VI

PREFACE

We are taught by Stephanus’s own words (on pages 30 line 17, 45 line 24, and 54 line 2) that he intended to devote his efforts to the Analytics. Furthermore, we know from the old catalogs of the Mendoza and Escorial libraries that there once existed a commentary not only on the Analytics but also on the Sophistical Refutations original Latin: Sophisticorum Elenchorum. Indeed, Codex 215 of the Mendoza collection contained "Commentaries of Stephanus the philosopher on the Analytics and the Refutations"; see Ch. Graux, Essay on the origins of the Greek collection of the Escorial, Paris 1880, page 376 and page 263, number 156. This manuscript, along with many others, perished in the fire of 1671 A devastating fire at the El Escorial library in Spain destroyed thousands of irreplaceable Greek and Arabic manuscripts. Additionally, in the catalog of books seen by Janus Lascaris at Arta (Ambracia) in the possession of Demetrius Tribolius, there appears: Notes of Stephanus, philosopher of Alexandria, on the two books of the Prior Analytics original Greek: Στεφάνου φιλοσόφου Ἀλεξανδρείας εἰς τὰ β τῶν προτέρων ἀναλυτικῶν σχόλια [K. K. Müller in Central Journal for Library Science I (1884) 395; compare Piccolomini Philological Review II 407: Notes of Stephanus the philosopher on the first of the second [Analytics] original Greek: Σχόλια Στεφάνου φιλοσόφου εἰς τὸ πρότερον τῶν δευτέρων φιλοσόφων from some catalog of Lascaris]. Hermann Usener rightly kept the memory of the Alexandrian Stephanus separate from that of the Athenian physician Stephanus and the interpreter of the Rhetoric, even though in the commentary on On Fractures original Greek: περὶ ἀγμῶν (peri agmôn) which exists in the Moscow Codex 270, folio 96 (Matthaei), it is inscribed: The usual eight introductory chapters by Stephanus, Alexandrian physician and philosopher, on Hippocrates' "On Fractures" original Greek: Στεφάνου ἰατροῦ ἀλεξανδρέως τοῦ φιλοσόφου εἰς τὸ περὶ ἀγμῶν ἱπποκράτους τὰ εἰωθότα προλέγεσθαι ὀκτὼ κεφάλαια. However, these titles seem to have arisen from mere conjecture, since the manuscript dates only to the 16th century.

Thus, we are now publishing for the first time the commentary of Stephanus of Alexandria on Aristotle’s book On Interpretation. Although this work adds almost nothing to our understanding of the philosopher's words that was not already more carefully and abundantly explained by Ammonius Ammonius Hermiae, a 5th-century philosopher whose commentary on this same text was the standard for centuries, it nonetheless appears to be a remarkable document of Aristotelian studies flourishing during the deep darkness of the Byzantine age. Furthermore, it possesses significant authority for restoring the original words of the philosopher, as it precedes all our surviving manuscripts in age. It must be admitted, however, that the readings Stephanus provides from his own copies—for we read on page 14 line 30 that he used several books—do not differ often or much from the standard text. The instances where he disagrees with all of Bekker’s manuscripts Referring to the 1831 standard edition of Aristotle by Immanuel Bekker are roughly as follows:

In On Interpretation:

• At 16ᵃ3: he omits "indeed" original: μὲν (men).
• At 16ᵃ20: after "separate," he adds "but introducing a defined nature" original: ὡρισμένην δὲ φύσιν εἰσάγουσα (hôrismenên de physin eisagousa).
• At 16ᵃ31: "for it is neither a statement nor a denial" original: οὐδὲ γὰρ λόγος οὐδὲ ἀπόφασίς ἐστι.
• At 16ᵇ10: instead of the standard "of those things said of another," he shows a variant reading "of existing things" original: τῶν ὑπαρχόντων (tôn hyparchontôn).
• At 16ᵇ25: "it is not possible to think of anything."
• At 17ᵃ11.12: "the 'is' or 'will be' or 'was'."
• At 17ᵃ15: "of this study."
• At 17ᵃ38: "since."
• At 17ᵇ3: he omits "therefore."
• At 17ᵇ15: "it will be predicated."
• At 18ᵃ18: "it is not one proposition" (unless perhaps he described the words too carelessly).
• At 18ᵇ26: "and such things."
• At 20ᵃ4: "to be healthy and to walk."
• At 20ᵃ25: he omits "at least."
• At 20ᵃ26: after "wise," he adds "is."
• At 21ᵃ32: after "objects of opinion," he adds "is."
• At 21ᵇ14: "all."
• At 21ᵇ27: "addition."
• At 22ᵃ38: "but it is clear."
• At 22ᵇ30: he omits "to be."
• At 23ᵃ12: "only."
• At 23ᵇ37: "they would be true."

Where Bekker’s manuscripts disagree with each other, Stephanus usually agrees with Codex C Codex Coislinianus 330, an important 11th-century manuscript of Aristotle.