Supplement to Analysis

Annotated Bibliography on Analysis
§3: Medieval and Renaissance Conceptions of Analysis

This bibliography is intended as a reference guide to the key works that deal, in whole or in part, with analysis and related topics such as analyticity and definition. Cross-references are by name(s) of author(s) or editor(s) and either year of publication or abbreviation as indicated immediately after their name(s). Notes in square brackets at the end of an entry indicate the relevant part(s) of the work and/or its significance to the topic of analysis. Key passages can be found quoted in the supplementary document on Definitions and Descriptions of Analysis, linked from the relevant entry and note by means of ‘{Quotation(s)}’. In some cases where there is material available online, an internet address is also given after the entry.

This section of the bibliography corresponds to Section 3 of the main entry, and is divided into subsections which correspond to the subsections of the supplementary document on Medieval and Renaissance Conceptions of Analysis. Where works include important material under more than one heading, they are cited under each heading; but duplication has been kept to a minimum. Cross-references to other (sub)sections are provided in curly brackets.

Annotated Bibliography on Analysis: Full List of Sections

3.1 Medieval Philosophy

  • Aertsen, Jan A., 1989, ‘Method and Metaphysics: The via resolutionis in Thomas Aquinas’, Modern Schoolman 63, 405-18
  • Albert of Saxony, S, Sophismata (c. 1350), Paris, 1502
  • Aquinas, Thomas, SW, Selected Writings of Thomas Aquinas, ed. and tr. Ralph McInerny, London: Penguin
  • Ashworth, E.J., 1973, ‘The Doctrine of Exponibilia in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries’, Vivarium 11, 137-67
  • Ashworth, E.J. and Spade, P.V., 1992, ‘Logic in Late Medieval Oxford’, in Catto and Evans 1992, 35-64 [theory of exposition]
  • Blumenthal, H.J. and Lloyd, A.C., (eds.), 1982, Soul and the Structure of Being in Late Neo-Platonism: Syrianus, Proclus and Simplicius, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press [includes Lloyd 1982]
  • Boethius, OD, On Division, tr. in Kretzmann and Stump 1988, 11-38
  • Broadie, Alexander, 1985, The Circle of John Mair, Oxford: Oxford University Press [ch. 6: ‘Exponible Propositions’]
  • Buridan, John, SD, Summulae de Dialectica, tr. Gyula Klima, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001 [Treatise 6, ch. 3: interpretation as ‘exposition’; Treatise 8: division, definition and demonstration; Treatise 9: sophisms]
  • Catto, J.I. and Evans, T.A.R., (eds.), 1992, History of the University of Oxford, Vol. 2: Late Medieval Oxford, Oxford: Oxford University Press [includes Ashworth and Spade 1992]
  • Crombie, A.C., 1953, Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press [61-90: medieval uses of resolutive method]
  • Dolan, Edmund, 1950, ‘Resolution and Composition in Speculative and Practical Discourse’, Laval Théologique et Philosophique 6 [distinguishes strict and loose senses of resolution and composition]
  • Erigena, John Scot, Periphyseon, 4 vols., ed. and tr. I.A. Sheldon-Williams, Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1968 [Vol. II, 526a-b: resolution as regression; distinction between ‘analusis’ (problem-solving) and ‘analutikê’ (regression)]
  • Hönigswald, Richard, 1961, Abstraktion und Analysis: Ein Beitrag zur Problemgeschichte des Universalienstreites in der Philosophie des Mittelalters, ed. Karl Bärthlein, Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer [opposition between analysis and abstraction in relation to the problem of universals]
  • Isaac, J., 1950, ‘La Notion de Dialectique chez Saint Thomas’, Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 34, 486-93
  • Jardine, Lisa, 1982, ‘Humanism and the Teaching of Logic’, in Kretzmann et al. 1982, 797-807
  • Klima, Gyula, 2000, ‘Buridan’s Theory of Definitions in his Scientific Practice’, in J.M.M.H. Thijssen and Jack Zupko, (eds.), The Metaphysics and Natural Philosophy of John Buridan, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 29-48
  • –––, 2001, ‘Introduction’ to Buridan SD, xxvii-lxii
