In the first part of chapter 2 of book II of the Physics Aristotle addresses the issue of the difference between mathematics and physics. In the course of his discussion he says some things about astronomy and the ‘ ‘ more physical branches of mathematics”. In this paper I discuss historical issues concerning the text, translation, and interpretation of the passage, focusing on two cruxes, ( I ) the first reference to astronomy at 193b25–26 and ( II ) the reference to the more physical branches at 194a7–8. In section I, I criticize Ross’s interpretation of the passage and point out that his alteration of ( I ) has no warrant in the Greek manuscripts. In the next three sections I treat three other interpretations, all of which depart from Ross's: in section II that of Simplicius, which I commend; in section III that of Thomas Aquinas, which is importantly influenced by a mistranslation of ( II ), and in section IV that of Ibn Rushd, which is based on an Arabic text corresponding to that printed by Ross. In the concluding section of the paper I describe the modern history of the Greek text of our passage and translations of it from the early twelfth century until the appearance of Ross's text in 1936.

Al-Kindī was influenced by two Greek traditions in his attempts to explain vision, light and color. Most obviously, his works on optics are indebted to Euclid and, perhaps indirectly, to Ptolemy. But he also knew some works from the Aristotelian tradition that touch on the nature of color and vision. Al-Kindī explicitly rejects the Aristotelian account of vision in his De Aspectibus, and adopts a theory according to which we see by means of a visual ray emitted from the eye. But in the same work, al-Kindī draws on Philoponus’ commentary on Aristotle's De Anima. His borrowing from this commentary, via an Arabic paraphrase of the De Anima, was crucial in the development of al-Kindī's new ‘ ‘ punctiform analysis of light.” Conversely, two broadly Aristotelian works by al-Kindī, which explain the reason things are colored, engage with problems about color dealt with in the Aristotelian tradition ( e.g. by Alexander of Aphrodisias ). But here the Aristotelian theory, and in particular the Aristotelian notion of the transparent, is abandoned in order to accommodate the visual ray theory expounded in De Aspectibus.

This study consists in a commentary on some passages from Avicenna, which deal with the category of the relative. The commentary points out the promotion of the relative to the role of an exclusive determining factor. An attempt is made here to show how Avicenna tries to detach the relative accident from its subject, in order to transform it into the exclusive determining factor of a pure thingness. The relative determination of this thingness must be able to receive specifications, which may extend as far as the infimae species. These specifications are obtained by the consideration of the other attributes of the subject of the relative attribution, which are henceforth no more than the “modes of advent” of the relation.

Coinciding with the scientific flourishing of the 5th / 11th century, which was favoured by the cultural policy of the Andalusī kingdoms ( mulūk al-tawā'if ), Abū ‘ Umar ibn ‘ Abd al-Barr, Ibn Hazm and Sā‘ id al-Andalusī all dealt with the classification of the sciences in many works that are already known. Ibn Bājja began his career at the end of this period. In his glosses to al-Fārābī’s commentary to the Isagoge he wrote a text on this subject that has not yet been analysed. The present paper studies Ibn Bājja's classification in connection with his predecessors and with the scientific and philosophical background of Andalusī culture. In their classifications of the sciences, all these authors express and stress important factors of the evolution of Andalusī science and thought, such as the dialectic between religious and rational sciences and the importance of the scientific method derived from Aristotle's logic. Sā‘ id al-Andalusī and Ibn Bājja ( and, to a lesser extent, Ibn Hazm ) show the profound influence exerted by al-Fārābī’s works, particularly the Ihsā' al-‘ ulūm. Thus, Ibn Bājja foreshadows the evolution of sciences in the next century and the movement headed by Ibn Rushd, Ibn Tufayl and others, characterized by the search for concordance with the postulates set forth by philosophical disciplines.