv cvoprTcot, ir "EXXivig sottv y dp abpicYKc(at tig &vOpmitog i;6v p6kppcapot'.
[EUpiKtKrcczt
o6 yp
tp6trm
68E
ED.]
v taipnotv, &vdy7KqbtoXOXp6vtikv elvact Vil 'to to yE-6og ;6 yiveO(t KcaOoXtKdv. 8t6itp iKca ty V oijto XEy6etvov 'T(OV ZT i(vtV OvCOv iT tyaxI , 6 To oov KWlcxr, t8x 8KaX-K o6F' [t8Xc'68v6u ets -cov XpuiTtrtrTov ''i Totoo'T6viot KaohxoXtK6vitvc( aXtv aOVa, otv i1 i wvaX firiot cxyac c yo tv i KacK8ctac9opa'.' oi vot yE totozov
tvo; WE68og; F'r'tI orTcciTo[vot tVg KcOoXtKov Op 86oug.68Fiv y~'p qxxotv itocKtEtiFvvv Xa~zu TO b Ka ob, i1 xyac(00,to6 8F& ntpayC(7zrmv, R iv TOJ 6 To a K1 i KWKoJ 8b t(xqp6poJ, tiv I(xyao00, 'tobJ' Et YTtov OVTOVV 'iav 6tac6popo, ro dccyacOOv ED.] ~XOi';S iEctg, ro [&yaCO6v 68F'zccb' FTzTiv To o;0 cxyaxO' i'OrtIV cxyacc, Xcxx ydp 9JE8og" 'o 6' r' KcaK6v. Kai t ic?c 6'rcaz' tiv &yacO6v, Ka1 x9i, ydp IcMIcx' t Xhtv yE86o;g- o0' iO Ct &XX& -o i~Fzepov acu'TOv. 6ocatcuirw; 6: Koa i 1t "Tv [y'xp zT ED.] x6taq6pov- eF6og yxp iozt zi6 to '~rat' Eo'ttV&(t6ptopa(', 6X(9rtp Koa( 'toab' cy'Ttv if KwaKKd'. OJV l oya06x EVcwOaYb totoarIt Wg ],tV 7 aXc0E o O~rsa toJ 1oaeviropEv,qXuivezCat8 il 8t& to Pil tacig itXrlevOcctdg Esvorpcroug
1rttouS t Kexpifoat, mot' 1tm
r';
E "EXXiv tPizcrPdkppacpog,
i tfig;
v iVepoyev(ov
88RiEsg yESortotnOfima21iV 8taipEOtv.
274
GIAN MARIO CAO
il totacrl KcaOi-'CTlKv taipeotg"- 't6ov vOp6yTCov St Elw oi oi St c'E1nvSg, oi Aiy[snxot, -iv oi [ttv &i y6xp i-poat, 'IvSoi'. t6iv y&p ~ipov
to ;uyobv ~zpo ED.] Tzv xipoCswv 6wv oe-8cv o art, Icat ?npooexig El0So dXv'Irt~li~)K~ wx [O tc ED.] ZOLJTOU E6&, 68OV Oi5owgEiXeIV 'T6iV
ydp, "AXXot 86 Kc-KiV~ivg viozcrlav xavtac [toPt bytYg taipeat Ty~voug iPl qcaiv, doTt6 ED.] Ei;gT 6posE fi d1o,Kci 6t fiotro toXZOipCx
i 'EXXovs6g, oi 6~ dvep6owv oi ljV tv 67 'CTOv fIFppapot', KFae' oSt 6taip7atv Xotx6v oa6 oi 6~ CDiv oi eoutv H~p(at, psup&po)v Aiylroitot, 6 p ca Et?iFg -cccv oi 6~ 'IvSot'. 6et1 cvcwv
Statpieow, ?itn KaKrx,6ptapov-cd
ci* Sea
ix-tyv fiv,
toyv ycya6Oxia 6Sea 6S tevac
ZE hcyaO6ivKa icx?acv, tzazt' aztv ftiv m6v obtw; [oiitw; 68thpopa. Xpijv obv nt lEety
o ED.]Tolv iXet, FtnXXov 8' taipeotv,6g XEVtv eiCngVw;'-Zv v-wv &giv trTyV x6tapopa, &6i
& & cyas0x, to6v6 8tacqep6vcov 8tacqpipova, ptv p K?adc'. 8& 6KEIt y&pi fi notidb Gtaipeat -to~v oi Xeyoo?n 't6iv av p60twv i-t v Etv 'yEX'6vevSg, oi P6~ i&ppapot, oi tF T iv 6~ appp6v ' vl Aiykrztot, oi 8& 1i-po0at, oi 8C 'IvSor'01t 8
6~CE tlVt avOp6twv 318r-lg9v]
Wl.tOiWto
6~ AiyiTntot, oi 8V 1-ipoat, oi 86~ 'IvSoiT'.[fols

