This Content Downloaded From 89.164.29.222 On Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC

The Diffusion of the Writings of Petrus Ramus in Central Europe, c. 1570-c.
1630
Author(s): Joseph S. Freedman
Source: Renaissance Quarterly , Spring, 1993, Vol. 46, No. 1 (Spring, 1993), pp. 98-152
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Renaissance Society of
America
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3039149
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Renaissance Society of America and Cambridge University Press are collaborating with JSTOR
to digitize, preserve and extend access to Renaissance Quarterly
This content downloaded from

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Diffusion of the Writings of Petrus Ramus
in Central Europe, c. 1570-c. 1630
by JOSEPH S. FREEDMAN*
FOR WHAT REASONS DID ACADEMICIANS select to use or not to use

any given textbook for their own classroom instruction during
the Renaissance? To what extent did ideological or pragmatic con-
siderations influence such decisions? In this article these questions
are posed to examine the use of the writings of Petrus Ramus (I 5I 5-
1572) and Omer Talon (ca. 15IO--1562) at schools and universities
in Central Europe during the six decades between I570 and 1630.
Did "Ramist" academicians of this period make use in the class-
room of writings by these two authors because of some fundamen-
tal agreement with their views? Or were these two authors pre-
ferred during these six decades because their writings could be used
eclectically and/or they fit well into specific parts of the curriculum
at certain academic institutions?
In the period between I570 and 1630 there were over 30 univer
sities and hundreds of schools in the German-language area of Eu
rope.I A large amount of curricular information-largely in the
form of annual, semi-annual, or occasional outlines of instructio
as well as personal or official correspondence-exists for many o
these schools and universities. Textbooks and printed disputation
arising from instruction held at these academic institutions are also
extant. This assessment of the use of writings by Ramus and Talon
in Central European academic institutions is based on the exam
nation of a substantial portion of this evidence. The task of finding
and evaluating such evidence pertaining to other parts of Europ
must be left for a separate study.
One of the most influential monographs on Petrus Ramus, titled
Ramus, Method, and the Decay of Dialogue, was published by Walter
*This article is an expanded and amended version of a paper read at the Sevent
Meeting of the International Association for Neo-Latin Studies in Toronto on I2 A
gust 1988. Library and archive locations (together with call numbers) are given for a
source materials cited within this article. Refer to the abbreviations given at the begin
ning of the bibliography.
IThe best annotated bibliography of these schools and universities in Central Eu
rope is Goldmann.
[98]

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
THE DIFFUSION OF THE WRITINGS OF PETRUS RAMUS 99
Ong in 1958.2 The significance of this monogra

hanced by his publication that year of a bibliograph
of the writings of Ramus and Talon, his Ramus and
which encompasses editions published both durin
lifetimes.3 Table A originally appeared within O
but was constructed on the basis of data given w
liography.4
Table A provides valuable information concerning the chrono-
logical and geographical dimensions of the proliferation of writings
by Petrus Ramus and Omer Talon. Using it, we can present the fol-
lowing three hypotheses: i. Central Europe (which for the pur-
poses of this paper shall be equated with the German-language area
of Europe, including Germany, German Switzerland, and Alsace)
is the area in which the writings of Ramus and Talon on logic and
rhetoric were most extensively used. 2. The extensive use of these
writings in Central Europe is basically limited to the years between
1570 and 1630. 3. Based on the places of publication given here in
Table A it can be postulated that these writings on logic and rhetoric
were much less extensively used at universities than at other kinds
of academic institutions. Additional printed and manuscript
sources found while researching this paper have served to give fur-
ther credence to these three hypotheses, each of which will be re-
turned to later.
First, however, it is imperative to discuss the use of terms such
as "Ramist," "Semi-Ramist," and "Philippo-Ramist." This kind
of terminology is sometimes used in order to explain the spread of
writings by Ramus and Talon on logic, rhetoric, and other subjects.
I would like to suggest that the use of such terminology is prob-
lematic when applied to Central Europe in the period between 1570
2Ong, I9581. A recent monograph by Philip Leith also makes substantial use of
Ong's work on Ramus. Leith argues that the rapid rise and subsequent decline in the
popularity of Ramus's writings was due to the massive yet unsuccessful attempt of
those writings to arrive at a complete formalization of thought; see Leith, 37, 73-9I.
There is an abundance of additional recent literature on Petrus Ramus; the following
two articles present excellent summaries of that literature: Sharratt, 1987, and Sharratt,
1972.
30ng, I9582.
40ng, I958I, 296. This table has been reproduced here with the permission of Har-
vard University Press (#881391).

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
ioo RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY
TABLE A. The Spread of the Writings

Petrus Ramus as Tabulated by W
DISTRIBUTION OF EDITIONS (INCLUDING ADAPTATIONS)
OF THE RAMIST DIALECTIC AND RHETORIC (FIGURE XV)a
Based on Ong, Ramus and Talon Inventory
Year FRANCE SPAIN GERMANY SWITZER- BRITISH ALSACE LOW ALL TOTALS
(EXCLU- LAND ISLES COUN- ELSE
SIVE OF Sala- Frankfort/M Stras- TRIES Phila-
ALSACE) manca Cologne Basle London bourg delphia
Marburg (Lahn) Zurich Cam- Mul- Leyden New
Paris Herborn Bern bridge house Amsterdam York
Lyons Hanau Geneva Oxford Utrecht
La Rochelle Dortmund Edin- Middelburg
Niort Nuremberg burgh (English
Sedan Speyer Puritan
Siegen colony)
Lemgo The
Magdeburg Hague
Bremen Tiel
Brunswick
Erfurt
Giessen
Hamburg
Hanover
Jena
Leipzig
Lich
Lubeck
Rostock
Stuttgart
Coburg
Goslar
Oppenheim
Rinteln
Ursel
Wittenberg
Di Rh Di Rh Di Rh Di Rh Di Rh Di Rh Di Rh Di Rh Di Rh
I543 (5 I) (I I)
-I557 (12A) (4 I)
I55 8 2 2 2 14
-I572 20 2 3 I 26
1573 5 I 14 (I I) 2 3 25
-1580 6 I 4 (2A) I 12
I58I I 34(2A) 7 II I 5 59
-1590 I I 12 5 I 3 23
I591 49(IA) 2 I 52
-600o I 15 I 4 I 22
I60I 20 2 22
-i6io 13 4 I 18
1611 16 4 I I I 23
-1620 I 8 I I I 12
1621 9 2 II
-1630 7 3 I0
1631 2 5 I I 9
-1640 I 5 4
1641 I I I 6 9
-650 I I 4 2 8
65 I 2 3 5 10
-I660 I 6 I 8
1661 3 2 6 4 15
-1700 4 I 5 I II
1701 2 2 (I I) 4
-I8oo I 2 2 (I A) I 6
i8oi 7 2 9
-1950 2 2 4
Total 14 4 151 23 42 4 22 2 262

Total 31 4 69 i6 33 0 II 2 166
Figures in parentheses, no
and Rhetoric grew: (I) Dial
aUnder each country, mun
preceding the less. 1572 i

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
THE DIFFUSION OF THE WRITINGS OF PETRUS RAMUS ioI
and I630. While relevant Central European te

use these terms, they do not do so in a way whic
or precise.
Here we shall look at three different kinds of primary sources in
order to evaluate the meaning of this terminology. First, we will
examine how individual works titled as "Ramist," "Philippo-
Ramist," and the like, discuss the following two points of philo-
sophical doctrine: the classification of philosophical disciplines and
the concept of method. Second, we shall see how the writings of
Ramus and Ramus's followers are used in the works of one philos-
opher. And finally, we shall look at the titles of 2I printed works
which pertain to Ramus with respect to the actual content of these
works. Each of these three kinds of sources will be examined here
in turn.
Seven different classifications of philosophical disciplines are
presented in Tables B, C, D, E, F, G, and H.5 The classification
given in Table B is byJohannes Thomas Freigius (1543-I583), one
of Ramus's most avid disciples.6 Table C is taken from a "Philippo-
Ramist" general textbook on the liberal arts.7 Tables E and F are
classifications given by unnamed followers of Ramus as presented
byJoannes Henricus Alstedius (1588-163 8) in 1612.8 Tables D, G,
and H are taken from commentaries on Ramus's logic by Rudolph
Goclenius the Elder (1547-I628), Severinus Sluterus, and Antho-
nius Peitmann.9
5Some of these, as well as some other classifications of philosophical disciplines, are

presented and discussed in the following publications: Freedman, I9852; Freedman,
1985', 65-72.
6Freigius, 579, A6v. The following works provide biographical and bibliograph-
ical information concerning Freigius: Ong, I958I, 399; Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie,
7: 34I-43.
7Bilstenius, I-2.
8"Technologia Rameorum. Plures Peripateticorum sententias de partitione
phia colligant sibi studiosi. Nos nunc colligemus summatim quae Ramei p
habent de partitione philosophiae. Petrus Ramus, quod sciam, in scriptis su
philosophiae ideam & partitionem generalem nobis reliquit. Sed discipuli &
ejus, ex scriptis, quae edidit, sequentem philosophiae distributionem extruun
dius, 1612, 373-74. Such a classification authored by Petrus Ramus himself
be located when researching this article. Concerning the life and writings of
Heinrich Alsted see Theologische Realenzyklopadie, 2: 299-303.
9Goclenius, 600o, I05; the title of this work by Goclenius is cited more fu
of Table M; Sluterus, 1612, table following 54; Peitmann, 4I-64. Peitmann
fessor of logic at the University of Rinteln; this is evident from the title pa
he is referred to as Logicae profess. publicus) and from the preface (espec

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
I02 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY
TABLES B-H. Seven "Ramist" Classifications

of Philosophical Disciplines
TABLE B. Johannes Thomas Freigius (1576)
puram= Grammatica
((orationem): t solutam = Rhetorica

I ornatam
instrumenta l a
(rationem): Logica (su
(Arithmetica
Philosophia quantitatem = Mathematica
Geometria
naturam rerum Musica

(rerum hoc Optica
est
p s circa): Astroqualitatem
est circa):
^partes^ Physiologia
Oeconomia
Oeconomua 11
Psychologia
. Meteo
mores = Ethica
Politica
On the basis of these seven classifications the following two

points can be made here. First, each classification is quite distinct
from the next. It is difficult to say which one is more or less
"Ramist, " particularly since all of the works in which they appear
are "Ramist" in some manner. Neither Ramus nor Talon ever seem
to have produced such a classification of the philosophical disci-
plines. I
Such individual differences can be seen by looking at these seven
classifications. Philosophy is referred to as philosophia in Tables B,
D, E, F, G, and H, as artes liberales in C and as ars philosophica in
H. Philosophy includes logic, rhetoric, and grammar in all of these
classifications except for the one in Table D. Tables B, C, D, and
Concerning the life and writings of Rudolph Goclenius the Elder, see Allgemeine Deut-
sche Biographie, 9: 308-12; Strieder, 4: 428-87; his life, writings, and influence are dis-
cussed in Freedman, I9881, 92-93, 524 (and those pages referred to in the index).
I°See the passage cited in footnote 8; modern scholarship on Ramus has not pro-
duced any evidence to the contrary.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
THE DIFFUSION OF THE WRITINGS OF PETRUS RAMUS I03
TABLE C. Joannes Bilstenius (I588)
C Trammatica
p Ihetorica
exotericae
'oetica
(schlechte
)ialectica
Kiinste) L
Optica
Astronomia
Physica < Geographia

artes liberales 4 Medicina
Musica
Arithmetica
acroamaticae
Mathematica r Geomet ria
(hohe
Kiinste) Architec
tura
Politica
Oeconomica
Apodemica
Ethica Polemica
Historia
Jurisprudentia
Theologia
TABLE D. Rodophus Goclenius (I600)
metaphysica
res necessanae
physica -- astronomia; sphaerica
(theoreticae) arithmetica - musica
mathematica
diartes philosophiae ethica geometria . - optica
discipnae J res contingentiae oeconomica

scliberales (practicae) politica
huius instber a maca, rhetorica, logica
huius instrumenta: grammatica, rhetorica, logica
E all give diverse representations of the contents of physics while

Tables B, C, D, E, F, and G all have divergent classifications of
mathematical disciplines. The sub-categories of ethics given in Ta-
ble B are not same as the sub-categories given in Table C. No sub-
categories of ethics are given in Tables D, E, F, G, and H.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLES E-F. Classifications Given by Two Followers of R

According to Johannes-Henricus Alstedius (1612)
ratione = dialectica
[generalis i
(geoerati grammatica
oratione
rhetorica
philosophia de quantitate multa = arithmetica

quantitatis
E. philosophia
(= mathematica) de qualitate magna = geometria
philosophia
cognitionis osophia prima = physica
philosophia )
qualitatis Astronomia
qualitatis a prima orta Musica
Optica
specialis
ars obsequendi = ethica

(publica . oeconomica
osophia ars imperandi . .politica
philosophia polmtca
actionis
agens = agricultura
privata
faciens = architectonica
dialectica
artes logicae rhetorica
grammauca
propaidia (= instrumentum philosophiae) gramat
J fI I ~arithmetica
F.
F. phiosophia artes mathematicae geometria
phlosophmetria
paideia ( = philosophia) physic
ethica with the use
Secondly, Tables B, C, D,
the period between 1575 an
tance of the discipline of m
tion of Freigius in 1576, met
of logic. The classifications
1612 make metaphysics an
By 1626 the classification g
make metaphysics the most
we shall see later, this deve

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE G. Severinus Sluterus (1612)
dialectica
Instrumentalis rhetorica - oratoria
grammatica - poetica
generalis /
Realis, ut Metaphysica
fphysica fm
~,4~h,hm;,-r I
Philosophia
verum
mathemadca cosmologia
geographia
specialis geodasia
I
stereometria
astronomia
genere = ethica optica

bonum
specie politica
oeconomica
TABLE H. Anthonius Peitmann (1626)
1. philosophia
subordinata logica, grammatica, rhetorica, physica, medica, musica,
et ] architectonica, mechanica, optica, ethica, oeconomica, politica,
secunda Ljuridica, apodemica, polemica, historica, chronologica
rationis = dialectica
generalis (prima philosophica lexicon

oradonis grammatica &
rhetorica philologia
2. ars philosophia
I naturans = theosophia
naturae = theoreticanaturans theosophia
specialis . naturata (= physica/mathematica?)
morum = practica

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Io6 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY
changing attitudes toward the use of Ramus's writings in

European schools during the early seventeenth century.
The concept of method was discussed frequently in
sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century Central Europe
nection with Petrus Ramus. Neal Ward Gilbert has noted that this
concept begins to be discussed shortly before I550 in writings o
logic as well as works written specifically on method itself.
Gilbert also makes the observation that various terms such as via
("way"), ratio ("reason"), modus ("manner"), and methodus
("method") are used in sixteenth-century sources in order to ref
to method.12 Eight examples of late sixteenth- and ear
seventeenth-century works by Central European authors whic
discuss or at least mention method are presented in Table I.I3
these eight examples the terms via, ratio, ratiocinatio ("reasoning")
modus, ordo ("order"), or some combination thereof are used wh
reference is made to "method."
These examples highlight the problem of assigning an exact
meaning to the term "method" in late sixteenth- and ear
seventeenth-century texts.I4 This complicates any attempt to u
derstand how the term "method" is utilized in writings on lo
where Petrus Ramus is mentioned. An additional complication
posed by the fact-as Walter Ong, Cesare Vasoli, and Nelly
Bruyere have shown-that Ramus's own views on method did n
remain the same during his entire academic career.I5
IGilbert, 121-22. The earliest such discussion which I have used to date is that pu
lished by Erasmus Sarcerius in the year 1539: Sarcerius, A2-A8. However, the te
methodus (methadus) appears to have had at least some currency at the beginning of
sixteenth century; see Hundt, cIv. The extent to which terms such as methodus, mod
ratio, and via were used in medieval philosophical writings has yet to be determine
I2Gilbert, 68-69, I76-77.
I3In addition, see the disputations on method presided over byJohann Heinrich
sted, Heinrich Dauber, and Heinrich Gutberleth which are referred to in footnote
below and cited in the bibliography.
I4Willich, I; "Methodus, est via docendi certa cum ratione, hoc est, methodus
ratio docendi .. ." Hemmingius, I565, 3; Ursus, 2; Sallerus and Thoveninus, I5
2; Beurerus, I; Neldelius, 2-3; Coelius, 98-IOI; "Methodus autem vel ordo (n
parum inter hac vel nihil discriminis) est ad adiscendum, docendum, verumq; inveni
dum apta rerum cognitarum dispositio." Brunnemannus, 423.
I In addition, it should be noted that sixteenth- and seventeenth-century authors
not attempt to find exact definitions of terms in the manner of many of their twenti
century counterparts. Definition theory was a part of the discipline of logic during
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; real definition, nominal definition, descriptio
imperfect definition, and essential definition are among the sub-categories of defini

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE I. Terminology Used to Define and/or

Method Within Select Sixteenth- and Early Seven
Texts on Logic
i. Jodocus Willichius/De methodo omnium artium et disciplinarum/
I550; 2. Nicolaus Hemmingius/De methodis libri duo/I565; 3. Nico-
laus Raymarus Ursus/Metapmorphosis logicae/ I589; 4. Ioannes
Sallerus S.J. /Disputatio logica De methodo/I592; 5. Ioannes Iacobus
Beurerus/Methodice [Gr.]: sive de usu organi logici/I597; 6. Johannes
Neldelius / Pratum logicum Organi Aristotelici/I607; 7. Michael
Coelius / Prodromus philosophiae Peripateticae/ I626; 8. Iohannes
Brunnemannus / Enchiridion logicum ex Aristotele et Philippo / 639
I. Methodus est . . . via atque ratio vel est . . . modus

