Prehistory of Modern Skepticism

The Prehistory of Modern Scepticism: Sextus Empiricus in Fifteenth-Century ItalyAuthor(s): Gian Mario CaoReviewed work(s):Source: Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 64 (2001), pp. 229-280Published by: The Warburg InstituteStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/751563 .

Accessed: 06/03/2013 22:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Warburg Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of theWarburg and Courtauld Institutes.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Mar 2013 22:21:07 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=warburg

http://www.jstor.org/stable/751563?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


THE PREHISTORY OF MODERN SCEPTICISM: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY

Gian Mario Cao

for Lucia Cesarini Martinelli, in , memoriam

T he chronological and geographical boundaries of this study do not call for any particular justification. The historiographical prominence of the Italian Quattrocento

may, however, appear to weaken my thesis that this period belongs, not to the history, but rather the prehistory, of modern scepticism - a thesis premised on the indisputable value of the textual revival of Sextus Empiricus in fifteenth-century Italy and the undeniable failure of the philosophical perspective propagandised by him. This premise, which forms the foundation of the following study, represents both my starting point and a consistent feature of my interpretation.

That said, it is also necessary to add that one of my main aims has been to put aside - and therefore, implicitly, to oppose - two alternative positions: first, the identification of the return of ancient philosophy (in this case, scepticism) with the birth of modern

thought; and second, the historiographical tendency to dismiss a problem which has been made unattractive to philosophers by the need to deal with non-philosophical issues of a

philological nature.1 Research of this kind, moreover, confers general validity on what has been stated specifically in relation to literary history: that up to the end of the fifteenth

century it consists above all of paleography.2 If, however, erudition is to be established as the norm of scholarship, the negative results of this decision must be pointed out, whether

they result from the incorrect use of the tools of specialised research or from losing sight of the merely ancillary nature of such investigations.

New evidence regarding the humanistic recovery of Sextus Empiricus will also need to be considered from this perspective. Recent studies offer us a richer and clearer picture of Sextus's presence in the fifteenth century. Nevertheless, the variety of information now available does not in itself constitute proof of its importance: if anything, it increases the need for historical judgement. Determining the diffusion of Sextus's writings can no

longer be the same as producing a history of the manuscript tradition carried out solely

1. Research into the recovery of ancient scepticism in medieval times has always been conditioned by a

philological emphasis which is technically rigorous but

unpromising on the philosophical level. While the few

known facts regarding these events have recently been

given some kind of order, the area of origin and precise

dating of the 13th/14th-century Latin translation of the Outlines of Pyrrhonism still need to be defined and, in

particular, the unity of the tradition established. The

relationship between surviving exemplars of the trans- latio latina has been deduced more than demonstrated.

Moreover, the uncertainty regarding the genealogical

relations between the manuscripts cannot be resolved without a critical edition of the text. For an evaluation of the available data and for earlier bibliography see P.

Eleuteri, 'Note su alcuni manoscritti di Sesto Empirico', Orpheus, vi, 1985, pp. 432-36; P. Porro, 'I1 Sextus Latinus e l'immagine dello scetticismo antico nel medioevo', Elenchos, xv, 1994, PP. 229-53-

2. C. Dionisotti, 'Dante nel Quattrocento', in Atti del Congresso Internazionale di Studi Danteschi (1965), 2

vols, Florence 1965-66, I, pp. 333-78 (352: 'Fino a tutto il Quattrocento, la storia letteraria, prima d'esser storia della lingua, e paleografia.').

JOURNAL OF THE WARBURG AND COURTAULD INSTITUTES, LXIV, 2001



230 GIAN MARIO CAO

for the purposes of textual criticism. The presence of the Outlines ofPyrrhonism (Pyrrhoniae hypotyposes) and Against the Professors (Adversus mathematicos) on the shelves of humanist libraries has long ago been deduced by research developed in the field of classical philology and carried out according to the laws of stemmatics. In our own times, however, the establishment of humanistic philology as an independent branch of learning has given respectability to a different objective, one which treats the importance of a manuscript in terms of the wealth of history behind it rather than its contribution to a recension of the text. Looked at from this new vantage point, it is not paradoxical for an autograph or

archetype which had no later influence to take second place to a distant or mechanically descriptus descendent which has no role to play in producing a critical edition of a text but which nevertheless enabled that text to survive.

I. SEXTUS IN RENAISSANCE BOOK INVENTORIES

Luciano Floridi's research into the diffusion of Sextus Empiricus's works in the Renais- sance, especially in the sixteenth century, has added some new dimensions to this picture: he has brought to light or clarified a number of episodes; and his up-dating of the list of the Sextus manuscripts (both Greek and Latin) has produced a picture which differs from the one outlined at the beginning of the last century.3 Nevertheless, studies of this type, based mainly on the examination of modern printed catalogues (whose summary nature and frequent unreliability need to be taken into account), are inevitably limited by the fact that they cover only surviving manuscripts.

A valuable contribution to this enterprise can be obtained from the exploration of ancient library inventories - as well, of course, as from information gleaned from any other kind of historical source. Such an approach, however, is by no means free from difficulty. This is due, above all, to the backwardness of Italian research in this field, first signalled by Giorgio Pasquali at the beginning of the 1930os when he pointed out the need for a collection of medieval catalogues, work on which is only now being carried out.4 Further-

more, while the documentary evidence found in ancient inventories helps to verify the

presence of a text in a given library collection, it tells us nothing about the ways in which

the text itself was approached.5

3. See L. Floridi, 'The Diffusion of Sextus Empi- ricus's Works in the Renaissance', Journal of the History

of Ideas, I.VI, 1995, pp. 63-85; for additions and corrections to his list of Sextus manuscripts see G. M. Cao, 'Nota sul recupero umanistico di Sesto Empirico', Rinascimento, xxxv, 1995, PP. 319-25 (319-2o). Floridi

is also the author of the long-awaited entry on 'Sextus

Empiricus', forthcoming in vol. viii of the Catalogus Translationum et Commentariorum: Medieval and Renais-

sance Latin Translation and Commentaries. See also G.

De Gregorio, 'Costantinopoli-Tubinga-Roma, ovvero

la "duplice conversione" di un manoscritto bizantino

(Vat. Gr. 738)', Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xcIII, 2ooo, pp.

37-1o7. 4. G. Pasquali, 'Per una raccolta dei cataloghi medi-

evali delle biblioteche d'Italia', Pegaso, iII, 1931, pp.

93-96 (repr. in idem, Pagine stravaganti di unfilologo, ed.

C. F. Russo, 2 vols, Florence 1994, I, PP. 118-22). But

see now G. Savino, 'Per una raccolta dei cataloghi medi-

evali delle biblioteche d'Italia', Studi Medievali, xxxi,

1990, pp. 789-803; D. Nebbiai-Dalla Guarda, I documenti

per la storia delle biblioteche medievali (secoli IX-XV), Rome

1992; eadem, 'La description du livre au XVe siecle:

pratiques et modeles', in Pratiques de la culture ecrite en

France au XVe sicle (actes du colloque international du

C.N.R.S., Paris 1992), ed. M. Onorato and N. Pons, Louvain-la-Neuve 1995, PP. 473-97.

5. See, in general, P. Kibre, 'The Intellectual

Interests Reflected in Libraries of the Fourteenth and

Fifteenth Century', Journal of the History of Ideas, vii,

1946, pp. 257-97; G. Billanovich, 'Biblioteche di dotti

e letteratura italiana tra il Trecento e il Quattrocento',



SEXTUS EMPIRICUS IN FIFTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY 231

With regard to Sextus Empiricus, the survey I have made of ancient catalogues,

although unsystematic and statistically unreliable (since it has been limited to published sources), probably gives us a fairly accurate picture of the rarity of his works. Copies found their way only into wealthy, organised institutions such as the Medici and Vatican libraries, or into the private collections of leading figures in Greek studies such as Francesco Filelfo and Cardinal Bessarion. A glance at the main fifteenth-century Italian collections will

provide sufficient proof of this. There is no trace of Sextus Empiricus in documents describing the history of

the Visconti and Sforza library.6 Nor is there any reference to him in the records of the

Gonzaga library in Mantua,7 the collection of the dukes of Urbino," or other libraries,

including those of the Malatesta,9 Savoyl' and Aragon.1" Whether one looks at private,12

in Studi e Problemi di Critica Testuale (Convegno di Studi

di Filologia italiana, g196o), Bologna 1961, pp. 335-

48; A. Petrucci, 'Le biblioteche antiche', in Letteratura

italiana, ed. A. Asor Rosa, II, Produzione e consumo, Turin

1982, pp. 527-54; A. Taylor, Book Catalogues: Their

Varieties and Uses, 2nd revd edn, Winchester 1986; C.

Csapodi, 'Les bibliotheques humanistes', in L'epoque de la Renaissance 14oo-i6oo, I, L'avenement de l'esprit nouveau (14oo-I48o), ed. T. Klaniczay et al., Budapest

1988, pp. 126-36; L. Gargan, 'Gli umanisti e la biblioteca pubblica', in Le biblioteche nel mondo antico e medievale, ed. G. Cavallo, Rome and Bari 1993, pp. 163-86; E.

Canone, 'Nota introduttiva. Le biblioteche private di

eruditi, filosofi e scienziati dell'eta moderna', in Biblio- thecae selectae. Da Cusano a Leopardi, ed. E. Canone, Florence 1993, pp. IX-XXXII.

6. See E. Pellegrin, La bibliotheque des Visconti et des

Sforza ducs de Milan au XVe sibcle, Paris 1955, which

contains the 1426 inventory ordered by Filippo Maria

Visconti (pp. 75-289); that of 1459, made after resto-

ration work to Pavia castle (pp. 290-328); and that of

1469, concerning the transfer to Pavia of the manu-

scripts of Galeazzo Maria Sforza (pp. 328-52). See also

M. G. Albertini Ottolenghi, 'La biblioteca dei Visconti e

degli Sforza: gli inventari del 1488 e del 1490', Studi

Petrarcheschi, viII, 1991, pp. 1-238, which includes and

analyses two inventories carried out in March 1488 (pp. 22-15 1) and April 1490o (pp. 152-238). Further docu-

mentation regarding the library is given by the list of

books on loan or not in the library premises which were

returned to Pavia in 1491, published by E. Fumagalli,

'Appunti sulla biblioteca dei Visconti e degli Sforza

nel castello di Pavia', ibid., VII, 1 99o, pp. 93-211. See

also the contributions by S. Cerrini, 'Libri dei Visconti-

Sforza. Schede per una nuova edizione degli inventari', ibid., vIII, 1991, pp. 239-81; and F. Petrucci Nardelli, 'La biblioteca Visconteo Sforzesca. Ubicazione e dispo- sizione del materiale librario', La Bibliofilia, xcvII, g1995, pp. 2 1-33.

7. See P. Girolla, 'La biblioteca di Francesco Gon-

zaga secondo l'inventario del 14o7', Atti e memorie della

reale Accademia virgiliana di Mantova, xiv-xvi, 1921-23,

pp. 3o-72; and also D. S. Chambers, A Renaissance

Cardinal and His Worldly Goods: The Will and Inventory

of Francesco Gonzaga (1444-1483), London 1992, pp. 166-85.

8. The so-called Indice vecchio, compiled largely in

about 1487, with additions by the librarian Agapito in

around 1496-98, is published in Codices Urbinates Graeci Bibliothecae Vaticanae, ed. C. Stornajolo, Rome 1895, pp. LIX-CLXXV; a second inventory, probably drawn up in 1520, was published by C. Guasti, 'Inventario della libreria urbinate compilato nel secolo XV da Federigo Veterano bibliotecario di Federigo I da Montefeltro

duca di Urbino', Giornale Storico degli Archivi Toscani, vI, 1862, pp. 133-47; VII, 1863, pp. 46-55, 130-54. See also G. Franceschini, 'Per la storia della biblioteca di Federico da Montefeltro duca di Urbino', Atti e memorie

della DI)eputazione di storia patria per le Marche, xII, 1959, pp. 41-77; L. Michelini Tocci, 'Agapito, bibliotecario

"docto, acorto et diligente" della Biblioteca Urbinate alla fine del Quattrocento', in Collectanea Vaticana in honorem Anselmi M. Card. Albareda, 2 vols, Vatican City 1962, II, pp. 245-80; idem, 'La formazione della biblioteca di Federico da Montefeltro: codici contemporanei e libri a stampa', in Federico di Montefeltro. Lo stato le arti

la cultura, ed. G. Cerboni Baiardi et al., III, La cultura, Rome 1986, pp. 9-17-

9. See A. Campana, Origine, formazione e vicende della Malatestiana, Rome 1953; La Biblioteca Malatestiana di

Cesena, ed. L. Baldacchini, Rome 1992; Libraria Domini. I manoscritti della Biblioteca Malatestiana: testi e decorazioni, ed. F. Lollini and P. Lucchi, Bologna 1995. See also La

biblioteca di un medico del Quattrocento: I codici di Giovanni di Marco da Rimini nella Biblioteca Malatestiana, ed. A.

Manfron, Cesena and Turin 1998. io. See S. Edmunds, 'The Medieval Library of

Savoy', Scriptorium, xxiv, 197o, pp. 318-27; xxV, 1971,

pp. 253-84; xxvi, 1972, pp. 269-93; Les manuscrits enlumines des Comtes et Ducs de Savoie, ed. A. Paravicini

Bagliani, Turin 1989. 1 1. See G. Mazzatinti, La Biblioteca dei re d'Aragona in



232 GIAN MARIO CAO

'state', or church collections, the results of this survey remain unchanged: Sextus's works are absent from the libraries of bishops and cardinals,'" from monastery and cathedral

library collections, in Florence and Tuscany,1" Padua and the Veneto,'5 as well as other

parts of Italy.16

Napoli, Rocca S. Casciano 1897; and esp. T. De Marinis, La Biblioteca napoletana dei re d'Aragona, 4 vols, Milan

1945-52. See also G. Bresciano, 'Inventari inediti del

secolo XV contenenti libri a stampa e manoscritti', Archivio Storico per le Province Napoletane, xxvi, I 9)o 1, pp.

1-32; C. De Frede, 'Biblioteche e cultura di signori

napoletani del '4oo', Bibliotheque d'Humanisme et Renais- sance, xxv, 1963, pp. 187-97. The Biblioteca Nazionale

of Naples currently holds a significant collection of

Greek manuscripts originating mainly from the Farnese

library (see L. Pernot, 'La collection de manuscrits grecs de la maison Farnese', Melanges d'archeologie et d'histoire

de l' Ecole Fran(aise de Rome, xcI, 1979, pp. 457-5o6; idem, 'Nouveau manuscrits grecs farn&siens', ibid.,

xcIlI, 1815, pp. 685-711; E. Mioni, 'Prolegomena', in

Catalogeus codicunm goaeorum Bibliothecae Nationalis Neapoli- tana, i. , ed. idem, Rome 1992, pp. V-VI) and from the

library of S. Giovanni a Carbonara, which was enlarged over time thanks to the efforts of figures such as

Demetrio Calcondila, Aulo Giano Parrasio, and Antonio

and Girolamo Seripando (see D. Gutierrez, 'La biblioteca di S. Giovanni a Carbonara di Napoli', Analecla

Augustiniana, xxlx, 1966, pp. 99-212). 12. Private collections also, of course, include

humanistic and family libraries; see e.g. C. Bec, Les livres des Florentins (I413-60o8), Florence 1984; A. Cataldi

Palau, 'La biblioteca Pandolfini. Storia della sua forma-

zione e successiva dispersione: identificazione di alcuni

manoscritti', Italia medioevale e umanistica, xxxi, 1 988,

PP- 259-395-

13. See e.g. A. Paredi, La biblioteca del PizoIpasso, Milan 1961; R. Avesani, 'Per la biblioteca di Agostino Patrizi Piccolomini vescovo di Pienza', in Melanges Eugene Tisserant, 7 vols, Vatican City 1964, vI, pp. 1-87; A. V.

Antonovics, 'The Library of Cardinal Domenico Capra- nica', in Cultural Aspects of the Italian Renaissance. Essays in Honour of Paul Oskar Kristeller, ed. C. H. Clough, Manchester and New York 1976, pp. 141-59; G. Lom-

bardi and F. Onofri, 'La biblioteca di Giordano Orsini

(c. 1360-1438)', in Scrittura, biblioteche e stampa a Roma

nel Quattrocento (atti del seminario, 1979), ed. C. Bianca

et al., Vatican City i98o, pp. 371-82; D. Norman, 'The

Library of Cardinal Oliviero Carafa, parts 1 and 2', The

Book Collector, xxxvi, 1987, pp. [i-38]; 'Pro bibliotheca

erigenda': Mostra di manoscritti ed incunaboli del vescovo

di Trento Johannes Hinderbach (1465-1486), Trent 1989; A. Cataldi Palau, 'La biblioteca del cardinale Giovanni

Salviati. Alcuni nuovi manoscritti greci in biblioteche

diverse dalla Vaticana', Scriptorium, xILIX, 1995, PP. 6o-

95; T. Haffner, Die Bibliothek des Kardinals Giovanni

d'Aragona (i456-1485), Wiesbaden 1997; (;. Rebec-

chini, 'The Book Collection and Other Possessions of

Baldassarre Castiglione', this Journal, I.xI, 1i)8, pp.

17-52. See also A. Petrucci, 'I libri della porpora', in I

luoghi della miemoria scritta. Manoscritti, incunaboli, libri a

stampa di Biblioteche Statali Italiane, ed. G. Cavallo, Rome

1994, PP- 3o3-o9.

14. See F. Baldasseroni and P. D'Ancona, La Biblio-

teca della Basilica fiorentina di S. Lorenzo nei secoli XIV e

XV, Prato and Florence Igo6; S. Orlandi, La Bibliotera di S. Maria Novella in Firenze dal sec. XIV al sec. XIX, Florence 1952; F. Mattesini, 'La biblioteca friancescana di S. Croce e Fra Tedaldo Della Casa', Studi Francescani,

I.vi, 196o, pp. 254-316; D. Gutierrez, 'La biblioteca di

Santo Spirito in Firenze nella met6i del secolo XV',

Analecta Augustiniana, xxv, 1962, pp. 5-88 (and again, idem, 'De antiquis Ordinis Eremitarurm Sancti Augus- tini bibliothecis', ibid., xxIII, 1954, PP. 163-374); C. T.

Davis, 'The Early Collection of Books ol S. CrIoce in

Florence', Proceeding of the American Philosophical Society,

evii, 1963, pp. 399-414; K. W. Humphreys, The Library

of the Carimelites of Ilorence at the End of the lFoureenuh

Century, Amsterdam 1964; L. Perini, 'L'inventario dei codici di S. Maria del Carmine di Firenze del 1461', in

A Giuseppe Ermini, 3 vols, Spoleto 197o, 111, pp. 4i 1-561

(= Studi Medievali, x, 1969). For other Tuscan libraries see D. Corsi, 'La Biblioteca dei frati domenicani di S.

Romiano di Lucca nel sec. XV', in Miscellanea di scritti vari in menmoria di Alfbnso Gallo, Florence 1i956, pp. 293-

31o; G. Savino, 'Libri pistoiesi in un inventario del XV secolo', Bullettino Storico Pistoiese, ixix,

1i 6(7, pp. 1 25-28; K. W. Humphreys, The Library of the Franciscans

of Siena in the Late Fifteenth Cenlury, Amsterdam 1 i978; MI.

E. Magheri Cataluccio and A. U. Fossa, Biblioteca e cultura a Camaldoli. Dal mnedioevo all'umnanesimo, Rome 1979; ;. Savino, 'La libreria della Cattedrale di San Zenone in

Pistoia nell'inventario sozomeniano del 1432', in 7ra libri e carte. Studi in onore di Luciana Mosiici, ed. G. Savino

and T. De Robertis, Florence 1998, pp. 421-35-

15. Cf. P. Sambin, 'La formazione quattrocentesca della biblioteca di S. Giovanni di Verdara in Padova',

Atti dell'Istituto veneto di scienze, lettere ed arti, (:xIv, 1955-

56, pp. 263-80; K. W. Humphreys, The Library of the

Franciscans of the Convent oqfSt. Antony, Padua at the Begin-

ning of the Fifteenth Century, Amsterdam 19 66; G. Cantoni

Alzati, La Biblioteca di S. Giustina di Padova. Libri e cultura

presso i benedettini padovani in eta umanistica, Padua 1982,

pp. 35-142; S. Bernardinello, 'Sulla biblioteca di

Gaetano da Thiene, lettore allo Studio e canonico della

Cattedrale di Padova', in Viridarium floridum: Studi di




There is, however, one exception. In 1459 Guarino da Verona, already in his nineties and close to death, wrote to Piero de' Medici asking to borrow a copy of Sextus's works, which were apparently unavailable to him in the Este library in Ferrara:'7

I hear that you have that noble author, Sextus Empiricus, with you. I am desperate to get hold of him. If you very kindly put me in possession of him, you will lay me under such an everlasting obligation that I will owe everything to you ...s8

I have been unable to find a reply to this letter in Piero's correspondence from this period. Nor is there any reference to Sextus's works in surviving documents concerning Guarino's

personal library or in his own writings.'9 All this seems to confirm the longstanding belief

storia veneta offerti dagli allievi a Paolo Sambin, Padua

1984, PP. 337-53. 16. See A. Sorbelli, 'La Biblioteca Capitolare della

Cattedrale di Bologna nel sec. XV: notizie e catalogo', Atti e Memorie della Deputazione di Storia Patria per la

Romagna, xxI, 1903, PP- 439-616; G. Borghezio, 'Inven-

tarii e notizie della Biblioteca Capitolare d'Ivrea nel

secolo XV', in Miscellanea Francesco Ehrle, 5 vols, Rome

1924, v, pp. 423-54; D. M. Inguanez, Catalogi codicum

Casinensium antiqui (saec. VIII-XV), Montecassino 1941; M.-H. Laurent, Fabio Vigili et les bibliotheques de Bologne au

debut du XVIe siecle d'apres le ms. Barb. Lat. 3185, Vatican

City 1943; G. Gullotta, Gli antichi cataloghi e i codici della

Abbazia di Nonantola, Vatican City 1955; G. Pistarino, 'Libri e cultura nella cattedrale di Genova tra Medioevo

e Rinascimento', Atti della Societa ligure di storia patria, II,

1961, pp. 1-117; V. Alce and A. D'Amato, La biblioteca

di S. Domenico in Bologna, Florence 1961; T. Kaeppeli, Inventari di libri di San Domenico di Perugia (i43o-80), Rome 1962; A. Belloni and M. Ferrari, La Biblioteca Capi- tolare di Monza, Padua 1974; M. Ferrari, 'Per una storia

delle biblioteche francescane a Milano nel Medioevo e nell'Umanesimo', Archivum Franciscanum Historicum,

LXXII, 1979, pp. 429-64; A. Franceschini, Inventari inediti di biblioteche ferraresi del sec. XV. B. La biblioteca del

Capitolo dei canonici della Cattedrale, Ferrara 1982 (= Atti e

Memorie della Deputazione prov. Ferrarese di storia patria, II);

La biblioteca di Pomposa, ed. G. Billanovich, Padua 1994; M. Ferrari, 'Due inventari quattrocenteschi della Biblio- teca Capitolare di S. Ambrogio in Milano', in Filologia umanistica per Gianvito Resta, ed. V. Fera and G. Ferrafi,

3 vols, Padua 1997, II, pp. 771-814; A. Riva, La Biblio- teca Capitolare di S. Antonino di Piacenza (secoli XII-XV), Piacenza 1997; L. Gargan, L'antica biblioteca della Certosa di Pavia, Rome 1998.

17. The presence of a substantial nucleus of manu-

scripts at the court of Ferrara is revealed in the inventory of Niccol6 III d'Este's books drawn up inJanuary 1436; a second list was compiled in 1467, during Borso's

reign, and has no relation to the first. From then until the end of the 15th century other inventories were

made, the last of which dates to 1495 and bears witness

to the conditions of the library under Ercole I. Despite Guarino's long period of teaching, it appears that the collection contains no Greek texts; this is confirmed by the solitary presence of a codex by Diodorus Siculus in the list of 1495 (item 464: 'Teodoro siculo in greco

coperto de montanina rossa'). For the texts of the various inventories see G. Bertoni, La Biblioteca Estense e

la coltura ferrarese ai tempi del duca Ercole I (i471-1505),

Turin 1903, pp. 211-71. See also A. Quondam, 'Le

biblioteche della corte estense a Ferrara', in I luoghi (as in n. 13), pp. 207-15; A. Grafton, 'Comment creer une

bibliotheque humaniste: le cas de Ferrare', in Lepouvoir des bibliotheques: La mimoire des livres en Occident, ed. M. Baratin and C. Jacob, Paris 1996, pp. 189-203; on

private libraries in Ferrara see e.g. D. Mugnai Carrara, La biblioteca di Nicolo Leoniceno. Tra Aristotele e Galeno: cultura e libri di un medico umanista, Florence 1991; C.

Andreasi, 'La biblioteca di frate Giovanni Battista Panetti

carmelitano', Medioevo e Rinascimento, XIV, 2000, pp. 183-231.

18. L. Capra, 'Contributo a Guarino Veronese', Italia medioevale e umanistica, Xiv, 1971, pp. 193-247 (247): 'Audio Sextum Empiricum auctorem nobilem apud te

esse, cuius habendi mirum me tenet desiderium. Eius autem si me compotem benignitate tua reddideris, adeo me tibi perpetuo devinxeris ut nihil quod tibi non debeam ...' The letter is published on the basis of San

Gimignano, Biblioteca Comunale MS 137 (A V 7) (noted by P. O. Kristeller, Iter Italicum, 7 vols, London and Leiden 1963-97, 11, p. 142), which differs from a similar collection of letters also addressed to Piero de' Medici - preserved in Urbino, Biblioteca Universitaria MS 135 (see A. Campana, 'Una lettera inedita di Guarino Veronese e il Plutarco mediceo della bottega di Vespasiano', Italia medioevale e umanistica, v, 1962,

pp. 171-78) - precisely because it contains the letter

concerning Sextus.

19. My research on Piero's correspondence was con- ducted in the Mediceo avanti il Principato collection

(hereafter MAP) and the Carte Strozziane of Archivio di Stato of Florence (hereafter ASF), starting from Archivio Mediceo avanti il Principato. Inventario, ed. A.



234 GIAN MARIO CAO

that the formation of a collection of Greek manuscripts in the Medicea privata, that is, the Medici private library, did not take place until the time of Piero's son, Lorenzo the

Magnificent. Clear traces of a Sextus manuscript can be found in the various inventories of the

Vatican Library, including those compiled by Sixtus IV's librarian, Bartolomeo Sacchi

(known as Platina), in 147520 and 1481,21 and a further three subsequently carried out in

1484 under the papacy of Innocent VIII,22 in 1518 by Zanobi Acciaiuoli,2" and finally in 1517-18 by the librarian Girolamo Aleandro together with Giovanni Severos, which, unlike the others, was written in Greek.24 Further evidence that there was a manuscript of Sextus in the Vatican Library is provided by the loans register, which records that a codex was returned to the library in November 1494 'by the Greek scribe Demetrius'

('per Dimetrium scriptorem grecum'), having been borrowed in January of that year by Gioacchino Torriano, General of the Dominican Order.25 The subsequent catalogue,

D'Addario and F. Morandini, 4 vols, Rome 1951-63; Le

Carte Strozziane del R. Archivio di Stato in Firenze. Inventario, 2 vols, Florence 1884-92; I also consulted Kristeller, Iter Italicum (as in n. 18), vii. On Guarino's library see H.

Omont, 'Les manuscrits grecs de Guarino de Verone et

la bibliotheque de Ferrare', Revue des Bibliotheques, II, 1892, pp. 78-81; A. Diller, 'The Greek Codices of Palla

Strozzi and Guarino Veronese', this journal, xxIv, 1961,

PP. 313-21 (317-21), now in idem, Studies in Greek

Manuscript Tradition, Amsterdam 1983, PP- 4o5-13 (409-13); I. Thomson, 'Some Notes on the Contents of

Guarino's Library', Renaissance Quarterly, xxIx, 1976,

pp. 169-77. I found nothing relevant in the Epistolario di Guarino Veronese, ed. R. Sabbadini, 3 vols, Venice

1915-19. 20. Item 245 corresponded to 'Sexti Heberici opus.

Ex membr. in pavonazio'. The inventory, contained in

Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (hereafter

BAV) MS Vat. lat. 3954 is published in full by E. Mfintz and P. Fabre, La bibliotheque du Vatican au XVe siecle, Paris

1887, pp. 159-250 (232); the Greek section is reproduced in R. Devreesse, Le fonds grec de la Bibliotheque Vaticane des origines t Paul V, Vatican City 1965, pp.

