<link rel="stylesheet" href="styles.f3b1fba60ec7970c.css">

Зауваження щодо видання «Вступу» до філософського курсу Теофана Прокоповича

Вантажиться...
Ескіз

Дата

Автори

Назва журналу

Номер ISSN

Назва тому

Анотація

The article supplements the publication of the introduction to Theophan Prokopovych’s philosophical course (taught at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in 1707-09). It analyses characteristics of Prokopovych’s manuscript in comparison with the manuscript of Georgiy Konyskyi’s philosophical course (taught in 1747-1749). The latter turns out to be a copy of the former, as it does not contain significant differences. The article describes the editorial principles of Prokop-ovych’s Prooemium and the significance of the text as well as gives short exposition of the content with the analysis of references by Prokopovych. It explains some codicological and tex-tological characteristics of both manuscripts. The analysis of textual relation between the two manuscripts shows that Konyskyi’s manuscript contains much more mistakes than Prokop-ovych’s manuscript. Most of more than a hundred variations between the manuscripts are mis-takes in Konyskyi’s manuscript. The author supposes that the student, the scribe of Konyskyi’s manuscript, not completely understood rather complicated style of Prokopovych. Prokop-ovych’s position about the style of exposition shows balancing between humanistic and scho-lastic ideas. It states that Prokopovych refers usually to ancient authors. The references in the text are quite detailed, but not enough accurate. Almost half of them (6 out of 12) happen to be incorrect. It is probable that Prokopovych made references from memory.

Опис

УДК

Тип документа

Мова

Є частиною

Бібліографічний опис

Симчич М. Зауваження щодо видання «Вступу» до філософського курсу Теофана Прокоповича [Текст] / М. Симчич // Sententiae. – 2020. – № 1. – С. 126-139.

Зібрання

Схвалення

Рецензія

Доповнено

Цитується в

Список використаної літератури (7)

  1. Allatius, L. (1864). De S. Joanne Damasceno prolegomena. In J.-P. Migne (Еd.), Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Graeca (Т. 94, col. 117-192). Parisii: Apud J.-P. Migne Editorem.
  2. Augustine. (n.d.). De Civitate Dei. Retrieved January 3, 2020, from The Latin Library website http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/augustine/civ19.shtml
  3. Cicero. (n.d.). De Officiis. Retrieved January 4, 2020, from The Latin Library website http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/cicero/off2.shtml
  4. Conimbricenses. (1607). Commentarii Collegii Conimbricensis e Societate Jesu In Universam Dialecticam Aristotelis Stagiritae. Coliniae Agrippinae [Köln]: Apud Bernardum Gualtherium.
  5. Diogenes Laertius. (1925). Lives of eminent philosophers (Vol. 2). London; New York: Heinemann; Putnam & sons.
  6. Kraye, J. (1993) The Philosophy of the Italian Renaissance. In Routledge History of Philosophy. Vol. 4: Renaissance and Seventeenth-Century Rationalis (pp. 15-65). London: Routledge.
  7. Saint John of Damascus. (1958). Philosophical chapters. In Saint John of Damascus, Writings (pp. 8-110). Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press.