Aristotle, as we saw, restricted the scope of natural philosophy by defining it as a branch of theoretical knowledge just below metaphysics and mathematics. It was the discipline that studied bodies undergoing change and motion, which included virtually every physical body in the universe and thus seemingly embraced medicine and alchemy within the domain of natural philosophy. But that did not occur, largely, I suspect, because the extant works that came to be identified with the name of Aristotle did not include works on medicine and alchemy and these disciplines were, therefore, not regarded as belonging to natural philosophy.

NEOPLATONISM AND ITS APPROACH TO ARISTOTLE

Aristotle was obviously not the only one who wrote on subjects regarded as part of natural philosophy. But so overwhelming was his influence, and so numerous his works, that Aristotle's works on natural philosophy, or physics, came to be regarded as synonymous with that discipline. To express one's opinions and judgments on natural philosophy as understood by Aristotle, it became customary in antiquity to comment on Aristotle's works. The name of the first commentator, or commentators, is unknown. Indeed, how Aristotle's works fared during the first few centuries after his death is a mystery. But in the second half of the first century bc, Aristotle's fortunes changed dramatically as a result of the efforts of Andronicus of Rhodes, who produced an edition of the works of Aristotle that forms the basis on which subsequent texts were based.