45-80 (55). Note that the manuscript does not appear in the list of Greek codices of Nicholas V (t 1455) nor

in the book loans approved by Callixtus III (t 1458)

compiled by Cosimo di Monserrat (see A. M. Albareda,

'I1 bibliotecario di Callisto III', in Miscellanea Giovanni

Mercati, 6 vols, Vatican City 1946, Iv, pp. 178-208),

published for the first time by Milntz and Fabre (as

above), pp. 316-44, and again by Devreesse, Le fonds (as above), pp. 11-42. On the papal collection in the

second half of the 15th century see J. Bignami Odier, La Bibliotheque Vaticane de Sixte IV t Pie XI, Vatican City

1973, PP. 9-43; on the Greek collection in particular see R. Devreesse, 'Pour l'histoire des manuscrits du

fonds vatican grec', in Collectanea Vaticana (as in n. 8), I,

PP. 315-36.

21. The inventory was compiled with the collaboration of Demetrio Guazzelli and is contained in BAV MS Vat. lat. 3947; see item 209, 'Sextus Empiricus, ex

membranis in rubeo'. It is published in Devreesse, Le

Fonds (as in n. 20), pp. 82-120 (91).

22. It appears in BAV MS Vat. lat. 3949. The Greek

section is published in Devreesse, ibid., pp. 122-51 (129, item 2o8: 'Sextus Empiricus').

23. The inventory is published ibid., pp. 186-235

(197), on the basis of BAV MS Vat. lat. 3955, an auto-

graph of the keeper of manuscripts, Lorenzo Parmenio; the note referring to Sextus, '241. Sextus Empiricus', appears in the margin. Between this inventory and the

preceding one, there is a description made strictly for

personal use c. 1510o by Fabio Vigili (BAV MS Vat. lat.

7135), listing 408 of the total of about 850 Greek

codices held at that time in the Vatican Library; this list,

reproduced ibid., pp. 153-80, does not include the

manuscript of Sextus Empiricus.

24. Different dates (July 1519 to December 1521) are proposed in Bignami Odier (as in n. 20), p. 3o, relying on a hypothesis first put forward by Devreesse, 'Pour l'histoire' (as in n. 20), p. 327 n. 1. The inventory is contained in BAV MS Vat. gr. 1483 and published in

Devreesse, Le Fonds (as in n. 20), pp. 237-63 (251); a

complete transcription of the note regarding Sextus

Empiricus (item 237) is given by P. Canart, 'D6metrius

Damilas, alias le librarius Florentinus', Rivista di Studi

Bizantini e Neoellenici, xxIv-xxvI, 1977-79, pp. 281-347

(307 n. 2: 'P3t•Xiov IK'

/ XYl•'ou

1 tTCiEptpoC

nTpbgd; aetqOratXtuco1);: / 'ob5 atroi npTCEi ypxtpxaat?cig;: / Zo)

aTobio Tt~Pi ptrqpoptui;: / 'oi ab )roi tpo;g yEOwzrpiav: / to) abcTo ; itpog ptOp'ztucog;: / 'ob a(czoi Ttpog

(&Trpo67yog;: / 'ob

aetrob itpo;g iovcto•Kog: / pt~pi

ixptrpto~o- / zo6v • z&x iE•rzov ox eTx tc6)v [rt6 86Erepov

1K<cpa•atov> ;'] / [zoo cabzoi i~oopvrRcXzov t6 fiov jov] / 6ecxa )

~totVfilcaarC /

X67yo;g tEpi QXya0o) •cai

•cacob.').




this time in Latin again, was compiled in 1533 by Nicola Maiorano. From this document, it appears that losses from the Greek collection due to the Sack of Rome in 1527 were not particularly severe - 859 codices are recorded, compared to 889 in the 1518 inven-

tory. Sextus Empiricus, however, had disappeared from the catalogue.26 According to information contained in the Greek catalogue of 1517-18, the lost manuscript preserved Against the Professors, but not the Outlines of Pyrrhonism, and the anonymous Ataooi k6yot, renamed Atiaketq; (the titles mean 'Contrasting Arguments' and 'Arguments' respectively) by Henri Estienne in his 1570 edition of Diogenes Laertius.27 The lost Vatican codex is believed to have belonged to the family of manuscripts assigned the siglum W by Arthur

Kochalsky and g by Hermann Mutschmann.28 On that basis, together with the information

regarding the return of the book in 1494, Paul Canart has argued that some of the Sextus codices which can be ascribed to this manuscript family may have descended from a scribe of Greek origin, Demetrius Damilas, the supposed 'librarius Florentinus',"29 and from the lost Vatican codex.30 Among these manuscripts, one long-missing codex stands out in

particular: MS Regimontanus S. 35. 8' (also recorded as 16 b 12, and referred to as 'K' and later 'R' by philologists) of the Stadtbibliothek in K6nigsberg, later Kaliningrad.:-

25. M. Bert6la, I due primi registri di prestito della

Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican City 1942, p. 84:

'Ego frater loakinus Turrianus, generalis ordinis predicatorum, recepi mutuo a domino loanne Fonsalitas

bibliotecario S. domini nostri libros duos in greco Eustracium in papiro super libros Ethicorum et

Elenchorum coopertum nigro et Sextum Empiricum in membranis, restituendos ad eius beneplacitum, die

XXVII ianuarii 1494 et manu propria in fide huius

scripsi. - Restituit die X novembris. Restituit per Demetrium scribam,. - Restituit Sestum Embiricum

die XVII michi Io<hanni, custode per Dimetrium scriptorem grecum'. The text is also transcribed by Canart

(as in n. 24), p. 317 (appx 1, no. 5). On Torriano see also S. Marcon, 'I libri del generale domenicano Gioachino Torriano (t 1550) nel convento veneziano di San Zanipolo', Miscellanea Marciana, II-Iv, 1987-89, pp. 81-116.

26. The list is contained in BAV MS Vat. lat. 3951 and the Greek part alone is published by Devreesse, Le Fonds (as in n. 20), pp. 266-312 (see also Librorum Graecorum Bibliothecae Vaticanae Index a Nicolao De

Maioranis compositus et Fausto Saboeo collatus Anno 1533, ed. M. R. Dilts et al., Vatican City 1998). Canart (as in

n. 24), p. 307, also suggests that the Sextus codex may have been destroyed by Conestabile di Borbone's troops during their assault on Rome.

27. Cf. T. Bergk, 'Uber die Echtheit der At0,kE'tg', in idem, Fiinf Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der griechischen Philosophie und Astronomie, ed. G. Hinrichs, Leipzig 1883, pp. 117-38; M. Schanz, 'Zu den sogenannten

AIAAEEEII', Hermes, xIx, 1884, pp. 369-84; C. Trieber, 'Die AIAAEEEII', Hermes, xxvii, 1892, pp. 210-48; E.

Weber, 'Ueber den Dialect der sogenannten Dialexeis

und die Handschriften des Sextus Empiricus', Philologus,

Ivii, 1898, pp. 64-102; W. Nestle, Von Mythos zum Logos. Die Selbstentfaltung des griechischen Denkens von Homer bis

auf die Sophistik und Sokrates, Stuttgart 1940, pp. 437-47; M. Untersteiner, Problemi difilologiafilosofica, Milan 1980,

pp. 137-38. Editions of the text in Die Fragmente der

Vorsokratiker, ed. H. Diels and W. Kranz, 6th edn, 3 vols, Dublin and Zurich 1951-52, II, pp. 405-16, and

especially T. M. Robinson, Contrasting Arguments: An

Edition of the Dissoi Logoi, New York 1979 (repr. Salem

1984). 28. A. Kochalsky, De Sexti Empirici adversus logicos

libris quaestiones criticae, Marburg 191 1, p. 32; H. Mutsch-

mann, 'Praefatio', in Sextus Empiricus, Opera, II, ed.

idem, Leipzig 1914, p. V.

29. The 'librarius Florentinus' was first discussed by D. Harlfinger, Die Textgeschichte der pseudo-aristotelischen Schrift HEPI ATOMO2 N FPAMMQ2N, Amsterdam 1971, pp. 201, 222-26, 228, 232-33, 417.

30. See Canart (as in n. 24), pp. 307-14 (? 3: 'Damilas et Sextus Empiricus'); see also Repertorium der

Griechischen Kopisten 8oo-i6oo (1. Handschriften aus Bibliotheken GroBbritanniens; 2. Handschriften aus Bibliotheken Frankreichs und Nachtrige zu den Bibliotheken GroBbritanniens; 3. Handschriften aus Bibliotheken Roms mit dem Vatikan), ed. E. Gamill-

scheg et al., 9 vols, Vienna 1981-97, 1 no. 93, 2 no.

127, 3 no. 16o. A reference to Damilas is also found in

J. Irigoin, 'La circulation des fontes grecques en Italie de 1476 i 1525', in Le livre et l'historien. Etudes offerts en

l'honneur du Professeur Henri-Jean Martin, ed. F. Barbier et

al., Geneva 1997, pp. 69-74 (70).

31. Handschriften-Katalog der Stadtbibliothek Kinigsberg i. Pr., ed. P. Rhode and A. Seraphim, K6nigsberg 19o9,



236 GIAN MARIO CAO

But, following Mutschmann,32 its identification with the lost Vatican codex would have to be excluded if it is considered to be the exemplar of Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana (hereafter Marc.) MS Gr. Z. 262 (408).

Generally speaking, however, we cannot totally exclude the possibility that the Regi- montanus codex might be the lost Vatican manuscript. Its close kinship to the Marciana

manuscript suggests that they were produced at roughly the same time, that is, towards the end of 146os; and this fits with the fact that there are clear indications of a Sextus

manuscript in the Vatican inventories from as early as 1475. Therefore, the first part of Canart's hypothesis, that Damilas's copy might be identified with MS Regimontanus S. 35. 80, is improbable; while the second part, that it might be one of the copies made by the 'librarius Florentinus' (Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana [hereafter Laur.] MS Plut. 85-24; and MS Marc. Gr. IV 26 [1442]), remains unproven.33

Yet one must acknowledge these conjectures are extremely tenuous, largely on account of the impoverishment of the surviving tradition. Thus, the responsibility assigned in the stemma to the lost Vatican codex is, in reality, another way of expressing the absence of definite information; and the legitimacy of the competing hypotheses is indicative of their merely supplementary nature rather than their ability to produce a coherent picture of the data.34

II. THE SEXTUS MANUSCRIPTS OF FILELFO AND BESSARION

As for Florence, mention has already been made of the formation of a collection of Greek books in the private Medici library at the time of Lorenzo the Magnificent. Even in the first half of the fifteenth century, however, Florentine humanists had access to a number of Greek codices - those of Niccolo Niccoli and Antonio Corbinelli, which later became

part of the libraries of the convent of San Marco and of the Badia Fiorentina respectively.35 We know a great deal about Niccoli's collection, which, thanks above all to the efforts of Cosimo de' Medici, was transferred to San Marco and became a 'public library'.36

p. 302. Note that prior to this Weber (as in n. 27), p.

65, had mentioned the possibility of an earlier dating

('14. oder 15. Jahrh.'); see also G. M. Cao, 'L'ereditA

pichiana: Gianfrancesco Pico tra Sesto Empirico e

Savonarola', in Pico, Poliziano e l'Umanesimo di fine Quat- trocento, exhib. cat. (Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana

1994), ed. P. Viti, Florence 1994, pp. 231-45 (238-39).

32. Mutschmann, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), p. VI:

'Regimontanus 16 b 12 (olim K a me nuncupatus), Veneti Marciani V ambitu specie fide plane gemellus'. It was also given this position in the stemma byJ. Mau,

'Praefatio', in Sextus Empiricus, Opera, III, ed. H.

Mutschmann andJ. Mau, Leipzig 1961, p. XIII. On the

Marciana codex, copied before 1468, see below, p. 245.

33. Canart (as in n. 24), p. 314 .

34. Regarding the Vatican collection, mention

should also be made of the Latin version of the first

four books of Against the Professors made in 1485 by the

papal librarian Giovanni Lorenzi and preserved in BAV

MS Vat. lat. 2990 (fols 266r-38 1v). A study of this with

a partial transcription - excerpta from fols 266r-68r,

273v-75r, 279r-80ov, 328v-29r, 331V-32V, 353r-55r,

357r-58r, 375v, 381r-v - can be found in C. B. Schmitt, 'An Unstudied Fifteenth-Century Latin Translation of

Sextus Empiricus by Giovanni Lorenzi (Vat. Lat. 2990)', in Cultural Aspects (as in n. 13), pp. 244-61 (250-57), of which the following passages should be corrected

as follows: 21 latentur: latenter I 26 denuntiverat:

denuntiaverat I 74 dulcidini: dulcedini I 79 elatus: elatis

I 96 artificior: artificiosior I 125 its: ita I 131 suscipiere:

suscipere I 155 quadem: quadam I 172 phylosophis:

philosophis I 177 pluraque: pleraque I 206 si: sin I

225 pervenimus: percurrimus I 233 suppositionem:

suppositiones I 233 ut ea: rei I 234 propositionem:

preparationem I 252 posteriorem: posterioremque I

270 additio <non,: additionem. A partial copy of this

translation (Against the Professors, I-III) has recently been

identified in Turin, Biblioteca Nazionale MS C.II. 11, datable to the first half of the 16th century: see Floridi, 'The Diffusion' (as in n. 3), pp. 64-65, 70-75, 83-84-




The initial nucleus of the Medici private library was formed by Cosimo (who should also be remembered for his work to promote the library of the Badia Fiesolana).7 Accord-

ing to the 1417-18 inventory, it numbered little more than sixty manuscripts, all of them either in Latin or in the vernacular.38 Evidence for the progressive enlargement of the collection can be found in the lists of Piero di Cosimo's books compiled in 145639 and

1465.40 None of the Medici or Florentine library collections from this period, however, seems to have contained any Sextus Empiricus manuscripts.

The inventory of the Medici library compiled on 20 October 1495 byJanus Lascaris and Bartolomeo de' Ciai at the request of the Florentine Signoria records the state of the collection at the end of the Laurentian period.41 It appears from this list that the library

35. R. Blum, La biblioteca della Badia Fiorentina e i codici di Antonio Corbinelli, Vatican City 1951.

36. B. L. Ullman and P. A. Stadter, The Public Library

of Renaissance Florence: Niccolb Niccoli, Cosimo de' Medici

and the Library of San Marco, Padua 1972, pp. 3-15; see

also E. Garin, La biblioteca di San Marco, Florence 1999

(previously published in La Chiesa e il Convento di San

Marco a Firenze, I, Florence 1989, pp. 79-148).

37. A. C. de la Mare, 'New Research on Humanistic

Scribes in Florence', in Miniatura fiorentina del Rinasci-

mento 1440o-525, ed. A. Garzelli, 2 vols, Florence 1985, I, pp. 440-44, 555-64; A. Garzelli, 'Note su artisti

nell'orbita dei primi Medici: individuazioni e congetture dei libri di pagamento della Badia fiesolana

(1440-- 1485)', Studi Medievali, xxvI, 1985, PP- 435-82.

38. Cosimo's books are known thanks to an Inventario di tutte cose trovate in casa di Giovanni de' Medici (ASF, MAP, filza CXXIX), partly available in F. Pintor, 'Per la

storia della libreria medicea nel Rinascimento. Appunti d'archivio', Italia medioevale e umanistica, III, 1960, pp.

190-210 (197-99), and now, in a complete form, in

Inventari medicei 1417-i465. Giovanni di Bicci. Cosimo e

Lorenzo di Giovanni. Piero di Cosimo, ed. M. Spallanzani, Florence 1996, pp. 3-72 (concerning the books see pp. 6, 20-23, 72), where the dating of the inventory is also

re-examined (Introduction, pp. XIV-XV). For a detailed

analysis of the inventory and numerous identifications of manuscripts see A. C. de la Mare, 'Cosimo and his

Books', in Cosimo 'il Vecchio' de' Medici, 1389-1464:

Essays in Commemoration of the 6ooth Anniversary of Cosimo de' Medici's Birth, ed. F. Ames-Lewis, Oxford 1992, pp.

i15-56. 39. There are actually two separate inventories,

drawn up in 1456 and 1463, but contained in the same codex (ASF, MAP, filza CLXII). The section concerning books, which appears only in the 1456 list, is published in E. Piccolomini, Ricerche intorno alle condizioni ed alle vicende della libreria medicea privata, Florence 1875,

pp. 115-22 (but the manuscript is referred to by the

previous shelf-mark, filza III); more recently in F. Ames-

Lewis, The Library and Manuscripts of Piero di Cosimo de'

Medici, New York and London 1984, pp. 365-79 (on

the books see pp. 367-76); and, in full, in Inventari

medicei (as in n. 38), pp. 87-136 (regarding the books

see pp. 107-17).

40. See ASF, MAP, filza CLXIII. An edition of the text

is found in Inventari medicei (as in n. 38), pp. 139-61 (on the books see pp. 151-57); a transcription of the ASF

copy, Carte Strozziane, ser. I, filza io, can be found in

Ames-Lewis, The Library (as in n. 39), PP- 391-96; for

the text according to ASF, MAP, filza CLXIII, see ibid.,

pp. 381-go. 41. The inventory (ASF, MAP, filza LXXXVII) was

published by Piccolomini (as in n. 39), pp. 65-1o8. The 1512 copy (ASF, MAP, filza CLXV) is partially transcribed by Ames-Lewis, The Library (as in n. 39), PP- 398-401; and in its entirety in Libro d'inventario dei beni

di Lorenzo il Magnifico, ed. M. Spallanzani and G. Gaeta

Berteli, Florence 1992 (for the books see pp. 41-50,

152-53). On the history of the Medici private library see also K. K. Miller, 'Neue Mittheilungen fiber Janos Laskaris und die Mediceische Bibliothek', Centralblatt

fiir Bibliothekswesen, I, 1884, pp. 333-412; P. Moreaux, 'Florenz, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana', in Aristoteles

graecus: Die griechischen Manuskripte des Aristoteles, I, Alexandrien-London, ed. P. Moreaux et al., Berlin and New York 1976, pp. 184-90; V. Branca, Poliziano e l'umanesimo della parola, Turin 1983, pp. 108-56; E. B.

Fryde, 'The Library of Lorenzo de' Medici', in idem, Studies in Humanism and Renaissance Historiography, London 1983, pp. 159-227; S. Gentile, 'Lorenzo e Giano Lascaris: il fondo greco della biblioteca medicea

privata', in Lorenzo il Magnifico e il suo mondo (convegno internazionale, Florence 1992), ed. G. C. Garfagnini, Florence 1994, pp. 177-94; idem, 'Pico e la biblioteca medicea privata', in Pico, Poliziano (as in n. 31), pp. 85-101; idem, 'I codici greci della biblioteca medicea

privata', in I luoghi (as in n. 13), pp. 115-21; E. B.

Fryde, 'Lorenzo's Greek Manuscripts, and in particular his own Commissions', in Lorenzo the Magnificent: Culture and Politics, ed. M. Mallett and N. Mann, London 1996, pp. 93-104; idem, Greek Manuscripts in the Private Library of the Medici, 1469-1510, 2 vols, Aberystwyth 1996.



238 GIAN MARIO CAO

included only one Sextus Empiricus manuscript, which had originally belonged to Francesco Filelfo.42 It was probably acquired by the Medici library in the summer of 1482, together with other Filelfo manuscripts which Lorenzo had redeemed from the usurer with whom the humanist had pawned them - they were later held for some time at the Milanese branch of the Medici bank and, finally, after Filelfo's death in 1481, moved to Florence.43 The item is recorded as '174 Sexti Embyrici pars, in papyro. - Gre'.44 It can be identified as Filelfo's manuscript on the grounds that it is written on paper and, above all, that the text preserved is incomplete.45 Since, however, this identification has been contested by E. B. Fryde, who believed the manuscript to belong to the personal library of

Angelo Poliziano,46 a re-examination of the whole issue is called for. To begin with, Filelfo seems to have been the first Renaissance reader of Sextus's

works. It is difficult to determine exactly when and under what circumstances he came to know about these writings. It was definitely not during the years he spent in Constanti-

nople (1420-27), if we consider the evidence that appears in his letter of June 1428 to

Ambrogio Traversari.47 It was certainly by the beginning of the 1440s, if we evaluate the

42. On this manuscript see p. 239 and ff. below.

43. We learn this from a note concerning a loan

made in 1482: 'A M. Agnolo da Monte Pulciano

si prest6 a' di primo di agosto detto: Plutarcho, in

membrana, in colonne, coperto di rosso, de' libri del

Filelfo, greco.' The Ricordi di arienti, libri et altre cose

prestate, cominciato questo di 3o di maggio 1480 (ASF, MAP, filza LXII) are published in Piccolomini (as in n.

39), PP. 124-26; and in Protocolli del Carteggio di Lorenzo

il Magnifico per gli anni 1473-74, 1477-92, ed. M. Del

Piazzo, Florence 1956, pp. 226-29 (229). On the Filelfo

manuscripts purchased by Lorenzo see Gentile, 'I codici

greci' (as in n. 41), p. 1 16; but above all the statement

by the librarista of San Marco, Zanobi Acciaiuoli, in an

addition made in January 1496 to the 1495 inventory

concerning the books that were recuperati per fratres: 'Item, a quodam amico nostro ego frater Zenobius

Acciaiolus habui: 7 Isaac Argyrum et lulium Pollucem, in papiro, in greco, in 4.- folio; et quia scriptum est in

tabulis: liber Francisci Philelphi; sciens ego quia omnes

fere libros Philelphi emit Laurentius de Medicis post eius mortem ...' (ASF, MAP, filza LXXXIV, published

by Piccolomini, as in n. 39, p. 95). There is no useful

information on this in F. Ruggeri, 'I1 testamento di

Francesco Filelfo', Italia medioevale e umanistica, xxxv,

1992, pp. 345-66. 44. Piccolomini (as in n. 39), p. 83 (no. 400).

45. This conclusion is neither contradicted nor con-

firmed by the hurried notes which Lascaris made in his

brief inventory of Lorenzo's Greek manuscripts, which

was drawn up during his second journey to Greece

(1491-92) in search of books for the Medici private collection, but perhaps also with the aim of spying; see Gentile, 'Lorenzo' (as in n. 41), pp. 181-82. The

inventory is included in BAV MS Vat. gr. 1412, which

preserves travel notes, lists of manuscripts inspected, epigrams, Latin translations of Greek writings and other texts of various kinds, published by Milller (as in n. 41), pp. 367-411: in two different, but related passages of the inventory of manuscripts, in the section 'E"( Inrl'optic Kai iotoptic&', Lascaris noted 'E(4to) 'EniEtptuoiJ P.' (fol. 37r), and in the section '(ptk6oo(px ii5', he wrote first 'Yi4tou H1ppOm<Eioi) (pEctcob P.' (fol. 39r) and just afterwards 'iYEtou I Hppmov<Eio) p.' (fol. 39v). What is striking about these notes is not Lascaris's use of the epithets H)ppbvEtog and

'pE)cctic6gq referring to Sextus (adjectives whose prevalence in the Outlines of Pyrrhonism, at the beginning of Book I for

example - see K. JaniEek, Sexti Empirici indices, 3rd revd edn, Florence 2000, pp. 102, 261 -might suggest that this was the text noted by Lascaris), but the inclusion of his works in a section of rhetorical and historical

writings. This suggests that in the Medici private collection there was a manuscript containing at least Book II of Against the Professors, entitled FHp6bg qilopuq, a book that is, moreover, absent from Filelfo's codex, which

preserves only Against the Dogmatists (= Against the Profes- sors, vii-xI). It is impossible to say how well Lascaris knew Sextus's works or to what extent his memory assisted him in his drawing up of the disorderly notes

concerning Lorenzo's Greek codices. He must have had a certain amount of curiosity regarding Sextus's

writings, however, since, during his travels, on a visit to the Greek scribe Demetrios Sguropoulos, he made an

entry in the same notebook concerning a codex of the Outlines of Pyrrhonism: 'EK Tob P' T6)v Eig t& y' T6)v Hi)<p>pov<E>iovv no'Cno )T(oYE(mv JEEpi Kpt piol) p6KEtuca t 6E

iliv' (fol. 79v). For the quoted passages see Mfiller (as in n. 41), pp. 373, 375, 402.

46. Fryde, Greek Manuscripts (as in n. 41), p. 807.




lengthy (but unacknowledged) citations from Sextus in his Commentationes Florentinae de

exilio ('Florentine Commentaries on Exile').48 The events surrounding his acquisition of the Sextus manuscript are completely unknown, as is the history leading up to it. Indeed, the identification of his codex with MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, reached through hard-won

philological research, was not made until fairly recent times;49 and the composite nature of this codex has created many problems for those studying the textual tradition of Sextus's works.

In the catalogue compiled at the end of the 17oos by Angelo Maria Bandini, librarian of the Laurenziana, it was stated that the volume contained an ancient central section

(probably dating from the early decades of the fourteenth century)50 and sixteenth-century additions.5' Mutschmann, in the prolegomena to his Teubner edition of Sextus, failed to

recognise the antiquity of the manuscript, which he had only superficially examined, and its central importance for the history of the tradition.52 This point was immediately taken

up by August Nebe,53 and in a more detailed manner by Kochalsky.54 Mutschmann, follow-

ing an initial, summary amendment to his article (which was made possible by Girolamo

47. Ambrogio Traversari et al., Latinae epistolae, Florence 1759, xxiv, ep. XXXII: 'Qui mihi nostri in

Italiam libri gesti sint horum nomina ad te scribo, alios

autem nonnullos per primas ex Byzantio Venetorum

naves opperior. Hi autem sunt Plotinus, Aelianus,

Aristides, Dionysius Halicarnasseus, Strabo Geographus,

Hermogenes, Aristotelis Rethorice, Dionysius Hali-

carnasseus de numeris et characteribus, Thucydides, Plutarchi Moralia, Proclus in Platonem, Philo Iudaeus,

Herodotus, Dio Chrysostomus, Apollonius Pergaeus, Ethica Aristotelis, eius Magna Moralia et Eudemia

et Oeconomica et Politica, quaedam Theophrasti

Opuscula, Homeri Ilias, Odyssea; Philostratus de

Vita Apollonii, Orationes Libanii et aliqui sermones

Luciani, Pindarus, Aratus, Euripidis Tragoediae septem, Theocritus, Hesiodus, Suidas; Phalaridis, Hippocratis, Platonis et multorum ex veteribus Philosophis Epistolae; Demosthenes, Aeschinis Orationes et Epistolae pleraque

Xenophontis Opera, una Lysiae Oratio, Orphei Argo- nautica et Hymni, Callimachus, Aristoteles de historiis

Animalium, Phisica, et Metaphysica, et de Anima, de

Partibus Animalium, et alia quaedam, Polybius, nonnulli sermones Chrysostomi, Dionysiaca, et alii Poetae

plurimi.' See also Cao, 'Nota' (as in n. 3), p. 321 n. 8.

48. Regarding the problematic chronology of the

Commentationes Florentinae and the work in general see G. M. Cao, 'Tra politica fiorentina e filosofia elle- nistica: il dibattito sulla ricchezza nelle Commentationes di Francesco Filelfo', Archivio Storico Italiano, civ, 1997, pp. 99-126 (103-04 n. 4).

49. The identification was put forward by Teresa

Lodi, director of the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana from 1933 to 1955, in a handwritten annotation to item 174 of the 1495 Medici inventory published by Piccolomini ('=85.19 [Filelfo]'), added to the offprint

belonging to the library. This identification was later

pointed out and discussed by L. Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico e una dispersa enciclopedia delle arti

e delle scienze di Angelo Poliziano', Rinascimento, xx,

1980, PP. 327-58 (353). 5o. According to Paolo Eleuteri, who kindly

informed me of his view.

51. A. M. Bandini, Catalogus codicum graecorum Biblio- thecae Laurentianae, 3 vols, Florence 1764-70, III, col.

278: 'Codex Graecus chartaceus Ms. in 4. Saeculi partim XIII. partim XVI. cum notulis quibusdam marginalibus.'

52. See H. Mutschmann, 'Die Uberlieferung der

Schriften des Sextus Empiricus', Rheinisches Museum

fiir Philologie, LXiv, 1909, pp. 244-83 (245: 'f = Laur.

85.19. Papier. 23,5 x 18 cm 354 ff. Von zwei Handen

geschrieben: 1. Hand: Hypotyposen, letztes Blatt von adv. Math. und Dialexeis. 23 Zeilen auf der Seite. XVI.

Jahrh. 2. Hand: Adv. Math., sehr lifckenhaft und nach-

fissig geschrieben. 24-27 Zeilen auf der Seite. XV.

Jahrh.').

