of Edinburgh, Session 1870 - 71 . 
441 
pine” Eeport for 1870), viz., that the barrenness of the deeper parts 
of the Mediterranean is due to the turbidity (from mud) of the 
bottom-water. 
2. Note. On the Use of the Scholastic Terms Vetus Logica 
and Nova Logica , with a Remark upon the corresponding 
Terms Antiqui and Moderni. By Thomas M. Lindsay, 
M.A., Examiner in Philosophy to the University of Edin¬ 
burgh. 
During the earlier part of the middle ages, or until the middle 
of the eleventh century, students of logic had a very incomplete 
knowledge of the logical works of Aristotle. They knew the trans¬ 
lations which Boethius had made of Porphyry’s Etcraytoyi), of Aris¬ 
totle’s rrepl KdTeyo pilin', and of llis 7 rep! kppnqvdds, and they knew little 
else. Their labours did not go beyond the reproduction of, and 
commenting on, these old G-reek writings. 
Towards the beginning of the twelfth century, however, the 
gradual diffusion of knowledge had brought with it acquaintance 
with the remaining treatises of Aristotle’s Organon. The old trans¬ 
lations of Boethius were recovered, and new translations were made. 
We are told that “ Jacobus Clericus of Venetia translated from 
G-reek into Latin certain books of Aristotle, and commented on 
them, namely, the Topica, the Analytics Prior and Posterior, 
and the Elenchi, although,” adds the chronicler, “an earlier trans¬ 
lation of these same books may be had.”* This was in 1128 a.d. 
It is more than probable that Roscellinus, who flourished 1080- 
1100, knew more of Aristotle’s writings than the treatises on 
the Categories and on Interpretation. Abelard (b. 1079—d. 1142) 
must have known the greater part of Aristotle’s Organon, and John 
of Salisbury (who died 1180), we know, knew the whole of it. 
Hence, whereas at the middle of the eleventh century the know¬ 
ledge of Aristotle was confined to acquaintance with the two first 
* “ Jacobus Clericus cle Venetia transtulit de grseco in latinum quosdam 
libros Aristotelis et commentatus est, scilicet Topica, Anal, priores et posteriores 
et Elenchos, quamvis antiquior translatis super eosdem libros haberetur.” 
Robert de Monte Clironica ad Ann. 1128, in Pertz, Monument, viii. 489. 
Quoted from Prantl, Gescliickte der Logik ii. p. 99. 
