1abysswalker
Few fine press editions of Aristotle's Ethics seem to exist.
Even considering his entire corpus, the fine press coverage seems sparse. Perhaps because his work lacks the poetry of Plato and some other ancient near-contemporaries? The lack still seems odd given Aristotle's place in the history of thought. The Limited Editions Club did a collection containing Politics & Poetics in 1964, which I find somewhat unsatisfactory for idiosyncratic reasons, and in any case it is not the Ethics; that is about it. There are no mentions of Aristotle in Colin Franklin's The Private Presses (1969), which has a decent bibliography of modern fine press output from before 1969.
For somewhat less rarefied possibilities, Easton, Franklin, and Folio provide a few options. It took me some effort to determine which translations these publishers used, so I figured it would be useful to post the information here all in one place, to aid future web searchers.
The Franklin Library published collected works of Aristotle in four volumes for the series Great Books of the Western World (1978/1979). The first of these four volumes includes the Ethics. I haven't seen these in person, but it looks like they use the same texts as the Britannica Great Books, which is the classic Ross translation.
Folio did a 2003 edition as part of a five volume Great Philosophers of the Ancient World set. I see pictures of it in a solo slipcase as well, so it must have also been sold individually. This edition uses the Thomson translation, about which I know nothing. I find the bearded old guy face cover design to be somewhat distracting and also a failure of imagination. (As a side note, this set is not mentioned on the Folio Society Devotees wiki, which is generally quite comprehensive. Edit: turns out I should have been looking at the FSD complete list, where it is listed; there are no other editions of Aristotle listed there.) Could it be that Folio never published Aristotle before 2003? That seems to be what web searches suggest.
Easton Press published a standalone edition (1999) that also uses the Thomson translation. Additionally, Easton published a five volume Complete Works of Aristotle collection in 2001 (there are matching volumes for Plato). The Aristotle volumes use the Revised Oxford Translation as edited by Jonathan Barnes. I am generally not a fan of the Easton house style, though for Aristotle it seems appropriate, and the cover design uses a tasteful Greek meander motif. I don't know what the printing quality is like, and in any case the market price of this set is high.
Does anyone here know of any other notable editions? For me, the ideal treatment would be something like the Libanus edition of Plato's Symposium, using the Rowe, Crisp, or Ross translations.
Digression on Translations
I am not an expert on Aristotle, and I do not read any Greek. However, I have some familiarity with the reputations and rough history of the major translations, and have opinions about how they read.
The recent 2002 translation of the Nicomachean Ethics by Rowe for Oxford is excellent and highly readable. All else equal, I would probably prefer this text in a nice binding. The typesetting of the paperback edition is modern and academic in style; the notes and commentary are both helpful and unobtrusive, but the overall feeling is somewhat cramped. Additionally, I think Oxford markets this edition primarily toward the captive student market for textbooks, and a hardcover edition may not even exist. Even if a hardcover exists with a non-perfect binding (I have not been able to determine this conclusively), it would almost certainly use the same typesetting. I currently have a physical copy of this edition.
The academic standard during the earlier 20th century was the 12 volume Oxford Works of Aristotle, edited by W.D. Ross. These volumes came out during the period starting 1912 and ending 1954. Scholars still respect these translations. The size of one book implied by a 12 volume edition seems likely to feel okay in the hand.
In 1984, Jonathan Barnes edited a two-volume revised version of the Oxford translations, now published (somewhat confusingly) by Princeton University Press as part of their Bollingen Series. This edition preserves most of the older Oxford translations, with a few updates and three (if I recall correctly) replacements. I think these two volumes include all (or almost all) the works contained in the older 12 volume series. I am sure this is an efficient, comprehensive, and rigorous packaging of Aristotle's thought, but too dense for someone looking for a pleasant reading experience.
Hackett publishes the recent 1999 Irwin translation, which has useful notes but feels as if Irwin would prefer to discuss his translation work with the reader rather than just translate the material.
