[573] II, 44. Narcos piscis est tantae virtutis, ut dicit Aristoteles.... II, 159. Ut docet Aristoteles, omnia mula sterilis est. While the substance of these two passages is found in Pliny’s _Natural History_, he does not mention Aristotle in these connections nor use the Greek word “narcos.” Moreover, Neckam seems to give credit as a rule to his immediate sources and not to copy their citations; as we have seen, he credited the fable of the fox and crow to Apuleius and not to Aesop to whom Apuleius credits it. [574] II, 153. Sed Aristoteli magis credendum esse reor quam vulgo. I, 39. Dicit tamen Aristoteles quod nihil habet duos motus contrarios. I, 7. Aristoteles qui dicit, “Solos melancholicos ingeniosos esse.” II, 1. Secundum veritatem doctrinae Aristotelicae omnes aquae sunt indifferentes secundum speciem. I, 9. Placuit itaque acutissimo Aristoteli planetas tantum cum firmamento moveri. Sed quid? Aristoteli audent sese opponere?... etc. [575] It would therefore seem that Professor Haskins (EHR, 30, 68) is scarcely justified in saying that “the natural philosophy and metaphysics of Aristotle” are “cited in part but not utilized by Alexander Neckam,” especially since he states presently that “Neckam himself seems to have been acquainted with the _Metaphysics, De Anima_, and _De generatione et corruptione_” (_Ibid_., 69, and “A List of Textbooks,” _Harvard Studies_, XX (1909), 75-94). Professor Haskins, however, believes that the new Aristotle was by this time penetrating England, but gives the main credit for this to Alfredus Anglicus or Alfred of Sareshel, the author of the _De motu cordis_, and the translator of the Pseudo-Aristotelian _De vegetabilibus_ and of an appendix to the _Meteorologica_ consisting of three chapters _De congelatis_, also translated from the Arabic. Alfred was no isolated figure in English learning, since he dedicated the _De vegetabilibus_ to Roger of Hereford and the _De motu cordis_ to Neckam: ed. Baruch, Innsbruck, 1878; and see Baeumker, _Die Stellung des Alfred von Sareshel ... in der Wissenschaft des beginnenden XIII Jahrts., München, Sitzber_. (1913), No. 9. On the whole it is probably safe to assume that his knowledge of Aristotle was soon at least, if not from the start, shared with others. Grabmann (1916), pp. 22-25, adds nothing new on the subject of Neckam’s knowledge of Aristotle. [576] I, 39; II, 11; I, 49; II, 129, 140, 157; II, 157 and 161. [577] I, 19; I, 16; II, 57; II, 162. [578] Fr. Rogeri Bacon, _Opera Inedita_, ed. Brewer, p. 457 in RS, vol. 15. [579] As I shall point out when I come to Roger Bacon, there are one or two rather striking resemblances between his interests and method and those of Neckam. [580] II, 155. [581] II, 174. [582] For instance, II, 148. “Qui autem in naturis rerum instructi sunt.” [583] II, 99. [584] I, 16, a citation from Aristotle gives him a little trouble. [585] II, 152.