Berthold of Moosburg: Difference between revisions

Line 7: Line 7:

He is notable for his work on the neo-Platonist [[Proclus|Proclus Lycaeus]]’ ”Elements of Theology (Institutio Theologica)” writing ”Expositio super Elementationem theologicam Procli”, which was done based on the Latin translation of Proclus’s work by another Dominican, [[William of Moerbeke|Willem van Moerbeke]].<ref name=”:32″>{{Cite journal |last=Beukes |first=Johann |date=2021-03-19 |title=Neoplatonism in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages: Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300–1361) as case study |url=http://www.hts.org.za/index.php/HTS/article/view/6281 |journal=HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies |language=en |volume=77 |issue=4 |doi=10.4102/hts.v77i4.6281 |issn=2072-8050|doi-access=free }}</ref> ”Expositio” would become the only commentary written on Proclus’s works to have come the medieval age.”'<ref name=”:32″ />”’ He attended [[University of Oxford|Oxford]], being dispatched there by his Dominican chapter for his [[studium generale]].<ref name=”:0″>{{Cite book |last=Calma |first=Dragos |title=The Renewal of Medieval Metaphysics: Berthold of Moosburg’s Expositio on Proclus’ Elements of Theology |last2=King |first2=Evan |publisher=Brill |year=2021 |isbn=978-90-04-47102-3 |location=University College Dublin}}</ref> It is believed that during this time he would have discovered works that influenced him in his writings such as [[Thomas of York (Franciscan)|Thomas of York’s]] ”Sapientiale”, [[Macrobius]]’ [[Commentarii in Somnium Scipionis|”Comentarii in Somnium Scipionis”]], and most notably [[Proclus|Proclus’]] [[Elements of Theology|”Elementationem Theologicam”]], which Berthold cited ten times just in his [[Gloss (annotation)|glosses]] on Macrobius.<ref name=”:0″ /> Berthold’s document, ”Expositio,” was written after the condemnation of Eckhart, which led to a period of disunity and chaos within the Dominican order.<ref name=”:23″>{{Cite journal |last=Beukes |first=Johann |date=2021 |title=Neoplatonism in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages: Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300-1361) as case study |journal=HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies |pages=5 of 15}}</ref>

[[File:Fortunabrunnen Freiberg Dietrich von Freiberg.jpg|thumb|Bronze image of Dietrich of Freiberg, a major influence on Berthold of Moosburg, as shown on the Fortuna-Brunnen in Munich, Germany.<ref name=”:12″ />]]

His ”Expositio super Elementationem theologicam [[Proclus|Procli]]”, written between 1340 and 1361,<ref>D. N. Sedley, ”The Cambridge Companion to Greek and Roman Philosophy” (2003), p. 327.</ref> was a major statement of the importance for Platonism of [[Proclus]].<ref>[[André_Vauchez]], [[Richard_Barrie_Dobson]], [[Michael_Lapidge]], ”Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages” (2001), p. 1153.</ref> In the making of his ”Expositio,” Berthold attempted to create a comprehensive written work that served as a bridge between the Christian and non-Christian Platonic view of his day.<ref name=”:12″>{{Cite book |last=Gersh |first=Stephen |title=Interpreting Proclus from Antiquity to the Renaissance |date=July 2014 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-46535-9 |publication-date= |pages=307 |language=English}}</ref> As a result, Berthold’s ”Expositio” incorporates both ‘Christian Platonic writings’ and ‘non- Christian Platonic writings.'<ref name=”:12″/> Berthold takes wisdom from [[Euclid]], and ‘adopts’ the [[Axiom|’axiomatic]]’ writing structure and style.<ref name=”:34″>{{Cite journal |last=Sannino |first=Antonella |title=Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources |journal=Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes |volume=63 |pages=245}}</ref> ~~Berthold of Moosburg~~ had a ~~healthy~~ respect for [[Euclidean geometry|Euclid]] and Euclid’s published works.<ref name=”:35″ />

