Chapter X: Section I: Remarkable Events in the Life of Aristotle

Introductory Remarks--Birth and Parentage of Aristotle--He
studies Philosophy under Plato--Is highly distinguished in
the Academy--Retires to Atarneus on the Death of his
Master--Marries--Is invited by Philip to superintend the
Education of Alexander--Prosecutes his Studies at the
Court--On the Succession of Alexander, returns to Athens,
where he sets up a School in the Lyceum--Corresponds with
Alexander, who supplies Means for carrying on his
Investigations--Alexander finds Fault with him for
publishing some of his Works, and after putting Callisthenes
to Death, exalts his Rival Xenocrates--On the Death of
Alexander, he is accused by his Enemies of Impiety, when he
escapes to Chalcis, where he dies soon after--His personal
Appearance and Character--His Testament--History of his
Writings--Great Extent of the Subjects treated of by
him--His Notions on elementary Bodies--The Material
Universe--The Changes to which the Earth has been subjected,
and the Eternity of its Existence--Conclusion.

Natural History, considered as a science or body of doctrine, commenced with Aristotle, the founder of the Peripatetic School, and one of the most illustrious philosophers of antiquity. His writings were held in the highest estimation by his own countrymen the Greeks, as well as by the Romans: they were considered as the most authentic sources of knowledge, after the revival of learning in Europe; and even at the present day their influence may be traced in the works of many who have not so much as bestowed upon them a cursory glance. It is therefore fit that we should begin our biographical sketches with that celebrated author, the more especially as he did not confine himself to a single branch of natural history, but, like all great minds, possessed an extensive acquaintance with objects of various classes. It is he only, whose comprehensive glance seizes upon what is common to numerous tribes, that can duly estimate what ought to be considered as distinctive of a particular group, or can form rules for the arrangement and description of the beings which compose it. The three greatest naturalists whom the world has produced, Aristotle, Linnaeus, and Cuvier, were men whose conceptions were enlarged by the most expanded views. Others have excelled them in particular departments, but none have equalled them in general knowledge.

Aristotle was born at Stagira, a city of the Thracian Chersonesus, in the first year of the 99th Olympiad, or the 384th before the Christian era. His father, Nicomachus, was physician to Amyntas, king of Macedonia, the father of Philip, and grandfather of Alexander the Great. Of his mother, we only know that her name was Phestis, and that, like her husband, she was originally from Chalcis. His family claimed descent from Machaon, the son of Esculapius. Having lost his parents at an early age, he went to reside with Proxenus, a citizen of Atarneus in Mysia, the friend to whose guardianship he had been left. According to some authorities, not being observed very strictly by those who had the immediate charge of his education, he spent a great part of his youth in licentious indulgences, by which he dissipated nearly the whole of a large patrimony. It is also said that he entered into the military profession, but finding it disagreeable soon renounced it, and, as a means of subsistence, sold medicines at Athens. But most of these reflections on his juvenile character may perhaps be attributed to slander.

However this may be, it became necessary for him to choose an employment; and, on going to Delphi to consult the oracle, he was directed to proceed to Athens, and apply himself to the study of philosophy. This he accordingly did, and at the age of seventeen commenced his career as a pupil of Plato.

Being of an ardent temperament, he addicted himself to his new pursuit with so much energy, that he determined to reduce his hours of repose to the smallest possible limits. For this purpose he placed a metallic basin beside his couch, and on lying down held out one of his hands with an iron ball in it, that the noise produced by the collision might awake him should he happen to slumber. Such intensity of application, in a penetrating and subtile mind, could not fail to render him highly successful in his studies. We accordingly find that he had not been long in the academy when he was distinguished above all the other scholars; and it is said that Plato used to call him the mind of his school, and to compare him to a spirited colt that required the application of the rein to restrain its ardour.

He has been accused of disrespect and ingratitude to his aged master, and with having set up a school in opposition to him. The author of this charge was Aristoxenus, his own pupil; but it is well known that he was personally an enemy to Aristotle, because that philosopher, in choosing a successor, had preferred Theophrastus. It is doubted, besides, whether he taught publicly until after Plato's death, which happened in 348 B. C.