l eottvv 'EXXvSg, oi
oi
fi toto?oZp6io"
'TVo
VI: FRANCESCOFILELFO, Commentationes Florentinaede exilio, book III MANETTUS:Tuum istum partiendi modum non possum equidem non probare, quem ab illis item perpulchre video observatum qui dixerunt bona esse alia in nobis, alia extra nos. Et rursus quae in nobis essent, alia esse animi, alia corporis. Nam cum divisio fieri multipliciter soleat ut cum genus in species partimur, et cum totum in proprias distribuimus partes; et cum vocem plura in significationes significantem proprias secamus; praeterea cum secundum accidens aut subiectum in tripliciter dirimentes, accidentia separamus, aut accidens in subiecta dividimus, aut in accidentia accidentia partimur. Ea sane divisio et princeps est et reliquis divisionibus antecellit, qua genus in suas species distribuitur. [fols 86v-87r]
Leiden,p998, Boston, Cologne
? VI: BOETHIUS, De divisione liber (ed. J. Magee, p. 6, 11.17-26)
Nunc diuisionis ipsius nomen dividendum est et secundum unumquodque vocabulum uniuscuiusque propositi proprietas partesque tractandae sunt, divisio namque multis dicitur modis. Est enim diuisio generis in species, est rursus diuisio cum totum in proprias distribuitur partes, est alia cum uox multa significans in significationes proprias recipit sectiones. Praeter has autem tres est alia divisio quae secundum accidens fieri dicitur. Huius triplex modus est: unus cum subiectum in accidentia separamus, alius cum accidens in subiecta dividimus, tertius cum accidens in accidentia secamus (hoc ita fit si utraque eidem subiecto inesse videantur).'74
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY ?VII: FRANCESCOFILELFO, Commentationes Florentinaede exilio, book inI non Verum ab re intelligere [MANETTUS]: abs te cupio, quot modis verbum hoc substantivum 'est' accipiendum putes apud philosophos. Non inepte Manette rogas. LEONARDUS: Falluntur enim nonnulli persaepe vim verbi istius et consuetudinem ignorantes. 'Est' autem duo significat: et id primo quod verbi substantivi proprium ducitur 'existit', ex quo 'dies est' dicimus, hoc est 'existit'; et item 'apparet' secundum quod dicunt aliqui mathematici non nunquam inter duo quaedam astra intervallum est ulnae, quod non pro eo accipiunt omnino, quod 'est' substantivum verbum significat, sed quod 'apparet', cum id intervalli quod tum propter altitudinem tum propter aspectus distantiam ulnae spacio videtur circumscribi, ad centum fortassis stadia aut etiam amplius terminetur. Cum igitur 'est' particula duplex significatum recipiat, cum speculando dicimus 'eorum quae sunt, alia sunt bona, alia mala, alia nec bona nec mala', 'sunt' hoc loco non substantive ponimus sed ut 'apparent'. Nam de bonorum ac malorum neutrorumque subsistentia ad naturam cum iis disceptandum est, qui certis quibusdam suisque decretis addicti sunt, hos graeci vocant 6oyatCUotUo;g. Sed horum quodque secundum id scilicet quod apparet appellare consuevimus aut bonum aut malum aut indifferens. Qua sententia ut existimo ductus Timo ille Phliasius ita scripsit in Sillis:175
