SCOT TRANSLATES AVERROES 127 



lichael Scot, Gerard of Cremona, or some other 

 cholar who worked under these masters. 



Renan, relying on the authority of Haureau, 1 

 as shown good reason to believe that at least the 

 ommentaries on the Physica and Metaphysica in 

 heir Latin versions came from the pen of Scot. 

 Jbertus Magnus, in a passage of high censure, 

 elivers himself in the following terms : ' Vile 

 inions are to be found in the book called 

 uaestiones Nicolai Peripatetici. I have been wont 

 say that the author of it was not Nicholas but 

 ichael Scot, who in very deed knew not natural 

 ilosophy, nor rightly understood the books of 

 istotle.'" The doctrine thus condemned is un- 

 ubtedly that of Averroes on the Physica and 

 etaphysica. A. manuscript of the Paris library has 

 treatise commencing thus : ' Haec sunt extracta 

 libro Nicolai Peripatetici,' and it seems that a 

 correspondence exists between this and a 

 digression in the commentary by Averroes 

 the twelfth book of the Metaphysics. This 

 gression, says Renan, often occurs in the manu- 

 ipts as a separate treatise called ' Sermo de 

 aestionibus quas accepimus a Nicolao et nos 

 mus in his secundum nostrum posse.' These 

 rds have been omitted from the printed editions 

 the Commentaries of Averroes, and thus the 

 utity of this treatise with the book censured by 

 bertus Magnus was not recognised till Haureau 

 overed it. 



The only result then of this sharp criticism is to 

 ure us that the versions of the Physica and 

 aphysica must also be reckoned to the credit 



De la Philosophic Scolastique, i. 470. - Opera, ii. 140. 



