Philoponus: On Aristotle's Prior Analytics

"the one saying that no man is winged." In some respect false, of which the contradictorily opposed is true. For example, "every man is white" is in some respect false, because "not every man is white" is true, which is the contradiction of "every man is white." Similarly, "no man is white" is in some respect false, because "some man is white" is true, which is the contradictorily opposed: —

f. 316v after "thus" (p. 402,27) adds: "of those things which conclude true and universal conclusions from false premises in the second figure, either from both false, or the major negative and the minor affirmative, or the major affirmative and the minor negative. And if [it is] from the false [premise] and the true [premise], in some respect false or wholly false. And either the major is wholly false and the minor true (and—true repeats). And either the major is in some respect false and the minor true (and—true repeats) or the major is true and the minor wholly false or the major is true and the minor is in some respect false. And if the major is wholly false and the minor true, either the major is negative and the minor affirmative. But if the major were in some respect false and the minor true, either the major is negative and the minor affirmative or the major affirmative and the minor negative. But if the major were true and the minor wholly false, either the major is affirmative and the minor negative. And either the major is negative and the minor affirmative. But if the major were true and the minor in some respect false, either the major is affirmative and the minor negative, or the major is negative and the minor affirmative. But if both premises are in some respect false, either the major is affirmative and the minor negative."

f. 321v in the bottom margin (after 419,5 "now the second"): "now he says this prevents the circular argument original: petitio principii from not being manifest: that the same thing b is not taken for g. Furthermore, the reversing. Furthermore, that in which one is in the other. And not the mode. That is to say, the conclusion stating that a belongs to every g. For a indeed belongs to every b. If indeed g does not reverse with b, or we conclude a belongs to every b. And that it is from the beginning i.e., circular. But if it does this, that is to say it is the same and g reverses with b, it would do what was said. That is to say, [it would be] a demonstration of the same thing by itself through the syllogism called 'through three.' For example, ag is through ab. db is through ag. Therefore ag [is] through ag. Which was the beginning: —"

The Marcianus 231 [Zanetti p. 119], formerly of Bessarion, is a paper manuscript; according to the C catalog, it dates to the 11th century. According to the judgment of Alfred Gercke, who observed that the scribe imitated much older letters, it was written in the 15th century. It now contains 234 folios, which are also shamefully lacerated. It lacks a title; for on folio 1r it begins with the words "(di)anoia and the principles" (p. 2,33), before which it appears that four folios have fallen out, as at the end of the commentary on folio 216v it is numbered 330 330 original: λλ' is 330 in Greek numerals. Folio 57r has a subscription: 'The first of the three.' Title: 'Of the same, on the first of the Prior Analytics, from the conversations of Ammonius Hermiae, the second of the three.' Folio 125r: 'John the Scholastic of Alexandria on the... the second of the three.' Folio 147r: 'Beginning of the third.' Subscription on folio 216v: 'The comments on the Prior Analytics, the second, are completed with God. End.' There follows folios 217r—234v, which is not mentioned in the catalog, a synoptic arrangement of philosophy: 'Of the Theologian Gregory. Just as those reading, etc.' Alfred Gercke, who collated folios 89r—113r (p. 192,1—243,24) and 125r—130r (p. 270,1—279,23), distinguished three hands by the color of the ink. A. Torstrik, who inspected the codex before, testifies that it agrees with the manuscript t so much at the beginning and the end (e.g., it exhibits 'modes' at p. 388,6) that it may be suspected that Trincavellus used this codex. We have rightly omitted noting the variation so that it may be known; I propose this sample, from which it may appear how much this codex also agrees with t.