His ”Expositio super Elementationem theologicam [[Proclus|Procli]]”, written between 1340 and 1361,<ref>D. N. Sedley, ”The Cambridge Companion to Greek and Roman Philosophy” (2003), p. 327.</ref> was a major statement of the importance for Platonism of [[Proclus]].<ref>[[André_Vauchez]], [[Richard_Barrie_Dobson]], [[Michael_Lapidge]], ”Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages” (2001), p. 1153.</ref> In the making of his ”Expositio,” Berthold attempted to create a comprehensive written work that served as a bridge between the Christian and non-Christian Platonic view of his day.<ref name=”:12″>{{Cite book |last=Gersh |first=Stephen |title=Interpreting Proclus from Antiquity to the Renaissance |date=July 2014 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-46535-9 |publication-date= |pages=307 |language=English}}</ref> As a result, Berthold’s ”Expositio” incorporates both ‘Christian Platonic writings’ and ‘non- Christian Platonic writings.'<ref name=”:12″/> Berthold takes wisdom from [[Euclid]], and ‘adopts’ the [[Axiom|’axiomatic]]’ writing structure and style.<ref name=”:34″>{{Cite journal |last=Sannino |first=Antonella |title=Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources |journal=Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes |volume=63 |pages=245}}</ref> had a respect for [[Euclidean geometry|Euclid]] and Euclid’s published works.<ref name=”:35″ />

He opposed his Christian-Platonic synthesis to [[Aristotelianism|Aristotelian]] philosophy.<ref>George Henry Radcliffe Parkinson, Stuart Shanker,

”Routledge History of Philosophy” (1999), p. 235.</ref> His sources included [[Theodoric of Freiberg]] and [[Albertus Magnus]].<ref name=”Steel2001″>{{Cite journal |last=Steel |first=Carlos |date=2001-06-21 |editor-last=Porro |editor-first=Pasquale |title=The Neoplatonic Doctrine of Time and Eternity and its Influence on Medieval Philosophy |url=https://brill.com/display/book/edcoll/9789004453197/B9789004453197_s003.xml |journal=The Medieval Concept of Time |doi=10.1163/9789004453197_003 |isbn=9789004453197|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/albert-great/ Albert the Great (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)<!– Bot generated title –>]</ref> Following Proclus’s model of two modes of duration, [[eternity]] and time, Berthold rejected the ”[[aevum]]”, an intermediate mode of time held by Theodoric and Albertus.<ref name=”Steel2001″ /> In ”Expositio” Berthold makes 132 citations from 93 different chapters from ”Clavis.” He uses these citations to reinterpret and to correct Proclus’s doctorines to make it more inline with Christian and platonic belief.<ref>{{Cite book |last=King |first=Evan |title=Reading Proclus and the Book of Causes Volume 1: Western Scholarly Networks and Debates |publisher=Brill |year=2019 |editor-last=Calma |editor-first=Dragos |location=Leiden |pages=399 |chapter=Eriugenism in Berthold of Moosburg’s Expositio super Elementationem theologicam Procli}}</ref> Further, in the making of ”Expositio”, Berthold referenced and used several authors and written works on top of his use of Proclus’ ”Elements of Theology” in the making of ”Expositio.”<ref name=”:12″ /> Some of the authors include but are not limited to [[Augustine of Hippo]], [[Calcidius]], [[Boethius]], [[Apuleius]], [[Macrobius]], and [[John Scotus Eriugena|Iohannes]] or [[John Scotus Eriugena]].<ref name=”:12″ />

== Ideas and philosophy ==

Line 47: Line 47:

Berthold’s ”Expositio has” notably have been influential on [[Nicholas of Cusa|Nicholas of Cusa’s]] works, and has been cited among a list of authoritative Neoplatonic authors in Cusa’s ”Apologia doctae ignorantiae”.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fiamma |first=Andrea |date=2017 |title=Nicholas of Cusa and the so-Called Cologne School of the 13th and 14th Centuries |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/45134418 |journal=Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Age |volume=84 |pages=91–128 |issn=0373-5478}}</ref>

”'[[Nicholas of Cusa]]”’ lists the author of ”Expositio” as Johannes von Mossbach.”'<ref name=”:36″>{{Cite journal |last=Sannino |first=Antonella |title=Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources |journal=Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes |volume=63 |pages=245}}</ref>”’ Many names have been attributed to Berthold of Moosburg.<ref name=”:38″>{{Cite journal |last=Sannino |first=Antonella |title=Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources |journal=Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes |volume=63 |pages=245}}</ref> Some of these different names are, Berchtold, Berealdus, Bartholomeus, Johannes von Mossbach.<ref name=”:38″ /> These ~~different~~ names span a range of historical sources.<ref name=”:38″ /> One example of the different name(s) attributed to Berthold of Moosburg in the historical timeline appears more than fifty years later when [[Nicholas of Cusa]] gives credit to Moosburg for his written work ”Expositio,” stating its ‘importance’ <ref name=”:38″ />

