<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:E.eustratius_2</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:E.eustratius_2</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:base="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><body xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" subtype="alphabetic_letter" n="E"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="eustratius-bio-2" n="eustratius_2"><head><persName xml:lang="la" xml:id="tlg-4031"><surname full="yes">Eustra'tius</surname></persName></head><p>(<persName xml:lang="grc"><surname full="yes">Εὐστράτιος</surname></persName>), one of the latest
      commentators on Aristotle, lived about the beginning of the twelfth century after Christ,
      under the emperor Alexius Comnenus, as metropolitan of Nicaea. According to a hint in the
      Commentary to the tenth book of the <title>Ethica Nicomachea</title> (if this part of the
      Commentary is composed by him), he appears to have also lived at Constantinople, and to have
      written his commentary in this place. (Comp. <hi rend="ital">ad Arist. Eth. Nic.</hi> 10.9.13,
      p. 472, ed. Zell.) Of his life we know nothing else.</p><div><head>Works</head><p>Of the writings of Eustratius only two are extant, and these in a very fragmentary state:
       viz.</p><div><head>1. <title>A Commentary to the second hook of the Analytica</title></head><div><head>Editions</head><p><bibl>Published by Aldus Manutius, Venice, 1534</bibl>, and <bibl>translated into Latin
          by A. Gratarolus. (Venice. 1542, 1568, fol.)</bibl></p></div></div><pb n="123"/><div><head>2. <title>A Commentary to Aristotle's Ethica Nicomachea</title></head><p>But, according to the latest researches, this commentary consists of very different
        materials, and great parts of it are the work of other interpreters, as Aspasius and Michael
        Ephesius. This has been proved chiefly by the researches of Schleiermacher, in his writings
        on the Greek Scholia to the Ethics of Aristotle (printed in the <hi rend="ital">Abhandlungen
         der Berliner Akademie der Wissensch.</hi> of the year 1816-1817, p. 263, &amp;c.).
        Schleiermacher has shewn that the author of the commentary to the <hi rend="ital">first</hi>
        book of the Ethics cannot possibly be the same person as the author of the comnmentary to
        the <hi rend="ital">sixth</hi> book, because very different interpretations of the <foreign xml:lang="grc">Ἑχωτερικοὶ Αόγοι</foreign> of Aristotle are given in the two passages
        cited. (See Stahr, <hi rend="ital">Aristotelia,</hi> ii. pp. 261, 262; Schleiermacher, p.
        267.) Probably Eustratius is only the author of the commentary to the sixth book, which is
        much better than the rest, and from which the commentaries to the second, third, and fourth
        book greatly differ. But perhaps the commentary to the <hi rend="ital">first</hi> is also to
        be ascribed to Eustratius, and the difference on the signification of the <foreign xml:lang="grc">Ἑχωτερικοὶ Αόγοι</foreign> may have been occasioned by Eustratius
        himself borrowing one opinion or the other from more ancient interpreters.</p><div><head>Editions</head><p><bibl>Published in the Greek language with some other commentators on the same work,
          Venice, 1536, fol.</bibl>, and <bibl>in the Latin language by J. Bernardus Felicianus,
          Ven. 1541, 1589, fol, Paris. 1543, Helmst. 1662, 4to.</bibl></p></div></div></div><div><head>Assessment</head><p>The commentaries of Eustratius greatly differ from similar works of elder commentators by
       their not being uninterrupted treatises on philosophical subjects, but <hi rend="ital">commentaries</hi> in the proper sense of the word, explaining single words and things. It
       is this which renders them of great importance. In the middle ages Robert of Lincoln
       translated this commentary into Latin, and Albertus Magnus and St. Thomas Aquinas made
       considerable use of it in their interpretation of Aristotle.</p></div><div><head>Further Information</head><p>Fabric. <hi rend="ital">Bibl. Graec.</hi> vol. iii. pp. 215, 264; Buhle's <hi rend="ital">Aristotle,</hi> vol. i. p. 299.</p></div><byline>[<ref target="author.A.S">A.S</ref>]</byline></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>