Stephen Read

Errata for Thomas Bradwardine, Insolubilia, Peeters 2010

I am very grateful to those (especially to Stephen Menn and Mark Thakkar) who have advised me about the following corrections and improvements to my edition and translation of Bradwardine's text:

p.5 fn.15: What is given is Crosby's translation. A better translation is: "Now that these clouds of ignorance have been put to flight by these winds of demonstration, it remains for the light of the knowledge of truth to shine forth."

p.11 n.39: the reference to Ockham's Summa Logicae should be to Part III-3 chapters 39 and 46

p.60 line 3: for '[in] demum' read 'in devium'

p.61 line 1: for 'To untie a knot is not a job for a nitwit' read 'No one can untangle a knot that he does not see'

p.61 line 2: for 'Aristotle means that' read 'So'

p.61 line 3: for 'sure in the end to be brought to heel' read 'led into error'

p.63 §2.2 line 1: for 'Especially' read 'First, then'

line 3 up: for 'a figure of speech' read 'the fallacy of form of expression'

p.65 §3.0 line 1: for 'the restricters, who solve insolubles' read 'the restricters who solve insolubles'

§3.1 lines 3-4 (and pp.67, 71, 75): 'branch' is not right as translation of 'radix' (literally, 'root'). 'Foundation' or 'basis' might be better.

p.68 line 1: for 'Differentie' read 'Differentia'

p.71 §3.1.7 line 3: for 'consider' read 'apply' and for 'being in whole' read 'being in the whole'

p.90 §5.3 line 4: for 'exercito' read 'exercitio'

p.224 footnote 23: for '296' read '251'

If you notice any further problems, or have further suggestions for improvements, please let me know. Thanks.

Stephen Read

---

slr at st-and dot ac dot uk