(*) 'Central Europe' should be roughly equated with the Holy Roman Empire and with the German language area of Europe.
Prof. Dr. Joseph S. Freedman, born in 1946, B.A. 1969 (University of Wisconsin-Madison), M.A. 1972, Ph.D. 1982 (University of Wisconsin-Madison), M.I.L.S. 1990 (University of
Michigan), is Associate Professor at Alabama State University. He was Gastprofessor at the University of Halle in 2004, at Uppsala in 2002, at Trinity College, Dublin in
2001, and Fellow of the Johannes a Lasko Bibliothek Emden in 2005, Scaliger-Fellow at the University of Leiden in 2003 and 2004.
He spent many years as a librarian and archivist working in management positions, and organized conferences at the Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbüttel (Germany) on
"Philosophy, Law and Theology in Heidelberg, at the turn of the 16th to the 17th century: the influence of Peter Ramus" (1997), and "The Universe of Learning in the Sixteenth and
Seventeenth Centuries" (2002).
Freedman, Joseph S. 1984. Deutsche Schulphilosophie Im Reformationszeitalter (1500-1650). Ein Handbuch Für Den Hochschulunterricht. Münster: MAkS Publications.
148 pages. Second edition revised edition (1985), 171 pages.
"This short textbook was published in connection with my seminars on the Reformation Era and Central European schools and universities during the 16th and early 17th centuries."
———. 1985. "Philosophy Instruction within the Institutional Framework of Central European Schools and Universities During the Reformation Era." In History of Universities. Vol.
5, 117-166. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Reprinted as Essay II in: Philosophy and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500-1700.
"In order to assess the place which philosophy instruction had within the organisational framework of schools and universities in Central Europe during the Reformation era
(c.1500-1650), one should first briefly take a closer look at the concept of philosophy. This concept is very frequently discussed in philosophical encyclopedias, in textbooks on metaphysics,
physics, mathematics, ethics, politics and logic, and in other kinds of works as well. Within the context of these discussions philosophy is usually divided into various disciplines. Three
classifications of philosophical disciplines by Central European authors are presented in tables a , b, and c.
Detailed discussion of such classifications lies beyond the scope of this paper. Only the following points need concern us here. Physics, mathematics, ethics, family life
(oeconomica), and politics appear in virtually all of these classifications made during the 1500-1650 period. Metaphysics is occasionally omitted, especially in those classifications
presented by some sixteenth-century Protestant philosophers. Family life is sometimes considered as a sub-category of politics. The seven liberal arts (i.e. grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic,
geometry, music, and astronomy) are usually included within these classifications. Arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy normally fall within the realm of mathematics. Increasingly from about
the year 1550 onwards some authors argue that philology (i.e. logic, rhetoric, grammar, and sometimes poetry and/or history) is not properly speaking a part of philosophy, but rather preparation for
and an instrument of the same. This latter development -- as we shall see -- was reflected within the philosophy curriculum of Central European academic institutions during the Reformation era." p.
"Metaphysics played an important role in the philosophical curriculum of fifteenth-century Central European universities. By the 1520s, however, metaphysics instruction began to be
removed from the curriculum.(97) This was especially true at Protestant universities (e.g. Basel, Leipzig, Rostock, Tubingen, and Wittenberg).(98) Yet at some Catholic universities -- e.g. Ingolstadt
(1526), Vienna (1537), and Heidelberg (1551) -- metaphysics instruction was also absent. Beginning in the second half of the sixteenth century, metaphysics instruction was strongly emphasised at
Jesuit academic institutions (e.g. the University of Dillingen) and at those universities where the Jesuits were able to influence or determine the philosophy curriculum (e.g. Cologne, Ingolstadt).
At some Protestant universities metaphysics instruction slowly resurfaced in the course of the late sixteenth and early seventeeth centuries.(99) Sometimes subject matter taken from the discipline of
metaphysics was taught as part of physics and/or ethics and/or logic instruction." pp. 124-125
(97) No easy explanation can be given for this development; this problem will be discussed in another article.
(98) Metaphysics was taught at the University of Leipzig through the year 1542 but not thereafter; see Leipzig (1502-1558), pp. 667-669.
(99) Max Wundt held to this opinion; see Max Wundt, Die deutsche Schulmetaphysik des 17. Jahrhunderts (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr/Paul Siebeck, 1939), pp. 5, 12-13, 34-69. To date
little evidence has been produced to the contrary. At the Altdorf Academy in 1586 and 1589 and at the University of Giessen in 1607 the professor of logic also taught metaphysics; by 1618 in Altdorf
and by 1629 in Giessen there was a professor of logic and metaphysics. See Altdorf (1586), fol. B1 Altdorf (1589), fol. B1r; Altdorf (1618); table 1.
———. 1985. "Classification and Definition within 16th and 17th Century Philosophy." In Studien Zur Klassifikation, Systematik Und Terminologie. Theorie Und Praxis. Akten Der 6.
Jahrestagung Des Münsteraner Arbeitskreises Für Semiotik, Münster 25. Und 26. September 1984, edited by Dutz, Klaus D., 321-354. Münster: Institut für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft und MAkS
———. 1986. "Cicero in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Rhetoric Instruction." Rhetorica no. 4 (3):227-254.
Reprinted as Essay III in: Philosophy and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500-1700.
"Any systematic attempt to investigate the role of Cicero within rhetoric instruction in16th- and 17th-century Europe will uncover an overwhelming amount of relevant source material
in printed and manuscript form extant in hundreds -- if not thousands -- of European archives and libraries. The assertion that Cicero was used within this rhetoric instruction amounts to little more
than the statement of a self-evident fact. Less evident is how and why Cicero's writings were used to teach rhetoric during the period from 1500 to 1700. A variety of source materials will be
examined here in order to arrive at tentative answers to these two questions." p. 227
———. 1986. "Signs within 16th and 17th Century Philosophy: The Case of Clemens Timpler (1563/64-1624)." In Geschichte Und Geschichtsschreibung Der Semiotik. Fallstudien. Akten
Der 8. Arbeitstagung Des Münsteraner Arbeitskreises Für Semiotik, Münster 2.-3.10.1985, edited by Dutz, Klaus D. and Schmitter, Peter, 101-118. Münster: MAkS Publikationen.
———. 1988. European Academic Philosophy in the Late Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth Centuries. The Life, Significance, and Philosophy of Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624).
Hildesheim: Georg Olms.
Table of Contents:
Foreword I; Preface V-XIX; Chapter 1: Introduction 1; Chapter 2-6: The Life of Clemens Timpler.
Chapter 2: Timpler's Childhood, Education, and Early Activity as a Private Teacher (1563/4-1592) 7
Chapter 3: Timpler at Heidelberg (1592-1595) 24
Chapter 4: Timpler as Professor at the Gymnasium Illustre Arnoldinum in Steinfurt/Westphalia (1595-1624) 34
Chapter 5: The Steinfurt Gymnasium Illustre Arnoldinum From its Beginnings in 1588 Until the Pillaging of the School in 1635 46
Chapter 6: Timpler's Personality and Religious Views 66
Chapter 7-9: Timpler's Historical Significance.
Chapter 7: Timpler' s Importance Within Seventeenth Century Europe 86
Chapter 8: Authorities Cited Within Timpler's Writings 125
Chapter 9: Timpler, Aristotle, and "Aristotelianism": Timpler' s Philosophy as School Curriculum 162
Chapter 10-20: Timpler's Philosophy.
