In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

BOOK REVIEWS 121 Teske's introduction is clear and well done. The translation is generally accurate, though one might quibble at the translators' common practice of altering the tense or mood of verbs and at the fact that they have made the text less metaphorical in tone than it actually is They also often omit inferential particles and the like to shorten long sentences and ratify William's dense prose. Consequently the English reader bears a somewhat heavier burden in determining the argumentative structure of the text than did his or her medieval counterpart. I would suggest the following substantive changes. On pp 68-69, for "there is grasped along with this sort of determination the intention that is all being [esse]. In another determination it signifies only that which is signified by a defining expression..." read "The intention which is 'being' is grasped with a determination of one sort or another, and signifies only that which is signified by a defining phrase ..." (omit omne with VbCDT). On p. 73, for "all composition and essential causation. 1 mean clothing such as there is in a species," read "all composition and causation. But by an essential clothing I mean the kind that is in the species 9 (read veto for vel with OV). On p. 75, for "[Such being], then, cannot be common and essential, though it is essential Since in tbis intention being lens] is said 'through its essence' as singular, it will be incommunicable to an essential plurality," read "'Because then it cannot be essential and common--though it is essential since being is said according to this intention 'through its essence'--it will also be singular and unable to be shared by an essential multitude." On p. 88, for "that the being said of the possibles makes known the first being" read "that 'being', said of possibles, predicates the first being." On p. l i L, for "From all eternity he willed that this begin to be now and not before, and [he did not will it only] on the condition that something new be added by his will..." read "From eternity.., and not before or after; nor by his will was anything new added.. ," (read for prius nisi, post [with ChMOV] nec [nay conjecture]). In sum, we must thank the translators for making this important work available to the non-Latin reader, who hitherto has been starved of material from the early thirteenth century. It is to be hoped that this work spurs increased interest in this unduly neglected period. NElL LEWtS Franklin and Marshall College Francisco Sanches (Franciscua Sanchez). That Nothing is Known (Quod nihil scitur). Introduction , Notes, and Bibliography by Elaine Limbrick. Latin Text Established, Annotated , and Translated by Douglas F. S. Thomson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, a988. Pp. x + 3~o. NP. This is the first English translation of Sanches's best-known work, and for that reason alone its appearance would be welcome. But there are other reasons for praising Professors Limbrick and Thomson's edition: Professor Limbrick has written an excellent introduction, in which she brings a fine learning to bear upon the principal subjects of Sanches's work and their historical context 0-88); and Professor Thomson has given us a very good (and duly annotated) Latin text based on the second edition, 122 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 29:1 JANUARY 1991 of 1581, but with reference to other editions too, and a careful English translation. Professor Limbrick's notes upon that translation are unusually competent; she is also responsible for the bibliography at the end of the book. I can find nothing missing in the latter, except Professors S. R~ibade, J. M. Artola and M. F. P6rez's Latin-Spanish edition, Quod nihil scitur (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, t984). Professor Limbrick's contributions will be obligatory reading for those interested in the history of modern philosophy, especially as regards the revival of scepticism. Many of Sanches's interpreters--moved, generally, by a desire to see their man as a rival to Descartes--have been accustomed to take him as a Cartesian avant la lettre. Such an attitude has assuredly been one of the reasons for...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 121-123
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.