Athenian After-Glow

Abstract

Aristotle died in retirement in 322 BC. His one-time pupil, Alexander the Great, had died in the midst of his conquests the year before. The empires of both great systematisers soon fell into disrepair. In fact Aristotle was more fortunate than. Alexander. He at least had had time to nominate a successor. His empire was thus preserved for a while from the dissension which tore apart that of Alexander. No warring satraps quarrelled over his great system of knowledge. Indeed, his successor Theophrastus carried on the great work of the Lyceum. We have already mentioned the two volumes on the plant kingdom with which he is credited. They complement in an exemplary fashion the Stagirite’s great works on animals. However, Theophrastus’ output, although encyclopaedic, did little to advance the system of his predecessor. It could hardly have been otherwise. The progressive method of modern science is a very modern acquisition. In the third century BC, as Gomperz points out (1), the Aristotelian system was quite probably the best possible. Thus, although Theophrastus possessed a fine critical intellect and attacked the Stagirite’s philosophy in many places, he did not possess the ability to improve it greatly, let alone replace it; and with a closely organised system nothing less would really suffice. The intellectual revolution necessary to effect this change waited twenty centuries in the future.