Chapter 10: A. The Organization of Timpler's Individual Philosophical Writings. B. Timpler's Short Treatise on the Liberal Arts (Technologia). C. The Interrelatedness of Academic
Disciplines Within Timpler's Thought: Mathematics and Theology Within Timpler's Writings 187
Chapter 11: Metaphysics 210; Chapter 12: Physics 249; Chapter 13: Logic 278; Chapter 14: Rhetoric 307; Chapter 15: Ethics 326; Chapter 16: Family Life 351; Chapter 17: Politics 363;
Chapter 18: Timpler's Practical Philosophy: Some Conclusions 387; Chapter 19: Optics 403; Chapter 20: Signs and Human Physiognomy 412; Chapter 21: Conclusions 427
Annotated Table of Contents to the Text of Chapters 1-21 b-n
Footnotes to the Preface XX
Footnotes to chapter 1-21 451
Bibliography 737; Contents listed : 737; Part I: Clemens Timpler 738; Part II: General Bibliography 771; Notes to the Bibliography 843; List of Illustrations XXII ; Illustrations
XXV; Index of Persons and Places.
"This monograph is a substantially revised version of my Ph.D. dissertation, which was defended at the University of Wisconsin-Madison on September 16, 1982; it bore the title, "The
Life, Significance, and Philosophy of Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624)." It was written and researched while residing in the Federal Republic of Germany for the ten years previous to its completion. In
its present revised form, chapter 11, 12, 17, and 20 of the dissertation have been completely rewritten. Chapters 7 and 18 have been rewritten in part. Minor alterations and corrections have been
undertaken in all of the remaining chapters. The bibliography has been expanded in order to include the multitude of additional seventeenth century works discussed in chapter 7 as well as to list
relevance secondary literature which has appeared since 1982.
Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624) has been chosen as the subject matter of this study principally because the quality of his philosophical writings stands out very noticeably in
comparison to that of works written by other late sixteenth and early seventeenth century academic philosophers. Indeed, it could be argued that he was one of the most talented philosophers active in
Europe between 1550 and 1650. However, he was less influential than some of his contemporaries (e.g., his own disciple Bartholomaeus Keckermann); one explanation for this shall be ventured in chapter
7 section 16 of this monograph.
Clemens Timpler not only exemplifies the highest standards of late sixteenth and early seventeenth century European academic philosophy, but his works also provide an excellent
survey of its scope and content. Timpler published textbooks on metaphysics, physics, logic, rhetoric, ethics, family life (oeconomica), politics, optics, and human physiognomy presented
well systematized and very detailed presentations of the major philosophical disciplines studied in his day (barring mathematics and grammar). Therefore, the examination of Timpler's philosophy also
serves as a very useful vehicle to gain a general understanding of the parameters of and topics discussed within late sixteenth and early seventeenth century European philosophy considered as a
whole. For this reason, the specialized as well as the general scope of this monograph is reflected in its title." (From the Foreword)
———. 1988. "Die Karriere Und Bedeutung Von Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624)." In 400 Jahre Arnoldinum 1588-1988. Festschrift, 69-77. Greven: Eggenkamp.
———. 1992. "Aristotelianism and Humanism in Late Reformation German Philosophy: The Case of Clemens Timpler, 1563/64-1624." In The Harvest of German Humanism. Papers in Honor of
Lewis W. Spitz, edited by Fleischer, Manfred, 213-232. St. Louis: Concordia Press.
———. 1993. "Aristotle and the Content of Philosophy Instruction at Central European Schools and Universities During the Reformation Era (1500-1650)." Proceedings of the American
Philosophical Society no. 137 (2):213-253.
Reprinted as Essay V in: Philosophy and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500-1700.
"The philosophy of the late Middle Ages and the Reformation Era, i.e., of the period between 1350 and 1650, has been largely ignored by historians of philosophy. A few philosophers
of this period
i.e., Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464) and Francis Suarez (1548-1617) - have frequently been studied by twentieth-century historians of philosophy. However, thousands of philosophers of
that three-hundred-year period have been neglected. The writings of those philosophers arose from their academic instruction at schools and universities scattered throughout Europe. One general fact
is known concerning a large portion of these writings: they make substantial use of Aristotle's works. How should one proceed in attempting to understand these writings and the manner in which they
Generally, there has been a tendency to place these authors within the framework of the "Aristotelian tradition" or "Aristotelianism." It is the purpose of this article to examine
the merits of that tendency. To what extent do these two concepts help us to, or deter us from, understanding European philosophy of the late fourteenth through the early seventeenth centuries?
This article will focus on the manner in which Aristotle's writings were utilized in Central Europe during the second half of this period, i.e., between 1500 and 1650. At individual
Central European schools and universities during this period, philosophy instruction included some or all of the following disciplines: metaphysics, physics, mathematics, ethics, family life
(oeconomica), politics, logic, rhetoric, grammar, poetics, and history. Texts by Aristotle were usually utilized to some extent in the instruction of metaphysics, physics, ethics, family
life, politics, logic, rhetoric, and poetics. In concentrating on Central Europe during these one and one-half centuries, extant sources can be utilized in order to answer the following three
questions: 1. In what ways are Aristotle's texts utilized at individual academic institutions during the Reformation era? 2. In what manner do individual philosophers use Aristotle's writings during
this period? 3. How does a group of sixteenth and seventeenth-century philosophers interpret Aristotle when discussing individual philosophical concepts?" (2)
(2) The focus of this article is limited to Central Europe during the Reformation Era for the following two reasons: 1. The curriculum of Central European schools and universities
during the Reformation Era can be discussed on the basis of primary sources extant both in manuscript and printed form; however, such sources are much harder to find for schools and universities in
other parts of Europe. 2. Central European philosophical works of the late Middle Ages are largely in manuscript form. These works are scattered throughout Europe; the vast majority of them have not
yet been read or in many cases even been sifted. The following article discusses-and gives primary source bibliography for- a large number of these Central European institutions: Joseph S. Freedman,
"Philosophy Instruction within the Institutional Framework of Central European Schools and Universities during the Reformation Era," History of Universities vol. 5 (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1985): 117-166. (some notes omitted)
———. 1993. "The Diffusion of the Writings of Petrus Ramus in Central Europe, C. 1570 - C.1630." Renaissance Quarterly no. 56 (1):98-152.
Reprinted as Essay IV in: Philosophy and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500-1700.
"For what reasons di Academicians select to use or not to use any given textbook for their own classroom instruction during the Renaissance? To what extent did ideological or
pragmatic considerations influence such decisions? In this article these questions are posed to examine the use of the writings ofPetrus Ramus (1515- 1572) and Omer Talon (ca. 1510- 1562) at schools
and universities in Central Europe during the six decades between 1570 and 1630. Did "Ramist" academicians of this period make use in the classroom of writings by these two authors because of some
fundamental agreement with their views? Or were these two authors preferred during these six decades because their writings could be used eclectically and/or they fit well into specific parts of the
curriculum at certain academic institutions?
In the period between 1570 and 1630 there were over 30 universities and hundreds of schools in the German-language area of Europe. A large amount of curricular information-largely
in the form of annual, semi-annual, or occasional outlines of instruction as well as personal or official correspondence-exists for many of these schools and universities. Textbooks and printed
disputations arising from instruction held at these academic institutions are also extant. This assessment of the use of writings by Ramus and Talon in Central European academic institutions is based
on the examination of a substantial portion of this evidence. The task of finding and evaluating such evidence pertaining to other parts of Europe must be left for a separate study." (p. 98)
"It was the period between 1570 and 1630, therefore, which saw the most extensive use of the writings of Petrus Ramus and Omer Talon at Central European schools. Among the points
made by Walter J. Ong in his monograph on Ramus are the following.125 First, opposition to Ramus from university-level academics was strong and often very well articulated. Second, Ramus's works on
logic and rhetoric were relatively uncomplicated in their content. And third, Ramus's writings were best received by, and to a large extent intended for, younger students. Ramus's influence in
Central Europe between 1570 and 1630 can be explained within the context of these three points. In Central Europe during these six decades the writings of Ramus found their most extensive use within
the realm of the pre-university level curriculum.
On the basis of the evidence presented in this article, it would appear that it was largely for pragmatic reasons that Ramus was used at some individual academic institutions but
not at others in Central Europe during the period between 1570 and 1630. It is difficult to use ideology to explain these developments. Ramus's disciples and commentators generally used Ramus's
writings eclectically. Some Ramus commentators (e.g., Friedrich Beurhusius, Severinus Sluterus) also published commentaries on Aristotle, Cicero, or some combination of these and/or other authors.