174. Filelfo must also have taken account of Boethius, De divisione liber (as above), pp. 26-28: 'Diuisio uero nominibus positis quoniam semper in duos terminos secatur manifestum est si quis generi et differentiae cum deest ipse nomen imponat, ut cum dicimus "figurarum quaedam sunt trilaterae aliae sunt aequilaterae, aliae duo latera habentes aequa, aliae totae inaequales". Trina igitur ista diuisio si sic proferretur fieret duplex: "figurarum quae trilaterae sunt aliae sunt aequales, aliae inaequales; inaequalium aliae sunt duo latera tantum aequa habentes, aliae tria inaequalia", id est omnia; et cum dicimus "rerum omnium alia sunt bona, alia mala, alia indifferentia", quae nec bona sunt scilicet nec mala, si ita diceretur gemina diuisio proueniret: "rerum
275
EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, ? VII: SEXTUS xI.17-20 (Bekker p. 549, 11.4-26) C Tpt tv rourwv ?vvrC&'oEEv oux roov 'AIXX. vbv 6' Kicvo iuw;g &pjt60t v7yK~rl JtrlVK6vevt, o atcivet, Kacc 96at'680 tpo6tapp6picat, 6ot co '"E
otov 'u'tccpxet', -E7trob Koa06 ooqetFv -6 'rob v-i itcap6vzog '6zt tippca 'tiicpac N iztv' oiov l[tApca'qxiveitat', ttxCpFet', iFrpov 6 86 eFti ccut Xhiytv Icce6 ztv;g z6)v -eOrl-tcaztuc6iv u rv tv oxvrpyov NeatF-cc 68eiv noxxcKt;,-trt o U T(o 8thazrtca rTrlsEuac6vztv,gv ion yovzrg Ica ou c&dvz'r ycp 'quoivel:at UT6pyet'-zdXa aTcca6iv Kacr6v, qxxiveract 6 ppXpet t v o' U" nrluacaov naph og ;aK napc 7'jv ifg OieOg x6nzaotcv. 8tvcoi 86i tuyvxdvovtog coi 'Tact trX ~YKExutK(og '(OV OVTOV XyOp)LEtV .topio0, Szav -d 8& ix 86~ evathc ~v aO&z0, ib tvy KWa, coTzTv', t6 'ta-tv' vz&xtzzotev o robg ritep(yg axX' 6zg tof 'quxivexOat' 8rloztKw6v. tept ptv
Rv[tFv
1o
ydp zifg z6ov ze rpbg zTlv qpbatv %rtoao~raEeg &ya6Oiv Kai Kaxxc6iv a obe6vzCpv ipcavot xtg6 itv yijtiv &y6vWg itpog tot;g 6oyatwccobg" 1cacd
68 z6 qptuv6tevov zoX, mv KEaczov ~Xojev 0ogo ip aov 6 ptopov tpoayopeevtv, ycyaO6v if K1Ca6 cep Kac 6 Titov'v toi6 tv6f-' g ot [toig
ivO6ah
oig
ED.] (
pfV' EO1KE6i0oiV,
Ap&D, oG [ot
6tav
Ka(at(piverat VT(at,
r1 [i ED.]
ydp *iyv
& trO0ov Xov Ka Xv6vxa, 0XE0ilg; 6p06eov ) i 6ro0 to1 ;Eiob 'I( (plS(Th KUac uyaUo0 [kpyaeoi[ ED.] i- 6v itv6arog yivErat &v6pi riog. [fols 319v-20r]
omnium alia sunt differentia, alia indifferentia; differentium alia sunt bona, alia mala" ... ' See also Cao, 'Nota' (as in n. 3), p. 324 n. g9. 175. In MS Laur. Plut. 85.19 the phrase appears as roi;g otv6iltotq instead of roig iv6(xatoiq, an error which Filelfo did not correct. Indeed, he could not correct it since he was clearly unaware of the existence of a work by Timon entitled 'IvGLAtoi. This explains why, in the corresponding Latin passage, he attributed the fragment cited by Sextus to the Xtikot (see Supplementum ed. H. Lloyd-Jonesand P. Parsons, Hellenisticum, Berlin and New York 1983, pp. 368-92 [nos 775840]; Timon of Phlius, Silli, ed. M. Di Marco, Rome 1989).
276
GIAN MARIO CAO
