Bukowski, Thomas P. “Siger of Brabant vs. Thomas Aquinas on Theology.” New Scholasticism 61, no. 1 (winter 1987): 25-32.
Criticizes the Armand Maurer-William Dunphy study of 1967.
Dunphy, William. “The Similarity between Certain Questions of Peter of Auvergne's Commentary on the Metaphysics and the Anonymous Commentary on the Physics Attributed to Siger of Brabant.” Mediaeval Studies 15 (1953): 159-68.
Compares similar passages found in the two works.
——— and Armand Maurer. “A Promising New Discovery for Sigerian Studies.” Mediaeval Studies 29 (1967): 364-69.
Presents parallels between the Peterhouse and the Vienna Sigerian manuscripts concerning the differences between philosophical and sacred theologies.
Ebbesen, Sten. “The Paris Arts Faculty: Siger of Brabant, Boethius of Dacia, Radulphus Brito.” In Medieval Philosophy, edited by John Marenbon, pp. 269-90. London: Routledge, 1998.
Examines some of the most celebrated personalities and works of the thirteenth century Parisian Faculty of Arts.
Maurer, Armand. “Esse and Essentia in the Metaphysics of Siger of Brabant.” Mediaeval Studies 8 (1946): 68-86.
Analyzes Questions on the Metaphysics, particularly the issues of being and existence.
———. “Ms Cambrai 486: Another Redaction of the Metaphysics of Siger of Brabant?” Mediaeval Studies 11 (1949): 224-32.
Compares a recently discovered manuscript with Questions on the Metaphysics.
———. “Siger of Brabant's De Necessitate et Contingentia Causarum and Ms Peterhouse 152.” Mediaeval Studies 14 (1952): 48-55.
Compares a manuscript, possibly the work of Siger, to De Necessitate.
Additional coverage of Siger's life and career is contained in the following source published the Gale Group: Dictionary of Literary Biography, Vol. 115.