Book Three
1 WE have now spoken about the sterility
of mules, and about those animals which
are
viviparous both externally and within
themselves.
The generation of the oviparous sanguinea
is to a certain extent similar to that
of
the animals that walk, and all may
be embraced
in the same general statement; but
in other
respects there are differences in them
both
as compared with each other and with
those
that walk. All alike are generated
from sexual
union, the male emitting semen into
the female.
But among the ovipara (1) birds produce
a
perfect hard-shelled egg, unless it
be injured
by disease, and the eggs of birds are
all
two-coloured. (2) The cartilaginous
fishes,
as has been often said already, are
oviparous
internally but produce the young alive,
the
egg changing previously from one part
of
the uterus to another; and their egg
is soft-shelled
and of one colour. One of this class
alone
does not produce the young from the
egg within
itself, the so-called ‘frog’; the reason
of which must be stated later. (3)
All other
oviparous fishes produce an egg of
one colour,
but this is imperfect, for its growth
is
completed outside the mother’s body
by the
same cause as are those eggs which
are perfected
within.
Concerning the uterus of these classes
of
animals, what differences there are
among
them and for what reasons, has been
stated
previously. For in some of the viviparous
creatures it is high up near the hypozoma,
in others low down by the pudenda;
the former
in the cartilaginous fishes, the latter
in
animals both internally and externally
viviparous,
such as man and horse and the rest;
in the
ovipara it is sometimes low, as in
the oviparous
fish, and sometimes high, as in birds.
Some embryos are formed in birds spontaneously,
which are called wind-eggs and ‘zephyria’
by some; these occur in birds which
are not
given to flight nor rapine but which
produce
many young, for these birds have much
residual
matter, whereas in the birds of prey
all
such secretion is diverted to the wings
and
wing-feathers, while the body is small
and
dry and hot. (The secretion corresponding
in hen-birds to catamenia, and the
semen
of the cock, are residues.) Since then
both
the wings and the semen are made from
residual
matter, nature cannot afford to spend
much
upon both. And for this same reason
the birds
of prey are neither given to treading
much
nor to laying many eggs, as are the
heavy
birds and those flying birds whose
bodies
are bulky, as the pigeon and so forth.
For
such residual matter is secreted largely
in the heavy birds not given to flying,
such
as fowls, partridges, and so on, wherefore
their males tread often and their females
produce much material. Of such birds
some
lay many eggs at a time and some lay
often;
for instance, the fowl, the partridge,
and
the Libyan ostrich lay many eggs, while
the
pigeon family do not lay many but lay
often.
For these are between the birds of
prey and
the heavy ones; they are flyers like
the
former, but have bulky bodies like
the latter;
hence, because they are flyers and
the residue
is diverted that. way, they lay few
eggs,
but they lay often because of their
having
bulky bodies and their stomachs being
hot
and very active in concoction, and
because
moreover they can easily procure their
food,
whereas the birds of prey do so with
difficulty.
Small birds also tread often and are
very
fertile, as are sometimes small plants,
for
what causes bodily growth in others
turn
in them to a seminal residuum. Hence
the
Adrianic fowls lay most eggs, for because
of the smallness of their bodies the
nutriment
is used up in producing young. And
other
birds are more fertile than game-fowl,
for
their bodies are more fluid and bulkier,
whereas those of game-fowl are leaner
and
drier, since a passionate spirit is
found
rather in such bodies as the latter.
Moreover
the thinness and weakness of the legs
contribute
to making the former class of birds
naturally
inclined to tread and to be fertile,
as we
find also in the human species; for
the nourishment
which otherwise goes to the legs is
turned
in such into a seminal secretion, what
Nature
takes from the one place being added
at the
other. Birds of prey, on the contrary,
have
a strong walk and their legs are thick
owing
to their habits, so that for all these
reasons
they neither tread nor lay much. The
kestrel
is the most fertile; for this is nearly
the
only bird of prey which drinks, and
its moisture,
both innate and acquired, along with
its
heat is favourable to generative products.
Even this bird does not lay very many
eggs,
but four at the outside.
The cuckoo, though not a bird of prey,
lays
few eggs, because it is of a cold nature,
as is shown by the cowardice of the
bird,
whereas a generative animal should
be hot
and moist. That it is cowardly is plain,
for it is pursued by all the birds
and lays
eggs in the nests of others.
The pigeon family are in the habit
of laying
two for the most part, for they neither
lay
one (no bird does except the cuckoo,
and
even that sometimes lays two) nor yet
many,
but they frequently produce two, or
three
at the most generally two, for this
number
lies between one and many.
It is plain from the facts that with
the
birds that lay many eggs the nutriment
is
diverted to the semen. For most trees,
if
they bear too much fruit, wither away
after
the crop when nutriment is not reserved
for
themselves, and this seems to be what
happens
to annuals, as leguminous plants, corn,
and
the like. For they consume all their
nutriment
to make seed, their kind being prolific.
