Commentary on the First Three Books of Aristotle's Physics

Democritus and Leucippus posited the atoms and the void (sic A: they posited BR), and that the void is infinite and the atoms are in it. And he said they were atoms because of their smallness (these two words deleted in A: omitted in R: from B from this place I have noted nothing) bodies of a certain sort, invisible because of their smallness and indivisible because of their hardness, such as are (are R) the particles appearing in the rays through the windows, etc. ABR.

S Parisiensis 1859 known to me only by name. Torstrikius noted that it contains Philoponean excerpts, from those namely which pertain to Arist. Θ 6 p. 259a 13—8 p. 262a 2, which we took care to publish from codex F.

T Marcianus 219 [Zanetti p. 117], parchment, 15th century, of 357 leaves. It contains f. 340 sqq. a fragment of Philoponus "on the remainder" etc. described from F, as is clear from the inscription itself: for T inscribes: "beginning of the other motion (sic! cf. F); of John Philoponus etc." I compared it myself.

V Ottobonianus 32 [Brandis Abhandl. der Berl. Akad. 1831 p. 68 nr. 115]. f. 17—29 contains the same fragment described from O; for what has faded in O, V has for the most part either omitted or wrongly supplied. A part of the fragment was described from this codex by Christian Belger, and the whole was compared most accurately by my friend Gustav Heylbut.

t JOHN THE GRAMMARIAN'S COMMENTARY ON THE FOUR FIRST BOOKS OF ARISTOTLE'S PHYSICS. | IOANNIS GRAMMATICI IN PRIMOS QVATVOR ARISTOTELIS DE NATVRALI AVSCVLTATIONE LIBROS COMENTARIA. By the privilege of the Venetian Senate, it is ordered that no one for ten years may with impunity either print these books or sell them in this city if printed elsewhere, or to others subject to Venetian rule. | MDXXXV. and at the bottom of the book: Venice in the house of Bartholomaeus Zanetti Casterzagensis, by the money and diligence of Ioannes Franciscus Trincavellus. Year from the birth of the Virgin | MDXXXV. Month of September. But in the inscription of the letter to Caspar Contarenus, which occupies the place of a preface, the editor is called VICTOR TRINCAVELVS. I received the entire scripture discrepancy of the Venetian edition into the critical note, neglecting the parts of the lemmas supplied from the published Aristotle. For the most part, I copied even the errors of the typesetters, yet I passed over not a few in silence: for frequently what was written wrongly in some copies was corrected in others. For example, it is written in the copy I use p. 514,1 correctly "in front" ἔμπροσθεν and p. 542,7 wrongly "he is born" πέφηκεν, in another wrongly "in front" ἔμπρωσθεν and correctly "he is born" πέφυκεν. cf. to p. 116,20 etc. I warned above that books I—III were described from codex M: in book IV Trincavellius used an apograph of codex G, with which his edition agrees in almost all things: cf. to p. 496,6. 497,5. 511,16 etc.

Of the Latin versions, I have seen three copies, of which the first (α) printed at Venice by Octavianus Scottus of D. Amadeus in the year MDLIIII bears the name of the interpreter Guilelmus Dorotheus, a Venetian theologian; the second (β) Ve-