”'[[Nicholas of Cusa]]”’ lists the author of ”Expositio” as Johannes von Mossbach.”'<ref name=”:36″>{{Cite journal |last=Sannino |first=Antonella |title=Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources |journal=Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes |volume=63 |pages=245}}</ref>”’ Many names have been attributed to Berthold of Moosburg.<ref name=”:38″>{{Cite journal |last=Sannino |first=Antonella |title=Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources |journal=Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes |volume=63 |pages=245}}</ref> Some of these different names are, Berchtold, Berealdus, Bartholomeus, Johannes von Mossbach.<ref name=”:38″ /> These names span a range of historical sources.<ref name=”:38″ /> One example of the different name(s) attributed to Berthold of Moosburg in the historical timeline appears more than fifty years later when [[Nicholas of Cusa]] gives credit to Moosburg for his written work ”Expositio,” stating its ‘importance’ <ref name=”:38″ />

==Works==

Berthold of Moosburg (died after 1361^[1]) Not much is known about Berthold of Moosburg’s youth.^[2] Berthold of Moosburg was a Dominican monk from the Teutonian Province.^[3] He was a member of the German Dominican order.^[4] The first recorded date on record for Berthold of Moosburg is 1316, when he was studying at Oxford University in England.^[5] At this time, Berthold would have been sixteen years old.^[6] In 1318, Berthold writes ‘marginal’ commentary on De iride, a written work of Dietrich of Freiburg.^[7] His active years spanned from 1316 to 1361 and these are the only years he can be traced in historical record.^[5] Berthold as a part of Dominican order was theologian and neo-Platonist of the 14th century, teaching in Regensburg in 1327.^[8] In 1335, Berthold was called to head the Dominican order in Cologne, Germany succeeding Eckhart.^[5]^[9] Also, in 1335 and then again in 1343, in Cologne, he is listed as the ‘executor,’ of estates.^[7]

As head of the Cologne Dominicans, Berthold represented the Dominican order at the Natio Bavariae in Nuremberg in 1348.^[10] While in Cologne, Germany he would have read the work of his processors.^[11] This would have included written work from ‘Albert the Great, Meister Eckhart, and Ulrich of Strasburg,’ among others.^[11] In 1361, Berthold is listed again as a representative and ‘executor,’ of another unknown estate.^[12]

He is notable for his work on the neo-Platonist Proclus Lycaeus‘ Elements of Theology (Institutio Theologica) writing Expositio super Elementationem theologicam Procli, which was done based on the Latin translation of Proclus’s work by another Dominican, Willem van Moerbeke.^[13] Expositio would become the only commentary written on Proclus’s works to have come the medieval age.^[13] He attended Oxford, being dispatched there by his Dominican chapter for his studium generale.^[14] It is believed that during this time he would have discovered works that influenced him in his writings such as Thomas of York’s Sapientiale, Macrobius‘ Comentarii in Somnium Scipionis, and most notably Proclus’ Elementationem Theologicam, which Berthold cited ten times just in his glosses on Macrobius.^[14] Berthold’s document, Expositio, was written after the condemnation of Eckhart, which led to a period of disunity and chaos within the Dominican order.^[15]

His Expositio super Elementationem theologicam Procli, written between 1340 and 1361,^[17] was a major statement of the importance for Platonism of Proclus.^[18] In the making of his Expositio, Berthold attempted to create a comprehensive written work that served as a bridge between the Christian and non-Christian Platonic view of his day.^[16] As a result, Berthold’s Expositio incorporates both ‘Christian Platonic writings’ and ‘non- Christian Platonic writings.’^[16] Berthold takes wisdom from Euclid, and ‘adopts’ the ‘axiomatic‘ writing structure and style.^[19] He had a strong respect for Euclid and Euclid’s published works.^[7]

He opposed his Christian-Platonic synthesis to Aristotelian philosophy.^[20] His sources included Theodoric of Freiberg and Albertus Magnus.^[21]^[22] Following Proclus’s model of two modes of duration, eternity and time, Berthold rejected the aevum, an intermediate mode of time held by Theodoric and Albertus.^[21] In Expositio Berthold makes 132 citations from 93 different chapters from Clavis. He uses these citations to reinterpret and to correct Proclus’s doctorines to make it more inline with Christian and platonic belief.^[23] Further, in the making of Expositio, Berthold referenced and used several authors and written works on top of his use of Proclus’ Elements of Theology in the making of Expositio.^[16] Some of the authors include but are not limited to ‘Augustine of Hippo, Calcidius, Boethius, Apuleius, Macrobius, and Iohannes or John Scotus Eriugena.’^[16]

