David (Neoplatonist)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Depiction of David in an Armenian manuscript from the 13th century in Matenadaran , Yerevan

David ( Greek Δαβίδ, Armenian Դավիթ Dawitʿ , usually called David the Invincible , more rarely David of Armenia ) was a late antique philosopher . He lived in the 6th and maybe the early 7th century and is said to have been an Armenian . His writings were translated into the ancient Armenian language and played a key role in spreading Greek philosophical thought in Armenia. In the Middle Ages he was nicknamed the Invincible (Armenian Անհաղթ Anhałtʿ , also Anyałtʿ , Anhaghtʿ or Anyaghtʿ ). This was originally assigned to a theologian of the same name and was later transferred to the philosopher, who was mistakenly equated with the theologian.

As a Neo-Platonist , David belonged to the school that dominated late antiquity. He probably received his training in the philosophy school of Alexandria in Egypt, which then belonged to the Byzantine Empire , and then worked there as a teacher. It is said that he returned to his Armenian homeland at a later stage in his life and became one of the most important bearers of the local cultural life. The legendary figure of the "invincible" David is still an object of cultural national pride in Armenia today.

The source situation is very unfavorable: because of confusion, obvious discrepancies and an abundance of legends, the research judges the majority of the traditional information about David's life as skeptical or negative. Most of the works traditionally ascribed to him are certainly not his. Only four of them are certain or presumably authentic. These are fonts that were intended for beginners' lessons; they explain the philosophy of Aristotle .

Life

Very little information about David in Greek is available from antiquity. The Armenian-language biographical tradition is rich, but did not begin until the Middle Ages and was influenced by the formation of legends from the beginning. It relates to a considerable extent to a theologian of the same name, with whom the philosopher was mistakenly equated. The Armenian origin of the philosopher David is not attested in ancient sources, but is mostly accepted in research - sometimes hesitantly.

David cites the Neo-Platonist Olympiodorus the Younger , who taught in Alexandria, as the authoritative authority. In addition, there are significant parallels to statements by the Neoplatonist Elias , who was a pupil of Olympiodorus, and correspondences with statements by Olympiodorus' teacher Ammonios Hermeiou . From this it is concluded that David received his philosophical training in Alexandria at the school where Olympiodorus taught. Since Olympiodorus was last attested to be alive in 565, David's activity as a philosophy teacher was likely to fall between the middle of the 6th century and the early 7th century. What is certain is that he gave lessons in Aristotelian philosophy and not only treated logic , but also interpreted Aristotle's physics . The Aristotelian philosophy formed the material for beginners' lessons in the philosophy schools of late antiquity , while the Platonic philosophy was reserved for advanced students.

Olympiodorus was a follower of the ancient pagan religion. For David, as for Elias, because of the Christian name, it is assumed that he was a Christian. But there is no direct ancient evidence of this. In any case, he might only nominally confess to Christianity, because in his writings he assumed the worldview of the pagan Platonists, especially the eternity of the world, which is incompatible with Christian revelation. In presenting his philosophical theses, he took no account of Christian beliefs.

Some researchers suspect that Olympiodorus was the head ( scholarch ) of the Neoplatonic school of philosophy in Alexandria , Elias succeeded him in this function and David later headed the school as Elias' successor. However, there is no evidence for these speculative hypotheses.

More detailed biographical information can be found in the medieval Armenian tradition, which is largely untrustworthy because of its legendary features. Allegedly David came from an otherwise unknown place called Nergin or Nerk‛in in the Tarōn (Tarawn) region in the southeast of what was then Armenia (today in Turkey, Muş province ). Armenian sources claim that he was a student of the scholar Maštoc ' (Mesrop), the inventor of the Armenian alphabet . But this is chronologically impossible for the Neoplatonist, because Maštoc 'died in 440. Another claim is that David studied in Athens and Constantinople . These alleged places of study cannot have been those of the Neoplatonist David, because the Neoplatonic school of philosophy in Athens no longer existed in David's time, and the ancient sources do not know anything about the existence of a philosophy school in Constantinople in the 6th century. Later, David is said to have returned to his homeland at an advanced age to spread his knowledge there. It is said that he was eventually ordained a bishop. In theology he is said to have distinguished himself as a Monophysite opponent of the teaching of the Council of Chalcedon , which was rejected in Armenia . His nickname “the invincible” is attributed to his art of argumentation, with which he supposedly won a theologian dispute about the nature of Christ. Apparently, in the course of the formation of traditions and legends, several Armenian scholars named David, including at least one theologian, were confused or mistakenly identified.

