of bodies fitted for receiving its influences. It is some-
what strange that Aristotle, whose teaching was so
didactic, should nowhere have given a definition of that
principle or being, to which he has assigned so exalted a
destiny.
CHAPTER IV.
Note 1, p. 77. But since such beings cannot, &c.] The purport of this passage is almost too obvious for comment, embodying the great fact of the perpetuation of the species, and compensation, by reproduction, for the death of the individuals; and number refers, of course, to individuals, species to the aggregate.
Note 2, p. 78. The term final cause, &c.] This is a kind of parenthetical clause, intended merely to guard against the supposition that the fact of some animals having a fixed habitat, not being locomotive that is, was unknown, or had escaped notice.
Note 3, p. 78. And this applies equally to growth and
decay.] Aristotle[1] perceived, although it may be in-
distinctly, that the source of nutrition is through the
blood—he perceived, that is, that "the blood is replenished
by vessels, which arise on and are spread over the mesen-
tery, and which empty themselves into the cava and the
- ↑ De Part. Animalm, IV. 3. 4.