53. A. Nebe, 'Zu Sextus Empiricus', Berliner philologische Wochenschrift, xxIx, 1909, cols 1453-54. But

already in 1889, while examining the important Sextan codex which belonged to Cardinal Bessarion (the current MS Marc. Gr. Z. 262 [408], about which see

below, p. 245), in the Annotazioni to the Elenco dei Lettori che hanno studiato il seguente Manoscritto preserved by the same Venetian library, so that Nebe had compiled the results of his own work: 'Esamin6 diverse lezioni per vedere se il presente codice sia migliore del Lauren- ziano. Secondo me, il Laurenziano e migliore'.

54. Kochalsky (as in n. 28), pp. 10-11. Regarding this research, aided by the availability of the docu- mentation gathered by Nebe (later passed on to K.

Kalbfleisch), see the intervention by Mutschmann



240 GIAN MARIO CAO

Vitelli's examination of the codex),55 returned to consult the manuscript in 1909 and

191 1, which led him, finally, to acknowledge its unquestioned value: in the introduction to the second volume of the edition, he even referred to 'the remarkable condition and excellence' of this manuscript, 'which surpasses the others by a long way'.56

Returning to Filelfo, there are numerous indications that there was a copy of Sextus

Empiricus's works among his books. In addition to the long passages from Sextus he translated at the beginning of the 1440os in the Commentationes Florentinae de exilio (and which appear here in Appendix I), attention should be given to a number of episodes which provide evidence for his possession of a Sextus codex and which, in particular, reveal its identifying characteristics. In the first place, there is the letter which he sent to Giovanni Aurispa in June 1441, in which, despite reproaching him for his unwillingness to exchange manuscripts, Filelfo agrees to lend him his own Sextus codex.57

Leaving aside a supposed quotation from Sextus regarding Empedocles in Filelfo's Convivia Mediolanensia ('Milanese Banquets', completed between 1443 and 1444),58 there is an explicit, though hardly significant, reference to Sextus in a letter to Sassolo da Prato

himself in Berliner philologische Wochenschrift, xxxIII,

1913, cols 197-98.

55. Mutschmann, 'Die Uberlieferung' (as in n. 52),

p. 478. This important amendment passed undetected

by Floridi, 'The Diffusion' (as in n. 3), p. 84: '5. Laur.

85.19, s. XV-XVI'.

56. Mutschmann, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), p. VI: 'de

codicis N mira condicione atque de praestantia eius,

qua ceteros longe superat'. Note how, unlike in the

article of 19o9, where it was indicated with the siglum 'f', in the critical edition it is referred to as 'N', in

honour of Nebe: 'nunc Arthurum Kochalsky secutus

malo "ad Nebei huius codicis optimi investigatoris honorem siglo N ornare"' (p. V). We should remember,

nevertheless, the ill-concealed dissatisfaction evident

in Giorgio Pasquali's statement that 'il Mutschmann,

avvertito, pote poi nell'edizione tener conto di quel frammento, come la sua eta e il suo valore esigevano: se egli non ne abbia fatto ancora troppo poco caso, non importa qui stabilire': see G. Pasquali, Storia della

tradizione e critica del testo, 2nd edn, Florence 1952, pp.

37-38. But see also idem, Filologia e storia, Florence

1920, p. 18: 'Sesto Empirico, fonte importantissima

per gli studi di filosofia greca, era svisato qua e lA da

lacune piccole ma non facili a supplire: ne ha colmate

pur ieri gran parte uno studioso tedesco, morto in

questa guerra, il Mutschmann, valendosi di una versione

medievale. Un altro tedesco, il Nebe, ha trovato qui a

Firenze in Laurenziana un manoscritto del medesimo

autore sfuggito anche al Mutschmann, che per certe

parti del testo presenta lezioni nuove e giuste: vergogna

per noi Italiani di non averlo trovato noi.'

57. Milan, Biblioteca Trivulziana (hereafter Triv.) MS 873, fol. 69r: 'Nemo te uno accipiendo facilior.

Te rursus nemo difficilior dando. Tu me liberalitatis

plurimum laudas, et hanc virtutem extollis oratione, ac recte tu quidem. Caeterum quam ipse virtutem tanti

facere videris, cur eam minus amplecteris? Es tu sane

librorum officina. Sed ex tua ista taberna libraria nullus

unquam prodit codex, nisi cum quaestu. Quid tandem

adeo te libris ingurgitas? Quibus utinam, ut par est, utereris. Ego petij abs te Strabonem geographum excri-

bendi gratia, cum mihi librarius esset domi. Reddita

mihi sunt a te verba cum assentatione permulta. Ad rem

autem nihil. Petis a me nunc Sextum Empericum eius excribendi gratia. Gero tibi morem, sed ea condicione

ne commodatum tibi iure doni ascribas. Quare fac ut ad

me meus redeat codex cum suo apud te officio functus

fuerit. Vale. Ex Mediolano IIII Idus lunias MCCCCXII.'

The letter is also published, with slight differences, in

Francesco Filelfo, Epistolarum familiarium libri XXXVII, Venice 1502, fols 31v-32r (and partially in Carteggio di

Giovanni Aurispa, ed. R. Sabbadini, Rome 1931, p. 7). This episode, already pointed out by A. Calderini, 'Ricerche intorno alla biblioteca e alla cultura greca di

Francesco Filelfo', Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica, xx,

1913, pp. 204-424 (389), was misinterpreted by A.

Franceschini, Giovanni Aurispa e la sua biblioteca. Notizie

e documenti, Padua 1976, p. 49 ('il codice di Sesto

Empirico, inviato al Filelfo nel 1441'), and his misin-

terpretation was later echoed by C. Bianca, "'Auctoritas"

e "veritas": il Filelfo e le dispute tra platonici e aristo-

telici', in Francesco Filelfo nel quinto centenario della morte

(atti del convegno, Tolentino 1981), Padua 1986, pp.

207-47 (213 n. 20o). 58. This hypothesis was put forward by Calderini (as

in n. 57), P- 389 n. 6, who failed to notice that Filelfo

could not have cited this passage of Sextus because of

the large gap in his codex, in which the text of Book

I of Against the Logicians is missing the initial pages




in August 1444, in which Filelfo discusses the difference between t6 WEO6og ;i7yetyv (to

speak lies) and t6 oei0e1oa t (to lie).59 The same theme was taken up again almost twenty

years later, in 1462, in a letter from Filelfo to Alberto Zancario.60

Other letters also contain important information regarding the manuscript which

serve to confirm its identification. In 1452 Filelfo wrote from Milan to his son Senofonte:

See to it that you go on my behalf to Cardinal Bessarion and ask him to loan me for a month Sextus

Empiricus, that sharp-witted and learned philosopher of the Peripatetic school. I have a manuscript in my possession, but in many places it is, so to speak, fenestratus.61 Therefore, I want to use his codex, if it is better, to emend mine. If, by chance, his is worse, it will return to its owner more correct. But if he is perhaps unwilling for his codex to travel, I will immediately send mine to him, if he prefers, provided he gets someone to emend it in this way.62

It seems likely that the failure of this attempt prompted Filelfo to repeat his request ten

years later, in May 1462, this time to Palla Strozzi:

... I have the five books which Sextus Empiricus committed to writing, with no less learning than

subtlety. In many places, however, they suffer defects caused by the ravages of time, on account of

(Against the Professors, vIi.1-41; see Sextus Empiricus, ed. I. Bekker, Berlin 1842 [hereafter cited as Bekker],

pp. 191, 1. 1-198, 1. 23) which contain the information

regarding Empedocles and Zeno.

59. MS Triv. 873, fol. 72r: 'Non idem esse to6 y~,og;

k-yEtv ticX uto y• Ei0cmt Sextus Empericus libro primo

de grammatica apertissime docet. Nam e{68E0ut, hoc

est mentiri, turn existimamur cum id dedita opera facimus in alterius fraudem atque detrimentum cui

mentimur. At eib6og ; keyEtv, hoc est mendacium dicere, etiam ad eius utilitatem cui dicimus mendacium fieri

a nobis potest, id quod et parentes in filios et medici in aegrotos observare plaerunque consuerunt. Multa

enim quandoque dicunt quae norunt non esse vera

et dicunt tamen ut illis vel admonitione vel exemplo vel spe aliqua prosint. Praeterea mentiendo non ipsi fallimur sed studemus alterum fallere in eius detrimentum. At durn mendacium dicimus tum etiam

secundum grammaticos nostros ipsi fallimur dum nos

vera loqui arbitramur. Vale. Ex Mediolano Nonis

Augustis MCCCCXLIIII.' The letter is also published in Filelfo, Epistolarum familiarium libri (as in n. 57), fol.

34r. According to Calderini (as in n. 57), P- 389 n. 7, the reference here is to Against the Professors, vI.379; in

actual fact, the reasoning is closer to that of Against the

Professors, VII.43-44, from which the examples of the doctor and the grammarian appear to be taken (MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, fol. i 16r).

6o. MS Triv. 873, fol. 229V: 'Mendaciorum tria esse

genera omnis erudita docet antiquitas. Nam et mentiri aliud est quam mendacium dicere et vanum esse alium

quam alterutrum. Qui enim mentitur id agit ut alterum fallat cum eius detrimento cum se ipse non fallit.

Loquitur enim ex animi sententia et quod loquitur

etiam intelligit. At vanus dum mendacium loquitur, delectandi dumtaxat gratia loquitur cum aliud praeterea curet nihil. Mendacium vero dicimus dupliciter: aut credentes verum a nobis dici quod falsum sit et ita ipsi potius fallimur quam fallamus; aut ad illius commodum cui mendacium dicimus, id quod ut Sextus docet

Empericus de medicis adversus aegrotantis saepe- numero usu venit. Medici enim permulta aegrotantibus dicunt quae ab omni veritate sunt aliena et ea tamen ut aegrotantibus prosint ...' The letter is also published in Filelfo, Epistolarum familiarium libri (as in n. 57), fol. 127r.

61. For this term see S. Rizzo, II lessico filologico degli umanisti, Rome 1973, p. 237; and S. Bernardinello,

Autografi greci e greco-latini in occidente, Padua 1979, PP. 2-3 (and n. 17).

62. MS Triv. 873, fol. 128r-v: 'Facito quamprimum adeas meo nomine cardinalem Nicaenum Bessarionem

atque ab eo petas mihi ut commodet in mensem unum Sextum Empericum ex peripatetica disciplina philo- sophum et acutum et eruditum. Nam is etiam mihi

est, sed pluribus in locis, ut ita loquar, fenestratus.

Itaque ex eius codice si melior fuerit cupio meum

emendare, sin fortasse deterior suus emendatior redibit ad dominum. Quod si suum codicem peregrinari fortasse noluerit meum istuc, si ita maluerit, propediem mittam, modo ipse eiusmodi emendandi provinciam cuipiam delegaverit. Vale. Ex Mediolano X Kal. Februarias MCCCCLII.' The letter is also published in

Filelfo, Epistolarumfamiliarium libri (as in n. 57), fol. 71 r

This episode was described in detail by Calderini (as in

n. 57), P- 389; and has been dealt with most recently by N. G. Wilson, From Byzantium to Italy: Greek Studies in the Italian Renaissance, London 1992, PP. 51-52.



242 GIAN MARIO CAO

which much is unintelligible to the reader. Therefore, if you have a manuscript of this kind, I ask you to send it to me at once. It will be returned to you with a month.63

Unfortunately, Filelfo received no reply, since it was at this time that Palla died. Neverthe- less, this document - with its explicit reference to the 'five books which Sextus Empiricus committed to writing' corresponding to the ancient part of the manuscript which contains

only the five books of Against the Dogmatists (Against the Professors, vii-xi) - confirms that Filelfo's copy was MS Laur. Plut. 85.19. This identification was, in any case, probable, given his description of the manuscript asfenestratus in the letter to his son Senofonte. The fact that the fenestrae or lacunae have not been filled and that they are easily identifiable in the

manuscript even now64 is a strong argument against the hypothesis that Filelfo obtained Bessarion's codex on loan and even annotated it.65 This is illogical when we consider that

compared to the fenestrae in Filelfo's codex, Bessarion's copy was, and still is, perfectly intact. 66 The strictly paleographical issue, raised by the attribution of some marginalia in Bessarion's copy of Sextus to the hand of Filelfo, is more complex and can only be solved

by means of a general consideration of the history and characteristics of the manuscript.

63. MS Triv. 873, fol. 226v: ' ... mihi sunt ii libri

quinque quos Sextus Empericus reliquit scriptos non

minus docte quam subtiliter. Verum multis in locis

temporum calamitate defectus patiuntur, quibus fit ut

multa legenti ignoratio offeratur. Quare si huiusmodi

codex tibi est ut eum ad me illico mittas rogo. Redibit

enim ad te intra mensem. ... Ex Mediolano VI Idus

Maias MCCCCLXII.' The letter is also published in

Filelfo, Epistolarum familiarium libri (as in n. 57), fol.

125r. No trace remains of a Sextus manuscript belong-

ing to Palla Strozzi; on his library and particularly on

the Greek manuscripts see Diller (as in n. 19), pp.

313-17; G. Fiocco, 'La Biblioteca di Palla Strozzi', in

Studi di bibliografia e di storia in onore di Tammaro De

Marinis, 4 vols, Verona 1964, II, pp. 289-31o; H.

Gregory, 'A Further Note on the Greek Manuscripts of

Palla Strozzi', this Journal, xLiv, 1981, pp. 183-85; Cantoni Alzati (as in n. 15), PP. 113-15, 183-86; M. L.

Sosower, 'Seven Manuscripts Palla Strozzi gave to the S.

Giustina Library', this Journal, xLviI, 1984, pp. 190-9 1;

idem, 'Palla Strozzi's Greek Manuscripts', Studi italiani

difilologia classica, Iv, 1986, pp. 140-51.

64. The following is a complete list of the sections

missing from the text: fol. 221r (Fig. 149), 'T'6 8 Itp6; ~t 6 dXXccTct(t ... i.. Tnov Pl biTndtpyEtv 6 tp6; "t'

(Against the Professors, viIi.456-57; Bekker p. 386, 11. 10-21 ); fol.

223r-v, 'COgtwOekEig ;6yog ... •in•i ytkiv ecitv' (Against

the Professors, VlII.473-76; Bekker p. 390, 11. 2-14); fol.

224v (Fig. 150), 'vov'?t(X; to; l I o6iSo ...

k7yoaot T;g 8k tiKcx;' (Against the Professors, IX.3-4; Bekker p. 392, 11.

6-17); fol. 225r, '<ppoveiv" KarowE•rdtovreg

... 866at 8' iv, c;g npopeinov' (Against the Professors, Ix.7-1o; Bekker

PP. 392, 1. 30-393, 1. 8). In addition, the fenestra at fol.

345r-v (Fig. 151), ''ycae6v [T6 KacKvO ED.] Kai &(popgL ...

Ei tr oLl i ov 6t16cx~cK'rat' (Against the Professors, xI.21 1-20;

Bekker pp. 587, 1. 18-589, 1. 3), was filled in during the 16th century by the scribe - perhaps Zacharias Cal-

lierges, as Paolo Eleuteri has suggested (on Callierges see Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten, as in n. 3o, 1 no.

1 19, 2 no. 156, 3 no. 197) -who completed the final

part of the codex (including the Atcoi k6yot); the old-

est text finishes definitively at the end of fol. 348v and

lacks the concluding pages 'Tcapov, if K~Xct Lvackoyicv ... aig cFenutcig 6ywy;ig 8t'4oovov ncapciSotEv' (Against the Professors, XI.251-57; Bekker pp. 594, 1. 31-596, 1.

5). According to Mutschmann, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), pp. V-VI, the exemplar for these additions was MS Laur.

Plut. 85.24, while he presumes that the initial inte-

gration of the three books of the Outlines of Pyrrhonism derived from MS Laur. Plut. 85.11.

65. An hypothesis put forward, but unsupported by

documentary evidence, by D. Robin, Filelfo in Milan:

Writings 1451-1477, Princeton 1991, p. 252: 'Marc.

Grec. Z. 262: Sextus Empiricus, Filelfo's marginalia'. Likewise unproven is the statement of Wilson (as in n.

62), pp. 51-52: '... if his hope of obtaining a more

intelligible text is disappointed, then at least there will

be the consolation of offering some improvements to

Bessarion for his copy (no doubt Marc. Gr. 262)'. 66. The passages missing from MS Laur. Plut. 85.19

(for which see above, n. 64) correspond to the following

passages in MS Marc. Gr. Z. 262 (408): Laur., fol. 221r

= Marc., fol. 255r, 11. 5-16 I Laur., fol. 223r-v = Marc.,

fol. 257v, 11. 8-19 I Laur., fol. 224v = Marc., fol. 259r, 11. 8-18 I Laur., fol. 225r = Marc., fol. 259V, 11. 8-15 I Laur.,

fol. 345r-v = Marc., fols 395v, 1. 16-396', 1. 19 (but in

this manuscript and g there is a gap here due to a saut

du mime au mime).




XX -n af 04-~

i-i

:~~~i ....... i

!i

•:•~i! :•_-.

z ,,,g

..... :.

...... •

A.#,tvov Kc~s o vo*7cm*Zo VII #t

li 7^ CA40

iAi

:Tip

: :ik i-?:i14"

"M?~

149. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, fol. 221 r



244 GIAN MARIO CAO

St ~Towapr t I

'rvZr T\zu %OL IP4 JTae ' m** # @ w 'K

v- 0"Trr - a *

v tir-rrw v Myrw- gg

n NJ Kr9~si~C olp ~ x9171;v~ i~

411 IMPr,4 by&?pyn r jd4r tfJAwh#er

~k A

'Zi~ '~~y ttept"~t~r 1PI~u.11~ ,w ~~irX 7744 144J Ur C kKfCE

~4t ljtlnsuv>W t.6Tcsv01V. 1

~ / bl..44 cs~c~tc 1~12ccr 7n~~U;7~a u~Jt

L Slll~)(W k I I ~i~: 1 D*j;~

4lylU ~lto7

150. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana MS Laur. Plut. 85-19, fol. 224v




The inventories made at the time of Bessarion's bequest of his library to the Venetian

Republic and in the decades which followed show that the cardinal possessed two manu-

scripts containing works by Sextus Empiricus: the first, item 75 in his library and item

408 in the inventory drawn up in 1468 (and appended to the letter of donation to the Venetian Republic);67 the second, item 12 in the inventory of 1474, a few years after his

death. While the latter appears to have gone missing during subsequent decades,68 the first is easily identifiable with MS Marc. Gr. Z. 262 (408).69 The autograph note allows us to determine the period in which Bessarion came into possession of the codex, since he refers to himself as the 'Cardinal of Tusculum', 70 an office which he held from April 1449 to October 1468 (when he became bishop of Sabina).71 Nevertheless, it has been pointed out that many of Bessarion's annotations to the books in his library were made late in his

life, at the time of the bequest.72 What this means is that any chronological indications

given by the cardinal which are not securely contemporary may be the result of an attempt to provide an historical record for the books in the collection or may simply correspond to the date on which the annotations were made.

Given the lack of detailed research on the subject, an important contribution to the

dating of the codex is provided by a number of external circumstances. Although its value was long underestimated, the inclusion of the codex in the 1468 inventory constitutes an

unequivocal fact. 73 A further and equally precise piece of evidence is found in a letter sent by Bessarion to Michael Apostolis requesting the works of Quintus Smyrnaeus and

67. The most recent publication of the letter and

inventory is found in L. Labowsky, Bessarion's Library and the Biblioteca Marciana: Six Early Inventories, Rome

1979, PP. 147-89 (174, item 408: 'Item Sexti akademici

philosophi, in pergameno'), together with an edition of

the later inventories and a survey of events surrounding the donation. It is important to observe that, although the shelf-mark of the Sextus manuscript changes, it

appears in the inventories made in 1474 (item 616: 'Sextus academaicus, in pergameno'), in 1524 (item

135: 'Sexti Academici complura, in pergameno'), in

1543 (item 158: 'Sestus Empiricus academicus, in

pergameno'), in 1545/46 (item 8B: 'Sexti academici

philosophi, in pergameno') and in 1575 (item 309: 'Sextus Empiricus ad mathematicos et astrologos et

alia, in pergameno, in 4"'). There is no evidence of

the presence of Sextus's writings in other Venetian

libraries of the time: see e.g. S. Connell, 'Books and

their Owners in Venice 1345-1480', this Journal, xxxV,

1972, pp. 163-86; M. Zorzi, 'I Barbaro e i libri', in Una

famiglia veneziana nella storia: i Barbaro (atti del con-

vegno, Venezia 1993), ed. M. Marangoni and M. Pastore

Stocchi, Venice 1996, pp. 363-96. 68. It does not appear in the 1524 inventory or in

subsequent ones. It is also missing from the 1468 list: see Labowsky (as in n. 67), p. 454-

69. See the tables published by Labowsky (as in n.

67), pp. 174, 225, 438, 468; see also the description of the manuscript in Bibliothecae D. Marci Venetiarum Codices

graeci manuscripti, ed. E. Mioni, Thesaurus antiquus, I: codices 1-299, Rome 1981, pp. 377-78. For further indi-

cations see Cao, 'L'erediti' (as in n. 31), pp. 236-38, no. 85.

70. 'Locus 75 Sexti academaici liber meus b<essa-

rionis, car<dinalis> tusculani ... rfilv &(ia(v i•apqpalv'Xeog rob T'Ov ou-)(KXCv.'

71. See L. Mohler, Kardinal Bessarion als Theologe, Humanist und Staatsmann, 3 vols, Paderborn 1923-42, I,

p. 260; R. Loenertz, 'Bessarione', in Enciclopedia Cattolica,

ii, Florence 1949, cols 1492-98 (1494, 1497); L.

Labowsky, 'Bessarione', in Dizionario biografico degli Italiani, Ix, Rome 1967, pp. 686-96 (689, 692); E.

Mioni, 'Vita del cardinale Bessarione', Miscellanea Marci-

ana, vI, 1991, pp. 11-219 (o00); M. Zorzi, 'Cenni sulla vita e sulla figura di Bessarione', in Bessarione e l'Uma-

nesimo, ed. G. Fiaccadori et al., Naples 1994, PP. 1-19 (2,6).

72. E. Mioni, 'Bessarione scriba e alcuni suoi collabo-

ratori', in Miscellanea Marciana di studi Bessarionei, Padua

1976, pp. 263-318 (278: 'Questi ex-libris, molti dei

quali ritengo scritti quando fu necessario redigere

l'inventario, mostrano talvolta la scrittura calligrafica, tal'altra quella corsiva e trasandata degli ultimi anni'). See also idem, 'Vita' (as in n. 71), p. 185-

73. Mutschmann, 'Die Uberlieferung' (as in n. 52),

p. 247 ('Ende des XV. Jahrh.'), and idem, 'Praefatio'

(as in n. 28), p. VI ('s. XV ex.'). The broad indication

('saec. XV') proposed by Mioni in Codices graeci (as in n.



246 GIAN MARIO CAO

Sextus Empiricus.74 This letter has been dated to 1454;75 so it is reasonable to set aside any conjecture regarding Bessarion's possession of the Sextus manuscript prior to this date,76 since he must have acquired it some time during the following fifteen years.

Let us return now to the problem of the marginalia supposedly entered in Bessarion's

copy of Sextus by Filelfo. The fact that these annotations have not been assigned to Filelfo in the main reference works for the study of Greek handwriting in the Renaissance is by no means conclusive.77 More significant is the complete absence of any discussion of this issue in contributions devoted to identifying the scribe of the Bessarion codex (the hand has been variously attributed to Caesar Strategos,78 to the so-called 'Anonymus Ly'7" and

69), p. 377, is probably due to his cautious approach. Attention has rightly been drawn to this significant fact

by Eleuteri, 'Note' (as in n. 1), p. 433.

74. Mohler (as in n. 71), III, p. 484 (no. 34): 'KItvTov 6' K&ad "r& HIppc0ve~t 6xbgro ye7yp&ovat, cooi

75. Labowsky, Bessarion 's Library (as in n. 67), p. I1; see also P. Eleuteri's entry in Bessarione e l'Umanesimo (as in n. 71), p. 502 (no. 112).

76. See Cao, 'L'eredita' (as in n. 31), pp. 236-39 (no. 85), where I suggest that Filelfo's detailed request to consult the Sextus codex, conveyed by his son Seno-

fonte to Bessarion in 1452, might support this further

backdating.

77. I present here a list (mainly drawn from P.

Canart, Paleografia e codicologia greca. Una rassegna biblio-

grafica, Vatican City g991 ) of repertories and studies of

Greek script in the Renaissance in general and more

specifically on Filelfo's Greek hand: H. Omont, 'Un

nouveau manuscrit de la Rhetorique d'Aristote et la

bibliotheque grecque de Francesco Filelfo', La Biblio-

filia, ii, 19goo-1, pp. 136-40; M. Vogel and V. Gardt-

hausen, Die griechischen Schreiber des Mittelalters und der

Renaissance, Leipzig 1909, pp. 440-41; X. F. I~aptvilXk, "E'E qveFSg cwmSt6oyp6•pot

iov Xpovmyv r?ig &vayevviGlo(g',,

'EireZTpig 2rob MeaiwovIcofb "ApZeiov, VIII-IX, 1958-

59, pp. 63-124; P. Canart, 'Scribes grecs de la Renais-

sance: Additions et corrections aux repertoires de

Vogel-Gardthausen et de Patrinelis', Scriptorium, xvII, 1963, PP- 56-82; K. A. De Meyier, 'Scribes grecs de

la Renaissance: Additions et corrections aux repertoires de Vogel-Gardthausen, Patrinelis et de Canart',

Scriptorium, xvIII, 1964, pp. 258-66; J. Wiesner and

U. Victor, 'Griechische Schreiber der Renaissance.

Nachtrfge zu den Repertorien von Vogel-Gardthausen, Patrinelis, Canart, de Meyier', Rivista di Studi Bizantini

e Neoellenici, xvIII-XIX, 1971-72, pp. 51-66; Bernardi-

nello, Autografi (as in n. 61), p. 55, ill. 30; R. Barbour, Greek Literary Hands A.D. 4oo-16oo, 2nd edn, Oxford

1981, p. 29, ill. 106; S. Rizzo, 'Gli umanisti, i testi

classici e le scritture maiuscole', in Atti del Convegno internazionale 'II Libro e ii Testo' (Urbino 1982), ed. C.

Questa and R. Raffaelli, Urbino 1984, pp. 225-41;

Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten (as in n. 30), 2 no.

520, 3 no. 5o6; P. Eleuteri, 'Francesco Filelfo copista e

possessore di codici greci', in Paleografia e codicologia greca (atti del colloquio internazionale, Berlino, Wolfenbfittel

1983), ed. D. Harlfinger and G. Prato, Alessandria

1991, , pp. 163-79; P. Eleuteri and P. Canart, Scrittura

greca nell'umanesimo italiano, Milan 1991, pp. 181-84; C.

Brockmann, Die handschriftliche Uberlieferung von Platons

•Symnposion, Wiesbaden 1992, pp. 22, 146-47; M. Cortesi, 'Libri greci letti e scritti alla scuola di Vittorino da

Feltre: fra mito e realta', in I manoscritti greci tra riflessione e dibattito (atti del colloquio internazionale, Cremona

1998), ed. G. Prato, 3 vols, Florence 2000, I, pp. 401- 16.

78. On the basis of a comparison with Paris, Bib-

liotheque Nationale (hereafter BnF) MS graec. 2159, dated 1492 and containing texts by Galen (see Inventaire sommaire des manuscrits grecs de la Bibliotheque Nationale, ed. H. Omont, II, Paris 1888, p. 207), the following

theory is put forward by Mutschmann, 'Die Uberlie-

ferung' (as in n. 52), p. 280: 'Der Marcianus Ve, der

aus der Bibliothek Bessarions stammt, ist von der Hand

der Caesar Strategos geschrieben, etwa am Ende des

XV. [correxi ex XVI.] Jahrh., wahrscheinlich auch in

Venedig'; on Strategos, in addition to the collection of

Fac-similes de manuscrits grecs des XVe et XVIe siecles, ed. H.

Omront, Paris 1887; repr. Hildesheim 1974, p. lo, ill.

7, which Mutschmann very likely knew, see the more

recent Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten (as in n. 3o), 2 no. 291.

79. D. Harlfinger, Specimina griechischer Kopisten der

Renaissance, I, Griechen des 15. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 1974,

p. 30, no. 64, where he proposes that MS Marc. Z. 262

(4o8) and other Greek codices in the Biblioteca Marci-

ana (MS Z. 215, fols 211r-99r; MS Z. 243; MS Z. 522; MS Z. 527, fols 1or-v, 15r-v, 4or-44v) are the work of the

same scribe, whose handwriting seems to be so closely linked - but 'auch Identitfit wfire denkbar' - to that of

Michael Lygizos (on whom see Album de paleographie

grecque, ed. M. Wittek, Ghent 1967, pp. 24-25, ill. 36, and especially Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten, as in

n. 30, 1 no. 282, 2 no. 386, 3 no. 465) that he merits

the epithet 'Anonymus Ly'. This proposal has been




Z dv otfQ O LtXktq1Mfl$\ / F ~OF I

e kai4vowoo44o r C

Xe (Iv m o'TlC- 0V xopow v 4X.f- arb.OPIC64AM n' W4 A7

a4* $4Ao VrvOuGhw 'o s/&CtO

'rc ',* r &\r0&eb , N

-vZ reor rtw4 EJcf i a . ',?

