Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

pdf version of the entry

Joane Petrizi
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/joane-petrizi/ Joane Petrizi
from the Fall 2015 Edition of the First published Tue Aug 29, 2006; substantive revision Wed Sep 9, 2015

Stanford Encyclopedia Joane Petrizi (12th century)—the most significant Georgian medieval
philosopher—devoted intensive work to neo-Platonic philosophy. He
of Philosophy translated Nemesius of Emesa's On the Nature of Man into Georgian, a
work which in that day attracted considerable attention. Of particular
importance is his Georgian translation of Proclus's Elementatio theologica,
to which he also wrote a step-by-step commentary. Petrizi's commentary
on the Elementatio theologica represents a significant effort at reception
inasmuch as the Georgian philosopher interprets the work immanently,
Edward N. Zalta Uri Nodelman Colin Allen R. Lanier Anderson
that is, on the basis of Proclus's philosophy itself. Therefore, he definitely
Principal Editor Senior Editor Associate Editor Faculty Sponsor
deserves to receive increased attention in presentations and reconstructions
Editorial Board
http://plato.stanford.edu/board.html of the philosophy of Proclus, and especially in research on medieval
Proclus commentaries. Up to now, the standard editions of the Elementatio
Library of Congress Catalog Data
ISSN: 1095-5054
theologica only mention Petrizi's Proclus work in passing (if at all), or
even criticize it unjustly (Dodds, pp. xli–xlii, 343; cf. in more detail
Notice: This PDF version was distributed by request to mem- Iremadze, Konzeptionen, pp. 225–231). Research on the Georgian
bers of the Friends of the SEP Society and by courtesy to SEP translation and interpretation of the Elementatio theologica in the context
content contributors. It is solely for their fair use. Unauthorized of Byzantine and Latin Proclus interpreters—Nicholas of Methone (12th
distribution is prohibited. To learn how to join the Friends of the
century), Berthold of Moosburg (14th century), Henry Bate of Mechelen
SEP Society and obtain authorized PDF versions of SEP entries,
(13th century)—will close this gap in Proclus research. Furthermore, the
please visit https://leibniz.stanford.edu/friends/ .
reception by Byzantine philosophers of the 11th and 12th centuries
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Psellos, Italos) should not be overlooked.
Copyright c 2015 by the publisher
The Metaphysics Research Lab 1. The Person and his Work
Center for the Study of Language and Information
2. Philosophy
Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
3. Historical Reception and Influence
Joane Petrizi
c 2015 by the author
Copyright Bibliography
Tengiz Iremadze A. Primary Literature
All rights reserved. B. Secondary Literature
Copyright policy: https://leibniz.stanford.edu/friends/info/copyright/