The opinions of individual "Ramists" on a given topic -- e. g. , the classifications of philosophical disciplines, the concept of method -- differed markedly. In fact, it is difficult to make any
sense at all of the term "Ramist" when discussing the use of Ramus's writings in Central Europe between 1570 and 1630. The extent to which "Ramism" can or cannot be used as a viable category to
explain the use of writings by Ramus and Talon at schools and universities beyond Central Europe is a topic which merits further attention." p. 144 (notes omitted)
———. 1994. "Instruction in Philosophy and the Arts in Early Modern Central Europe: Some Thoughts Concerning the Reproduction of Select Primary Source Materials." Chloe.Beihefte
zum Daphnis no. 25:961-974.
Conference Proceedings, "Editionsdesiderate zur frühen Neuzeit. Beiträge zur Tagung der Kommission für die Edition von Texten der Frühen Neuzeit" held at Wolfenbüttel, Germany,
October 4-7, 1994 (Zweiter Teil).
"The bulk of the textbooks used in sixteenth-, seventeenth-, and eighteenth-century Europe which are extant have survived as printed works. This is especially true in the case of
editions of works by Aristotle, Cicero, and other ancient as well as modem authors; the same also applies to most commentaries and independently titled textbooks.
Student lecture notes usually have survived as manuscripts. Disputations did not begin to be commonly published in Central Europe until the latter decades of the sixteenth century.
Academic correspondence generally is extant in manuscript form, though some collections of such correspondence were published during the early modem period.
Reference works, official academic orations, and announcements of lecture offerings for the coming semester or year were normally published, while curriculum plans frequently were
not. Some printed works contained important handwritten addenda such as owner's marks, autographs, student notes, and corrections; some broadsheets and other short printed works have survived due to
the fact that they were inserted between leaves of manuscripts.
All of these various types of sixteenth-, seventeenth-, and eighteenth-century works written on diverse philological and philosophical subject-matters together constitute a very
large quantity of extant printed and manuscript material. How can one determine which samples of these materials should be edited and/or reproduced in print or non-print formats? In order to provide
an answer to this question, three preliminary questions can be posed here: 1. At which libraries and archives are these materials found and how thoroughly have these materials been catalogued there?
2. Which bibliographies of these early modem philological and philosophical works are available? 3. What works have already been made edited and/or reproduced in some format?
Germany does not have a national library having a role comparable to that of the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris and of the British Library in London. But Germany does have hundreds
of libraries and archives that house sixteenth-, seventeenth-, and eighteenth- century printed works and manuscripts. The Duke August Library in Wolfenbuttel and the Bavarian State Library in Munich
are among the most important repositories of philological and philosophical materials from this time period. The Duke August Library has been especially active in publishing catalogs describing its
own sixteenth- and seventeenth-century printed works and in making its own bibliographic records accessible electronically. And its holdings - together with those of the Bavarian State Library - form
the core of the multivolume Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des 16. Jahrhunderts [VD 16]." pp. 965-966
———. 1994. "Classifications of Philosophy, the Arts, and the Sciences in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Europe." The Modern Schoolman no. 72 (1):37-65.
Reprinted as Essay VII in: Philosophy and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500-1700.
"One aspect of the history of philosophy which has received relatively little attention is how the philosophy concept itself has been classified into parts and how these
classifications have evolved over the centuries. A few studies have focused on the development of these classifications in the ancient and medieval West; several other studies have discussed their
development in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Europe. Classifications of philosophy during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries have been almost completely neglected; during those two
centuries the manner in which philosophy -- and related concepts such as the arts, the liberal arts, the sciences, and encyclopedia -- was divided into parts underwent some significant changes.
Philosophy was taught at universities and schools throughout Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and served to prepare students for study of theology, medicine,
and jurisprudence.' A large volume of writings -- both in printed and in manuscript form -- was produced in conjunction with this philosophy instruction. Many textbooks on metaphysics, physics,
mathematics, ethics, logic, and other subjects written during this period contained a section on the concept of philosophy, while some writings were devoted specifically to that latter topic. When
examining the philosophy concept, most authors provided a definition or definitions thereof before proceeding to classify its parts. Some authors also included discussion of the various schools
(sectae) of philosophers.
Despite the fact that many attempts were made to define philosophy during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, these definitions generally do not provide us with much
information concerning the philosophy concept itself.
This is partially due to sixteenth- and seventeenth-century views with respect to definitions. During those two centuries, definition theory was normally discussed within logic
textbooks and within short treatises specifically devoted to the subject matter of both definition and classification or just definition alone." p. 37 (notes omitted)
This article has its origin in a lecture given at the Fourth International Leibniz Congress at Hannover, Germany in November of 1983; it appears here in expanded and revised
———. 1994. "Encyclopedic Philosophical Writings in Central Europe During the High and Late Renaissance (C. 1500 - C. 1700)." Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte no.
Reprinted as Essay VI in: Philosophy and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500-1700.
"The history of encyclopedias begins in the ancient world and extends up to the present day. What is an encyclopedia?1 What kinds of encyclopedias are there? And to what extent are
encyclopedias intended for pupils at schools, for students at universities, or for some other, non-academic groups of people?
This article will attempt to provide answers to these questions within the limited context of Central Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.(*) It is important to
keep in mind that the Latin. term encyclopaedia was only one of many terms that were used during that period in order to denote or describe such works. And a few of these terms -- such as
method (methodus) and system (systema) -- can be regarded as very significant for the development of encyclopedias in Central Europe during these two centuries.
Some sixteenth- and seventeenth-century encyclopedias intended to cover all academic subjects, including theology, jurisprudence, medicine, and philosophy. Other encyclopedias only
covered one or several of these areas; still others covered the mechanical arts, occult science, or popular subject matter. This article focuses primarily on the area of philosophy, that is, on
encyclopedic writings on philosophy that are "interdisciplinary" insofar as they discuss at least two philosophical disciplines." (pp. 212-213, notes omitted)
"The first years of the seventeenth century saw three concurrent developments in Central Europe. First, the metaphysics emerged as a preeminent philosophical discipline. Second, the
the term systema began to be used in the titles of comprehensive textbooks on many philosophical as well as non-philosophical disciplines. Third, there was a sharp increase in the number of
encyclopedic philosophical writings. Shortly before the year 1620, there was a virtual explosion in the number of such writings, which then continued to appear commonly in Central Europe through the
seventeenth century and thereafter.
As indicated earlier, the discipline of metaphysics contains concepts relevant to all other philosophical disciplines. Just as works on metaphysics and interdisciplinary
philosophical works disappeared together in the early sixteenth century, they began to reappear together at the end of that same century. Systematic textbooks on individual disciplines intended to
cover the entire scope of those disciplines. This new emphasis on the comprehensive coverage of individual academic disciplines from the year 1600 onwards went hand-in-hand with the reemergence of
encyclopedic philosophical writings which were intended as comprehensive philosophical textbooks." p. 234
(*) It is within the context of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Central Europe that a sufficient diversity and quantity of primary source materials -- including both
philosophical texts by individual authors and detailed information concerning the curricula of individual academic institutions -- could be found in order to arrive at conclusions concerning the
evolution of encyclopedic philosophical writings.
———. 1997. "The Career and Writings of Bartholomew Keckermann (D. 1609)." Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society no. 141 (3):305-364.
Reprinted as Essay VIII in: Philosophy and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500-1700.
"In conclusion, the following three questions can be posed with respect to Keckermann and his writings. First, what was Keckermann's contribution to intellectual history? Second,
why was Keckermann so famous during the early seventeenth century? And third, which of these first two questions should concern us most, and why?