5vr414. M.A,44 pstyg4 , .

*pC

Wuc*r s"n lrSZ 9n7Jvr.-yi444 t.esJi5*sn *eau**eitM, Ii tr4A.. ?'veiewl l t p.vell a ar

r 1.x@,.40.o.. . A. f4'

(9 as asof . 4

t*, *ef tt r7 #SVAe4ss

?71?p4WW. 0

/ $44W4V;.n4;i OW

~ 4r4na,~v -1.44r^r1

o~?EO~ob trm Aiecyb,;i

*evi

n *~,49L )d'VQ*704ee

ALA 4"IW7.0. W t

151. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, fol. 345r



248 GIAN MARIO CAO

to an unspecified collaborator of Bessarion),80 as well as in paleographical studies of the

manuscript.8' As for Filelfo, since the request he made to Bessarion through his son Senofonte

dates from February 1452, any annotations in the codex would have been made by a man of nearly fifty-five (Filelfo was born in 1398).82 It has been said that the mature phase of the development of his Greek handwriting is marked by a 'fossilisation and hardening'. In other words, his later works are distinguished by a series of characteristic features and

by a stylistic quirkiness such as one would expect to find in the 'hand of an old man'.83 Needless to say, none of this is found in the Marciana codex. With only a few exceptions, the marginal notes are limited to the correction or addition of terms and sometimes of rubrics written in the same ink as the headings. These additions are distributed in a uniform manner throughout the more than four hundred folios that make up the manu-

script - which, as we have already seen, contains the eleven books comprising Against the

Professors, while Filelfo's codex (that is, the ancient part of what is now MS Laur. Plut.

85.19) contained only the five books of Against the Dogmatists (Against the Professors, vII-xI). Nor are there any changes in the handwriting, which remains the same throughout and which bears a close relation to the text. For all these reasons, the hypothesis that Bessarion lent Filelfo a Sextus manuscript, which he then proceeded to annotate, must be rejected.

There is no doubt, none the less, that on the basis of what we know - including, of course, the translations from Sextus which appear in the Commentationes Florentinae de exilio - some definite conclusions can be drawn regarding Filelfo's possession and use of the works of Sextus preserved in MS Laur. Plut. 85. 19. I have attempted in a separate study to make a detailed analysis of the ideological importance of Filelfo's reading of Sextus.84 Here it is only necessary to emphasise that although his Latin versions are marked by correctness and literalness, as attested elsewhere,85 he shows no interest whatever in the

philosophy of scepticism and an absolute incomprehension of its historical position. Instead of dwelling on the most obvious proof of this - his reference in 1452, more than

taken up by Canart, 'Demetrius Damilas' (as in n. 24),

p. 309, and more recently by P. Eleuteri, 'XXXII. Sesto

Empirico', in I Greci in Occidente, ed. G. Fiaccadori et al., Venice 1996, pp. 39-40 (no. 44).

8o. Mioni, who only partly accepts the proposal made by Harlfinger, states in Codices graeci (as in n. 69),

p. 377: 'Librarius unus, idem qui Marc. Gr. 215 (ff.

211-299), 243 et 527 (partim) descripsit, etiam hoc

volumen exaravit.'

81. Eleuteri, 'Note' (as in n. 1), p. 433- 82. See the entries on Filelfo by V. R. Giustiniani, in

Lexicon des Mittelalters, Iv, Munich and Zurich 1989, cols

444-45; and H.-V. Beyer, in Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit, ed. E. Trapp et al., 12 Faszikel:

TopkTxiav - 'Qp"ivtog, Vienna 1994, pp. 101-03 (no.

29803). 83. Eleuteri, 'Francesco Filelfo' (as in n. 77), p. 166

('cristallizzazione e sclerotizzazione'); Eleuteri and

Canart, Scrittura greca (as in n. 77), p. 182 ('mano di un

vecchio'). Filelfo's handwriting has been associated with

the so-called 'Chrysokokkes-Schrift' by D. Harlfinger, 'Zu griechischen Kopisten und Schriftstilen des 15. und

16. Jahrhunderts', in La Paleographie grecque et byzantine

(colloque du C.N.R.S., Paris 1974), Paris 1977, pp. 327- 43 (333-34). I would like to thank Paolo Eleuteri and

Sebastiano Gentile for discussing this question with me.

84. Some brief indications regarding passages of

Against the Ethicists by Sextus Empiricus translated in the

Commentationes Florentinae de exilio by Filelfo are found in Cao, 'Nota' (as in n. 3), pp. 319-25; and for analysis of the main passages see idem, 'Tra politica' (as in n.

48), pp. 108-26.

85. See e.g. D. Marsh, 'Francesco Filelfo's Translation

of the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum', in Peripatetic Rhetoric after Aristotle, ed. W. W. Fortenbaugh and D. C. Mirhady, New Brunswick and London 1994, PP- 349-64 (esp. 355, referring to the classification by R. Sabbadini, La

scuola e gli studi di Guarino Guarini veronese, Catania 1896,

p. 135: 'traduzione strettamente letterale col Filelfo').




ten years after acquiring the manuscript, to Sextus Empiricus as a 'sharp-witted and learned philosopher of the Peripatetic school'86 - my aim is to point out his rather shallow, unconscious return to themes that were critical of the ancient philosophical tradition, a tradition which was enthusiastically revived at this time in the intellectual milieu of humanism to which Filelfo himself belonged.

Furthermore, Filelfo's interest in Sextus cannot be defined as merely doxographical, since his recourse to the authority of the ancients took different forms and had different

objectives. The fact that Sextus's name is never mentioned in the Commentationes Floren-

tinae, while many of his statements about Timon, Xenocrates, Crantor, Zeno, Cleanthes and Chrysippus are translated into Latin, does not permit us to conclude that Filelfo considered the book Against the Ethicists (from which all the citations are taken) to be merely an anthology of useful quotations. The passages which Filelfo took from Sextus are far the most significant borrowings, in both length and complexity, in the whole of the Commentationes Florentinae; and they concern problems of an ethical nature, such as the classification of things into good, bad and indifferent, and the definition of each of these

categories (Against the Professors, XI.3-4 1). In Filelfo's literal Latin versions of these texts, his propensity towards gnomic pronouncements gives way to displays of conceptual virtu-

osity, so that the contrast between dogmatic assertions (mainly Stoic) and sceptical refu- tations leaves the reader with neither certainties nor doubts, but merely the impression of a sterile technical facility.

The underlying purpose of the Commentationes Florentinae can be found in the succession and alternation of themes, genres and languages. From this perspective, philosophy plays a significant role since it broadens the expressive possibilities of a text which moves from the lowest and most vulgar registers used in the invectives against the Medici to the abstract discussions of ethical classifications taken from Sextus. The latter,

accurately translated by Filelfo, are occasionally relevant to passages in the Commentationes Florentinae. Nevertheless, his merits as a Hellenist reveal themselves, in this context, as limitations: in the end, his precision did little service to the cause of scepticism, which would not establish itself within the 'Republic of Letters' until well into the following century.

III. MORE ON FILELFO'S SEXTUS MANUSCRIPT

It now seems clear that item 174 of the 1495 Medici inventory can be identified with Filelfo's codex fenestratus. But this only goes part of the way to answering Fryde's denial that Filelfo owned the manuscript in question, since his view is based directly on its

possession by Angelo Poliziano. It is therefore worth summarising the main points surrounding the issue.

Poliziano's ownership of MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, which Fryde reaffirmed several times with varying degrees of certainty,s7 is based on the identification of the humanist's annotations in the central and oldest part of the codex. According to Fryde: 'He annotated

86. See p. 241 above.

87. Fryde, Greek Manuscripts (as in n. 41), pp. 23, 233, 239, 294, 308, 719, 807.



250 GIAN MARIO CAO

very fully this part of the manuscript', although his 'marginal notes in it have been much damaged by damp and are now often illegible.'88 In actual fact, the only support for this two-fold hypothesis - that Poliziano copiously annotated the manuscript and that it suffered serious damage from damp - is found in a few passages previously pointed out

by Lucia Cesarini Martinelli in her exemplary reconstruction of Poliziano's notebooks or zibaldoni.89 Despite having inspected the manuscript several times,90 Fryde was unable to find further traces of Poliziano's reading of the codex - which in any case would not imply ownership ipsofacto- apart from one additional annotation.91 And this, after having denied Filelfo's possession of the manuscript solely on the grounds that it lacks any arms or

ownership notes,92 a criterion which his own account is equally incapable of satisfying. Fryde's account is further undermined by his incorrect references to Against the

Professors. As is well known, this work is composed of eleven books: six under the heading of Against the Professors and five entitled Against the Dogmatists (Against the Professors, vii-xI), very probably written first.9- Fryde, however, states that the work is composed ofjust eight books,94 the first six of which are supposedly transmitted in the oldest part of MS Laur. Plut. 85.19,9:5 except, that is, for the last book, Against the Ethicists (Against the Professors, xi), which is 'a later addition'96- a fact which was overlooked in what he refers to as Angelo Maria Bandini's 'slovenly' and misleading description.97 In reality, this last book is not a later addition at all, as is apparent from the many studies of the codex, as well, of course, as a careful examination of it. Not by chance do the long passages from Sextus translated and paraphrased by Filelfo (set out in the Appendix below) come precisely from Against the Ethicists, which is preserved almost entirely in MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, apart from the

concluding page (Against the Professors, XI.251-57; Bekker pp. 594, 1. 31-596, 1. 5). All this confusion probably derives from Fryde's reliance on information from the

inventory which Fabio Vigili drew up between 1508 and 15 o of the Greek and Latin

manuscripts returned to Cardinal Giovanni de' Medici, the son of Lorenzo the Magnifi- cent and later to become Pope Leo X, following events subsequent to the fall of the Medici

regime in 1494.98 In the Greek list, transmitted in BAV MS Barb. lat. 3185, item 138 reads: 'Six books of Commentaries on the Professors by Sextus Empiricus',"'' on the basis of which Fryde maintained that it was necessary to rearrange all other information and

reject all previous accounts.'() It is exactly this point, however, which betrays the fragility of

88. Ibid., pp. 718, 308. 89. Cesarini Martinelli (as in n. 49), PP. 353-54. 9o. Fiyde, Greek Manuscripts (as in n. 41), p. 322 n..

246. 9 1. 'Cum omnia quae fiunt ex eo fieri quod non est',

on fol. 117r (Fryde, ibid., p. 322 n. 246a).

g)2. Fryde, ibid., p. 294. 93. W. Kroll, 'Sextus [4]', in Paulys Real-Encyclopddie

der classischen Altertunmswissenschaft, ed. G. Wissowa, 11.4,

Stuttgart 1923, cols 2057-61 (20o57); J. Allen, 'The

Skepticism of Sextus Empiricus', in Aufstieg and Nieder- gang der Riimischen Welt, ed. W. Haase and H. Temporini, II.36/4, Berlin and New York 199o, pp. 2582-607 (2583). J. Barnes, Introduction to Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Scepticrism, ed. J. Annas and J. Barnes, 2nd

revd edn, Cambridge 2000, pp. XIII-XIV, is more

sceptical regarding the possibility of dating Sextus's

works.

94. Fryde, Greek Manuscripts (as in n. 41), p. 293. 95. Ibid., p. 294 (repeated also on pp. 3o8, 719,

807). 96. Ibid.

97. Ibid. 98. On this Vigili inventory (not to be confused with

the other Vatican inventory made by Vigili for Julius II; published by Devreesse, Le Fonds, as in n. `2o, pp. 153- 80; see n. '3 above) see esp. Fryde, 'The Library' (as in

1. 41).

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




his own account; for how was it possible for Poliziano to transcribe or translate in his note-

books passages from both the Outlines of Pyrrhonism and Against the Professors, when he had

at his disposal a codex containing only the five books of Against the Dogmatists (Against the

Professors, vII-xI)? Moreover, Poliziano believed that Sextus's works were divided into ten

books, returning to a problematic suggestion made by Diogenes Laertius (Ix. 1 16)101 but, above all, following what he found in the Greek manuscript which he used in his study of

Sextus Empiricus. These facts provide indisputable proof that this manuscript could not

have been MS Laur. Plut. 85.19.102

Yet another difficulty arises from the Vigili inventory itself. Entry 138, mentioned

above, is not the only reference to this work of Sextus. A little further on Vigili registered a second Sextus manuscript, which he describes in more detail:

152. Ten books of Commentaries on the Professors by Sextus Empiricus, at the end of which the

following is written: The tenth book of Commentaries by Sextus Empiricus. The end of the ten books of Commentaries according to contradiction by Sextus the Sceptic. It is doubtful whether the book written from

beginning to end in Doric dialect is by Sextus. It concerns, so it seems, moral philosophy, for in it the

good and bad, the ugly and the beautiful, the just and the unjust, truth and falsehood are discussed in various chapters; and it is incomplete." 3

This description is not as helpful as one might have hoped. The combination of the Greek colophon copied by Vigili and the clear allusion to a work in Doric dialect made

up of contrasting arguments does not lead us directly to a known manuscript with Against the Professors in ten books and the Atocot X6yot. As for the Greek colophon, it is also found

in other Sextus manuscripts containing the Outlines of Pyrrhonism at the beginning.104 Additional difficulties in Vigili's description arise from the division of Sextus's work

into ten books, whether or not this includes the Outlines of Pyrrhonism. Consequently, the

identification of item 152 with MS Laur. Plut. 85.24 suggested by Fryde,105 although

supported by the exact correspondence of the Greek colophon and the presence of the

Atocoi X6yot in this codex, ends up decidedly weakened. Besides, Fryde's claim that 'the

Medici library possessed ... a complete version of the works of Sextus'"(6 rules out MS

Soo. But see the comments in the posthumously

published volume: E. B. Fryde, The Early Palaeologan Renaissance (2 6zi-c. 136o), Leiden, Boston and Cologne 2000, p. 201, referring to Cao, 'L'eredita' (as in n. 31),

pp. 234-35, no. 84.

lo1. Hpo66o ilou6F' coie a zog; 6 'EutpEptc6g;, o'

tz 8Kca tzv XKE'ntr&Wv K-a '

a KhtXXtra'. Diogenes

Laertius, Vitae philosophorum, 2 vols, ed. M. Marcovich,

Stuttgart and Leipzig 1999,1, p. 7o8, 11. 12-13. 102. See also D. F.Jackson, 'Fabio Vigili's Inventory of

Medici Greek Manuscripts', Scriptorium, I1II, 1998, pp. 199-204, esp. 200.

103. '152. Sexti Empirici in Mathematicos commentariorum libri decem. In quorum fine ita scriptum est:

Y'Xtoij 'Elnetpu•obnO

iO Vtj'vrt& v t"6 KOarov. TC2og; tcOv tob

•KCn'et1Cob1 (Cro) "rcov np6g &v'ripprlotv 86C•K jnogtvrltOrwmv. Liber qui an Sexti Empirici sit, dubitatur,

dorica lingua scriptus ex principio ad finem, de morali

ut videtur philosophia. In eo enim de bono et malo, de

turpi et pulchro, de iusto et iniusto, de veritate et

mendacio variis capitibus disputatur, et est imperfectus'. BAV MS Barb. lat. 3185, fol.

2•V. I would like to thank

Giorgio Piras for checking the transcription of this

passage in the manuscript. 104. E.g. Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (here-

after BSB) MS gr. 79 (fol. 341r), where Against the

Professors and the Atoooti 6 yot are preceded by the Outlines ofPrrhonism; for descriptions of this and other Sextus manuscripts see Sextus Empiricus, HPOE MOYEI- KOYZ. Against the Musicians (Adversus musicos), ed. D. Davidson Greaves, Lincoln and London 1986, p. 77.

lo5. Fryde, Greek Manuscripts (as in n. 41), pp. 294- 95-

0o6. Ibid.



252 GIAN MARIO CAO

Laur. Plut. 85-24 as a possible candidate for identification with Vigili's entry, since the

composite nature of this manuscript was shown by both Mutschmann and Kochalsky, while its dual paternity was demonstrated by Canart.107

So, even if, for the sake of argument, we grant Fryde's hypothesis that MS Laur. Plut.

85.19 was owned by Poliziano, Vigili's inventory provides no resolution to the problems involved in such an identification. Furthermore, the inventory carried out by Lascaris confirms that at least until 1495 Filelfo's codex was the only Sextus manuscript in the Medici private library;08s while Poliziano's death in 1494 requires us to search for older

manuscripts and sources of evidence. Nor should we overlook the fact that Poliziano's notebooks contain no trace of the Atooi X6yot and that, despite his problematic division of Sextus's writings into ten books, he distinguishes clearly between the Outlines of Pyrrho- nism and Against the Professors.

IV. SEXTUS IN SAN MARCO

It will be useful here to recall that, while Filelfo's Sextus manuscript was the only one in the Medici private library,'09 the other Florentine library linked to the Medici family -

the library of the Dominican Convent of San Marco, known as the Medici public library or Medicea pubblica - contained another important exemplar of Sextus Empiricus, MS Laur. Plut. 85.11.110 This codex was probably acquired by the San Marco library around

1499, when its owner, Giorgio Antonio Vespucci, entered the convent bringing with him as donations about ten Greek manuscripts, a large number of Latin ones and several incunabula."' His will, drawn up in May 1497, clearly shows the importance which he attributed to the volume containing Sextus's works:

107. Kochalsky (as in n. 28), p. o0; Mutschmann, 'Praefatio' (as in n. 28), pp. XI-XII, in which MS Laur. Plut. 85.11 is said to be the exemplar of the Outlines

of Pyrrhonism (to be distinguished, therefore, from the

manuscript which has controversially been identified as the exemplar of the books comprising Against the

Professors). More recently Canart, 'Demetrius Damilas'

(as in n. 24), p. 311, has attributed the oldest section of MS Laur. Plut. 85.24 (fols 102r-o9v, 11 r-352r, accord-

ing to the recent numbering in pencil found in the lower right-hand margin) to the 'librarius Florentinus', while ascribing the execution of the 16th-century part to the hand of Camillo Zanetti (fols 3r-g99v, 101r-v, 1 Ior-v; on Zanetti see Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten, as in

n. 3o, 1 no. 212, 2 no. 299, 3 no. 351). o08. See above, p. 238.

109. The Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana now holds a number of manuscripts of Sextus's works datable to the 15th century (see Floridi, 'The Diffusion', as in n. 3, pp. 84-85) but which did not become part of its collection until the following century. It was only because he failed to take account of this fact that R. H. Popkin, 'Introduzione all'edizione italiana', in idem, La storia dello scetticismo. Da Erasmo a Spinoza, Milan 1995, P. XIV, could maintain that, at the time of Savonarola (t 1498),

there were five Greek manuscripts of Sextus in the

library of San Marco. Equally flawed is the statement in

R. R. Bolgar, The Classical Heritage and its Beneficiaries, 2nd edn, Cambridge 1977, p. 489: 'Before 1492. Three

MSS of Sextus Empiricus (one perhaps Cod. Laur.

LXXXV, 1 i) in the catalogue of the library of Lorenzo

dei Medici.'

1io. See Bandini (as in n. 51), III, cols 270-71; Mutschmann, 'Die Uberlieferung' (as in n. 52), p. 248;

Kochalsky (as in n. 28), p. o; Mutschmann, 'Praefatio'

(as in n. 28), pp. V-IX; D. Harlfinger andJ. Harlfinger, Wasserzeichen aus griechischen Handschriften, I, Berlin 1974, no. 46; W. Cavini, 'Appunti sulla prima diffusione in

occidente delle opere di Sesto Empirico', Medioevo, III, 1977, pp. 1-20 (16-17); Cao, 'L'eredit6' (as in n. 31),

pp. 239-40, no. 86; L. Cesarini Martinelli and A. Dane-

loni, 'Manoscritti e edizioni', in Pico, Poliziano (as in n.

31), pp. 305-43 (337-38, no. 142).

1 1 i. See Ullman and Stadter (as in n. 36), pp. 38-43, and the important review of their book by F. Di Bene-

detto, Studi Medievali, xiv, 1973, PP- 947-6o (949-50); A. C. de la Mare, The Handwriting of Italian Humanists, I, Oxford 1973, pp. 106-38; A. F. Verde, 'La Congrega- zione di San Marco dell'Ordine dei Frati Predicatori:

il "reale" della predicazione savonaroliana', Memorie




And because the testator himself has stated and affirmed that among those very books of his are two ancient Greek books which are precious because they are greatly esteemed and similar ones are

very rarely found. One is called 'Pironia', the other Ammonius with other Aristotelian commentators,

treating logic and philosophy. The testator himself wanted and ordered that within one month after his death they should be consigned to the said brothers of San Marco and chained in their own

library, since in this way they cannot be removed from the said library nor will anyone be permitted to remove them from there unless an accurate copy has previously been made from the books themselves and has been carefully edited."2

The colophon shows, furthermore, that the copying of the text was completed on 8

September 1464 (year 6973 of the Byzantine era) by the Greek scribe Thomas Prodro- mites (Fig. 152)."1- Carlo Vecce has recently argued that the manuscript can be traced

to the abbey of San Nicola di Casole at Otranto,"14 where Prodromites stayed towards

the mid-146os following the fall of Constantinople. Vecce cites as evidence the colophon to a codex of Francesco Barbaro's letters, MS Vat. lat. 3440, dating from July 1467.-15 He also claims that it is certain that the abbey's library contained a manuscript of Sextus

Empiricus's works, because Antonio Galateo stated in his Esposizione del Pater Noster (1504- o8) that he recalled having read, as a young man, a very ancient but fragmentary Greek

manuscript entitled Outlines of Pyrrhonism which was found in the Terra di Otranto.1"6 A

more important testimony is Galateo's letter to Pietro Summonte De suo scribendi genere

(ep. XXXIV), datable to 1512-13:

Domenicane, xiv, 1983, pp. 151-237 (162-63, 194-95). On Vespucci's library see also the recent articles by F.

Gallori, 'Un inventario inedito dei libri di Giorgio Antonio Vespucci', Medioevo e Rinascimento, Ix, 1995,

pp. 215-31 (esp. 227, item 123: 'Pironii Sexti philoso-

phica, in papiro, in corio rubro', not identified by the

author); and F. Gallori and S. Nencioni, 'I libri greci e

latini dello scrittoio e della biblioteca di Giorgio Antonio

Vespucci. Introduzione e catalogo', Memorie Domenicane,

xxvIII, 1997, pp. 155-359 (in which, again, the Sextus codex is not identified: p. 191).

112. De la Mare, The Handwriting (as in n. i11), p. 114: 'Et quia ipse testator dixit et affirmavit quod inter

ipsos eius libros sunt duo libri graeci antiqui et pretiosi eo quod magno estimentur et rarissime [rarissimi ED.]

eorum similes reperiuntur quorum unus Pironia, alter

Ammonius cum aliis commentatoribus Aristotelis nun-

cupatur, de logica ac philosophia tractantes, hos duos libros voluit ac mandavit ipse testator quod infra unum mensem tunc proxime futurum post eius mortem

consignentur fratribus Sancti Marci predicti et in ipsa eorum libreria incatenentur, cum hoc quod extra

dictam libreriam extrahi non possint nec ulli extrahere inde liceat, nisi prius ex ipsis libris emendata copia extrahatur ac recognita diligenter.'

113- 'E'T)XEt LV noVhoi XpovoiX coXp Sionota Pipfou 't)og 6 tamba ypdycag Om oaw 6 npo6poitrlg. 660( 6 X0E6g iltACv

6 Xppto•r6 ,g-qoy' iv&t••tWvog

ty' cen6rtLJ3pipw rl" (fol. 345v). The great majority of studies devoted to the

manuscript have followed Bandini's erroneous dating of 1465; some exceptions include Vogel and Gardt- hausen (as in n. 77), P. 150; Harlfinger, Specimina (as in n. 79), p. 32, no. 69; C. Vecce, 'Esercizi di traduzione nella Napoli del Rinascimento. II: Alessandro d'Afro- disia, Altilio e Galateo', Annali. Sezione Romanza. Istituto Universitario Orientate, xxxII, 1990o, pp. 103-37 (135)- On Thomas Prodromites see Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten (as in n. 30), 2 no. 188, 3 no. 237.

114. See Vecce (as in n. 113), pp. 128-37 (? 3: 'Sesto

Empirico a Casole'). 1 15. Francesco Barbaro, Epistolario, I, La tradizione

manoscritta e a stampa, ed. C. Griggio, Florence 1991,

pp. 162-66 (163, fol. 46': 'Expliciunt foeliciter per me Thomam Constantinopolitanum in civitate Ydronti in ede divi Nicholai de Casulis. Anno domini

M"CCCC?LXVIII? XV? indictione XXI? Iulii'). See also Vecce (as in n. 113), p. 136, and Kristeller, IterItalicum (as in n. 18), vi, p. 332.

116. Vecce (as in n. 113), p. 129, who draws, with some changes, on the text printed in La Giapiga e varii opuscoli di Antonio de Ferrariis detto il Galateo, 4 vols, Lecce 1867-71, III, p. 213 (which I have not been able to consult): 'ed io me ricordo, essendo iovane, averlo letto in un libro antiquissimo greco, in certi fragmenti da persone trovati in terra de Otranto, soprascripto nufhiv'to v iunorun6rocmv'.



254 GIAN MARIO CAO

'06)44%.

vi ?4 r .gC4t4' # *

P.. .. . ..... .••....••k i.

. .........

i* O a t

i Is. il

F .

:,

ad

:.....

... ..

..... .......

: . ..: :i *i

| * *

:

r _r * *clr

A..-

'44* * i '. ...

.

-:;40

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

: + f

....

152. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana MS Laur. Plut. 85.19, fol. 345v




When Pyrrho of Elis wrote against logic, physics, ethics, that is, against good morals, he gained more fame than others who dealt most diligently with these subjects. Our friend Sergius, a most diligent investigator of ancient books, found some fragments of this commentary here in the Salentine

peninsula in a certain ancient and ruined casula. The work is entitled the Outlines of Pyrrhonism; and I have discovered that Cicero repeated many things verbatim from it.117

The 'ancient and ruined casula' was actually the abbey of San Nicola di Casole after the

sack of Otranto in 1480 (while it is easy to identify 'our friend Sergius' as Sergio Stiso da

Zollino).11s Our main source for the events surrounding the fate of Sextus's works in

Otranto is, however, a request made in a letter of September 1230 from the metropolitan of Corfu, Giorgio Bardanes, to Giovanni Grasso, notary to Frederick II and a poet who

travelled in the circle of abbot Nicola Nettario:

If it so pleases God that we may be together, bring two books for me: that is, Homer's Odyssey and

something of those philosophical works which you have published, that is, the 'Pyrrhonia'. Since you, on the other hand, desire to learn from my books, I give [them] to you with a ready and extended

hand.119

According to Vecce, if the 'Pyrrhonia' mentioned here correspond to Sextus Empiricus's works ('the notary could have had a transcription of it made from a manuscript rescued by Nettario in the East'),120 then it is likely that MS Laur. Plut. 85.11, completed by Thomas

Prodromites in September 1464, was indeed copied at San Nicola di Casole.

This theory certainly deserves serious consideration, and it is not difficult to imagine how the manuscript might subsequently have come to Florence. Nevertheless, it does not

take sufficient account of the timing of Prodromites's movements; for while it is not certain

that he was at Casole in July 1467,121 we know for sure that he was in Constantinople

during the summer of 1466 - according to the colophon of BAV MS Ottob. gr. 395, dated

117. Antonio De Ferrariis Galateo, Epistole, ed. A.

Altamura, Lecce 1959, p. 217: 'Pyrro eliensis plus famae adeptus est cum contra logicam, physicam, ethicam, hoc est contra bonos mores scripsit, quam

plerique alii, qui de his diligentissime tractaverunt:

cuius commentariorum fragmenta aliqua Sergius noster

diligentissimus librorum veterum indagator hic apud Salentinos in quadam antiqua casula et ruinosa reperit,

quorum titulus est Hi le5vi' v ionor•iunoemv.

Et ab hoc

Ciceronem multa retulisse ad verbum deprehendi.'

118. See A. Jacob, 'Sergio Stiso de Zollino et Nicola

Petreio de Curzola. A propos d'une lettre du Vaticanus

Gr. 1o 19', in Bisanzio e 17talia. Raccolta di studi in memoria

di Agostino Pertusi, Milan 1982, pp. 154-68 (165-66).

