More likely from a chronological and geographical point of view, Simplicius’ influence on Paul would reinforce a hypothesis which has not met much favor either among Greek or Arabic scholars, that is to say, the settling of Simplicius in a Graeco-Syriac speaking region after he and/or some of his colleagues from Athens returned from Khosrow Anushirwan’s court in 532. The city of Harran (Carrhae), where intellectual Syriac Hellenism remained alive till the end of the tenth century, has been proposed by Tardieu as the place where Simplicius might have stayed. C. Luna has challenged the part of Tardieu’s hypothesis, which deals with evidence contained in Simplicius’ On Physics, regarding the place where he composed this commentary. Nonetheless, the case has been bolstered by further elements brought forward and documented by I. Hadot. So far, the entire issue remains to be addressed comprehensively or disproved by any Greek or Arabic scholar, especially when it comes to the issue of Simplicius’ school of mathematics, the existence of which has been recorded only by Arabic sources. This issue makes Simplicius’ return to Athens problematic.
In addition to I. Hadot’s most recent study on this issue (2007), it maybe added that: (1) from the report of the tenth century bio-bibliographer Ibn al-NadIm, it appears that the Arabic translation of Simplicius’ On Cat. and its chapter on relatives in particular may at some point have been studied by readers of the Euclidean commentator and mathematician Theon of Alexandria. This constitutes indirect supplementary evidence for Simplicius’ teaching activities, both mathematical and philosophical. (2) Al-Farabl’s Book of Particles (see Vallat 2004:373-375; 2011a) also points to the fact that the gathering of logical and mathematical interests in relation to the question of Aristotle’s treatment of relatives remained a well-established tradition among the Arabic philosophers after Simplicius’ time. The possible influence of Simplicius on al-Farabl’s On Elements can now be assessed on the basis of Arnzen’s recent edition of al-NayrizI’s ‘‘Sammelkommentar’’ on Euclid’s Elements, which includes 24 quotations by Simplicius. Apparently (see Hogendijk 2008), Qusta b. Luqa (d. c. 912) made use of Simplicius’ On Elements in his Introduction to Geometry. (3) The Graeco-Aramaic name of the dedicatee of Simplicius’ On De anima mentioned by Ibn al-NadIm is in all likelihood a Harranian name; (4) the historian Agathias is not the only surviving source for the exile of Simplicius and his colleagues. Ibn al-NadIm’s Fihrist not only bears witness to both of the philosophers’ journey to Khosrow’s court and of their departure, but notes at the same time that Priscianus’ Solutiones ad Chosroem was sent to Khrosow. Since Ibn al-NadIm did not rely on any Greek source, it means that this treatise was somehow translated either into Pahlavi or into Syriac. Moreover, the second discussion between Khosrow Anushirwan and the philosophers reported in Hunayn b. Isltaq’s Adab al-falasifa (p. 60) might well bring together distinctive features of Damascius’ metaphysical agnosticism.
From I. Hadot’s study, one may also retain that a Pagan genealogy might explain more satisfactorily the origin of the typically harsh Neoplatonic anti-Christian polemic echoed in various texts by Arabic scientists and philosophers (whether heathen or Muslim) than the 'Abbasid’s philhellenism alleged by Gutas. A thorough examination of Thabit b. Qurra’s praise of the triumph of the Graeco-Syriac heathenism over Christianity along with the consideration of the specificity of the Harranian milieu studied by Pingree might justifiably lead to a reappraisal of the primary ideological context of the Graeco-Syriac-Arabic translation movement.
The other, much better known, means of transmission from Alexandria to the Syriac and Arabic-speaking world is exemplarily represented by a former Christian student of Ammonius in Alexandria called Sergius of Resh'ayna (d. 536). Plato’s disappearance from the philosophical curriculum might be attributable, to begin with, to Sergius’ decision to replace him with Christian theological works, such as those of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. Be that as it may, as Hugonnard-Roche and Watt have shown, from the sixth to the tenth century Christian Syriac scholars proficient in Greek and, later on, in Arabic, represent not only the best known channel through which Greek philosophy was subsequently transmitted to the Arab world, but also the other, monotheistic, matrix of Arabic philosophy. Whether clerics, monks or appointed translators, and scholars, their role should not be underestimated. Arabic-Islamic philosophy most probably owes to them not only its monotheistic form of Neoplatonism, which originated under the supervision of the Muslim philosopher al-KindI within the ‘‘KindI Circle’’ of appointed translators (Endress 1997b), but also its specific Peripatetic anatomy, shaped within the School of Baghdad to which al-FarabI belonged. The tenth century Arabic translation of Aristotle’s whole Organon can thus be seen as the achievement of their four-centuries-long work. Through them, the Alexandrian conception of philosophy as an Aristotelian curriculum of studies passed on not only to al-FarabI, Avicenna, and Averroes, but also, thanks to these three authors, to the Latin world where it contributed in some way to the elaboration of the Gradus Philosophicus in the Faculties of Arts.
See also: > 'AbdallatIf al-BagdadI > Arethas of Caesarea > Aristotle, Arabic > Barhebraeus > Ibn SIna, Abu 'AlI (Avicenna) > Ibn Suwar (Ibn al-Khammar) > Ibn al-Tayyib > Ibn Zur'a, 'Isa ibn Isltaq > al-KindI, Abu Yusuf
Ya'qub ibn Isltaq > Logic in the Arab and Islamic World
> Philoponus, Arabic > Plato, Arabic > Plotinus, Arabic
> Porphyry, Arabic > Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite
> Sergius of Resh'ayna > Thabit ibn Qurra > Themistius, Arabic > Translations from Greek into Arabic > Yalrya ibn 'Adi
World History