Ideas and philosophy

[edit]

Despite this rejection of Aristotelian ideas, Berthold borrows frequently from these predecessors.^[24] He often melds neo-Platonism and Christian theology in a synthesis sometimes called by contemporary scholars, eriugenism, a school of philosophy named for Johns Scotus Eriugena.^[24] Sometimes he would even attempt to build off the work of these Aristotelian thinkers, such as he did with Albertus Magnus’s work, De Natura Origine Animae.^[24] Berthold states that “souls are poured in by being created and are created by being poured in” (creando infundi et infundendo creari).^[24] Stating as much creates a cyclical argument for the origin of souls and avoids the idea of a souls pre-existence in accordance with neo-platonic though.^[24] While this still puts Berthold in opposition to authors such as Proclus and Albertus, it presents his argument in such as way as not to be directly confrontational to them.^[24]

Berthold continues with his analysis of the soul, building of the analysis of Proclus by Dietrich of Freiburg who features frequently in his works as one who shares a similar way of thinking.^[24] In this he makes emphasis to further align with platonic theory by stating that the soul and body can never be truly joined as one “form”.^[24] All of these arguments and those he makes on other topics serves to place learned members of the church such as Dionysius and Proclus in line with platonic philosophy.^[24] This is not to say that his work is meant solely to reframe the works of previous philosophers. Berthold often expanded on the philosophies of those whom he commented on such as he had done with Dietrich of Freiburg, wherein he extended his principles “both upward (from the intelligences to the gods), downward (to the incorruptible spiritual body),” when evaluating his commentaries on Proclus.^[24]

Providence and fate

[edit]

Berthold was a pivotal figure in the discussion of providence in 13th and 14th century Germany.^[14] Regna duo duorum was a new concept created by Berthold of Moosburg and other theologians in the Dominican Order.^[14] Regna duo duorum focused on twofold providence, which separated natural providence and voluntary providence, and created two distinct realms..^[14]

Berthold also theorizes two hierarchal realms, the realm of providence, and the realm of fate.^[14] The realm of providence in Berthold’s philosophy is the realm of God and gods.^[14] Berthold followed the standard Dominican theology at the time, believing that voluntary providence was the subject of dogmatic theology.^[14]

The realm of fate in Berthold’s philosophy is the structure of structure of the physical world.^[14] Berthold also described natural providence as the realm of fate.^[14] He believed that many things were not subject to fate.^[14] Things close to God were exempt from fate, because of the control providence has over fate.^[14] In Berthold’s Expositio, he defines natural providence as all natural occurrences on Earth and in the Heavens, and all other things in the natural world.^[14]

Berthold also believed in two forms of intellect, the primal intellect and the potential intellect.^[25] He believed that once the intellects aligned, it became impossible to speak of intellect any longer because intellect requires a difference between thought and the object of thought.^[25]

Dionysius and the Three Movements of the Soul

[edit]

Throughout his works, Berthold reinstated the idea of the three movements of the soul, originally proposed by Dionysius the Areopagite and later studies by Proclus.^[9] According to Dionysius, the souls of both angels and humans perform a threefold movement that moves the soul to a higher understanding and closer to unification with God.^[9] For Berthold, the human soul was particularly important as the human soul is a part of the natural world and those of angels are not.^[9]

The first movement of the soul moves in a circular motion moving inward on itself and closer to God.^[9] This movement is marked by contemplation and withdrawal of the external world to focus on inner peace and unity.^[9] The second movement moves in a spiral and is defined by the idea of the soul moving from speculative reasoning towards that of intelligible understanding of the divine.^[9] The third and final movement of the soul moves in a straight line, reaching out towards god.^[9] According to Berthold, this third movement is what sums up the movements in what he called “unity” transcending the natural mind. Once all three movements of the soul are complete, the unification between God and the human soul become close enough that the human soul is deified.^[9] To Berthold, the individual deification of the soul is not substantive on its own, but the process itself is where the real substance lie. ^[9]

Expositio Super Elementationem Theologicam Procli

[edit]