With regard to the first question, Keckermann can be considered to have made at least three contributions to intellectual history. First, Keckermann was one of the earliest Western
thinkers to use the term "system" to describe academic treatises; his detailed discussion of the component parts of systematic textbooks appears to be the first of this kind and may have been without
parallel during the entire seventeenth century. Second, Keckermann was exceptional in so far as he stressed that each academic discipline -- barring metaphysics -- has its own history. Keckermann
documented the history of individual disciplines by including chronologically and systematically arranged bibliographies within writings on some of those disciplines. In his multi-volume history of
logic, Wilhelm Risse refers to Bartholomew Keckermann as the first historian of logic.(81) Keckermann's bibliographies, which are evidence of his broad knowledge of scholarship in his time, can still
be used today to identify the names of many important sixteenth-century authors of academic works.
Third, Keckermann was able to integrate discussion of rhetoric, history, collections of aphorisms, dictionaries, emblems, and other "humanist" subject matter within logically
arranged and systematically organized treatises. He stressed the relevance of this humanist subject matter to public life. It could be argued that Keckermann made a valuable contribution to early
modern European intellectual history insofar as he was successful in incorporating a form of civic humanism within a scholastic framework.
Turning to the second question, at least eight reasons can be given in order to help explain Bartholomew Keckermann's fame during the seventeenth century. First, his academic career
and the publication of his many writings began at an opportune time; higher education had been expanding in Central Europe during the late sixteenth century and continued to do so through the first
quarter of the following century." Second, academic encyclopedias and encyclopedic collections of academic writings began to appear in Central Europe in about the year 1600; they were published --
and used within academic instruction -- with increasing frequency during the following decades. The author of the preface to the 1614 edition of Keckermann's collected works pointed to their
encyclopedic scope and to their enhanced usefulness as a result of that scope." Keckermann published works on almost all of the academic disciplines taught by his contemporaries.
Third, Keckermann began his career by publishing primarily in the discipline of logic, for which there was a tremendous demand at Central European schools and universities during
his time. His many types of logic textbooks were able to be used in logic instruction at various levels. Fourth, the years around 1600 saw the introduction of a number of new textbook formats in
Central Europe; with his Systema and his Prolegomena, Keckermann belonged to that group of scholars at the forefront of these new developments.
Fifth, he used the writings of Aristotle eclectically and the writings of Ramus critically at a time when many other school and university professors chose to do likewise. Sixth, he
won the enthusiastic support of colleagues, friends, and students, who edited and published many of Keckermann's works both before and after his early death. Seventh, published attacks directed
against Keckermann's writings -- beginning in the year 1599 -- by a host of enemies helped to make him better known. And eighth, Keckermann's reputation had a snowball effect. Some academic
institutions and individual professors chose to use his writings in part because of their reputation and of their relative availability in a period when libraries and the book trade functioned less
effectively than they do today.
Turning to the third question, I would like to suggest that the study of Keckermann's contribution to intellectual history deserves less attention than does the study of his career
and of his systematically-written works. Thousands of professors and other teachers published their writings during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Most of the writings of these authors have
been unread for centuries; many of these writings have yet to be rediscovered, assuming that they are still extant at all. So while Keckermann appears to have made several important contributions to
European intellectual life within the context of schools and universities, one cannot completely exclude the possibility that he was at least partially preempted by thinkers whose works are still
unread or unknown. And it should also be noted that originality was not valued by Keckermann's contemporaries in the same way as it is by twentieth-century scholars. It was not uncommon in
Keckermann's time for the authors of academic writings to defend themselves against -- or to attack others with -- the charge of "unwarranted novelty."
On the other hand, if we pose the question how Keckermann's career was so successful, our answer also provides us with information concerning the academic and intellectual
environment of his time. The general parameters affecting Keckermann's academic career also pertained to thousands of other individuals who were pursuing such careers during the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries. Certain paths led to successful careers at academic institutions; as part of this process, a professional scholar such a Keckermann might fail to receive the offer of a certain
academic position but might also decline to accept another position.
In addition, Keckermann's academic writings generally appear to have differed relatively little in content from the content of writings of other sixteenth- and seventeenth-century
authors, including the hundreds of sixteenth-century authors whom he cited as well as those seventeenth-century authors who made use of Keckermann's writings within their own. In studying
Keckermann's writings on metaphysics, physics, mathematics, ethics, family life, politics, logic, rhetoric, and history, we are looking at a corpus of learned views that -- barring a relatively small
number of controversial points of doctrine -- basically represented the curriculum in the arts and the sciences during his time.
To summarize, the value of studying Keckermann's career and writings lies not so much in the fact that he was original in some scientific, or intellectual sense of that word.
Instead, while studying Keckermann we are also provided with a wealth of information concerning academic life in his time as well as concerning a large body of knowledge taught to tens of thousands
of students at European schools and universities. It could be argued that the study of the career and writings of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century European professional scholars pertains more to
social history or cultural history in some broad sense than it does to intellectual history." (pp. 323-325, notes omitted)
(81) Wilhelm Risse, Die Logik der Neuzeit, vol. 1, 1500-1640 (Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Friedrich Frommann Verlag / Gunther Holzboog, 1964), 9.
———. 1999. Philosophy and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500-1700. Teaching and Texts at Schools and Universities. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Variorum Collected Studies Series. CS626. Collection of seven previously published essays with a new Introduction.
Contents: Preface VII-VIII; Introduction. The Study of Sixteenth- and Seventeenth- Century Writings on Academic Philosophy: Some Methodological Considerations 1-40 (First
Publication); II. Philosophy Instruction within the Institutional Framework of Central European Schools and Universities during the Reformation Era 117-166 (History of Universities 5.
Oxford,) 1985); III. Cicero in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth- Century Rhetoric Instruction 227-254 (Rhetorica 4, no. 3. Berkeley, California, 1986); IV. The Diffusion of the
Writings of Petrus Ramus in Central Europe, c. 1570-c. 1630 98-152 (Renaissance Quarterly 46, no. I. New York, 1993); V. Aristotle and the Content of Philosophy Instruction at Central
European Schools and Universities during the Reformation Era (1500-1650) 213-253 (Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 137, no. 2. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1993) VI.
Encylopedic Philosophical Writings in Central Europe during the High and Late Renaissance (ca. 1500-ca. 1700) 212-256 (Archiv fair Begriffsgeschichte 37. Bonn, 1994); VII. Classifications of
Philosophy, the Sciences, and the Arts in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Europe 37-65 (The Modern Schoolman 72, no. 2. St Louis, Missouri, 1994); VIII. The Career and Writings of
Bartholomew Keckermann (d. 1609) 305-364 (Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 141, no. 3. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1997); Index of Academic Institutions 1-3; Index of
Authors and Persons (Pre-AD 1800) 1-10; Index of Concepts/Terms and People/Places 1-9.
"Instruction in philosophy and the arts was a normal part of the university-level and secondary education routinely received by students in late medieval and early modem Europe. Yet
the study of this instruction has received relatively little attention by modem scholars. The articles in this collection focus on this largely neglected area of research with a primary focus on
Central Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
The purpose of article I is to bring together as well as to expand upon many of the topics discussed and conclusions stated in articles II through VIII; in doing so, the concepts of
classification and definition as well as some sixteenth- and seventeenth-century views concerning "schools of philosophers" (sectae) are discussed. Article II draws a connection between the
evolving role of philosophy instruction within the institutional framework of Central European schools and universities between ca. 1500 and ca. 1650 and the evolution of the philosophy concept
during that same period. Article III is devoted to discussion of how and why Cicero's writings were used to teach rhetoric at European schools and universities during the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries. Article IV begins by presenting evidence - published by Walter Ong - that the writings of Petrus Ramus and Omer Talon were printed most often in Central Europe than anywhere else, and
mainly between c. 1570 and c. 1630; this article then examines why that was the case, and attributes this not to the influence of ideology, but instead mainly to pragmatic decisions made at
individual Central European academic institutions.
