E. M. Cope’s 1867 introduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric (London: MacMillan) is available via Internet Archive in several different scans digitized by
In addition to Logos 7 basic, Logos 7 academic basic is available for free. Resources included in the package are sufficient to get one’s feet wet with the principles of how research in and with biblical languages work in Logos—namely:
Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon
Lexham Bible Dictionary
Septuagint (Lexham English and Swete Greek editions)
Lexham Hebrew Bible
Greek New Testament (SBL)
Lexham Textual Notes
Abbot-Smith Greek Lexicon
For additional information about Logos 7 academic basic, see the LogosTalk blog. To download the package, see the Logos website. For other discussion, see also Logos 7 Basic for free and Trial versions of Biblical Studies software.
Texas Christian University’s open, online thesis repository contains John Burkett’s treatment of Book III of Aristotle’s Retoric. The project is a commentary-style work on that book that strives to complete the project that William Grimaldi began with Books I and II. According to the abstract,
This new commentary on Aristotle’s Rhetoric III serves the purpose which the text held at the Classical Lyceum: elucidating Aristotle’s theory of style (lexis) and arrangement (taxis) for scholars, teachers, and practitioners of rhetoric. This commentary provides a much needed update because the last commentary, written by Cambridge classicist E. M. Cope in 1877, is now understood as a misinterpretation that reads Aristotle Platonically, takes seriously only rational appeals, assumes a mimetic theory of language that depreciates style, and misdefines central concepts like the enthymeme and common topics. Providing a new interpretation, this commentary may be summarized by three adjectives: Grimaldian, rhetorical, and accessible. First, this Grimaldian commentary applies the new rhetoric philosophy of William M. A. Grimaldi, S.J., which he explicates in Studies in the Philosophy of Aristotle’s Rhetoric (1972) and in his two-volume Commentary (1980-1988), wherein Grimaldi develops an integrated and contextual interpretation of the Rhetoric. Second, this rhetorical commentary observes the rhetoric in the Rhetoric since Aristotle typically practices what he teaches: writing with enthymemes, defining by metaphor, clarifying by antithesis, and arranging units by thesis, analysis, and synthesis. This commentary observes how Aristotle applies his three rhetorical appeals (êthos, pathos, logos), his theories of propriety (prepon), exotic (xenos), and virtue (aretê) in style, and the systems of Greek imagery, all of which develop a unified and interactive theory of invention, style, and arrangement. Attention is given to Aristotle’s creative theory of metaphor, being a tropos (turn) and a topos (place) of invention, functioning as a stylistic syllogism for creating knowledge with quick, pleasant learning. Arrangement also functions creatively with localized topical procedures for responding to the particular needs of each part of a composition. Third, this accessible commentary features text, translation, comments, and glossary for readers who may not be familiar with Aristotle’s idiom but who have an interest in his rhetorical theory and technical terms. Finally, incorporating recent scholarship, this commentary provides insights from classical rhetoric and new rhetoric, showing their interrelationship and how contemporary research in rhetoric builds on and helps to elucidate Aristotle’s expansive rhetoric as a general theory of language.
For the project’s full text, see TCU’s repository. On a personal note, I had the privilege of working for John while he was working on this project. Discussions with him about some of the more problematic approaches to Aristotle’s Retoric that are noted above proved quite enriching, helpful, and informative, and I’m delighted to see that his project is openly available for interested readers’ consumption.
It takes some digging, but Internet Archive appears to have the entire edition of Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province (London: Burns, Oats, and Washbourne, 1913–1929). Links to the individual volumes are below. Comments are certainly welcome if anyone notices a volume(s) that I’ve missed out.
- 1: QQ. 1–26
- 1: QQ. 27–49
- 1: QQ. 50–74
- 1: QQ. 75–102
- 1: QQ. 103–19
- 2.1: QQ. 1–48
- 2.1: QQ. 49–89
- 2.2: QQ. 1–46
- 2.2: QQ. 47–79
- 2.2: QQ. 80–100
- 2.2: QQ. 101–40
- 2.2: QQ. 141–70
- 2.2: QQ. 171–89
- 3: QQ. 1–26
- 3: QQ. 27–59
- 3: QQ. 60–83
- 3: QQ. 84–suppl. 33
- 3.suppl.: QQ. 34–68
- 3.suppl: QQ. 69–86
- 3.suppl: QQ. 87–99
John Calvin’s commentaries have been brought into varying English versions. The version published in Edinburgh by Calvin Translation Society, 1844–1856, is the version that has been reprinted by Baker Academic and Logos Bible Software.
Many of these volumes are openly available online. Below is a list with links to those that I’ve located thus far. Volumes not yet found are:
- Psalms (vol. 1)
- Isaiah (vol. 1)
- Catholic Letters
Interested readers who may find these volumes are specially welcome to post links below to help complete the list.
The Internet Archive has PDF scans freely available three volumes of Hermann Strack and Paul Billerbeck’s Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch (München: Beck, 1922–1961):
Each of the files is reasonably large (75.7–81.5 MB). So, they may take some time to load on slower connections or browsers.
As a side note, these PDFs cover the whole New Testament. But, the SBL Handbook of Style notes a 6-volume edition of Strack and Billerbeck’s work (§6.4.7). Does anyone with better knowledge of the 6-volume version know whether (a) volumes 4–6 have contents beyond those of volumes 1–3 listed above, (b) the 6-volume version is simply a different printing of the 3-volume version, or (c) something else?
The MLA has started a new initiative, named the Humanities Commons. According to the Commons’s introductory webinar registration page,
Imagine a humanities network with the sharing power of Academia.edu, the archival quality of an institutional repository, and a commitment to using and contributing to open source software. Now imagine that this network is not-for-profit. It doesn’t want to sell your data or generate profit from your intellectual property. That’s Humanities Commons. Run by a nonprofit consortium of scholarly societies, Humanities Commons wants to help you curate your online presence, expand the reach of your scholarship—whatever form it may take—and connect with other scholars who share your interests.