2. Methodus est via docendi . . .hoc est ... ratio docendi
3. Methodus est ratiocinatio . . .

4. (methodus): is described in terms of dispositio and modus
roughly equivalent to ordo
5. Methodice est doctrinarum, consiliorum de ratione, & ordi
comprehensio.
6. Methodus [=] . . . ordo doctrinae . . . modus probandi .
7. Coelius supplements the term methodus with modus, via,
ratio.
8. Methodus est ... ordo . . . dispositio.
TableJ presents in summary form views on methods given

different writings that mention Ramus. Numbers I, 2, a
commentaries on Ramus's logic. Number I presents what
tially a view found in Ramus's own logic. I6 It appears to hav
a matter of principle for many authors that they shou
method exactly as it was presented in one or more texts by
himself.17 This was to some extent a polemical issue in
Europe during the decades around I600.i8 However, num
and 3 depart to some extent from Ramus's views on me
that were used in that period. For example, see the following presentations
categories of definition: Crucius, B5v-B7; Wedemannus, table 8 (A4v), t
'6Ong, I958', 245-54, 402; Vasoli, 568-6oi; Bruyere, 41-202.
'7Beurhusius, 1583, 733-35.
'8The authors of the three disputations cited in footnote 28 apparently in
do precisely that.
I9Bartholomew Keckermann's discussion of Ramus's method is one indication of
this; see d.6 in number 2 of Table N as well as footnote 71 below.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Io8 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY
TABLE J. Discussions of Method (methodus) within Ten

on Logic in which Petrus Ramus is Mentioned
i. Fredericus Beurhusius / Ad P. Rami Dialecticam/I583; 2. Dav

Schramus/Partitiones logicae et rhetoricae, ad verae methodi R
leges/ I 589; 3. Conradus Neander/Tabulae... in ... illam diss
artem. P. Rami Dialecticae/159I; 4. Rupertus Erytropilus / Tab
generales in Dialecticam P. Rami, quibus ex altera facie opponu
tabulae ex praeceptis Dn. Philippi Melanchthonis/ 588; 5. Paulu
Frisius/Comparationum dialecticarum ... quibus Philippi Melan
thonis, & Petri Rami praecepta dialectica ... conferuntur/I59o;
Otho Casmannus/Logicae Rameae & Melanchthonianae collat
Exegesis/ 1594; 7. Bartholomaeus Sengebehr/Compendium dial
Philippi ... item P. Rami observationibus utilissimis illustrata/
8. Gregor Horstius/Institutionum logicarum, libri duo ... ex A
tele, eiusdemque interpretibus / I608; 9. Andreas Cramerus /
Comparationum logicarum . . . dialecticae Philippeae/ I6Io; IO.
ens Timplerus / Logicae systema methodicum/I6I 2.
I. Beurhusius says that methodus est dianoia variorum axiom

homogeneorum pro naturae suae claritate prarepositorum, u
omnium inter se convenientia iudicatur memoriaque compre
tur. This method consists of "sola & unica" via i.e.:
a. ab antecedentibus notioribus -> consequentia ignota
b. generales & universales -- specialissimae
2. Methodus est relatio disposita, quam praescribit natura

(this includes the following):
a. synthesis: ad sensum accedunt; attendenda adjuncta
b. analysis: a sensu recedunt; simplicia exprome[n]s
3. a. Methodus est rectus partium ejus, quod ad explicandum susci

itur, ordo & dispositio.
b. Method is either "perfect" (perfecta) or "imperfect" (imper-
fecta). In perfect method one precedes I) from that which is
better known to that which is less known and 2) from that
which is most general to that which is less general. In imper-
fect method-which does not necessarily imply defects or
superfluousness-one precedes in the inverse order (gradus in-
versus) and one uses induction.
4. a. Methodus Ramo est dispositio, qua de multis enunciatis homo

geneis suoque vel syllogismi judicio notis, id, quod absoluta
notione primum est, primo loco disponitur, quod est secundu
secundo, quod tertium tertio, & sic deinceps. Ideoque hic sem
per a generalibus proceditur ad specialia. Haec einim sola &
unica procedendi via est (ut solide P. Ramus defendit) ab ante-
cedentibus ad consequentia ...

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
THE DIFFUSION OF THE WRITINGS OF PETRUS RAMUS o09
TABLE J. Method/Logic/Petrus Ramus (conti

b. Philipp Melanchthon only touches upon isolated
ing to method; in doing so, he (so Erytropilus imp
not come into conflict at all with the method of Petrus Ramus.
5. a. Philipp Melanchthon divides method (methodus = viae) into

two categories:
I) analytic (analytica): posteriores -> priores;
inductio singularium & specialium ->
generalissimum
2) synthetic (synthetica): priores & notiores -> posteriores &
ignotiores
generales & universales -- speciales &
singulares
b. Synthetic method (= ordo) is referred to by Philipp Melanch-
thon and by Petrus Ramus as method; Ramus does not discuss
analytic method at all.
c. Frisius notes that it is the intention of Ramus-some of his
views notwithstanding-to agree with Melanchthon's views on
method.
6. a. Methodus est dianoia variorum axiomatum homogeneorum

pro naturae suae claritate praepositorum: unde omnium inter se
convenientia judicatur, memoriaque comprehenditur ... ab
universalibus ad singularia . . . sola & unica via proceditur ab
antecedentibus omnino & absolute notioribus ad consequentia
ignota.
b. Casmann refers to Melanchthon's method as nova methodus
Philippi; he describes it as quae monstrat certam rationem trac-
tandi & explicandi membrum aliquod integri corporis.
7. Method is not defined or directly described; it is merely noted that
the discipline of logic consists of three parts, and each part must
be methodically explained.
8. Horstius does not accept the Ramists' (Ramistae) methodus unica.
a. Ramists argue for the methodus unica; one should, so they say,
always begin with universals when seeking knowledge; to use
other methods would be "injurious" (contraria).
b. Horstius answers by making the following observations:
I) The universals used in theoretical disciplines are "principles"
(principia) while those universals used in practical disciplines
are "the final result" (finis); those two kinds of universals
belong to two completely different classes.
2) To use other methods is not injurious but merely "differ-
ent" (diversae).
c. Rudolph Goclenius attempts to reconciliate these two opinions
by concluding that the methodus unica does not negate the fun-
damental distinctions between species (which apparently also

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
IIO RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY
TABLE J. Method/Logic/Petrus Ramus (continued)

applies to Horstius's two classes of universals). Horstius d
not completely reject this reconciliation (haec conciliatio n
omnino improbanda est, modo ab ipsis quoque Ramaeis ea
ratione intelligatur).
9. Cramer notes that in his edition of Becmann's textbook on "Phil-
ippic" (i.e., "Melanchthonian") logic he has combined Ramist
method (methodus Ramea) with the order of Aristotle (Aristotelis
ordo).
io. a. Methodus ... est instrumentum dianoeticum bene ordinandi
res diversa & varias secundum prius & posterius, commodio
cognitionis gratia.
b. Timpler divides method into methodus inventionis and me
dus doctrinae; the latter is either perfecta or imperfecta, while
perfecta is either universalis or particularis.
c. Methodus unica can only be used to describe (the sub-categ
of) methodus doctrinae perfecta universalis.
Numbers 4, 5, 6, and 7 all purport to be works on logic w

combine the views of Petrus Ramus and Phillip Melanchthon
they go in very different directions with respect to the concep
method. Numbers 4 and 6 essentially adopt a view on method
ilar to that of Ramus, and both regard Melanchthon to be in
mony with Ramus.20 On the other hand, number 5 basically acc
a view on method similar to that of Melanchthon but considers
Ramus to be in harmony with Melanchthon.21 Number 7 goes
neither direction. Instead, this work appears to equate method wi
logic itself.22
Number 8 attacks the Ramists with regard to method but th
appears to accept a compromise between Ramist and Anti-Ram
views offered by Rudolph Goclenius the Elder. 23 Number 9 claim
to be a "Melanchthonian" logic textbook. It uses two differen
Latin terms, methodus and ordo, to state the use of material allege
taken from both Ramus and Aristotle.24 Number Io is a logic text
20Schramus, 53-54; Neander, I59I, table before 251 (252).

"2Erytropilus, L4-L4v; Casmannus, 292-309.
22Frisius, 1590, 98-IOI, table after III.
23Sengebehr, 54-54V (55-55v).
24Horstius, 393-95.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
THE DIFFUSION OF THE WRITINGS OF PETRUS RAMUS iii
book by Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624) wh

title, is an independent work.25 It is very crit
odus unica.26 Yet many other independent w
ample, logic disputations held in an academy
born, Nassau under the supervision of Hein
Gutberleth, and Johann Heinrich Alsted in
present definitions of method which are almo
tions given by Petrus Ramus himself.27
Ramus is one of the authorities whom Cl
tions frequently in his own writings; these fr
ities are tabulated in Table K.28 Timpler was a
at a school in the town of Steinfurt, Westphal
K lists his citations of Petrus Ramus. He makes much less use of
Ramus than he does of Aristotle, Cicero, or Bartholomaeus Ke
ermann (1572/3-I609).3° Timpler's textbook on logic contains t
bulk of his citations of Ramus.31
Items 2a, 2b, and 2c in Table K list the number of times that
various philosophical schools are mentioned. Item 2a refers to "A
istotelians" (Peripatetici, Aristotelici, interpretes Aristotelis, ii, qui A
istotelem sequuntur). Item 2b refers to "scholastics" (scholastici, nom
nales). The citations in 2c pertain in various ways to Petrus Ramus.
Number 3 in Table K lists the five authors associated with Ramus
who are cited most often in Timpler's writings. Friedrich Reisn
25Cramerus, I.
26Timplerus, 1612.
27"Quaestio 9. An Methodus doctrinae sin tantum unica? Ramus unicam tantu
Methodum doctrinae esse docet, quae ex Aristotelis sententia ab universalibus ad s
gularia, seu a generalibus ad specialia; & sic ab antecedentibus omnino & absolute n
tioribus ad consequentia ignota declaranda progrediatur. Quae sententia etsi vera e
de methodo perfecta & universali, de qua etiam Ramus videtur loqui: tamen falsa e
de methodo doctrinae in genere acceptae." Ibid., Liber IV, Caput 8, Questio 9 (72
30).
28Dauberus and Munichius; Gutberleth and Schefferus; Alstedius and Figulus. Con-
cerning the Herborn Academy, refer to the recent monograph by Menk.
29Most of this information is given in Freedman, 1988I, 128-30, 134, 142, 163. Most
of Timpler's citations of Ramus, Talon, and other authorities associated with Ramus
are found in his textbooks on logic and rhetoric; for this reason the citations found in
each of these two textbooks are listed here. Timplerus, 1612 and 1613.
3°See Freedman, I988', and I9882.
3IThe use of Cicero's writings by Timpler is discussed in Freedman, 1986, 234-35,
249. Concerning Keckermann and Timpler's use of Cicero, also refer to Freedman,
I988', 32-33, 122-24, 156-57, 473-74, 561-62, 576 (and to the other pages referred
to in the index of this volume).

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
II2 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY
TABLE K. Ramus, "Ramists," and Selected Other Authoriti

within the Writings of Clemens Timpler (I563/4-I62
( ) = number of total citations within Timpler's writings
[ ] = number of citations within Timpler's Logic textbook
{ } = number of citations within Timpler's Rhetoric textbook
I. a. Aristoteles (1783 <- [212] {99})
b. Sacred Scripture (888 <- [8] {64})
c. Cicero (472 <- [26] {281})
d. Plato (I61 <- [ 5] {9} )
e. Keckermannus (140 <- [40] {73})
f. Zabarella (Io8 <- [33] {6})
g. Suarez (106 <- [o] {o})
h. Quintilian (87 <- [4] {79})
i. Aquinas (84 <- [3] {o})
j. Seneca (8I <- [I] {I})
k. Petrus Ramus (8I <- [68] {8})
2. a. Peripatetici (87 <- [46] {2}); Aristotelici (12 <- [5] {I}); inte
tes Aristotelis (5 <- [I] {o}); ii, qui Aristotelem sequuntur
[I] {o})
b. scholastici (76 <- [o] {o}); nominales (2 <- [o] {o})
c. Ramaei; Ramistae (27 <- [I5] {5}); Rami discipuli (II <- [9] {o});
Rami sectarii (3 <- [3] {o}); schola Ramea (12 <- [7] {2}); ii, qui
Ramum sequuntur (9 <- [6] {3}); Rami interpretes, ex mente
Rami (5 <- [5] {o}); illi, qui Rami reprehendunt (I <- [I] {o})
3. Reisnerus (21 <- (o) {o}); Talaeus (20 <- (2) {I7}); Ursinus (I3 <-
[I3] {o}); Hausmannus (o <-- [o] {I0}); Treutlerus (8 <- [o] {8})
and Omer Talon were students of Ramus in Paris. 32 Wilhelm Urs-

inus and Hieronymus Treutler produced commentaries on Ra
mus's logic.33 Hermann Hausmann (1541-1606) was a colleague o
Timpler's at the Academy in Steinfurt, Westphalia. Hausmann pro-
duced a "Philippo-Ramist" textbook on rhetoric.34
32However, the three passages in Timpler's metaphysics textbook which mention

Ramus are all noteworthy; they shall be discussed shortly. Two of these passages ar
mentioned in numbers I and 2 of Table I.
33In his textbook on optics Timpler appears to regard Friedrich Reisner as the mo
important authority on this subject matter; see Freedman, I988I, 410-II, 713, 82
Concerning the relation between Ramus and Talon see the two works by Ong cit
in footnotes 2 and 3.
34Ursinus; Treutler and Assaeus; Treutler. Timpler cites Ursinus's commentar
however, he does not yet mention any work on logic written by Treutler. Timpler

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
The term "Ramist" is never defined or explained

is not clear whether a Ramist is someone who follows Ramus all
of the time, most of the time, some of the time, or only with respect
to individual points of academic doctrine. Timpler never mentions
how he would distinguish between the groups of people whom he
refers to in 2c of Table K as "Ramists" (Ramaei, Ramistae), "disci-
ples of Ramus" (Rami discipuli), "sectarians of Ramus" (Rami sec-
tarii), those belonging to the "Ramist School" (schola Ramea),
"those who follow Ramus" (ii, qui Ramum sequuntur), as "interpret-
ers of Ramus" (Rami interpretes, ex mente Rami), and "those who re-
buke Ramus" (illi, qui Rami reprehendunt). It is also unclear if or to
what extent Timpler would regard all of the five individuals listed
in number 3 of Table K-i.e., Hausmann, Reisner, Talon, Treut-
ler, and Ursinus-as Ramists.
Clemens Timpler's own very eclectic manner of using Ramus
and individuals in some manner associated with Ramus is evident
from Table L. 3 In passages I and 2 Timpler's opposition to Ramus
centers around the latter's intention to place certain concepts within
the realm of logic while Timpler prefers to assign those same con-
cepts to the domain of metaphysics. 36 However, in passage 3 of Ta-
ble L Timpler has the same opinion as Ramus with reference to the
term ars.
In passage 4 of Table L Timpler sides with what he refers t

"Ramists" (Ramei) against Ramus, "those who follow Ramus"
complures philosophi, qui Ramum sequuntur), and a number of o
authors. In passage 5 Timpler criticizes both "those authors
have followed Ramus" (illi, qui Ramum secuti) and "those aut
who oppose Ramus" (illi, qui Ramum reprehendunt). In passa
Timpler argues in favor of his own interpretation of Ramus's vi
on efficient causes against the interpretation(s) of Ramus given
other individuals.
textbook on rhetoric cites a work by Treutler titled De methodo eloquentiae; a copy of

this latter work could not be located while researching this article.
3SHausmannus, I605 and I6I5. Hausmann also presided over a number of dispu-
tations on logic; for example, see Hausmannus and Oldenburgius. Concerning Haus-
mann's career at Steinfurt, see Freedman, I988I, 54, 56, 499, 750.
36Timplerus, I605; Timplerus, 1604. Both of these textbooks were reprinted; see
Freedman, I988I, 748, 750-52, 754, 760-65. Timpler's textbooks on logic and rhetoric
were cited in footnotes 24 and 27, respectively. In each of the passages i through Io
the relevant page numbers can be determined by finding the correct book, chapter, and
question numbers.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE L. Mentions of Ramus and "Ramists" within

Timpler's Writings: I Examples
M = Timpler's Metaphysics textbook; PN 1 = Timpler's General
Physics textbook; L = Timpler's Logic textbook; R = Timpler's Rhe
oric textbook
L = Liber (Book); C = Caput (Chapter); Q = Quaestio/Problema

("Question")
I. M: L3C2QI: Utrum ad Metaphysicam pertineat, agere de causis,
& quomodo?
Timpler states that general discussion of causality belongs within
the discipline of metaphysics and attacks the view of Ramus that
this should only be done within the discipline of logic.
2. M: L3C3QI: An doctrina generalis de subiecto & adiuncto pertin-
eat ad Metaphysicam?
Timpler answers affirmatively, and attacks the view of "Ramus
and all of his disciples" that general discussion of subject and
predicate can only be given within the discipline of logic.
3. PN 1: CIQ2: An Physica sit ars, & quidem contemplativa?
Timpler answers to the affirmative, supporting recentiores Philo-
sophi, praesertim illi qui sunt a Ramo against what he refers to as
the tota schola Peripatetica.
4. L: LICIQI5: An Logica recte distribuatur in Inventionem & Judi-
cium?
Cicero, Quintilian, Rudolph Agricola, Luis Vives, Ramus, and alii
complures philosophi, qui Ramum sequuntur all answer this ques-
tion to the affirmative. Timpler disagrees; he gives io arguments
for his own view, citing "Ramists" (Ramei) within two of them.
5. L: LIC3Q9: An potentia explicandi & probandi sint affectiones
argumentorum?
Timpler answers this question affirmatively; when responding to
objections he criticizes illi, qui Ramum reprehendunt as well as
illi, qui Ramum secuti.
6. L: LIC6QI: An efficiens recte definiatur causa externa a qua effec-
tum est?
Timpler argues this question to the affirmative, and states that
those who interpret Ramus's definition thereof differently are mis-
taken.
7. L: L2C2QI: An antecedens, consequens, & connexa sint species

argumentis artificialis: & quidem ab aliis realiter dis-
tinctae?
Timpler notes that Ramus makes no express mention of the terms
antecedens, consequens, and connexa in the first part of his logic
textbook. Timpler then proceeds to give five arguments for the

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
THE DIFFUSION OF THE WRITINGS OF PETRUS RAMUS II5
TABLE L. Ramus - "Ramists" / Timpler (continued)

affirmative position; Timpler uses material from Guilielmus Ur
nus's commentary on Ramus's logic textbook in favor of this p
sition.
8. L: L3C2Q3: Quid sit Enuntiatum affirmatum vel negatum?