Article V focuses on the manner in which Aristotle's wrtings were utilized in Central Europe during the sixteenth century and the first half of the seventeenth; it is argued that
individual philosophers and individual academic institutions elected to utilize Aristotle's writings largely due to practical considerations and not because of any general affinity for
"Aristotelianism" or "Aristotelian" views. Article VI examines the evolution of the encyclopedic philosophical writings produced in Central Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; in
doing so, attention is given to the decline and subsequent rebirth of the discipline of metaphysics, to the concepts of method and system, to the writings of Petrus Ramus and Omer Talon, to the
evolution of philosophical curricula at Central European schools and universities, and to the manner in which encyclopedia and related concepts are utilized in writings of this period. Article VII
focuses on classifications of philosophy, the sciences, and the arts during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; attention is given to definitions of philosophy, mention of individual
philosophical disciplines, discussions of the liberal arts, and the evolution of the philosophy concept itself. Article VIII provides new biographical and bibliographical material concerning
Bartholomew Keckermann (d. 1609); it also discusses Keckermann's contributions to intellectual history as well as why and how he became so famous in academic circles during the early seventeenth
century." (from the Preface)
———. 1999. "Phillip Melanchthon's Views Concerning Petrus Ramus as Expressed in a Private Letter Written in 1543: A Brief Assessment." In Phillip Melanchthon Und Die Marburger
Professoren. Vol Ii, edited by Mahlmann-Bauer, Barbara, 841-848. Marburg: Universitätsbibliothek.
———. 1999. "Introduction. The Study of Sixteenth- and Seventeenth- Century Writings on Academic Philosophy: Some Methodological Considerations." In Philosophy and the Arts in
Central Europe, 1500-1700. Teaching and Texts at Schools and Universities, 1-40. Aldershot: Ashgate.
"1. Topics discussed within this collection of articles; 2. Definitions and classifications within the context of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century thought and beyond; 3.
Sixteenth- and seventeenth-century writings on philosophy normally arose within the context of academic instruction; principal philosophical subject matters (academic disciplines) and genres of
philosophical writings during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; 4. Academic philosophical writings vs. academic writings on jurisprudence, medicine and theology; 5 . Academic philosophical
writings vs. non-academic treatises; 6 . Schools of philosophers (sectae) as discussed during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; ideological constructs and the study of sixteenth- and
seventeenth-century academic philosophy; 7. To what extent was religious confession a major factor within sixteenth- and seventeenth-century academic philosophy? 8 . To what extent were there
variations between different regions of Europe with regard to academic philosophy? 9. Complex philosophical concepts (e.g., nature, signs, theory of knowledge) and the parameters of individual
academic disciplines in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; 10 . Due to the rudimentary state of our knowledge concerning sixteenth- and seventeenth-century philosophy, the conclusions arrived
at in this volume are stated in cautious terms; the primary aim of this volume is to further research in this subject area.
1. Articles II through VIII of this collection all pertain to texts on philosophy and the arts as utilized at schools and universities during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries
with an emphasis on Central Europe. These seven articles focus on three kinds of topics: 1. authors of these texts, 2. the academic institutions at which those authors taught and produced texts in
published and unpublished form, 3. terms, concepts, and subject areas discussed within texts. The three indices which accompany this collection are devoted to 1., 2., and 3. above.
The authors mentioned in this collection represent a small sampling of the thousands of such authors who taught at Central European schools and universities - or whose writings
circulated there - during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. An addition, four separate articles (III, IV, V, and VIII) focus on how educators of the High and Late Renaissance discussed two
ancient authorities (i.e., Aristotle and Cicero) and two more "recent" ones (i.e., Petrus Ramus and Bartholomew Keckermann). Curriculum plans and texts specifically intended for or used at individual
academic institutions in sixteenth-and seventeenth-century Central Europe are the principal sources used in order to discuss those same academic institutions; one article (II) focuses primarily on
curriculum plans.(1) The concepts of philosophy (via "classifications of philosophical disciplines") and encyclopedia (via "encyclopedic philosophical writings") are discussed within two separate
articles in this collection (VI and VII). The concepts of classification, definition, nature, and sign are discussed within sections 2 and 9 of this introductory article.
(1 )Article VIII, however, also makes extensive use of some additional kinds of primary source materials (e.g., academic correspondence, dedications/prefaces to published textbooks,
and the minutes of faculty governing bodies at the University of Heidelberg) as sources of biographical information." pp. 1-2
———. 2001. "Melanchthon's Opinion of Ramus and the Utilization of Their Writings in Central Europe." In The Influence of Petrus Ramus, edited by Feingold, Mordechai,
Freedman, Joseph S. and Rother, Wolfgang, 68-91. Basel: Schwabe.
"Philipp Melanchthon (1497-1560) and Petrus Ramus (1515-1572) can be considered as two of the sixteenth century's most significant educators. To what extent were the writings of
these two authors utilized in Central European schools and universities during the sixteenth and the early seventeenth centuries? Were Melanchthon and Ramus regarded as complementary or as contrary
authorities? The search for answers to these two questions requires examination of the ways in which writings on the arts by Ramus (i.e., logic, rhetoric, grammar, arithmetic, and geometry) and
Melanchthon (i.e., logic, rhetoric, grammar, physics, the soul, and ethics) were utilized during that period. This article will attempt to provide such answers through discussion of the following ten
1. the demand for Ramus' writings on logic as well as other arts disciplines;
2. the demand for Melanchthon's writings on logic and the other arts;
3. adoption of, and commentaries on, Melanchthon's writings on the arts;
4. adoption of, and commentaries on, Ramus' writings on the arts;
5. polemical writings against Ramus' writings on the arts;
6. the lack of extant polemical writings against Melanchthon's writings on the arts;
7. the frequency with which sixteenth- and seventeenth-century writings on the arts authored by both Lutherans and Calvinists utilized works by Ramus in combination with works by
8. the eclectic and independent manner in which Melanchthon, Ramus, Aristotle, and other authors were utilized by late sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century writings on the
9. revised versions of Ramus' and Melanchthon's writings on the arts;
10. differences between individual commentaries on Ramus' and Melanchthon's writings on the arts." pp. 68-69
———. 2001. "'Professionalization' and 'Confessionalization': The Place of Physics, Philosophy, and Arts Instruction at Central European Academic Institutions During the Reformation
Era." Early Science and Medicine no. 6 (4):334-352.
"During the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, physics was regularly taught as part of instruction in philosophy and the arts at Central European schools and universities.
However, physics did not have a special or privileged status within that instruction. Three general indicators of this lack of special status are suggested in this article. First, teachers of physics
usually were paid less than teachers of most other university-level subject-matters. Second, very few Central European academics during this period appear to have made a career out of teaching
physics. And third, Reformation Era schools and universities in Central Europe emphasized language instruction; such instruction not only was instrumental in promoting the confessional -- i.e.,
Calvinist, Lutheran, and Roman Catholic-agendas of those same schools and universities, but also helped to prepare students for service in nascent but growing state governments."
———. 2002. "Philosophical Writings on the Family in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Europe." Journal of Family History no. 27 (3):292-342.
"Recent research on the early modern European family has largely been based on archival sources that are extant for relatively few localities during this same period. This research
can be augmented by examining discussions of the family contained within academic writings on theology, jurisprudence, medicine, and philosophy during the early modern period. This article focuses on
philosophical writings that arose in connection with sixteenth- and seventeenth-century academic instruction. These writings routinely discuss the proper relationship between husband and wife,
between parents and children, and between masters and servants; also discussed are various categories of domestic possessions and how these possessions should be acquired and administered. Within
these philosophical writings, one controversial issue pertaining to family life is sometimes raised: whether servants are more essential to the family than children. These writings uniformly equate
the family with the nuclear family; in doing so, they provide collaboration for similar findings by social and demographic historians."
———. 2003. "When the Process Is Part of the Product: Searching for Latin-Language Writings on Philosophy and the Arts Used at Central European Academic Institutions During the
Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries." In Germania Latina Latinitas Teutonica. Politik, Wissenschaft, Humanistische Kultur Vom Späten Mittelalter Bis in Unsere Zeit. (Band Ii), edited by
Kessler, Eckhard and Kuhn, Heinrich C., 565-591. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag.