Works

David's certainly or presumably genuine works are not scientific investigations, but introductory writings for beginners intended for teaching. They orientate themselves about the material without going into subtle details. The original texts were written in Greek. According to Armenian tradition, David made the surviving translations into Old Armenian himself, but this is considered unlikely in recent research. In any case, the Armenian texts belong to the products of an important translation movement, which is called the “Hellenizing” or “ Graecizing ” school (Armenian Yownaban Dproc ' ). The scholars involved in this movement were active in the period from the 6th to the 8th centuries. They made classical educational literature and philosophical manual knowledge accessible to a reading public who did not know Greek. In this way, an Armenian education system based on the requirements of the Greek cultural tradition could be established.

Certainly or presumably authentic works

Four of the works ascribed to David are considered authentic or at least believed by some experts to be probably genuine: the Prolegomena of Philosophy , a Commentary on the Isagogue of Porphyry and two Commentaries on Aristotle.

The prolegomena of philosophy

The Prolegomena of Philosophy provide a general introduction to the subject. According to the heading, the transmitted text is a postscript (apo phōnḗs) of oral statements by the teacher. The common expression apo phōnḗs ("after the voice", so "as presented") is sometimes used in Byzantine literature with a weaker meaning and then only describes the authorship of the person named as the author of the text. In the present case, however, it actually appears to be a student's postscript.

Among other things, the work pursued a protreptic (advertising) intention: As a lecturer, David wanted to inspire his listeners to an intensive study of philosophy by showing them the value and rank of striving for wisdom at the beginning. Then he wanted to acquaint the beginners with the requirements of philosophical work. It was customary at the time for philosophy teachers to write such prolegomena . In the Philosophical School of Alexandria one began the lesson with such an introduction, only afterwards one turned to individual philosophical works and their commentary.

David's prolegomena are divided into lessons (práxeis) . In addition to the Greek version, there is also an Armenian version that differs considerably from the Greek text. It bears the inauthentic title Definitions and Classifications of Philosophy against the Four Theses of the Sophist Pyrrhon . David defends the right to exist of philosophy against objections from Pyrrhonic skeptics who deny the possibility of a well-founded certainty. He discusses six definitions for the term philosophy. He emphasizes the Platonic concept of deification of man through philosophical endeavors. As a supporter of the Platonic ontology , which is based on the assumption of an independent spiritual reality, he fights the materialistic teaching of the Stoics , according to which there is nothing immaterial.

Christian Wildberg has a special opinion on the authorship . He doesn't think the author was actually called David. According to Wildberg's hypothesis, the work comes from an unknown pagan Neo-Platonist living in Alexandria and was only ascribed to David in the Middle Ages.

The comments

A page of a manuscript from David's Isagogue Commentary written in 1348 . Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana , D 47 sup., Fol. 24v

The Scholien zur Isagoge des Porphyrios , David's commentary on this very widespread introduction to Aristotelian logic written by an early Neo-Platonist, are, like the Prolegomena, marked as student postscript. There is also an Armenian version of the work written in Greek (analysis of the Isagogue of Porphyrios) . It is said to come from the author himself, but this information has been viewed with skepticism in recent research.

For a commentary on Aristotle's Analytica priora , of which only a fragmentary Armenian version has survived, David is named as the author in part of the handwritten tradition. Some historians of philosophy consider this ascription credible. According to another research opinion, however, it is not a work of David, but an Armenian version of the commentary that Elias wrote on the work of Aristotle.

The explanation of the ten categories is a commentary on the categories of Aristotle with an introduction to Aristotelian philosophy. In Alexandria it was customary to add such an introduction to a category comment. This work is available both in Greek and in an incomplete Armenian version. In the only surviving manuscript, the beginning and end of the Armenian text are missing. While in the Armenian manuscript - probably because of its incompleteness - there is no indication of the author, in the Greek tradition the work is referred to as a transcript from David's teaching. In research it is controversial who wrote it. The editor Adolf Busse , followed by a number of philosophical historians, advocates attribution to Elias, since there are content-related contradictions to David's theses in the Isagogue Commentary. Other researchers, including Ilsetraut Hadot, believe that David is the author. David himself expressly states that he has commented on the categories . A clue for the dating arises from the fact that the commentary on categories by Johannes Philoponos , which emerged in the first half of the 6th century, is quoted.