Timpler gives five definitions of affirmative and negative enun
tion: two by Aristotle, one from an early edition of Ramus's lo
textbook (Ramus in editione suae Dialecticae, quam Talaeus com
mentario illustravit), one from a later edition of Ramus's logic
textbook, and one by "other logicians." Timpler accepts the def
nitions by Ramus, but notes that those from the earlier edition
better.
9. L: L3C3QI: An Enuntiatum secundum materiam, & quidem rec

dividatur in commune & proprium: & commune ru
sus in definitum & infinitum: & definitum in univer-
sale & particulare?
Timpler answers this question to the affirmative. He attacks Ra-
mus's classification of enuntiation: Bisterfeld [in his own edition of
Ramus's logic textbook] has "corrected" Ramus here.
Io. R: L3CsQ2: Quotuplex sit Synecdoche?
Talaeus, other Ramists (alii Ramaei), and Hausmann classify syn-
ecdoche into various sub-categories; Timpler disagrees, and then
gives his own classification of these sub-categories.
i . R: L3C7Q4: Unde Ironia in oratione cognoscatur?
Quintilian, Talaeus, Keckermann, and Hausmann all give different
answers to this question. Timpler accepts the answer of Haus-
mann here to the effect that irony can only be understood when
words are correlated with the intent of the given person.
In passage 7 of Table L Timpler obviously regards Ramus as an

authority. In passage 8 Timpler accepts Ramus's definitions of af-
firmative and negative enunciation as given in an earlier-as op-
posed to a later-edition of Ramus's logic textbook. In passage 9
Timpler notes that Bisterfeld's edition of Ramus's logic has im-
proved upon Ramus's own less than adequate classification of
enunciation. In passage 10 Timpler disagrees with Hausmann with
respect to one issue but in passage I I Timpler agrees with him with
respect to a different issue.
On the basis of these eleven passages it is clear that there is no
simple formula which explains how Ramus or those individuals

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
somehow connected to Ramus are utilized in the writ

Clemens Timpler. It is also evident from passages 3, 4, 6
9 that individual Central European authors of the period
1570 and 1630 could interpret or reinterpret Ramus's views o
cific points of doctrine in different manners. Clemens Timpl
in fact only one of a great many authors active during thi
who all used Ramus's writings in a complex variety of w
The variety of ways in which Ramus appears with
sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century writings printed in
tral Europe is also evident in the 21 examples of such writ
ib, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4a, 4b, 5a, 5b, 5c, 6a, 6b, 7, 8a, 8b, 9,
IIa, lib) given in Table M.37 Items Ia and ib are two gr
textbooks used at the Academy in Herborn. Item Ia is "P
Ramist" while Ib is "Mauritian-Philippo-Ramist." Items 2a
are two textbooks which discuss the rhetoric of Omer Talon. But
they also include diverse additional works which were intended for
use in academic instruction. Item 2a includes commentary
Ovid's poems while 2b includes commentary on 22 psalms from
the Old Testament.
Items 3a and 3b are two editions of Ramus's logic textboo
which show differences in content. 38 Items 4a and 4b are two work
which according to their titles discuss the logic of both Philip
Melanchthon and Petrus Ramus. Yet they are diverse in form
well as in content.39
Items 5a, 5b, and 5c are three works on logic by Friedrich
Beurhusius (I536-I609). Beurhusius was rector of a school in
Dortmund and a well-known partisan of Ramus.40 Item 5a is on the
logic of Aristotle, Boethius, and Cicero; 5b intends to compare the
logic of Ramus with that of Melanchthon; 5c is devoted to the logic
of Ramus alone. These three textbooks most probably were pub-
lished in order to fulfill diverse instructional requirements at the
Dortmund School as well as other academic institutions. Severinus
37Library locations and call numbers for those copies of Ia through i ib used in Tab
M are given in the bibliography.
38This can be observed on the basis of the dichotomous charts which summarize
the contents of each commentary; see Rodingus (Table M, 3a), table after I136; and Bi
terfeldius (Table M, 3b), table after 128.
39Erytropilus's text consists mainly of tables with short commentary; Casmann's
text is narrative. Erytropilus directly contrasts the views of Ramus and Melanchtho
on individual issues while Casmann does not wish to highlight such contrasting view
40Concerning Beurhusius, see Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, 2: 584-85.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE M. Late Sixteenth- and Early Seventeenth-C

Writings Printed in Central Europe which pertain to Petr
21 Examples
Ia. Grammatica latina Philippo-Ramea, ad faciliorem puerorum cap-
tum perspicua methodo breviter conformata, & duobus libris dis-
tincta. Addita sunt passim tabulae cum generales, tum speciales;
ex quibus methouds cognosci potest. Herbornae: Excudebat
Christophorus Corvinus, I591.
ib. Alstedius, Joannes-Henricus, praes. and Coccejus, Sigmundus,
resp. Compendium grammatices latinae, harmonice conformatae,
& succincta methodo comprehensae: quam non inepte quis
dixerit Mauritio-Philippo-Rameam. In illustri Herbornea publicae
censurae subjectum. Herbornae Nassoviorum: I6I0.
2a. Beurhusius, Fredericus. Audomari Talaei rhetoricae, P. Rami
praelectionibus observare, rudimenta. Addita ad finem Ovidianae
elegiae analysi. Tremoniae: Excudebat Alb. Sart., 1582.
2b. Frisius, Paulus. Epitome rhetorices Audomari Talaei collecta ...
Huic adjecti sunt . . . comparationum rhetoricarum libri duo.
Quibus elementa rhetorices Philippi Melanchthonis cum praecep-
tis partim logicis Petri Rami, partim rhetoricis Audomari Talaei
breviter modeste conferuntur. Addita est Psalmi XXII. analysis
logica & rhetorica. Francofurti: Apud heredes Andreae Wecheli,
Claudium Marnium & Io. Aubrium, I600.
3a. Rodingus, Guilielmus. P. Rami Regii Professoris Dialecticae libri

duo, ex variis ipsius disputationibus, et multis Audomari Talaei
commentariis breviter explicati. Francofurti: Apud haeredes An-
dreae Wecheli, 1582.
3b. Bisterfeldius, Johannes. Rameae dialecticae libri duo: propositi

noviter et expositi. Sigenae Nassoviorum: Ex officina Christo-
phori Corvini, I597.
4a. Erytropilus, Rupertus. Tabulae generales in Dialecticam P. Rami,
quibus ex altera facie opponuntur tabulae ex praeceptis Dn. Phil-
ippi Melanchthonis confectae. Lemgoviae: Excudebantur in offi-
cina typographica Conradi Grothenii, 1588.
4b. Casmannus, Otho. P. Rami Dialecticae & Melanchthonianae col-
latio: institutae ac proposita lectionibus privatis Helmstadii. Ha-
noviae: Apud Guilielmum Antonium, 1594.
5a. Beurhusius, Fredericus. M. T. Ciceronis, Dialecticae libri duo.
Ex ipsius Topicis; aliisque libris collecti, ex Aristotele vero Boet-
ioque uspiam completi, & propriis ipsius exemplis illustrati. Ad-
ditis etiam brevius explicationum collationumque notis. Coloniae:
Apud Gosvinum Cholinum, I583.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE M. Writings which Pertain to Petrus Ramus (con
5b. Beurhusius, Fredericus. P. Rami Dialectici libri duo: et h

gione comparati Philippi Melanth. Dialecticae libri quatuo
explicationum et collationum notis, ad utramque conform
tionem uno labore addiscendam. (Mulhusii): (Apud haered
Georgii Hantzsch, impensis Otthonis a Riswick), 1586.
5c. Beurhusius, Fredericus. Petri Rami Regii Professoris Dial
libri duo. Defensio ejusdem dialecticae per scholasticas qu
dam interpretationum, animadversionum, triumphorum,
emendatinum disquisitiones. Francofurdi: Apud Andreae W
heredes, Claudium Marnium, & Ioann. Aubrium, 1590.
6a. Sluterus, Severinus. Anatome logicae Rameae, qua ipsa pr
primum perpicue dissecantur & explicantur: deinde singul
bratim in utramque partem perpetuis obiectionibus & resp
ibus, partim a Peripateticis motis, partim ab auctore recen
cogitatis solidissime disputatur & examinantur. Frincofurt
D. Zachariam Palthenium, I608.
6b. Sluterus, Severinus. Anatomia logicae Aristoteleae sive syncrisis
logica, qua primo ipsa praecepta, ex organo Aristotelis method-
ice proposita, celebriorum interpretum glossis explicantur:
Deinde quid Ramei in iisdem desiderent, indicatur: Tertio de-
nique diversae Aristotelicorum & Rameorum sententiae, in con-
sensu, & dissensu comparatur, ut quid verum falsuve sit, liquido
congoscatur. Prostat in nobili Francofurti Paltheniano, I6Io.
7. Bergius, Conradus. Artificium Aristotelico-Lullio-Rameum in
quo per artem intelligendi, logicam: artem agendi practicam: artis
loquendi... elaboratum. Bregae: Typis Sigfridianis sumptibus
Joh. Eiringi & Joh. Perferti, 1615.
8a. P. Rami Dialectica, cum praeceptorum explicationibus, disquisi-
tionibus, & praxi nec non collatione cum Peripateticis. Ex Za-
barellae, Schegkii, Matth. Flacc. Illyrici, Rod. Goclenij, Fr.
Beurhusij, loan. Piscatorij, & Rodolph. Snellij commentarijs &
praelectionibus. Collecta a M. Christophoro Cramero . . . aucta
plurimis in locis in usum logicae studiosorum edita a Rodolpho
Goclenio. Ursellis: Apud Cornelium Sutorium sumtibus Iohnae
Rhodij, 1600.
8b. Goclenius, Rodolphus, praes. and Chesnecopherus Suecus, Nico-
laus, resp. Isagoge optica cum disceptatione geometrica de uni-
verso geometriae magisterio, hoc est, geodaesia rectarum per ra-
dium, & aliis quaestionibus philosophicis, iuxta aureum P. Rami,
methodum concinnata, in inclyta Marpurgensi Academia pro in-
signibus magisterii Philosophici consequendis publica ad dispu-
tandum proposita. Francofurti: Apud loan. Wecheli viduam,
sumtibus Petri Fischeri, I593.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE M. Writings which Pertain to Petrus Ramus (con

9. Petri Rami Arithmeticae libri duo, et Algebrae totidem:
Schonero emendati & explicati. Eiusdem Schoneri libri d
De numeris figuratis; alter, De logistica sexagenaria. Fran
Apud heredes Andreae Wecheli, 1586.
ioa. Snellius, Rudolphus. Partitiones physicae methodi Rame
bus informatae: exceptae olim ex dictandis ejus ore in sch
Marpurgensi. Nunc primum in lucem editae. Hanoviae: A
Guilielmum Antonium, 1594.
iob. Snellio-Ramaeum philosophiae syntagma, tomis aliquot
distinctum; quibus continentur I. Generales sincerioris p
phiae Rameae informationes: 2. Dialectica, 3. Rhetorica,
ithmetica, 5. Geometria, 6. Sphaera, seu Astronomia, 7.
8. Psychologia, 9. Ethica; Rhodolphi Snellii... commen
bus succinctis & accuratis; sed cum aliorum huius ani viro
lectissimis observationibus ac notis studiose passim collat
auctis; explicata: quibus praefatio D. Rhodolphi Goclen
praefixa est. Tomo autem primo hic post praefatione sub
vera vereque Ramea recte philosophandi ratio. Sequentib
ac separatis tomis reliqua sequentes disciplina. Francofur
officina typographica Ioannis Saurij, impensis haeredum
Fischeri, 1596.
i a. M. Cornelii Martini Antvverpii adversus Ramistas dispu
subjecto et fine logicae ... A Friderico Beurhusio in scho
Tremoniana. Conrado Hoddaeo D. in Gymnasio Gottingen
Heizone Buschero in schola Hannoverana. Lemgoviae: Sum
bus Magni Holstenii bibliopolae Hannoverani, 1596.
IIb. (Corvinus, Jodocus.) Tetramerum autoschediasticum pro
sione sententiae Andreae Libavij, de apodixi Aristotelea c
mentem Petri Rami, adversus sana sophismata & virulent
calumnias Ioannis Bisterfeldii cuiusdam sine causa furentis. Cum
praefatione And. Lib. ad omnes eruditos logicos. Francofurti:
Excudebat Ioannes Saurius, impensis Petri Kopffij, 1596.
Sluterus published two different logic textbooks: 6a is on the log

of Ramus while 6b is on the logic of Aristotle. Sluterus probabl
wrote these two textbooks because he used both the writings of Ar-
istotle and the writings of Ramus when he taught logic.4I
4'On the title pages of 6a and 6b Sluter is referred to as Scholae Stadiensis Rector
i.e., the principal of the school in the town of Stade. Also refer to the work by Slut
referred to in footnote 9 and cited in the bibliography.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
120 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY
Item 7 is a logic textbook which purports to be Aristo

Lullian, and Ramist. Number 9 combines Lazarus Schoner
tion of two works by Petrus Ramus on mathematics with
Schoner's own mathematical works. Schoner was an avid follower
of Ramus.42
Items 8a and 8b are two works for which Rudolph Goclenius the
Elder bears responsibility. The first is on Ramus's logic, but from
the title it is evident that it is more than just that. In this work the
logic of Ramus is explained with the use of writings by Friedrich
Beurhusius, Matthias Flacius Illyricus, Rudolph Goclenius the El-
der, Johannes Piscatorius, Jakob Schegk, Rudolphus Snellius, and
Jacobus Zabarella. Christophorus Cramerus apparently collected
the material used within this work; Rudolph Goclenius edited it for
the use of logic students.43 Item 8b is a disputation held in partial
fulfillment of the Master of Arts degree requirements of Nicolaus
Chesnecopherus, a Swedish student at the University of Marburg.
Chesnecopherus was the author of this disputation on optics, ge-
ometry, and geodasy; Goclenius was his teacher.44 According to the
title page the method of Ramus is used within this work; Ramus
is cited a number of times in this disputation's section on geodasy.45
Items Ioa and Iob are two philosophical works by Rudolph Snel-
lius who was a professor at the University of Marburg for part of
his career.46 The appearance of Ramus on these title pages is some-
what deceptive. The text of Ioa mentions neither Ramus nor his
method. In iob Snellius defends Petrus Ramus against one of his
major critics; however, in this latter work Snellius also has sharp
criticism for what he refers to as "Pseudoramists" (Pseudoramei).47
Items I Ia and lib are examples of polemical writings by indi-
viduals who were in favor of or opposed to the use of Ramus's writ-
42Concerning Lazarus Schoner's life and works, see Strieder, 13: I85-88.
43This work contains the classification of philosophical disciplines which is given
in Table D.
44Chesnecophorus wrote the dedication to this disputation (A2-A4v); the text
this dedication (A4-A4v) makes it clear that he is also the author of the disputati
It also contains prefaces by Lazarus Schonerus (fol. BI-Blv) and Rudolph Gocleni
(B2-B2v).
45See pages 34, 35, 36, 40, and 43 of this disputation.
46Concerning the career of Rudolphus Snellius, see Bangs, 37-38 and Joche
4: 648-49.
47See 180-83 of this work (i.e., Iob of Table M) and the discussion given later
this article.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
ings. Such writings appeared frequently in C

about 1570 until at least the I630s.48 Item i a
Ramus works written by Friedrich Beurhus
daeus, and Heizo Buscher, who taught at Luth
mund, Gottingen, and Hannover, respective
Jodocus Corvinus, who defended the anti-Ram
Libavius, a Lutheran, while attacking the views
feld, a Calvinist.50
From the information presented in Tables
I, J, K, L, and M it is clear that terms such as "
Ramist," and the like lose most of their valu
the context of primary source data which pe
most all of the writings presented in Tables B
connection with academic instruction; the ne
stitutions were different.5I Therefore, indiv
used and interpreted Ramus differently and
various other authors.
The eclectic manner in which Timpler used Ramus and those
whom he associated with Ramus is evident from Table L. This
same attitude toward Ramus was held by many of Timpler's
temporaries. Rudolph Goclenius's commentary on the logic o
mus was briefly described above and listed as item 8a of Tab
This work contains a classification of philosophical discip
which has very little in common with the classifications giv
other commentaries on Ramus's logic or given by Ramus's fo
ers.52 However, the discussion of method given by Gocleni
very similar to views on method held by Petrus Ramus hims
48Two additional examples of such polemical writings are given here: Wackeru
Helmoldus; Fabricius and Wolffen von Gedenbergk. The title pages identify Wac
and Fabricius as principals of schools in G6ttingen and Mulhausen (Saxony), r
tively. The first disputation is sharply critical of Ramus while the second one i
portive of him.
49Concerning Beurhusius, see 5a, sb, and 5c of this table and footnote 37. Wi
gard to Heizo Buscher, see Jcher, I: 1512 and Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie 3:
sOAndreas Libavius taught at Jena, Rothenburg on the Tauber, and Cobur
Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, i8: 530-32; very little is known about Bisterfeld;
of Table M and the documents in Wiesbaden SA: Abt. 95, Nr. 324, 5 . Johann St
statement to this same effect from the year 1572 is given in Ie of Table N.
5sMissing text for footnote 51.
52Compare Table D with Tables B, C, E, F, G, and H.
s3Goclenius's discussion of method is given in pages 667-701 of that same w