"While Central Europe witnessed a growing trend towards the use of the vernacular during the 16th century, Latin still remained the dominant language in Central European academic
institutions well into the 18th century. This paper will discuss Latin language writings on philosophy and the arts which arose in connection with academic instruction at those academic institutions.
More specifically, this paper will focus on the following six questions (1-6): 1. What are the various subject-matters which comprised "philosophy and the arts" at Central European academic
institutions during the 16th and 17th centuries? 2. What are the various genres of writings -- and the component parts of these genres -- that comprised philosophy and the arts? 3. How does one find
such writings at individual libraries and other information repositories within as well as beyond Germany? 4. What are some of the factors and problems involved in searching for such writings? 5. How
does this search process enable us to gain knowledge concerning 16th- and 17th-century writings on philosophy and the arts? 6. Can this search process provide us with additional insights pertaining
to yet other areas of inquiry?"
———. 2004. "Academic Philosophical and Philological Writings on the Subject-Matter of Women, C. 1670-C.1700." In Geschlechterstreit Am Beginn Der Europäischen Moderne. Die
Querelle Des Femmes, edited by Engel, Gisela, Hassauer, Friederike, Rang, Brita and Wunder, Heide, 228-244. Königstein/Ts: Verlag Ulrike Helmer.
Kulturwissenschaftliche Gender Studies, Vol. 4
———. 2004. "The Soul (Anima) According to Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624) and Some of His Central European Contemporaries." In Scientiae Et Artes. Die Vermittlung Alten
Und Neuen Wissens in Literatur, Kunst Und Musik, edited by Mahlmann-Bauer, Barbara, 791-830. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrasowitz.
———. 2005. "Disputations in Europe in the Early Modern Period." In Hora Est! On Dissertations, 30-50. Leiden: Universiteitsbibliotheek Leiden.
Kleine publicaties van de Leidse Universiteitsbibliotheek, Nr. 71.
"During the early modern period, disputations constituted a major component of the curriculum at schools and universities scattered throughout Europe. Disputations and disputation
theory are the subject matter of a number of recent publications. A number of recent scholarly writings on university history have also included detailed discussion of this same topic. The present
article intends to highlight some results of this recent research (including my own as Scaliger fellow in Leiden) and place it within the context of the abundant and valuable holdings at the Leiden
A working definition of disputation can be constructed by looking at the theory as well as the practice of disputations. The disputations were frequently examined within the context
of textbooks and other writings on logic. Beginning in about the year 1550, writings devoted specifically to the subject-matter of disputations were published in Europe. Curriculum plans,
instructional schedules, and statutes frequently discuss disputations that are to be held, often mentioning genres and categories thereof. And most importantly, one can examine actual extant
disputations themselves, though it is possible to become almost overwhelmed by the sheer mass and variety of them which are extant in European and non-European libraries Within this complex context,
disputations during the early modern period can be understood here as logical exercises held on a very wide range of possible subject-matters which were held by two or more participants as part of
academic instruction at European schools and universities." (notes omitted)
———. 2005. "A Neglected Treatise on Scientific Method (Methodus Scientifica) Published by Joannes Bellarinus (1606)." In Geschichte Der Hermeneutik Und Die Methodik Der
Textinterpretierenden Disziplinen, edited by Schönert, Jörg and Vollhardt, Friedrich, 43-82. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Historia Hermeneutica. Series Studia Band 1.
"As common as discussions of method - and of scientific method in particular -are in recent scholarship and pedagogy, our knowledge of the early evolution of these two concepts is
still relatively scant.(1) This article will highlight a neglected treatise on the concept of scientific method - published by Joannes Bellarinus in the year 1606 (*) - which appears to be the first
known published treatise bearing this title. This treatise can be placed in the context of late sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century discussions of method, definition theory, classification
theory, and the classification of academic disciplines. Such early discussions of scientific method and related concepts can be used to provide useful insights pertaining to recent scholarly
discussions on these same subject-matters.
The history of the concept of method during late middle ages has not yet been studied extensively. And while this concept was mentioned occasionally within some writings during the
early sixteenth century, it was not until mid-century that the concept of method begins to be accorded direct and extensive discussion. Such discussions of method are very numerous from the 1550s
onward. The bulk of these discussions - contained within treatises on method itself, within treatises on logic, and within treatises on other subject-matters -have yet to be studied; the authors of
many treatises containing such discussions on method have been forgotten for centuries.
A thorough examination of the concept of method during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries would require a separate study extending well beyond the parameters of this
article. Here the following summary points can be made concerning discussions of method during this period (I - III): (I) the distinction between method and order was sometimes discussed during this
period, as was the distinction between method and reason (ratio); (II) the concept of method was often understood as having various degrees of perfection and/or imperfection; (III) the concept of
method was often explained with the aid of the concepts of definition and/or classification and/or demonstration.(5) As shall be elucidated shortly, all three of these points pertain to the content
of Joannes Bellarinus's treatise on scientific method." (pp. 43-45, some notes omitted)
(*) Joannes Bellarinus: Praxis scientiarum, seu methodus scientifica practice considerata, ex Aristotele potissimum accepts. Mediolani: Apud haer. Pontij & Joan. Baptistam
Piccaleum impressores archiep. I606.
(1) The books by Henry Batter and Lutz Danneberg cited in this article provide bibliographical information on recent studies pertaining to method and scientific method. Henry H.
Bauer: Scientific Literacy and the Myth of the Scientific Method. Urbana and Chicago 1992; Lutz Danneberg: Methodologien. Struktur, Aufbau und Evaluation. (Erfahrung und Denken 71). Berlin 1989. --
The following older but still very valuable study examines the concept of method as discussed by selected Italian, English, and German authors during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth
centuries: Neal W. Gilbert: Renaissance Concepts of Method. New York 1960.
(5) The concept of method as examined by numerous Central European authors during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries is discussed in Joseph S. Freedman: Philosophy
and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500-1700. Teaching and Texts at Schools and Universities. (Variorum Collected Studies Series, CS626). Alderhot u.a. 1999 - see here particularly my articles: The
Diffusion of the Writings of Petrus Ramus in Central Europe, c.1570-c.1630, pp. 106-111; Encyclopedic Philosophical Writings in Central Europe during the High and Late Renaissance (ca. 1500-ca.
1700), pp. 222.223, p. 232, p. 245 (Table L) and pp. 251-252 (Table R). The concept of method was discussed - from the middle of the sixteenth century onwards - within treatises specifically devoted
to method as well as within general treatises on the subject-matter of logic: for example, refer to the following: Hieronymus Borrius: De Peripatetica docendi atque addiscendi methodo. Florentine:
Apud Bartholomacum Sermattellium 1584. [Chicago, Illinois. USA, Newberry Library: Case / B / 235 / .1034); Augustinus Hunnius: Dialectica seu generalia logices pracepta (...) consueverunt. Lovanii:
Apud Hieronymum Wellaeum 1561 (pp. 165-171: de methodo). [Municipal Library / Stadtbibliothek (StB) Trier: Ao / 80 / 20 (2)1 Many additional writings from this period pertaining to the concept of
method are mentioned in the monograph Renaissance Concepts of Method by Neal Gilbert (fn. 1).
———. 2006. "Ramus and the Use of Ramus at Heidelberg within the Context of Schools and Universities in Central Europe, 1572-1622." In Späthumanismus Und Reformierte Konfession.
Theologie, Jurisprudenz Und Philosophie in Heidelberg an Der Wende Zum 17. Jahrundert, edited by Strohm, Christoph, Freedman, Joseph S. and Selderhuis, Herman J., 93-126. Tübingen:
"The brief residence of Petrus Ramus (1515-1572) in Heidelberg (1569-1570) is a matter of record; detailed examination thereof has also been given by Kees Meerhoff, both in a
previous publication as well as in his contribution to this volume (1). Yet very little is known concerning the extent to which Ramus's writings were utilized in Heidelberg during the five decades
following his death. In this article, extant evidence concerning the utilization of Ramus's writings in Heidelberg between 1572 and 1622 is evaluated within the context of how Protestant academic
institutions in Central Europe made use of those writings in the course these same decades (2)." p. 93
(1) Kees Meeerhoff, Ramus et l'Université. De Paris à Heidelberg (1569-1570), in: Idem/Michel Magnien (eds.), Ramus et l'Université, Paris: Editions Rue d'Ulm, 2004, 89- 120.