Speusippus, the nephew of the sage just named, having been appointed to succeed him in his school, Aristotle, retiring from Athens, went to reside with Hermeias, governor of Assus and Atarneus in Mysia. Here he remained three years; but his friend having been executed, by command of Artaxerxes, as a rebel against Persia, he was obliged to seek refuge in Mytelene, taking with him Pythias, the kinswoman and adopted daughter of Hermeias, to whose memory he afterwards erected a statue in the temple of Delphos. This lady, endeared to him by the gratitude which he felt towards her father, and by the distress to which she had been reduced by his death, he married in the thirty-seventh year of his age. She died, however, soon after their union, leaving an infant daughter, who received the same name.

A short time having elapsed, he was invited by Philip to superintend the education of his son. This distinction he no doubt owed in part to his previous intimacy with the King of Macedonia; but it must also have arisen from the great celebrity which he enjoyed, as excelling in all kinds of science, and especially in the doctrine of politics. Alexander had attained the age of fifteen when the management of his studies was confided to Aristotle, then in his forty-second year. There is ground, however, for presuming that previous to this period the philosopher had been consulted respecting the instruction of the young prince.

The master, it has been said, was worthy of his pupil, and the pupil of his master. In our opinion the master was worthy of a better pupil, and the pupil might have had a better master. At all events, Alexander, who was ambitious of excelling in every pursuit, must have profited greatly in the acquisition of knowledge by the lessons of the most eminently-endowed philosopher of his age. According to Plutarch and Aulus Gellius, he was instructed by him in rhetoric, physics, ethics, and politics; and so high was the estimation in which he held his preceptor, that he is said to have declared, that "he was not less indebted to Aristotle than to his father; since if it was through the one that he lived, it was through the other that he lived well." It is also supposed that he had been initiated in the abstruse speculations respecting the human soul, the nature of the Divinity, and other subjects, on which his master had not yet promulgated his notions to the world.

During his residence at the court of Macedonia, Aristotle did not exclusively devote himself to his duties as instructor of the young prince, but also took some share in public business, and continued his philosophical researches. For the latter purpose Philip is said to have granted him liberal supplies of money. In consideration of his various merits the king also rebuilt his native city, Stagira, which had been destroyed in the wars, and restored it to its former inhabitants, who had either been dispersed or carried into slavery.

Alexander had scarcely completed his twentieth year when the assassination of his father, by Pausanias, one of the officers of the guard, called him to the throne. Aristotle, however, continued to reside at the court two years longer; when some misunderstanding having arisen, he left the young monarch at the commencement of his celebrated expedition into Asia, and returned to Athens. It has been alleged that he accompanied his former pupil as far as Egypt; but the fact is not certain, although circumstances would seem to render it probable.

He was well received at Athens, on account of the benefits which Philip had conferred, for his sake, on the inhabitants of that city; and, obtaining permission from the magistrates to occupy the Lyceum, a large enclosure in the suburbs, he proceeded to form a school. It was his custom to instruct his disciples while walking with them; and for this reason the new sect received the name of Peripatetics, or walking philosophers. In the morning he delivered his acroatic lectures to his select pupils, imparting to them the more abstruse parts of metaphysical science; and in the evening gave to his visiters or the public at large exoteric discourses, in which the subjects discussed were treated in a popular style. As the Lyceum soon acquired great celebrity, scholars flocked to it from all parts of Greece. Xenocrates, who shared with him the lessons of Plato, had by this time succeeded Speusippus in the Academy, and it has been alleged that Aristotle established his seminary in contemptuous opposition; observing, that it would be shameful for him to be silent while the other taught publicly. But although the rival sages of those days cannot be supposed to have been influenced by a gentler spirit than animates those of our own times, there is no reason for attributing to the Stagirite in this matter any other motive than a laudable desire of seeking his own interest by communicating knowledge to those who were desirous of receiving it.

In this manner he gave public lectures at Athens thirteen years, during the greater part of which time he did not cease to correspond with Alexander. That celebrated prince had placed at his disposal several thousand persons, who were occupied in hunting, fishing, and making the observations which were necessary for completing his History of Animals. He is moreover said to have given the enormous sum of 800 talents for the same purpose; while he also took care to send to him a great variety of zoological specimens, collected in the countries which he had subdued.

