POST-SOCRATIC SCIENCE AT ATHENS 



earth, it must unfortunately be added that the con- 

 servative philosopher paused without taking one other 

 important step. He could not accept, but, on the 

 contrary, he expressly repudiated, the doctrine of the 

 earth's motion. We have seen that this idea also was 

 a part of the Pythagorean doctrine, and we shall have 

 occasion to dwell more at length on this point in a suc- 

 ceeding chapter. It has even been contended by some 

 critics that it was the adverse conviction of the Peri- 

 patetic philosopher which, more than any other single 

 influence, tended to retard the progress of the true 

 doctrine regarding the mechanism of the heavens. 

 Aristotle accepted the sphericity of the earth, and that 

 doctrine became a commonplace of scientific knowl- 

 edge, and so continued throughout classical antiquity. 

 But Aristotle rejected the doctrine of the earth's mo- 

 tion, and that doctrine, though promulgated actively 

 by a few contemporaries and immediate successors of 

 the Stagirite, was then doomed to sink out of view 

 for more than a thousand years. If it be a correct 

 assumption that the influence of Aristotle was, in a 

 large measure, responsible for this result, then we shall 

 perhaps not be far astray in assuming that the great 

 founder of the Peripatetic school was, on the whole, 

 more instrumental in retarding the progress of astro- 

 nomical science that any other one man that ever 

 lived. 



The field of science in which Aristotle was pre-emi- 

 nently a pathfinder is zoology. His writings on nat- 

 ural history have largely been preserved, and they 

 constitute by far the most important contribution 

 to the subject that has come down to us from an- 



185 



