I have already remarked that Aristotle, while enrolling all the Ten Predicaments as independent heads, each the _Generalissimum_ of a separate descending line of predicates, admitted at the same time that various predicates did not of necessity belong to one of these lines exclusively, but might take rank in more than one line. There are some which he enumerates under all the different heads of Quality, Relation, Action, Passion. The classification is evidently recognized as one to which we may apply a remark which he makes especially in regard to Quality and Relation, under both of which heads (he says) the same predicates may sometimes be counted.[79] And the observation is much more extensively true than he was aware; for he both conceives and defines the Category of Relation or Relativity (_Ad Aliquid_) in a way much narrower than really belongs to it. If he had assigned to this Category its full and true comprehension, he would have found it implicated with all the other nine. None of them can be isolated from it in predication. [Footnote 79: Aristot. Categ. p. 11, a. 37. Simplikius says that what Aristotle admits about [Greek: poio/tês], is true about all the other Categories also, viz.: that it is not a strict and proper [Greek: ge/nos]. Each of the ten Categories is (what Aristotle says about [Greek: to\ o(\n]) [Greek: me/son tô=n te sunôno/môn kai\ o(mônu/môn.--ou)de\ ga\r e)kei=na kuri/ôs e)sti\ ge/nê, ou)de\ ô(s ge/nê tô=n u(p' au)ta\ katêgorei=tai, _ta/xeôs ou)/sês pantachou= prô/tôn kai\ deute/rôn_.] (Scholia ad Categor. p. 69, b. 30, Br.) This is a remarkable observation, which has been sufficiently adverted to, I think, by Brentano in his treatise on Aristotle's Ontology.]