The misunderstanding which had begun before Aristotle parted from his royal pupil, but which had not prevented the good offices of the latter, increased towards the end of his career. One of the first occasions seems to have been offered by the philosopher, who, having published his works on physics and metaphysics, received from Alexander, who was piqued at his having divulged to the world the valuable knowledge which he had obtained from him in his youth, the following letter:--

"Alexander to Aristotle, wishing all happiness. You have
done amiss in publishing your books on the speculative
sciences. In what shall I excel others if what you taught me
privately be communicated to all? You know well that I would
rather surpass mankind in the more sublime branches of
learning than in power. Farewell."

This epistle exhibits the king as a very exclusive personage; and, joined to what history has recorded of his actions, tends to show that selfishness, however refined or disguised, was the main source of his insatiable ambition. One of the sincerest pleasures of a great mind is to communicate to others all the blessings that it possesses. On other occasions he appeared to entertain a wish to mortify the philosopher by exalting his rival Xenocrates, who had nothing to recommend him besides a respectable moral character. It has even been asserted by some, that the conqueror, after he had put Callisthenes to death, intended the same fate for Aristotle.

This Callisthenes was a kinsman and disciple of the other, through whose influence, it is said, he was appointed to attend the king on his Asiatic expedition. His republican sentiments and independent spirit, however, rendered him an indifferent courtier; while his rude and ill-timed reflections finally converted him into an object of suspicion or dislike. The conspiracy of Hermolaus affording Alexander a plausible pretext for getting rid of his uncourtly monitor, he caused him to be apprehended and put to death. Some say that he was exposed to lions, others that he was tortured and crucified; but, in whatever way he met his end, it is generally agreed that his life was sacrificed to gratify the enmity of his sovereign. Aristotle naturally espoused the cause of his relative, and from that period harboured a deep resentment against his destroyer. It has even been alleged that he was privy to the supposed design of murdering the victorious prince; but of this there is no satisfactory evidence.

Notwithstanding the coolness which thus existed between "Macedonia's madman" and "the Stagirite," the latter continued to enjoy at least an appearance of protection, which prevented his enemies from seriously molesting him. But as the splendour of his talents, his success in teaching, and the celebrity which he had acquired in all parts of Greece, had excited the animosity of those who found themselves eclipsed by the brightness of his genius, no sooner was Alexander dead, than they stirred up a priest, named Eurymedon, with whom was associated Demophilus, a powerful citizen, to prefer a charge of impiety against him before the court of Areopagus, on the ground that he had commemorated the virtues of his wife and of his friend Hermeias with such honours as were exclusively bestowed on the gods. Warned by the fate of Socrates under similar circumstances, he judged it prudent to retire; remarking, that he wished to spare the Athenians the disgrace of committing another act of injustice against philosophy.

He effected his escape, with a few friends, to Chalcis in Euboea, where he died soon after, in the year 322 B.C., and the 63d of his age; having, on his deathbed, appointed Theophrastus of Lesbos, one of his favourite pupils, his successor at the Lyceum. Various accounts are given of his demise; but it is probable that an overexcited mind, and a body worn out by disease, were the real causes of his dissolution.

According to Procopius and others, Aristotle drowned himself in the Euboean Euripus, because he could not discover the cause of its ebbing and flowing, which are said to take place seven times a-day. Sir Thomas Browne, in his Enquiries into Vulgar and Common Errors, refutes this assertion on the following grounds:--In the first place, his death is related to have taken place in two ways by Diogenes Laertius; the one, from Eumolus and Phavorinus, that being accused of impiety for composing a hymn to his friend Hermeias, he withdrew to Chalcis, where he drank poison; the other, by Apollodorus, that he died of a disease in his stomach, in his sixty-third year. Again, the thing is in itself unreasonable, and therefore improbable; for Aristotle was not so apt to be vexed by the difficulty of accounting for natural phenomena, nor is there any evidence that he endeavoured to discover the ebb and flow of the Euripus, for he has made no mention of it in his works. Lastly, the phenomenon itself is disputable; and it appears from a comparison of testimonies on the subject, that the stream in question flows and ebbs only four times a-day, as is the case with other parts of the sea, though it is subject to irregularities dependent upon the winds and other causes. "However, therefore, Aristotle died," concludes our author, "what was his end, or upon what occasion, although it be not altogether assured, yet that his memory and worthy name shall live, no man will deny, nor gratefull schollar doubt: and if, according to the Elogie of Solon, a man may be onely said to be happy after he is dead, and ceaseth to be in the visible capacity of beatitude: or if, according unto his own Ethicks, sence is not essentiall unto felicity, but a man may be happy without the apprehension thereof; surely in that sence he is pyramidally happy, nor can he ever perish but in the Euripe of ignorance, or till the torrent of barbarisme overwhelme all."