1
Joane Petrizi Tengiz Iremadze

Academic Tools Porphyry and the Fathers of the Church (Petrizi, Opera I, pp. XXVI–LII;
Other Internet Resources Alexidse, pp. 148–168). He held Platonic philosophy in particularly high
Related Entries esteem. Its representatives included in his view both Plato's predecessors
(Orpheus, Pythagoras, etc.) and the neo-Platonists. He calls Plato ‘the
philosopher of the day’ (Petrizi, Opera I, p. XXVII). When Petrizi speaks
1. The Person and his Work of the ‘philosopher’, he means Proclus. By contrast, in the Latin middle
ages, the designation philosophus was reserved for Aristotle.
To date there is no reliable information on Petrizi's dates and biography.
According to older Georgian research, he lived in the second half of the Among Plato's works, Petrizi refers to the dialogues Parmenides, the
11th century and the first half of the 12th century. More recent research, Laws, Phaedrus, Phaedo and Timaeus. Although he does not mention
however, tends to date him to the second half of the 12th century. The state them, he also quotes Theaetetus and the Symposium (Petrizi, Opera II, pp.
of research is aggravated by the lack of information on Petrizi. The little 34, 84). Petrizi also mentions various works of Aristotle's, but not the
personal information that is known about him stems from remarks pseudo-Aristotelian works used by Scholastic philosophers (Iremadze,
scattered through his works in which Petrizi briefly speaks about himself. Konzeptionen, p. 57). It can be gathered from his Interpretation that in
In his Proclus commentary—the Interpretation of the Elementatio addition to the Elementatio theologica he also knew other works by
theologica of Proclus—and in the Postscript, which is traditionally Proclus (for example the Parmenides and Timaeus commentaries as well
ascribed to him, the author mentions his own cares and problems. as the Platonic Theology) and drew on them as he saw fit in commenting
on the Elementatio theologica (Iremadze, Konzeptionen, p. 57).
According to authoritative reports, Petrizi translated Nemesius of Emesa's
work On the Nature of Man into Georgian (Petrizi, Opera II, p. 223).
2. Philosophy
According to these accounts, Petrizi encountered numerous difficulties and
obstacles put in his way by both Greeks and Georgians because of his Petrizi's commentary on Proclus's Elementatio theologica consists of a
work. Based on the current state of research on his work and on his Preface (Introduction) and the commentaries to each chapter of this work.
biography, together with a detailed study of his Proclus Commentary, In Sh. Nutsubidze and S. Kaukhchishvili's edition of Petrizi's Proclus
Petrizi can be characterized as a 12th-century thinker. The character of Commentary, these commentaries are followed by an epilogue.
Georgian thought in the 12th century is manifested in his style of
philosophizing and in his manner of presenting arguments, in his In his Introduction to the Elementatio theologica, Joane Petrizi reflects on
knowledge of ancient philosophy and in his intellectual interest in the sense (the intentio) of this book, and sees it in the proof of ‘the much
maintaining ancient thought in its rightful place. discussed One’ (Petrizi, Commentaries, p. 149). Then he briefly treats the
peculiarity of the One, which in his opinion is not identical with any
Petrizi names the philosophers whom he treated in his Interpretation: being. The pure and genuine One must be examined and proved in
Orpheus, Parmenides, Zeno, Plato, Aristotle, Alexander of Aphrodisias, accordance with the rules of syllogisms (Petrizi, Opera II, p. 3).

2 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Fall 2015 Edition 3


Joane Petrizi Tengiz Iremadze

According to Petrizi's exegesis, this One is the crucial concept in the Therefore, it is also the goal of all Being, which constantly strives for it
overall process of grounding knowledge. If this principle is not provable, inasmuch as each caused thing reverts to the cause (Petrizi, Opera II, prop.
there are no incontrovertible propositions and the goal of gnoseology will 8, p. 33).
not be reached. The One is the principle that makes knowledge possible.
The Good is the archetype of Being as such, which, as its image, also
In the first chapter of his Elementatio theologica, Proclus treated the One derives its status in the cosmos through participation in the Good. This is
as the origin of all modes of multiplicity. Petrizi follows this in his so because of the identity of the Good with the One. Because all entities
commentary to this proposition, presenting the arguments for Proclus's only appear by virtue of participation in the One, and because the One,
approach in his own way. Petrizi adheres primarily to the basic axiom that taken in itself, is a pure Good, the Good is also deemed to be the ultimate
the chain of beings requires an origin. Otherwise the universe would have source and the super-simple reference point of the universe. To
its origin in an Other, which for its part would have to be the One characterize the Good, Petrizi adduces and uses principles from Plato's
inasmuch as the first principle (= the One) should comprise all entities of Phaedrus, treating the various degrees of goodness. The first Good heads
the cosmos without exception. The One as the cause and origin of being as the Good, and thereafter follow the various levels of goodnesses. The
such is deemed to be the better, and takes on no qualities from what it good is also deemed to be the principle of order and structuring of Being.
causes. This One alone confers selfness to all other entities because, as the That which is first to be linked to it has traces of the Good in itself, and the
generator and principle of everything that follows it, it is in need of first monads also have such a nature. It is precisely in these first entities
nothing. that Beauty and the Good are found (Petrizi, Opera II, prop. 8, p. 34).

