72 ARISTOTLE. 



are then described^ such as the kingfisher, the black- 

 bird, the cuckoo, the marten, eagles, owls, fishes, 

 insects, and quadrupeds. 



The fragments which remain of Aristotle's His- 

 tory of Animals may, perhaps, be considered as 

 presenting the general views which he had intended 

 to precede his more particular descriptions; but, 

 regarded even in this light, it cannot be denied that 

 they are extremely deficient in method. There is 

 in them no approach to a regular classification, we 

 do not say of animals, but of subjects to be discuss- 

 ed. He is continually making abrupt transitions, 

 seems to lose sight of the object more immediately 

 in view, to indulge in digressions foreign to it, 

 and frequently repeats a circumstance which he 

 had related before. His work resembles the rude 

 notes which an author makes previous to the final 

 arrangement of his book ; and such it may possi- 

 bly have been. Of descriptions, properly so called, 

 there are few, — those of the elephant, the camel, 

 the bonasus, the crocodile, the chameleon, the 

 cuckoo, the cuttlefish, and a few others, being all 

 that we find. 



It may appear strange, that the statements of 

 naturalists should so frequently prove incorrect. In 

 how many works, even of the present day, are er- 

 rors to be discovered, which might have been avoid- 

 ed by a proper use of the organs of vision, and a re- 

 solution to take nothing on trust ! But it is much 

 easier to employ the imperfect remarks of others, 

 to collect from books, compare and arrange, than 

 to seek or make opportunities of observation for 

 one's self; and of so little consequence do some men 

 hold the actual inspection of natural objects, that. 



