Studie se věnuje dialogu Anselma z Canterbury De grammatico. Tento spis byl samotným autorem označen jako úvod do dialektiky. V dobové dialektice zastával klíčové místo Aristotelův spis Kategorie. Tento článek se proto pokouší interpretovat Anselmův dialog jako určitou pedagogicky koncipovanou podobu komentáře k Aristotelovým Kategoriím. V návaznosti na Anselmův spis jsou postupně představeny jednotlivé teze z Aristotelových Kategorií (jak tzv. antepredicamenta, tak pojednání o substanci, kvalitě a částečně i vlastnictví) a způsob, jakým s nimi Anselm pracoval. and The paper deals with the dialogue De grammatico written by Anselm of Canterbury. The author of the dialogue himself described the work as an introduction to dialectics. In that epoch, the leading role in the given art belonged to Aristotle's Categories. As a result, the article aims to interpret Anselm's dialogue as a commentary to Aristotle's Categories conceived in a pedagogic form. Following Anselm's treatise, the paper analyses particular theses from the Categories (firstly the so-called antepredicamenta, then the categories of substance, quality, and partly also having) and the approach Anselm employed in working with them.
John Duns Scotus is trying, in two places of his work, to improve the famous Proslogion argument of St. Anselm of Aosta. These thoughts seem to cause difficulties for the interpreters of Scotus' philosophy, as they consider John's thinking to be quite different from Anselm's outcomes, and they are at a loss why Doctor Subtilis sees certain ideological alliance with the Canterbury archbishop. -- This study is trying to trace some points of concurrence between both thinkers and also to find out how did John Duns Scotus understand the thoughts of Anselm and why he thought that their trains of thoughts might have been similar to a certain extent. The main expostulation which Scotus gives Anselm is a small correlation of his argument with actually existing world, and so he frames his improvements so that there would be a secured link to the factually real existences. Anselm must have been well aware of this as he considered existence to already posess the actual being. Scotus envisaged the existence in a diferent way and that is why he had to add these improvements. -- John Duns Scotus' understanding of Anselnt's argument is, with his own reading of Proslogion, quite diferent from other medieval, and not only medieval, thinkers, who are represented in the study by St. Thomas Aquinas.
Věhlas Gerberta z Remeše (jako papež Silvestr II.) je již od středověku tradován zejména v přímé vazbě s jeho studiem quadrivia ve Španělsku. Tato studie se zabývá problematikou měření času podle Gerberta a snaží se ukázat, že základní koncepce a znalosti, kterých Gerbert k měření času užívá, jsou takřka výhradně převzaty z latinské (převážně) encyklopedické tradice, s výjimkou díla De utilitatibus astrolabii, které je někdy Gerbertovi připisováno, v němž jsou recipovány arabské i latinské zdroje. Nejprve jsou popsány zmínky o Gerbertově konstrukci horologií (část I), následně je představen Gerbertův dopis bratru Adamovi (část II), následuje vymezení základních pojmů – den, noc, rovnoměrná a nerovnoměrná hodina apod. podle latinské tradice i podle spisu De utilitatibus astrolabii (část III), popisy časových pásem podle latinských autorit, včetně řeckého původu těchto paralelních zón (části IV a V) a časová pásma podle nejstarších arabských astrolábů a spisu De utilitatibus astrolabii (část VI), návody k určení přítomnosti v určitém klimatu podle Gerbertova dopisu a spisu De utilitatibus astrolabii (část VII) a pokusy o vysvětlení některých dalších detailů z Gerbertova dopisu Adamovi (část VIII). and The fame of Gerbert of Rheims (as a pope Sylvester II.) is since middle ages connected mainly with his study of quadrivium in Spain. This paper deals with timekeeping according to Gerbert and wants to show that the ground of his conceptions and knowledge is almost certainly adopted from the tradition of Latin encyclopedists, excluding the treatise De utilitatibus astrolabii (sometimes attributed to Gerbert), which used Arabic and Latin sources. Firstly mentions of Gerbert's constructions of horology is described (part I), then Gerbert's letter to brother Adam is introduced (part II), afterwards basic timekeeping’s terms (day, night, equal and unequal hour etc.) is defined according to Latin tradition and according to author of De utilitatibus astrolabii (part III), after that follows descriptions of time zones according to Latin authorities, including Greek origin of this parallel circles (parts IV and V) and the same topic according to the oldest Arabic astrolabes and according to author of De utilitatibus astrolabii (part VI), then follows instructions for recognition of actual zone according to letter written by Gerbert and according to author of De utilitatibus astrolabii (part VII), and finally this text attempts to clarify some details of Gerbert's letter to Adam (part VIII).
Tato studie se věnuje výkladu násobení podle čtyř nejstarších latinských středověkých autorů, kteří sepsali své texty o početních úkonech na abaku kolem roku 1000, tedy podle Gerberta z Remeše (Pravidla pro počítání na abaku, Regulae de numerorum abaci rationibus), Herigera z Lobbes (Pravidla počítání na abaku, Regulae numerorum super abacum), Abbona z Fleury (Komentář k Victoriově spisu Calculus, In Calculum Victorii commentario; resp. tzv. Abbonův abakus, Abbonis abacus) a Bernelia mladšího z Paříže (Kniha o abaku, Liber abaci). Po představení, vysvětlení a srovnání pravidel pro násobení podle těchto spisů následuje v příloze originální znění a překlad Herigerových, Gerbetových a Abbonových pravidel pro násobení. and This paper deals with the interpretation of multiplication according to four oldest medieval Latin authors of mathematical texts about the counting board or abacus written around year 1000, i.e. according to Gerbert of Reims (Rules for computatiton on the abacus, Regulae de numerorum abaci rationibus), Heriger of Lobbes (Rules for computation on the abacus, Regulae numerorum super abacum), Abbo of Fleury (Commentary on the Calculus of Victorius, In Calculum Victorii commentario; respectively so called The Abbon's abacus, Abbonis abacus) and Bernelius Junior of Paris (Book on the abacus, Liber Abaci). After the presentation, explanation and comparison of rules for multiplication contained in these writings, follows the original text and translation Heriger's, Gerbert's and Abbon's rules for multiplication in appendices.
One of the most predominant themes of llth century philosophical and theological thought was the controversy between Berengar of Tours and Lanfranc of Pavia on the nature of the changing of bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ during the mystery of Eucharist. Both notable dialectics of their day expanded the debate between Ratramnus of Corvey (maybe even John Scotus Eriugena) and Paschasius Radbert, who 200 years earlier renewed interest about theoretical solutions of sacrament Eucharist, when they developed the ideas of patristic saints Ambrose and Augustine. Using peripatetic logic, Berengar developed thinking of Ratramnus and refuted the materialization of Jesus Christ's presence during Eucharist because of dialectic and grammatical reasons. He believed that the Son of God is actually presem at the Eucharist, but only as sacrament (sacramentum). Lanfranc refuted his assertions by logically rebuking Berengat's formal inconsistencies in his syllogisms and defended the official church and its teachings by describing the changes of bread and wine during Eucharist using Aristotle's metaphysical teachings about substance and accidents.