The essential features of the One (goodness, unity) are visible in each In his Proclus Commentary, Joane Petrizi analyses the dialectic hidden in
creature. If the one were of the same value as the rest of being, then the ‘cause’ and the ‘caused’ more thoroughly and in more detail than does
cosmic harmony and its order would fail; furthermore, it would not be Proclus himself in the corresponding chapters of his Elementatio
possible to distinguish between the first and the last in the series (Petrizi, theologica. In Petrizi's exegesis, the abstract, mathematical style of this
Opera II, prop. 1, p. 13). The universe would thus have no first and no last work is augmented in content with a wealth of material. Petrizi operates
reference point, no origin and no unities following it. It is precisely on the very often with visually illustrative examples, and is careful to illuminate
impossibility of such an assumption that Petrizi's ontological reflections the theorems set forth in the Elementatio theologica by means of human
were based. In Petrizi's view, the One is identical with the Good. All Being experience. This resulted from the goals of his Interpretation. It primarily
presupposes the first Good because all creatures of nature participate in addressed a broad public and served the study of this significant work
this good and only possess good qualities by virtue of their participation. from Greek antiquity.
Being is not by its own nature the Good, but becomes a Good
subsequently, by participation in the One. Therefore, in Petrizi's view a Petrizi treats the problem of the cause and the caused from various
distinction must be made between the Good in itself and good entities perspectives, for the treatment of this topic proved to be of fundamental
inasmuch as the former is above all nature and is a pure good in itself. importance for the logical structure of his philosophical project. In

4 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Fall 2015 Edition 5


Joane Petrizi Tengiz Iremadze

Proposition 30, he treats the traditional view of the dialectic of causality in One of the most important aspects of Petrizi's philosophy is his
detail, examining the etymological meanings of the terms epistemology. It has only recently been reconstructed and systematically
characteristically used in Greek for this relationship (Petrizi, Opera II, researched in the light of the medieval discussion of the essence of thought
prop. 30, pp. 79–81). The dialectic of causality becomes manifest in the (cf. Iremadze, Konzeptionen, pp. 161–241). In his epistemology, Petrizi
process of the descent from the One to the Many and the ascent from the emphasizes the productive power of (human) reason, which is capable of
Many to the One. The cause is the phase within the entirety of emanation the real positing of being as such and is thus a determinative principle of
that generates, that which thus has priority both in ontological and in being.
axiological terms vis-à-vis the caused inasmuch as in the neo-Platonic
system of generation the generator is better than the generated. 3. Historical Reception and Influence
With regard to the problem of causality, Petrizi applied the criticism of the Joane Petrizi is the most widely read Georgian philosopher. Petrizi's
Peripatetic doctrine of principles in critical discussion of the Aristotelian Proclus Commentary with his Georgian translation of the Elementatio
concept of causes. In the realm of theoretical philosophy, the system of theologica had a major influence not only on Georgian philosophy and
four causes proved to be inadequate and flawed. In this context, it seemed culture, but also outside of Georgia. In 1248, the Armenian monk Svimeon
to Petrizi to be necessary to work out a new conception of causality. He translated Petrizi's Proclus work into Armenian, thus contributing to the
studied Proclus's philosophy on the basis of Greek sources, and regarded it dissemination of the philosophy of Proclus there. In the 17th century,
as appropriate to his research goals to adopt the existing structure of the Armenian philosophers devoted intensive work to Proclus's thought, to
system of causes. In this point, he worked in the same way as Byzantine which they attributed contemporary relevance; in 1651, the Armenian
philosophers of the time such as Psellos and Italos, who recognized the bishop Svimeon Dshughaezi wrote commentaries to facilitate the
priority of Platonic philosophy on this issue. understanding of the Elementatio theologica. The basis for his
commentary was the 13th-century Armenian translation by the monk
In Proposition 75 of his commentary, Petrizi distinguishes five different
Svimeon of Petrizi's Georgian translation.
modes of causa, characterizing them in nuce. He adds a fifth kind of causa
to the traditional system of causes. In addition to the material, formal, final In 1757, these commentaries, together with the Armenian version of the
and efficient causes he conceives a creative cause (Petrizi, Opera II, prop. Elementatio theologica, were translated into Georgian; they have made a
75, p. 136). It was, he claims, neglected in the Aristotelians’ theoretical clear mark on Georgian culture. Thus, in the 18th century there were at
work, who, in contrast to Proclus, had underestimated the relevance of the least two different commentaries on the Elementatio theologica in
creative cause. This applies both to Aristotle and to his interpreters, above Georgian.
all Alexander of Aphrodisias, whom Petrizi criticizes in this connection
(Petrizi, Opera II, prop. 11, p. 38). It must be emphasized that the thinkers of the Georgian Enlightenment in
the 17th and 18th centuries reacted to these traditions in diverse ways.
Some trenchantly criticized the Armenian version with reference to its

