De archidoxis

From Theatrum Paracelsicum
Revision as of 10:57, 3 July 2022 by JP (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Heading|level=1|align=left|family=serif|bold=0|text=<i>also:</i> </br>Theophrastia, <i>book one</i>}} {{Heading|level=3|align=left|before=1|family=serif|bold=0|text=I. Basic information}} <b>Printing History, Manuscripts.</b> Not printed. No manuscripts known. <b>Editions.</b> Not edited by Huser or Sudhoff. <b>Relationship between different versions.</b> Text not preserved. <b>Structure, genre/form, perspective, style.</b> <b>Relationship to other texts.</b> <b...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Theophrastia, book one

I. Basic information

Printing History, Manuscripts. Not printed. No manuscripts known.

Editions. Not edited by Huser or Sudhoff.

Relationship between different versions. Text not preserved.

Structure, genre/form, perspective, style.

Relationship to other texts.

Authenticity, authorship. De archidoxis is the first of three works composing the book Theophrastia, according to Valentius de Retiis (see § ‎1.24). Since the other two works, Parasarchum (§ ‎1.20) and Carboantes (§ ‎4.22) are apparently spurious (and nowhere to be found), one cannot exclude that this De archidoxis was fictitious, too. However, the most plausible hypothesis is that it refers to the authentic work of Paracelsus entitled Archidoxis, for two reasons: firstly, Valentius de Retiis describes De archidoxis as a text “in which [Paracelsus] explains how to extract the virtues and separate them from what is devoid of any strength:” a fitting description for the authentic Archidoxis. Secondly, the authentic Archidoxis is expressly said to be taken “ex Theophrastia Paracelsi Magni”, as the most reliable manuscripts and editions have it.

Time of writing.

First printed: not printed

Historical Manuscript Catalogues: Libri Theophrasti (Dresden), fol. 5vb

III. Bibliography

Essential bibliography: Sudhoff, Bibliographia Paracelsica, 142, 171–172, 190–194, 198–199, 391; Sudhoff, Paracelsus-Handschriften, 87–89, 93, 98, 102, 710; CP 1: 585, 590–595; CP 2: 165, 984, 1003; CP 3: 116, 121, 129, 170.

Further bibliographical references:

Peuckert, Pansophie (1956), 460.

Gilly, Paracelsus in der BPH (1993), 37, 38.

Gilly, Adam Haslmayr (1994), 97, 103.

Kurt Goldammer, “Zur philosophischen und religiösen Sinngebung von Heilung und Heilmittel bei Paracelsus,” in Kurt Goldammer, Paracelsus in neuen Horizonten. Gesammelte Aufsätze (Vienna, 1986) (Salzburger Beiträge zur Paracelsusforschung, 24), 343–357, on 347.

Udo Benzenhöfer, “Zur ‘Archidoxis’-Schrift des Paracelsus,” Nova Acta Paracelsica, N.F. 19 (2005), 105–124, on 109.

Didier Kahn, “Quintessence and the Prolongation of Life in the Works of Paracelsus,” Micrologus, 26 (2018), 183–225.