119. J. M. Hoeck and R. J. Loenertz, Nikolaos-Nektarios von Otranto Abt von Casole, Ettal 1965, p. i86, 11. 47-51: 'Si ita Deo placuerit, ut una simus, duos nobis affer

libros, Homeri videlicet Odysseam et aliquid eorum

quae philosophica edidisti operum, Pyrrhonia videlicet.

Siquidem vero tu ex nostris libris econtra accipere cupis, dabo tibi veloci et extensa manu.' But see also G. Cavallo, 'Libri greci e resistenza etnica in Terra

d'Otranto', in Libri e lettori nel mondo bizantino. Guida storica e critica, ed. G. Cavallo, Rome and Bari 1982, pp. 155-78.

120. Vecce (as in n. 113), P. 134: 'del quale il notaio

poteva aver curato una trascrizione da un codice salvato da Nettario in Oriente'. The 'Pyrrhonia' is attributed instead to Giovanni Grasso in Poeti bizantini di terra d'Otranto nel secolo XIII, ed. M. Gigante, 2nd edn, Naples 1979, PP. 46-47-

12 1. Note the doubts raised by C. Griggio concerning the identification of 'Thomas Constantinopolitanus' of BAV MS Vat. lat. 3440 with

emlt;o 6

Hpo6popi•rlG of MS Laur. Plut. 85.1 1 and m0ot&a Hpo6p61wto; 6

K•ctzpopX~6,t of BAV MS Vat. Ottob. gr. 395: both

because up until that time the activity of writing at the

monastery of Casole was confined to Greek texts, and because a paleographical comparison between the colophons of MSS Vat. lat. 3440 and Vat. Ottob. gr. 395 suggested to Guglielmo Cavallo that 'le mani siano diffe- renti' (Barbaro, Epistolario, as in n. l 15, p. 163). The

speculative nature of the identification was, however, recognised by Vecce (as in n. 1 13), p. 136 n. 72.



256 GIAN MARIO CAO

at Constantinople on 20oJuly 1466 and signed 'Em[t<&>f, Hpo8p6[ttog 6 Kc•a(popiaXc'.122

So if the different pieces of evidence taken from Thomas's autograph notes are to be used in order to date his scribal activity, then he must have written the Sextus manuscript at the time of his stay in Constantinople, which lasted at least until the end of the summer of

1466. Even if these colophons are not taken to imply a strict chronology, Prodromites's

(possible) presence at San Nicola di Casole in 1467 cannot be used to support the theory that the Sextus codex was written in the Otranto abbey three years earlier.

Added to these difficulties is the insuperable obstacle raised by Galateo's various statements regarding the fragmentary state of the Sextus codex.l•23These show that he cannot have been referring to MS Laur. Plut. 85.1 1, a codex which is completely intact.

V. THE HUMANISTIC SEXTUS: FICINO, PICO, POIIZIANO It appears, in any case, that MS Laur. Plut. 85.1 1 was the text of reference in Laurentian

Florence, presumably by virtue of its completeness. In fact, unlike Filelfo's codex, which contained only the five books of Against the Dogmatists, this exemplar included both the Outlines of Pyrrhonism and all the books of Against the Professors. Paleographical analyses of the manuscript confirm this hypothesis: besides the ownership notes made, first, by Giorgio Antonio Vespucci and, later, by the Convent of San Marco,124 they have also

brought to light some autograph annotations, cross-reference marks and corrections in the handwriting of some of the most prominent figures in Lorenzo's circle: Angelo Poliziano, Giovanni Pico della Mirandola and, probably, Marsilio Ficino.

As far as Ficino is concerned, he is quite likely to have been aware of ancient sceptical currents of thought. This is an assumption based more on the intellectual climate of his times - we need only think of Ambrogio Traversari's Latin translation of the Lives of Eminent Philosophers by Diogenes Laertius, containing a 'Life of Pyrrho',125 or Cicero's

Academica'6 - than on the annotation probably added by him to the verso of the front

flyleaf of the Laurenziana manuscript: 'Sextus the Pyrrhonian of the sceptical sect';'97 or

122. Codices manuscripti graeci Ottoboniani Bibliothecae

Vaticanae, ed. E. Feron and F. Battaglini, Rome 1893, pp. 207-08; Vogel and Gardthausen (as in n. 77), p.

15o; Repertorium der Griechischen Kopisten (as in n. 30), 2

no. 188 (ill. 104 ).

123. See above, nn. 116, 117. See also Vecce (as in

n. 113), p. 29 n. 53, where he proposes that '... da

persone potrebbe essere emendato, come vedremo, in

de Pirrone'.

124. Thanks to the restoration of the codex in 1972, the recto of the front flyleaf, which was previously stuck

down to the inside cover and consequently inaccessible, has revealed some valuable annotations: 'Liber [inter- linear olim] Georgii Antonii Vespucci Kxai •6o

(pikwv'; the change of ownership following its donation to the

convent is demonstrated by the note 'Conventus Sancti

Marci de Florentia ordinis predicatorum habitus a fratre

Giorgio Antonio Vespuccio filio eiusdem conventus'

and by the indication, in the same hand, of its position

in the library, 'In bancho 2•

Graecae Latinae ex parte occidentis' - also confirmed by the Este inventory, which lists as item 1142: 'Sexti Empyrici Piromorum

dogmatum libri decem': see Ullman and Stadter (as in

n. 36), p. 257; Branca (as in n. 41), pp. 118-19.

125. See M. Gigante, 'Ambrogio Traversari interprete di Diogene Laerzio', in Ambrogio Traversari nel 17 centenario della nascita (convegno internazionale, Camaldoli

and Florence 1986), ed. G. C. Garfagnini, Florence

1988, pp. 143-75- 126. See C. B. Schmitt, Cicero Scepticus: A Study of the

Influence of the Academica in the Renaissance, The Hague

1972. 127. Cao, 'L'erediti' (as in n. 31), p. 239, 'sextus

pyrronius de secta sceptica'. On the relationship between Giorgio Antonio Vespucci and Ficino see

Marsilio Ficino e il ritorno di Platone, exhib. cat. (Biblio- teca Medicea Laurenziana 1984), ed. S. Gentile et al., Florence 1984, pp. 86-87, 118, 132-34-




the various references to the sceptics present in his works.128 Mention of the Academic

philosophers in his youthful tract De quatuor sectis philosophorum ('On the Four Sects of

Philosophers', 1457) should be understood as an allusion to the ancient Academy, that

is, to Plato."9-

More relevant, though still quite general, references are found in his Liber de voluptate ('A Book on Pleasure', 1457), particularly in the preface:

There are three styles of philosophical discourse. The first is when, in disputing, we defend and

approve a certain side of a question, as the Peripatetics and Stoics did. In the second, which was used

by almost all Academics and Socratics, after setting out a question, we relate diverse views and arguments regarding the issue at stake, so that having put forward many positions and compared them with each other, we may select from among them the most probable and likely. The third style was

especially suited to the sceptics, who were rejected by all the more excellent philosophers, since they think that everything is a matter of indifference, nor did they have anything certain or probable to follow, for they mingled and mixed together things which are separate and distinct in the order of nature. Therefore, from all these styles, I have decided at this time that the method of discourse I should propose for myself is that of the Academics and Socratics.l'3

An explicit reference to the sceptics is also found in Ficino's commentary on the Philebus

(1469), chapter XXIX: 'when [Protarchus] said that the goal of a discussion is discovery, not uncertainty, he is making it obvious that Plato proposes to pass on doctrine, not ambi-

guities. When the sceptics and Arcesilas and Carneades pursued ambiguities, they fell

away from Plato."'I Just before this, in chapter XXVIII, Ficino mentions Pyrrho of Elis:

128. Recorded in detail in the 'Indice degli autori citati negli scritti del Ficino', compiled by P. O. Kristeller, II pensiero filosofico di Marsilio Ficino, revd edn, Florence 1988, p. 489. For an interesting analysis of

Ficino's attitude to scepticism see M. A. Granada,

'Apologetique platonicienne et apologetique sceptique: Ficin, Savonarole,Jean-FranCois Pic de la Mirandole', in Le scepticisme au XVIe et aui XVIie siecle, ed. P.-F. Moreau,

Paris 2001, pp. 11-47 (15-19).

129. 'Sunt autern he discipline Academicorum

veterum, Peripateticorum, Stoicorum, Epicureorum. Academicorum autem veterum princeps extitit Plato Atheniensis': the tract is published in P. O. Kristeller,

Supplementum ficinianum, 2 vols, Florence 1937, II, pp. 7-11 (7); see also Marsilio Ficino (as in n. 127), pp. 22-23, no. 19 (and also pp. 11-12, no. io, where a connection with his reading of Diogenes Laertius is

assumed); and also G. Santinello, 'Note sulla storio-

grafia filosofica nell'etia moderna', in La storiografiafilo- sofica e la sua storia, Padua 1982, pp. i03-27 (1o07-12).

130. Marsilio Ficino, Opera ... omnia, 2 vols, Basle

1576; facs. repr. Turin 1983, I, p. 986: 'Tria vero sunt

... apud Philosophos disserendi genera. Unum quo certam aliquam quaestionis partem disputando defen-

dimus, atque approbamus, ut Peripatetici, ac Stoici effecere. Alterum quo quaestione proposita diversas ad

id, quod quaeritur sententias, rationesque referimus, ut

propositis pluribus, invicemque collatis, quid ex iis

probabilius, verisimiliusque appareat eligamus, quo Academici, ac Socratici pene omnes utebantur. Tertium vero genus Scepticorum maxime proprium est, qui

curn omnia indifferentia esse putent, nec certum, aut

probabile habebant quicquam quod sequantur, ea

enim, quae naturae ordine seiuncta distinctaque sunt

confundunt atque permiscent ab excellentioribus,

quibusque Philosophis reiiciuntur. Ego igitur ex iis omnibus Academicorum, Socraticorumque in disse- rendo rationern hoc tempore proponendam inihi decrevi.' Again, in chapter XVI entitled 'Quid de voluptate Sceptici senserint, quid Dionysius, quid Theodorus': 'Piro [sic] quoque Eliensis, atque omnes, qui ab eo fluxerunt Philosophi Sceptici nominati, hoc uno cum

Aristippo Cyrenaicorum principe consenserunt, quod nihil ex omnibus rebus natura iucundum, aut asperum esse queat, voluptatemque, ac doloremque aut ab hominum opinione, aut usu fieri, aut certa nostrorum

corporum affectione, nam quod modo iucundum

appareat, cras contra molestum futurum, quodque alteri

asperum, alteri aliter affecto suavissimum, quia verum eiusmodi varietatem recipit, negat suapte natura quale videatur existere, verum pro diversitate hominum, quae sensibus admonentur, varia quoque videri putant' (ibid., pp. 1008-09).

131. Marsilio Ficino, The Philebus Comnmentary, ed. and tr. M. J. B. Allen, Berkeley, Los Angeles and London

1975, P. 280 and Latin text on p. 281.



258 GIAN MARIO CAO

'Protagoras, Pyrrho and Herillus consider nothing is more one thing in itself than another, but there are innumerable aspects to things according to each man's judgement. So they never come upon the one, but claim eventually that the one exists simply as a term in

everyday conversation.'132

Chapter VII of Book xI of Ficino's Platonic Theology (1470-74),'13 entitled 'Objection of the sceptics and reply: that something certain can be known','34 has been compared to the Contra Academicos and other writings by St Augustine, as well as to Cicero's Tusculan

Disputations, 15 while the allusion to Pythagoras and Empedocles contained in a passage from chapter XIV of Book v is said to derive from Sextus Empiricus, among others.'36 But neither this passage nor another one from chapter IV of Book xvii, where the sceptics are once more named, appear to come from Sextus.'137 The sceptics are referred to again in a letter of January 1478 to Cardinal Raffaele Riario: 'the sceptic philosophers and many others falsely slander me'.138

Lastly, when mentioning a statement regarding the Pythagoreans in his commen-

tary of Plotinus's Enneads (1486-90), Ficino refers directly to Sextus Empiricus: 'The

Pythagoreans, according to Sextus the Pyrrhonian, say that this [i.e. common force] is a spirit infused into all things, in the manner of a soul, which unites humans to other animate beings, after they have been united to divine beings from a different source.'139 This citation is probably taken from a passage in the first book of Sextus's Against the

Physicists (Against the Professors, IX. 1 27) 140

132. Ibid., p. 262 and Latin text on p. 263.

133. Ficino, however, continued to revise the text until it was printed in November 1482: see Marsilio Fi~ino (as in n. 127), pp. 111-13, nos 87-88.

134. Marsilio Ficino, Theologie Platonicienne de l'immor-

talite des imes, ed. R. Marcel, 3 vols, Paris 1964-70, II,

pp. 145-46: 'Obiectio scepticorum et responsio. Quod

aliquod certum sciatur.'

135. See the critical apparatus, ibid.

136. Ibid., I, p. 213: 'Sed meminisse oportet eos

qui animas nostras inferiores esse sempiternas existi-

mant, etiam plantarum animas, secutos esse Aegyptios

Pythagoreosque, existimantes animas humanas esse

mentes delapsas in rationem atque sensum, animas

vero brutorum esse nostras in sensum generationem-

que omnino prolapsas, plantarurn denique animas esse

easdem lapsas omnino in generandi potentiam, posse-

que omnes iterum ad superiora converti. Quod quidem

Empedocles, Timaeus Locrus, Origenes, Plotinus

significasse videntur.' In the critical apparatus, Marcel

compares the passage to a Pythagorean testimony trans-

mitted by Sextus (Against the Professors, Ix. 127), which,

however, is certainly the source of another text by Ficino concerning Pythagoras found in his commentary on Plotinus's Enneads: see nn. 139, 140 below.

137. Ibid., II, pp. 165-66: 'Academiae vero quatuor iis antiquiores in hoc ab iis discrepabant inter se

congruentes, quod scripta Platonis omnino poetica esse

arbitrabantur. Sed inter se differebant, quod Carneades

Platonem et putavisse et tractavisse omnia opinabatur

Scepticorum more velut ambigua, neque ullum in rebus

ullis habuisse delectum ...'

138. Ficino, Opera (as in n. 130), 1, p. 796: 'falso me

Philosophi Sceptici aliique permulti calumniantur ...

See also The Letters of Marsilio Ficino, iv, London 1988,

pp. 37-42.

139. Ficino, Opera (as in n. 13Vo), , Ip. 1736: 'Hunc

[scil. communem vim] Pythagorici, referente Sexto

Pyrronio, esse dicunt spiriturn in modum animae rebus

cunctis infusumn, qui homines conciliet caeteris ani-

mantibus, conciliatos aliunde numinibus.' Note that in

this passage Sextus is referred to as 'Sextus Pyrronius' as

in the note on fol. IF of the Vespucci codex quoted earlier (see n. 127 above).

140. 'oi 0Vy oOV ntEpi tovy Hua)Oy6pa v K ai to6v 'ERnE6SoeKXa Kati zo

,otnor6v trv 'TIzuhXv irXfOo; <pacti Ril

RO6vov TIiV ipo'rp6g &XlkXi)g ui iapo; Tobg EOobg E'val nyva Kotvoviav, uXXu x iai rpo6T t& &Xoya t6v 5jyv. v

y&p bilrapyXEt Irv~pbat o6 6t& rtavT6og ob K6c~Lpo) 68t1i•ov WUXfg Tp6tnov, t,6 ai ~iKvo{bv ipa& rrp6og xciEva' (MS Laur.

Plut. 85.11, fol. 262'). See Granada (as in n. 128), pp.

18-19, who suggests that Ficino's knowledge of Sextus

came through Poliziano.




It is clear from these passages that such value as Sextus Empiricus had for Ficino lay in the doxographical information he provided. The radical nature of Sextus's arguments does not seem to have aroused any particular interest or curiosity in him, nor did he feel

that they required confutation. Given his indifference towards scepticism as a philosophical position, Ficino merits no further attention here.

Of greater interest are the cross-reference marks which appear in the margins of

some folios in Vespucci's manuscript. These marks were formerly attributed to Poliziano.141

Recently, however, they have been connected to those employed by Giovanni Pico della

Mirandola in other manuscripts.142 In contrast to the situation with Ficino, the paleo-

graphical evidence in this case confirms the assumption that Pico made a careful study of

Sextus Empiricus's Against the Astrologers (Against the Professors, v) as part of his preparation for writing the Disputationes adversus astrologiam divinatricem ('Disputations against Divina-

tory Astrology').143 Yet the parallel passages which have been identified do not appear to be conclusive,

except for a short section of the Disputationes, which, however, came to Pico via Angelo Poliziano.144 This passage (Against the Professors, v.2) concerns the different names of

astrology and of astrologers according to the Chaldeans. It was first recorded in Poliziano's

notebooks and later taken up again by him in his Panepistemon (where, however, genethlio-

logia, 'casting nativities', replaces the mistaken reading yevEahoyia, 'genealogy', found in

his manuscript of Sextus):145

... 6 r tcp6g yEvEakoya(xv, iyv cqtvoT•potg oKocYtoovtsg ov6tacytv oi Kaxka&ot

mOrlrtoitog K?ai &cy'pox6yoiug cyqpcxg aoxrobg MvayopEacountv ... (MS Laur. Plut. 85.1 1, fol. 144v)

(It is rather genealogy, which the Chaldeans adorn with more high-sounding titles, describing themselves as 'mathematicians' and 'astrologers' ...) '46

Pico seems to be referring to the same passage in the following text:

... those things which [astrology] predicts will happen in the future on the basis of the stars are fraudulent lies told in order to gain money; they are prohibited by civil and pontifical laws, kept in place by mankind's excessive eagerness for knowledge, ridiculed by philosophers, practised by charlatans and held in suspicion by all the best and wisest men. In olden times those who profess it were called Chaldeans, from the national origin, or genethliaci ['nativity-casters'], from the profession itself. Recently, in order to gain respectability through a shared name, they call themselves mathematicians and astrologers.'47

141. Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n.

49), P. 353. 142. Gentile, 'Pico' (as in n. 41), p. 96, compares

these marks to those found in MS Laur. Plut. 5.9, which

includes the Greek text of the four major Prophets. 143. S. Gentile, 'Pico filologo', in Giovanni Pico della

Mirandola (convegno internazionale, Mirandola 1994), ed. G. C. Garfagnini, 2 vols, Florence 1997, II, pp. 465- 90 (479 n. 47), draws attention to 'alcuni "paralleli" tra

l'opuscolo di Sesto Empirico e le Disputationes del Pico'.

144. On the close collaboration between Pico and Poliziano see A. Grafton, Commerce with the Classics:

Ancient Books and Renaissance Readers, Ann Arbor 1997, chap. 3, esp. pp. 126-31.

145. See below, Appendix II, ? I; also the critical

apparatus of Sextus Empiricus, Contro gli astrologi, ed. E.

Spinelli, Naples 2000, p. 54. 146. Sextus Empiricus (Loeb edn), ed. and tr. R. G.

Bury, 4 vols, Cambridge, Mass. and London 1933-49,

IV, p. 323 (with slight modification).

147. Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Disputationes adversus astrologiam divinatricem, ed. E. Garin, 2 vols, Florence 1946-52, I, p. 40:

' ... quae [scil. astrologia] de sideribus eventura pronunciat, fiaudem mercenariae



260 GIAN MARIO CAO

It is also worth pointing out that in his Quaestio de falsitate astrologiae (151o), Giovanni

Pico's nephew, Gianfrancesco, who edited the Disputationes for publication in 1496, two

years after his uncle's death, implies that his own use of Sextus for the refutation of

astrology is an innovation.148 Furthermore, although the 'Tractatus contra arithmeticos et contra astrologos' listed in the inventory of Pico's books'49 can be identified in principle with Sextus's Against the Arithmeticians and Against the Astrologers (Against the Professors, Iv-v), there is nothing in the manuscript tradition which corresponds to such a codex.151)

mendacitatis, legibus interdictam et civilibus et

pontificiis, humana curiositate retentam, irrisam a

philosophis, cultam a circolatoribus, optimo cuique

prudentissimoque suspectam, cuius olim professores

gentilicio vocabulo Chaldei, vel ab ipsa professione

genethliaci dicebantur; mox, ut nominis communione honestarentur, mathernaticos se dixerunt et astro-

logos ...' As for the other putative similarities pointed out by Gentile, 'Pico filologo' (as in n. 143), p. 479 n. 47, while it is true that the themes are the same, the sequence of arguments is different; moreover, the

examples are taken up only in part (and sometimes

superficially) and, once again, in a different order. In

the first passage Pico discusses the astrologers' claim

to determine everyone's 'hora fatalis'. He maintains

that if 'non igitur de hora qua fieri, sed qua esse

incipiunt res, fata rerum rationabiliter auspicabimur'. Then regarding man, 'multa et inextricabilis necessario

ambiguitas nascitur. Quid enim potius statuernmus, cumr tanta multa eius principia eaque omnia digna prin-

cipatu conspiciantur?' The astrologers' conclusion that

'ex hora nativitatis nascentis hominis fata dependeant' is arbitrary, as is the fact that they place birth before

conception ('genituram conceptui et fetus animationi') - anyway 'momentum quo quis nascitur exploratum habere astrologus non potest' - and this despite the

'hora extimata sive suspecta' devised to compensate for

the imprecision of the observer and of the instruments

of observation (Pico, Disputationes, Ii, pp. 154-60, 288-

92). Sextus examines analogous positions, attributing them to the Chaldeans, whose claim to have discovered

the zodiacal sign is demolished by the impossibility of establishing the exact time of birth - whether in

terms of the ejaculation of semen, of fertilisation or

of childbirth, of having reliable indicators of time

('6)po(~6xntov') or of observing precisely the rise of the

zodiacal sign-given the indiscernible nature of the

different parts (even using the system of the hydriae), the variation in places of observation and in the acuity of the observers, and finally the inevitable partiality of

every observation from whatever viewpoint (Against the

Professors, v.5o-87). In the second passage Pico asks the

rhetorical question: 'ex hac autem caelestium motuum incertitudine quis non totam labefactari videt divinatricem astrologiam? quarn si labatur uno gradu, cadere

tota veritate sit necessarium' (Pico, Disputationes, 11, p.

332); Sextus diagnoses the difficulty, or rather the

impossibility, of distinguishing the parts of the zodiac from each other, since they are not continuous bodies but composed of separate stars whose precise distances

escape the terrestrial observer (Against the Professor:s, v.74, 78-79). In the third passage Pico objects that 'solent autem astrologi, sicut omnis ars prodigiosa, experientiae plurinmum titulo se defendere', but that 'fieri tamen experimentia super caelestibus libro prae- senti nulla posse monstrabimus', noting above all that

'eadem vero constellatio aut numquam, ut probant doctiores, aut quod veteres crediderunt, non nisi post multa milia saeculorum eadem est reditura'; and he observes, secondly, that 'particularis eadem constellatio in alio toto aliud operatur' (Pico, Disputationles, II, pp. 456-60); Sextus insists only on the fact that the

necessity of repeating the operation clashes with the

impossibility of finding the same configuration, except after a long interval of time - that is, according to the recurrence of the 'great year', every 9,177 years (Against the Professors, v. lo3-o5).

In the fourth passage Pico

generally attacks the Chaldeans, who 'ad stellas libenter omnia referebant', believing that 'corpora inferiora moveri ab superioribus' and that 'quaecumque acci- derent hominibus, sive corporis sortes, sive animi, sive fortunae, de caelestibus causis crederent provenire' (Pico, Disputationes, II, p. 50oo); Sextus is more precise in

stating that according to the Chaldeans themselves there is a relation between the seven major planets - Sun, Moon, Mars, Jupiter, Venus, Saturn and Mercury - and the efficient causes of every event in life (Against the

Professors, v.5). 148. W. Cavini, 'Un inedito di Giovan Francesco Pico

della Mirandola: la Quaestio defalsitate astrologiae', Rinasci- mento, xIII, 1973, PP. 133-71 (148: 'Initia quoque non hominum modo, sed regnorum et urbium, ex quibus divinare volunt, aut nullo pacto noscunt aut si quicquam de eis sciunt est rarissimum, quoniamn super hoc

magna astrologorum dissensio, de qua agit in nono adversus astrologos loannes Picus patruus. Illud tamen afferam quod apud Sextum Ephecticum legitur astro-

logos confutantem, cum parilem horoscopum geniturae moliuntur dicere.').

149. See the inventory transmitted by BAV MS Vat. lat. 3436, in P. Kibre, The Library of Pico della Mirandola, New York 1936, pp. 210 (no. 673), 258 (no. 1044); a




When we turn to Angelo Poliziano, however, there is no doubt that he made use of the Sextus manuscript belonging to Vespucci. Evidence for this comes from the extensive

excerpts from the Suda, Macrobius, Sextus Empiricus and other classical writers which he

brought together in various notebooks, presumed to have been eighteen in number, some of which are preserved in BSB MS lat. 798 and in Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale

(hereafter BNCF) MS Magl. VIII. 1420. This activity was begun in his youth and revived

just before the courses he gave at the Florentine studio at the beginning of the 1490s.151

A detailed paleographical analysis has revealed an apparent kinship between the texts

copied during the first phase of this work (the Suda and Macrobius, but not Sextus) and the older autographs written by Poliziano before 1480.152 Moreover, the presence of similar excerpts from Sextus in a fascicle of BnF MS graec. 3o69 - copied in 1488, according to indications left by Poliziano himself'53 - enables us to give a precise date to the Sextus

transcriptions found in the Munich and Florence notebooks, since they were presumably made at the same time.154

transcription of the copy of the catalogue preserved in the Archivio di Stato of Modena (Archivio segreto estense, Cancelleria, raccolte e miscellanee, Archivio per materie, Letterati, busta 55) was published by F. Calori Cesis, 'Giovanni Pico della Mirandola detto La Fenice

degli ingegni', Memorie storiche della citta e dell'antico ducato della Mirandola, xI, 1897, PP- 32-76 (33: 'Tractatus contra arithmeticos et contra astrologos manuscriptus in papiro sine numero'); but see also the criticism of this edition by E. Garin, Giovanni Pico della Mirandola: vita e dottrina, Florence 1937, pp. i06-16.

15o. For doubts regarding the identification of this

entry in the inventory with the works of Sextus see P.

O. Kristeller, 'Giovanni Pico della Mirandola and His

Sources', in L'opera e il pensiero di Giovanni Pico della Mirandola nella storia dell'umanesimo (convegno inter-

nazionale, Mirandola 1963), 2 vols, Florence 1965, I,

PP. 35-133 (55); the identification was, however, treated as certain by Schmitt, 'An Unstudied ... Trans- lation' (as in n. 34), PP. 246, 258; and more recently by P. Zambelli, L'apprendista stregone: astrologia, cabala e arte lulliana in Pico della Mirandola e seguaci, Venice

1995, P. 14. On the independent circulation of Ipo6g

6d•oYpoX6,youg on its own (MSS Laur. Plut. 9.32 and Laur.

Plut. 59-17) see A. Nebe, 'Textkritisches zu dem Buch des Sextus Empiricus nppo6g tcvpoX6youg', Rheinisches Museum fiir Philologgie, L.xxi, 1916, pp. 102-16; there is no mention of this in Sextus Empiricus, Contro gli astro-

logi (as in n. 145).

151. The reconstruction of the complex events

surrounding Poliziano's notebooks, starting from the identification of BSB MS Lat. 798 (though BNCF MS

Magl. VIII 1420o was described by I. MaYer, Les manuscrits

d'Ange Politien, Geneva 1965, PP- 117-23), was carried out by Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), and taken up again in Cesarini Martinelli and Daneloni

(as in n. 1o10), pp. 329-30, 337-39-

152. See Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), P- 338; the reference comes from autograph letters dating from the period 1475-79 and recorded

by A. Perosa, 'Due lettere inedite del Poliziano', Italia

medioevale e umanistica, x, 1967, pp. 345-74 (now in

idem, Studi difilologia umanistica, ed. P. Viti, 3 vols, Rome

2000, I, pp. 155-84)- 153. See Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in

n. 49), P- 338; the date is obtained from the intestation

(fol. 181r) '1488 die 22 septembris hora diei 24', and

from the colophon (fol. 193r) 'in fine die 8 octobris hora circiter 18'. A description of the codex is found in Mostra del Poliziano nella Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana.

Catalogo, [ed. A. Perosa], Florence 1955, PP. 84-85, no.

84; Maler (as in n. 151), pp. 227-32; see also L. Cesarini

Martinelli, 'Grammatiche greche e bizantine nello scrittoio del Poliziano', in Dotti bizantini e libri greci nell'Italia del secolo XV (atti del convegno internazionale, Trento

1990o), ed. M. Cortesi and E. V. Maltese, Naples 1992,

pp. 257-90 (258). 154. As S. Rizzo, 'I1 latino del Poliziano', in Angelo Poli-

ziano poeta scrittorefilologo (atti del convegno internazio-

nale, Montepulciano 1994), ed. V. Fera and M. Martelli, Florence 1998, pp. 83-125 (96-97), has pointed out, in the 'Praefatio' to the Miscellaneorum centuria prima, which can be dated to September 1489, Poliziano described future readers of the work as 'agrestes', 'delicati' and 'medii inter hos', drawing on a fragment from

Aristophanes (Poetae comici Graeci, ed. R. Kassel and C.