(2) The year 1572 has been chosen here since it is the year of Ramus's death.
"In an earlier publication I have argued that there does not appear to have been a "Ramist" position with regard to the following two selected points of doctrine: the classification
of philosophical disciplines and the concept of method. Tables V-XI will be utilized in order to investigate whether or not one can speak of a "Ramist" and/or a "Non-Ramist" position with regard to a
third point of doctrine: the concept of definition. Definition was an important concept that was regularly discussed within writings on logic during the 16th and 17th centuries (56).
Table V provides a synopsis of how Wilhelm Roding discusses the concept of definition within his 1574 edition of the logic of Petrus Ramus; Roding republished this edition in 1576,
i.e. while a teacher in the Paedagogium in Heidelberg". At the top of Table V, the manner in which definition - together with conjugate, notatio and distributio - is subsumed within
the subject-matter of logic is evident. Notatio is the category Ramus uses to refer to nominal definition. For Ramus, definition is synonymous with what many other authors referred to as
"real definition" (definitio rei). Ramus's distinction between perfect and imperfect definition (the latter considered as synonymous with "description") appears to have been adopted by the
vast majority of authors who discuss the concept of definition during the late 16th and early 17th centuries.(58) Roding's own commentary pertaining to Ramus's "that which is defined" (definition) is
presented in full at the bottom of Table V; this commentary includes a positive comment concerning Aristotle (see Table V: C.)
Tables VI and VII contain dichotomous charts - which outline sub-categories of definition given by Petrus Ramus and Philipp Melanchthon - within a text on logic published in Lemgo
by Rupertus Erytropilus in the year 1588. (59) On the basis of these two sub-categories of definition, the following three points can be made. First, Ramus's categories of definition are much simpler
than Melanchthon's. Melanchthon's categorization includes a list of laws and conditions as well as a list of rules, all of which serve to regulate the making of good definitions; Ramus's
categorization, on the other hand, presents some examples of definitions but no regulations that govern them.
Second, Melanchthon divides definition into definitio nominis and definitio rei; for Ramus, definitio is equivalent to definitio rei. And third,
both Ramus and Melanchthon distinguish between perfect definition and imperfect definition.
Yet Ramus equates imperfect definition with description while Melanchthon does not." (pp.106-107, some notes omitted)
(56) Refer to the discussion of definition (and the related concept of classification) in the following article: Joseph S. Freedman, The Study of Sixteenth- and Seventeenth Century
Writings on Academic Philosophy: Some Methodological Considerations, in: IDEM, Philosophy and the Arts, I: 1-40, 2-7. 24-28.
———. 2007. "Christian Wolff's Two-Volume Philosophical Treatise on the Family (Oeconomica) in Context." In Christian Wolff Und Die Europäische Aufklärung, edited
by Stolzenberg, Jürgen and Rudolph, Oliver-Pierre, 217-231. Hildesheim: Georg Olms.
Akten des 1. Internationalen Christian-Wolff-Kongresses, Halle (Saale), 4.-8. April 2004. Teil 3
———. 2007. "The 'Melanchthonian Encyclopedia' (1597) (*) of Gregor Richter (1560-1624)." In Fragmenta Melanchthoniana. Band 3: Melanchthons Wirkung in Der Europäischen
Bildungsgeschichte, edited by Frank, Günther and Lalla, Sebastian, 105-141. Ubstadt, Heidelberg, and Basel: Verlag Regionalkultur.
(*) Judicia florentis scholae Melanchthonis (1592); Criseis Melanchthonianae (1597).
———. 2008. "An Extraordinary Broadsheet on Natural Philosophy: The Theatrum Universitatis Rerum (1557) by Christophorus Mylaeus." In Sol Et Homo. Mensch Und Natur in
Der Renaissance. Festschrift Zum 70.Geburtstag Für Eckhard Kessler, edited by Ebbersmeyer, Sabrina, Pirner-Pareschi, Helga and Ricklin, Thomas, 241-315. München: Wilhelm Fink.
Humanistische Bibliothek: Texte und Abhandlungen. Reihe I: Abhandlungen. Band 59.
"The present study is devoted to a broadsheet consisting mainly of an extensive series of such dichotomous charts pertaining principally to the subject-matter of natural philosophy.
This broadsheet -- bearing the title "Theatre of the Universe of Things" (Theatrum universitatis rerum) -- was published in the year 1557 by Christophorus Mylaeus [Christophe Milieu] d.
1570). Only one published copy thereof is known to have survived."(*) p. 242
"The very top of the broadsheet presents the title of the work -- Theatrum universitatis rerum as well as the division of its subject-matter (universitas rerum)
into Natura ipsa and Natura altera. The bulk of the broadsheet consists of dichotomous charts that also include longer and shorter text segments. These dichotomous charts and
accompanying texts focus mainly on natural philosophy and include discussion -- contained pages A through O -- of incorporeal things, celestial heavens, stars, the four elements (fire, air, water,
and earth), inanimate 'corporal things (e.g., stones, metals), plants (e.g., roots, herbage, fruits, trees), beasts (e.g., fish, birds, mammals), the human being considered with respect to his/her
component parts, and the human being considered as a whole. Captions placed above selected segments of these dichotomous tables briefly summarize the content of those segments; this content is also
supplemented by texts that are placed below -- and linked to -- other segments of these same dichotomous tables.
Table C (I.-VI.) summarizes the content of the dichotomous tables that together serve to constitute the bulk of his own Theatrum universitatis rerum. Its principal
subject-matter is universitas rerum, which Mylaeus describes as 1. that variety of all things to be found in nature and 2. the unity, harmony, and consensus brought to this diversity and
discord (through God). In the Theatrum universitatis rerum, Mylaeus notes (I. of Table C) that "the universe of things" (universitas rerum) consists of five components without
clearly listing what they are. These five components, however, clearly correspond to the titles to the five "Books" (libri) contained within the 1551 edition of Mylaeus's treatise on
historiography (Table B): 1. De natura, 2. De prudentia, 3. De principatu (principatus), 4. De sapientia, and 5. De literatura.
In the Theatrum universitatis rerum, these five components are paired with two distinct categories of nature. The first (natura ipsa) corresponds directly to natura; the
second (natura altera) comprises prudentia, principatus, sapientia, and literatura. The terms "nature" (natura) and "natural" (naturalis) were used in a
multitude of ways within philosophical writings during the sixteenth century; the prominence which Mylaeus gives to these two uses of the term nature in this broadsheet was probably less common He
describes both natura ipsa and natura altera at some length, and states that the latter is the "imitator, assistant, and vicar" (imitatrix, adiuntrix, & vicaria) of the
former.' On the basis of Mylaeus's description of natura altera, it could be understood as equivalent to -- or: roughly equivalent to -- human nature. Humans are made -- by virtue of the goodness of
"that same superior, providing, and ingenious nature" (i.e., God) -- with a body that empowers us to act and a mind that empowers us to contemplate." (pp. 244-245, notes omitted)
(*) Christophorus Mylaeus, Theatrum universitatis rerum. Basileae: Ex officina Johannis Oporini, 1557 mense Martio. The only known extant copy is owned by the Bayerische
Staatsbibliothek Munchen and has the call number 20 Enc. 19m / Res [a digital copy is now available at the Münchener Digitalisierungszentrum (MDZ)].
———. 2008. " Die Debatte Um Frauen Und Gender in Der Schulphilosophie Des 16. Und 17. Jahrhunderts. Der Fall Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624)." In Heißer Streit Und Kalte
Ordnung. Epochen Der "Querelles Des Femmes" Zwischen Mittelalter Und Gegenwart, edited by Hassauer, Friederike, 206-217. Göttingen: Wallstein Verlag.