Vera loquor, nam vera mihi mea dicta videntur. Ordo mihi rectus, regula mihi recta est. Quod manet ipsa dei semper naturabonique. Inconcussa quibus sit sua vita viro. [fol. 87r-v] FILELFO, Commentationes ?VIII: FRANCESCO Florentinaede exilio, book III LEONARDUS: At idem Crantor Soderine hoc abs te plurimum dissentit, qui ubi divitias in illo universo ac publico graecorum spectaculo cum maximo omnium consensu pro se causam egisse introduxisset, ita rursus voluptatem in medium procedentem facit causam contra divitias pro se dicere, ut probet se iure optimo divitiis praeferendam, quippe quae neque firmae sint nec diuturnae, nec etiam propter sese ab hominibus expetantur, sed propter illum qui ex iis fructus ac voluptas sequitur. Itaque suffragiis graecorum omnium a voluptate divitiae convincuntur. Nec a voluptate solum, verum etiam a bona valitudine. Nam cum esset voluptas iam palmam reportatura, continuo bona valitudo cum magna omnium de se expectatione progreditur, docetque neque divitias nec voluptatem usui cuiquam esse posse ubi ipsa defuerit. Quod graeci rursus audientes non inviti in sententiam eunt bonae valitudinis. Monemur igitur a gravissimo Crantore vel inter ipsa indifferentia non commodorum atque incommodorum mediocre faciundum esse discrimen. [fol. 9gor-v]
? VIII: SEXTUs EMPIRICUS, Against theProfessors,
xi.51-58
(Bekker p. 556, 1. 24-p. 558, 1. 7)
(fr. 7a Mette) FivOev-Kca6 Kpxwvtop
Ei;g tqcpactv 'yotv nwovp "ob XEyoti0voupot6jetvog lyctSg Ei ccapievrtt uvFexp'iTao rcTapoectyClart. y7p vo1](TrttgEv, q(aol( [(pol(Yt ED.], KOtv6V It T6V
1-avEXxilvyv 09catpov, eig robto tr ~aCrTov Gc T v TCv dya6v nacptov xa c rpCeOv iKEtv, Eb)Og KaFt Eig ;vvotCav wvtrtCotouptevov 'v Stacopag. Toig gya60oig terig ovaXOTrl61tFocc np6iTov Pv 'nXobtog ncapanfl6Sacsg y7p 6 cpe'"'~76y, &v6peFgHvcvXXlveg, K6a0tov IcCapxm [tnapFXmvED.] &ntvcsvOp6ontot;g txg A FOicg; acCi 6 aixtrcx;g%otoShxeTg K; x tflv &Cxxrlv dxxcautv EiL vo obot Fv Xpet6Orltg oKa bytaivou(yt, KCa [Fv EpPv1 _cpEXm TNzepnv , v 6' noohiotX &iit6iv tcOv pCgemyv TOtov y7Cp vebpa y7ivotC~t'. oi 6to0[utc86v C1obxoucv're X6y7v HavvXXrlvwg -KEEeobo1atv [KEOb)o)oottv ED.] Wto6o?0vxt t t& o Xhourcw. hXX'F oto-yC v ioiu u E inpomria TC u Fntot icxa iTc ovi (Homer, vaKxrlpuzrojtvoo XIV.2 Iliad, 16)
6''4Epo;g v 8' 6 &pt'~ri) iFivt tv (Ptko6rlg, vivt. 'r?1 [6oaptoTr;ED.], i' 'r' i*1KEyEv6ov IEp ppove6vmov, d&pppatg;, nl)Kta XF7.rF ED.], 6at aco ilv 6iKat6v
ov "v raTrcoa [acvraToarc ortv vayccope-etv (Euripides, Phoenissae, 558; Electra,944) 6' F; Eig
ED.] 8' 6AP' pog Oi;0C oi p[tog, pepog
[i~Fir~Xt' ED.] OtK(OV, ptcKpov vOcfla'g;
oL[o
Fit'rtf
XPOvov,
K E 68ticcdzl rTnpd;g tov vCpCitnmvo6 St' iacZv6v, CxXa&tiv i54 aihcoi nptytvot~ivrlV dx'6na0utv 'K 6Cmg on ci ovi'v, hawivtg oi HavkvrlE;g, Kc? " i tO xpanya XE-tv obio;g bio c3ap6vteg, v. 1CKe1COVTr t 6ev tilv S6ovilv TregvovoCC ov&xc Kci tca?trlkg 6 PPape3iov ppeaPOct eFXot'Trl;g, tcv ~intv eiopa3XX7n arv6piv biyeia uvi~pv ctfl ez d obteifSovfig obie nhXkovrco OE6iv, Kci 8tS6' Kl, bg; (Eurip. [ft ED.] aTtcv Telep6; tgs )nobaog aitfig fr. Nauck) 714 Telephus,
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY Ti ytp

