Page:Aristotle (Grant).djvu/48

often mentions; praises, and quotes Aristotle, but it is not, “our Aristotle,” but the Aristotle of Alexandria, the writer of dialogues. Several passages of these dialogues have been translated and preserved by Cicero, who extols the “golden flow of their language,” using terms which are as far as possible from being applicable to the harsh, compressed, and difficult style of Aristotle’s scientific treatises. The latter were, indeed, too difficult and too repulsive for Cicero, as is plain from the story which he himself relates: Cicero had in his Tusculan villa some of the works of Aristotle, as we at present possess them, probably copies of the recension of Andronicus; when asked by his friend Trebatius what the ‘Topics’ of Aristotle were about, he advised him “for his own interest” to study the book for himself, or else to consult a certain learned rhetorician. Trebatius, however, was repelled by the obscurity of the writing, and the rhetorician, when consulted, confessed his total ignorance of Aristotle. Cicero thinks this no wonder, since even the philosophers know hardly anything about him, though they “ought to have been attracted by the incredible flow and sweetness of the diction.” He then proceeds to give Trebatius a summary of the first few pages of the ‘Topics’ of Aristotle, which he had apparently read up for the occasion. From facts like this, it may be concluded that in the two last centuries before the Christian era, it was only the lighter and less valuable compositions of Aristotle that were generally known and admired. His more serious and really valuable contributions to thought and knowledge were left out of