Austin, 111.2, Berlin and New York 1984, no. 70o6) transmitted in Sextus's Against the Grammarians (Against the

Professors, 1.228; Bekker p. 650, 11. 30-32), which he had transcribed in BSB MS Lat. 798 (fols 69r-7oV), on the basis of MS Laur. Plut. 85.11 (fol. io8v), a short time earlier.



262 GIAN MARIO CAO

As already noted, it seems probable that Poliziano used MS Laur. Plut. 85.11 in

compiling his excerpts from Sextus Empiricus. This is partly based on the fact that, in both the manuscript and Poliziano's notebooks, Against the Professors is divided into ten

books.'55 More important, however, is the correspondence between these excerpts and the text transmitted in the Laurenziana manuscript. Final confirmation is provided by two

marginal notes, undoubtedly in Poliziano's hand, which fill gaps in this codex.156 Cesarini Martinelli's reconstruction of Poliziano's notebooks has brought to light

their strongly traditional structure, modelled on the system of the liberal arts and owing much to the great medieval encyclopedias, especially that of Isidore of Seville. 57 This shows that although his compilation of excerpts from Sextus Empiricus was completed when he was a mature scholar, it was inserted into a scheme adopted at a much earlier

stage of his intellectual career. In order to avoid modifying this youthful scheme, Poliziano took pains to collect together a number of texts which did not fit into his original plans and place them in a separate notebook (which later became part of BnF MS graec. 30o69).158 This unwillingness to abandon his initial project can be explained by his incli- nation towards encyclopedism, which can be seen not only in his notebooks but also in his early work 'Pro quodam adolescente in gymnasio pisano',-59 and in the praelectio to his course on the Nicomachean Ethics at the Florentine studio for the academic year 1490-91, which was published under the title Panepistemon in February 1492.160

While not overlooking recent findings concerning the astrological section of the

Panepistemon and its indebtedness to Sextus's Against the Astrologers (Against the Professors,

v),16'i I do not want to reopen the debate over the importance of this short piece1"" or the

155. See p. 251 above, n. 101.

156. The additions, identified and analysed by Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), PP.

352-53, were made in the upper left-hand margin at

fol. 18or ('tor b6 Xpto ; t v •v oinv

' aTT,•ob

tob

repetgviou' [Against the Professors, v11.2o7]) and fol. 203'v

('-Kaid Yeb8og ;ro pi ? 6xpxov x•w pil &v'tKEij•Ev6v Otvt' [ibid., vii.i.o]) respectively. In all likelihood Poliziano

obtained these texts from Filelfo's codexfernestratus, which

formed a part of the Medici private collection from

1482 and the text of which corresponds exactly to that

transcribed by Poliziano (fols 137r and 167r). 1 7. Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n.

49), PP- 348-49.

158. Ibid., p. 354.

159. This work, published by I. Maier, 'Un inedit de

Politien: la classification des Arts', Bibliotheque d'humanisme et Renaissance, xxii, 196o, pp. 338-55 (343-44), and entitled 'Angelus Politianus pro quodam adolescente in ginnasio Pisano de laudibus artium liberalium

verba', reveals his youthful interest in philosophy- an

interest which is usually assigned to his mature years and credited to the influence of Giovanni Pico. For

further evidence of the young Poliziano's engagement with philosophy see J. Kraye, 'L'interpretation platonicienne de l'Enchiridion d'Epictete proposee par Politien:

Philologie et philosophie dans la Florence du XVc

siecle, I la fin des annees 70', in Penser entre les lignes:

Philologie et philosophie au Quattrocento, ed. F. Mariani-

Zini, Villeneuve d'Ascq 2001oo, pp. 161-77.

16o. Angelo Poliziano, Praelectio cui titulus Panepis- temon, Florence 1492; for the date of publication see S. Meltzoff, Botticelli, Siginorelli and Savonarola, Florence

1987, p. 27 -. 43. See also Branca (as in n. 41), pp.

73-90 (86 n. 22); A. F. Verde, Lo Studio Fiorentino, 1473-

1503: ricerche e documenti, IV.2, Florence 1985, pp.

945-47- 161. See J.-M. Mandosio, 'Filosofia, arti e scienze:

I'enciclopedismo di Angelo Poliziano', in Poliziano nel

suo tempo (atti del convegno internazionale, Chianciano,

Montepulciano 1994), ed. L. Secchi Tarugi, Florence

1996, pp. 135-64 (150o), and Gentile, 'Pico filologo' (as in n. 143), p. 478 n. 46, where it is suggested that Poliziano drew on Sextus's Against the Astrologers

(Against the Professors, v.2, 5-7, 12, 21-22, 32, 50-53) in

his description of the zodiac in the Panepistemon. For a

comparison between these passages from Poliziano's

Panepistemon and the corresponding texts from Sextus

see Appendix II below.

162. See C. Dionisotti, GCi umanisti e il volgare fra

Quattro e Cinquecento, Florence 1.968, pp. 42-44, for a

favourable assessment of the Panepistemon, revising the




significance of Poliziano's borrowings from Sextus in the various sections of this work.163

I would like to suggest, however, that Poliziano's faithfulness to his youthful encyclopedic intentions has some bearing on the emphasis which he himself (and, later on, other interpreters) gave to his supposed conversion to philosophy in the 1490s.164 It is not my aim to simplify his intellectual development in terms of a schematic opposition between continuity and discontinuity.165 I merely want to highlight Poliziano's aware- ness that the kind of encyclopedic project he had in mind must take into account the Western philosophical tradition. Not that this means he should now be ranked among the philosophers. As Carlo Dionisotti has rightly pointed out: 'the only encyclopedia which Poliziano ever conceived of was one based on the philological discussion of Greek and Latin sources'.166

In relation to Sextus, it is true to say that the fifteenth century witnessed a revival not of sceptical philosophy but rather of sceptical texts. This holds for Poliziano as well. No one since antiquity could claim as wide and as accurate a knowledge of Sextus's works. Yet Poliziano's humanistic interpretation of Sextus was limited because he ignored the

polemical and revolutionary importance of sceptical arguments. This can be seen in the

way that his excerpts from Sextus's writings break off whenever the descriptive and doxo-

graphical material gives way to more strictly confutative sections.17 We cannot, therefore, attribute philosophical scepticism to Poliziano, even in a concealed form. Only in an

extremely weak sense could he be called a sceptic; but this would be an inaccurate use

of the term and one which, because of its naivety, it would be highly inappropriate to

severe judgement of V. Cian, Contributo alla Storia

dell'enciclopedismo nell'eti della Rinascita, Lucca 1915, pp.

13-14. See also E. Garin, Medioevo e Rinascimento, 2nd

edn, Bari 1973, P- 245; Maier, 'Un inedit (as in n. 159),

pp. 338-42; C. Dionisotti, 'Leonardo uomo di lettere',

Italia medioevale e umanistica, v, 1962, pp. 1883-2 16

(2o6); I. Maier, Ange Politien. La formation d'un poete humaniste (1469-148o), Geneva 1966, p. 46; V. Juien, 'Politien et la

th)orie des arts figurativs', Bibliotheque

d'humanisme et Renaissance, xxvII, 1975, PP. 131-40; A.

Serrai, Le classificazioni. Idee e materiali per una teoria e

per una storia, Florence 1977, pp. 48-5o0; idem, Storia

della bibliografia, I, Bibliografia e Cabala. Le Enciclopedie

rinascimentali (I), Rome 1982, pp. 171-75; Mandosio

(as in n. 161), pp. 143-64; and M. Pereira, 'L'uso del

"Panepistemnon" del Poliziano nella Isagoge in rhetoricam

pseudolulliana', Physis, xvi, 1974, PP. 223-33.

163. Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n.

49), P 356, suggested that the writings of Sextus Empi- ricus were one of the main sources for the Panepistemon; this suggestion was repeated by Serrai, Storia (as in n.

162), p. 172. A different view, however, has been put forward regarding the musical section by F. Brancacci,

'L'enciclopedia umanistica e la musica. II Panepistemon di Angelo Poliziano', Rinascimento, xxxiII, 1993, PP. 93- lo9 (106-o7), and eadem, 'Ie fonti musicali classiche

nell'opera di Poliziano', Interpres, xii, , 1992, pp. 135-49;

and regarding the section on the arts of the trivium

by A. Wesseling, 'Poliziano and Ancient Rhetoric:

Theory and Practice', Rinascimento, xxx, 199o, pp. 191- 204 (194). There is also a reference to the presence of Sextus in the Panepistemon in A. Bettinzoli, Daedaleum Iter: studi sulla poesia e la poetica di Angelo Poliziano, Florence 1995, p. 137 n. 174-

164. Branca (as in n. 41), pp. 248-5 1, who recalls the

acknowledgment in the Coronis of the Miscellaneorum

centuria prima of the influence exerted on Poliziano by Giovanni Pico: 'is me instituit ad philosophiam, non ut antea somniculosis, sed vegetis, vigilantibusque oculis

explorandam ...' (Poliziano, Opera omnia, ed. I. Maier,

I, Scripta in editione basilensi anno MDLIII collecta, Turin

1971, p. 310).

165. Regarding the '... programma enciclopedico che, con intensiti sempre maggiore, torna ciclica- mente ad affacciarsi dalle carte del Poliziano' see, e.g., A. Bettinzoli, 'Rassegna di studi sul Poliziano (1972-

1986)', Letterel taliane, xxix, 1987, pp. 53-125 (77). 166. Dionisotti, 'Leonardo' (as in n. 162), p. 20(6: 'i

Poliziano non concepi mai altra enciclopedia che

quella fondata sulla discussione filologica delle fonti

greche e latine'.

167. See Cesarini Martinelli, 'Sesto Empirico' (as in n. 49), P. 354-



264 GIAN MARIO CAO

apply to the systematic and punctilious reader of Sextus revealed by his notebooks. This distinction is not the same as Poliziano's famous claim to be a grammaticus rather than a philosophus.168 The word grammaticus implies a personality genuinely open to all the intellectual experiences of antiquity. Poliziano was not, however, the type to wander with reckless abandon along the dangerous path of sceptical arguments, which undermine

every belief and result in the suspension of judgement. His encyclopedic inclinations are evidence, if anything, of a contrary impulse: the need to set things down, and to do so

systematically. It was not the cautious Poliziano but rather Fra Girolamo Savonarola, more accus-

tomed to living close to the edge, who seems to have approached the vertiginous precipice of philosophical scepticism - at least according to the biography of him by Gianfrancesco Pico:

... shortly before his death [Savonarola], hearing that certain Greek writings of the philosopher Sextus had been preserved, in which all learning discovered by human means was refuted, ordered that they should be translated from Greek into Latin, since he loathed the ignorance of many people who boasted that they knew something. He delegated this task to Giorgio Antonio Vespucci, an

expert in both languages from his Order; he also wanted Zanobi Acciaiuoli, who belonged to the same Order and had command of both languages, to take on this work. And they would have fuilfilled his hopes had sudden death not seized him."''1

This passage, which has featured prominently in the scholarly literature, is a significant testimony, whether one chooses to accept the account - together with the claim that Savo-

narola wanted to co-opt Sextus for his polemic against pagan learning (doctrina gentium) - or instead decides to challenge its authority. Something of that authority is no doubt

owed to what Gianfrancesco himself undertook in his Examen vanitatis doctrinae gentium ('An Examination of the Vanity of Pagan Learning'), published in 1520, a work which was

guaranteed a posthumous investiture by Savonarola's plan to translate the writings of Sextus Empiricus.1'7

Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa

168. He makes this claim in the Lamia, his inaugural lecture for the course he gave on Aristotelian logic in the 1492-93 academic year: see Angelo Poliziano, Lamia. Praelectio in Priora Aristotelis Analytica, ed. A.

Wesseling, Leiden 1986, esp. the concluding section

where, as the editor suggests, he may be drawing on

Sextus's Against the Grammarians (p. 16, 11. 30-32: 'Grammaticorum enim sunt hae partes, ut omne scrip- torum genus, poetas, historicos, oratores, philosophos, medicos, iureconsultos excutiant atque enarrent'; cf.

Against the Professors, 1.59, 'napoc Ka' oi Xapi~vaeg it a)•Vciv nEpt~ nohxcAv inpayCta ~to xvroo o•yypacqpOv,

"toito itLv io'roptK(Gv TO 'to 68P p11 roptxpvK V Kat ij61r ptpooo'6pcv' [MS Laur. Plut. 85.11, fol. 92r]).

16q. Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola, Vita

Hieronymi Savonarolae, ed. E. Schisto, Florence 1999, pp. 112-13, 11. 35-43: '... quippe qui audiens Graeca

quaepiam Sexti Philosophi monumenta asservari, in

quibus universae doctrinae humanitus inventae confu-

tatae essent, ea e graeco transferri in latinum, paululum

antequam moreretur, mandaverat, perosus multorum,

qui se scire iactabant, ignorantiam. Idque ipsum muneris Georgio Antonio Vespuccio utriusque linguae

gnaro, qui ex eius erat sodalitate, delegarat, volebatque eidem operi Zenobium etiam Acciaiolum, utriusque linguae compotem eiusdemque virum sodalitatis, in-

cumbere, fecissentque votis satis ni mors ipsum violenta

rapuisset' ('confutatae' is the editor's conjecture). The

first half of the translation is adapted from D. P. Walker, The Ancient Theology, London 1972, p. 59.

170. See Cavini, 'Appunti' (as in n. 1 lo), pp. 19-20, who suggests that Gianfrancesco Pico had read Sextus's

writings in the Vespucci manuscript held in the library of San Marco. Cavini identifies the first signs of this




Appendix I

This Appendix presents selections from the three books of Francesco Filelfo's Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, based on BNCF MS II.I.70o.7' Facing the Latin text are the relevant passages from Against the Ethicists (Against the Professors, xi) by Sextus Empiricus, as they appear in the Greek manuscript which belonged to Filelfo: MS Laur. Plut. 85.19. The one exception is ? VI, which was inspired by De divisione liber of Boethius.

The transcriptions are faithful reproductions of the original texts. I have, however: followed modern usage regarding punctuation and capitalisation; restored the iota subscript; and inserted inverted commas for examples (but not for citations). While my transcription of the Greek passages does not constitute a philological contribution to the establishment of the text of Sextus, I have indicated in square brackets, followed by 'ED', the variant readings accepted in Hermann Mutschmann's Teubner edition (as in n. 28) which differ from those found in Filelfo's manu-

script. I have not provided a critical apparatus, nor have I specified in each case whether textual differences depend on the testimony of other manuscripts, on necessary corrections (additions or

deletions), on the conjectures of Mutschmann or previous editors. The Greek text also contains, in round brackets, brief bibliographical references,172 identifying testimonies transmitted by Sextus.

? I.A-E: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, book I

[PALLAS]: Quo fit ut eadem saepe res apud alios laudi, apud alios vituperationi danda

existimetur, apud alios in precio habeatur, contemnatur apud alios. Aethiopes pulcher- rimam mulierem putant, quae maxime et sima et nigra sit. Persae vero quae sit tum naso maxime adunco tum etiam albissima. Alii vero neutram probant, sed eam omnibus forma

praestare dicunt, quae media quaedam sit et figura et colore. Zeno autem ille citieus

quem in stoica disciplina unice admirantur, in disputationibus de instituendis pueris nihil differre ait vel uti puerorum amoribus vel

g I.A: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors,

xl.43 (Bekker p. 554, 11. 22-28)

'ai 8v zp6nov T ouTcp vove;g, ei FzTot, nept Tou

c-vci twva o cyawtxTtKi1v e~64oppiav trpi tfig

et)6ppo c( a a•cig ycvatcog o•t;7ouvctKotv,

Tob t\v Attionog ; iTv ottoldrlv cat

gelvzozUTzrlv [thcXvzT&Trlv ED.] JtpolpivovTog, toi 6b FI\pooTu TF- v ypuano lOrT& TT\a\ AXKoTuyTlv

no6EXoou, t ivo, &ou 6i v tlTlv - Iv cCxta& m~ o6v

Xapacc,,Tip Koav

t K•a•o TCCV. Xp.aV [acr3v iaxxiova Xiyovto; ... [fol. 323']

reading in a brief text written in 1510, the Quaestio de

falsitate astrologiae, in which Pico explicitly cites Sextus

Empiricus in three different passages ('Un inedito', as in

n. 148, pp. 140, 147-48). This issue was recently raised

again in M. di Loreto, 'La fortuna di Sesto Empirico tra

Cinque e Seicento', Elenchos, xvI, 1995, PP- 331-74

(334-37). Note, finally, the innovative contribution of

S. Ioli, 'Sextus Latinus: Sesto Empirico nelle traduzioni latine moderne', Dianoia. Annali di Storia della Filosofia. Dipartimento di Filosofia, Universiti di Bologna, iv, 1999,

PP. 57-97. 171. On the manuscript see Cao, 'Tra politica' (as in

n. 48), pp. 100-02 n. 2.

172. I have used the following abbreviations, preceded by the number of the fragment: Isnardi Parente = Senocrate and Ermodoro, Frammenti, ed. M. Isnardi Parente, Naples 1982; Mette = H. J. Mette, 'Zwei Akademiker heute: Krantor

von Soloi und Arkesilaos von Pitane', Lustrum, xxvi,

1984, PP. 7-94; Nauck = 7Tragicorum Graecorum Frag-menta, ed. A. Nauck, 2nd edn, Leipzig 1889; SVF = Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, ed. H. von Arnim, 3 vols, Leipzig 19o3-05.



266 GIAN MARIO CAO

non uti, eodemque modo interesse nihil aut

pueris aut puellis congredi, haec enim non

diversa, sed eadem esse, et itidem decere eadem esseque decora. Ad haec quae Oedipus in fabulis cum Iocasta matre perpetrasse dicitur, nullam afferre turpitudinem probare argumentatur. At haec nos non turpia et foeda modo, sed scelerata et impia non iniuria censemus. POGGIUS: At non omnes Pallas sententiam tuam istam admittant. PALLAS: Non hic Poggi vel de Cosmo et Medicibus quibus omne vetitum licet, vel de bambalione quopiam, cui nihil sanctum

est, habetur sermo, sed de viro et severo et

pudico. Longeque melius et gravius et illus- trius christianos philosophatos puto, quam vel Zenonem vel reliquam omnem illam

antiquitatem, quae veri dei legem praecepta- que ignorabat. Quid enim Chrysippo stultius,

qui in libro de iusticia ita scripserit: 'Quod si membrorum pars aliqua abscidatur, quae ad alimentum usui sit, neque ea defodienda est,

neque aliter iacienda, sed esu absumenda

potius, quo pars altera in nobis fiat'. Hoc illi

turpe non videbatur, at nobis immanitatis

plenum. Aitque idem Chrysippus in libro de officio de parentibus sepelliendis loquens ita ad verbum: 'Cum autem parentes diem obierint, sepulturis utendum est iis, quae maxime simplices sint, quasi corpus sicuti

unguis aut capilli nihil nostra intersit nec curiosiore nobis diligentia huiusmodi in rebus opus sit. Quare etiam si carnes fuerint ad alendum utiles, iis utentur quemadmodum propriis partibus. Sin autem inutiles, aut iis defossis monumentum imponent, aut con- crematis cinerem dimittent, aut aeminus

proiectis non magis eas curabunt quam vel

praesegmina vel capillos'. Nec turpia Chry- sippo stoico haec prodigia nec mala vide- bantur. Apud nos vero non modo hominum sed ipsius naturae et institutis et legibus habentur inhumana, dira, tetra, horrenda.

Sed quo nostra tendit oratio? Ut intelligamus nonnihil esse natura et turpe et malum, quod apud aliquos neque turpitudini est neque malo cuipiam obnoxium. Nonnulla etiam

turpia et mala duci, quae natura non sunt.

? I.B: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, xI.19o (Bekker p. 582, 11. 20-25)

Ka gi tv rtpt gtIiv tai6xmv & ymyf;ig v t~•i 6taxptpai[g 6 dapEotd&px1g; Z?ilvv (fr. I 250 SVF) cotauOm ctva v

tie'tatv- 't"StoarpitEtv 6i

ItrlSkv altkov tr18i: Ifooov JOat8tKx i"

?til JatUtl&, grS 11 OileaF if

&ppeva-" o y7&p &Xh3a

?lrat8tOlcog if -irl

l atStKo0tg, oit 8 e01"xatl 1i &ppeatv, &Xk(x &d at I s( p TEEEt E iac ? pFiTcovTd

FoYtv'. [fol. 342r]

? I.C: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, xI. 191 (Bekker p. 582, 1. 31-p. 583, 1. 2)

yoai ye 6 - 0iv Z ivov (fr. I 256 SVF) Zt& xnpi zTig

'IoKYazrTg ;ca Oi6SiixoSog Oei i•topouelva

q(piotv, 0-Mt o 1v 6Ftvov tp~Ptat "tilv prTipa. [fol. 342v]

? I.D: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, xI.193 (Bekker p. 583, 11. 14-18)

M'yerat 8' Av 'T C •p 8Stcatooabvil ibn

Xp'toixou (fr. III 748 SVF) Taoti- 'icai iav ztiv

ItFkov & knocotfi Zt IFipoS npo; i v Tpopqilv XplolIov, .LTe:T Icawop'OettV avToT tre1T Fa

p5int-tv, vakiaietyv 6_ ab'ot, 6ngo [roo;g ~i ED.] vti6v ~

iv•'T•piv -Tcpov pipo; yivrl'at'. [fol.

342v]

? I.E: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, xI.194 (Bekker p. 583, 11. 18-30).

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

yovieOv Tma?;pfg 8t eppx6levog, Plc; qploaiv"

(fr. III 752 SVF)

'Tdxoyevotivov 6F' TCv yov'ov

taTocpo XpIxi; ov 'aTo g dt"X ox Cat( iSXg, (0g (v Tos

06lxatog;, KtOx~ep 6voog ; i pptpXOv, o0S6v 1v1og spog igga, oS'

, c-taepo6ig ai1

toumopia; pooSe06opvov fi-iv

zotaobzo ztva

[TrotaG(Tln;g tv6; ED.]. 6t Kai X1poioyMv ptiv OVT(ov t ov peCov Tpoq~pf Xpialovzat ab'ot;g, 1cacxiEtp K aX ztov i6iov eprwPv, oTov xo66; doxlonivzog i~npahke Xpi(alot a6zro, cat 'Toi napa(x 5aiotog ;(XXPiv 6 OvzTvW aUt)ov in

Katopotavztg to v9iVLa intoiaoutv [o~xaoountv ED.], ni KaWcKact1avC tzg ztiyv Ti•(ppav WpYioaoutv, if Cxaxp6tEpov ip•tVZTEg oThS*ELiav interpoiPrv

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




Et idem esse apud alios turpe ac malum, quod apud alios et honestum et bonum iudicetur. Dandam igitur operam puto, ut aut quae honesta et bona natura sunt, aut quae secus

nequaquam nos fugiant. Nam siquid in his

deliquerimus, etiam si nulla nos afficiamur

ignominia, dedecorosi sumus. At illa quae hominum duntaxat opinione talia esse iudi- cantur, contemnenda nobis omnino non sunt. Id enim et fastidiosi esset et intemperantis ingenii. Sed quorum opinio iudicium faciat, consyderandum est etiam atque etiam. Non enim quid insipientes et improbi, sed quid probi et sapientes de nobis sentiant, movere nos debet [...]. [PALLAS]: Quamobrem huiusmodi ignominia sua natura mala non est. [fols 43r-44r]

? II: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, book ii

[PALLAS]: Et quam Stoici magnum quiddam in philosophia mihi profiteri visi sunt, ii primi quid sentiant, audiendi sunt, qui sequentes communis notiones bonum utilitatem esse definiunt, aut non aliud ab utilitate. Et utilitatem quidem virtutem dicunt bonamque actionem. Non aliud ab utilitate esse volunt bonum hominem et amicum. Virtus enim

imperitantem rationis vim repraesentans quo- modo habeat, et bona actio quae operatio quaedam sit secundum virtutem manifesto

prodest. Bonus autem homo atque amicus qui et ipsi e numero bonorum sint, neque utilitas esse dicendi sunt, neque alii ab utilitate.

Idque ob huiusmodi causam. Sectatores enim Stoicorum partem dicunt neque eandem esse cum toto nec aliam a toto, veluti pes neque idem est cum toto homine. Non enim totus homo est pes, nec alius a toto. Nam toto cum

pede totus ipse homo intelligitur homo. Sic

igitur quam boni hominis et amici pars est virtus, pars autem neque eadem esse cum toto

possit nec alia a toto, dicebatur bonus homo et amicus non esse alius ab utilitate. Itaque omne bonum ea definitione compraehendi putant, sive continuo utilitas sit sive non sit ab utilitate aliud. Qua quidem ex re consequenter bonum tripliciter dicunt appellari. Nam uno

? II: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, XI.22-38 (Bekker p. 550, 1. 4-P- 553, 1. 26)

ot p~v oiv lomcotoi (fr. III 75 SVF) t6ov cotvtov 0;g gnietv gvvotcov •x6evot

6opi,•ovrat Tdya0ov

zp6xon z6 'dyaO6v oztyv 6iheta i" oy i'c~pov

cOgpelFtha;', bOpiReFtav ?I'v kE*yov7egE T'lv apeTylv 'Kai triv anout0aiav np7tpV, o( bX Vepov 6*: ce4eia;g t6v ano-uaiov &'vOpaoov Ialc t6v pikov. - lv y xp peT n( t; xov fyer ovtuov

KaOeuTTwKrnia, caX rI anou6aia npatt;, 'vtpyEtM T1 ooua K1a' xapeXpViv, avTtIKp-u cTiTV oqpi*)ta- 6

SanotouSaiog &vOpoixog ;al 6 g piko;, xn htv tz~v ayaOCOv oVTEg KaX au'oit, o01TE OTp -kEta kEXO1EFv av xupyxetv oiO' i0Epot p0eei1ag St' aiXav

zotabla'zv- Ta 7p IFtpQ, (pao Ezotlcov na6FESg,

oiie t1 & abtm 'Toi; 6kot~;w tiv o ie Rzepoia 'tCv 6"kov, olov ri lEip

obce•

c a)Ti r~

mtv TO) Xci

avOp n6O, o0 y7p 6lo; 6jvOpolo; hoxTiv XFEip,

oi••: •tpa Tob o 6o, o v y&p t~if ot X?tpi 6og; 6 avOpxogn voTiat XvvOpaoog;. nE'i oiv iai toi

oanou•o6aoiou voponou Kat Too qiov Ipog i~civ

I I apecrT1, -cx 6T a) )pr) o6)et a6"Tx [Ta"Tx' ED.] TOi;

6Xot; 5omat [&•Gtiv ED.] oi'TE FTEpa Tt6v 6'ov,

ei'prTat 6 anouoSao;g &vOpxog Iac 6 (pOtog o;

-empog c c"eOag. •aoE ndav dyaeov z'TO tp

epu-txfptEt ?(pat, Oav zUe i5 O E'4 Eag cq}ta uyX~M•vn, (x

v eE [TE ?1 ED.] I et1pov t EXetO*a.

EvOEv [EVOev KaO• ED.] KOIMT& KokZOU0tiav "ptpogi

six6vzeg dya96v xpoaayope6eo0aut, ~iaoov T6v o)tatvo i 1v y iaO ' K 6i(aV Tt v n imntpokTlv



268 GIAN MARIO CAO

modo id bonum dici ex quo aut a quo fit

utilitas, quod certe principalissimum est et virtus. Ab hac enim tanquam a fonte quopiam omnis naturaliter manat utilitas. Secundo

autem modo id per quod utilitas contingit. Sic enim non solum virtutes dicentur bona, sed etiam quae secundum virtutes actiones

proficiscuntur, siquidem per hasce utilitas

contingit. Ultimo vero modo bonum dicitur

illud, quod utilitatem afferre potest. Et haec

quidem assignatio complectebatur tum virtutes tum actiones secundum virtutes, tumrn amicos tum probos viros, tum etiam et

deum et bonos angelos (interpretor enim bonos angelos quos gentilitas nTouSa6oug; 6ai4lova; vocabat). Atqui ob eam causam aliter atque aliter tum apud Platonem et

Xenocratem tum apud Stoicos bonum nomi- natur. Nam Academici cum dicunt aliter

nominari bonum secundum speciem et aliter

secundum participationem speciei, non quid sit bonum ostendunt, sed boni significata multis modis exponere videntur, et quam invicem plurimum discrepent nec habeant

quicquam inter se commune, quemadmodum licet intueri in hac voce 'canis'. Ut enim ex hac ipsa voce prolatio quidem signifi- catur, sub quam et animal latrabile cadit et

aquatile et astrum, nihil autem huiusmodi

prolationes habent invicem communem.