  • Kretzmann, Norman, 1982, ‘Syncategoremata, exponibilia, sophistimata’, in Kretzmann et al. 1982, 211-45 [exponible propositions as involving syncategoremata, requiring exposition]
  • Kretzmann, N., Kenny, A., Pinborg, J. and Stump, E., (eds.), 1982, The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [includes L. Jardine 1982, Kretzmann 1982, Serene 1982, Spade 1982]
  • Kretzmann, N. and Stump, E., (eds.), 1988, The Cambridge Translations of Medieval Philosophical Texts, Vol. 1: Logic and the Philosophy of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [includes Boethius OD; Nicholas of Paris S; Peter of Spain T]
  • Lloyd, A.C., 1982, ‘Procession and Division in Proclus’, in Blumenthal and Lloyd 1982, 18-45
  • Marenbon, John, 1987, Later Medieval Philosophy (1150-1350), London: Routledge [ch. 2: ‘The techniques of logic’; 89-90: ‘historical analysis’ as approach to medieval philosophy]
  • –––, 2007, Medieval Philosophy: An historical and philosophical introduction, London: Routledge [297-301: Ockham’s nominalism]
  • Murdoch, John E., 1975, ‘A Central Method of Analysis in Fourteenth-Century Science’, XIVth International Congress of the History of Science: Proceedings No. 2 (Tokyo), 68-71
  • –––, 1978, ‘The Development of a Critical Temper: New Approaches and Modes of Analysis in Fourteenth-Century Philosophy’, in Medieval and Renaissance Studies 7, ed. S. Wenzel
  • –––, 1979, ‘Propositional Analysis in Fourteenth-Century Natural Philosophy’, Synthese 40, 117-46
  • Nicholas of Paris, S, Syncategoremata, selections tr. in Kretzmann and Stump 1988, 174-215
  • Oeing-Hanhoff, L., 1963, ‘Die Methoden der Metaphysik im Mittelalter’, in Wilpert 1963, 71-91 [distinguishes ‘conceptual’ and ‘natural’ resolution]
  • –––, 1971, ‘Analyse/Synthese’, in Ritter 1971, columns 232-48 {§1.1}
  • Panaccio, Claude, 2004, Ockham on Concepts, Aldershot: Ashgate [chs. 4-6: connotation and nominal definitions]
  • Peter of Ailly, TE, Tractatus exponibilium, Paris, 1494
  • Peter of Spain, T, Tractatus, called afterwards Summule logicales, ed. L.M. de Rijk, Assen: van Gorcum, 1972; selections tr. in Kretzmann and Stump 1988, 216-61 [fallacies of composition and division]
  • Read, Stephen and Bos, Egbert P., (eds.), 2001, Concepts: The Treatises of Thomas of Cleves and Paul of Gelria: An Edition and Systematic Introduction, Louvain: Peeters
  • Régis, Louis-M., 1948, ‘Analyse et synthèse dans l’oeuvre de saint Thomas’, Studia Medievalia, 1948, 303-30
  • de Rijk, L.M., 1982, Some 14th century tracts on the probationes terminorum: Martin of Alnwick O.F.M., Richard Billingham, Edward Upton and others, Nijmegen: Ingenium Publishers [edition of four textbooks, with introd.]
  • Serene, Eileen, 1982, ‘Demonstrative Science’, in Kretzmann et al. 1982, 496-517 [accounts of Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics]
  • Spade, Paul Vincent, 1973, ‘The Origins of the Mediaeval Insolubilia-Literature’, Franciscan Studies 33, 292-309
  • –––, 1982, ‘Insolubilia’, in Kretzmann et al. 1982, 246-53
  • –––, 1990, ‘Ockham, Adams and Connotation: A Critical Notice of Marilyn Adams, William Ockham’, Philosophical Review 99, 593-612 [relationship between theory of exposition and theory of connotation]
  • –––, 1998, ‘Three Versions of Ockham’s Reductionist Program’, Franciscan Studies 56, 335-46
  • –––, (ed.), 1999, The Cambridge Companion to Ockham, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [includes Spade 1999a]
  • –––, 1999a, ‘Ockham’s Nominalist Metaphysics: Some Main Themes’, in Spade 1999, 100-17
  • Sweeney, Eileen C., 1994, ‘Three Notions of Resolutio and the Structure of Reasoning in Aquinas’, The Thomist 58, 197-243 [resolutio as (reductive) division, as (Neoplatonic) reversion, and as (geometrical or ethical) problem-solving]
  • Trouillard, Jean, 1977, ‘La Notion d’analyse chez Érigène’, in Jean Scot Érigène et l’histoire de la philosophie, Paris: R. Roques, 1977, 349-56
  • William of Ockham, SL, Summa Logicae, ed. P. Boehner, G. Gál and S. Brown, St. Bonaventure, New York: Franciscan Institute, 1974
  • Wilpert, P., (ed.), 1963, Die Metaphysik im Mittelalter: Ihr Ursprung und ihre Bedeutung, Berlin [includes Oeing-Hanhoff 1963]

