It was not until a very late period that logic appeared in the Latin language in the form of a school text. In fact, with the exception of Varro’s Dialectic in his “Nine Books of the Disciplines,” which has been lost, there were no writings on logic in the Latin down to the fourth century. Instruction in the subject was apparently given in Greek and to but few pupils. In the fourth century, however, Greek was going out of use, and it became necessary, if logic was to be saved in the schools, to have Latin text-books.[225] The need was met by a line of text-writers, of whom Marius Victorinus (c. 350) was the first. The oldest Latin school-book on logic that has survived, however, is that of Martianus Capella. Neither he nor his two successors, Cassiodorus and Isidore, were versed in the subject; they were merely compilers of educational encyclopedias. Such was the perfunctory origin of the Latin text-books on logic.[226] [225] It was thought that the Latin vocabulary was not well suited to the expression of the ideas of logic. _Cf._ Martianus Capella, _De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii_ (ed. Eyssenhardt) where Dialectica is about to speak: “Ac mox Dialectica, quanquam parum digne latine loqui posse crederetur, tamen promptiore fiducia restrictisque quadam obtutus vibratione luminibus etiam ante verba formidabilis, sic exorsa.” [226] It is true that the works of Boethius, which were not school texts, served to revivify the subject, but his influence was very slight in this respect until long after Isidore’s time. M. Manitius, _Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters_ (München, 1911), pp. 29–32. The reader of Isidore’s account of logic is struck by the enthusiasm displayed. Speaking of Aristotle’s Categories he says: “This work of Aristotle’s should be read attentively, since, just as is stated therein, all that a man says is included in the ten categories.”[227] Further on he quotes the saying that “Aristotle dipped his pen in intellect when he wrote the _Perihermeniae_.”[228] Again, a study of Apuleius “will introduce the reader advantageously with God’s help to great paths of understanding.”[229] All of these passages, however, come word for word from Cassiodorus. Isidore’s enthusiasm as well as his bibliography seems to lack genuineness.[230] [227] 2, 26, 15. _Cf._ Cass. Migne, _P. L._, vol. lxx, col. 1170. [228] 2, 27, 1. _Cf._ Cass. Migne, _P. L._, vol. lxx, col. 1170. [229] 2, 28, 22. _Cf._ Cass. Migne, _P. L._, vol. lxx, col. 1173. [230] The substance of Isidore’s _De Dialectica_ is taken chiefly from Cassiodorus. A number of passages seem to be based on Martianus Capella: for example, _Etym._, 2, 31, 1, on Martianus Capella (Eyssenhardt), 118, 8 ff.; _Etym._, 2, 31, 4–5, on M. C., 118, 15–25; _Etym._, 2, 31, 7, on M. C., 120, 9 ff. ANALYSIS