6 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Fall 2015 Edition 7


Joane Petrizi Tengiz Iremadze

contents (see below on Anton Bagrationi). But one point is certain: in the essence and the activity of the soul can be distinguished inasmuch as
modern era in Georgia, Proclus's philosophy was the subject of intensive knowledge is not the primary quality of the soul. In its knowledge, the
consideration and interest by virtue of Petrizi's works. soul proceeds from one being to another, that is, the acquired insights are
deemed to be the bases for the progress of knowledge. The knowledge of
Let us here have a look at three important stages of the Georgian reception reason has to be characterized differently, for its activity is grounded in
of Proclus and Petrizi. eternal knowing and can be seen as nothing other than this activity. At this
point it must be remarked that Anton Bagrationi made intensive use of the
(1) Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani (1658–1726) integrates numerous theorems
noetic terminology of Petrizi's Proclus Commentary to characterize his
from Petrizi's Proclus work into his Georgian Dictionary. In the definition
concept of knowledge. His significant philosophical determinations of
and discussion of the problem of knowledge, he refers to the 20th
noetics were worked out exclusively with reference to Petrizi.
proposition of the Interpretation and determines reason as the simple,
bodiless knowledge of the known (Orbeliani, vol. I, p. 166, col. 1–2). Anton Bagrationi was trenchantly critical of the Armenian version of the
Other important philosophical definitions—for example the determination Elementatio theologica inasmuch as it did not represent Proclus's or
of real being (Orbeliani, vol. I, p. 574, col. 1), of production (Orbeliani, Petrizi's genuine doctrine. In his work Theology, of which a critical edition
vol. II, p. 366, col. 2; p. 367, col. 1), of causality (Orbeliani, vol. I, p. 480, has not yet been published, he claims that true metaphysics was there
col. 1–2), of motion (Orbeliani, vol. I, p. 479, col. 2)—are taken from combined with false theories and thus disfigured. In his opinion, the old
Petrizi's Proclus Commentary. In his Georgian Dictionary, Sulkhan-Saba version (that is, Petrizi's version) of the Elementatio theologica should be
Orbeliani made equally intensive reference to Petrizi's Georgian studied rather than the new (Armenian) version. Admittedly, he sided with
translation of the work On the Nature of Man by Nemesius of Emesa. Petrizi in this point: Petrizi's interpretation of Proclus's philosophy should
be accepted rather than its arbitrary transformation by modern Armenian
(2) In his philosophical work Spekali (1752), the philosopher and
and Georgian interpreters.
theologian Anton Bagrationi (1720–1788) refers to Petrizi's Interpretation,
adopting numerous theorems of neo-Platonic origin from him. Anton (3) In contrast to Anton Bagrationi, Joane Bagrationi (1768–1830) mainly
Bagrationi took some chapters devoted to Proclus's problem of knowledge relied on the Armenian commentaries on the Elementatio theologica in his
almost verbatim from Petrizi's work (Anton I., Spekali, pp. 327–331). main work, Kalmasoba, which is written in dialogue form. In the
determination of the One and its dialectics, he quotes the first chapters of
The last chapters of Spekali are devoted to Petrizi. In chapters 148 and
Proclus's work. Furthermore, the chapters on nous (for example prop. 20)
149, Anton Bagrationi treats the topic of knowledge on the basis of the
are given adequate consideration in Kalmasoba. In this work, Joane
propositions on nous in the Interpretation. Following Petrizi, it is here
Bagrationi does not comment on all the chapters of the Elementatio
claimed that reasoned knowledge is different from the soul's mode of
theologica; a total of 86 chapters were commented on. It is remarkable
knowledge. In its essence, the activity and the substance of reason are a
that the author interprets or transforms some passages of Proclus's and
unity, whereas the nature of the soul shows itself to be differentiated. The
Petrizi's work in an original manner; in the discussion of the problem of