e inRkobzog Rhoiro; [[nkobro; ED.] 60pe*hi
277
v6oov;
[J'iKp Uv ED.] OkXotttKUC JtKCpMv Ka 0l7pav [O' ED.]&Xu1rov ED.] FXOV riCtcppav [xov &A0u0nov OiKEtVtor1yV [Piorov ED.] i" RXOuTCV VOoEiV
drobouavzrg ndhtv oi Hnavi~krlveg Kai eiravcp`6vrc; [etra-cxa66v-F; ED.], 60; oi6K vevTztKXtvoer7ifi Cci voco~oav tnocrzivcat'Zrlv (p'1o1ot vt ev Iiv )bEYav.&XX E6ctoviav, &v6pita inoXb vTcpo; &ptvremyv xwa ?ipcxov
%Xouya
TEpt
F-Cuomily,
xarao'rdocd
TE
X'711-'@ob
iTapotorn;, &v6pe; 'EXXlve;, &xXotpia v yivc~t 1i Krit [IKZi~StED.] Z tnap' uiv 10tou ei"atvt6 Te [T' &v ED.] o i TEO csyaO6iv, ; C Vnt v tzoig &CyaOoig ( nEptootit (t tv K pac~~v', ai ro61zov o1v eilkfhoovwr 1 Ic ot ril 1oTCCoav,rg e'EXrlvrg [-tv nprcia &petif bYiTC, 8&66' mpEtpa Zfe tC& dto6(0Toaoat, c&c 6''pita 6 r&4ou-ot v cc f flSovf, Xueeaocdov ntobzov. [fols 324v-25V]
il
Appendix II
This Appendix contains a passage from Poliziano's Panepistemon: see his Opera omnia, Venice 1498, fol. Z iir-v; there are slight differences in the 1553 Basle edition (as in n. 164), p. 467v, as Facing the Latin text are the relevant passages from Sextus Empiricus, Against the Professors, they appear in MS Laur. Plut. 85.11 (with several differences from those indicated by Gentile, 'Pico filologo' [as in n. 143], PP. 480-81 n. 46). For the sake of convenience, both texts have been divided into numbered paragraphs.
[I] Plerique tamen astrologiam vocant ipsam, quae proprie genethliologia vocatur, cuiusque professores a veteribus Caldei, Mathematici, Genethliacique vocantur, quae licet utroque iure, civili, pontificioque damnetur, impugnetur ab Augustino, rideatur a Basilio, tamen quia multos habet etiam nunc amatores, iure in caeterarum consortium recipietur. [II] Dividunt igitur zodiacum circulum in signa duodecim, singulaque mox in partes tricenas, quas in minuta rursus sexagena. Signorumque alia masculina faciunt, alia foeminina, quaedam bicorpora, quaedam tropica, nonnulla item solida.
[I] ... ahXXnpbg e [yevetcakoyTac v wyvEaoyaycv ED.], 1v TCLvoz~pot; ov6aoctv oi i KooTtoUvEwg a; ic t KcahX6tot CL0alatcOtctg pok76you;goaq (v.2 CazoT; avcvayopesouitv ... 1. 1]; fol. 144V) 728, 1. 29-729, [Bekker pp.
obv (optac6v cKicov cnpC9p ctatpobxtv KacrlXl"gOcc E-ig 6Ec?a o 6xtac, Ei EiSao(Tv 6 pt~Kovra... c?(tov [tovipac KECXn ... tCv 6F ry tlv 8&v 'oVpa v Eit iiloviKcra
6'
[II] zrov iiv
?(pmiwv
rcx
[itv
rtva
Cxppenvucwd
iacobat
rSc
6F
278
GIAN MARIO CAO
[III] Notant et quatuor illa centra, quae nos cardines, Horoscopum, Mesuranema, Occasum, quaeque singulis Hypogeum, praecedunt,
[IV] Apoclimata succedunt Epanaphorae.
[V] Sic domicilia duodecim faciunt,
[VI] quorum torpida tria, reliqua nomen habentia boni, malique genii, dei, deaeque mortis, et utriusque fortunae.