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Goclenius also shows an eclectic attitude towards Ramus in other

writings as well.54
It has already been noted that Johann Heinrich Alsted presided
over a logic disputation on method in 1612 which largely echoes
Ramus's views on that subject. Yet in other works Alsted takes
positions much more distant from those associated with Ramus.
Alsted's presentation of two classifications of philosophical disci-
plines by followers of Petrus Ramus were given in tables E and F;
yet Alsted's own classification of philosophical disciplines is very
different from both of them. In a logic disputation on causes pre-
sided over by Alsted at the Herborn Academy in I6 1 it is noted
that generally speaking there are problems with both Aristotle and
Ramus but that Aristotle is the lesser evil of the two.ss The title of
Alsted's "Mauritian-Philippo-Ramist" compendium on Latin
grammar given in item Ia of Table M is further evidence of his in-
dependent attitude towards the use of Ramus in his own writings.
The individual authors who used Ramus between 1570 and I630
normally did so too eclectically to allow the effective use of terms
like Ramist, Philippo-Ramism, and Semi-Ramism as explanatory
factors for the diffusion of Ramus's writings in Central Europe dur-
ing this period. On the other hand, the examination of historical,
institutional, and curricular factors can lead to a much more viable
explanation of this diffusion. The adoption of Ramus's writings
in Central European academic institutions can be understood in
large part by looking at the form and content of the curriculum at
these institutions during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth
centuries.
Central Europe saw a rapid educational expansion beginning

about 550. This growth accelerated rapidly in the 1 570s and 58os
and then continued, though apparently to a somewhat lesser extent,
well into the seventeenth century. 56 Confessional motivations ap-
pear to have played a major role in this expansion. Almost all of
these academic institutions were founded by and/or expanded by
54Refer to the mention made of Goclenius by Gregorius Horstius in number 8 of

Table J.
5s"An Logica Rami sit praeferenda Aristotelis? Respon. Aristotelis habet sua
menda, Rami sua. Nihilominus Rami mihi videtur mendosior." Alstedius and Stu-
boeus, C4.
56See the discussion given in Freedman, I9852, 121-22.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Lutherans, Calvinists, and Roman Catholics, and some

rect competition with one another.57
Most of these academic institutions in Central E
schools, not universities. Some of the Protestant scho
referred to as scholae triviales due to the fact that the t
logic, rhetoric, and grammar-normally taught to
arithmetic and geometry-were the basic subjects taug
schools during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth
These schools were sometimes attached to universitie
tory schools. In both cases they normally consisted of b
and ten grades.59
However, many of these schools which were not attach
versities proceeded to expand their curriculum in the co
late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Some sch
added one or more additional subjects.60 But others adde
"upper" division offering university-level instructio
phy, jurisprudence, medicine, and theology to what t
came the school's "lower" division.61 The lower division of these
multi-level, "consolidated" schools normally consisted of grad
while the upper division usually did not.62
Logic and rhetoric were usually studied in both the lower and th
upper level of these consolidated schools. They were also stud
at university preparatory schools and again at universities. T
study of grammar was usually reserved for lower level instruction
57The proximity of the Jesuit University of Dillingen (Danube) and the Luthera
consolidated school in Lauingen (Danube) is mentioned in Ibid., 146, I48-49. The
valry between the Jesuit school in Muinster (Westphalia) and the Calvinist schoo
Steinfurt (Westphalia) is discussed in Freedman, I988', 47-48, 490.
58The examples of Neubrandenburg (I5 3) and Juterbog (I579) are given he
"Prima classis . . . Elementa quoque Dialectices et Rhetorices, ut in trivialibus Sch
fieri solet, reliquis lectionibus addemus, et usum artium simul indicabimus." Brach
A6, A8; Grunius; the example of Dessau (1625) is given in footnote 66.
59Refer to the examples given in Freedman, I9852, 138 (footnote 23).
60Such appears to have been the case at schools in Soest and Wesel. See Vogele
I4-15 and Vormbaum, 192-207; Kleine, first pagination, 38-39 and second pagin
tion, 4-6, 10-I4.
6IThe Strassburg school grew in this manner; see Strasbourg StA: AST 319, 3
331, 392, 393, 396, 450, 451 and Schindling. A similar development took place at
Calvinist school in Steinfurt; see Freedman, I988', 47, 489.
62Such was the case in Herborn; refer to Table T. These multi-level schools some
times were given the name Gymnasium illustre; refer to the discussion given in Fr
man, i9852, 121, 141-42.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
while metaphysics, physics, and practical philosophy wer

mally left for upper level or university instruction.63
With these institutional developments in mind, we can now
at the information given in Tables N through U. Table N p
four different opinions concerning the academic value of w
by Petrus Ramus. Number I in Table N is a letter byJohann
(I507-I589).64 This letter precedes the text ofHenricus Sch
curriculum plan of 1572 for a Roman Catholic school in S
in Alsace.65
It is important to note that Sturm was a Lutheran who was com-
menting on the use of Ramus at a Roman Catholic school. Petrus
Ramus was Calvinist. Ramus was used in instruction at a number
of Calvinist schools in Central Europe (e.g., Bremen, Dessau, He
born, KOthen, Steinfurt, Warendorf, Wesel) during the late si
teenth and early seventeenth centuries.66 Yet during this sam
period in Central Europe many Lutheran schools (e.g., Brau
schweig, Gottingen, Hannover, Korbach, Laubach, Lemgo, Mar
burg Regensburg, Soest, and Stadthagen) and several Lutheran u
versities (e.g., Giessen and Rinteln) also made at least some use
Ramus's writings.67 And Ramus's works appear to have be
63Practical philosophy usually included ethics, family life (oeconomica) and politic
These three subjects are mentioned in Tables B, C, D, E, G, and H.
64Schorus, 5-7. Concerning Sturm, see Schmidt.
6sWith regard to Henricus Schorus and the Savere school, see Table O and foo
note 87 below.
66Evidence of the use of Ramus and/or Talon at the following schools is given he
I) Bremen: Brevis artium et lectionum index, A3v; ECb6eiLo Scholae Bremanae, B2-B
2) Dessau: Suhle, 24-25; 3) Herborn: see Table T; 4) Steinfurt: see Freedman, 1988
5I, 494-95 as well as Table K, Table L, and footnote 3 5; 5) Warendorf: Meier and Me
ering, 34-35, 48-49; the original of this curriculum plan for the Warendorf school
the year 1594 is located in MOnster, Bistumsarchiv, GV. Warendorf, St. Laurenti
A 5 , B1. I; 6) Wesel: see Kleine, first pagination, 39 and second pagination, 5, 14. A
refer to the discussion given within footnote 70.
67The use of writings by Ramus and/or Talon at the following Lutheran academ
institutions can be documented here: i) Braunschweig: Koldewey, 149, 152; 2) Giesse
"Logicus Organum Aristotelis profitebitur, aut praecepta ex Aristotele desumpta, ac
commodata ad methodum Rami. . ." Privilegia et leges ... Academiae Giessenae
d. 12. Octobr. ann. 1607 [Giessen UA: Urk. Nr. 318, 6; reprinted in H. Wassersch
ben, 20]; 3) G6ttingen: see no. I Ia of Table M and the following: G6ttingen StA: Alt
Aktenarchiv (Schulsachen, Lateinschule), nr. 10, 2b-2f (Delineatio lectionum Pae
gogii G6ttingensis . . Anno [i5]98), 2b; 4) Hannover: see footnotes 47 and 82 as w
as the corresponding passages in the text; 5) Korbach/Corbach: see Table R and fo
note 94; 6) Laubach: Windhaus, I I9; 7) Lemgo: refer to Table S as well as to footnote
94 and III; 8) Marburg: see Table U and footnote 107; 9) Rinteln: refer to footno

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE N. Four Selected Opinions concerning th

Academic Value of Writings by Petrus Ramus
I. Joannes Sturmius (March I, 1572); 2. Bartholomaeus Kec
(1606); 3. Joannes Gisenius and Gerhandus Schuckmannus
Statius Buscherus (1625)
I. a. Sturm begins by noting that Ramus is used in instruc
at a school in Saverne (Alsace).
b. Sturm says that Petrus Ramus is a good man. The fact
Ramus offends others by freely speaking about Aristot
writings and by using a different method (via & ordo
no consequence. Aristotle acted likewise toward those
preceded him.
c. Similarly, mathematicians cannot be expected to blindly follow
Euclid and Ptolemy.
d. Many academic institutions have defended Ramus's views.
e. Sturm notes that he wishes to use equity and humanity when
judging the views of others. He cannot expect others to use his
own methods in their schools. Each locality is different from the
next and has diverse educational needs.
2. a. Keckermann's "Introduction to Logic" (Praecognita logica) con-

sists of three "treatise" (tractatus) and a long preface.
b. This preface discusses the differences between "Peripatetics"
(Peripatetici) and "Ramists" (Ramei)
I) Keckermann states Ramists have used good definitions in
grammar, geometry, and theology. Ramist definitions and
dichotomies are useful in grammar and geometry but are not
sufficient within the disciplines of logic, ethics, and physics.
2) Keckermann notes that Rudolph Snellius has discussed the
differences between Aristotelian and Ramist philosophy (Ar-
istotelean & Ramea philosophia) in a work published at
Frankfurt in the year 1596. Keckermann quotes extensively
from this work in order to stress the following: Ramists are
too dependent upon definitions and dichotomies; they don't
explain things (res ipsae).
c. Treatise 2 of Keckermann's Introduction to Logic is a short his-
tory of logic. He divides logic into four parts: I. up to the year
I500; 2. from 1500 up to Ramus; 3. Petrus Ramus; 4. from Ra-
mus up to (about) the year I595.
d. In his discussion of Petrus Ramus Keckermann notes the follow-
ing (i.-6.):
I) Ramus rightly criticizes scholastics and "Sorbonists" for hav-
ing corrupted Aristotle's writings; however, Aristotle himsel
should be praised. Ramus and his followers need to distin-
guish between Aristotle's logic and commentaries thereupon.
2) Ramist philosophy is not comprehensive. Ramus has pro-
duced works on grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, and

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE N. Four Selected Opinions/Petrus Ramus (contin

geometry but no works on ethics, on physics, or on ot
[unspecified] disciplines.
3) Ramists concentrate too much on definitions and dicho
and not enough on properties of things themselves. Ram
make academic disciplines the measure of things, where
should be the other way around. They also are too depe
upon ambiguous terms.
4) Ramists confuse metaphysics with logic.
5) Entity (ens) belongs to the first principles of philosoph
Ramist philosophy does not discuss this and does not ha
first principles at all.
6) Keckermann has problems with the methodus unica of
Ramists. They proceed from universals to "those which
more simple" (simpliciores); however, they neglect to p
ceed from universals to species. Method has two species
oretical (i.e., synthetic), and practical (i.e., analytic). In
former one proceeds from most general to most simple
the latter one proceeds in the opposite manner.
3. a. Ramists (Ramei) and Peripatetics (Peripatetici) agree conc
the object (objectum), subject (subjectum) and final result
of philosophy. The object of philosophy is natural entity
naturale). The subject of philosophy is "intellect or inclina
(intellectus vel voluntas). The final result of philosophy sh
be the "restoration of natural unity" (restitutio in integru
naturale).
b. Ramists and Peripatetics disagree concerning the manner in
which one should investigate and acquire knowledge of things
(e.g., in this process the Ramists combine logic and metaphysics
where Peripatetics do not). There are two reasons for this dis-
agreement:
I) Ramists omit many parts of Aristotle's logic because they are
regarded as not useful.
2) Ramists hold to the view that there are general laws which
are basic to all individual academic disciplines. They take
many doctrines out of the category of "special"-and put
them into the category of "general"-academic disciplines.
c. Gisenius and Schuckmannus assert that Ramus's logic should be
studied. Many authors (Chytraeus, Menzerus, Hawenreuterus,
Johannes Regius, and Zwingerus are mentioned) praise Ramus.
In one of his works on logic even Keckermann feels compelled
to praise the value of Ramus's methods as well as Ramus's abil-
ity as a mathematician and as an orator.
d. Zacharias Ursinus has said that Ramus's logic is novel and
should not be used in academic instruction. Gisenius and

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE N. Four Selected Opinions/Petrus Ramus (con

Schuckmannus defend the use thereof while noting tha
not thereby support all of Ramus's views.
e. It is best to use both Aristotle and Ramus when study
f. One should choose between Aristotle and Ramus within the
context of individual points of doctrine. However, many
learned men make the following general distinction: Aristotle is
to be preferred with respect to subject matter while Ramus is
favored with respect to methodology. (Hinc illum tritum:
Aristotelem lego propter res; Ramum propter methodum &
tradendi modum.)
4. a. Ramus's logic should be used in Christian schools. In doing so,
we are following Luther's advice to bring Aristotle's works on
logic into a more comprehensible and useful form.
b. Julius Pacius praises Ramus's logic in a letter written in 1586.
c. For a long period of years Ramus has been used in many schoo
in Lower Saxony, Hesse, and Westphalia. In some universities
one has also made some use of Ramus. In I606 at the Universit
of Giessen it was decreed that Aristotle's Organon should be
studied with the use of Ramus's method.
d. Seneca notes that what is useful and good does not please the
majority. This is why Ramus and his followers (sectatores) have
had so much opposition.
e. But Ramus's loyal followers have defended him well:
I) In 1587 Fridericus Trinaeus and [Caspar] Pfaffradius re-
sponded to [Zacharias] Ursinus's attack against the use of Ra-
mus's logic and rhetoric in schools.
2) [Rudolph] Snellius responded to Hysagathus's attacks against
Ramus.
f. Ramus is criticized for challenging Aristotle's authority. Busc
erus responds by noting that Aristotle's philosophy is itself re
garded as far too sacred; he was not a Christian.
g. Ramus is criticized for being [overly] novel. If so, then Joann
Ludovicus Vives, [Rudolph] Agricola, and Philippus Melanch-
thon must be criticized as well, because-like Ramus-they hav
used Aristotle's writings selectively, not slavishly.
h. It is argued that one should not study Ramus in schools beca
students will have to start learning logic all over again, and w
therefore have wasted much time and money. [Apparently
Buscherus is referring to the general use of Aristotle's logic in
university level instruction.] Buscherus notes that the many
years' of experience show that youth who study Ramus's logi
in school do very well scholastically at the university level.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
known at a number of Roman Catholic academic institutions as

well; his works found their way in Jesuit libraries in Cologne,
Mainz, Munster/Westphalia, and Trier.68
Sturm was rector of a Lutheran school in Strassburg from 1538
until 58 . The writings of Ramus appear not to have been used a
that school.6 Yet in his letter preceding the curriculum plan by
Schorus, Sturm notes that he cannot expect others to use his own
methods in their schools since each locality is different from th
next and has diverse educational needs.70 Sturm obviously is not ab-
solutely opposed to the use of Ramus's philosophy in school in-
struction.
7 and 8I; IO) Vogeler, 14 and Vormbaum, 205-o6. Also refer to the discussion given
within footnote 70.
68For Cologne, see the following: [Bibliothekskatalog des Gymnasium Montanum;
i6. Jh.], 21 (799, 8oi, 803), 2Iv (808, 826, 831), 26v (989, 995), 27 (998, Iooo, I004),
27v (1015, o108, 1021), 33 (1219), 39 (1428) [Koln StA: Univ. 1127]; Catalogus gen-
eralis totius bibliothecae Collegii Coloniensis Soc. Jesu. Anno 1628, fol. 248v, 265, 266,
276, 28i, 282, 298v, 334v [Koln StA:Jes. Abt. 35]; the presence of Ramus's works at
theJesuit school in Trier is evident from the following library catalog: Katalog der Bib-
liothek des Jesuitenkolleges vomJahre 1586, 392 (41), 40Iv (5), 415 (IO), 4I8v (55),
435v, 443 (74), 478 (221, 222), fol. 545v [Trier StA: 4° 2228/I8I5]. In the case of Mainz
and Miinster, owner's marks on books provide evidence ofJesuit ownership of works
by Ramus and Talon. For example, see the following: "SocietatisJesu Monasterii 1613"
is written on the title page of Talaeus; "Collegij Societ. Jesu Monasterii an. 1633" is
inscribed on the title page of Ramus and Schegk. Similar evidence for Mainz can be
found by looking at title pages of works by Ramus owned by the Mainz City Library;
see Mainz StB: I/c: 4°/4(I), I/s/1035 (I)(2), I/s/1036 (I)(2), and I/k/2I.
69"Man konnte annahmen, daB die Lehren des Petrus Ramus und der sich auf ihn
berufenden "Ramisten" wegen mancher sachlicher Ubereinstimmungen von der
StraBburger "Sturmianern" besonders intensiv aufgegriffen worden waren. Dies trifft
jedoch nicht zu. Sturm versuchte zwar 1569 vergeblich, Ramus an die StraBburger
Akademie zu berufen, aber er selbst wie seine Mitarbeiter lehnten es stets ab, die "meth-
odus Ramea" zu iibernehmen. Wahrend an manchen deutschen Hochschulen, wie etwa
in Herborn, in der Grafschaft Nassau, der Ramismus um I600 die wissenschaftliche
Diskussion beherrschte, fanden sich gleichzeitig in StraBburg nicht einmal Spuren
seines Einflusses." Schindling, 204. In examining of the Strassburg school documents
cited in footnote 6I I have not found any other mention of Petrus Ramus's writings.
7oSome schools also appear not to have been consistent with regard to their use of
Ramus. The use of Ramus at the Lutheran school in G6ttingen in 1596 and 1598 is ev-
ident from I Ib of Table M and from footnote 67; opposition to Ramus there in I631
is suggested by the title referred to in footnote 48 (and cited in the bibliography). Doc-
uments cited in footnote 66 point to the use of Ramus at the Calvinist school in Bremen
in 1568 and I600. Yet similar documents from 1589 and 1590 do not mention Ramus
at all; see the following: Index artium, 1589; Index artium, 1590. The extent to which
and period(s) during which Ramus's writings were used at any given academic insti-
tution can only be judged by examining all of the extant source materials pertaining
to that academic institution.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Number 2 of Table N summarizes the discussion of Petrus Ra-

mus in Keckermann's "Introduction to Logic" (Praecognita logic
textbook.7I This textbook discusses Ramus in its preface and se
tion on the history of logic.72 In this preface Keckermann quo
a passage from a work by Rudolph Snellius in arguing th
"Ramists" (Ramei) are too dependent upon definitions and dich
omies; as a result, they do not examine things themselves (res i
sae).73 Ramus and many of those individuals who commented up
and edited his works did in fact make extensive use of definitions
and dichotomous charts, though they were by no means the only
authors of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries wh
did so.74
Keckermann gave Ramus central importance in the history of
logic. 75 Keckermann echoed Snellius in criticizing the over-
dependence of Ramists upon definitions and dichotomies.76 Keck-
ermann himself noted that "Ramus and his disciples" confused
metaphysics with logic. 77 He also noted that the philosophy of Ra-
mus did not discuss the principle of entity (ens); entity was in fact
the basic concept discussed in early seventeenth-century textbooks
on metaphysics.78
Also factual is Keckermann's observation that the philosophy of
Petrus Ramus was not comprehensive. He observed that Ramus
produced works on grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, and ge-
ometry; however, Ramus did not author works on ethics, physics,
7IThe following imprint is used in this article: Keckermannus, 1606; number 2 in

