Page:Imperial Dictionary of Universal Biography Volume 1.pdf/243

ARI states, Greek and barbarian, accompanying them with criticism and commentary, such as he alone in the ancient world could have produced. Of this vast work—the foundation of his theoretical dissertations on politics—not a line remains.—It is pleasant to pause a moment in contemplation of this happy period of Aristotle's life. He had returned to Athens on the departure of Alexander for the East, and completed the formation of his school in the Lycæum. The Aristotle of the common apprehension is simply an austere abstraction—a rugged titanic Intellect, above concern in human interests, and incapable of human emotion. The actual Aristotle, on the contrary, was slender in make, scrupulous as to dress,—one who chose to have rings on his fingers, and preferred a smooth chin. He had small eyes, and a feminine voice; and he loved intensely his daughter Pythias, Herpilis his second spouse, and his son the young Nicomachus, who all at that time shared his abode. With such a surrounding, and amid the facilities afforded him by the unwearied and ceaseless solicitudes of Alexander, the cup of his happiness was full. But alas! this serene period was of short duration. The foul murder of Callisthenes, a nephew of Aristotle, moved his sensitive mind to its depths; and during the six years that remained of the Conqueror's brief life, their intercourse seems to have been rare and very painful. Other troubles immediately arose. On Alexander's death, the enemies of our illustrious Thinker imagined that their time had come. An accusation of impiety was got up by a priest, Eurymedon—the charge being that the philosopher had erected altars in memory of his first Wife and of his friend Hermias! Ingenious, but not rare: it is never difficult to extract impiety out of a pious act! Aristotle fled, so that—as he said himself—the Athenians might be spared a new crime against philosophy. He retired to Chalcis, where, after the interval of a year, he died in the month of September, 323 ., at the age of sixty-two. Of the intellectual character and achievements of this great inquirer, we shall speak below. The incidents of his life, as now sketched, are of a nature to relieve us from the task of more than alluding, in the briefest way, to that charge of his contemporary detractors,—brought up, of course, with redoubled virus by numerous Ecclesiastics—the charge, viz., of ingratitude towards his master Plato. It would certainly be strange, if a man, who, in every well-authenticated passage of an active life, showed himself incapable of forgetting a kindness—who repaid every obligation tenfold—should, in this single instance, have acted in flagrant opposition to every habit and tendency of his nature:—it would indeed be strange, if he, through whose just, magnanimous, and careful appreciation, the names and doctrines of his predecessors have mainly been preserved from forgetfulness, should have thought it permissible, or even safe for him, to misrepresent and travestie those grand speculations which were as public, and had as great a certainty of passing down to posterity as his own:—it would be doubly strange if the author of those two immortal chapters, "The Analysis of the Virtues"—chapters composed of portraits, most true and most generous—undisfigured by exaggeration—the manifest product of a noble as well as of a penetrating nature; it would indeed be strange if such a nature could on such an occasion have suddenly become the bondslave of envy, malice, and all meanness! But his vindication is easy. The genius of the one philosopher differed greatly from that of the other. Aristotle could not comprehend Plato, and therefore opposed him. The mode he chose for that opposition is described in an often-quoted passage from the first book of the Ethics:—"It will perhaps be better to examine the theory carefully and narrowly, even although, on inquiry, it may become a very delicate one, seeing that philosophers who are very dear to us have supported the theory of ideas. It will be right also, when alluding to these philosophers, to put wholly aside all personal feelings, and to think only of the defence of the truth. Both, indeed, are dear; nevertheless, it is a sacred duty to give preference to the defence of truth." Who shall condemn the method of Aristotle? Shall we substitute the form of polemics of the present day?

II.—But we must hasten to consideration of the positive achievements of our philosopher, a task that can be accomplished here only in the most cursory way. And first, a general summary. It is impossible to read even the titles indicative of the range of research accomplished by a man whose life reached only to sixty-two years, without profoundest astonishment; nor perhaps is a better illustration furnished by History, of the great truth, that universality is an unfailing characteristic of loftiest geniuses,—not universality as to information, but universality as to thought. It may be said with justice, that there was not one subject of interest mooted in his day, which the Stagyrite did not touch and adorn; and he laid besides, the foundations of many new sciences. The only portions of his works that have reached our time, which may be termed of inconsiderable value, are his ,—such as the "," the book de Mundo, the de Cœlo, the treatise on the Principles of Physics, &c. &c. No good work on physics could be written in Aristotle's time. The value of Experiment was not recognized, nor its methods understood; and besides, the entire physical speculation of Greece proceeded on the ground of a false method. Yet, even in these treatises, one is constantly meeting with remarks, whose sagacity has the air of prophecy, for they assuredly foreshadow some remarkable modern positive discoveries.—Leaving the Physics, we find ourselves in presence of that amazing collection which may be termed the of Aristotle—consisting of the immortal History of Animals—the treatise on the Parts of Animals—another on their Motions—a third on their Walk—a fourth on their Generation: next comes the treatise on Plants, and portions of the Parva Naturalia: with this division we must also partially connect a very remarkable work to which we shall again refer—the treatise , or concerning the Human Soul. The works here enumerated are of great magnitude; Schneider's edition of the History of Animals alone, occupying four volumes octavo. This last work, above all, is a repertory, not of facts only, but of principles:—the inestimable value of the whole class depending on this, that they are the results of acute and conscientious observation, and skilful classification, two powers in regard to which Aristotle has never been surpassed. "I cannot read this book," said Cuvier, "without unbounded wonder. It is indeed impossible to conceive how one man was able to collect and compare the multitude of special facts, and the mass of aphorisms contained in it,—of none of which had his predecessors the remotest idea. The History of Animals is not a Zoology, commonly so called,—that is to say, a mere description of various animals; it is more nearly a General Anatomy, in which the author treats of the generalities of the organization of animals, and in which he exposes their differences and resemblances, as indicated by a comparative examination of their organs,—thus laying the true basis of all grand classifications."—The student who may well have regarded this immense natural history as adequate to absorb the whole lifetime of a man even of the loftiest genius, dying at the age of sixty-two, has only to turn to a new volume, and his amazement is renewed. He is again in presence of amplest labours for another life—an astonishing amount of yet more arduous thought—the foundation of sciences much more remote. We speak of course of the achievements of Aristotle in, and inquiry. The consist of the well-known treatises on Rhetoric and Poetics,—the latter of which long swayed all modern criticism—not indeed with unmixed effects, for Aristotle was deficient in the faculty of Imagination, neither possessing the glorious luxuriance of the faculty as Plato possessed it, nor careful to appreciate it. The, or as the philosopher termed them, the sciences, consist of those Ethical treatises to which we shall refer below;—the Economics, and the Politics. The latter treatise—the thoughtful and compressed result of his lost collection of upwards of 150 actual Constitutions—is one of the works in which the penetrating genius of the Stagyrite is the most clearly revealed. Nothing to which it is more unlike, than a book of description; it is a methodical deduction of great principles of government, a discrimination of the principles underlying every different form of government, and a prophetic declaration concerning their comparative stabilities. A few remarks in this precious volume made the fortunes of Machiavel and Montesquieu; nor has even Rousseau in the Contrat Social escaped its all-pervading influence. Every framer of an Utopia has borrowed from Aristotle; but alone, his Politics are not an Utopia. The book is the result of experience, of the widest research and impartial reflection; and it will continue the great classic, so long as man remains as he is.—The last division of this section of the labours of Aristotle is probably that which has most occupied the attention of philosophical writers from his time until now—those namely relating to : they are, the and the. It were vain to attempt in this place an analysis of either of these very memorable