Neque secunda prolatione prima continetur, nec tertia secundam complectitur, sic etiam cum dicitur bonum secundum ideam et

bonum quod est particeps ideae, expositio quidem eorum bonorum est quae signifi- cantur verum et separatorum et quibus nullum omnino huiusmodi bonum contineatur. Et hi

quidem hoc pacto de bono locuti sunt de

quorum celebri subtilique sententia quod meum iudicium sit non multopost ut spero disseram. Nam neque Stoicis neque ipsi peripateticorum principi Aristoteli maximo in

philosophia et gravissimo viro in iis assentior,

quae contra huiusmodi bonum subtiliter

magis quam vere disseruit. Sed ut redeam ad Stoicos, volunt ii quidem in ipsius boni

appellatione secundum significatum com- plecti primum et tertio quoque duo contineri. Fuerunt autem qui dicerent id esse bonum

Extypatpo~)tv [ U7Coypa(ppoXotv ED.]. vEyEat y•p xya06v, qaa i, cKa0' ,va

i-•v p6xov t6 ix(p' o0 if

6•p' oi Eaztv (JAekd2ao0at, 0 6i c( pXtKcTzXTov

%rnfipy- al

dpTKl" art6 T(yn p zao, ztn t6i7CEP ztvo; nmyig n~aa ncx qu(X ev u aviXoaEtv d•i~iEta. Iam'

Tetpov 6E zT Ica' 8 alutpaivet 0gie:iooa0at" oiztg; ol i6vov at peza ei X0i•ovzat

( tya6, 6Xh&t Kaic at iawc' aizt xT npttg, FitCEp cat Kazx

•t••tx; o5xtpaivet (jepetoeat. ca x 6E 8 ov

Tpitov iai zTFeeatov -p6ioov •hyezat dyao0v T6 ot6v z:e p(Aekiv, lc Ceptkatpt0avo0o)5g [i•nptka.tpavoGar g; ED.] ti;g io66Eo•

;

TaXz)Tg xTg E apEzxa Iai t &;g vapEzoug

(p'4est Ka' poikg q ui ou g KaI Toibg orouaxtoug avOp&itoug, eOoF -S; K-T atnou&aiou;g 6xaiovag. Tnap' iyv aida•yv oxK Ev i~o k•'yeTat cnapO. 1E Totg TEpti T6v FI•h&av Kaic Evolpazr (fr. 97 Isnardi

Parente) ntokkaXAg 6vod O4a at TyaO6v at

nap~x zoi;g XIt1oi;. •eEvot gti v y p, 6zav

TiaOtv ~ipq hikyo0aot ya 0'v i'v '6'av Ica'

i•p; 'To -z

etzXov Tifg 8 tac, oa5tatvbteva K -Tieev•Iat Kai K•C •

nohk a•0klkoyv 8teunwra

CKai 1iEtqiav FXovTa Iolvviav, ot6v Ze icai ~it

Tfg; 'Xcmyv' q(pmvFig epo-Pev.

Adg yXp 17 K ZTazg oltatwiveTat tv tCtG

iP' 0 iv t6o biatcov

[rxialc•tl•cov ED.]

iE'tnT•CE (^OV, cKai i'Tt il()' ij'v

To Ev•v6pov [EvWypov ED.], Kai cnpog Tzotot; i0p'

iv 6 (ptk6o,(po;, o0 itv 'xkk) Icati ip' iyv t6 1otpov, o i6v ~ o Klotvv Xooutv adt Tota~tat 0toE'tg, o68' '•tsepti•,eXFt "tf SemuziUpa cf ?npoki

•ta zT Tpiztr 8Emzi-pa [iF GEmitpa ED.], oi0zT Icxv Tzi0 q&xvat yaeo0v ziv i6 tav Ica z6 zizov zfg tikaOP OEVOVat6g it•v oaz&t 6

atatvoptivv, -eCX6ptati0v 66E v ait o tepav

n-picplwtv •t(opatv6vTmov. 61X' o titv

Xp1at6"tepot, 1g) xpodeov, zotozTot Ztveg f;

av" o6 8' 67o Tfig

ITzoCS OXountv i~ni zTig zos Tya0o npoo5yopiaP To

•_EbUepov o(%tatv6tevov i-?mepthknzt•cov Elivat

Tob np6Too Kat To zptzov nFEptkljn:tKov T•v 60i6v. iaav 6- oi qcp6mcovzue (fr. III 73 SVF)

yaeovtv-i pyyx -t 6 St' abT6o axipeov. oi 8'

o•ztgo ';ya66v WO zt zt6 GuTa4a3v6tevov tpo;g eF6atioviav', ztvi~g

' 't6 outkrqporzubov

Ei6tba ovtia'. (fr. I 184, 554; III 73 SVF)

obSatiovia 68 iortv, g ooi mE itpt t6v Zilvova

I•ai KhEvOrvv Icai Xpixotutov irn6tocav, eipota Piom.

nhilyv .

yivo; tif toi &yxeoi Exno860ssq %art zotottov- Ei66aot 8' %vtot,




quod sit propter se expetendum. Alii vero id esse bonum definiunt quod ad felicitatem adiuvat. Aliqui vero quod felicitatem

compleret bonum esse volebant. Felicitatem autem esse secundum Zenonis et Cleanthae et Chrysippi assignationem vitae facilem ac

prosperum decursum. Verumtamen quo bonum assignatur genus est huiusmodi. Con- sueverunt autem nonnulli cum tripliciter dicatur bonum, continuo ad definitionem

primi significati inquirere quo ad id quod dicitur bonum est illud ex quo aut a quo utilitas proficiscitur, ut si vero bonum est illud a quo utilitas fit, solam generalem virtutem dicere oporteat bonum esse. Ab hac enim sola utilitas fit. Excidit autem ab ea definitione

quaeque virtus particularis, ut prudentia, ut

temperantia reliquaeque virtutes. Nam a nulla ipsarum haec ista utilitas proficiscitur. Sed a prudentia proficiscitur sapere et non

quod communis est prodesse. Nam si hoc

ipsum prodesse contingat, non erit secundum definitionem prudentia sed generalis virtus. Et a temperantia quod de ipsa praedicatur temperantem esse non quod commune est

prodesse. Et eodem modo de reliquis dici potest. Contra ii cupientes quam definitionem

posuerant sustinere ita respondent. Cum a nobis dicatur id esse bonum ab quo utilitas

proficiscitur, idem est ac si dicatur bonum id esse ab quo ad aliquid eorum quae in vita sunt utilitas proficiscitur. Sic enim quaelibet etiam

particularis virtus bonum erit quae quidem nequaquam communiter utilitatem afferat, sed eorum aliquid praebeat quibus utilitas fit, harum enim virtutum alia ut sapiamus praestat sicuti prudentia, alia ut temperantes simus sicut temperantia. At hi quidem Stoici cum volunt huiusmodi responsione primum crimen effugere in alterum sunt crimen devoluti. Si enim horum alterum est quod dicitur bonum id esse ab quo utilitas ad eorum aliquid proficiscitur quae in vita sunt, generalis virtus quae bonum sit sub definitionem minime cadet. Non enim ab ipsa utilitas ad eorum aliquid proficiscitur quae in vita sunt, quam una e particularibus fiet sed simpliciter utilitas. Et alia in hanc sententiam multo plura quae non versute minus quam

zpty6g ekyopl vou T&yaxoi, rpobg zov Tob rp)Tzou

(olo-vatvoltvolu 6pov E~b0g intrE e 0iv, Kca0 Xi~yet 'zT6 yao6v ~atz t z6 i' o0 if &q'

o( ,

aztv c6ELdaea0oat', cb Ei 'Ta aig ;&Xkeiatg dya06v AEct Tz 6dM' oi Eaztv 1)XPeekooat, i6vlrv pIcziEov zTlv yevtCly (XPEiyV

dya66,vv in7pXEtv, (x6n I06vqq y7p ta6zrlng ~z [TzaOUzg T1]

tativt ED.] T6

0iPAEheoa0at, i cxCnCtn atv 8 zoE Spo0 Elcc~ar

[icKxoYrv ED.] T6)V E itC6CV, OtOV Tfiv (pp6v1otV KaacU Tv •o)(PPOo%)VIv K~a( Txg Xotnx;g. oi6r oiSE6qtg y'p aXzTi6v ouLipativet t abzo zotzo

T6 6•(PF-v, XXL' ndn6 -tv Zfg (PpovicEo;g Z6

(ppoveiv KCaX o ) Kotv6zepov To6 6)(•iv, Ei y&p

axiro toTio aipaivot, To 6'x(PEiv, oliic x rat

6)ptaihvwog qp6vflntg, yEvtKi 86' apEZ1, alt, &nb

•rig aonppoo6v1g t• icaz' a•tfilv icazry6pula, ao(ppowive, o' to6 'otv6v, ~9(hpoPv, iai n1ri zT)v

,otiur6v To

v6~,oyov. oi 6' xv(tKrato?lmc

, Evot

tpog ozTo T6 ••yEcqlta zozTo qaxciv 6tzav

Fyo01tEv" '-ya06v io5ztv (9' o0 oup5alvo t zt

09ekhe~ia0at', Av '~o? zoTzo [Av i'o? zoz'T(O ED.]

kMyot-LEv- ' ya06v ~actv q ' o0 a0lt[aivet' t zT6)v

iv To 1ito 6 )PEko at'. o0btzo yp iat iKcrz ,T6v 'n7' E'iSotug pE'ITv yae0v yevia~oeat, xotv)g

Iitkv To6 6xpEiv 1Pt iFntp-povu((, ti t6)v v ev 'T) [AV To) Pi(O ED.] ((PEk•e(O(at a

p7OEXOpLkVl, OlOV fi

-LV (PpovEiV [To (PPOVEV ED.],

Ka•CExEp fi

(p6v;otg, 11 66 t6 ocnppovgv, 6)q ;1 of~ ppooovl.

Oelhicave6g 8- olzot 6G 67nokoyo~ltFvot zTO Cp6Tepov yklm a qouyeiv, eig ReFpov

exCKultoOloumv. Ei y(p EzEpov Eozt zT L-Y6Y Evov ZTO)Tov [ZotoZTO ED.]: ' yaO6V i-aztv (cp' 0 oaqupatvet t - 6)v v Pi•t 6)c(ekeo9at',

11 ye~vtacil &pETzl cyaOov oau o)X 1O7on7Ea(5ixat T

6p?'o o) y&p 6ni' aitfjg au pftivwt

Tt T•

v v

To• t io 6)p~ePdoat, in itia T6)v n' e7toug

yevil•e•rat, (X(X wn 7)g [Xk' &nd!k)g ED.] T6

KaFi iEpa 6' coE0 o kyeaeat tpbg Tobg TotomTouqg

Spoug, 8oymantt iSg iEX6etva n7eptepyetag [nIepte~pyiag ED.]. ll &iv 'I On67pf drnoSdeat, 6zt c6 •0yov Wxya66v tz6 b~ ePoiv if z6 St' aizb6 aipezv i zT6 ouvepyoiv npog Tzlv FS6atuitovitv [rnp6bg e68aGtoviav ED.], i

oico co;g 6noutSo6og, ob% 8 i~rtv dyaO6v 8tShouKEt, &•& •6 o' appeLPtnbg o••at nsEpi•tlorgtv [napi~ozr-tv ED.]. 6 • t)6 YPfP[T••K() ztwyaOG naptokxp oi

axb'b 6EiKvvot ztyaO6v. e8Otgw yovv

ti piv h ePOEti Zb dyaO6v [zTayaeov



270 GIAN MARIO CAO

acute inventa sunt, ab iis dici solent qui de verbo potius quam de re disceptare consuerunt. Nobis autem satis sit si ostendimus

qui definit bonum id esse quod prodest vel quod per se expetendum est vel quod ad felicitatem comitetur aut huiusmodi aliam

assignationem affert eum non quid bonum sit docere sed quod bono accidit declarare. Qui vero quod bono accidit ostendit haud is mihi bonum ipsum videtur ostendere. Con- tinuo igitur quod et conducit bonum et quod expetendum esse secundum quod bonum dicitur videlicet bonum et quod felicitatis est effectivum, nemo est qui dissentiat. Verum si rursus quaeratur quid tandem est hoc prodesse et quod per se sit expetendum et quod felicitatem efficiat non modo non consentient sed dissentient maxime. POGGIUS: Et quamobrem ita dissentiant Pallas cum prius consenserint id esse bonum quod esset utile, et quod expetendum foret, et quod felicitatem efficeret. PALLAS: Quoniam Poggi de substantia

quaeritur non de accidente. Nam alii bonum dicent virtutem, alii indolentiam, alii voluptatem et eam quidem tum mentis bene

compositae rectaeque rationis, tum quam ipse tantopere persequeris dissoluti sensus petu- lantisque appetitus, alii vero aliud quippiam vel simplex vel coniunctum. Quod si ex

superioribus definitionibus patuisset quid esset bonum, haudquaquam dissentirent pro- indeatque ignorata natura boni. Non igitur eae definitiones quid sit bonum, sed quid bono accidat, omnes docent. Itaque non solum ob hanc causam reiciendae sunt, verumetiam quia rem quam esse nequeat, videntur appetere. Nam qui aliquid eorum

quae sunt ignorat, is neque illius accidens

potest cognoscere, uti siquis ad eum qui quid sit equus ignoret, dixerit 'equus est animal hinnibile', is quod est equus minime docet. Nam qui equum ignorat, quid etiam sit hinnire, quod equo accidit, ignoret necesse

est. Et qui audiat bovem esse animal mugibile, nec teneat quid sit bos huic bos haud

monstratur. Neque enim mugire, quod bovi accidit, is compraehendat qui bovem ignorarit. [fols 65v-68r] 173

ED.] Kai [KOCt To ED.] nt aipt E 6v iayt, trap6

Tya0bv eip'rcat 6o oTov tyaxo6v, 6-t [r6t WE ED.] Eiat?tovia; 6,1 TotKOtl6tKov, o(yXmpo0ot nTavEg [nTav,-g oa5)Xmpo5otv ED.]" 'kV' E' V

npoo~5exFrTlatX, Ti notoE Coat to To ,To Too(PFov Kai St' ab6 aXipe,6v •ali Fi~at&tovixg notolytK6v, o

,ict CLto(ppovilo)ot, Kxait7Ep outgdoivog rtp6t) pov aht6 :yovTEg tO6 ogEiov Kai t6 aipeT6v, xa ' Eitg &ntorov -4~wZvex0OIVat nT6 EI?tov, 0To Itgv apFty U Yovkog, Fo0 S- [8' ED.] 1)6OVT'V, TOb 6

~'i~v7itV, TO% 6' W0o t T6v

6tag&pp6vmov. Ei 6S y~ ~i7 t6v Tpoetpriv•tvv 6p0v

A6eiivco, 6 %oat t6 &Tya6v, oii Aiv i t~FaaYia-ov &g 0

yvoougivrlg tijg ,0yaOoC (p0omg;. Toivuv oi X 0 otv Tyya6Ov [-azt t6

7yaeov ED.] oi CKKEiEtVOt SpOt 6pth66KOottyv,

6h&h to apFptllCldTrog *yaAO. 8t6eT-p o0' 6l wa,

To0To it6vov e•ai atoxOppot, 6) & Cai iae6o6ov

66tuvvtov Ttvo;g gpievtrat rp&ay'iaTog; 6 y6p

dyvoCv t TiOv 6vtmv, o'Tog; o6 6 oTp(p5- 1rolgC inc ivw y7tvvocEtv 86vacat. oiov 6 tp6og T6v ayvoobvTa, T i'o tv t"nnog, gy

v" ' i.T7og o,

? 4ov Xpq-t rtulctK6v' o0 8t606 K t, 5 0(rtyV i rro;g-

tO6 y7p P1 y7tvxov-t

Tov tinovt v ov a

Xp•e*ty;tV &yvoetzaot, aeFp Av To0 Yinnoo ovPtpFlKq6g. Kai 6 itp6og bTv p l aT•ctkcip6zTa,

Ti

Uont po0g, npocpp6btevog- 'PoSg tot ?6pov pvlcrltn6v' o0t napiztrlot T6v pov-" Tw7 y&'p pil ytvxiOKovzt Tobrov vaKaVakrlniameat CKa t6

OucaaOat, PEPf-0t1oC6g iit6pxov Tob Po6;. [fols

32or-22v]




? III: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, book II

PALLAS: Revocemus igitur nostram orationem, unde nescio quo pacto defluxerat. Et id quod erat in manu resumamus absolvamusque breviter. Itidem igitur cui quid est ipsum bonum obscurum sit, ei frustra et inutiliter dixero bonum id esse, quod expetendum est, aut quod utilitatem affert. Nam primum quae sit ipsius boni natura discendum est, deinde

intelligendum quod et expetendum est et felicitatem efficit. Natura vero ignorata boni, huiusmodi definitiones quid bonum sit docere non possunt. Et de his quidem satis. Non enim

longiores esse possumus. Ex his autem quae brevi oratione perstrinximus, quid huiusmodi

philosophi malum esse definiant abunde

patere censeo. Malum est enim ea ratione

quod bono contrarium aut detrimentum affert aut non aliud a detrimento. Et detrimentum quidem est quemadmodum vitium et mala actio. Sed non aliud a detrimento

quemadmodum malus homo et inimicus. Inter haec autem duo bonum et malum, id esse Stoici volunt quod &6tp(popov nominant, nos indifferens recte appellemus. Id autem est quod neutrum habet. Nam quod indifferens est neque in malis est nec in bonis numerandum. [fols 68v-69r]

? IV: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, book iii

LEONARDUS: Nequaquam tu quidem sentis cum Crantore, qui philosophus non ignobilis in theatro graecorum omnium ita divitias

loquentes inducat: 'Nos quidem, o Graeci universi, ornamentum omnibus praebemus hominibus. A nobis vestiuntur calcianturque ac reliquum fructum capiunt. Usui sumus et valitudinariis et valentibus. Atque in pace quidem delectamus, in bellis vero nervi sumus rerum gerendarum. [fol. 83v]

? III: SEXTUs EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, XI.39-41 (Bekker p. 553, 1. 26-p. 554, 1. 9)

ocob~v iai po; t6ov avev6rvcov [vwvv6rymov

ED.] OVTX (xfo0o0 [Trty0eo0 ED.] tr6vTcV Ke

vpceXh6Xg Xyezat, 6it &'ya06v iot To aipe~ov i

t6b 0(pEXof)v. tp6-Iov y7p 6gE ipaeZiv Tiv abToi

To dao o y pl")atv, 'Tma m6mTE

~ oivvat, iOm

ep-Xdi iac 6ir axipe~6v o5t ial e-8atioviax

notrlutc6v. it' &0yvoOZ4VO)U [&yvooUbt'vI ED.]

6' TaTin Ka1 oGi otob) ot v 6po v o)V

6t66K0cov TO6 to? rmobtEvov.

A•EIyltaTog ;~v odv Xdptv dTEnaplcKo TX za•)T

eipfoa Ot ex p t ;tig mtyaOoi voYomg;. E 4v, )lg

otoat, oac(pi mzyYxvegt

caX t& (x pt •coi KoKOcw ) TEvohoyo)eva a nxap x oig Lt~po8660tg. aicwbv

y7p ~not T6 Evavtiov 'T6o )yaO4-" 7ep pX6pr[

:omtiv i o1) ize:pov OX6fl,3g, axi 13X6013 tv 6)5~iEp

K tada Kail upa 7cp4ttg, o iETpov 8E dnl;g aO~Ox•p

6 q(a o; &'vOpono;og ax 6

kyep6;. txaia 6E, Tolamov, plpti 6E Tob' E dyaxOo0

Ka. KaKxo, O"TEp Ka &x6StWxapopov ovo~md(To

[(1vo0 tc 0o ED.], i ast 6T ot S ei6pq E0Xov. [fols 32 2V-2 3r]

? IV: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, XI.51-53 (Bekker p. 556, 1. 24-P- 557, 1. 4)

FivO•v Kac 6 Kp6&vmp (fr. 7a Mette) Egig q pamtv mo•s Eyo7Ltvou po-OX 0tFvog tcaSg &Tetv ~navu

oapiEvmt ouvexpiloa'o napaftiyp[at. Ei yxp vo0ototgev, q(pXo• [(PYo7t ED.], KOtV6V Tt T6v

HawvXX1voyv OaTpov, Etig ToiTo T icxaoTov

tOv cyaOojv Taptbov •ai mtv tpwTridv Avrtuotot~tvov ilqt etv, Et0b;g Kad Egig Evvotav

SvatiOj6lEOa Tfg v Toig yaOoig 8taqpopSg.

np6imov tv y&p o6 txobtog nxapantl6Slaaxg pd."

'•76, 1iv6peSg Havi-lvXvesg, K6o5ov 7tapiXO

173. Between the passages transcribed here and indicated as II and III, Filelfo inserted a lengthy invective, in which Sextus's serious philosophical point about the definition of an ox is used as the springboard for a

personal attack on Filelfo's enemy Lorenzo de' Medici:

'Bos est Laurentius Medices. Num habes quicquam quod huic definitioni obiicias? Aspice Laurentii latera,

aspice palearia. Incessum consydera. Nonne cum

loquitur mugit? ...'



272 GIAN MARIO CAO

? V: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, book III

[LEONARDUS]: Dicunt enim illi eorum quae sunt (sic enim t& 6vza quandoque inter-

pretari malo quam entia, quamquam ita etiam

utar, si videbitur), alia esse bona, alia mala et alia esse quaedam inter haec, quae nec bona sint nec mala censenda, quae quidem ipsa indifferentia nominant. Verum ex his vir gravissimus Xenocrates utens singularis numeri casibus ita dicere consuevit: 'Omne

quod est, aut bonum est aut malum aut nec bonum nec malum, quod ipsum etiam est indifferens, separatum scilicet quoddam genus quod neque in bonorum nec in malorum sit ratione reponendum'. Quam quidem rerum partitionem, etsi veteres illi omnes videntur amplexi omnesque con- sentiunt rerum differentiam esse in tris

partes distributam, nihilo tamen minus in contentionem prodeunt cum dicant definitionem ab universali parum differre, quippe quae idem sit potestate. Nam qui dicit verbi causa 'orator est - ut Cato definiebat - vir bonus dicendi peritus', hic vi plane idem dicit quod ille quicunque ita definiat 'siquid est orator, id est vir bonus dicendi peritus', sed differentiam facit in voce idque sophis- tice. Quamobrem quod etiam ita dicitur eorum quae sunt, alia sunt bona, alia mala,

alia neque bona neque mala', id tale secundum Chrysippum universale vi est ac

si dicatur 'siqua sunt entia, ea vel bona sunt vel mala vel indifferentia'. Atqui huiusmodi universale mendatio subiacet quandocunque mendacium ullum subiunctum habet. Nam subiectis duabus rebus - alia bona alia mala, aut alia quidem bona alia indifferenti, vel bona etiam et indifferenti - siquidem dixeris 'hoc est entium bonorum' verum sit; quod si dicas 'haec sunt bona' sit mendacium. Non enim sunt bona, sed hoc quidem est bonum,

[7tXap~~ov ED.] ?ci&(v v'Op(brotg Kai zxg ;Oiftzag Kat zT&g EToSGioeStg Kat ZTiv Xrkllv dx6cr0auotv Xpet1S)g e6iq vooobot Kai ytaivolot, Kat Ev

tv eipivn Trapee za ZepTva, vv Sk nrokLEvotg veipa z6)v 7rpX emyOV yivotat'. [fols 324v-25r]

? V: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors,

xI-3-17 (Bekker p. 546, 1. 8-p. 549, 1. 3)

H6*vzg giv oi oKizc zp67tov ozotoetoiv

6oicovzeg zT v qptkoo06qmov, Kaci i•t7pavoTzaza 7rxap& irvzTag oF ze Ir6to ztig pX(tag 'Aimca6iiag Kat oi anor zob -eptxrzou, izt 6 S Tifg Izodg, e~i0aot 8tapo ievot k~7yetv z•Tv vzwv t&

vT v

Evat WyaO6, z 6 Icalc, zT 6'tEza b zoTzov, C&rp iaA &St6i(popa ••ouatv 6Utazepov 6• nrap& robg z k lo-g o6 -Evoicpzrflg (fr. 231 Isnardi

Parente) c zamiqg Lvtucxag szaoeot Xp01tFevog

qxa•ce" 'nv C6 v T iv i 0 yaO6v tov i Ka"ic6v &oztv

io o aZe dTyaO6v o5ztv o0ze Icac6v oztv.' K?ai zTCv 0otur6v qptoo6p`ov ... [qrtkoo6ayov )opig ED.]

xoSe6ieo g zFilv zota(l)zv 6taipeotv ... [6taipewtv 7rpoote~EivWv abhzO; ED.] E661C•t Kai 6 cc 68E1ttV ounrapakaltp

.... [ou .tcgapaoax.Ptp3vetv. ei y&p

ED.] E(Z-t -t VeVptoPIUtov Irpay, ayUZ v yaC6v ... [1nptya zv

C ya66iv Ka KaxK&v KaK EaD.]

TzOv •giTE 7mya

O•v Pt F Icalcov, EcEvo ilTot

(7ya•6v oztyv i~ oic

" tOv tXyae6v. Kai ei pK v

7yaO6v ioztv, ic [Ev ED.] ZTCV Z ptv yevioeVzat ei 8' olt FaZrtv ya9a6v, iizot Iac6v 5oztv ?i1 obse Kax v cartv oizTe yaO6v aztv" ei 6' KaK6v

inatv, v UOv zpt v nx p et, ei E1 ooZe yaO6v

oztv o0bZe KaCK6V oZt, ~ a t rOv v v zptOv

Icra(aTiaerzat. x&cv &pa zo6 v fizot cyaO6v artv i

iKa•-6v tYv if obze cya'O6v i~ctv obzTe K aK6v

noztv. uvaxvet w 6FKa olzog XOpi;g dxoSetteugo

npooyi~accto i'v 6tadpetv, tEintep 6 eig ZFiv

K1C•aoKeTFv [Eit KarZTKE•riV ED.] ltbig ncapak(q0eVg 760og o EXep6g EP;F-aztv awifg"- 6ev E v Ei xV 7zaf cepti~onrKe z ilv nicsztv i

dx66et;tg, Trat • at 11 6taipoeot;

E 4 awzpig ntorZi RIl 8tail pov)ea zifg xkoSetiemc.

'AXX' g4w;, cxainep oup~gvoI 60Kobvrog

)7cXcpetyV aKcvrZX a6vz'c( zoJ Ozt zpta77il iazrtv i1 zt6v 6vtv ctacpop&, -tvig o06•v fczzov etpeothoyoixtv 6ooloyobvteg

p- tiv vv zoig

obot tacpopxv 6St zotarz zig tiozt, ooptoztKic g t opooetho6tCevot pfv &z9eetpoc totatpvoet.

Kai roto eio6pe~a

,tKwpov Avoaeev upohap6vzeg.




hoc autem malum. Et eodem modo si dicas 'haec sunt mala' falsum sit; nam mala certe non sunt sed ipsorum alterum. Idem quoque de indifferentibus accidat: falsum est enim 'haec sunt indifferentia' quemadmodum de bonis malisque ostendimus. MANETTUS: At mihi Leonarde videtur Xenocrates in sua illa partitione prudentior, qui singularis numeri usus sit casibus. Nam si pluralibus casibus esset usus, eius omnis

partitio monstratis diversi generis rebus, necessario mentiretur.

LEONARDUS: Mones tu quidem Manette subtiliter ac docte.

MANETTUS: Ad haec cum omnis sana generis partitio ea sit, quae propinquas dividit atque coniunctas species, nonne siquis ita partiatur 'homines alii sunt Latini, alii Scythae, alii Turci, alii Aegyptii, alii Persae', idcirco is erret

quoniam aliarum propinquarum specierum non coniunctam et propinquam speciem disiungit, sed huius speciei species. LEONARDUS: Certe Manette ut dicis. Itaque rectior ea fuerit partitio, id quod te video

intelligere, cum dicitur 'homines alii sunt Latini, alii barbari' et per subdivisionem 'barbari quorum alii sunt Scythae, alii Turci, alii

Aegyptii, alii Persae'. Idem rursus dicendum fuerat in eorum quae sunt partitione. Nam

quecunque bona et mala sunt, differentiam

apud nos habent. Quecunque vero inter bona

malaque sunt, non differunt quo ad nos.