Table N is based on pages I5-I7, I9, II9, I22, 124, 127, 133-35, 142-43. (Method
is discussed on pages 142-43 of this imprint.) This work was first published in 1599;
see Keckermannus, I599.
72Wilhelm Risse regards Keckermann to be the first historian of logic; see Risse, 9.
73Keckermann, I606, 14-I 5. Keckermann is referred to in page I8I of this textbook
by Snellius, the title of which is given in iob of Table M.
74Among such other authors that do so are the following: Rhodolphus (Caspar
Rhodolphus's dedication of this work [A2v-A4v] is dated 8July 1534; it was published
in I55I); Toscanella; Valeriis; Deucerus; Nicolai.
75This is evident from 2c of Table N; see Keckermann, I606, 72-192.
76Ibid., 127.
77"Quod . . . Ramo & eius discipulis . . .Disciplinas non solum truncant & mu-
tilant, sed etiam & miscent ac confundunt Metaphysicam cum Logica, hanc cum illa
. " Ibid., I33-34.
78Ibid., 135. This can be documented by consulting the early seventeenth cent
textbooks on metaphysics which are cited in Wundt, x-xxvi. One of these text
is referred to in footnote 36 above.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
and other unnamed disciplines (e.g., metaphysics).79 The r

tions of this fact will concern us shortly.
Number 3 of Table N is taken from a philosophy dispu
held byJoannes Gisenius and Gerhardus Schuckmannus at
in Lemgo on 21 July and 23 July 161o. This disputation was d
to the question of whether Ramus's writings should be u
schools.80 After noting some basic agreements and disagr
between "Ramists" (Ramei) and "Peripatetics" (Peripatetici
nius and Schuckmannus suggested that both Aristotle and
should be used when studying logic and one should choose
them with respect to individual points of doctrine.8I Howeve
enius and Schuckmannus presented and appeared to accept
lowing general maxim: Aristotle is to be preferred with re
subject matter (res) while Ramus is favored with respect t
odology (methodum & tradendi modum).82 We shall return
maxim later.
No. 4 of Table N summarizes part of a treatise by Stats Buscher
(d. 1641) which advocated the use of Ramus's logic within Chris-
tian schools.83 Buscher was principal of a Lutheran school in Han-
nover when this treatise was published in I625.84 Buscher made a
number of comments concerning the relation between Ramus and
Aristotle. He noted that Ramus had been defended well by his loyal
followers. 85 And he also noted that the philosophy of Aristotle was
79"Ex quibus sexta sequitur, quae in eo est; quod Ramea Philosophia imperfectum,
inconstans & rude corpus sit. Grammaticam, Rhetoricam, Logicam, Arithmeticam,
Geometriam edidit. At Physicam, Ethicam aliasque disciplinas nondum ad suas hy-
potheses informare Rameis fuit possibile, nec credo unquam est possibile futurum."
Keckermannus, I606, 127.
80Gisenius and Schuckmannus.
8'Ibid., A4v, Quaestio V, lines I-4.
82"In genere distinguunt docti nonnulli inter rem tractatam, & modum tractandi:
in re tractata multi praeferunt Aristotelem; Res enim omnes pluribus persequitur Ar-
istoteles quam Ramus; At in modo tractandi praeferendum esse censent Ramum, cum
accuratius & rotundius seu tradat, quam Aristoteles. Hinc illud tritum: Aristotelem
lego propter res: Ramum propter methodum & tradendi modum." Idem., lines 4-9.
83S. Buscherus, 1625.
84This is mentioned on the title page of S. Buscherus. Concerning the career of Stats
Buscher, see Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, 3: 643-44 andJ6cher, I: 1512-I3. His fa-
ther, Heizo Buscher, was principal of this same Lutheran school in Hannover; see foot-
note 49 and I a of Table M.
8sS. Buscherus, 328-30. Rudolph Snellius is among those whom Stats Buscher re-
gards as a partisan of Ramus; in doing so, Buscher cites the same work by Snellius

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
THE DIFFUSION OF THE WRITINGS OF PETRUS RAMUS 13I
regarded as being far too sacred; it was to be remembered that

istotle was not a Christian.
Buscher stated that Ramus's logic should be used in Christian
schools in order to make Aristotle's works on logic more under-
standable. Youth who studied Ramus's logic in school did very
well scholastically at the university level.86 Buscher was apparently
alluding here to the fact that the study of Ramus's logic in schools
was followed by the study of Aristotle's logic at universities and in
the upper level of consolidated schools.
Tables 0, P, and Q present three opinions on the specific place
of Ramus's writings within the academic curriculum. Henricus
Schorus's outline of the curriculum at a school in Saverne is given
in Table 0.87 The trivium and religion were the main subjects stud-
ied in the six grades which make up this school. The writings of
Ramus were to be used in studying logic, rhetoric, and grammar
Talon's rhetoric was also to be studied.
Table P outlines remarks made by Lazarus Schoner in the preface
of his 1586 edition'ofthe arithmetic and algebra of Petrus Ramus.88
This preface says little about Ramus himself; however, it provides
valuable information concerning the order in which individual dis-
ciplines were to be studied. 89 The study of grammar, rhetoric, and
logic were to be followed by the study of arithmetic and geometry.
These subjects were to be studied at the pre-university level. The
remaining mathematical disciplines-i.e., optics, astronomy, ge-
ography, etc. -as well as physics and ethics were to be taught at
the university level. Important to remember in this connection is
the fact that grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, and geometry
(Ibid., 330) which Keckermann quotes in support of his own attack on certain Ramist
views. See iob of Table M (205-72), 4e of Table N, and footnote 73.
86S. Buscherus, 341-42.
87Schorus; concerning Henricus Schorus (d. 1596), see Sitzmann, 2: 717-18. Infor-
mation concerning the curriculum of the Saverne school during the years 1566, 1567,
I568, and I 75 is extant; see Strasbourg, Archives Departementales du Bas-Rhin: G
1734, no. 31, fol. i, lv, 2 and G 1734, no. 14, fol. I, iv, 7v. In the year 1568 (no. 31,
2) Ramus's grammar (R. Rami rudimenta Grammatica) is mentioned. Concerning the
school in Zabern and Roman Catholic educational concerns in Alsace, see the following
literature: Hahn, I94I, 354-55; Hahn, 1913, I07-08.
88Schonerus (see no. 9 of Table M and footnote 37).
89Ibid., fol. *3-*3v.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLES O-Q. The Place of Ramus's Writings withi

the Academic Curriculum: Three Opinions
TABLE 0. Henricus Schorus (1572)

Schorus makes use of Ramus's writings the basis of the curricu
a school in Saverne (Alsace); he places this curriculum into six
(classes):
Grade I (= primordii): elementary catechism (Latin and vernacular
[i.e., German]); elementary language in-
struction
Grade 2 (= rudimenti): Ramus's grammar; the "Sacred Dialogues"

(dialogi sacri) of Sebastianus Castellio; Old
Testament and New Testament; practice in
vernacular [i.e., German] language
Grade 3 (= grammatica): advanced grammar [Ramus]; sacred dia-
logues; Cicero's letters and orations; Greek
language
Grade 4 (= rhetorica): works on rhetoric by Ramus and Talon; poetics
Grade 5 (= logica): the logic of Ramus
Grade 6 (= theologica): Sacred Scripture; the continued study of
Ramus's grammar, rhetoric, and logic with the
use of examples from Sacred Scripture.
Schorus refers to grammar, rhetoric, and
logic as: tres artes . . . generales, univer-
sales, omnium denique hominum rerumque
communes
were precisely those academic subjects con

wrote textbooks.9o
In 1595 Henning Rennemann published a detailed defense of
Ramist philosophy (philosophia Ramea) against "Peripatetics"
(Peripatetici) and against the attacks ofPhilipp Scherb in particular.9s
Rennemann stated the fact that Peripatetic philosophy required be-
tween twelve and sixteen years of study before it could be mastered;
on the other hand, Ramist philosophy could be taught in a period
90Refer to the imprints of these textbooks listed in Ong, I9582.

9IRennemannus, 1595; concerning the life and writings ofPhilipp Scherb (d. I605)
see J6cher, 4:254.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE P. Lazarus Schoner's Preface to the 1586 Edit

Textbook on The Arithmetic and Algebra of Petru
i. Schoner agrees with older authorities as well as with m
authorities (including Ramus) that mathematics should f
study of grammar, rhetoric, and logic yet should prece
of physics and ethics.
2. Schoner believes that arithmetic and geometry should b
within grades, not-as others believe-as part of "grade-
university-level) education.
3. Other mathematical disciplines (i.e., optics, astronomy,
etc.), physics, and ethics are to be taught at the univers
of eight years.92 Rennemann's eight-year curriculum

in Table Q.93 It places the individual disciplines-i.e.,
rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy
physics--in the exact same order as does Schoner in
spite his reference to this as a "Ramist" curriculum i
served that Aristotle's writings had increasing impo
from year five onwards.
A large number of sources which document the use
writings within the curriculum of Central European
tween I570 and 1630 are extant. The place of Ramus'
within the curriculum of four of these schools is presen
R, S, T, and U. The curriculum at Corbach in the year
lined in Table R; the Lemgo curriculum of the year 1
in Table S.94 At Corbach the writings of Ramus were us
grammar, rhetoric, logic, and arithmetic; however, th
used to teach more advanced subject matters such as
92Rennemann, 55-58.
93Ibid., 58-62. It is not certain what Rennemann means by "Ramists
referring to Freigius, Rigerus, and Scribonius. Concerning Freigius,
footnote 6. Also see Freigius, 1579. Concerning Wilhelm Adolf Scrib
19582, 113, 206, 208, 213, 529 and Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, 33:
Johannes Rigerus, see Ong, I9582, 218, 528.
94Rector novae scholae Corbachiensis, Lazarus Schonerus . . . Lect
citationum per omnes classes a Cal. Octob. huius anni 1578 index [Ma
Pak. 6 (= 15 Waldeck Aeltere Kanzeleien 8 Schulen 6), I, 4-5v]; H

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE Q. Henning Rennemann (1595)

The teacher of Aristotle needs between I2 and I6 years to teach
material; only 8 years (ages i through I8) are required to teach
arts (artes) of Ramist philosophy:
Year I: elementary grammar [using Ramus]
Year 2: grammar [using Ramus]; Cicero's shorter letters; short p
style exercises
Year 3: rhetoric [using Ramus]
Year 4: logic [using Ramus]
Year 5: advanced logic, with the use of the writings of Aristotl
of his interpretes
Year 6: Ramus's arithmetic and geometry; the astronomy of Scribon
"Ramist"]; Greek language; the writings of Aristotle and
interpretes are also to be read
Year 7: the ethics of Rigerus or of some other "Ramist" author, using
works by Aristotle, Cicero, Danaeus, and others as well
histories
Year 8: physics, using the ["Ramist"] works of Freigius or Scriboniu
physics. The situation at the Lemgo school in 1597 was simi

logic of Ramus and the rhetoric of Talon were used to teac
two subjects. But their writings were not utilized in order to
ethics, physics, and other advanced subjects.95
The Academy at Herborn consisted of an upper level and a l
level. The curriculum of both levels in the year I6I I is out
Table T.96 The trivium dominated the curriculum of the five
which made up the lower level of the Herborn Academy. Y
mus is not mentioned at all in connection with the upper leve
riculum; Aristotle is the author to be used in upper level
instruction.
The study oftrivium and of religion together basically constitute
the four-grade curriculum of the Marburg preparatory school in
95Concerning Scribonius, see footnote 93.

96Index lectionum, I6io. This broadsheet was originally printed for the Fall/Winter
Semester of 6IO-I I. As can be seen on the basis of extensive changes written in by
hand, however, this broadsheet also was used in the Spring/Summer Semester of 161 .
The words Calend. Octob. Anno 1610 are crossed out (though not made illegible) here
and are replaced in handwriting with: Cal. Aprilis I1611.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLES R-U. Ramus and other Authorities within

the Curriculum of Four Academic Institutions
TABLE R. The School at Corbach (1578)

elementary language instruction (in Latin and in Ger-
(grades 8 and 7):
man); Luther's catechism (in German); music; ele-
mentary arithmetic
Philipp Melanchthon's Grammatica minor; the [Sa-
(grades 6 and 5):
cred] Dialogues of Sebastian Castellio; Cicero's let-
ters; music; Virgil's Eclogues; history ([oannes] Slei-
danus); Ramus's Greek grammar; Ramus's arithmetic
(grades 4 and 3):
Ramus's Greek grammar; Talaeus's Rhetoric; Ramus's
Logic; history (Xenophon); music; New Testament
(in Greek); Virgil's Aeneid poetry readings; orations;
geometry
(grades 2 and I):Hebrew grammar (Martinius); ethics (Cornelius Val-
erius); Justinian's Institutes; Demosthenes's Olynthi-
acs; astronomy; geometry (using Aristotle's Mechan-
ics); Homer's Iliad; physics (Cornelius Valerius);
logic; rhetoric; New Testament (in Greek); Old Tes-
[grade I: tament (in Hebrew); disputations and declamations
highest grade] taken from the subject matter of physics and ethics
1624. This curriculum is presented in Table U.97 The writings of

Ramus were used to teach logic and rhetoric at Marburg; they were
apparently not utilized in order to teach grammar there.
On the basis of the information contained in Tables O, P, Q, R,
S, T and U one can venture the hypothesis that logic and rhetoric,
followed by grammar, arithmetic, and geometry, were the main
school subjects which were taught most frequently with the use of
writings by Ramus and his disciples. Ramus's writings on logic and
grammar were often used in combination with those of Philipp
Melanchthon. Indeed, this combination was prevalent in a large
number of those Lutheran and Calvinist schools in Central Europe
where writings by Ramus were used.98
97Diehl, 8-13; the original is in Darmstadt SA: E 6/B, 7/I, fol. I34r.
98For this reason, a large number of"Philippo-Ramist" textbooks were published
in Central Europe during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. In addition
to the textbooks cited in footnotes 5 and 33, numerous other examples of textbooks
can be given (for example, H. Buscher).

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE S. The School at Lemgo (1597)

(grade 8): language instruction/elementary grammar (Latin an
man); catechism
(grade 7): Latin grammar (using Golius and Chytraeus); Luthe
echism; Sacred Scripture (Latin and German); Cato's D
chi
(grade 6): Latin grammar; Luther's Catechism; Sacred Scripture; Cast-

ellio's Dialogues; poetry selections; Latin prose (Cicero) and
drama (Terence); music; writing exercises
(grade 5): Latin grammar; catechism; Sacred Scripture; select poems
and orations; Aesop's Fables; Castellio's Dialogues; Vives's
Colloquia; music; disputations; orations; analysis of poetry
(grade 4): Greek grammar (Gualtperius); Ramus's logic; Talaeus's rheto-
ric; elementary theology (catechism as examined by
Chytraeus); New Testament (in Greek); Greek fables and
poems; Latin prose (Cicero), poetry (Virgil), and drama
(Terence); arithmetic (Gemma Frisius); ethics
(grade 3): Ramus's Logic with that of Philipp Melanchthon; rhetoric
(repetition); Greek grammar (Gualtperius), poetry, and ora-
tions; New Testament (in Greek); elementary theology (cat-
echism as examined by Chytraeus); ethics (Cicero's De
officiis); Latin prose (Cicero) and poetry (Virgil); history
(Sleidanus); arithmetic; Justinian's Institutes; exercises in
logic and rhetoric
(grade 2): (it is noted that logic, rhetoric, Greek grammar, and Latin
grammar have been studied in previous grades); New Tes-
tament (in Greek); Latin prose (Cicero); arithmetic; history
(Sleidan); Hebrew grammar; Old Testament (in Hebrew);
[highest physics (Philipp Melanchthon and Scribonius [a "Ramist"]);
grade theology (Chytraeus; Herbrandus; Martinus Crusius), ethics
at the (Aristotle as explained in the compendium on ethics by
Lemgo Philipp Melanchthon); Justinian's Institutes (Theophilus);
school] examinations; repetition exercises
Shortly after the murder of Petrus Ramus in Paris on 26 August

1572 his main publisher, the Wechel press, moved to Frankfurt am
Main.99 This provided some impetus for the diffusion of Ramus's
writings in Central Europe from the 1570s onwards. However, this
diffusion was also greatly aided by curricular conditions at Central
European schools.
99The circumstances surrounding this move are discussed in Lunckoronska, 32-36.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE T. The Academy at Herborn (1611)

A. (Upper theology; languages (Hebrew; Greek); jurisprud
Level): medicine; philosophy (includes the following): log
istotle), metaphysics, physics, geometry, arithmet
cero's orations (used to teach logic, rhetoric and e
history, chronology, disputations, private colloqui
B. (Lower Level: consists of five grades): [grade I = highest
(grade I): logic (Ramus); Hebrew (Buxtorfius); Latin prose
and poetry (Virgil and Horace); Greek prose (Isocr
Heidelberg Catechism
(grade 2): elementary logic (Ramus); rhetoric (Talaeus); Gre
mar (Theophil Golius); ethics (Cicero's De officiis)
New Testament (in Greek); Old Testament; Latin
(Ovid)
(grade 3): advanced grammar (Ramus and Melanchthon); Latin prose
(Corderius; Cicero's Letters as edited by Sturm); elemen-
tary ethics (Cato's Distichi); Greek grammar; elementary
religion (in Greek); vocabulary (Adrianus Junius)
(grade 4): grammar (Ramus and Melanchthon); elementary Latin prose
(Corderius; Cicero's Letters as edited by Sturm); elemen-
tary ethics (Cato's Distichi); elementary Greek grammar;
vocabulary (Adrianus Junius)
(grade 5): elementary grammar (Ramus and Melanchthon); elemen-
tary catechism; elementary Latin prose; elementary
vocabulary
In the decades between 1570 and I620 the curriculum of Central

