Authors/Campsall/QSLA

This version of Quaestiones super librum analeticorum (Questions on the Prior Analytics of Aristotle) by Richard Campsall is taken from Edward Synan's edition of Caius 668*/645 (Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, Toronto 1968, see Synan 1968). Synan suggests that it was probably written in the early years of the 14th century. According to Henrik Lagerlund in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Sometime before 1308 he wrote his Questions on the Books of the Prior Analytics (Questiones super librum Priorum Analeticorum), a commentary on the first book of the Prior Analytics that devotes 14 of its 20 questions to modal syllogistic. He seems to think that there is nothing to add to the theory of assertoric syllogistic and his presentation of it is fairly standard, but he has lots of interesting things to say about modal syllogistic.

The main development of modal syllogistic in Campsall's work is his systematic application of the distinction between composite (de dicto) and divided (de re) modal sentences. Campsall seems to have held that the system of modal syllogisms presented in the Prior Analytics was intended for divided modal sentences, and so he tries to prove that what Aristotle said is basically correct when modal sentences are understood in this way. But this turns out to be a very cumbersome task. It is no surprise that he does not quite succeed, as he occasionally admits. [1]

Electronic version

• Q1 Quaeratur: utrum sillogismus sit subiectum huius?
• Q2 Quaeratur: utrum sillogismus habeat resolvi in propositiones, et propositiones in terminis?
• Q3 Quaeratur: utrum universalis negativa de inesse in illis de praesenti convertatur in terminis?
• Q4 Quaeratur: utrum universalis negativa de inesse in illis de praeterito et futuro convertatur simpliciter?
• Q5 Quaeratur: utrum universalis negativa de necessario convertatur in terminis?
• Q6 Quaeratur: utrum universalis affirmativa de necessario convertatur?
• Q7 Quaeratur: utrum affirmativa de contingenti ad utrumlibet convertatur?
• Q8 Quaeratur: an ab inferiori ad superius, cum nota contingentiae, valeat consequentia?
• Q9 Quaeratur: utrum universalis affirmativa de necessario et particularis affirmativa de contingenti utrumlibet, in eisdem terminis, interimant se?
• Q10 Quaeratur: utrum uniformis de inesse valeat?
• Q11 Quaeratur: utrum uniformis de inesse valeat in illis de praeterito et de futuro?
• Q12 Quaeratur: utrum, maiore de necessario, et minore de inesse, sequatur conclusio de necessario in prima figura?
• Q13 Quaeratur: maiore de inesse, et minore de necessario, sequatur conclusio de necessario?
• Q14 Quaeratur: utrum ista mixtio necessarii, et inesse, valeat in quarto secundae, et quinto tertiae?
• Q15 Quaeratur: an, posito possibili inesse, accidat impossibile et generaliter, utrum diffinitio contingentis sit bene data?
• Q16 Quaeratur: utrum propositio de contingenti utrumlibet convertatur per oppositas qualitates?
• Q17 Quaeratur: utrum uniformis de contingenti valeat in prima et tertia figura?
• Q18 Quaeratur: utrum, maiore de contingenti, et minore de inesse, sequatur conclusio de contingenti?
• Q19 Quaeratur: utrum illa de contingenti antecedat ad suam de inesse?
• Q20 Quaeratur: utrum, maiore universali negativa de necessario, et minore de contingenti, sequatur duplex conclusio, contingentis, et inesse?