ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD. 13 



Parts of Animals/ A few general remarks may be made, 

 however, as to the place which Aristotle holds in relation 

 to the science of natural history. 



In the first place, then, Aristotle occupied an attitude 

 towards natural history which in one very important sense 

 agrees with that held by modern scientific workers 

 namely, in so far as he regarded direct observation as 

 more important than speculation or theory. He cannot 

 be said to have invariably observed this rule strictly ; but 

 upon the whole he displays a marvellous love for facts, 

 and also a much greater care in sifting his facts than 

 was usual at the period in which he wrote, or indeed in 

 much later periods. Many of the facts which he records 

 are naturally inaccurately given ; others are not facts at 

 all, but mere fictions ; while others are so glaringly wide of 

 the truth, and could so readily have been shown to be so,* 

 that one can only wonder how they should for an instant 

 have been accepted by a man of his extraordinary sagacity. 

 Nevertheless, Aristotle knew that observation ought to be 

 the guide to all sound scientific investigation, and in this 

 respect he was a notable exception to those philosophers 

 who followed him for many centuries. Moreover, con- 

 sidering the time at which he lived, and the very imperfect 

 methods which he was forced to employ, he must be set 

 down as an observer of pre-eminent powers. This is 

 especially conspicuous in his treatment of certain groups 

 of animals, with which we may suppose him to have had 

 a more intimate personal acquaintance than he could have 

 had with other groups. Thus, his observations upon Cuttle- 



* For example, the statement that the males of the human species, of sheep, of 

 goats, and of pigs, have more teeth than the females. 