Fake works

Medieval Armenian tradition ascribes a number of works and translations to David, most of which cannot have come from him. When assessing this information, it must be taken into account that authors of the same name have often been mixed up. Among other things, David is said to have translated the isagogue of Porphyrios and the writings of Aristotle into Armenian.

The works certainly not written by the philosopher David trained in Alexandria include:

  • Scholia on the grammar of Dionysius Thrax . They come from a grammarian who cannot be identical with the philosopher David because he takes a different view.
  • A panegyric on the Holy Cross .
  • Translations of writings by patristic authors ( Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita , Nemesios von Emesa and others) into Armenian.
  • A commentary on the isagogue , which in the handwritten tradition is partly attributed to David and partly to Elias, but which in reality cannot come from either of these two philosophers. The name of the author as "Pseudo-Elias" has become common.

reception

middle Ages

Texts by David were used in Byzantine logic compendia from the end of the 6th to the middle of the 8th century. At that time there was a need for concise, summarizing representations of Aristotelian logic, which present the material of the relevant textbooks of the late Alexandrian school in a didactically prepared form. One of the authors who used material from David's Prolegomena was the church father John of Damascus , who dealt with Aristotelian logic in his dialectic .

In Armenia, David's writings became authoritative textbooks in the Middle Ages. There he was counted among the most important personalities in Armenian cultural history and accordingly glorified. Since he was considered a leading theologian and student of famous church fathers, one could see in him a great thinker who correctly placed the Aristotelian ontology in the service of Christian dogmatics. With the weapons of philosophy he successfully defended the Monophysite teaching of the Armenian Church against the supporters of the Council of Chalcedon. The nickname "the invincible" was traced back to his theological superiority. A different explanation of the epithet is offered by an anecdote, according to which David was the only scholar able to interpret a puzzling wisdom on an old stele ; after this demonstration of his outstanding erudition, people began to call him the invincible philosopher.

As early as the 7th century, the Armenian scholar and encyclopaedist Anania Schirakatsi took up David's doctrine of the division of philosophy. In the High and Late Middle Ages , the appreciation for the writings of the ancient philosophy teacher intensified; Armenian scholars written comments to his Isagoge -Scholien and the Armenian version of the Prolegomena . In the monastery schools, the prolegomena belonged to the material that was prescribed for philosophy lessons.

Modern times

According to medieval tradition, until the onset of modern scientific research, David was believed to be the author of numerous writings that did not actually come from him; more than 26 translations were ascribed to him. The first edition of the Armenian Prolegomena translation appeared in Constantinople in 1731. In 1833 the first complete edition of the Armenian translations of David's works was published in Venice. In the period 1900–1904, Adolf Busse brought out a critical edition of the Greek texts in Berlin, making them fully accessible in print for the first time; previously only excerpts had been published.

Statue of David in Yerevan , Armenia, erected in 1985
Soviet postage stamp on the occasion of the 1980 anniversary

The Armenian Apostolic Church counts "David the Invincible Philosopher" among the "holy teachers and translators", whose feast is celebrated on the second Saturday in October.

During the time Armenia belonged to the Soviet Union , David was still very popular there. In 1980 the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic celebrated its 1,500th birthday, assuming a fictitious, arbitrarily assumed year of birth of the philosopher. To mark the occasion, the Armenian Academy of Sciences in Yerevan , the capital of Armenia, held a congress and festival program, and a street was named after David. From a Marxist perspective, “his humanism, his secular mentality, his deep belief in the power of science, a whole series of materialistic theses” were praised . It was said that he was one of the most progressive scholars of his time.

Jonathan Barnes paid tribute to David's overall achievement in an essay published in 2009. He reminded that one should not expect more from such a manual author than what is necessary for his didactic purpose. In Barnes' judgment, the Isagogue Scholia is one of the two best commentaries on the often commented work of Porphyry. The question of David's originality cannot be answered, because although some of his theses are only attested by him, it is unknown which writings that are lost today were available to him. For Barnes, the outstanding intellectual historical significance of the philosophy teacher of late antiquity lies in the impetus he gave as a mediator of Aristotelian ideas on Armenian culture, even if he himself was not the translator of his works.