Itaque longe subtilius partiamur si dixerimus eorum quae sunt alia non differunt, alia

differunt. Et differentium quidem alia sunt bona, alia mala'. Talis enim partitio eius

partitionis est similis qua modo dicebatur 'homines alii sunt Latini, alii barbari. At barbari alii Scythae sunt, alii Turci, alii

Aegyptii, alii Persae'. [fols 85v-86v]

T6v y&p 8pov qctoiv oi 'rEvoyp6C(pot (fr. II

224 SVF) ~Wthrf Tii ouvrZSEt 6tacpiepstv t•o KaccOoXtiob, 68v&ctEt t6v aiIrov 6vca. Kaic EiCo'mg 6 y0p it6vv '&vOp Ot6g d;Ot ?Cov XoytK6v Ovrl'6v' t•O sit6v'rt '(E Ti

h'ttv &vOpmorog, k

?Eivo 6oj6v iort Xoyt-cv vrllr6v' tfi

tv 86vd'tet t ab• ' h6 it, " 8o pXvf6

68t6•popov. Kcai t Tot'to, autqpavv;g iK To) til

6tovov IKaccoXotKlciv t ov Eti titpolg {vact

ineptxhrlprtKt6v, 6,XX&6

Kccad 6v 6pov iti t6cxv•c•a rcx

ei61] ro• Ino6t6oStovou t phyttcaog 8t6luKEtv, otov

t6v k •v

toJ avvp6xo u it wVTCSg Toug KaC

E6Sog v vOpwtnou;, Zov 86F rob ~itnnot iTin t Ivrwg

,ob;g itTnou•g. iv6g o; rFTo•xoaiFvrog ieS6oUg

iKcWCrepov 7iv•act tox0rlp6v, t, 6 v KcaoxtKHv acc 6

9po;. &X7 y&p );g taDca (Pwva(Xg (i; ~layIv•a

KWCzcr 68)vagtiv (0Tkrat [i('zt ED.] 'It 0WcTc

, Wg

6i1 [06E ED.] KCail r iXe-to;, qpao•, 8taipe•cig, 6bvattv X~ouO• KsaeooXljiv, uvvrcaet rob

KceOoXtKob 6tEvi"vo~EV. o6 y•p tp6trm 68E

8tatpowtEvog 'trov C&vOptrwmv oi otiv eiotv

"EX1iveg, oi 6E Pd(ppapot' fioov rt Xi'yet 'ei

ztvi;g stotv cvoprTcot, AKEivot

ir "EXXivig sottv i

p6kppcapot'. i;6v y dp tig &vOpmitog abpicYKc(at [EUpiKtKrcczt ED.]

r'; "EXXiv E tPizcr Pdkppacpog,

&vdy7Kq btoXOXp6v tikv elvact Vil v taipnotv,

yE-6og ;6 yiv•eO(t 'to KcaOoXtKdv. 8t6itp iKca to

oijto XEy6etvov 'T(OV OvCOv ZT iT V i(vtV ty tyaxI ,

t8x 6 KWlcxr, 8- o6F' To oov

[t8Xc' 68v6u ets KaX-K -cov XpuiTtrtrTov Totoo'T6v iot KaohxoXtK6v- ''i itvc( aXtv aOVa, i wvaX firiot cxyac otv i1

KacK- c yo i tv 8ctac9opa'. oi• ' vot yE totozov

Kc•OoXtKov WE68og; F'r'tI orTcciTo[vot tvo; tVg Xa~zu Op 86oug. 68Fiv y~'p qxxotv itocKtEtiFvvv

ntpayC(7zrmv, TO b R iv xyac(00, to6 8F& Ka ob, i1 TOJ

tiv I(xyao00, To 8b 6 t(xqp6poJ, i KWKoJ K1 a 6tac6popo, ro 'iav 'tobJ' Et YTtov OVTOVV dccyacOOv

[&yaCO6v ED.] ~XOi';S iEctg, ro 68F 'zccb' FTzTiv

cxyaxO' 9JE8og" o;0 yd•p i'OrtIV cxyacc, Xcxx To

tiv &yacO6v, 'o 6' KcaK6v. Kai r' 6'rcaz' ic?c t

IcMIcx' t Xhtv yE86o;g- o0' ydp iO Ct Ka1 x9i, &XX& -o i~Fzepov acu'TOv. 6ocatcuirw; 6: Koa i 1t

"T v

x6taq6pov- eF6og y•xp iozt zi6 [y'xp zT ED.]

'~rat' Eo'ttV &(t6ptopa(', 6X(9rtp Koa( to

'toab•' cy'Ttv

oya06x if KwaKKd'. l

],tV OJV

EVc•wOaYb totoarIt Wg

1oaevirop•Ev, qXuivezCat 8 il 7 o aXc0E O~rsa toJ

Esvorpcroug 8t& to Pil tacig itXrlevOcctdg 1rttouS t K•expifoat, mot' 1tm i tfig ; v iVepoyev(ov

88RiEsg yE•SortotnOfima 21iV 8taipEOtv.



274 GIAN MARIO CAO

VI: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, book III

MANETTUS: Tuum istum partiendi modum non possum equidem non probare, quem ab illis item perpulchre video observatum

qui dixerunt bona esse alia in nobis, alia extra nos. Et rursus quae in nobis essent, alia esse animi, alia corporis. Nam cum divisio fieri multipliciter soleat ut cum genus in

species partimur, et cum totum in proprias distribuimus partes; et cum vocem plura significantem in significationes proprias secamus; praeterea cum secundum accidens

tripliciter dirimentes, aut subiectum in accidentia separamus, aut accidens in subiecta dividimus, aut in accidentia accidentia

partimur. Ea sane divisio et princeps est et

reliquis divisionibus antecellit, qua genus in suas species distribuitur. [fols 86v-87r]

"AXXot 86 Kc-KiV~ivg viozcrlav xavtac ydp,

q•caiv, bytYg taipeat Ty~voug doT•t6 iPl [toPt ED.] Ei;g T 6posE fi • d1o, Kci 6t fiotro toXZOipCx KcaOi-'CTlKv il tota•crl taipeotg"- 't6ov vOp6yTCov oi

-•iv Elw c'E1nvSg, oi St

Aiy[snxot, oi St

i-poat, oi &i 'IvSoi'. t6iv y&p ~ipov [ttv y6xp ~zpo ED.] Tzv xipoCswv 6wv oe-8cv o to ;uyobv Icat ?npooexig El0So dXv'Irt~li~)K~ art, wx [O

tc ED.] ZOLJTOU E 6&, 68OV Oi5owg EiXeIV 'T6iV

dvep6owv oi i ljV tv 'EXXovs6g, oi 6~

fIFppapot', o•a6 KFae' oSt 6taip7atv Xotx6v 'CTOv 67

psup&po)v oi CDiv eoutv Aiylroitot, oi 6~ H~p(at,

oi 6~ 'IvSot'. 6et1 p 6 c•a Et?iFg -cccv cvcwv Statpieow, ?itn Sea c i* v toyv ycya6Ox ia

KaKrx, 6ptapov-cd ix-tyv fiv, 6Sea 6S tevac

m6•v ZE hcyaO6iv Ka icx?acv, tzazt' aztv ftiv 68thpopa. Xpijv obv nt lEety obtw; [oiitw;

XEVtv ED.] Tolv o taipeotv, 6g iXet, FtnXXov 8'

eiCngVw; '-Zv v-wv & giv trTyV x6tapopa, & 6i

8tacqpipov•a, to6v 6 8tac•qep6vcov

& ptv cyas0x, &

8& K?adc'. 6KEIt y&p i -to~v noti•db

p Gtaipeat fi Xeyoo?n 't6iv av

p60twv oi i-t v Etv 'yEX'6vevSg,

oi 6~ P i&ppapot, tF iv 6~ T ap•p•p6v oi ' vl Aiykrztot, oi 8& 1i-po0at, oi 8C 'IvSor'01t - 8

6•~CE tlVt Wl.tOiWto fi t•oto?oZp6io" 'T•Vo

avOp6tw•v oi

l eottvv 'EXXvSg, oi 6~ AiyiTntot, oi 8V 1-ipoat, oi 86~ 'IvSoiT'. [fols

318r-lg9v]

? VI: BOETHIUS, De divisione liber (ed. J. Magee,

Leiden, Boston, Cologne p998, p. 6, 11. 17-26)

Nunc diuisionis ipsius nomen dividendum est et secundum unumquodque vocabulum

uniuscuiusque propositi proprietas partesque tractandae sunt, divisio namque multis dicitur modis. Est enim diuisio generis in species, est rursus diuisio cum totum in proprias distribuitur partes, est alia cum uox multa

significans in significationes proprias recipit sectiones. Praeter has autem tres est alia divisio

quae secundum accidens fieri dicitur. Huius triplex modus est: unus cum subiectum in accidentia separamus, alius cum accidens in subiecta dividimus, tertius cum accidens in

accidentia secamus (hoc ita fit si utraque eidem subiecto inesse videantur).'74




?VII: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, book

inI

[MANETTUS]: Verum non ab re intelligere abs te cupio, quot modis verbum hoc substantivum 'est' accipiendum putes apud philosophos. LEONARDUS: Non inepte Manette rogas. Falluntur enim nonnulli persaepe vim verbi istius et consuetudinem ignorantes. 'Est' autem duo significat: et id primo quod verbi substantivi proprium ducitur 'existit', ex quo 'dies est' dicimus, hoc est 'existit'; et item 'apparet' secundum quod dicunt aliqui mathematici non nunquam inter duo quaedam astra intervallum est ulnae, quod non

pro eo accipiunt omnino, quod 'est' substantivum verbum significat, sed quod 'apparet', cum id intervalli quod tum propter alti- tudinem tum propter aspectus distantiam

ulnae spacio videtur circumscribi, ad centum fortassis stadia aut etiam amplius terminetur. Cum igitur 'est' particula duplex significatum recipiat, cum speculando dicimus 'eorum

quae sunt, alia sunt bona, alia mala, alia nec bona nec mala', 'sunt' hoc loco non substantive ponimus sed ut 'apparent'. Nam de bonorum ac malorum neutrorumque subsistentia ad naturam cum iis disceptandum est, qui certis quibusdam suisque decretis addicti sunt, hos graeci vocant 6oyatCUotUo;g. Sed horum quodque secundum id scilicet

quod apparet appellare consuevimus aut bonum aut malum aut indifferens. Qua sententia ut existimo ductus Timo ille Phliasius ita scripsit in Sillis:175

? VII: SEXTUS EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, xI.17-20 (Bekker p. 549, 11. 4-26)

'AIXX. C Tpt tv rourwv

roov ?vvrC&'oEEv oux

v7yK~rl vbv JtrlVK6vevt,

Kicvo 6' iuw; g &pjt60t tpo6tapp6picat, 6ot co '"E 96at' 680 o atcivet, Kacc

Rv [tFv 1o otov 'u'tccpxet', Koa06 ooqetFv

-E7t rob

itcap6vzog -6 '6zt tippca iztv' v-i 'rob 'tiicpac

ttxCpFet', iFrpov 86 6 N oiov l[tApca 'qxiveitat',

Icce6 ztv;g z6)v -eOrl-tcaztuc6iv

eFti ccut Xhiytv noxxcKt;, -trt o NeatF-cc 68eiv u tv rv oxvrpyov

8thazrtca rTrlsEuac6v ztv, gv ion U yovzrg T(o

'quoivel:at Ica ou c&dvz'r UT6•pyet'- zdXa ycp ppXpet t v aTcca6iv Kacr6v, qxxiveract 6

nrluacaov naph o' U" og ;aK napc 7'jv if g OieOg x6nzaotcv. 8tvcoi 86i tuyvxdvovtog coi 'Tact

.topio0, S•zav XyOp)LEtV ~YKExutK(og '(OV OVTOV trX

ib ~v •tvy aO&z0, -d 8&

KW•a•, ix 86~ evathc

coTzTv', t6 'ta-tv' vz&xtzzotev o robg ritep(yg axX' 6zg tof 'quxivexOat' 8rloztKw6v. tept ptv ydp zifg rpbg zTlv qpbatv %rtoao~raEeg z6ov ze

&ya6Oiv Kai Kaxxc6iv a obe6vzCpv ipcavot xtg6 itv yijtiv &y6vWg itpog tot;g 6oyatwccobg" 1cacd

68 z6 qptuv6tevov zoX, mv KEaczov ~Xojev 0ogo ycyaO6v ip aov if• 6 pt- opov tpo•ayopeevtv,

K1Ca6 cep Kac 6 Titov 'v toi6 g tv6f-' ot [toig

ivO6ah oig ED.] EO1KE ( 6i0oiV, 6tav pfV'

r1 [i ED.] ydp *iyv Ap&D, oG [ot Ka(at(piverat VT(at,

trO0ov & 0XE0ilg; 6p06eov Xov Ka Xv6vxa,

) i 6ro0 ;Eiob 'I( (plS(Th KUac to1 uyaUo0 [kpyaeoi[ ED.]

i- 6v itv6arog yivErat &v6pi riog. [fols 319v-20r]

174. Filelfo must also have taken account of Boethius, De divisione liber (as above), pp. 26-28: 'Diuisio uero

nominibus positis quoniam semper in duos terminos

secatur manifestum est si quis generi et differentiae cum

deest ipse nomen imponat, ut cum dicimus "figurarum

quaedam sunt trilaterae aliae sunt aequilaterae, aliae

duo latera habentes aequa, aliae totae inaequales". Trina igitur ista diuisio si sic proferretur fieret duplex: "figurarum quae trilaterae sunt aliae sunt aequales, aliae

inaequales; inaequalium aliae sunt duo latera tantum

aequa habentes, aliae tria inaequalia", id est omnia; et cum dicimus "rerum omnium alia sunt bona, alia mala, alia indifferentia", quae nec bona sunt scilicet nec

mala, si ita diceretur gemina diuisio proueniret: "rerum

omnium alia sunt differentia, alia indifferentia; differentium alia sunt bona, alia mala" ... ' See also Cao, 'Nota' (as in n. 3), p. 324 n. g9.

175. In MS Laur. Plut. 85.19 the phrase appears as

roi;g otv6iltotq instead of roig iv6(xatoiq, an error which Filelfo did not correct. Indeed, he could not correct it since he was clearly unaware of the existence of a work by Timon entitled 'IvG•LAtoi. This explains why, in the corresponding Latin passage, he attributed the fragment cited by Sextus to the Xtikot (see Supple- mentum Hellenisticum, ed. H. Lloyd-Jones and P. Parsons, Berlin and New York 1983, pp. 368-92 [nos 775- 840]; Timon of Phlius, Silli, ed. M. Di Marco, Rome

1989).



276 GIAN MARIO CAO

Vera loquor, nam vera mihi mea dicta videntur. Ordo mihi rectus, regula mihi recta est.

Quod manet ipsa dei semper natura bonique. Inconcussa quibus sit sua vita viro. [fol. 87r-v]

?VIII: FRANCESCO FILELFO, Commentationes Florentinae de exilio, book III

LEONARDUS: At idem Crantor Soderine hoc abs te plurimum dissentit, qui ubi divitias in

illo universo ac publico graecorum spectaculo cum maximo omnium consensu pro se causam

egisse introduxisset, ita rursus voluptatem in medium procedentem facit causam contra divitias pro se dicere, ut probet se iure optimo divitiis praeferendam, quippe quae neque firmae sint nec diuturnae, nec etiam propter sese ab hominibus expetantur, sed propter illum qui ex iis fructus ac voluptas sequitur. Itaque suffragiis graecorum omnium a voluptate divitiae convincuntur. Nec a voluptate solum, verum etiam a bona valitudine. Nam cum esset voluptas iam palmam reportatura, continuo bona valitudo cum magna omnium de se expectatione progreditur, docetque neque divitias nec voluptatem usui cuiquam esse posse ubi ipsa defuerit. Quod graeci rursus audientes non inviti in sententiam eunt bonae valitudinis. Monemur igitur a

gravissimo Crantore vel inter ipsa indifferentia commodorum atque incommodorum non mediocre faciundum esse discrimen.

[fol. 9gor-v]

? VIII: SEXTUs EMPIRICUS, Against the Professors, xi.51-58 (Bekker p. 556, 1. 24-p. 558, 1. 7)

FivOev -Kca 6 Kpxwvtop (fr. 7a Mette) Ei;g tqcpactv

"ob XEyoti0vou pot6jetvog lyctSg 'yotv nwovp

ccapievrt t uvFexp'iTa•o rcTapoectyClart. Ei y7p

vo1](TrttgEv, q(aol( [(pol(Yt ED.], KOtv6V It T6V

1-avEXxilvyv 09catpov, eig robto tr ~aCrTov

TCv dya6v nacptov xa c Gc v T rpCeOv

wvtrtCotouptevov iKEtv, Eb)Og KaFt Eig ;vvotCav

ovaXOTrl61tFocc terig 'v Toig gya60oig Stacopag. np6iTov Pv y7p 6 'nXobtog ncapa•nfl6Sacs•g cpe'"- '~76y, &v6peFg HvcvXXlveg, K6a0tov IcCapxm [tnapFXmv ED.] •&ntv csvOp6ontot;g •acCi txg A FOicg;

aixt rcx;g %otoShxeTg K; x tflv &Cxxrlv 6 dx•xcautv Xpet6Orltg EiL vo obot oKa bytaivou(yt, KCa Fv [Fv EpPv1 _cpEXm TN zepnv , v 6' noohiotX

vebpa tcOv pCgemyv y7ivotC~t'. TOtov y7Cp &ii t6iv

X6y7v C1obxoucv're oi HavvXXrlvwg 6to0[utc86v

-KEEeobo1atv [K•EOb)o)oottv ED.] Wto6o?0vxt t t&

inpomria TC o Xhourcw. hXX' E v F oto-yC u ioiu

vaKxrlpuzrojtvoo u Fntot xa ic iTc ov i (Homer, Iliad, XIV.2 16)

'r?1 iFivt tv (Ptko6rlg, vivt. 6'' 4Epo;g v 8' 6 &pt'~ri)

[6oaptoTr; ED.],

d&pppatg;, i' 'r' i*1KEyE v6ov nl)K•ta IEp ppove6vmov,

XF7.rF

6' Eig F; ov "v raTrcoa [ac•vraToarc ED.], 6at aco ilv 6iKat6v ortv vayccope-etv (Euripides, Phoenissae, 558; Electra, 944)

oL [o ED.] 8' •pog oi• p[tog, 6AP' Oi;0C pepog

Fit'r•tf [i~Fir~Xt' ED.] OtK(OV, ptcKpov vOcfla'g;

XPOvov,

68ticcdzl K E rTnpd;g tov vCpCitnmv o6 St' iacZv6v, CxXa& tiv i54 aihcoi nptytvot~ivrlV dx'6na0utv Kc? ci ovi'v, hawivtg

oi H•avkvrlE;g,

on 'K 6Cmg

XE-tv tO xpanya i " obio;g bio c3ap6vteg,

1CKe1COVTr t 6ev tilv S6ovilv TregvovoCC v. ov&xc

Kci tca?trlkg 6 PPape•3iov ppeaPOct eFXot'Trl;g, ~intv eiopa3XX7n biyeia ez tcv uvi~pv arv6piv ctfl OE6iv, Kci 8tS6' d Kl, bg; obte ifSovfig obie nhXkovrco

Telep6; tgs [ft ED.] aTtcv )nobaog aitfig (Eurip.

Telephus, fr. 714 Nauck)




Ti ytp e inRkobzog Rhoiro; [[nkobro; ED.] 60pe*hi

v6oov;

JtKCpMv [J'iKp Uv ED.] OkXottt KUC• Ka• •0l7pav [••O' riCtcppav ED.] &Xu1rov FXOV [x•ov &A0u0nov ED.]

OiKEtV tor1yV [Piorov ED.] i" RXOuTCV VOoEiV

drobouavzrg ndhtv oi Hnavi~krlveg Kai eiravcp`6vrc; [etra-cxa66v-F; ED.], 60; oi6K

vevTzt KXtvoer7ifi Cci voco~oav tnocrzivcat 'Zrlv

E6c••toviav, (p'1o1ot vt ev Iiv )bEYav. &XX•

&v6pita inoXb vTcpo; &ptvremyv xwa ?ipcxov %Xouya TEpt F-Cuomily, xarao'rdocd TE X'711-'@ob

il iTapotorn;, &v6pe; 'EXXlve;, &xXotpia

yiv•c~t 1i Kr•i•t [IKZi~St ED.] Z v tnap' uiv

csyaO6iv, ei"atvt6 Te [T' &v ED.] o i TEO 10tou

nEpto•otit v C •(t

; Vnt tzoig &CyaOoig ( eilkfhoovwr 1 tv K pac~~v', •a

i ro61zov o1v

1oTCCoav•,rg ot e'EXrlvrg Ic

[-tv nprc•ia ril &petif dto6(0Toaoat, c&c 8&66' mpEtpa Zfe bYiTC, tC& 6' 'pita cc f flSovf, Xueeaocdov 6 r&4ou-ot v

ntobzov. [fols 324v-25V]

Appendix II

This Appendix contains a passage from Poliziano's Panepistemon: see his Opera omnia, Venice

1498, fol. Z iir-v; there are slight differences in the 1553 Basle edition (as in n. 164), p. 467- Facing the Latin text are the relevant passages from Sextus Empiricus, Against the Professors, v, as

they appear in MS Laur. Plut. 85.11 (with several differences from those indicated by Gentile, 'Pico filologo' [as in n. 143], PP. 480-81 n. 46). For the sake of convenience, both texts have been divided into numbered paragraphs.

[I] Plerique tamen astrologiam vocant ipsam, quae proprie genethliologia vocatur, cuiusque professores a veteribus Caldei, Mathematici,

Genethliacique vocantur, quae licet utroque iure, civili, pontificioque damnetur, impu- gnetur ab Augustino, rideatur a Basilio, tamen

quia multos habet etiam nunc amatores, iure in caeterarum consortium recipietur. [II] Dividunt igitur zodiacum circulum in

signa duodecim, singulaque mox in partes tricenas, quas in minuta rursus sexagena. Signorumque alia masculina faciunt, alia foeminina, quaedam bicorpora, quaedam tropica, nonnulla item solida.

[I] ... ahXX npbg e

wyvEaoyaycv [yevetcakoyTac v ED.], 1v TCLvoz~pot; KooTtoUvEwg ov6aoctv oi KcahX6tot CL0alatcOtctg i a; ic t

pok76you;g oaq CazoT; avcvayopesouitv ... (v.2 [Bekker pp. 728, 1. 29-729, 1. 1]; fol. 144V)

[II] zrov iiv obv (optac6v •cKicov cnpC9p KacrlXl"gOcc ctatpobxtv E-ig 6E•c?a o 6xtac, EiSao(Tv 6

c•?(tov Ei

[tovipac pt~Kovra...

ry 8&v tlv 6F 'oVpa v Eit iiloviKcra KECXn ... tCv 6' ?(pmiwv rcx [itv rtva Cxppenvucwd iacobat rSc 6F



278 GIAN MARIO CAO

[III] Notant et quatuor illa centra, quae nos cardines, Horoscopum, Mesuranema, Occasum, Hypogeum, quaeque singulis praecedunt,

[IV] Apoclimata succedunt Epanaphorae.

[V] Sic domicilia duodecim faciunt,

[VI] quorum torpida tria, reliqua nomen habentia boni, malique genii, dei, deaeque mortis, et utriusque fortunae.

[VII] Post haec Arietem capiti, Taurum

cervici, Geminos humeris, cordi Cancrum,

pectori Leonem, Virginem ventri, Libram renibus, et vertebris, Scorpionem genitalibus, Sagittarium femoribus, Capricornum geni- culis, Aquarium tibiis, Pisces pedibus.

[VIII] Sed et alios aliis regionibus, populisque

praeficiunt. Inter errantes autem soli, lunaeque dant primatum, Saturnum soli congruere,

OlQ&udK, K-ai rx citv 6•gtcca t& 86 oi5, •acti tv&

kyv tpomtl&x, tvca o•E tp&6 (v.5-6 [Bekker p. 729, 11. 19-26]; fol. 145r) [III] o , tilv axax -cti ntcavyov toltjlv It •Ati •ic crrlg yev-reSmg Kptweovrca ?(0ta ccpbg;

iyv trov ccinoveFXoLxztryv %zjpactv, •iaci &p' dv

dctoc;a Tzx; itpoayopA)octg [1tpoayop YtP

ED.] ROtLtOVT*at, 't•cYap6X qoXrtv tvcat -T6v

&pteOt6v, &tEep Kotv() htv ov6oazTt K•VTpac KcXo{)otv, itacizrpov 86 z6v tkv WpocYKO•6ov z6 6E

lgaeoupavrlCua 6i 86a o vov t6 6 iio6 yriv Kci

avrttpeoop6•avrmljt, {5 Kat awo'xt6 eloouvp6cvrljt Foxtiv (v.12 [Bekker p. 730, 11. 21-27]; fol.

145r-v) [IV] o0 6 ijv xXx Ixxci iaalxtou totWmTv t65v

Ki~rvTpv [T tilv tpoOyov ~6tov rt6KX4tCta KaXoob)t, tr 6Ek Et6tEvov itnavapop6v (v.14 Bekker p. 731, 11. 3-5]; fol. 145v) [V] Fvtot 68 Koi •o•ar-yov (Stov Eig 68m(Ectxai6pta 8t6X6vteg (v.9 [Bekker p. 730, 11. 6-7]; fol. 145r) [VI] fiirl 6F t6 - ir v

tpocva•cp6Pelvov Too)

wcpocKwortoovrtog ; SO6io), v Tio (Pcavepo ov, KaKoS

8cailov6g qpcatv tvat, To 6a stercc zouto, ~iE6nevov o6 v tq eYoupavpovozt, rpya0WoO

Wailiovog, TO 6E rtpoc7yov tot) LeooupCavo)VTog

KTrom oEypi86a c i i tovototpitav Kai e6v, To 6

pxp6JtEvov iEti riv U6xvtv C&py7bv ?(tov Ka

c&pX'v Ocav~xo , TO 6F e-tCr Ttivv

6&xtv v To)

(xc4avse iotvoiv W•ai K(aKClv ru Trlv, ijTEp

K•a 8t6ttperp6v ~att TOp KC-Ko 6caitovt, Tb T

pX6otevov ibi6 y7fv &yc•Oyailav TOXrlv 8tctEpov Tr c0yaO 6cailovt,

To 86~ xoympobv axu6 Too)

vttteooupavipc•V•ctcrog 0 ;Ex' (&vc•tro•iv 08Ev,

6tactpov [povv [6t&[-poV ED.] TO 08&, T 6 F

ttep6gPLvov TO? bpoKit6 I

apy6v, 6 itxXytv

taoteTrpeF [6tcterTp6v •aG't ED.] TO) &py7 (v.15- 17 [Bekker p. 731, 11. 5-16]; fol. 145') [VII] Kpth6v nv y&p •crEqxXiv 6vojt&oroU t, tzaTpov 86E tpcXhov, 86t6to;o 6g •S jto0g, Kaplivov 6- cziypvov, X0ovra 6F tXEup xq,

xnapO6vov 68 yXoTo?og, Suy6v 68 •ay6vag, oopitiov ai6Soov Kc w fl tpcv, to6orlTv nlpo;g,

caiy6Kepv y6vaaT, t6poy6ov [t6prl60v ED.]

Kvl1Jatg, iXOlaSg 86 ir6&ag (v.21-22 [Bekker pp.

73 1, 1. 30-732, 1. 3]; fol. 146r) [VIII] Kai TV 1ve hic~ Iv TC fq tcV•v 4povuiv KLai

ouvenptloupe~v qcoY Kp6vov 'e Kil A~i KYi vEpxfiv, ov g Kl- i AfltrppVOTr K(a7o i- Out 6ia ct6




lovem, Mercuriumque dicunt, quos et diurnos

appellant.

[IX] Domos autem singulas soli, lunaeque binas caeteris assignant, aliasque praeterea denotant, quibus singuli tristentur, et gaude- ant. Fines decanosque pervident, tum qui cui sint utrinque satellites, Trigonicus ne, an

Tetragonicus, an Hexagonicus, an directus inter quosque sit aspectus, stellarumque caeterarum diathema genituraeque dominum,

praesertim qui dicitur Oecodespotes, et

reliquorum configurationes, quae &cureptc~toi vocantur, unde etiam de vita, et morte, de

moribus, fortunaque non singulorum modo, sed civitatum gentiumque pronunciant, ausi

etiam Chronocratora, quem dicunt, ausi mundi genituram prodere Apotelesmatum vestigiis.

6ov i"Xtov, ib <rvepyoiot, ztov pte' titpav

y7voW•ivov [yevvo~tvov ED.] F7tPKcpa~Eiv (v.32 [Bekker p. 733, 11. 26-30]; fols 146v--47r)



280

JOURNAL OF THE WARBUR(; AND COURTAULD INSTITUTES, LXIII, 2001



Documents

Prehistory of Modern Skepticism