8 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Fall 2015 Edition 9


Joane Petrizi Tengiz Iremadze

cause, he begins by distinguishing three main kinds—God, nature and skill detailed account of the state of Petrizi research, cf. Iremadze,
—and emphasizes God's superiority to all other causes. Joane Bagrationi Konzeptionen, pp. 13–27).
made use of Svimeon Dshughaezi's commentaries, attempting to interpret
Proclus and Petrizi with their help. Furthermore, Joane Bagrationi brought Bibliography
clarity to the noetics of the Elementatio theologica, characterizing the
various kinds and functions of knowledge and designating the knowing A. Primary Literature
soul as specific to man.
1. Petrizi's Works
Although Joane Petrizi's work received increasing attention in the course
of time and Georgian thinkers always emphasized his intellectual heritage, Joane Petrizi, Interpretation of the “Elementatio theologica” of Proclus,
a thorough-going scholarly treatment of Petrizi's works only really began ed. and with a study by Sh. Nutsubidze and S. Kaukhchishvili (Opera
in the 20th century. Without a doubt, the most important stage in Petrizi II), Tbilisi 1937 (in Old Georgian).
research is represented by the publication of a scholarly edition of Petrizi's –––, The “Elementatio theologica” of the Platonic Philosopher Proclus,
philosophical works. The edition began in 1937 with the publication of the trans. from the Greek, ed. and with a study and a vocabulary by S.
second volume of Petrizi's Proclus work—the Intertpretation of the Kaukhchishvili, with an introduction by M. Gogiberidze (Opera I),
“Elementatio theologica” of Proclus. This volume was edited by Sh. Tbilisi 1940 (in Old Georgian).
Nutsubidze and S. Kaukhchishvili; it includes a comprehensive and –––, Rassmotrenie platonovskoi filosofii i Prokla diadokha. Perevod c
valuable study of Petrizi's philosophy in which the teaching of the drevnegruzinskogo jazyka I. D. Pantskhavy. Redaktori toma G. V.
Georgian philosopher is viewed as reflected by his contemporaries and Tevzadze, N. R. Natadze. Vstupitelnaja statia i primechanija G. V.
analysed with reference to Byzantine and Georgian medieval thought. Tevzadze, Moskva 1984 (in Russian).
–––, Kommentare zur “Elementatio theologica” des Proklos. Selected
The first volume of Petrizi's Proclus work (The Elementatio theologica of Texts, translated from Old Georgian into German, introduction and
the Platonic Philosopher Proclus) was published in 1940. This volume annotations by L. Alexidze, in Orthodoxes Forum, Munich 9 (1995),
contains the Georgian translation of the Elementatio theologica from the pp. 141–171.
Greek. The editor was S. Kaukhchishvili; M. Gogiberidze wrote an –––, Interpretation of the “Elementatio theologica” of Proclus Diadochus,
introduction to the volume. It also contains a comprehensive vocabulary trans. into modern Georgian, with an introduction and annotations by
for both volumes, also compiled by S. Kaukhchishvili. In the 20th century, D. Melikishvili, Tbilisi 1999.
Petrizi's Interpretation was translated into Russian. The Russian –––, Kommentar zur “Elementatio theologica” des Proclos, Übersetzung
translation of 1984 with an introduction and annotations by G. Tevzadze is aus dem Altgeorgischen, Anmerkungen, Indices und Einleitung von
of particular importance. After the publication of scholarly editions of L. Alexidze und L. Bergemann, Amsterdam/Philadelphia 2009.
Petrizi's works, both philosophical and philological problems of the Nemesius of Emesa, On the Nature of Man, trans. into Old Georgian by
Proclus commentary have been subject to thorough-going research (for a Joane Petrizi, ed. with an introduction and vocabulary by S.

