352 The Study of Animal Life app. 



cared more about the useful, dangerous, and strange animals than 

 about those which were humble and familiar ; we had more in- 

 terest in haunts and habits than in structure and history ; we 

 were content with rough-and-ready classification, and cherished 

 a feeling of superstitious awe in regard to the indistinctly-known 

 forms of life. We were inquisitive rather than critical; we 

 accepted almost any explanation of facts, and, if we tried to inter- 

 pret, forced our borrowed opinions upon nature instead of trying 

 to study things for ourselves. So was it with those naturalists who 

 lived before Aristotle. 



We must also recognise that the science of zoology had its 

 beginnings in a practical acquaintance with animals, just as botany 

 sprang from the knowledge of ancient agriculturists and herb- 

 gatherers. Much information in regard to the earliest zoological 

 knowledge has been gathered from researches into the history of 

 words, art, and religious customs, and there is still much to be 

 gleaned. Therefore I should recommend the student to dip into 

 those books which discuss the early history of man, such as 

 Lubbock's Prehistoric Times (1865), and Origin of Civilisation 

 (1870) ; Tylor's Primitive Culture (1871), and Anthropology 

 (1881); Andrew Lang's Myths, Ritual, and Religion; besides 

 works on the history of philosophy, such as those of Schwegler and 

 of Zeller, which give some account of ancient cosmogonies. 



(2) But just as there are precocious children, so there was an 

 early naturalist, whose works form the most colossal monument to 

 the intellectual prowess of any one thinker. The foundations of 

 zoology were laid by Aristotle, who lived 384-322 B.C. He 

 collected many observations, and argued from them to general 

 statements. He records over five hundred animals, and describes 

 the structure and habits, the struggles and friendliness, of some 

 of these. His is the first definite classification. His work 

 was dominated by the idea that animal life is a unity and part 

 of a larger system of things. In part his works should be read, 

 and besides the great edition by Bekker (Berlin, 1831-40), 

 there is a translation of The Parts of Animals by Dr. Ogle, and 

 of The History of Animals by R. Cresswell. See also G. J. 

 Romanes's "Aristotle as a Naturalist," iVi'««te«M C«»/»^ (Feb. 

 1891, pp. 275-289). 



(3) After the freedom of early childhood, and in most cases 

 after precocity too, there comes a lull of inquisitiveness. Other 

 affairs, practical tasks, games and combats, engross the attention, 

 and parents sigh over dormant intellects; so the historian of 

 zoology sighs over the fifteen centuries during which science 

 slumbered. The foundations which Aristotle had firmly laid 

 remained, but the walls of the temple . of knowledge did not rise. 