3.2 Renaissance Philosophy

  • Ashworth, E.J., 1988, ‘Traditional logic’, in Schmitt and Skinner 1988, 143-72
  • Copenhaver, Brian P. and Schmitt, Charles B., 1992, Renaissance Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press [118-21: Zabarella on method; 227-39: Agricola and Ramus on method; 247-50: Sanches on method; includes extensive bib.]
  • Crombie, A.C., 1953, Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press
  • Di Liscia, Daniel A., Kessler, Eckhard and Methuen, Charlotte, (eds.), 1997, Method and Order in Renaissance Philosophy of Nature: The Aristotle Commentary Tradition, Aldershot: Ashgate [includes Morrison 1997]
  • Edwards, William F., 1976, ‘Niccolò Leoniceno and the Origins of Humanist Discussion of Method’, in Mahoney 1976, 283-305
  • Gilbert, Neal W., 1960, Renaissance Concepts of Method, New York: Columbia University Press [5, 25, 27, 81-2, 140-1, 190, 196; analysis as decomposition: 17, 22, 80; geometrical analysis: 31-5; ch. 5: Ramus’ single method; 200-8, 218-9: Digby’s and others’ double method] {§1.2}
  • Jardine, Lisa, 1988, ‘Humanistic logic’, in Schmitt and Skinner 1988, 173-98
  • Jardine, Nicholas, 1988, ‘Epistemology of the sciences’, in Schmitt and Skinner 1988, 685-711 [686-93: demonstrative regress, Nifo and Zabarella]
  • Kristeller, P.O. and Wiener, P.P., (eds.), 1968, Renaissance Essays from the Journal of the History of Ideas, New York [includes Randall 1968]
  • Limbrick, Elaine, 1988, ‘Introduction’ to Sanches 1581 [§5: influence of Galen’s methodology]
  • Mahoney, Edward P., (ed.), 1976, Philosophy and Humanism, Leiden: Brill [includes Edwards 1976]
  • Morrison, Donald, 1997, ‘Philoponus and Simplicius on Tekmeriodic Proof’, in Di Liscia, Kessler and Methuen 1997, 1-22 [Aristotle and the Renaissance theory of regressus] {§2.4}
  • Ong, Walter J., 1958, Ramus, Method, and the Decay of Dialogue, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press [ch. 11: ‘The Method of Method’, §13: ‘Analysis and Genesis (Synthesis)’; 299-301: analysis by definition and division]
  • Ramus, Petrus, DI, Dialecticae Institutiones, Paris, 1543, facsimile ed. with Ramus AA and introd. by W. Risse, Stuttgart-Bad Canstatt, 1964; tr. into French as Dialectique, ed. M. Dassonville, Geneva, 1964
  • –––, AA, Aristotelicae Animadversiones, Paris, 1543, facsimile ed. with Ramus DI and introd. by W. Risse, Stuttgart-Bad Canstatt, 1964
  • Randall, J.H., 1961, The School of Padua and the Emergence of Modern Science, Padua
  • –––, 1940, ‘The Development of Scientific Method in the School of Padua’, in Kristeller and Wiener 1968, 217-51; orig. publ. 1940
  • Sanches, Francisco, 1581, Quod nihil scitur, ed. and tr. as That Nothing is Known by Elaine Limbrick and Douglas F.S. Thomson, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988 [174-5: anticipation of the paradox of analysis; includes introd. by Limbrick 1988]
  • Schmitt, Charles B. and Skinner, Quentin, (eds.), 1988, The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [includes Ashworth 1988, L. Jardine 1988, N. Jardine 1988, extensive bib.]
  • Walton, C., 1971, ‘Ramus and Bacon on method’, J. Hist. Phil. 9, 289-302
  • Wightman, William P.D., 1964, ‘Quid sit methodus? “Method” in Sixteenth Century Teaching and “Discovery”’, J. Hist. Medicine 19, 360-76
  • Zabarella, Jacopo, 1597, Opera Logica, Köln; repr. Hildesheim and New York, 1966
  • –––, 1607, Opera Logica, Frankfurt; repr. Frankfurt, 1966

Copyright © 2014 by
Michael Beaney <michael.beaney@york.ac.uk>

Open access to the SEP is made possible by a world-wide funding initiative.
Please Read How You Can Help Keep the Encyclopedia Free