10 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Fall 2015 Edition 11


Joane Petrizi Tengiz Iremadze

Gorgadze, Tbilisi 1914. Bertholds von Moosburg”, in W. Geerlings / C. Schulze (eds.), Der
Kommentar in Antike und Mittelalter, Bd. 2: Neue Beiträge zu seiner
2. Other Authors Erforschung (Clavis Commentariorum Antiquitatis et Medii Aevi 3),
Leiden/Boston, S. 237–253.
Anton I. (= Bagrationi), 1991, Spekali, ed., with a study and vocabulary by –––, 2007, “Die Philosophie der Selbstreflexivität”, in Philosophy—
G. Dedabrishvili, Tbilisi (in Georgian). Theology—Culture. Problems and Perspectives: Jubilee volume
Joane Bagrationi, 1974, Kalmasoba. Philosophical Part, ed. by G. dedicated to the 75th anniversary of Guram Tevzadze, ed. T.
Dedabrishvili (Studies on the History of Georgian Philosophical Iremadze, T. Tskhadadze, G. Kheoshvili, Tbilisi, pp. 66–78.
Thought, vol. III), Tbilisi (in Georgian). –––, 2009, “Joane Petrizi ”, in Philosophenlexikon, ed. S. Jordan, B.
Proclus, 1963, The Elements of Theology. A revised Text with Translation, Mojsisch, Philipp Reclam Verlag, Stuttgart, pp. 285–286.
Introduction and Commentary by E. R. Dodds, Oxford, 2nd edition. –––, 2011, “Seiendes versus Sein. Zu einer neuen Interpretation der
Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani, 1991, Georgian Dictionary, 2 vols., ed., with a Gattungslehre von Joane Petrizi”, in Philosophy in Global Change:
study and vocabulary by I. Abuladze, Tbilisi (in Georgian). Jubilee volume dedicated to the 65th anniversary of Burkhard
Mojsisch, ed. T. Iremadze (in collaboration with H. Schneider and K.
B. Secondary Literature
J. Schmidt), Tbilisi, pp. 133–139.
Alexidze, L., 1997, “Griechische Philosophie in den ‘Kommentaren’ des –––, 2011, “Zur Rezeption und Transformation der Aristotelischen und
Joane Petrizi zur ‘Elementatio Theologica’ des Proklos”, in Oriens Proklischen Ursachenmodelle bei Joane Petrizi”, in Archiv für
Christianus. Hefte für die Kunde des christlichen Orients 81: 148– mittelalterliche Philosophie und Kultur (Heft XVII), Sofia, pp. 96–
168. 111.
Dodashvili, S., 2001, “Brief Discussion of Georgian Literature”, in S. –––, 2013, “Secular and Divine Wisdom in Medieval Georgian Thought
Dodashvili, Works, ed. and with a preface by T. Kukava, Tbilisi 2001, (Anonymous Author, Ephrem Mtsire, Joane Petrizi)”, in T. Iremadze,
pp. 214–220 (in Georgian). Philosophy at the Crossroads of Epochs and Cultures. Intercultural
Gogiberidze, M., 1961, Rustaveli, Petrizi, Preludes, ed. by I. Megrelidze, and Interdisciplinary Researches, Tbilisi, pp. 16–25 (in Georgian).
Tbilisi (in Georgian). Jeck, U. R., 2010, Erläuterungen zur georgischen Philosophie, Tbilisi (in
Iremadze, T., 2004, Konzeptionen des Denkens im Neuplatonismus. Zur German and Georgian).
Rezeption der Proklischen Philosophie im deutschen und georgischen Kekelidze, K., 1960, History of Georgian Literature, vol. 1: Old Georgian
Mittelalter: Dietrich von Freiberg—Berthold von Moosburg—Joane Literature, Tbilisi (in Georgian).
Petrizi, Amsterdam/Philadelphia. Khidasheli, Sh., 1956, Joane Petrizi, Tbilisi (in Georgian).
–––, 2004, “Der intellekttheoretische Ansatz der Selbstreflexivität des –––, 1988, History of Georgian Philosophy, Tbilisi, p. 170–197 (in
Denkens gemäß Kapitel 168 der ‘Elementatio theologica’ des Proklos Georgian).
und seine Deutung sowie Entfaltung im ‘Proklos-Kommentar’ Marr, N., 1909, Joane Petrizi—the Georgian Neo-Platonist of the XIth–