With respect to personal appearance, Aristotle was not highly favoured. He was of short stature, with slender legs, and remarkably small eyes. His voice was shrill, and his utterance hesitating. Although his constitution was feeble, he seems to have enjoyed good health. His moral character has been impeached by some; but we may presume that it was not liable to any serious imputation, otherwise his faults would not have escaped the observation of his numerous enemies, who yet could only prefer against him some vague charges of impiety.

Aristotle was not merely a philosopher; he was also what would at the present day be called a gentleman and a man of the world. In accordance with this character he dressed magnificently, wore rings of great value, shaved his head and face, contrary to the practice of the other scholars of Plato, and freely indulged in social intercourse. He was twice married. By his first wife, Pythias, he had a daughter of the same name, who was married to Nicanor, the son of Proxenus. His second wife was Herpylis, a native of Stagira, by whom he had a son, called Nicomachus.

It is difficult to determine his real character. Those who seem to find pleasure in reviling him, assert that he was a parasite, a habitual glutton and drunkard, a despiser of the gods, a vain person, whose chief care was to ornament his person, and thereby counteract the unfavourable impression which his disproportioned figure might make. It has been said, with perhaps more truth, that he taught his pupil Alexander principles of morals and policy which were not the best adapted for a prince of his ambitious temper; and that his desire of standing forth as the founder of a philosophical sect, induced him to prefer abstract disquisitions to solid knowledge, and to indulge in a spirit of contradiction and innovation. On the other hand, he has been extolled as a prodigy of knowledge and intellect, and represented as "the secretary of nature." Jews have laid claim to his philosophy as derived from Solomon, and Christians have held him up as a person ordained to prepare the way for a Divine revelation. It is certain, however, that he was a very remarkable individual, possessed of great powers of observation and discrimination, and one who, had he devoted himself to the study of natural objects with a sincere desire of ascertaining their properties and a resolution to adhere to truth, might have succeeded in laying on a solid basis the foundations of physical science.

Diogenes of Laertes in Cilicia, who lived about the end of the second century, and who wrote an account of the lives of the philosophers, has preserved his testament, the substance of which is as follows:--Antipater, the regent of Macedonia, is appointed his executor. To his wife Herpylis he leaves the choice of two houses, the one in Chalcis, the other at Stagira. He commends her domestic virtues, and requests his friends to distinguish her by the kindest attention. To Nicomachus, his son by Herpylis, and to Pythias, his daughter by his first wife, he bequeaths the remainder of his fortune, excepting his library and writings, which he leaves to Theophrastus. He desires that his daughter shall be given in marriage to Nicanor, the son of his benefactor Proxenus, or, should he not be inclined to receive her, to Theophrastus, his esteemed pupil. The bones of Pythias he orders to be disinterred and buried with his own body, as she herself had desired. None of his slaves are to be sold; they are all either emancipated by his will, or ordered to be set free by his heirs whenever they shall become worthy of liberty. Finally, he orders that the dedications which he had vowed for the safety of Nicanor be presented at Stagira to Jupiter and Minerva.

The same writer gives the titles of 260 works of Aristotle. Many of these, however, have perished. From his situation in society, and the munificent patronage of Alexander, he possessed more ample resources than any other man of science that could be named; and, considering the age in which he lived, his success in the investigation of nature may be considered as almost unrivalled. It is to be regretted that so many of his treatises have been lost, and that even those which have been transmitted to us have not been preserved in a perfect state.

Strabo has given a melancholy history of these works, in the ninth book of his geography. Aristotle, as we have stated above, had bequeathed them to Theophrastus, the most distinguished of his pupils, and his successor in the school. That philosopher left them, together with his own works, to his scholar Neleus, who carried them to his native city, Scepsis in Asia Minor. The heirs of Neleus, who were unlettered men, kept them locked up; and when they understood that the King of Pergamos, to whom the town belonged, was collecting books, to form a library on the plan of the Alexandrian, they concealed them in a vault or cellar, where they lay forgotten 130 years. When accidentally discovered, at the end of that period, they were found to be greatly injured by damp and vermin. At length they were sold to an inhabitant of Athens, named Apellicon, who, however, was not so much a lover of philosophy as a collector of manuscripts, and who adulterated the original text by his injudicious emendations and interpolations. Several copies thus altered were published by him. When Athens was taken by Sylla, the library of this citizen was carried to Rome, where the works of Aristotle were corrected by Tyrannion, a grammarian. Andronicus of Rhodes afterwards arranged the whole into sections, and gave them to the world.