Text editions and translations

Greek

  • Adolf Busse (Ed.): Davidis prolegomena et in Porphyrii Isagogen commentarium (= Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca , Volume 18, Part 2). Georg Reimer, Berlin 1904 (critical edition of the Prolegomena of Philosophy and the Commentary on the Isagogue )
  • Adolf Busse (Ed.): Eliae in Porphyrii Isagogen et Aristotelis Categorias commentaria (= Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca , Volume 18, Part 1). Georg Reimer, Berlin 1900, pp. 105–255 (critical edition of the category commentary that the editor attributes to Elias)

Old Armenian, partly with English translation

  • Sen S. Arevšatyan (ed.): Dawitʿ Anałtʿ: Erkasirut'iwnk 'p'ilisop'ayakank'. Haykakan SSH GA Hrat, Erevan 1980 (uncritical edition of the Armenian versions of David's works)
  • Bridget Kendall, Robert W. Thomson (Eds.): Definitions and Divisions of Philosophy by David the Invincible Philosopher . Scholars Press, Chico 1983, ISBN 0-89130-616-1 (critical edition of the Armenian text with English translation)
  • Aram Topchyan (Ed.): David the Invincible: Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics. Old Armenian Text with an English Translation, Introduction and Notes (= Philosophia antiqua , Volume 122 = Commentaria in Aristotelem Armeniaca - Davidis Opera , Volume 2). Brill, Leiden 2010, ISBN 978-90-04-18719-1 (critical edition)
  • Gohar Muradyan (Ed.): David the Invincible: Commentary on Porphyry's Isagoge. Old Armenian Text with the Greek Original, an English Translation, Introduction and Notes (= Philosophia antiqua , Volume 137 = Commentaria in Aristotelem Armeniaca - Davidis Opera , Volume 3). Brill, Leiden 2015, ISBN 978-90-04-28084-7 (critical edition)

English

  • Sebastian Gertz (translator): Elias and David: Introductions to Philosophy, with Olympiodorus: Introduction to Logic. Bloomsbury Academic, London et al. 2018, ISBN 978-1-3500-5174-4 , pp. 79-189 (English translation of the Prolegomena of Philosophy )

literature

Overview representations

Collection of articles

  • Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (ed.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque (= Philosophia antiqua , Volume 116 = Commentaria in Aristotelem Armeniaca - Davidis Opera , Volume 1) . Brill, Leiden 2009, ISBN 978-90-04-16047-7

Investigations

  • Benedetta Contin: La version arménienne des œuvres grecques de David l'Invincible. Research on the formation of vocabulary épistémologique arménien. Université de Genève, Genève 2011 (dissertation, online )
  • Jean-Pierre Mahé: David l'Invincible dans la tradition arménienne. In: Ilsetraut Hadot (ed.): Simplicius: Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée . Fascicule 1, Brill, Leiden et al. 1990, ISBN 90-04-09015-0 , pp. 189-207