European schools generally emphasized the trivium together with
arithmetic and geometry. Ramus's most influential works were rel-
atively uncomplicated textbooks on precisely these same subjects.
Therefore, Ramus's writings, often in combination with works by
Philipp Melanchthon and/or by other authors, fit almost ideally
into the curricular framework of Central European "trivial"
schools. And it was these schools that became more and more nu-
merous in Central Europe during the I570s and I58os.I°°
'I°The extent to which trivial schools were established outside the German languag
area of Europe during this same period is not clear. Their existence in Friesland is e
ident from Trivialium scholarum. However, they do appear to have commonly exist
in England during this period. Grammar schools there generally taught grammar

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
TABLE U. The University of Marburg Preparatory School

(grade I): logic (Ramus); rhetoric (Ramus); catechism (Luther/
Kassel textbook); Sacred Scripture (Latin and Greek);
Latin grammar (Kassel textbook); Greek and Latin
language exercises; Greek grammar (Gualperius);
poetry exercises; music; arithmetic; Latin poetry
(Virgil) and prose (Cicero); Greek prose (Isocrates)
(grade 2): logic (Ramus); rhetoric (Ramus); Sacred Scripture
(Latin and Greek); catechism (Luther/Kassel text-
book); Latin grammar; Greek grammar (Gualperius);
Latin language exercises; music, arithmetic; Latin
poetry (Virgil) and prose (Cicero); Greek prose
(Isocrates)
(grades 3 and 4): Sacred Scripture (Latin and Greek); catechism
(Luther/Kassel textbook); Greek grammar (Gualpe-
rius); Latin grammar (Kassel textbook) and poetry
[grade 4 = (Kassel textbook); music; arithmetic; Castellio's
lowest grade] Sacred Dialogues; vocabulary
On the other hand, Ramus did not produce textbooks on ethics

and physics. These two subject matters were basic constituents
of the philosophy curriculum taught at arts faculties at Central
European universities during the late sixteenth and early seven-
teenth centuries. Aristotle's works on these two subjects, as well
as his works on metaphysics, family life (oeconomica), politics, logic,
rhetoric, and poetics, had been used in arts faculties of Central Eu-
ropean universities since their inception at the end of the fourteenth
century; they continued to be used there into the eighteenth cen-
tury. Io0 Aristotle produced writings on almost all of the philosoph-
ical disciplines studied at Central European universities; Ramus and
Ramus's disciples did not do so.
some rhetoric, but no logic; logic and most instruction in rhetoric was normally left
to the English universities. Refer to the following: Stowe; Webster, 51-68.
'°'An excellent overview of the curriculum of Central European arts faculties in the
period around I400 is given in Lorenz, 204-58 (and especially 229-36). The continued
use of Aristotle's writings in Central Europe into the eighteenth century can be doc-
umented by numerous academic disputations, statute books, textbooks, timetables,
etc.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Therefore, it is not surprising that Central European

ties generally distanced themselves from Petrus Ramu
from writings by Ramus, Ramus's disciples, and Ram
mentators. Palatine Elector Frederick III (1559-157
Petrus Ramus to receive a professorship in ethics at the U
of Heidelberg in 1569; however, the arts faculty at Hei
able to prevent this from happening. I02 He was allowe
there briefly on Cicero, but he was not permitted to
logic. Io3
At the University of Leipzig the attempts by Johannes Cramer
(1530-1602) to teach using Ramus's writings there in the 1570s and
I58os met with very stiff resistance. I4 The prohibition issued
against the use of Ramus's writings there on 5 August 1592 appears
to have been effective. I0 Lazarus Schoner was made head of the
preparatory school attached to the University of Marburg in
I575.Io6 His attempts to teach logic and rhetoric there using Ra-
mus's writings met with very fierce opposition from the arts faculty
of the university. Schoner finally resigned his position in I578.I07
Some use of Ramus's writings was made in the early seventeenth
century at the universities of Giessen and Rinteln. 08 At most Cen-
tral European universities, however, the opponents of Ramus were
successful. Conditions at individual institutions determined the
manner in which and extent to which these opponents carried
day. However, a major cause of their success undoubtedly was
fact that Ramus did not produce works that were generally deem
valuable for instruction at the university level in Central Euro
University-level instruction was also offered at the upper d
sion of consolidated schools, such as the Herborn Academy, fr
'02Hautz, 2: 55-56; Hautz based his conclusions on documents in the Heidelb

University Archive.
"3Hautz, 2: 56-58; Heidelberg UA: I, 3, 51, BI. 91-92.
'04See the following article: Voigt, 3I-6I. Most of the documents upon wh
Voigt based his conclusions are extant in the Leipzig University Archive.
iosVoigt, 60. I have not been able to find any traces of Ramus's influence at the
versity of Leipzig after this date.
i06Concerning Lazarus Schoner, see Table P and no. 9 of Table M as well as f
notes 37, 88, and 94.
I'7See Marburg SA: 22 b Schulsachen 44 Padagogium, nr. 3, 4, 5 and Friedri
57-79.
Io8See footnote 67.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
the late sixteenth century onwards.Io9 The logic and rhet

struction offered in the upper division of these consolidated
appears to have been taught with some use of the writings
istotle and/or Aristotle commentators and with little or no use of
writings by Ramus and/or of writings influenced by Ramus. How-
ever, the writings of Petrus Ramus and Omer Talon were some-
times utilized in order to teach logic and rhetoric in the lower di-
vision of those same consolidated schools.
It was noted earlier that Bartholomew Keckermann criticizes
"Ramists" (and that Rudolph Snellius attacks "Pseudoramists")
placing too much emphasis on the presentation of definitions
dichotomies and not enough emphasis on discussion of those thing
which are defined and dichotomized. But Ramus's disciples an
Ramus commentators generally seem to have regarded such d
nitions and dichotomies as basic constituent parts of their teachin
strategy. This "method" of teaching appears to have been effectiv
in and appropriate for lower level instruction in Central Europ
schools during the period between about 1570 and 1630.
On the other hand, the more advanced instruction offered in t
upper division of consolidated schools and at universities consi
of detailed treatment of the relevant subject matter. Definitions
dichotomies could only have a limited role within this advanced in
struction; the writings of Aristotle and of Aristotle commentato
were considered most suitable for this instruction. The view that
"Aristotle is to be preferred with regard to subject matter while Ra-
mus is favored with respect to method" appears to have had many
adherents in Central Europe during this period. I I This view could
be interpreted to mean that Ramus should be used in school instruc-
tion while Aristotle should be preferred for instruction at the uni-
versity level. The fact that logic and rhetoric instruction were
taught using Ramus at the elementary level and Aristotle at a more
advanced level lends credence to such an interpretation.III
IO9In the years 1585 and 1598 logic was taught with the use of Ramus's writings in
both the upper and lower divisions of the Herborn Academy; from the year I6Io on-
wards the use of Ramus's logic appears to have been limited mainly to the lower di-
vision of that academy. See the Herborn curriculum outlines cited in footnotes 96, 112,
and I I4; also see Table T and Leges Scholae Herbornensis.
""Refer back to no. 3 in Table N and to footnote 80.
"'In the case of the Calvinist school in Steinfurt it has been noted that Hermann
Hausmann made use of Ramus's writings on rhetoric and logic while Clemens Timpler
made more use of Aristotle's writings when teaching these subjects. See Table K and

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
It has been noted that the writings of Petrus Ramus a

Talon fit very well into the curricular framework of Ce
ropean Protestant schools during the period between 57
and it was during this period that they found their widest d
By 1620 that curricular framework was undergoing a n
changes, and the works of Ramus began to be utilized les
frequently. This drop is particularly noticeable in the 163 o
of these curricular changes can be identified here.
First, in the early seventeenth century, Central European
moved in the direction of teaching the entire scope of phil
disciplines. During the last three decades of the sixteenth
instruction in grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, and
was emphasized both at single-level schools and at the lo
of consolidated schools.II3 At single level schools instru
physics, ethics, politics, astronomy, geography, and/o
footnote 33. Hausmann was principal of the Steinfurt school's lower div
Timpler taught in the school's upper division. See Freedman, 1988I, 51
(especially footnote 37), 495, and 496 (especially footnote 45), 499 (f
Countless documents can be cited to document the use of Aristotle's wo
and rhetoric at the university level. Refer to the relevant sources cited in
19852, 151-66. Cicero's writings were also used extensively to teach rhet
the school and the university level, see Freedman, 1986.
II2The curriculum outlines of some Central European schools provid
dence of this development. The writings of Ramus and Talon were used to
rhetoric, Greek grammar, and geometry at the Bremen school in I606. I
writings were still used there in order to teach logic and rhetoric; in 1645
no longer used. See the following: Elenchus Gymnasii Bremani; Index lecti
Index lectionum, I645. Ramus's name also does not appear in the Bremen
outlines for the years 1676 and 1699 [Bremen SA: (in) 2.-ad T.5.a.I.c.
3092)]. At the Lemgo school Ramus's writings were used in 1597 (see Table
[Lemgo StA: (in) A 3240] but apparently not in the years 1638 (Von Ver
Lektionen, 1638) [Lemgo StA: (in) A 3239] or 1645 (Diataxis lectionum [
(in) A 3239]. The writings of Ramus and Talon on logic and rhetoric are
in the Herborn curriculum outline from the year 1585 (see footnote 107),
writings on logic, rhetoric, and grammar are mentioned in the curriculum
the years 1598 (see footnote 112), 1610/1611 (see Table T), 1621/1622, an
[Wiesbaden SA: Abt. 95, Nr. I7502 (anno 1621/1622) and (anno I627/I628
grammar is mentioned in the Herborn curriculum outline of the year 1652
SA: Abt. 95, Nr. i750' (anno 1652)]. The use of Ramus's writings did not
die out in Central Europe during the second half of the seventeenth centu
ident from Grammatica Latina Philippo-Ramaea, I674.
II3Instruction in religion was also emphasized at all schools during this
the examples of school curricula given in Tables 0, R, S, T, and U.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
sometimes was also offered. I4 Some or all of these latter, more ad-
vanced subjects normally were taught-together with theology,
medicine, and/or jurisprudence- in the upper level of consolidated
schools. II5
In the early seventeenth century, instruction in physics, ethics,
politics, astronomy, geography, and history found its way into the
curriculum of many more single-level schools. I6 The subject mat-
ters of family life (oeconomica) and metaphysics also began to be
taught both at single-level schools and at consolidated schools.II7
Metaphysics was the last and most controversial philosophical dis-
cipline to be introduced into the curriculum of Central European
schools.
Metaphysics gradually disappeared from the curriculum of Cen-
tral European universities during the 1520s, 1530s, and I540s.118 It
began to be reintroduced with the establishment of Jesuit schools
in the I55OS.II9 However, Protestant educational institutions did
not begin to teach metaphysics until toward the end of the sixteenth
century. It began to be taught at Protestant universities and in the
upper division of Protestant consolidated schools by I6o00.I2 It
only began to be taught at single level Protestant schools about
1620; it was introduced into the curriculum of some of these latter
schools in the course of the following decades. I2I
"4Curriculum oftheJiiterbog school in 1579 (see footnote 58), of the Lemgo school
in 1597 (see Table S), and of the Korbach (Corbach) school in 1578 (see Table R) all
serve to illustrate this point.
IIsThe following two examples of Strassburg in the year 1578 and Herborn in the
year 1598 can be given here: Boschius, fol. c4-dI; Rector . . Index lectionum.
II6For example, see the curriculum of the Bremen school in the year i606 (see foot-
note 112) and of the Soest school in the year i618 (see footnote 60).
I 7Family life was taught as part of the philosophy curriculum in Central European
universities during the late Middle Ages but was often omitted from that same cur-
riculum during the sixteenth century; see Lorenz, 204-58 and Freedman, I9852, 123-
24. It apparently was taught more often from the end of the sixteenth century onwards;
it is discussed within all of the encyclopedic philosophical works mentioned in footnote
121 below.
II8Refer to the examples given in Freedman, I9852, 125, 145 (footnote 99).
I9See Ibid., 125, 145 (footnote 99).
I20This is clear from the discussion given and the primary sources cited by Max
Wundt.
I21For example, metaphysics was taught in a school in Halle by the year 1620; see
Stotzner, 16-22; Evenius. Many of the encyclopedic philosophical writings published
during the seventeenth century were authored by teachers at consolidated schools (e. g.,
see the works by Butelius and Seybothius mentioned in the following footnote and

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
The introduction of metaphysics into the curriculum o

usually meant that the entire scope of philosophical disci
being taught there. 22 This resulted in a need for com
works on philosophy at some schools. As a consequenc
at schools, professors at consolidated schools, and a few
at universities began to publish encyclopedic philosophica
in Central Europe beginning shortly before I600 and
throughout the seventeenth century. 23
This all served to undermine the importance of Ramus
school curriculum. In numbers I and 2 of Table L and
4 of Table N it can be seen that Ramus placed metaphy
the discipline of logic and he tried to deemphasize the fo
portance. He only produced textbooks on grammar
logic, arithmetic, and geometry; he did not publish
on the remaining, philosophical disciplines. Ramus's w
well into the curricular framework of Central Europea
the decades after 1570; by the I62os this was becoming le
the case.
The second main reason for this change of attitude towards Ra-
mus stems from attitudes toward authority which were prevalent
at early seventeenth-century academic institutions. Aristotle was
an authority whose writings had been used for centuries; Petrus Ra-
mus was a recent authority whose writings were placed by early
seventeenth-century academicians alongside the writings of many
other sixteenth-century authors. The writings of ancient authors
such as Aristotle, Cicero, Plato, Seneca, and Vergil had been used
in academic instruction in Central Europe during the Middle Ages
and continued to be used during the sixteenth and seventeenth cen-
turies. Textbooks by Ramus and by other post-medieval authors
had much less longevity, as most academic institutions tended to
keep replacing them with-yet more current textbooks. In the years
following the death of Ramus his enthusiastic students such as Jo-
hannes Thomas Freigius, Friedrich Reisner, and Henricus Schorus
cited in the bibliography). Metaphysics was also taught at a school (Gymnasium poe-
ticum) in Regensburg from no later than 1664 onwards; see Lurz, 498, 500.
22Refer to the works cited within footnotes 121 and 123.
I23For example, see the following works: Hawenreuterus and Deczius; Butelius;
Cocus; Alstedius, 1620; Seybothius.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
propagated his works and views.I24 But Ramus's later sup

had not studied under him directly; his followers becam
distant from him - and less enthusiastic about him - as the decades
passed.
It was the period between 1570 and 1630, therefore, which saw
the most extensive use of the writings of Petrus Ramus and Omer
Talon at Central European schools. Among the points made by
Walter J. Ong in his monograph on Ramus are the following.I25
First, opposition to Ramus from university-level academics was
strong and often very well articulated. Second, Ramus's works on
logic and rhetoric were relatively uncomplicated in their content.
And third, Ramus's writings were best received by, and to a large
extent intended for, younger students. Ramus's influence in Cen-
tral Europe between I570 and 1630 can be explained within the
context of these three points. In Central Europe during these six
decades the writings of Ramus found their most extensive use
within the realm of the pre-university level curriculum.
On the basis of the evidence presented in this article, it would ap-
pear that it was largely for pragmatic reasons that Ramus was used
at some individual academic institutions but not at others in Central
Europe during the period between 1570 and 1630. It is difficult to
use ideology to explain these developments. Ramus's disciples and
commentators generally used Ramus's writings eclectically. Some
Ramus commentators (e.g., Friedrich Beurhusius, Severinus
Sluterus) also published commentaries on Aristotle, Cicero, or
some combination of these and/or other authors. The opinions of
individual "Ramists" on a given topic-e.g., the classifications of
philosophical disciplines, the concept of method-differed mark-
edly. In fact, it is difficult to make any sense at all of the term
"Ramist" when discussing the use of Ramus's writings in Central
Europe between I570 and 1630. The extent to which "Ramism"
can or cannot be used as a viable category to explain the use of writ-
ings by Ramus and Talon at schools and universities beyond Cen-
tral Europe is a topic which merits further attention.
ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
I24Concerning Freigius, Reisner, and Schorus refer b

respectively.
I'2See Ong, I988', I36-39, 214-24, 275-76, 303-0

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Bibliography
Note: Library and archive locations (to- Bangs, Carl. Arminius: A Study in the Dutch
gether with call numbers) are given for all Reformation. Grand Rapids, MI, 1985.
source materials cited within this article. Bergius, Conradus. Artificium Aristotelico-
The following abbreviations are used for Lullio-Rameum in quo per artem intelligendi,
this purpose: logicam: artem agendipracticam: artis loquendi
FB = Firstliche Bibliothek . . . elaboratum. Brieg, I6I5. [Wolfenbiit-
GB = Gymnasialbibliothek tel HAB: 7.4 Log.]
HAB = Herzog August Bibliothek Beurerus, Joannes Jacobus. ME)o6tLX: sive
LB = Landesbibliothek de usu organi logici. Hanau, 1597. [Halle
LHB = Landes- und Hochschulbib- ULB: Fb 4I0]
liothek Beurhusius, Fredericus. Audomari Talaei rhe-
SB = Staatsbibliothek toricae, P. Ramipraelectionibus observare, ru-
SA = Staatsarchiv dimenta. Addita ad finem Ovidianae elegiae
StA = Stadtarchiv analysi. Dortmund, 1582. [Dortmund
StB = Stadtbibliothek StLB: Ht 7032]
StLB = Stadt- und Landesbibliothek . Ad P. Rami Dialecticam variorum et
SUB = Staats- und Universitatsbib- maxime illustrium exemplorum . . . inductio
liothek
. . . Quae Paedagogiae logicae pars tertia.
UA = Universitatsarchiv Cologne, 1583. [Darmstadt LHB: U 358]
UB = Universitatsbibliothek . M. T. Ciceronis, Dialecticae libri duo.
ULB = Universitats- und Landesbib-
Ex ipsius Topicis; aliisque libris collecti, ex
liothek
Aristotele vero Boetioque uspiam completi, &
Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. 56 propriiss
vols. ipsius exemplis illustrati. Additis
Leipzig, 1875-1912. etiam brevius explicationum collationumque
Alstedius, Johannes-Henricus. Philosophia
notis. Cologne, I583. [Basel UB: Frey.-
digne restituta. Herborn, 1612. [Marburg
Gryn. Q VII 14 (I)]
UB: XIV C I36] .P. Rami Dialectici libri duo: et his e re-
-. Cursusphilosophici encyclopaedia. Her-
gione comparati Philippi Melanth. Dialecticae
born, 1620. [G6ttingen SUB: 4° Did. 192/
libri quatuor cum explicationum et collationum
5i] notis, ad utramque conformationem uno la-
, praes. and Coccejus, Sigmundus, bore addiscendam. Mulhouse, Georgius
resp. Compendium grammatices latinae, har- Hantzsch and Ottho a Riswick, 1586.
monice conformatae, & succincta methodo com- [Berlin (West) SB: N1 3560]
prehensae: quam non inepte quis dixerit Mau- . Petri Rami Regii Professoris Dialecticae
ritio-Philippo-Rameam. In illustri Herbornea libri duo. Defensio ejusdem dialecticae per
publicae censurae subjectum. Herborn, 161o. scholasticas quarumdam interpretationum, an-
[Wiesbaden LB: Gs 8420 (Herborner Dis- imadversionum, triumphorum, & emendati-
sertationen, J. H. Alsted, V)] num disquisitiones. Frankfort, 1590. [Berlin
, praes. and Christianus Stuboeus, (West) SB: N1 3464]
resp. Disputatiophilosophica De causis. Her- Bilstenius Marsbergianus, Joannes. Syn-
born, I611. [Wiesbaden LB: Gs 8420 tagma Philippo-Rameum artium liberalium,
(Herborner Dissertationen, J. H. Alsted, methodo brevi ac perspicua concinnatum.
I, 4)] Basel, 1588. [Wolfenbfttel HAB: Alv.:
, praes. and Engelhardus Figulus, Ca 58 (i)]
resp. Disputatio logica De methodo. Her- Bisterfeldius, Johannes. Rameae dialecticae
born, 1612. [Wiesbaden LB: Gs 8420 (Her- libri duo: propositi noviter et expositi. Siegen,
borner Dissertationen, J. H. Alsted, I, 9)] 1597. [Halle ULB: Fb 367 (2)]

