Line 22: |
Line 22: |
| == Corpus Christi == | | == Corpus Christi == |
| | | |
− | * Corpus Christi 119 | + | * Corpus Christi D119 |
| + | ** commentary on ''Perihermenias'' possibly Nicholas of Cornwall |
| + | * Corpus Christi D230 |
| + | **''Exposition of the Isagoge'' Cornibiensis (ff 57r-59v) |
| * Corpus Christi 250 | | * Corpus Christi 250 |
− | * Corpus Christi 293b | + | * Corpus Christi E293B |
| + | ** ''Exposition of the Isagoge'', Nicholas of Cornwall ff 69ra-77va |
| | | |
| == Merton == | | == Merton == |
| | | |
| * Merton 289 | | * Merton 289 |
− | * Merton 292: [[Simon of Faversham]] - ''Perihermenias''. | + | * Merton 292 |
| + | ** [[Simon of Faversham]] - ''Perihermenias''. |
| + | ** Simon, ''Quaestiones super Analytica Priora'' (111r-137v). |
| * Merton 296 | | * Merton 296 |
| | | |
Line 49: |
Line 55: |
| | | |
| * Caius 344/540 | | * Caius 344/540 |
− | **[[William de Bonkes]], Questions on Priscian, questions on the ''Perihermenias''. | + | ** [[William de Bonkes]], Questions on Priscian (1ra, 19va) |
− | ** [[John de Stycborn]], Questions on the ''Praedicamenta'', questions on the ''Perihermenias''. | + | ** Anon. ''Quaestiones super Physicam'', I-VIII (Caius 344, ff 105rb-170vb) |
| + | ** [[William de Bonkes]], Questions on the ''Perihermenias'' (Lewry quotes 171rb, 189rb) |
| + | ** [[John de Stycborn]], Questions on the ''Praedicamenta'' (inc. 203rb), questions on the ''Perihermenias'' (inc. 210vb, 213rb) |
| + | ** ''Syncategoremata'', attr. Walter Burley (ff 230r-264v). |
| + | ** Johannes de Waefeld, ''Quaestiones super Physicam'', I (Caius 344, ff. 264ra-277vb) |
| * Caius 434/434 | | * Caius 434/434 |
| ** [[Walter Burley]], Some leaves containing most of ''De exclusivis'' (1r-6r), beginning of ''De exclusivis''. All of ''De exceptivis'', and the beginning of ''De obligationibus'' are lost, the remainder of ''De obligationibus'' (7r-10r). For ''De insolubilibus'', Bradwardine's ''Insolubilia'' is substituted (10-13), ''De suppositionibus'' (13-19). Heytesbury's ''De significationibus propositionum multiplicium'' (19-21), Anonymous ''Sophismata'' and ''Obligationes''. | | ** [[Walter Burley]], Some leaves containing most of ''De exclusivis'' (1r-6r), beginning of ''De exclusivis''. All of ''De exceptivis'', and the beginning of ''De obligationibus'' are lost, the remainder of ''De obligationibus'' (7r-10r). For ''De insolubilibus'', Bradwardine's ''Insolubilia'' is substituted (10-13), ''De suppositionibus'' (13-19). Heytesbury's ''De significationibus propositionum multiplicium'' (19-21), Anonymous ''Sophismata'' and ''Obligationes''. |
Line 62: |
Line 72: |
| ** William Dallying, probably a Cambridge master, discusses the sophisma 'Anima Antichristi necessario erit' in his questions in the ''Perihermenias'' | | ** William Dallying, probably a Cambridge master, discusses the sophisma 'Anima Antichristi necessario erit' in his questions in the ''Perihermenias'' |
| ** [[Walter Burley]], Questions on the ''Posterior Analytics''. | | ** [[Walter Burley]], Questions on the ''Posterior Analytics''. |
| + | ** Guillelmus de Hennore. ''Sophisma'' 'Sola species definitur'. (23vB & 44rA-46rB) |
| * Caius 611/341 | | * Caius 611/341 |
− | ** Unascribed question on the ''Elenchi'' by an author [[Directory:Logic Museum/Sten Ebbesen|Sten Ebbesen]] has called 'The Englishman'<ref>Ebbesen, 'The Dead Man is Alive', ''Synthese'', xl (1979)</ref>. As 'Willelmus vocor' is given as an example of a congruous expression, we may infer that the author's name was 'William'. The version of these questions in the Oxford Oriel 33 has on the first leaf a note that these quires were given by William de Walcote. So it is possible that the ''Elenchi'' may be connected with an Englishman who was a fellow of Merton from 1291-1308. There is a transcription of questions 21 and 22 in Braakhuis 1981. | + | ** Unascribed question on the ''Elenchi'' by an author [[Directory:Logic Museum/Sten Ebbesen|Sten Ebbesen]] has called 'The Englishman'<ref>Ebbesen, 'The Dead Man is Alive', ''Synthese'', xl (1979)</ref>. As 'Willelmus vocor' is given as an example of a congruous expression, we may infer that the author's name was 'William'. The version of these questions in the Oxford Oriel 33 has on the first leaf a note that these quires were given by William de Walcote. So it is possible that the ''Elenchi'' may be connected with an Englishman who was a fellow of Merton from 1291-1308. There is a transcription of questions 21 and 22 in Braakhuis 1981. (1r-24v) |
| * Caius 612/543 | | * Caius 612/543 |
| ** [[John of Felmingham]], questions on the ''Elenchi''. | | ** [[John of Felmingham]], questions on the ''Elenchi''. |
Line 103: |
Line 114: |
| * A.G. Little & F. Pelster, ''Oxford Theology and Theologians AD 1282-1302'' Oxford 1934 | | * A.G. Little & F. Pelster, ''Oxford Theology and Theologians AD 1282-1302'' Oxford 1934 |
| * [[Directory:Logic Museum/Osmund Lewry|Lewry, P.O.]] (ed.), 1985, The Rise of British Logic: Acts of the Sixth European Symposium on Medieval Logic and Semantics , Papers in Mediaeval Studies 7, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Toronto. | | * [[Directory:Logic Museum/Osmund Lewry|Lewry, P.O.]] (ed.), 1985, The Rise of British Logic: Acts of the Sixth European Symposium on Medieval Logic and Semantics , Papers in Mediaeval Studies 7, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Toronto. |
− | * [[Directory:Logic Museum/Sten Ebbesen|Ebbesen, Sten]], 1987, “Talking about what is no more. Texts by [[Peter of Cornwall]], [[Richard of Clive]], [[Simon of Faversham]] and [[Radulphus Brito]],” [[Directory:Logic Museum/CIMAGL|Cahiers de l'Institut du Moyen-Âge Grec et Latin]] 55, Copenhague. | + | * [[Directory:Logic Museum/Sten Ebbesen|Ebbesen, Sten]], 1987, “Talking about what is no more. Texts by [[Peter of Cornwall]], [[Richard de Clive]], [[Simon of Faversham]] and [[Radulphus Brito]],” [[Directory:Logic Museum/CIMAGL|Cahiers de l'Institut du Moyen-Âge Grec et Latin]] 55, Copenhague. |
| | | |
| ==Resources== | | ==Resources== |