Aristotle

So much has been written about Aristotle, and the works of this great man are so widely cited, discussed, and interpreted, that readers may be tempted to reproach me for dwelling on a topic that has long since been exhausted by countless earlier authors. But one cannot understand the origins of zoological philosophy without going back to the illustrious tutor of Alexander the Great. Of all the scholars of antiquity, he alone was able to digest far-reaching, rigorous observations and organize his knowledge in a way that permitted him to discern its fundamental consequences. More than one passage of his Natural History of Animals could have been written two thousand years later by Cuvier or Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire. The principles of comparative anatomy that Aristotle developed in the first pages of his memorable work are essentially the same as those we recognize today. I need only cite the following lines: ‘There are animals whose parts are similar to the corresponding parts of other animals, while there are others that lack these similarities. The parts may resemble each other in having a similar function. For example, the nose, eye, flesh, and bones of a man resemble the nose, eye, flesh, and bones of another man, but they also resemble those of a horse and other animals that we take to be members of the same group... Another kind of resemblance is that of related animals in which the features differ only in the way they are developed. Birds and fishes belong to a single, major group that includes a great number of varieties.