^{page 115 note 1} The subjects are—(1) true conclusion from false premises: 162a 10; (2) fallacy of begging the question: 162b 31.

^{page 115 note 2} S.E. 168a 21. This definition also occurs (but without the words τῷ τατα εἶναι) in Top. 1, 1, 100a 25, S.E. 1, 165a 1, and is presumed (including those words) in Rh. I, 2 (‘Analytics’ section: see § IV below), 1356b 15. It is very probable that this is a stock definition of συλλογισμς much older than the developed doctrine of the syllogism.

^{page 116 note 1} The following account has reference to Maier's, standard work, Die syllogistik des Aristoteles (Tübingen, 1896–1910)Google Scholar. His general view is stated in the Vorwort to the whole work; details in Vol. III, pp. 56 ff., ‘Die Entdeckung des Syllogismus.’

^{page 118 note 1} One might perhaps put the matter thus. The Topics offered itself originally as an exhaustive list of forms of argument. A science was a field of discussion differentiated by its possession of certain material resources: its discussions could only select from these forms those which were most suitable. The later discovery was that all arguments derive from one fundamental form, which at once becomes the ideal of science.

^{page 120 note 1} It may be noted that of these four terms the only one which occurs in the Topics is σημεῖον (recognized as a rhetorical term in S.E. 167b 9). Ἐνθμημα occurs once, again as a term of Rhetoric (Top. VIII, 164a 6).