Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published online by De Gruyter November 18, 2021

Conceiving Prime Matter in the Middle Ages: Perception, Abstraction and Analogy

  • Nicola Polloni EMAIL logo


In its formlessness and potentiality, prime matter is a problematic entity of medieval metaphysics and its ontological limitations drastically affect human possibility of conceiving it. In this article, I analyse three influential strategies elaborated to justify an epistemic access to prime matter. They are incidental perception, negative abstraction, and analogy. Through a systematic and historical analysis of these procedures, the article shows the richness of interpretations and theoretical stakes implied by the conundrum of how prime matter can be known by human beings. In particular, the reasons behind the later medieval acceptance of analogy as the main way to unveil prime matter become clearer by pointing out the correlation between the ontological and epistemological levels of the medieval examination of prime matter.

Albert the Great 1895. De quattuor coaequaevis. Ed. by A. Borgnet. Paris.Search in Google Scholar

Aristotle 1970. Physics. Trans./Comm. by W. Charlton. Oxford.10.1093/oseo/instance.00259299Search in Google Scholar

–. 1993. Metaphysics: Books Γ, Δ and Ε. Trans./Comm. by C. Kirwan. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

–. 1994. Metaphysics: Books Z and H. Trans./Comm. by D. Bostok. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

–. 2006. Metaphysics: Book Θ. Trans./Comm. by S. Makin. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

–. 2016. De anima. Trans./Comm. by C. Shields. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

–. 2018. Metaphysics: Book Iota. Trans./Comm. by L. M. Castelli. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

Ashworth, E. J. 2013. “Being and Analogy”. In A Companion to Walter Burley. Ed. A. Conti. Leiden/Boston, 135–65.Search in Google Scholar

Augustine 1841. Confessiones. Ed. by J.-P. Migne. PL 32. Paris.Search in Google Scholar

–. 1864. De civitate Dei. Ed. by J.-P. Migne. PL 41. Paris.Search in Google Scholar

–. 1865. De natura boni. Ed. by J.-P. Migne. PL 42. Paris.Search in Google Scholar

Averroes 1512. Commentarium magnum in Metaphysicam. Venice.Search in Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (ed.) 1991. The Complete Works of Aristotle. Princeton.Search in Google Scholar

Blackwell, R. J./Spath R. J./Thirlkel, W. E. (trans.) 1995. Commentary on Physics. Notre Dame.Search in Google Scholar

Bonaventure 1882. Commentarius in secundum librum Sententiarum. Quaracchi.Search in Google Scholar

Brower, J. E. 2014. Aquinas’s Ontology of the Material World: Change, Hylomorphism, and Material Objects. Oxford.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198714293.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Calcidius 2011. Commentaire au Timée de Platon. Ed. by B. Bakhouche. Paris.Search in Google Scholar

–. 2016. On Plato’s Timaeus. Ed./trans. by J. Magee. Cambridge, MA.Search in Google Scholar

Charles, D. 2018. “Physics I.7”. In Aristotle’s Physics Book I: A Systematic Exploration. Ed. by D. Quarantotto. Cambridge, 178–205.10.1017/9781108181853.009Search in Google Scholar

Confucius 2008. The Analects. Trans. by R. Dawson. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

Des Chenes, D. 1996. Physiologia: Natural Philosophy in Late Aristotelian and Cartesian Thought. Ithaca.10.7591/9781501723711Search in Google Scholar

Francisco Suárez 1861. Disputationes metaphysicae. Vivés edition. Paris.Search in Google Scholar

Friedman, R. 2021. “Is Matter the Same as Its Potency? Some Fourteenth-Century Answers”. Vivarium 59, 123–42.10.1163/15685349-12341400Search in Google Scholar

Geoffrey of Aspall 2017. Questions on Aristotle’s Physics. Ed. by S. Donati/C. Trifogli. Trans. by C. Trifogli/J. Ashworth. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

Giles of Rome 1555. Hexaemeron. Rome.Search in Google Scholar

Granger, E. H. 1984. “Aristotle on Genus and Differentia”. Journal of the History of Philosophy 22/1, 1–23.10.1353/hph.1984.0001Search in Google Scholar

Grene, M. 1974. “Is Genus to Species as Matter to Form? Aristotle and Taxonomy”. Synthese 28/1, 51–69.10.1007/978-94-010-2224-8_6Search in Google Scholar

Hamesse, J. 1974. Les Auctoritates Aristotelis: un florilège médiéval. Louvain.Search in Google Scholar