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Boschius, Michael. Actus tres, Academiae rei- 15. & Poesis. . . traditum in
14. Oeconomica,
pub. Argentoratensis: I. Classicorum, Illustri
II. Bac-Witebergensium Academia. Frank-
fort, 1617. [Wolfenbtittel HAB: 417.I
calaureorum, III. Magistrorum. Strasbourg,
I578. [Wolfenbittel HAB: 202.2 Quodl.
Quodl. (I)]
(2)] Coelius, Michael. Prodromus philosophiae
Brachtus, Matthias Chesselius. Ludus literar- Peripateticae. Wroclaw, 1626. [Wolfenbtit-
ius Neobrennopyrgi. Wittenberg, I553. tel HAB: 314.3 Quodl. (7)]
[Wolfenbittel HAB: 509 Quodl. (5)] Corvinus, Jodocus. Tetramerum autoschedias-
Brevis artium et lectionum index, quibus . . . ticum pro defensione sententiae Andreae Li-
aestate ... anni 68 in Schola Bremensi naviter bavij, de apodixi Aristotelea contra mentem
intendemus. N.p., I568. [Bremen UB: Petri Rami, adversus sana sophismata & vir-
Brem.b.446 (nr. Io)] ulentissimas calumnias loannis Bisterfeldii
Brunnemannus, Johannes. Enchiridion logi- cuiusdam sine causafurentis. Cum praefatione
cum ex Aristotele & Philippo potissimum ita And. Lib. ad omnes eruditos logicos. Frank-
concinnatum. Frankfurt, I639. [Wolfen- fort, 1596. [Basel UB: K. f. V 36 (2)]
buittel HAB: 20 Log.] Cramerus, Andreas. Comparationum logi-
Bruyere, Nelly. Methode et dialectique dans carum libri quatuor, Dialecticae Philippeae ex-
l'oeuvre de la Ramee. Paris, 1984. amussim respondentes a . . . Christiano Bec-
Buscherus, Heizo. Harmoniae logicae Phillip- manno Hannoverano quondam Rectorepublice
porameae libri duo .. .nunc primum in gra- praelecti, hactenus suppressi, nunc in usum
tiam studiosae juventutis in lucem editi. Schola Quedlinburgenis editi. Magdeburg,
Lemgo, 1595. [Marburg UB: XIV C 463i] I6Io. [Hannover LB: P-A 18]
Buscherus, Statius. Christlicher und Notwen- Crucius, Winandus. Dialectices Cornelii Val-
diger Unterricht, Wie die Studia der C. Ju- eriipartis iudicandi compendium ingratiam iu-
gendt . . Auch ob man Rami Logicam hiezu ventutis scholarum trivialium per erotemata
in Christlichen Schulen bey der Institution concinnatum, ediscendi causa. Cologne,
nutzlich gebrauchen konne. Rinteln, 1625. I576. [Trier StB: R/8°/I 30]
[Wolfenbtittel HAB: 864.2 Theol. (3)] Dauberus, Henricus, praes. and Casparus
Butelius, Christophorus, praes. Enchiridion Munichius, resp. Disputatio logica De meth-
philosophicum compendiose continens fere odo . . . Ad diem 23. Februarii. Herborn,
omnes philosophiae Aristotelicae disciplinas 1605. [Wiesbaden LB: Gs 8420 (Her-
.. .in illustri Paedagogium Stetinensi. . . borner Dissertationen, Daniel-Fuchs, I a)]
De philosophia. Logica. Rhetorica. Ethica. Deucerus, Johannes. Analysis totius philoso-
Oeconomica. Politica. Physica acroam. De co- phiae, tam contemplativae, quam practicae.
elo. Meteorologia. De corpore perfecte mixto. Jena, 1612. [G6ttingen SUB: 8° Did.
Anthropologia. An homo ist animal. Liibeck, 184/5]
1609. [Berlin (West) SB: Ni 7284] Diataxis lectionum & exercitiorum in Schola
Casmannus, Otho. P. Rami Dialecticae & Lemgoviensi . . . anno . . . 1645. Rinteln,
Melanchthonianae collatio: instituta ac prop- I645. [Lemgo StA: (in) A 3239]
osita lecionibus privatis Helmstadii. Hanau, Didascalia Susatensis exhibens . . . normam et
I594. [Wiesbaden LB: 8° Herb. 593pl formam docendi et discendi. Soest, I618.
(I an)] [Soest StB: As IoI8 (rara)]
Cocus, Joannes. Speculum philosophicum uni- Diehl, Wilhelm, ed. Die Schulordnungen des
versale philosophiae corpus sectionibus XV. GrofJherzogtums Hessen. I. Die hoheren
exhibens. In quo 1. Artes logicae, 2. Mathe- Schule der Landgrafschaft Hessen-Darmstadt.
maticae arithmetica, 3. Musica, 4. Cosmo- I. Die Texte, 8-13. (Stundenplan des
graphia, 5. Uranographia, sive astronomia, 6. Marburger Paedagogs im ersten Jahr der
Astrologia, 7. Meteorologia, 8. Metallo- darmstadtischen Herrschaft. 1624.) Mon-
graphia, 9. Historia animalium, 10. Meta- umenta Germaniae Paedagogica, 2. Ber-
physica, 11. Physica, 12. Ethica, 13. Politica, lin, 1903.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Elenchus Gymnasii Bremani . . . abFreigius,

Autumno Joannes Thomas. ECoq)LvaL xat
anni 1606. . . declaratus. Bremen, I606.
86ELLOaLL, seu logicae & ethicae. Basel, 1576.
[Bremen SA: Bibliothek 23 Af(2)] [Hannover LB: P-A 568 (I)]
E6Ew&LLo Scholae Bremanae . . . rectore,Quaestiones physicae. Basel, I579.
Andrea Wedemejero, inde ab autumno[Miinster
anni UB: PI 772]
praesentis 1600 deinceps administrandae.
Friedrich, Arnd. Die Gelehrtenschulen in Mar
Bremen, 600o. [Bremen SA: (in): 2.- burg, Kassel und Korbach zwischen Melanch-
T.5.a.I.c. (DDR I032/3092)] thonianismus und Ramismus in der zweiten
Erytropilus, Rupertus. Tabulae generales in Hdlfte des 16. Jahrhunderts. Darmstadt and
Dialecticam P. Rami, quibus ex alterafacie op- Marburg, 1983.
ponuntur tabulae ex praeceptis Dn. Philippi Frisius, Paulus. Comparationum dialecticarum
Melanchthonis confectae. Lemgo, 1588. libri tres quibus Philippi Melanchthonis, &
[Wolfenbiittel HAB: Alv.: Nb 39 (4)] Petri Rami praecepta dialectica breviter ac
Evenius, Sigismundus. Methodi linguarum ar- modeste conferuntur. Frankfort, 1590. [Ber-
tiumque compendiosioris scholasticae demon- lin (West) SB: N1 3464/5 (2 an)]
stratio veritas, in Schola Hallensi illustri ad -. Epitome rhetorices Audomari Talaei col-
disputandum exercitij publici loco proposita. lecta . . . Huic adjecti sunt . . . comparatio-
Halle, 1620. [Hannover LB: P-A 503] num rhetoricarum libri duo. Quibus elementa
Fabricius, Georgius-Andreas, praes. and rhetorices Philippi Melanchthonis cum prae-
Thilo Wolffen von Gedenbergk, resp. ceptispartim logicis Petri Rami, partim rhetor-
Tractatio quaestionis, an Ramus sit pestis icis Audomari Talaei breviter modeste confer-
scholarum? A nonnemine nuper, satis im- untur. Addita est Psalmi XXII. analysis logica
prudenter ac temere evulgata; nunc vero per & rhetorica. Frankfort, I600. [Gottingen
analysin logicam Ramaeam, hoc est, veram ex- SUB: 8° Philos. II, 1324]
aminata . . . in Gymnasio Mulhusino . . . Gilbert, Neal Ward. Renaissance Concepts of
ad d. 12. Novembr. Miihlhausen, 1631. Method. New York, 1960.
[G6ttingen SUB: 8° H.lit.partic.I, 3653 Gisenius, Johannes, praes. and Gerhardus
(6)] Schuckmannus, resp. Quaestionum philo-
Freedman, Joseph S. "Philosophy Instruc- sophicarum disputatio prima . . Ad diem 21.
tion within the Institutional Framework & 23. Julii. Lemgo, I6Io. [Lemgo StA: Y
of Central European Schools and Univer- 1092 (= Sammelband, Disputationen,
sities during the Reformation Era." His- I6I0-I615), nr. 25]
tory of Universities 5 (1985): I 7-66. Goclenius, Rodolphus, praes. and Chesne-
. Deutsche Schulphilosophie im Reforma- copherus Suecus, Nicolaus, resp. Isagoge
tionszeitalter (1500-1650): Ein Handbuch optica curm disceptationegeometrica de universo
fur den Hochschulunterricht. 2. Vollig geometriae mageterio, hoc est, geodaesia rec-
umgearbeitete und ergdnzte Auflage. Miin- tarum per radium, & aliis quaestionibus philo-
ster, I985. sophicis, iuxta aureum P. Rami, methodum
. "Cicero in Sixteenth and Seven- concinnata, in inclyta Marpurgensi Academia
teenth Century Rhetoric Instruction."
pro insignibus magisterii Philosophici conse-
Rhetorica 4, no. 3 (Summer 1986): 227-54.
quendis publica ad disputandum proposita.
Frankfort, 1593. [Darmstadt LHB:
. "Karriere und Bedeutung von Clem-
ens Timpler (I563/4-I624)." 400 Jahre
33/3595]
Arnoldinurn 1588-1988. Festschrift. , ed. P. Rami Dialectica, curm praecepto-
Greven, I988. rum explicationibus, disquisitionibus, &praxi
. European Academic Philosophy in nec thenon collatione cum Peripateticis. Ex Za-
barellae, Schegkii, Matth. Flacc. Illyrici,
Late Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth Centu-
Rod.
ries: The Life, Significance, and Philosophy ofGoclenij, Fr. Beurhusij, loan. Piscato-
Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624). 2 vols.
rij, & Rodolph. Snellij commentarijs & prae-
Hildesheim and Zfirich, 1988. lectionibus. Collecta a M. Christophoro

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Cramero . . . aucta plurimis in locis in usum

tur, & defenditur . . . disputabuntur die 3.
Martii. Steinfurt, Theophilus Caesar,
logicae studiosorum edita a Rodolpho Go-
clenio. Oberursel, 600o. [Marburg UB:
1604. [Bremen UB: C. S. 40 (no. 32)]
XIV C 462b] Hautz, Johann Friedrich. Geschichte der Uni-
Goldmann, Karlheinz. Verzeichnis der Hoch- versitdt Heidelberg. 2d vol. Mannheim,
schulen. Neustadt on the Aisch, 1967. 1864.
Grammatica Latina Philippo-Ramaea, ad fa- Hawenreuterus, Johannes Ludovicus, praes.
ciliorem puerorum captum perspicua methodo and Joannes Deczius, resp. Synopsis
breviterconformata, duobus libris distincta . . philosophiae . . . ad disputandum proposita in
Addita suntpassim tabulae cum generales, tum Academia Argentinensi. Wittenberg, I595.
speciales; ex quibus methodus cognosci potest. [Braunschweig StB: C3342]
Herborn, 1591. [Wolfenbiittel HAB: Hemmingius, Nicolaus. De methodis libri
394. I.7 Quodl. (3)] duo. Leipzig, I565. [Steinfurt-Burg-
Grammatica Latina Philippo-Ramaea, ad fa- steinfurt GB: Theol.Octav. Quart 6]
ciliorem puerorum captum perspicua methodo Hopingk, Martinus. Diataxis studiorum in
breviter conformata, duobus libris distincta. Schola Lemgoviensi, promulgata anno salutis
Steinfurt, I674. [Steinfurt-Burgsteinfurt 1597. Lemgo, I597. [Lemgo StA: Bib-
FB: 8°D I7.4I] liothek, nr. 359]
Grunius, Johannes. ZxaLyQattla scholae triv- Horstius, Gregorius. Institutionum logicarum
ialis recte aperiendae . . typi lectionum & ex- libri duo in quibus ex Aristotele, eiusdemque
ercitiorum in singulis bene instituti Gymnasii interpretibus res ipsa candide declarantur . ..
classibus. . . conscripta pro Gymnasio Iutre- ante annos aliquot studiosaejuventitui in illus-
bocensi. Wittenberg, I579. [G6ttingen tri, Academia Wittebergensi propositi, et iam
SUB: 8° Didact. 52/57 (5)] primum ab autore recogniti, ac ad praelum
Gutberleth, Henricus, praes. and Johannes- elaborati. Wittenberg, I608. [Darmstadt
Cunradus Schefferus, resp. Disputatio log- LHB: U 365/10]
ica De methodo. Herborn, Christophorus Hundt, Magnus. Compendium totius logices.
Corvinus, I606. [Wiesbaden LB: Gs 8420 Leipzig, Per Jacobum Thanner, I507.
(Herborner Dissertationen, Ganteswiler- [University of Illinois, Urbana-Cham-
Gutberleth, II)] paign: x88I/A8xL/I503 (2)]
Hahn, Karl. Die kirchlichen Reformbestrebun- Index artium et lectionum . . . aestivis mensibus
gen des Strassburger Bischofs Johann von anni 89 in Schola Bremensi naviter incumbe-
Manderscheid (1569-1592). Strasbourg, mus. Bremen, 1589. [Bremen UB: Brem.
I913. b.597 (nr. I)]
. Die katholische Kirche in Strafiburg Index artium et lectionum . . .aestivis mensibus
unter dem Bischof Erasmus von Limburg anni 90 in Schola Bremensi naviter incumbe-
(1541-1568). Frankfort on the Main,
mus. Bremen, 1590. [Bremen UB: Brem.
I94I. b.597 (nr. 2)]
Index lectionum et exercitationum in illustri
Hausmannus, Hermannus. Philippo-Rame-
um Rhetoricae artis systema. Steinfurt,
Schola Bremensi . . . proxima hieme anni
Theophilus Caesar, I605. [Steinfurt-
1638habendarum. Bremen, 1638. [Bremen
SA: (in) 2.-ad T. .a.I.a.Nr. 6]
Burgsteinfurt FB: 8° C 17,127 (2)]
- . Philippo-Rameum Rhetoricae artis Indexsys-
lectionum et exercitationum in illustri
Schola Bremensi . . . hac hieme anni 1645
tema. . . Editio altera. Steinfurt, Theoph-
ius Caesar and Joannes Carolus Unckel habendarum. Bremen, I645. [Bremen SA:
Francof., I6I5. [Steinfurt-Burgsteinfurt (in) 2.-ad T.5.a.I.c. (DDR 1032/3092)]
FB: 8° C 17,70 (2)] Index lectionum hac hyeme habendarum in illustri
- , praes. and Henricus Oldenburgius, Schola Nassovica Herbornensipublica . . in
resp. Subjectas theses logicas, quibus verus et utroque Paedagogeo, Herbornensi et Sigen-
legitimus sensus definitionis Rameae explica- ensi. Inchoabuntur lectiones Calend. Octob.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
Anno 1610. N.p., I6Io. [Wiesbaden SA: 1596. [Berlin (West) SB: N1 3530
Lemgo,
Abt. 95, Nr. I7502] (I)]
Meier, A. and H. Meyering, eds. "Ein
Jocher, Christian Gottlieb. Allgemeines
Schulprogramm
Gelehrten-Lexicon. 4 vols. Leipzig, I750- der Lateinschule aus dem
I75I. Rpt. Hildesheim, 1960-1961. Jahre I594." In Von der Lateinschule zum
Keckermannus, Bartholomaeus. Praecogni-Gymnasium Laurentianum Warendorf1329-
1979, 34-35, 48-49. Warendorf, 1979.
torum logicorum tractatus III. Cum disposi-
Menk, Ha-
tione typica systematis logici, adornati. Gerhard. Die Hohe Schule Herborn in
nau, I599. [Hannover LB: P-A 848]ihrer Frihzeit (1584-1660). Ein Beitrag
zum Hochschulwesen des deutschen Kalvinis-
Praecognitorum logicorum tractatus III
mus im Zeitalter der Gegenreformation.
... Nunc secunda editione recogniti atque
Wiesbaden, 1981.
emendati. Hanau, I606. [Liibeck StB: Phi-
los. 8° I819] Neander, Conradus. Tabulae plane novae suc-
cinctae . . . in illam disserendi artem, P. Rami
Kleine, Adolf. Geschichte des Weseler Gymna-
Dialecticae libros duos. Frankfort, I59I.
siums von den altesten Zeiten bis zur Gegen-
[Wolfenbiittel HAB: Alv.: Cc 332 (5)]
wart. Wesel, I882.
Neldelius, Johannes. Pratum logicum, Organi
Koldewey, Friedrich. Braunschweigische Aristotelici septis inclusum. Frankfort, 1607.
Schulordnungen. I. Schulordnungen der Stadt
[Tiibingen UB: Ab 70.8°]
Braunschweig, I49-I53 (Elenchus lectio-
Nicolai, Henricus. Pansophia liberalis. Tabel-
num et exercitiorum huius semestris in
lis succincte ordinate que comprehensa & re-
Schola Martiniana, anno 1603). Monu-
praesentata. Gdansk, 1646. [Wolfenbiittel
menta Germaniae Paedagogica I. Berlin,
1886.
HAB: I71.45 Quodl. (9)]
Ong, WalterJ. Ramus, Method, and the Decay
Leges Scholae Herbornensis. Neustadt on the
of Dialogue. Cambridge, MA, 1958.
Haardt, I585. [Leiden UB: 5I5 C 8 (3)]
. Ramus and Talon Inventory. Cam-
Leith, Philip. Formalism in AI and Computer bridge, MA, 1958.
Science. New York and London, I990.
Peitmann, Anthonius. Parsprima logicae . . .
Lorenz, S6nke. "Libri ordinarie legendi. continens . .. brevem ac nervosam adprincipia
Eine Skizze zum Lehrplan der mitteleuro- Ramea reductionem. Rinteln, 1626. [Mar-
paischen Artistenfakultat um die Wende burg UB: XIV C 745e (2 an)]
vom 14. zum I5. Jahrhundert." In Argu-Ramus, Petrus andJacob Schegk. P. Rami et
mente und Zeugnisse . . . philosophische und Jacobi Schicii Epistolae, in quibus de logicae
historische Beitrdge, ed. Wilhelm Hogrebe, artis institutione agitur. N.p., 1569. [Miin-
204-58. Studia Philosophica et Historica ster UB: S2 781 (I)]
5. Berne and Frankfort on the Main, 1986. Rector . .. Index lectionum Scholae Nassovicae
Lunckoronska, Maria. "Andreas Wechels Sigenensis Aestivo Semestri habendarum
Gaste." Frankfurter Beitrdge Arthur Richel 1598. N.p., 1598. [Wiesbaden SA: Abt.
gewidmet, 32-36. Frankfort on the Main, 95, Nr. 17502]
I933. Rennemannus, Henningus. Dissertatio, pro
Lurz, Georg, ed. Mittelschulgeschichtliche Do-
philosophia Ramea, adversus Peripateticos,
kumente Altbayerns, einschliesslich Regens-
illi quam D. Phil. Scherbius. . . ante paucos
burgs. Monumenta Germaniae Paedagog- annos, contra Rameos edidit, obiecta. Frank-
ica 42: 498-5o6. Berlin, 1908. fort on the Main, I595. [Wolfenbiittel
Martini, Cornelius. M. Cornelii Martini HAB: Alv.: Ca 56 (I)]
Antvverpii adversus Ramistas disputatio De Risse, Wilhelm. Die Logik der Neuzeit. I.
subjecto et fine logicae . . . A Friderico 1500-1640. Bad Cannstatt, 1964.
Beurhusio in schola Tremoniana. Conrado Rhodolphus, Caspar. Dialectica. Mainz:
Hoddaeo D. in Gymnasio Gottingensi. I55I. [Mainz, Bibliothek des Gutenberg
Heizone Buschero in schola Hannoverana. Museums: Ink. a. 5]