rx citv 6gtcca t& 86 oi5, OlQ&udK, K-ai acti tv& (v.5-6 [Bekker p. oE kyv tpomtl&x, tvca tp&6 729, 11.19-26]; fol. 145r) [III] o , tilv axax -cti ntcavyov toltjlv It ccpbg; yev-reSmgKptweovrca ?(0ta Ati ic crrlg dv iyv ccinoveFXoLxztryv %zjpactv, trov iaci &p' YtP [1tpoayop dctoc;a Tzx;itpoayopA)octg tvcat -T6v ED.] 'tcYap6X qoXrtv ROtLtOVT*at, &pteOt6v, &tEep Kotv() htv ov6oazTt KVTpac z6 KcXo{)otv, itacizrpov 86 z6v tkv WpocYKO6ov 6E iio6 yriv Kci 6i o vov t6 6 86a lgaeoupavrlCua Kat avrttpeoop6avrmljt,{5 awo'xt6 eloouvp6cvrljt Foxtiv (v.12 [Bekker p. 730, 11. 21-27]; fol. 145r-v) 6 ijv xXx Ixxci [IV] o0 iaalxtou totWmTv t65v Ki~rvTpv [T tilv tpoOyov ~6tov rt6KX4tCta (v.14 Et6tEvov itnavapop6v KaXoob)t, tr 6Ek Bekker p. 731, 11.3-5]; fol. 145v) [V] Fvtot 68 Eig Koi oar-yov (Stov 68m(Ectxai6pta 8t6X6vteg (v.9 [Bekker p. 730, 11.6-7]; fol. 145r) - t6 ir v [VI] fiirl 6F tpocvacp6Pelvov Too) ; SO6io), v Tio (Pcavepo ov, wcpocKwortoovrtog KaKoS qpcatv tvat, To 6a stercc
zouto, v o6 ~iE6nevov
8cailov6g
[VII] Post haec Arietem capiti, Taurum cervici, Geminos humeris, cordi Cancrum, pectori Leonem, Virginem ventri, Libram renibus, et vertebris, Scorpionem genitalibus, Sagittarium femoribus, Capricornum geniculis, Aquarium tibiis, Pisces pedibus.
TO Wailiovog, 6E rtpoc7yovtot) LeooupCavo)VTog c i i tovototpitav Kai e6v, To 6 KTrom oEypi86a ?(tov Ka pxp6JtEvov iEti riv U6xvtv C&py7bv TO 6&xtv v e-tCr Ocav~xo 6F , c&pX'v Ttivv To) ru K(aKClv Trlv, ijTEp iotvoiv Wai (xc4avse T TOp KC-Ko6caitovt, Tb ~att 8t6ttperp6v Ka pX6otevov ibi6 y7fv TOXrlv 8tctEpov &ycOyailav To 86~ xoympobv axu6Too) Tr c0yaO 6cailovt, 0 ;Ex' (&vctroiv 08Ev, vttteooupavipcVctcrog ED.] TO 08&, T 6F [6t&[-poV [povv 6tactpov I apy6v, 6 itxXytv ttep6gPLvov TO? bpoKit6 [6tcterTp6vaG'tED.] TO) &py7 (v.15taoteTrpeF [Bekker 17 p. 731, 11.5-16]; fol. 145') [VII] Kpth6v nv y&p t, crEqxXiv 6vojt&oroU tzaTpov 86E tpcXhov, 86t6to;o 6g S jto0g, 6- cziypvov, X0ovra 6F tXEup xq, Kaplivov xnapO6vov 68 yXoTo?og, Suy6v 68 ay6vag, Kc fl tpcv, to6orlTv nlpo;g, oopitiov ai6Soov w caiy6Kepv y6vaaT, t6poy6ov [t6prl60v ED.]
Kvl1Jatg, iXOlaSg 86 ir6&ag (v.21-22
tq rpya0WoO eYoupavpovozt,
[Bekker pp.
[VIII] Sed et alios aliis regionibus, populisque praeficiunt. Inter errantes autem soli, lunaeque dant primatum, Saturnum soli congruere,
73 1, 1. 30-732, 1. 3]; fol. 146r) [VIII] Kai TV 1ve TCfq hic~ Iv 4povuiv KLai tcVv qcoY Kp6vov 'e Kil A~i KYi ouvenptloupe~v Kl- g AfltrppVOTr K(a7oiOut 6ia ct6 i vEpxfiv, ov
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY lovem, Mercuriumque dicunt, quos et diurnos appellant. [IX] Domos autem singulas soli, lunaeque binas caeteris assignant, aliasque praeterea denotant, quibus singuli tristentur, et gaudeant. Fines decanosque pervident, tum qui cui sint utrinque satellites, Trigonicus ne, an Tetragonicus, an Hexagonicus, an directus inter quosque sit aspectus, stellarumque caeterarum diathema genituraeque dominum, et praesertim qui dicitur Oecodespotes, reliquorum configurationes, quae &cureptc~toi vocantur, unde etiam de vita, et morte, de moribus, fortunaque non singulorum modo, sed civitatum gentiumque pronunciant, ausi etiam Chronocratora, quem dicunt, ausi mundi genituram prodere Apotelesmatum vestigiis.
279
y7voWivov [Bekker p. 733, 11.26-30]; fols 146v--47r)
6ov i"Xtov, ib <rvepyoiot, ztov pte' titpav (v.32 [yevvo~tvov ED.] F7tPKcpa~Eiv
280
JOURNAL
OF THE WARBUR(;
AND COURTAULD
INSTITUTES,
LXIII,
2001