Web links

Remarks

  1. ↑ Valentina Calzolari: David et la tradition arménienne . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 15–36, here: 22 f .; Gohar Muradyan (Ed.): David the Invincible: Commentary on Porphyry's Isagoge , Leiden 2015, pp. 1 f. However, Leendert Gerrit Westerink (ed.) Expresses doubts : Prolégomènes à la philosophie de Platon , Paris 1990, p. XXXVII.
  2. ↑ On the parallels in Ammonios see Maïa Rapava: Traditions et innovations dans l'école neo-Platonicienne d'Alexandrie (Ammonius Hermias et David l'Invincible) . In: Bedi Kartlisa 40, 1982, pp. 216-227.
  3. ^ Jean-Pierre Mahé: David l'Invincible dans la tradition arménienne. In: Ilsetraut Hadot (ed.): Simplicius: Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée , Fascicule 1, Leiden 1990, pp. 189–207, here: 203 f .; Leendert Gerrit Westerink: Texts and Studies in Neoplatonism and Byzantine Literature , Amsterdam 1980, pp. 59-64.
  4. ↑ Jonathan Barnes: David and the Greek Tradition. In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 3-14, here: 3 f.
  5. ↑ Leendert Gerrit Westerink (ed.): Prolégomènes à la philosophie de Platon , Paris 1990, pp. XXXVI – XXXVIII.
  6. ↑ Leendert Gerrit Westerink: Texts and Studies in Neoplatonism and Byzantine Literature , Amsterdam 1980, p. 64; Bridget Kendall, Robert W. Thomson (Eds.): Definitions and Divisions of Philosophy by David the Invincible Philosopher , Chico 1983, p. XI.
  7. ↑ Bridget Kendall, Robert W. Thomson (ed.): Definitions and Divisions of Philosophy by David the Invincible Philosopher , Chico 1983, pp. XV – XVIII; Agnès Ouzounian: David l'Invincible . In: Richard Goulet (ed.): Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques , Volume 2, Paris 1994, pp. 614 f., Here: 614; Leendert Gerrit Westerink (Ed.): Prolégomènes à la philosophie de Platon , Paris 1990, pp. XXXVI f .; Valentina Calzolari: David et la tradition arménienne . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 15–36, here: 20–27.
  8. ↑ Valentina Calzolari: David et la tradition arménienne . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 15–36, here: 20–27; Jean-Pierre Mahé: David l'Invincible dans la tradition arménienne. In: Ilsetraut Hadot (ed.): Simplicius: Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée , Fascicule 1, Leiden 1990, pp. 189-207, here: 189-195.
  9. ↑ See Jonathan Barnes: David and the Greek Tradition. In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 3–14, here: 4–5.
  10. ↑ Aram Topchyan (ed.): David the Invincible: Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics , Leiden 2010, p. 7 f.
  11. ↑ See on this term Benedetta Contin: La version arménienne des œuvres grecques de David l'Invincible , Genève 2011, p. VII f.
  12. ↑ Valentina Calzolari: Aux origines de la formation du corpus philosophique en Arménie: quelques remarques sur les versions arméniennes des commentaires grecs de David. In: Cristina D'Ancona (Ed.): The Libraries of the Neoplatonists , Leiden 2007, pp. 259-278, here: 261-264; Valentina Calzolari: David et la tradition arménienne . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (ed.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 15–36, here: 15–20.
  13. ↑ Maïa Rapava: Traditions et innovations dans l'école neo-platonicienne of Alexandria (Ammonius Hermia et l'David Invincible) . In: Bedi Kartlisa 40, 1982, pp. 216-227, here: 217 f.
  14. ^ Christian Wildberg: Three Neoplatonic Introductions to Philosophy. Ammonius, David and Elias. In: Hermathena , No. 149, 1990, pp. 33-51, here: 39.
  15. ^ Benedetta Contin: La version arménienne des œuvres grecques de David l'Invincible , Genève 2011, p. 46 f.
  16. ↑ For the Armenian version, see Valentina Calzolari: Du pouvoir de la musique dans la version arménienne des Prolégomènes à la philosophie de David le Platonicien (Orphée et Alexandre le Grand) . In: Antje Kolde et al. (Ed.): Koryphaio andri. Mélanges offerts à André Hurst , Genève 2005, pp. 417–431 and Valentina Calzolari: La version arménienne des Prolegomena philosophiae de David et son rapport avec le texte grec . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 39-65.
  17. ↑ On David's argument against the Stoics see Elias Tempelis: The School of Ammonius, Son of Hermias, on Knowledge of the Divine , Athens 1998, pp. 91-93, on his Platonism Abraham Terian: Plato in David's Prolegomena Philosophiae . In: Avedis K. Sanjian (Ed.): David Anhaghtʿ. The 'Invincible' Philosopher , Atlanta (Georgia) 1986, pp. 27-35.
  18. ^ Christian Wildberg: Three Neoplatonic Introductions to Philosophy. Ammonius, David and Elias. In: Hermathena , No. 149, 1990, pp. 33-51, here: 44 f.
  19. ↑ See Gohar Muradyan (ed.): David the Invincible: Commentary on Porphyry's Isagoge , Leiden 2015, pp. 2–8.
