428 



Attic talent, amounts to above £79,000. The work composed 

 under such auspices, is such as might have been expected. 

 The extent of the observations is prodigious ; and we cannot 

 read far in any part of it, without being constrained to ex- 

 claim with Cicero, Quis omnium doctior, quis acutior, quis in 

 rebus vel inveniendis vel judicandis acrior Aristotele ? 



Shortly after the introduction of Greek literature to Eu- 

 rope, and when this book was first printed, those sciences 

 which have nature for their object, were in the lowest condi- 

 tion. There was at that time no taste diffused for the study of 

 zoology or comparative anatomy ; and at later periods, when 

 the value of these studies came to be better appreciated, the 

 Aristotelian philosophy', had fallen into disuse. Thus this 

 work has, from this combination of circumstances, been 

 passed over ; is seldom quoted except at second-hand ; and 

 no edition of it distinct from the other works of the author, 

 or illustrated as the subject required, has appeared since 

 that of Scaliger, published in 1619, — except one, accompanied 

 by a French translation by Camus, in 1782, which is said to 

 be incorrect, and is become scarce. 



Dr. Osborne proceeded to make a short analysis of the 

 contents of this work, and showed that Aristotle had antici- 

 pated Dr. Jenner's researches respecting the cuckoo, as also 

 some discoveries with respect to the incubated egg, which 

 have been published within the last year. His observations 

 on fish and cetaceous animals are curious in the extreme, as 

 might be expected from the variety of these animals abound- 

 ing in the Grecian seas. Those on insects it is difficult to ap- 

 preciate, from uncertainty as to the names. He describes 

 the economy of bees, as we have it at present ; but mistakes 

 the sex of the queen. He holds the doctrine of spontaneous 

 generation in those cases, in which he could not detect the 

 ovary ; an inevitable conclusion arising from the want of the 

 microscope, to which, and the want of knowledge of pneu- 

 matic chemistry, his principal errors are to be referred. 