Prehistory of Modern Skepticism

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prehistory of Modern Skepticism

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Prehistory of Modern Scepticism: Sextus Empiricus in Fifteenth-Century Italy Author(s): Gian Mario Cao Reviewed work(s): Source:

THE PREHISTORYOF MODERN SCEPTICISM: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURYITALY

the text itself was approached.5

SEXTUSEMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

GIAN MARIO CAO

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

I have been unable to find a reply to this letter in Piero's correspondence

from this period. belief

1984, PP. 337-53.

1 tTCiEptpoC XYl'ou nTpbgd; / Zo) npTCEi ypxtpxaat?cig;:

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

und die Handschriften

GIAN MARIO CAO

SEXTUSEMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

GIAN MARIO CAO

IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY SEXTUSEMPIRICUS ITALY

Jahrh.'). 53. A. Nebe,

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

GIAN MARIO CAO

GIAN MARIO CAO

,w7744 144J Ur C kKfCE ~~irX

IMPr,4 by&?pyn jd4r r

MS Laur. Plut. 85-19, fol. 224v

IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY SEXTUSEMPIRICUS

GIAN MARIO CAO

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

a4* $4Ao 'rc

n' arb.OPIC64AM VrvOuGhw 'os/&CtO

5vr414.M.A,44 o~?EO~ob Aiecyb,;i

Wuc*r s"n lrSZ Ii ?'veiewl tr4A..

IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY SEXTUSEMPIRICUS

GIAN MARIO CAO

99. 'Sexti Empirici Commentariorumr maticos libri sex' (fol. 28r).

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

who draws, with

GIAN MARIO CAO

.....k i. . ......... . .......

$ ;' .... .... ....

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

GIAN MARIO CAO

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

Paris 2001, pp. 11-47 129. 'Sunt autern

GIAN MARIO CAO

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

GIAN MARIO CAO

It is also worth pointing

out that in his Quaestio de falsitate astrologiae (151o),

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

GIAN MARIO CAO

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

Florentinaede exilio, book I

KoavKao [acr3v Xp.aV iaxxiova TCCV. [fol. 323'] Xiyovto; ...

GIAN MARIO CAO

? I.B: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors,

? I.E: SEXTUSEMPIRICUS, Against theProfessors, xI.194 (Bekker p. 583, 11. 18-30).

\ 'T6 nepi zomo maOi'xovro',Tn i z nEpt

yovieOv Tma?;pfg 8t eppx6levog, III 752 SVF)

6F' TCv yov'ov

not?ioovtat, KaOxwEp abUTov avuog [fols 342v'-43r]

? II: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinaede exilio, book ii

~iaoov six6vzeg dya96v xpoaayope6eo0aut, y K ' Tt 6i(aV n i1v iaO v imntpokTlv

GIAN MARIO CAO