  20. ↑ For the research discussion see Aram Topchyan (ed.): David the Invincible: Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics , Leiden 2010, pp. 9-17; Jean-Pierre Mahé: David l'Invincible dans la tradition arménienne. In: Ilsetraut Hadot (ed.): Simplicius: Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée , Fascicule 1, Leiden 1990, pp. 189-207, here: 201 f. Cf. the three essays devoted to the topic in the volume L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , published by Valentina Calzolari and Jonathan Barnes , Leiden 2009, pp. 105-150.
  21. ↑ Richard Goulet provides a research overview: Élias. In: Richard Goulet (ed.): Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques , Volume 3, Paris 2000, pp. 57–66, here: 58 f., 60–65. See also Valentina Calzolari: David et la tradition arménienne . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 15-36, here: 29-32; Manea Erna Shirinian: The Armenian Version of David the Invincible's Commentary on Aristotle's Categories . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 89-102; Agnès Ouzounian: David l'Invincible . In: Richard Goulet (ed.): Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques , Volume 2, Paris 1994, pp. 614 f., Here: 615; Jean-Pierre Mahé: David l'Invincible dans la tradition arménienne. In: Ilsetraut Hadot (ed.): Simplicius: Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée , Fascicule 1, Leiden 1990, pp. 189-207, here: 197-201.
  22. ↑ Valentina Calzolari: David et la tradition arménienne . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (ed.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 15–36, here: 27 f.
  23. ↑ Valentina Calzolari: David et la tradition arménienne . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 15–36, here: 28.
  24. ^ Jean-Pierre Mahé: David l'Invincible dans la tradition arménienne. In: Ilsetraut Hadot (ed.): Simplicius: Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée , Fascicule 1, Leiden 1990, pp. 189-207, here: 191 f.
  25. ↑ The commentary is edited by Leendert Gerrit Westerink: Pseudo-Elias (Pseudo-David): Lectures on Porphyry's Isagoge , Amsterdam 1967. On the author's question, see Miroslav Marcovich : Pseudo-Elias on Heraclitus . In: American Journal of Philology 96, 1975, pp. 31-34, Henry J. Blumenthal : Pseudo-Elias and the Isagoge Commentaries Again . In: Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 124, 1981, pp. 188–192 and Wanda Wolska-Conus: Stéphanos d'Athènes et Stéphanos d'Alexandrie. Essai d'identification et de biography . In: Revue des Études byzantines 47, 1989, pp. 5–89, here: 69–80.
  26. ↑ Mossman Roueché: Byzantine Philosophical text of the Seventh Century . In: Yearbook of Austrian Byzantine Studies 23, 1974, pp. 61–76.
  27. ^ Jean-Pierre Mahé: David l'Invincible dans la tradition arménienne. In: Ilsetraut Hadot (ed.): Simplicius: Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée , Fascicule 1, Leiden 1990, pp. 189-207, here: 192, 204 f .; Valentina Calzolari: Aux origines de la formation du corpus philosophique en Arménie: quelques remarques sur les versions arméniennes des commentaires grecs de David. In: Cristina D'Ancona (Ed.): The Libraries of the Neoplatonists , Leiden 2007, pp. 259–278, here: 260 f .; Valentina Calzolari: David et la tradition arménienne . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 15–36, here: 25.
  28. ↑ For details see Avedis K. Sanjian: David Anhaghtʿ (the Invincible): An Introduction . In: Avedis K. Sanjian (Ed.): David Anhaghtʿ. The 'Invincible' Philosopher , Atlanta (Georgia) 1986, pp. 1-16, here: 12-14; Sen Arevshatyan: David the Invincible in Armenia and other Countries: the Fate of his Legacy . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 175–180, here: 177; Valentina Calzolari: David et la tradition arménienne . In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 15-36, here: 34.
  29. ^ Jean-Pierre Mahé: David l'Invincible dans la tradition arménienne. In: Ilsetraut Hadot (ed.): Simplicius: Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée , Fascicule 1, Leiden 1990, pp. 189-207, here: 193; Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 201-203 (bibliography).
  30. ↑ Avedis K. Sanjian: Preface . In: Avedis K. Sanjian (Ed.): David Anhaghtʿ. The 'Invincible' Philosopher , Atlanta (Georgia) 1986, pp. IX f.
  31. ↑ Sen Arevšatyan: David l'Invincible et sa doctrine philosophique . In: Revue des Études Arméniennes 15, 1981, pp. 33–43, here: 33.
  32. ↑ Jonathan Barnes: David and the Greek Tradition. In: Valentina Calzolari, Jonathan Barnes (eds.): L'œuvre de David l'Invincible et la transmission de la pensée grecque dans la tradition arménienne et syriaque , Leiden 2009, pp. 3-14, here: 5, 10, 13 f.
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on November 30, 2015 .
personal data
SURNAME David
ALTERNATIVE NAMES David of Armenia; David the Invincible; Dawitʿ Anałtʿ; Dawit Anhaghtʿ; Dawit Anyaghtʿ
BRIEF DESCRIPTION late antique philosopher
DATE OF BIRTH 6th century
DATE OF DEATH 6th century or 7th century