Page:Philosophical Review Volume 20.djvu/445

431 Munich on the De anima intellectiva of Siger, in which he compares Siger's doctrine with that of Aristotle, Averroes, and Thomas Aquinas, and for the first time raises a doubt concerning the Averroism of Siger. It is fortunate that Bruckmüller's study, which is thorough and scholarly, is not vitiated by his conclusions, which are not conclusive. There seems no doubt that Siger was an Averroist, or at least was known as such. That he regards Averroes as the commentator of Aristotle par excellence, whom he takes as his guide in the interpretation of the latter, seems also clear, and the fact that he sometimes misunderstands Averroes, if we believe Bruckmüller, does not make him any the less an Averroist.

Latterly, in 1908, Baeumker, on the strength no doubt of Mandonnet's work, particularly his publication of Siger's writings, has retracted his statement respecting the character and authorship of the Impossibilia. He agrees with Mandonnet that it is a work of Siger and not written against Siger. He maintains, however, in a note of his latest volume on Witelo (Witelo, ein Philosoph und Naturforscher des XIII. Jahrhunderts, Münster, 1908, p. 573, note 2) that his view of Siger differs widely from that of Mandonnet. It would be interesting to know what Baeumker's view is on this most interesting and important subject, and the students of mediæval philosophy would be greatly benefited by a monograph on the philosophy of Siger from Baeumker's pen. If we are to judge from the sketch on mediæval philosophy which he contributed to the volume on the history of philosophy in Kultur der Gegenwart, Baeumker regards Siger as representing a radical Aristotelianism, or a moderate Averroism. His differences from Mandonnet must therefore be in detail.

Finally, the last stage so far in the Siger affair is the appearance of the second edition of Mandonnet in two volumes. The second volume, dated 1908, contains the original texts, the first volume contains the historical, biographical, and critical portion, and is dated 1911. The first volume is a very valuable piece of work. The treatment of Siger himself is preceded by a chapter on "The Influence of Aristotle on the Intellectual Movement of the Middle Ages," and a second on "The Influence of Aristotle on the Formation of the Doctrinal Currents of the Thirteenth Century." In the study of Siger, also, Mandonnet keeps constantly in touch with the history of ideas in the thirteenth century, and gives Siger his proper place in that history.

There are a few interesting additions, textual or in foot-notes, which may be referred to briefly. Interesting is p. 7, note 3, where he