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

410 BOOK REVIEWS which is really helpful, shows that the authors have in mind the needs of our sad generation of college students who have little Latin and less than less Greek. Where Merrill cites the original Greek, this edition gives a good translation, often original. Much has been done since Merrill's edition in 1907, and this work offers a convenient s~thesis. If it does not displace Merrill in our American courses, it will at any rate be a welcome addition to his fine volume. The University of Wisconsin Press can well be proud of this finely printed and well-indexed book. Villanova OoUege, Villanova, Pa. JoHN J. GAVIGAN, 0. S. A. The Philosophy of Marsilio Ficino. By PAUL OsKAR KrusTELLER (Trans. by Virginia Conant). New York: Columbia University Press, 1948. Pp. xiv +441. $4.50. The philosophers of the Renaissance are little known. The textbooks usually pass over the two centuries which mark the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of modem times with a few perfunctory remarks. The overthrow of the medieval system and the rise of the new science seem to them more important than the work done by thinkers who, after all, form the link between the past and the present. Thus, we welcome any study which makes us better acquainted with the personalities who fashioned thought in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Among these thinkers, Marsilio Ficino (1438-1499) holds a prominent place. He was the founder and the head of the " Platonic Academy " at Florence and exercised a great influence on many people. Pico della Mirandola, for instance, was his pupil. Ficino, who was ordained a priest in 1473', attempted to work out a synthesis of Christian doctrine and Platonic, or rather NeoPlatonic , philosophy, although he took account, even to a large extent, of Aristotelian and Thomistic ideas. He was thoroughly opposed to Averroism which, at his time, dominated many of the philosophical schools. Ficino'a translations played an important role in the " humanistic " movement; the one he made of Plotinus is still highly regarded. Notwithstanding his dependence on ancient and medieval philosophy he was not without ideas of his own. His work is well worthy of consideration. Accordingly, one opens Dr. Kristeller's book with great expectations. That one is disappointed, in a measure, is the result of several defects, two of which are of a rather serioos nature. The many quotations from Ficino are mostly given in English trans~ lation only. This is in itself a drawback. It becomes the more so when the reader realizes that the translations are open to objections. Terms are BOOK REVIEWS 411 used for which it is difficult to imagine the original expression, e. g., "the peculiar end of a thing" (p. 143), "charm" (p. ~65), "model" (p. 95). Sometimes the translation is definitely mistaken: p. 37 where sufficientia 8Ubsistendi is rendered by "capacity for existence"; the phrase universi natura possibilius . . . (p. 72) is mistranslated; demens on p. 165 does not mean " mad " but "lacking mind," or " not mindlike "; secretio (p. ~17) is not " secretion " but rather separation, what Eckehardt called Abgeschiedenheit , nor does vacatio mean "vacation" but being free for, having a mind emptied of other things. It is hardly correct to translate affectio (of will) by disposition. On p. 39 decuit is rendered by "it was convenient," decet by " meet," although the use of the past and present tense is obviously significant. Princeps becomes "prince" on p. 80, and "head" on p. 83; neither of these words gives exactly the' sense. Act and action are not distinguished (pp. 77 and 236) . Twice one comes across mistakes which, perhaps are printing errors, p. 21 desiderant-denying, p. 296 laetus in praesens. The phrase" the angel has a number" (p. 88) is to say the least, clumsy and not to be understood by anyone not acquainted with Nco-Pythagorean speculation. Complexio is not a "sum" (p. 8~) but something like an integration, an organic togetherness, and must be read in the light of Cusanian philosophy. Ficino mentions Cusanus, the author tells us, only once, and the editors of the great edition of Cusanus' works refer to only one passage which might be...

pdf

Share