Early Peripatetics

Historical Background and Key Figures

The term Early Peripatetics designates the first generations of philosophers in the Peripatetic school, founded by Aristotle at the Lyceum in Athens. Chronologically, it usually covers the period from Aristotle’s death in 322 BCE through roughly the early 2nd century BCE, before the school’s later, more eclectic phases and its partial absorption into broader Hellenistic and Roman intellectual life.

Aristotle’s immediate successor as head (scholarch) of the Lyceum was Theophrastus of Eresus (c. 371–287 BCE). A prolific author, Theophrastus systematically developed and extended Aristotelian research across logic, physics, botany, ethics, and characterology. His Characters and botanical works demonstrate both empirical curiosity and a concern with classifying natural and human phenomena.

Theophrastus was followed by Strato of Lampsacus (scholarch c. 287–269 BCE), often called “Strato the Physicist” for his focus on natural philosophy. Strato is known for emphasizing physical and mechanistic explanations over teleological ones, marking an important internal shift within the Peripatetic tradition.

Later leaders include Lyco of Troas (3rd century BCE), remembered for rhetorical skill and attention to moral education; Aristo of Ceos; and Critolaus of Phaselis (2nd century BCE), who represented the Peripatetic school in diplomatic missions and engaged in polemics with Stoic and Academic philosophers. Figures such as Dicaearchus of Messene and Demetrius of Phalerum, although not always scholarchs, were influential Peripatetics who applied Aristotelian methods to history, geography, politics, and cultural criticism.

These early Peripatetics operated in a competitive Hellenistic landscape, alongside the Stoics, Epicureans, and Skeptical Academy, each claiming to be the true heir of classical Greek philosophy. Their work both preserved Aristotle’s texts—often through editing and commentary—and adapted Aristotelian ideas to new debates about physics, ethics, and knowledge.

Doctrinal Developments

The early Peripatetics generally accepted the Aristotelian framework—substance theory, four causes, hylomorphism (form–matter composition), and the centrality of empirical observation—but they diverged in emphasis and interpretation.

Logic and methodology. Theophrastus refined Aristotle’s syllogistic logic, exploring new forms of inference and hypothetical propositions. While remaining within the Aristotelian tradition, he expanded attention to language and the structure of arguments, contributing to a more sophisticated Peripatetic toolkit for scientific and philosophical analysis.

Natural philosophy. Here variation is most striking. Theophrastus continued Aristotle’s teleological orientation—explaining natural phenomena by reference to purposes or ends—yet also showed sensitivity to anomalies and empirical exceptions. By contrast, Strato of Lampsacus moved toward a more naturalistic, quasi-mechanistic outlook. Ancient reports suggest he:

• Downplayed or eliminated divine providence in explaining the cosmos
• Emphasized natural forces, such as weight and motion, rather than final causes
• Showed interest in the physics of vacuum, motion, and time

This development led some ancient critics to portray Strato as abandoning Aristotle’s theology, though many scholars note that he still worked within broadly Peripatetic physics.

Psychology and biology remained central, in continuity with Aristotle’s De Anima and biological treatises. Early Peripatetics further elaborated classifications of living beings, investigated sense-perception and cognition, and continued empirical collection of data, especially under Theophrastus’ leadership in botany and plant physiology.

In metaphysics, there is less evidence of radical innovation. The early Peripatetics maintained a commitment to substances as primary beings and to form–matter analysis, though some, like Dicaearchus, may have stressed the embodied and mortal character of the human soul, thereby raising questions about the status of purely immaterial substances in the Aristotelian system.

Ethics and Political Thought

In ethics, early Peripatetics largely adopted Aristotle’s framework of eudaimonia (flourishing or happiness) as the highest human good, achieved through activity in accordance with virtue. They generally upheld a moderate position between rigorous Stoic moralism and Epicurean hedonism:

• Virtue is necessary for happiness, but
• External goods (health, wealth, friends, political stability) significantly affect the quality and completeness of a flourishing life.

Theophrastus is reported to have given somewhat greater weight to fortune and external conditions than Aristotle, leading some ancient observers to suggest that he made the wise person more vulnerable to misfortune than in the original Aristotelian view. This internal debate shows how early Peripatetics tested the resilience of ethical theory against real-world contingencies such as political upheaval and personal loss.

Emotions and character. The early Peripatetics continued Aristotle’s nuanced account of emotions as responsive to evaluative judgments and as potentially educated by habituation and reason. Works like Theophrastus’ Characters analyze moral types and dispositions, exploring how social environment and upbringing shape virtue and vice. These studies approached ethics from a quasi-empirical and psychological angle, distinguishing the Peripatetic tradition from more doctrinally rigid schools.

Politics and social theory also developed significantly. Dicaearchus of Messene wrote on constitutions, cultural history, and the life of Greece, often combining historical narrative with evaluative judgment. Early Peripatetics examined:

• The relative merits of different constitutional forms
• The role of education and law in cultivating virtue
• The importance of leisure (scholē) and civic participation for a flourishing life

Some early Peripatetics, such as Demetrius of Phalerum, even occupied political office, bringing Aristotelian ideas into practical governance. Their experience prompted reflection on the tension between contemplative life and political engagement, an issue already present in Aristotle and revisited by his successors.

In later antiquity, the distinctiveness of the early Peripatetics was partly obscured by the dominance of Stoic and Platonic traditions and by the textual transmission of Aristotle’s works themselves. Nonetheless, ancient testimonies attribute to these first generations of Peripatetics both the preservation and critical transformation of Aristotelian philosophy, ensuring its survival as a major current in Hellenistic and Roman thought.