Hasse, D. N. 2000. Avicenna’s De Anima in the Latin West: The Formation of a Peripatetic Philosophy of the Soul 1160–1300. London.Search in Google Scholar

John Duns Scotus 1993. Lectura in librum secundum Sententiarum. Ed. by Commissio Scotistica. Vatican City.Search in Google Scholar

Lindberg, D. C. 1981. Theories of Vision from al-Kindi to Kepler. Chicago.Search in Google Scholar

Lorentz, H. 2019. “The Principles of Natural Things – Two or Three?” In Aristotle’s Physics Alpha: Symposium Aristotelicum. Ed. by K. Ierodiakonou/P. Kalligas/V. Karasmanis. Oxford, 262–85.10.1093/oso/9780198830993.003.0009Search in Google Scholar

McCord Adams, M. 1987. William Ockham. 2 vols. Notre Dame.Search in Google Scholar

Moro, E. 2017. Il concetto di materia in Agostino. Rome.Search in Google Scholar

Mousavian, S. N./Fink, J. L. (eds.) 2020. The Internal Senses in the Aristotelian Tradition. Cham.10.1007/978-3-030-33408-6Search in Google Scholar

Nicole Oresme 2013. Quaestiones super Physicam. Ed. by S. Caroti/J. Celeyrette/S. Kirschner/E. Mazet Leiden/Boston.Search in Google Scholar

Pasnau, R. 2011. Metaphysical Themes (1274–1671). Oxford.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199567911.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Pereira, M. 2014. “Remarks on materia naturalis”. In Roger Bacon’s Communia Naturalium. A 13th Century Philosopher’s Workshop. Ed. by P. Bernardini/A. Rodolfi. Florence, 103–38.Search in Google Scholar

Petagine, A. 2019. Il fondamento positivo del mondo: Indagini francescane sulla materia all’inizio del XIV secolo. Rome.Search in Google Scholar

Plato 1960. Timaeus. Trans. by R. G. Bury. Cambridge, MA.10.1515/9781400835867-026Search in Google Scholar

Plotinus 1951. Enneads. Ed. by P. Henry/H.-R. Schwyzer. Paris/Bruxelles.Search in Google Scholar

–. 1966. Enneads. Trans. by A. H. Armstrong. Cambridge, MA.Search in Google Scholar

Polloni, N. 2020. The Twelfth-Century Renewal of Latin Metaphysics: Gundissalinus’s Ontology of Matter and Form. Toronto.Search in Google Scholar

–. 2021. “Roger Bacon on the Conceivability of Matter”. In Roger Bacon and Medieval Science and Philosophy: Studies in Honour of Jeremiah Hackett. Ed. by N. Polloni/Y. Kedar. London, 76–97.10.4324/9781003033943-5Search in Google Scholar

Reydams-Schils, G. 2020. Calcidius on Plato’s Timaeus: Greek Philosophy, Latin Reception, and Christian Contexts. Cambridge.10.1017/9781108354745Search in Google Scholar

Rodolfi, A. 2004. Il concetto di materia nell’opera di Alberto Magno. Florence.Search in Google Scholar

Roger Bacon 1935. Questiones in VIII libros Physicorum. Ed. by F. M. Delorme. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

–. 2019. Opus tertium. Ed./trans. by N. Egel. Münster.10.28937/978-3-7873-3625-8Search in Google Scholar

Thomas Aquinas 1965. In octo libros Physicorum Aristotelis expositio. Marietti edition. Rome.Search in Google Scholar

Thomas of York 1952. Sapientiale. Ed. by C. A. Grassi. 2 vols. Toronto.Search in Google Scholar

Trifogli, C. 2017. “Geoffrey of Aspall on Matter”. In Materia: Nouvelle perspectives de recherche dans la pensée et la culture médiévales (XIIe-XVIe siècles). Ed. by T. Suarez-Nani/A. Paravicini Bagliani. Florence, 99–122.Search in Google Scholar

Van Winden, J. C. M. 1965. Calcidius on Matter: His Doctrine and Sources. Leiden.10.1163/9789004320215Search in Google Scholar

Walter Burley 1491. Expositio super libros Physicorum Aristotelis. Venice.Search in Google Scholar

William of Conches 2006. Glosae super Platonem. Ed. by É. Jeauneau. Turnhout.Search in Google Scholar

William of Ockham 1984. Summula philosophiae naturalis. Ed. by S. Brown. Saint Bonaventure, NY.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2021-11-18

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 31.3.2023 from
Scroll to top button