SUPPLEMENT TO THE PREFACE

...contains. Folios 245 and 246, i.e., page 186, line 27 [from the word] "to be possible" original: ἐνδέχεσθαι to 191, line 31, were supplied by a more recent hand—the same one, it seems, that previously corrected the original scribe's hand throughout—in the 16th century, evidently because of the wretched condition of the end of the manuscript. It was collated by Wilhelm Crönert.

VATICANUS 1018 [Brandis, as cited above, p. 52 n. 6] A paper manuscript from the 15th–16th century, which contains in folios 203 verso – 354 verso the Prior Analytics with the scholia Scholia are ancient or medieval marginal commentaries used to explain a text. of Philoponus and others. It bears the same titles as Manuscript Y, to which it clearly appears to be entirely similar based on the notes recorded by Wilhelm Crönert, Alfred Gercke, and Anton G. Roos. However, the number of scholia is slightly smaller. See Manuscript Y.

VATICANUS 1021 [Brandis, as cited above, p. 54 n. 17] A bombycine A type of paper made from cotton or silk fibers rather than wood or parchment. manuscript in a square format [Q] from the 14th–15th century, consisting of 411 folios, now divided into two volumes. After the commentary of Ammonius on the book On Interpretation [cf. vol. IV 5 p. IX], it contains on folios 361 verso – 411 verso pages 1–85, line 33 of this commentary. It was collated by E. Pfuhl.

REGINENSIS 116 [Stevenson, Greek Manuscripts of the Regina Collection, 81 sq.; Brandis, as cited above, p. 51 n. 5] A paper manuscript from the 14th century, consisting of 393 folios. Folio 82 recto bears the title: "Scholarly notes from the lectures of Ammonius son of Hermeias, by John Philoponus the Alexandrian, grammarian and scholar" original: ἰωάννου ἀλεξανδρέως γραμματικοῦ καὶ σχολαστικοῦ τοῦ φιλοπόνου ἐκ τῶν τοῦ ἀμμωνίου τοῦ ἑρμείου συνουσιῶν, σχολικαὶ ἀποσημειώσεις. Folio 87 recto contains "Aristotle's Prior Analytics, Book One," and folio 146 recto "Aristotle's Prior Analytics, Book Two" (ending on folio 171 recto) with many mostly anonymous scholia. Occasionally the name Isaac is found, as on folios 89 verso and 162 verso. On folio 123 recto, one reads: "Explanation of the diagram concerning the abundance of propositions by Alousianos: this diagram concerning the abundance of propositions brings together the four modes of the first figure" original: ἐξήγησις εἰς τὸ περὶ εὐπορίας προτάσεων διάγραμμα τοῦ ἀλουσιάνου: τοῦτο τὸ διάγραμμα τοῦ περὶ εὐπορίας προτάσεων συνάγει τοὺς τέσσαρας τρόπους τοῦ $\bar{α}$^ου^ σχήματος — ending on folio 123 verso: "and thus all syllogisms are completed through this diagram" original: καὶ οὕτως ἅπαντες συλλογισμοὶ τελειοῦνται διὰ τούτου τοῦ διαγράμματος. Folios 82 recto – 87 recto were collated and described by E. Pfuhl:

In the preceding works of Aristotle, mention has been made of the preliminary topics that ought to be discussed before each work. It is not out of place to mention them now as well. They are as follows: the goal, the utility, the order of reading, the reason for reading, whether the book is a genuine work of the philosopher, and the division into chapters.

First, then, we must speak of the goal. The philosopher’s goal is to speak about demonstration. But since demonstration is a kind of syllogism, it is clear that one must first speak about the syllogism in general. For there are many types of syllogisms. Either a syllogism is demonstrative, having its principles from "common notions" Self-evident truths or axioms., and for this reason it is always true and never false. For the common notions from which such a syllogism is built are always true and self-evident. Or it is dialectical, having its principles from the opinions and suppositions of the majority or the more reputable people; this type does not always tell the truth but sometimes lies, since opinion is also of this nature—for it does not always tell the truth. Or it is sophistical, being always false. For the goal of the sophists is to refute everything, especially what seems to be true and what is demonstrated by experts. While it also takes its principles from opinion, it is from false opinion and never from the truth. This is more properly called a "fallacy" original: παραλογισμὸς (corrected from παρασυλλογισμὸς, 'pseudo-syllogism') rather than a syllogism in the strict sense.

In the present book of the Analytics, he teaches about the demonstrative syllogism. In the Topics, about the dialectical. In the Sophistical Refutations, about the sophistical—not so that we may use it, but so that we are not deceived by those who do. Let us then inquire which of these is discussed here, namely, in the first book of the Prior Analytics. And we say that it is about none of these, but about the simple and universal syllogism—that is, how a syllogism is constructed. (p. 4,20) We must know that although there are these three... we use only... for this is ridiculous. As for the fact that it is useful... demonstration... contributes to the simple syllogisms through which demonstrations [are made], it is clear that this too is useful for philosophy. — The order of reading is... [to make] clear to us what is said, let us say...