According to Dr Gillies, Aristotle must have "composed above 400 different treatises, of which only forty-eight have been transmitted to the present age. But many of these last consist of several books; and the whole of his remains together still form a golden stream of Greek erudition, exceeding four times the collective bulk of the Iliad and Odyssey."

He was scarcely less ambitious than his pupil Alexander, and his works embrace nearly the whole range of human knowledge as it existed in his day. He was the inventor of the syllogistic mode of reasoning, the principles of which he lays down in his work on logic. In his books on rhetoric, he has investigated the principles of eloquence with great accuracy and precision, insomuch that they form the basis of all that has since been written on the subject. His work on poetics, or rather the fragment which has come down to us under that name, although almost entirely confined to the consideration of the drama, contains principles applicable to poetical composition in general, and is equally distinguished for precision and depth of thought. Those on ethics and politics are also remarkable productions; and although the former has been effectually superseded by a more perfect system, the latter contains much that is interesting even at the present day. In his metaphysics, he expounds the doctrine of Being abstracted from Matter, and speaks of a First Mover,--the life and intellect of the universe, eternal and immutable, but neither omnipresent nor omnipotent. When treating of physics, he does not in general lay down rules _a priori_, but deduces them from the observation and comparison of facts. This being the case, we might expect that such of his writings as relate to natural history should contain much truth.

He holds that all terrestrial bodies are composed of four elements,--earth, water, air, and fire. Earth and water are heavy, because they tend towards the earth's centre; while air and fire, which tend upwards, are light.

Besides these four elements, he has admitted a fifth, of which the celestial objects were composed, and whose motion is always circular. He supposed that there is above the air, under the concave part of the moon, a sphere of fire to which all the flames ascend, as the brooks and rivers flow into the ocean.

He maintains that matter is infinitely divisible; that the universe is full, and that there is no vacuum in nature; that the world is eternal; that the sun, which has always revolved as it does at present, will for ever continue to do so; and finally, that the generations of men succeed each other without having had a beginning or foreseeing an end.

He alleges that the heavens are incapable of decay; and that although sublunar things are subject to corruption, their parts nevertheless do not perish; that they only change place; that from the remains of one thing another is made; and that thus the mass of the world always remains entire. He holds that the earth is in the centre of the world; and that the First Being makes the skies revolve round the earth, by intelligences which are continually occupied with these motions.

He asserts that all of the globe which is now covered by the waters of the sea was formerly dry land; and that what is now dry land will be again converted into water. The reason is this: the rivers and torrents are continually carrying along sand and earth, which causes the shores gradually to advance, and the sea gradually to retire; so that in the course of innumerable ages the alleged vicissitudes necessarily take place. He adds, that in several parts which are considerably inland, and even of great elevation, the sea, when retiring, left shells, and that, on digging in the ground, anchors and fragments of ships are sometimes found. Ovid attributes the same opinion to Pythagoras.

Aristotle farther remarks, that these conversions of sea into land, and of land into sea, which gradually take place in the long lapse of ages, are in a great measure the cause of our ignorance of past occurrences. He adds, that besides this other accidents happen, which give rise even to the loss of the arts; and among these he enumerates pestilences, wars, famines, earthquakes, burnings, and desolations, which exterminate all the inhabitants of a country, excepting a few who escape and save themselves in the deserts, where they lead a savage life, and where they give origin to others, who in the progress of time cultivate the ground, and invent or rediscover the arts; and that the same opinions recur, and have been renewed times without number. In this manner, he maintains that, notwithstanding these vicissitudes and revolutions, the machine of the world always remains indestructible.

If an apology were necessary for the brevity of the above sketch, it might be urged, that it probably contains all that is authentic respecting the life of this eminent philosopher; and that our object is to condense, not to expand; to direct the attention to characteristic features, not to lead the mind to expatiate vaguely upon the general surface.