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
ISO RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY
entiarum. Rothenburg on the Tauber

Rodingus, Guilielmus. P. Rami Regii Profes-
1636. [Hannover LB: P-A 183 (2)]
soris Dialecticae libri duo, ex variis ipsius dis-
putationibus, et multis Audomari TalaeiSharratt,
com- Peter. "The Present State ofRamu
Studies." Studifrancesci 47-48, anno I6
mentariis breviter explicati. Frankfort, 1582.
[Darmstadt LHB: U 357/7] fascicolo 2-3 (1972): 201-13.
. "Recent Work on Peter Ramus
Sallerus S.J., Johannes, praes. and Franciscus
Thoveninus, resp. Disputatio logica (I970-1986)."
de Rhetorica 5 (I987): 7-58.
methodo. Ingolstadii ... Academia Sitzmann,
anno Edouard. Dictionnaire des homm
1592 ... Septembrispublice ad discutiendum
celebres de l'Alsace depuis les temps les plu
proposita. N.p., Wolfgang Eder, 1592.
reculesjusqu'a nosjours. 2d vol. Paris, I973
[Halle ULB: Fb 4Io] Sluterus, Severinus. Anatome logicae Ramea
Sarcerius, Erasmus. Methodus divinae scrip-
qua ipsa praecepta primum perpicue dissecan
turae loca praecipua explicans. Schwabisch-
tur & explicantur: deinde singula membratim
Hall, I539. [University of Illinois,
in utramque partem perpetuis obiectionibus &
Urbana-Champaign: Stonehill 208] responsionibus, partim a Peripateticis motis
Schindling, Anton. Humanische Hochschule
partim ab auctore recens excogitatis solidissim
und Freie Reichsstadt. Gymnasium und Akad-
disputatur & examinantur. Frankfort, I608
[Berlin (West) SB: N1 3632]
emie in Strassburg 1538-1621. Wiesbaden,
I977. .Anatomia logicae Aristoteleae sive syn-
Schmidt, Charles. La Vie et les travaux deJean crisis logica, qua primo ipsa praecepta, ex or
Sturm. Strasbourg: I855. Rpt. Nieuw-gano Aristotelis methodiceproposita, celebrio-
koop, I970. rum interpretum glossis explicantur: Deind
Schonerus, Lazarus. Petri Rami Arithmeticae quid Ramei in iisdem desiderent, indicatur
libri duo, et Algebrae totidem: a Lazaro Tertio denique diversae Aristotelicorum
Schonero emendati & explicati. Eiusdem Rameorum sententiae, in consensu, & dessens
Schoneri libri duo: alter, De numerisfiguratis; comparatur, ut quid verumfalsumve sit, liqui
alter, De logistica sexagenaria. Frankfort, do congoscatur. Frankfort, I6Io. [Berli
1586. [Wolfenbiittel HAB: 6 Arithm.] (West) SB: N1 3633]
Schorus, Henricus. Specimen etforma legitime . In Petri Rami Dialecticam Commentar-
tradendi sermonis & rationis disciplinas, ex. P. ius, publicis disputationibus quibus praecept
Rami scriptis collecta, & Tabernensi Scholae dialectica Rameae & perspicue explicantur &
accommodata . . . cum praefationeJo. Stur- ab adversariorum corruptelis nervose vindican
mij. Strasbourg, 1572. [Stanford Univer- tur, in Scholae Stadensi traditus. Hamburg
sity, Green Library: Z 239.9/A 36 M29c 1612. [Berlin (West) SB: N1 3634]
(no. 4)] Snellius, Rudolphus. Partitiones physic
Schramus, David. Partitiones logicae et rhetor- methodi Rameae legibus informatae: excepta
icae, ad verae methodi Rameae leges, inpuri- olim ex dictandis ejus ore in scholae Marpur
oris logices studiosorum gratiam conformatae. gensi. Nuncprimum in lucem editae. Hanau
Frankfort, 1589. [Wolfenbiittel HAB: I594. [Wiesbaden LB: T 7024 (I)]
Alv.: Cc 326 (2)] . Snellio-Ramaeum philosophiae syn-
Sengebehr, Bartholomaeus. Compendium di- tagma, tomis aliquot separatis distinctum; qui
alecticae Philippi, in quo nudapraecepta ad ar- bus continentur 1. Generales sincerioris
tis illius veram cum noticiam tur praxin per- philosophiae Rameae informationes: 2. Dia-
tinentia ... nonnullubi item P. Rami lectica, 3. Rhetorica, 4. Arithmetica, 5.
observationibus utilissimis illustrata describun-
Geometria, 6. Sphaera, seu Astronomia, 7.
tur. In gratiam atque usum Scholae Cellensis
Physica, 8. Psychologia, 9. Ethica; Rhodolphi
Snellii . . . commentationibus succinctis &
promulgatum. Uelsen, 600o. [Wolfenbtittel
HAB: 394.29 Quodl. (2)] accuratis; sed cum aliorum huius ani virorum
Seybothius, Johannes. Paedia gemina,lectissimis
una observationibus ac notis studiose
philologica linguarum, alter philosophicapassim
sci- collatis & auctis; explicata: quibus

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
THE DIFFUSION OF THE WRITINGS OF PETRUS RAMUS ISi
praefatio D. Rhodolphi Goclenii . -. .prae-

Rudimenta dialecticae P. Rami, breviter
fixa est. Tomo autem primo hic postcollecta
prae-. . . in usum Scholae Herbornensis.
Editio
fatione subiungitur ver vereque Ramea rectesecunda correctior. Herborn, 1599.
philosophandi ratio. Sequentibus vero [Basel UB: K.f.VI I7 (2)]
ac sep-
Trivialium scholarum in urbibus Leovardiana,
aratis tomis reliqua sequentes disciplina.
Frankfort, 1596. [Wolfenbiittel HAB: Doccumana,
6. I Bolsvardiana, Snecana, Harlin-
Log. (2)] gana, Frankekerana, instituendarum ratio.
St6tzner, Paul. Sigismund Evenius. Ein Beitrag Franeker, 1588. [Leeuwarden, Provinciale
zur Geschichte des Ratichianismus. Beilage Bibliotheek: (In) 408 Hs., nr. 2]
zum Jahresberichte des Gymnasium zu Ursinus, Guilelmus. Commentarius in P.
Zwickau Ostern 1895. Zwickau, 1895. Rami dialecticam tam theoricus, quam practi-
Stowe, A. Monroe. English Grammar Schools cus cumprimis luculentus &fructuosus. Frank-
in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth. New York, fort, I607. [Wiesbaden LB: Bd I032]
1908. Ursus Ditmarsius, Nicolaus Raymarus.
Strieder, Friedrich Wilhelm. Grundlage zur Metamorphosis logicae. Strasbourg, 1589.
einer Hessischen Gelehrten und Schriftsteller [Berlin (West) SB: N1 3305/Io (4 an)]
Geschichte. I8 vols. Gottingen et al., 1783- Valeriis, Valerius de. Aureum sane opus, in quo
1819. ea omnia breviter explicantur, quae . . . Ray-
Suhle, H. Herzogliches Friedrichs-Realgym- mundus Lullus, tam in scientiarum arbore,
nasium zu Dessau. VI. Jahresbericht, 20-25 quam arte generali tradit. Augsburg, 1589.
(Lectiones scholarum trivialium Anhalti- [Hannover LB: P-A 1577]
narum distributae per quinque ordines. Vasoli, Cesare. La dialettica e la retorica dell'U-
1625). Dessau, 1888. manesimo. "Invenzione" e "Metodo" nella
Talaeus, Audomarus. Rhetorica, e P. Rami cultura del XV e XVI secolo. Milan, 1968.
Regii . . . praelectionibus observata. (Colo- Vogeler, Eduard. Geschichte des Soester Archi-
niae Agrippinae: Apud Theoldorum Bau- gymnasiums. I. Teil, Wissenschaftliche
mium, 1581). Beilage zumJahresbericht des Archigymnasi-
Theologische Realenzyklopddie. 2d vol. Berlin ums zu Soest . . .1882/3, I4-I5 (Pro-
and New York, 1978. gramma M. Moysis Gummersbach rect.
Timplerus, Clemens. Metaphysicae systema scholae Susatens. forma patente editum
methodicum. Steinfurt, I604. [Marburg ac. 1569). Soest, 1883.
UB: XIV b Ioo] Voigt, Georg. "Uber den Ramismus an der
. Physicae seu philosophiae naturalis Universitat Leipzig." Berichte iber die Ver-
systema methodicum in tres partes digestum handlungen der koniglich sdchsischen Gesell-
. . . pars prima . . physicam generalem. schaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig.
Hanau, 1605. [Braunschweig StB: C I488 Philologisch-historische Classe. 40. Leipzig,
(I)] i888.
. Logicae systema methodicum. Hanau, Vormbaum, Reinhold ed. Die evangelischen

1612. [K61n UStB: P 5/56] Schulordnungen des siebenzehnten Jahrhun-
. Rhetoricae systema methodicum. Ha- derts. Gutersloh, 1863.
nau, 1613. [Minster UB: S2 7076] Wackerus, Fridericus, praes. and Otto
Toscanella, Orazio. Imodipiu communi con che Christoporus Helmoldus, resp. Quaestio
ha scritto Cicerone le sue epistole secondo igen- an Ramus sit pestis scholarum. Goslar, 163 I.
eri di quelle, con altre cose. Venice, 1569. [G6ttingen SUB: 8° H.lit.partic.I, 3653
[Chicago, Newberry Library: Y/672/ (5)]
. C77948] Wasserschleben, H. Programm . . . Landes-
Treutler, Hieronymus, praes. and Elias As- universitdt. Die dltesten Privilegien und Stat-
saeus Londinensis, resp. Theses De unica P. uten der Ludoviciana. Giessen, 88 I.
Rami methodo. Herborn, I591. [Berlin Webster, Charles. "The Curriculum of the
(West) SB: Nh 384 (9)] Grammar Schools and Universities,

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC
1500-1660: A Critical Review of the Lit- Frankf

erature." History ofEducation 4 (1975): SI- (West)
„„ 68. . * , Windhaus, G. "Zur Ge
Wedemannus, Henningus. Tabulae logicae, z L .
',. .* 'TT~ i-schule zu Laubach (Hessen) im I6. Jahr-
ita studiose conscriptae. Hamburg, Lauren-
atuiu seifru
tius Pfeifferus tan He
and Henric bri Mbibl.
Mejerus us . hundert." Mitteilungen der Gesellsch
Lunaeburgensis,
Lunaeburgensis, 1627. [Minchen
1627. SB: 2* Jfuir
[Munchen SB: 2 deutsche
° Erziehungs- und Schulgeschi
Ph.sp.56] 6 (I896): 99-121, 194-222.
Willich, Jodocus. De methodo omnium artium Wundt, Max. Die deutsche Schulmetaphysik
et disciplinarum informanda opusculum. des 17.Jahrhunderts. Tibingen, 1939.

89.164.29.222 on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC

This Content Downloaded From 89.164.29.222 On Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

This Content Downloaded From 89.164.29.222 On Sat, 23 Jan 2021 16:14:40 UTC

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Diffusion of the Writings of Petrus Ramus in Central Europe, c. 1570-c.

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3039149

This content downloaded from

FOR WHAT REASONS DID ACADEMICIANS select to use or not to use

This content downloaded from

Ong in 1958.2 The significance of this monogra

This content downloaded from

TABLE A. The Spread of the Writings

Total 14 4 151 23 42 4 22 2 262

This content downloaded from

and I630. While relevant Central European te

5Some of these, as well as some other classifications of philosophical disciplines, are

This content downloaded from

TABLES B-H. Seven "Ramist" Classifications

TABLE B. Johannes Thomas Freigius (1576)

((orationem): t solutam = Rhetorica

naturam rerum Musica

On the basis of these seven classifications the following two

This content downloaded from

TABLE C. Joannes Bilstenius (I588)

Physica < Geographia

TABLE D. Rodophus Goclenius (I600)

discipnae J res contingentiae oeconomica

E all give diverse representations of the contents of physics while

This content downloaded from

TABLES E-F. Classifications Given by Two Followers of R

philosophia de quantitate multa = arithmetica

ars obsequendi = ethica

This content downloaded from

TABLE G. Severinus Sluterus (1612)

genere = ethica optica

TABLE H. Anthonius Peitmann (1626)

generalis (prima philosophica lexicon

This content downloaded from

changing attitudes toward the use of Ramus's writings in

This content downloaded from

TABLE I. Terminology Used to Define and/or

I. Methodus est . . . via atque ratio vel est . . . modus

3. Methodus est ratiocinatio . . .

8. Methodus est ... ordo . . . dispositio.

TableJ presents in summary form views on methods given

This content downloaded from

TABLE J. Discussions of Method (methodus) within Ten

i. Fredericus Beurhusius / Ad P. Rami Dialecticam/I583; 2. Dav

I. Beurhusius says that methodus est dianoia variorum axiom

2. Methodus est relatio disposita, quam praescribit natura

3. a. Methodus est rectus partium ejus, quod ad explicandum susci

4. a. Methodus Ramo est dispositio, qua de multis enunciatis homo

This content downloaded from

TABLE J. Method/Logic/Petrus Ramus (conti

5. a. Philipp Melanchthon divides method (methodus = viae) into

6. a. Methodus est dianoia variorum axiomatum homogeneorum

This content downloaded from

TABLE J. Method/Logic/Petrus Ramus (continued)

Numbers 4, 5, 6, and 7 all purport to be works on logic w

20Schramus, 53-54; Neander, I59I, table before 251 (252).

This content downloaded from

book by Clemens Timpler (1563/4-1624) wh

This content downloaded from

TABLE K. Ramus, "Ramists," and Selected Other Authoriti

and Omer Talon were students of Ramus in Paris. 32 Wilhelm Urs-

32However, the three passages in Timpler's metaphysics textbook which mention

This content downloaded from