Biology -- Greece -- History; Medicine, Greek and Roman
These treatises of Theophrastus are in many respects the most complete
and orderly of all ancient biological works that have reached our time.
They give an idea of the kind of interest that the working scientist
of that day could develop when inspired rather by the genius of a
great teacher than by the power of his own thoughts. Theophrastus
is a pedestrian where Aristotle is a creature of wings, he is in a
relation to the master of the same order that the morphologists of the
second half of the nineteenth century were to Darwin. For a couple
of generations after the appearance of the _Origin of Species_ in
1859 the industry and ability of naturalists all over the world were
occupied in working out in detail the structure and mode of life of
living things on the basis of the Evolutionary philosophy. Nearly
all the work on morphology and much of that on physiology since his
time might be treated as a commentary on the works of Darwin. These
volumes of Theophrastus give the same impression. They represent the
remains—alas, almost the only biological remains—of a school working
under the impulse of a great idea and spurred by the memory of a great
teacher. As such they afford a parallel to much scientific work of our
own day, produced by men without genius save that provided by a vision
and a hope and an ideal. Of such men it is impossible to write as of
Aristotle. Their lives are summed up by their actual achievement, and
since Theophrastus is an orderly writer whose works have descended to
us in good state, he is a very suitable instance of the actual standard
of achievement of ancient biology. ‘Without vision the people perish’
and the very breath of life of science is drawn, and can only be drawn,
from that very small band of prophets who from time to time, during the
ages, have provided the great generalizations and the great ideals. In
this light let us examine the work of Theophrastus.
In the absence of any adequate system of classification, almost all
botany until the seventeenth century consisted mainly of descriptions
of species. To describe accurately a leaf or a root in the language
in ordinary use would often take pages. Modern botanists have
invented an elaborate terminology which, however hideous to eye and
ear, has the crowning merit of helping to abbreviate scientific
literature. Botanical writers previous to the seventeenth century were
substantially without this special mode of expression. It is partly to
this lack that we owe the persistent attempts throughout the centuries
to represent plants pictorially in herbals, manuscript and printed, and
thus the possibility of an adequate history of plant illustration.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account