By the thirteenth century Aristotle had come fully into vogue, and the references to his teaching in Dante (1265–1321), said to number upwards of 300, show what a hold he had obtained upon the greatest man of the age. The “moral Seneca” is also known to Dante, and placed by him in the same region of the unseen world (_H._ iv.), but the references to his teaching are insignificant by comparison (less than ten). Dr. Sandys states (_op. cit._ 591 _n._) that the references to Aristotle are mainly to the _Ethics_, _Physics_, _Metaphysics_, and _De Anima_. But we are now on the eve of the Renascence, whose “morning-star ... arose in the person of Petrarch” (_op. cit._ 650), early in the fourteenth century (1304–1374). Greek scholarship was reviving in the West, and Petrarch studied the language in his later days. But his inspiration was derived in the first instance from Latin, “the philosophical works of Cicero and the moral letters of Seneca” (_op. cit._ ii. 4). The latter he cites as many as sixty times (_ib._ 7), and he was also familiar with the Senecan tragedies (_ib._ 6). From this and from the general course of history we seem justified in believing that during the Middle Ages, in default of any general knowledge of Aristotle, Seneca was the chief authority on Physical Science. The views transmitted by him, for they were comparatively seldom altogether his own, having obtained currency, found their way into literature, and probably went far to colour the conceptions entertained on the subject in all the earlier literature of Modern Europe. Later, when Aristotle’s works became more widely known, his authority became supreme alike in philosophy and in science. Nor does the temporary ascendancy of Seneca, though historically very important, carry with it any presumption of rivalry, not to say superiority, to Aristotle. Seneca may best be regarded as pupil and interpreter of Aristotle, in so far as the two come into competition. His date, the language employed as his medium, his position, his reputation as a Christian, and his activity in other fields, all conspired to give him a position in the Middle Ages which is not necessarily the measure of his intrinsic merit as compared with Aristotle. VII. THE PRESENT TRANSLATION From what has preceded, it will appear that the path of the translator of the _Quaestiones Naturales_ is beset with snares. At best he has a choice of difficulties, It may perhaps, therefore, be well to say a word or two upon the method in which these have been dealt with on the present occasion.