Crisp did a translation in 2000, which is the version of the Ethics presented in the Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy series. This might be my second favorite at the moment, as it is clear and readable, and from my perspective it seems like Crisp prioritizes meaning over literalness. (I may also be influenced by the nice typesetting, which has a more traditional style compared to the Oxford/Rowe paperback.)
D.P. Chase did a translation for Everyman's Library number 547 (1930 and 1943 editions, I think). I know nothing about this translation and have never seen these copies in person, though I am familiar with this era of the series generally, and the page spreads are likely to be cramped.
Since this is Aristotle, I am sure there are other options I have missed, but these are the translations with which I have some familiarity.
Even considering his entire corpus, the fine press coverage seems sparse. Perhaps because his work lacks the poetry of Plato and some other ancient near-contemporaries? The lack still seems odd given Aristotle's place in the history of thought. The Limited Editions Club did a collection containing Politics & Poetics in 1964, which I find somewhat unsatisfactory for idiosyncratic reasons, and in any case it is not the Ethics; that is about it. There are no mentions of Aristotle in Colin Franklin's The Private Presses (1969), which has a decent bibliography of modern fine press output from before 1969.
For somewhat less rarefied possibilities, Easton, Franklin, and Folio provide a few options. It took me some effort to determine which translations these publishers used, so I figured it would be useful to post the information here all in one place, to aid future web searchers.
The Franklin Library published collected works of Aristotle in four volumes for the series Great Books of the Western World (1978/1979). The first of these four volumes includes the Ethics. I haven't seen these in person, but it looks like they use the same texts as the Britannica Great Books, which is the classic Ross translation.
Folio did a 2003 edition as part of a five volume Great Philosophers of the Ancient World set. I see pictures of it in a solo slipcase as well, so it must have also been sold individually. This edition uses the Thomson translation, about which I know nothing. I find the bearded old guy face cover design to be somewhat distracting and also a failure of imagination. (
Easton Press published a standalone edition (1999) that also uses the Thomson translation. Additionally, Easton published a five volume Complete Works of Aristotle collection in 2001 (there are matching volumes for Plato). The Aristotle volumes use the Revised Oxford Translation as edited by Jonathan Barnes. I am generally not a fan of the Easton house style, though for Aristotle it seems appropriate, and the cover design uses a tasteful Greek meander motif. I don't know what the printing quality is like, and in any case the market price of this set is high.
Does anyone here know of any other notable editions? For me, the ideal treatment would be something like the Libanus edition of Plato's Symposium, using the Rowe, Crisp, or Ross translations.
Digression on Translations
I am not an expert on Aristotle, and I do not read any Greek. However, I have some familiarity with the reputations and rough history of the major translations, and have opinions about how they read.
The recent 2002 translation of the Nicomachean Ethics by Rowe for Oxford is excellent and highly readable. All else equal, I would probably prefer this text in a nice binding. The typesetting of the paperback edition is modern and academic in style; the notes and commentary are both helpful and unobtrusive, but the overall feeling is somewhat cramped. Additionally, I think Oxford markets this edition primarily toward the captive student market for textbooks, and a hardcover edition may not even exist. Even if a hardcover exists with a non-perfect binding (I have not been able to determine this conclusively), it would almost certainly use the same typesetting. I currently have a physical copy of this edition.
The academic standard during the earlier 20th century was the 12 volume Oxford Works of Aristotle, edited by W.D. Ross. These volumes came out during the period starting 1912 and ending 1954. Scholars still respect these translations. The size of one book implied by a 12 volume edition seems likely to feel okay in the hand.
In 1984, Jonathan Barnes edited a two-volume revised version of the Oxford translations, now published (somewhat confusingly) by Princeton University Press as part of their Bollingen Series. This edition preserves most of the older Oxford translations, with a few updates and three (if I recall correctly) replacements. I think these two volumes include all (or almost all) the works contained in the older 12 volume series. I am sure this is an efficient, comprehensive, and rigorous packaging of Aristotle's thought, but too dense for someone looking for a pleasant reading experience.
Hackett publishes the recent 1999 Irwin translation, which has useful notes but feels as if Irwin would prefer to discuss his translation work with the reader rather than just translate the material.
Crisp did a translation in 2000, which is the version of the Ethics presented in the Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy series. This might be my second favorite at the moment, as it is clear and readable, and from my perspective it seems like Crisp prioritizes meaning over literalness. (I may also be influenced by the nice typesetting, which has a more traditional style compared to the Oxford/Rowe paperback.)
D.P. Chase did a translation for Everyman's Library number 547 (1930 and 1943 editions, I think). I know nothing about this translation and have never seen these copies in person, though I am familiar with this era of the series generally, and the page spreads are likely to be cramped.
Since this is Aristotle, I am sure there are other options I have missed, but these are the translations with which I have some familiarity.
2wcarter
>1 abysswalker:
Ethics by Aristotle is listed in the FSD Complete List of Books as both a stand alone volume and part of a set under 2003.
In the FSD wiki, only selected book brochures and limited editions are listed, although links to brochures for the catalogues and prospectuses for almost every year are there, including 2003.
Ethics by Aristotle is listed in the FSD Complete List of Books as both a stand alone volume and part of a set under 2003.
In the FSD wiki, only selected book brochures and limited editions are listed, although links to brochures for the catalogues and prospectuses for almost every year are there, including 2003.
3abysswalker
>2 wcarter: thanks for the correction! I updated that paragraph.
4MobyRichard
There seems to be very little fine press Aristotle period. The only letterpress I know of is the LEC Politics. Nonsensical Plato on the other hand gets all the love.
5Glacierman
Yeah, poor Harry gets the short end of the stick.
6U_238
>3 abysswalker: This is great, I’m sure it’ll be a resource to many in future!
Also, wanted to point out that your edit still reads as if mention of these books is absent from the complete list of FS publications. Maybe it’s just me.
Also, wanted to point out that your edit still reads as if mention of these books is absent from the complete list of FS publications. Maybe it’s just me.
7Jobasha
>4 MobyRichard:
"Nonsensical Plato on the other hand gets all the love."
Hmmmmm. I'm not sure I agree with this. Plato might add a bit of numerology here and there, and sometimes his arguments are a bit wishy-washy but at least he doesn't make up facts and present them as truths, e.g. Mayflies, misogyny etc.
"Nonsensical Plato on the other hand gets all the love."
Hmmmmm. I'm not sure I agree with this. Plato might add a bit of numerology here and there, and sometimes his arguments are a bit wishy-washy but at least he doesn't make up facts and present them as truths, e.g. Mayflies, misogyny etc.
9jroger1
>1 abysswalker: “The Franklin Library published collected works of Aristotle in four volumes for the series Great Books of the Western World (1978/1979). The first of these four volumes includes the Ethics. I haven't seen these in person, but it looks like they use the same texts as the Britannica Great Books, which is the classic Ross translation.”
You are correct. Not all the Franklin volumes in that set use Britannica’s translations, but the Aristotles do.
You are correct. Not all the Franklin volumes in that set use Britannica’s translations, but the Aristotles do.
10MobyRichard
>7 Jobasha:
All of Platonism is made up...lol. His 'Republic' is blatantly utopian and totalitarian. His style is muddled and vague. Often he doesn't seem to understand the implications of his own ideas and so relies on mystical metaphors that are immediately misunderstood by his followers. Which I blame Plato for that. The Platonic Dialogue is admittedly perfect for this day and age, setting up straw men everywhere and then burning them alive in the public forum. Aristotle has his problems, but his style is lucid and except for his metaphysics (i.e. the parts where he sticks closest to Plato) you can always tell what Aristotle believes. Especially considering that what we have of Aristotle is probably mostly lecture notes, not "publishable" works.
As to facts as we understand them, i.e. independently falsifiable data, there are none in the Platonic dialogues. Just one-sided arguments against opponents with remarkably low self-esteem. Again, perfect for this echo chamber era.
All of Platonism is made up...lol. His 'Republic' is blatantly utopian and totalitarian. His style is muddled and vague. Often he doesn't seem to understand the implications of his own ideas and so relies on mystical metaphors that are immediately misunderstood by his followers. Which I blame Plato for that. The Platonic Dialogue is admittedly perfect for this day and age, setting up straw men everywhere and then burning them alive in the public forum. Aristotle has his problems, but his style is lucid and except for his metaphysics (i.e. the parts where he sticks closest to Plato) you can always tell what Aristotle believes. Especially considering that what we have of Aristotle is probably mostly lecture notes, not "publishable" works.
As to facts as we understand them, i.e. independently falsifiable data, there are none in the Platonic dialogues. Just one-sided arguments against opponents with remarkably low self-esteem. Again, perfect for this echo chamber era.
11MobyRichard
>8 gmacaree:
I don't find Plato that fun, just vague except in the Republic which again is blatantly totalitarian. As poetry, Plotinus and Porphyry, while 1000% more mystical and nonsensical, are far more beautiful to me. I'd take Porphyry's life of Plotinus over all of Plato combined.
I don't find Plato that fun, just vague except in the Republic which again is blatantly totalitarian. As poetry, Plotinus and Porphyry, while 1000% more mystical and nonsensical, are far more beautiful to me. I'd take Porphyry's life of Plotinus over all of Plato combined.
12abysswalker
>6 U_238: clarified further.
13abysswalker
>4 MobyRichard: re: nonsensical: Plato's ideas can become incoherent mysticism in the hands of his epigones, but even apart from the music I give Plato credit for being perhaps the first thinker to present a sophisticated idea of internal psychic divisions, predating modern psychological dual-process theories by ~2400+ years. Further, I think there is a good case to be made for a threefold division, separating appetites from spirited striving (basically Plato's thymos) rather than simply considering reason and emotion as separate subsystems.
And anyone that has yet to read Phaedrus in the 1995 Nehamas/Woodruff translation published by Hackett is missing out.
That said, obviously I would like to see Aristotle get more quality print attention.
And anyone that has yet to read Phaedrus in the 1995 Nehamas/Woodruff translation published by Hackett is missing out.
That said, obviously I would like to see Aristotle get more quality print attention.
14abysswalker
>11 MobyRichard: I'd take Porphyry's life of Plotinus over all of Plato combined.
Recommended edition?
Recommended edition?
15SDB2012
>1 abysswalker: The recent Bartlett and Collins translation seems to be respected. I'm no expert but landed on it when searching for a translation to study. My purpose was to learn a bit about the history and foundation of virtue ethics. It worked for that but some parts of the text were difficult to get through. I believe that is due to the difficulty of translating ancient Greek into modern English.
I own the Folio version and really like the way it's structured in terms of giving a summary of the key concepts from each chapter up front.
I own the Folio version and really like the way it's structured in terms of giving a summary of the key concepts from each chapter up front.
16abysswalker
>15 SDB2012: thanks for the pointer. I am unfamiliar with this one. The reviews sound promising, and publication by The University of Chicago Press is encouraging. Probably only available easily as an academic paperback, but so it goes.
As a side note, the Google books preview of this edition provided by the press website is generous. It shows most or all of the front and introductory matter, along with a good chunk of the first part of the first book. So anyone curious can read the thinking behind the translation, which seems to prioritize literalness more that I would prefer, but could still be a useful comparison.
As a side note, the Google books preview of this edition provided by the press website is generous. It shows most or all of the front and introductory matter, along with a good chunk of the first part of the first book. So anyone curious can read the thinking behind the translation, which seems to prioritize literalness more that I would prefer, but could still be a useful comparison.
