There’s no way to tell in those translations (as with the Greek) what the precise antecedent of “them” is, without some deduction. As far as I can tell, however they all seem to read ἅπασιν as adjectival to ἐκείνοις (“them all”) not a separate antecedent from it (I notice now that you point this out – sorry, I missed that on first read).
Anyway, they all seem to be reading it differently than I was in one way, and I’m sure they’re right. I had thought that it meant:
“…which being one in everything will be the same in them,” ie., making this phrase a logical deduction from his mystical idea of this one
However, taking ἅπασιν as an adjective to ἐκείνοις, instead of it’s own thing:
“…which will be one and the same in all of them,”
Much better in the context than my understanding, and makes the Greek flow so much nicer. [EDIT: I see from your edits now that all this recapitulates the translation history of this sentence. Ha. That’s really perfect.]
they all seem to read ἅπασιν as adjectival to ἐκείνοις (“them all”) not a separate antecedent from it
I just don’t see the justification for doing that.
They two are quite separate and they each have their own preposition, the standalone ἐν and the one inside the ἐνῇ.
I’m now thinking Zabarella wrongly introduced this reading (not the first time he did such a thing!) and he has been followed ever since.
But it is also in Gerard’s translation from the Arabic. And that is what Averroes used. And that influenced Zabarella. Hmm. I think it is the corruption that accumulated in the Syriac to Arabic to Latin transmission.
Well, as far as repeated ἐν goes, I’ve seen it before, and a TLG search reveals that Aristotle does it frequently, so I’m not sure that can be an objection. As much as I’d like to self-justify my earlier reading, I really do think that Zabarella’s (I’ll take your word for his Latin, which I’m shaky at) is much superior. It flows better, and removes a question I had about where Aristotle was pulling this “one in everything” concept from (as it is not really justified by the preceding).
What TLG search did you do? That could help a lot.
And I haven’t yet tried figuring out the manuscript variants. Oh boy, what a sentence this is! — not even a whole sentence!
εν and ενειμι lemma 5-word proximity in Aristotle.