Berthold primary extant work, his Expositio Super Elementationem Theologicam Procli, often referred to more succinctly as his Expositio.^[26] It shows his adherence to Platonic ideas rather than the more common Aristotelian views of the day, demonstrated most clearly in the third introduction to his Expositio, praeambulum, wherein he presents a fictitious dialogue between Aristotelians and Platonist over their fundamental preconceptions upon which their logical arguments are built.^[26]^[27] Berthold’s argument is not against philosophy’s relation to theology, as one may expect given his disagreements on Aristotelian presuppositions, but rather against the Aristotelian preconceptions in metaphysics.^[27]

The book opens with three introductions before moving on to the propositum et commentum; the prologus, the expositio tituli, and the praeambulam.^[27] The prologus opens with a line spoken by St. Paul, whom Berthold refers to as the “summus divinalis sapientiae theologus Paulus loquens de mundanae philosophiae sapientibus” translated as “the highest theologian of the divinizing wisdom, regarding the sages of worldly philosophy.”^[27]

The line comes from Romans 1:19-20 which say:

“Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.”^[28]

Berthold proceeds to break apart the verse and analyse it piece by piece, going over any potential differences in grammar that could cause a change in meanings.^[29] Curiously, during his academic sermon, Berthold cites Hermes Trismegistus twice in his analysis, a pre-Platonic writer which he sourced from Albertus Magnus.^[29] Hermes Trismegistus holds a central role in the arguments made in the prologus and over half of the discussion on Romans 1:19 and 20 focuses much on interpreting it using the Hermetica.^[29]

Legacy and attributions

[edit]

Berthold’s Expositio has notably have been influential on Nicholas of Cusa’s works, and has been cited among a list of authoritative Neoplatonic authors in Cusa’s Apologia doctae ignorantiae.^[30]

Nicholas of Cusa lists the author of Expositio as Johannes von Mossbach.^[31] Many names have been attributed to Berthold of Moosburg.^[32] Some of these different names are, Berchtold, Berealdus, Bartholomeus, Johannes von Mossbach.^[32] These names span a range of historical sources.^[32] One example of the different name(s) attributed to Berthold of Moosburg in the historical timeline appears more than fifty years later when Nicholas of Cusa gives credit to Moosburg for his written work Expositio, stating its ‘importance.’ ^[32]

Expositio super elementationem theologicam Procli 184-211. De animabus, edited by Loris Sturlese, Rome, Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1974.
Bertoldo di Moosburg, Tabula contentorum in Expositione super Elementationem theologicam Procli, edited by A. Beccarisi, Pisa, Scuola Normale Superiore, 2000.
Expositio super Elementationem theologicam Procli, in Corpus philosophorum Teutonicorum medii aevi, vol. 6, edited by Loris Sturlese:
- 6/1: Prologus. Propositiones 1-13, Meiner, Hamburg 1984. ISBN 3-7873-0599-8
- 6/2: Propositiones 14-34, Meiner, Hamburg 1986. ISBN 3-7873-0673-0
- 6/3: Propositiones 35-65, Meiner, Hamburg 2001. ISBN 3-7873-1560-8
- 6/4: Propositiones 66-107, Meiner, Hamburg 2003. ISBN 3-7873-1655-8
- 6/6: Propositiones 136–159, Meiner, Hamburg 2007
- 6/7: Propositiones 160-183, Meiner, Hamburg 2003

Markus Fűhrer, Stephen Gersh, Dietrich of Freiberg and Berthold of Moosburg, in Stephen Gersh (ed.), Interpreting Proclus from Antiquity to the Renaissance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014, pp. 299–317.
Antonella Sannino, Berthold of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 63, 2000 (2000), pp. 243–258
Beukes, Johann. (2021). Neoplatonism in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages: Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300–1361) as case study. HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies. 77. 10.4102/hts.v77i4.6281.