12 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Fall 2015 Edition 13


Joane Petrizi Tengiz Iremadze

XIIth Century, St. Petersburg (in Russian). Tschelidze, E., 1994, “Life and Work of Joane Petrizi”, Part I in Religia
Melikishvili, D., 1975, The Language and Style of Joane Petrizi's [Religion] 3-4-5 (Tbilisi), pp. 113–126 (in Georgian).
Philosophical Works, Tbilisi (in Georgian). –––, 1995, “Life and Work of Joane Petrizi”, Part II in Religia [Religion]
Mojsisch, B., 2002, “Die Theorie des Intellekts bei Berthold von 1-2-3 (Tbilisi), pp. 76–89 (in Georgian).
Moosburg. Zur Proklosrezeption im Mittelalter”, in Th. Kobusch, B. Zakaradze, L., 2011, “Proclus in the Georgian and Latin Middle Ages
Mojsisch, O. F. Summerell (eds.), Selbst—Singularität—Subjektivität. (Ioane Petritsi and Berthold of Moosburg)”, in Philosophy in Global
Vom Neuplatonismus zum Deutschen Idealismus, Change: Jubilee volume dedicated to the 65th anniversary of
Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 175–184. Burkhard Mojsisch, ed. T. Iremadze (in collaboration with H.
Mtschedlishvili, L., 1997, “On the Interpretation of a Passage in Joane Schneider and K. J. Schmidt), Tbilisi, pp. 125–132.
Petrizi's ‘Interpretation’”, in Matsne, Philosophical Series 1 (Tbilisi),
pp. 62–67 (in Georgian). Academic Tools
Nutsubidze, Sh., 1988, History of Georgian Philosophy (Collected Works
in six volumes, vol. 5), Tbilisi (in Russian). How to cite this entry.
Tavadze, G., 2013, The Power of Maps. Gelati and the Concept of Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP
Caucasian Philosophy in the Context of Intercultural Philosophy, Society.
Tbilisi (in Georgian). Look up this entry topic at the Indiana Philosophy Ontology
Tevzadze, G., 1981, “The Principle of Analogy in Joane Petrizi's Project (InPhO).
Philosophy”, in G. Tevzadze (ed.), Problems of the History of Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers, with links
Medieval Philosophy, vol. 1, Tbilisi, pp. 227–241 (in Georgian). to its database.
–––, 1982, “Johannes Petrizi”, in E. Lange, D. Alexander (eds.),
Philosophen-Lexikon, Berlin, S. 447.
Other Internet Resources
–––, 1993, “Joane Petrizi on the Determination of Man”, in Iweria.
Journal of the Georgian-European Institute 3 (Tbilisi and Brussels), [Please contact the author with suggestions.]
pp. 83–98 (in Georgian).
–––, 1996, “The Philosophy of Joane Petrizi”, in Sh. Khidasheli, M. Related Entries
Makharadze (eds.), History of Georgian Philosophical Thought, vol.
1, Tbilisi, pp. 181–249 (in Georgian). Proclus
–––, 2002, “Die Kategorie der Subjektivität in Joane Petrizis Kommentar
zu Proklos”, in Th. Kobusch, B. Mojsisch, O. F. Summerell (Hrsg.), Copyright © 2015 by the author

Selbst—Singularität—Subjektivität. Vom Neuplatonismus zum Tengiz Iremadze

Deutschen Idealismus, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, S. 131–154.

14 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Fall 2015 Edition 15