ANTONI ANDREW (Antonius Andreas, Antoni Anreae, Antoni Andreu)—a philosopher and theologian, b. around 1280 in Tauste near Saragossa, d. around 133 in Lerida.

There is no certain and documented data on the course of Antoni’s studies or the degrees he obtained while at the University of Paris or in Spain. In the 1390s he entered the Franciscans, probably in Monzón (Montebono). From there after his novitiate he was sent to the Studium Generale in Lerida where he stayed until 1800; he probably obtained the degree of master of the arts there. He went to Paris for further studies where he was a student of John Duns Scotus (probably already during his first stay in Paris from 1302 to 1303, or during his second stay from 1304 to 1307); he was probably presented in Paris to Duns Scotus by his former teacher who was then the general of the Franciscan order, Gonsalvus de Balboa. Probably during his studies in Paris Antoni became a follower and propagator of Scotus’ doctrine. It is generally thought that he was an immediate student of Scotus and continuator of his doctrine. There is no data to suggest that Antoni remained in Paris after Scotus left Paris in 1307. Antoni returned to Spain and taught theology, the philosophy of nature, and logic in the convent in Monzón or in Lerida where most of his works in philosophy were written. Antoni left a rich body of scientific work that is predominantly philosophical in character. His works were very popular until the seventeenth century, as is evident from the very many manuscripts that have been preserved in university libraries throughout Europe and numerous editions of certain treatises. The most popular was Tractatus super tribus principiis naturae and Quaestiones super XII libros metaphysicae. It is sufficient to recall that the Quaestiones went through as many as 17 editions over the course of thirty years in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. His works are marked by a clear style and Scotistic finesse. He faithfully present the doctrine of his master and so received the popular title of “Scotulus” (“Scotellus”) and was called “doctor dulcifluus”.

The works of Antoni whose authorship is beyond doubt are: Scriptum in artem veterem, and under this title are several logical treatises, namely: Scriptum super Porphyrii Isagogen ad Categorias Aristotelis; Scriptum super Categorias Aristotelis; Scriptum super sex principia Gilberti Porettani; Scriptum super librum Divisionum Boethii. A second group consists of commentaries to Aristotle’s Metaphysics: Scriptum aureum super Metaphysicam Aristotelis, known as the Expositio litteralis; Quaestiones super XII libros Metaphysicae Aristotelis, a work which is more independent of Aristotle’s text, while the Expositio is a commentary ad litteram. The next work is Tractatus de tribus principiis rerum naturalium (materia, forma et privatio) which like the Quaestiones Metaphysicae was enormously popular; finally there is Quaestio de subjecto totius logicae.

Works ascribed to Antoni as the sole author but of questionable authenticity include the following: Quaestiones in VIII libros Physicorum; Quaestiones super libros De anima; Tractatus de syllogismo (demonstrativo et topico); Tractatus formalitatum ad mentem Scoti; Commentarium in IV libros Sententiarum; Compendiosum principium in libros Sententiarum; Sermones (Sermones a prima dominica Adventus; Sermones a S. Andrea; Sermones de fastivitatibus et dominicis totius anni et communes plurimorum editi per fratrem Antonium de Hispania; Sermones feriales totius anni eiusdem doctoris). Lost works form a separate group of Antoni’s writings: Scriptum in Novam Logican; Quaestiones ordinariae de logica; Quaestiones quodlibetales; Tractatus de modis distinctionum; and Quaestiones mercuriales seu commentarius super regulas iuris.

In Poland M. Gensler made a catalogue of Antoni’s works with the incipit’s, explicit’s, and a complete list of manuscripts and printed works. He published this in Mediaevalia Philosophica Polonorum 31 (1992).

Antoni’s commentary on the Metaphysics was used for lectures not only in Franciscan schools but also in many European universities, as is evident from the many manuscripts in libraries. The influence of Antoni’s commentary on the Metaphysics is also apparent in the Jagiellonian University. Several professors lectured on questions from Antoni’s Metaphysics in Kraków in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. These professors were Scotists: Nicholas of Michalwic, Marcic Kułap of Tarnowiec, and the student of Michael of Bieszczyków, John of Stobnica who wrote that he held classes on metaphysics (1505) according to Antoni’s commentary, i.e., his Quaestiones from 1487 (inc. BJ 2230). Michael of Bieszczyków probably lectured according to Antoni for he possessed in his library a Venetian edition of the Quaestiones from 1491 (inc. BJ 1530). The Quaestiones are also found in the manuscripts of the Jagiellonian Library: ms BJ 2061, f. 98v, and ms BJ 2524, f. 4r–103 r, which belonged to Martin of Tarnowiec, and later to Jacob Friedl of Kleparz who left glosses in the manuscripts, whence we may suppose that he was influenced by Antoni.

The influence of Antoni’s commentary is most apparent in how the division of the theoretical sciences is presented and in the discussion of their respective objects, especially the object of metaphysics. In Antoni’s commentary he writes, of course, about the Aristotelian division of the theoretical sciences and about the degrees of abstraction, but his attention is focused more on the object of the sciences in general. He thinks that each science can have only one object. The object is adequate to the science, which means that the science cannot exceed the framework drawn out for it by its object. An adequate object has a feature that formally belongs to it, and the feature must in a certain way belong to everything that belongs to the domain of the science. The adequate object of metaphysics is being as such. The formal features of this object in which everything considered by first philosophy shares is being or beingness. The concept of being as being includes all beings—God, spiritual substances, and other creatures, and it is universal with respect to all of them. Although God is not the adequate object of metaphysics, God has a special place among beings. God is the most perfect being and is first in perfection. Antoni’s arguments on the object of metaphysics and the concept of being are rather extensive. In short, we may say that the object of metaphysics is being as such; being thus conceived is univocal with respect to God and the creature; being is divided into infinite and finite; infinite being is the major part of the object of metaphysics. In connection with the substantial unity of being he discusses the problem of the so-called principle of individualization of being. Antoni does not treat this as a central problem in his Quaestiones, but he does discuss it and takes a somewhat different view of it than does Duns Scotus. In Scotus’s doctrine the principle of individuation is the ultimate or final form of a being, and it is the last definition of the individual different from others (haecceitas). Antoni takes a somewhat different view of individuation. Individuation does not lie with form as Scotus thought, but with matter. As Antoni explains this problem, he makes a distinction between the form of the whole, and makes a distinction between matter as opposed to the form of the part and matter as opposed to the form of the whole. Matter opposed to the form of the part is an essential element of being and it constitutes being together with form; matter opposed to the total form and essence is not part of the concept of the essence; this matter is not part of the essence and is an individual property of being; it determines the ultimate form of a being (haecceitas) and is the principle of individuality. In Antoni’s commentary there is no question dedicated to the problem of essence and existence in both material and immaterial beings. With respect to God the author primarily emphasizes God’s infinity, necessity, and perfection. Toward the end of the twentieth century there was an increased interest in Antoni’s doctrine, especially his commentary on the Metaphysics (C. Bérubé, G. Pini).

H. Hurter, Nomenclator litteralius theologiae catholicae, Oeniponte 1871–1886, 1926², II 465–467; M. Bihl, in: Dictionnaire d’Histoire et del Géographie Ecclésiastique, P 1914, II 1633; Marti de Barcelona, Fra A. Andreu OM. Doctor Dulcifluus, Criterion (1929), 321–346; J. and T. Carreras y Artau, Historia de la filosia española, Ma 1943, II 456–416; C. Balić De critica textuali scholasticorum scriptis accomadata, Anton 20 (1495), 285–288; G. Bérubé, Antoine André, témoin et interprète de Scot, Anton 54 (1979), 386–446; A. Popper, La filosofia nello studio francescano del Santo a Padova, Pd 1989; G. Pini, Una lettura scotista della Metafisica di Aristotele, l’Expositio in libros Metaphysicorum di Antoni Andrea, in: Documenti e Studi sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale, II 2, Spoleto 1991, 529–556; M. Gensler, A. Andreae—The Faithful Pulil? Antoni Andreaae’s Doctrine of Individuation, MPhP 31 (1992), 23–38; idem, Catalogueof Works by or Ascribed to Antoni Andreae, ibidem, 147–155; S. D. Dumont, Transcendentale Being and Scotists (A. Andreas, Petrus de Navarra, Petrus de L’Aquil,a et Petrus Thomae), Topoi 11 (1992), 135–148; G. Pini, Sulla fortuna delle “Quaestiones super Metaphysicam” di Antoni Andrea, Documenti e Studi (1995), 281–361.

Kazimierz Wójcik

<--Go back