^ Ashley/Dominicans: 3 Mystics 1300s Archived 2008-07-25 at the Wayback Machine
^ Beukes, Johann (2021). “Neoplatonism in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages: Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300-1361) as case study”. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies: 5 of 15.
^ Retucci, Fiorella. “Between Cologne and Oxford: Berthold of Moosburg and Thomas of York’s Sapientiale”. The Renewal of Medieval Metaphysics: Berthold of Moosburg’s Expositio on Proclus’ Elements of Theology: 89.
^ Loconsole, M (2022). “The figure and Thoughts of Berthold of Moosburg. New Studies and Perspectives”. Bulletin de Philosophie Medievale.
^ ^a ^b ^c Zavattero, Irene (2020). In the Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy: Philosophy between 500 and 1500. pp. 282–286. ISBN 9789402416633.
^ Beukes, Johann (2021). “Neoplatonism in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages: Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300-1361) as case study”. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies: 5 of 15.
^ ^a ^b ^c Sannino, Antonella. “Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes. 63: 245.
^ Gieraths: Life in Abundance – 1 Archived April 4, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j Sturlese, Loris (2021). “8 Berthold of Moosburg, the unum animae, and Deification”. In Calma, Dragos; King, Evan (eds.). The Renewal of Medieval Metaphysics: Berthold of Moosburg’s Expositio on Proclus’ Elements of Theology. History of Metaphysics: Ancient, Medieval, Modern. Leiden Boston: BRILL. ISBN 978-90-04-47102-3.
^ Beukes, Johann (2021-03-19). “Neoplatonism in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages: Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300–1361) as case study”. HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies. 77 (4): 15. doi:10.4102/hts.v77i4.6281. ISSN 2072-8050.
^ ^a ^b Sannino, Antonella. “Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes. 63: 3.
^ Sannino, Antonella. “Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes. 63: 245.
^ ^a ^b Beukes, Johann (2021-03-19). “Neoplatonism in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages: Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300–1361) as case study”. HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies. 77 (4). doi:10.4102/hts.v77i4.6281. ISSN 2072-8050.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m Calma, Dragos; King, Evan (2021). The Renewal of Medieval Metaphysics: Berthold of Moosburg’s Expositio on Proclus’ Elements of Theology. University College Dublin: Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-47102-3.
^ Beukes, Johann (2021). “Neoplatonism in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages: Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300-1361) as case study”. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies: 5 of 15.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e Gersh, Stephen (July 2014). Interpreting Proclus from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Cambridge University Press. p. 307. ISBN 978-1-108-46535-9.
^ D. N. Sedley, The Cambridge Companion to Greek and Roman Philosophy (2003), p. 327.
^ André_Vauchez, Richard_Barrie_Dobson, Michael_Lapidge, Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages (2001), p. 1153.
^ Sannino, Antonella. “Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes. 63: 245.
^ George Henry Radcliffe Parkinson, Stuart Shanker,
Routledge History of Philosophy (1999), p. 235.
^ ^a ^b Steel, Carlos (2001-06-21). Porro, Pasquale (ed.). “The Neoplatonic Doctrine of Time and Eternity and its Influence on Medieval Philosophy”. The Medieval Concept of Time. doi:10.1163/9789004453197_003. ISBN 9789004453197.
^ Albert the Great (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
^ King, Evan (2019). “Eriugenism in Berthold of Moosburg’s Expositio super Elementationem theologicam Procli”. In Calma, Dragos (ed.). Reading Proclus and the Book of Causes Volume 1: Western Scholarly Networks and Debates. Leiden: Brill. p. 399.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j King, Evan (2019). Reading Proclus and the Book of Causes Volume 1: Western Scholarly Networks and Debates. Brill. ISBN 9789004345102.
^ ^a ^b “무스부르크의 베르톨드에게서 지성과 ‘영혼의 하나’ – 그의 하나의 형이상학(Henology)에 대한 해석 – – 중세철학 – 한국중세철학회 – KISS”. 학술논문검색사이트 KISS (in Korean). doi:10.52654/pma.30.153.
^ ^a ^b Fuhrer, Markus; Gersh, Stephan (2014). Interpreting Proclus: From Antiquity to the Renaissance. Cambridge University Press. pp. 306–308. ISBN 9781108465359.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Calma, Dragos; King, Evan (2021). Renewal of Medieval Metaphysics: Berthold of Moosburg’s Expositio on Proclus’ Elements of Theology. University College Dublin: Brill.
^ Romans 1:19-20, King James Version.
^ ^a ^b ^c King, Evan (2021). Supersapientia: Berthold of Moosburg and the Divine Science of the Platonists. Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-46548-0.
^ Fiamma, Andrea (2017). “Nicholas of Cusa and the so-Called Cologne School of the 13th and 14th Centuries”. Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Age. 84: 91–128. ISSN 0373-5478.
^ Sannino, Antonella. “Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes. 63: 245.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Sannino, Antonella. “Berthold’s of Moosburg’s Hermetic Sources”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes. 63: 245.

Ideas and philosophy

Providence and fate

Dionysius and the Three Movements of the Soul

Expositio Super Elementationem Theologicam Procli

Legacy and attributions

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply