142 | CHAPTER 5
(d. 536) emphasized how Aristotle was the first to unite the scattered do-
mains of human knowledge into a coherent whole, just as a wise doctor as-
sembles the materials for his cures.^71 Although Sergius’s surviving transla-
tions are mostly of medical works by Galen (d.c. 216) and include nothing
authentic by Aristotle, he was aware that, without the theoretical framework
of Aristotle’s logic, medicine and philosophy and even the inner meaning of
scripture would remain a closed book. He saw in the corpus of Aristotle’s
writings a survey of human knowledge and the best guide to its systematiza-
tion and structure. He planned to write introductions to each of Aristotle’s
works in their proper sequence: practical philosophy, physics, mathematics,
and finally theolog y. His project was not only contemporary with but also
similar in scale to Boethius’s, and as much influenced by the teaching tradi-
tions of his alma mater Alexandria, still the world leader in science, philoso-
phy, and medicine.
Syriac literature is largely Christian. Sergius was a (Chalcedonian) Chris-
tian with, as we shall see, theological interests. yet there were dissenters. In a
treatise on Aristotelian logic addressed, originally in Syriac or Middle Per-
sian, to the Iranian philosopher- king Khosrow I (531–78/79), and much
influenced by—again—the Alexandrians Elias and/or David, Paul the Per-
sian compared knowledge which addresses what is near, manifest and uncon-
troversial, with belief which deals with invisibles such as God, not exactly
describable and therefore likely to spur doubt and dispute.^72 Therefore, Paul
argued, knowledge—meaning philosophy and in particular logic—is better
than belief; for knowledge is authoritative, gives access to all the world’s
beauty, and pacifies the soul by showing it the realm of Intellect. A story cir-
culated that Paul was denied episcopal advancement and converted to Maz-
daism. He represented the other extreme of Christian reaction to philosophy
compared to Ephrem’s or Anastasius of Sinai’s view that it was the font of all
evil. Between came Christian theologians and philosophers like Elias and
David who, sometimes with misgivings, deployed Aristotle in defense of
their faith, and accommodated non- Christian doctrines such as the eternity
of matter.^73 Such, broadly speaking, was the position of Sergius too.
[5:52] 79. In general on the growing literalness of translation technique, see D. King, The Syriac versions
of the writings of Cyril of Alexandria (Louvain 2008) 15–25, 358–60.
71 H. Hugonnard- Roche, “Aux origines de l’exégèse orientale de la logique d’Aristote,” Journal asi-
atique 277 (1989) 8–13; id., Logique d’Aristote [3:8] 168, 175 n. 1, 182–85. For a bibliography of Sergius’s
works, see http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/share/research/centres/clarc/projects/latinandsyriac/list-of-serguis
-works.html.
72 Gutas, Greek philosophers [5:32] IX, esp. 247–48; J. Teixidor, Aristote en syriaque (Paris 2003)
37–39; P. Bruns, “Paul der Perser,” Römische Quartalschrift 104 (2009) 28–53, esp. 45–47. On Paul’s debt
to Alexandria: Gutas, Greek philosophers [5:32] IX.238–50. On Sasanian Aristotelianism generally: J. T.
Wa l k e r , The legend of Mar Qardagh (Berkeley 2006) 180–90; D. Gutas, “Origins in Baghdad,” in R. Pas-
nau (ed.), The Cambridge history of medieval philosophy (Cambridge 2010) 15–17, esp. n. 18.
73 Westerink and Trouillard, Prolégomènes [5:27] XXXVI, XXXVIII; cf. Chadwick, Boethius
[5:42] 22. For the possibility Elias and David were still polytheists, see C. Wildberg, “Elias,” SEP, http://