[The Debate on Women and Gender in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Academic Philosophy: The Case of Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624)].
———. 2009. "Necessity, Contingency, Impossibility, Possibility, and Modal Enunciations within the Writings of Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624)." In Spätrenaissance-Philosophie in
Deutschland 1570-1650. Entwürfe Zwischen Humanismus Und Konfessionalisierung, Okkulten Traditionen Und Schulmetaphysik, edited by Mulsow, Martin, 293-318. Berlin: de Gruyter.
"The four modal concepts of necessity, contingency, possibility, and impossibility are examined within Timpler's textbook on metaphysics. Section 8 of Timpler's collection of
philosophical exercises is devoted to discussion of necessity and contingency. Timpler's textbook on logic discusses necessary and contingent formal enunciations and also presents brief treatment of
the concept of modality itself.
In discussing modal concepts and modality Timpler cites a variety of sources. Most frequently cited are Aristotle, Sacred Scripture, "scholastics" (scholastici), Franciscus
Piccolomineus (1520-1604), Francisco Suárez (1548-1617), and Jacob Zabarella (1533-1589 ). Timpler's discussions of modal concepts also include citations of other authorities, including Cicero, St.
Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, John Duns Scotus, Averroes, Chrysostomus Javellus, Julius Caesar Scaliger, Benedictus Pererius (c. 1535-1610), Petrus Ramus (1515-1572), and Bartholomew Keckermann
(d. 1609). In the case of some of the questions (quaestiones)and problems (problemata)contained in Timpler's writings pertaining to modal concepts, however, no sources are cited at
With regard to Timpler's citations of sources the following two points should be mentioned. First Timpler may have relied on some authorities more heavily that his infrequent
citations of them would suggest. And second, Timpler was usually quite eclectic in his use of such authorities. In many cases for example, when arguing in his textbook on metaphysics that something
is possible which nonetheless never was nor will be -- Timpler uses Aristotle in order to support his own view. Yet when arguing that absolute necessity does not conflict with free will, Timpler
cites several passages from Aristotle to the contrary; yet Timpler concludes that Aristotle's testimony is not sufficient in this case. In his textbook on metaphysics, Timpler argues that Jacob
Zabarella incorrectly defines necessary and contingent things; in doing so, Timpler notes that Zabarella misinterprets Aristotle. On the other hand, Timpler agrees with Zabarella's distinction
between that which is possible and that which is absolutely necessary.
Timpler appears to have regarded himself primarily as a metaphysician, and he makes metaphysics central to his thought. Most of Timpler's views on modality are elucidated within his
textbook on metaphysics. The most basic ontological components of this latter textbook are diagrammed in Table A1." (pp. 295-296).
———. 2009. "The Godfather of Ontology? Clemens Timpler, "All That Is Intelligible", Academic Disciplines During the Late 16th and Early 17th Centuries, and Some Possible
Ramifications for the Use of Ontology in Our Time." Quaestio.Yeabook of the History of Metaphysics no. 9:3-40.
Paper read at the International Conference Origin and Development of Modern Ontology, held at the Università di Bari (Italy) 15-17 May 2008.
———. 2010. "Published Academic Disputations in the Context of Other Information Formats Utilized Primarily in Central Europe (C.1550-C.1700)." In Disputatio 1200-1800. Form,
Funktion Und Wirkung Eines Leitmediums Universitärer Wissenskultur, edited by Gindhart, Marion and Kundert, Ursula, 89-128. Dordrecht: Springer.
"What is -- or: what can be understood to fall under the umbrella of -- an academic disputation? An answer to this question can be approached by placing such disputations within the
context of other information formats -- which could also be referred to in this context as instructional media -- that were utilized in academic instruction (held primarily in the German language
area of Europe) during the period between 1550 and 1700."
———. 2012. "Johann Kahl's Collection of Writings on Practical Philosophy (1595) in Context." In Philosophie Der Reformierten, edited by Frank, Günther and Selderhuis,
Herman J., 241-298. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstat: Frommann-Holzboog.
———. 2015. European Academic Philosophy During the 16th and 17th Centuries: A Schematic Introduction and Guide.
Not yet published.
Contents: Chapter 1 (Introduction), Chapters 2 through 6 (curricular documents, general philosophical writings / concepts; theoretical, practical, and rational philosophy) and
Appendices (illustrations, biographies of selected academic philosophers, bibliography of primary sources presented, list of recommended, digitally accessible writings; a brief bibliographical guide
to secondary literature). Chapters 2 through 6 will each consist of three sections: a. A relatively brief narrative section; b. A list of questions - which can be used for purposes of discussion
and/or for further research - to the individual paratexts that are contained in c.; c. Excerpts from primary source materials will be presented in the form of paratexts (for example, dichotomous
charts; tables; narrative in outline form).
Freedman, Joseph S., Feingold, Mordechai, and Rother, Wolfgang, eds. 2001. The Influence of Petrus Ramus. Studies in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Philosophy and
Sciences. Basel: Schwabe.
Schwabe Philosophica. Band 1.
Table of Contents: Mordechai Feingold, Joseph S. Freedman, Wolfgang Rother: Preface 7; Wolfgang Rother: Ramus and Ramism in Switzerland 9; Theo Verbeek: Notes on Ramism in the
Netherlands 38; Thomas Elsmann: The Influence of Ramism on the Academies of Bremen and Danzig: A Comparison 54; Joseph S. Freedman: Melanchthon's Opinion of Ramus and the Utilization of Their
Writings in Central Europe 68; Riccardo Pozzo: Ramus' Metaphysics and its Criticism by the Helmstedt Aristotelians 92; Erland Sellberg: The Usefulness of Ramism 107; Mordechai Feingold: English
Ramism: A Reinterpretation 127; Elizabethanne Boran: Ramism in Trinity College, Dublin in the Early Seventeenth Century 177; Kees Meerhoff: "Beauty and the Beast": Nature, Logic and Literature in
Ramus 200; Guido Oldrini: The Influence of Ramus' Method on Historiography and Jurisprudence 215; Ian Maclean: Logical Division and Visual Dichotomies: Ramus in the Context of Legal and Medical
Writing 228; Nicholas Jardine and Alain Segonds: A Challenge to the Reader: Ramus on Astrologia without Hypotheses 248; Index of Names 267.
"The present volume originated in a workshop, held in the Bibelsaal of the Herzog August Library of Wolfenbüttel on 1 and 2 July 1997 and devoted to an examination of the influence
of Petrus Ramus. The papers deal with the diverse use made of Ramus both by followers and adversaries in the religious and scholarly controversies that raged throughout (mainly) Protestant Europe
during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. In terms of organization the volume is divided along regional and thematic issues. The impact of Ramist ideas on Calvinism informs a first
group of papers concentrating on various Reformed territories: Switzerland (Wolfgang Rother), the Netherlands (Theo Verbeek), Bremen and Gdansk (Thomas Elsmann). A second group examines Lutheran
responses to Ramus: Joseph Freedman analyzes Melanchthon's view, Riccardo Pozzo evaluates the criticism by the Helmstedt Aristotelians, and Erland Sellberg scrutinizes Ramus' reception at the Swedish
universities. Two further contributions probe the Ramist debate in the British Isles: in England (Mordechai Feingold) and in Ireland (Elizabethanne Boran). The section devoted to thematic issues
places Ramus within Renaissance disciplines where his impact was most keenly felt: logic and literature (Kees Meerhoff), historiography and jurisprudence (Guido Oldrini), law and medicine (Ian
Maclean), and astronomy (Nicholas Jardine and Alain Segonds)." (from the Preface)
Freedman, Joseph S., Strohm, Christoph, and Selderhuis, Herman J. 2006. Späthumanismus Und Reformierte Konfession. Theologie, Jurisprudenz Und Philosophie in Heidelberg an Der
Wende Zum 17. Jahrundert. Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck,.
Spätmittelalter und Reformation. Band 31