And some fowls after laying too much,
so
as even to lay two eggs in a day, have
died
after this. For both the birds the
plants
become exhausted, and this condition
is an
excess of secretion of residual matter.
A
similar condition is the cause of the
later
sterility of the lioness, for at the
first
birth she produces five or six, then
in the
next year four, and again three cubs,
then
the next number down to one, then none
at
all, showing that the residue is being
used
up and the generative secretion is
failing
along with the advance of years.
We have now stated in which birds wind-eggs
are found, and also what sort of birds
lay
many eggs or few, and for what reasons.
And
wind-eggs, as said before, come into
being
because while it is the material for
generation
that exists in the female of all animals,
birds have no discharge of catamenia
like
viviparous sanguinea (for they occur
in all
these latter, more in some, less in
others,
and in some only enough in quantity
just
to mark the class). The same applies
to fish
as to birds, and so in them as in birds
is
found an embryonic formation without
impregnation,
but it is less obvious because their
nature
is colder. The secretion corresponding
to
the catamenia of vivipara is formed
in birds
at the appropriate season for the discharge
of superfluous matter, and, because
the region
near the hypozoma is hot, it is perfected
so far as size is concerned, but in
birds
and fishes alike it is imperfect for
generation
without the seminal fluid of the male;
the
cause of this has been previously given.
Wind-eggs are not formed in the flying
birds,
for the same reason as prevents their
laying
many eggs; for the residual matter
in birds
of prey is small, and they need the
male
to give an impulse for the discharge
of it.
The wind-eggs are produced in greater
numbers
than the impregnated but smaller in
size
for one and the same reason; they are
smaller
in size because they are imperfect,
and because
they are smaller in size they are more
in
number. They are less pleasant for
food because
they are less concocted, for in all
foods
the concocted is more agreeable. It
has been
sufficiently observed, then, that neither
birds’ nor fishes’ eggs are perfected
for
generation without the males. As for
embryos
being formed in fish also (though in
a less
degree) without the males, the fact
has been
observed especially in river fish,
for some
are seen to have eggs from the first,
as
has been written in the Enquiries concerning
them. And generally speaking in the
case
of birds even the impregnated eggs
are not
wont for the most part to attain their
full
growth unless the hen be trodden continually.
The reason of this is that just as
with women
intercourse with men draws down the
secretion
of the catamenia (for the uterus being
heated
attracts the moisture and the passages
are
opened), so this happens also with
birds;
the residual matter corresponding to
the
catamenia advances a little at a time,
and
is not discharged externally, because
its
amount is small and the uterus is high
up
by the hypozoma, but trickles together
into
the uterus itself. For as the embryo
of the
vivipara grows by means of the umbilical
cord, so the egg grows through this
matter
flowing to it through the uterus. For
when
once the hens have been trodden, they
all
continue to have eggs almost without
intermission,
though very small ones. Hence some
are wont
to speak of wind-eggs as not coming
into
being independently but as mere relics
from
a previous impregnation. But this is
a false
view, for sufficient observations have
been
made of their arising without impregnation
in chickens and goslings. Also the
female
partridges which are taken out to act
as
decoys, whether they have ever been
impregnated
or not, immediately on smelling the
male
and hearing his call, become filled
with
eggs in the latter case and lay them
in the
former. The reason why this happens
is the
same as in men and quadrupeds, for
if their
bodies chance to be in rut they emit
semen
at the mere sight of the female or
at a slight
touch. And such birds are of a lascivious
and fertile nature, so that the impulse
they
need is but small when they are in
this excited
condition, and the secreting activity
takes
place quickly in them, wind-eggs forming
in the unimpregnated and the eggs in
those
which have been impregnated growing
and reaching
perfection swiftly.
Among creatures that lay eggs externally
birds produce their egg perfect, fish
imperfect,
but the eggs of the latter complete
their
growth outside as has been said before.
The
reason is that the fish kind is very
fertile;
now it is impossible for many eggs
to reach
completion within the mother and therefore
they lay them outside. They are quickly
discharged,
for the uterus of externally oviparous
fishes
is near the generative passage. While
the
eggs of birds are two-coloured, those
of
all fish are one-coloured. The cause
of the
double colour may be seen from considering
the power of each of the two parts,
the white
and the yolk. For the matter of the
egg is
secreted from the blood [No bloodless
animal
lays eggs,] and that the blood is the
material
of the body has been often said already.
The one part, then, of the egg is nearer
the form of the animal coming into
being,
that is the hot part; the more earthy
part
gives the substance of the body and
is further
removed. Hence in all two-coloured
eggs the
animal receives the first principle
of generation
from the white (for the vital principle
is
in that which is hot), but the nutriment
from the yolk. Now in animals of a
hotter
nature the part from which the first
principle
arises is separated off from the part
from
which comes the nutriment, the one
being
white and the other yellow, and the
white
and pure is always more than the yellow
and
earthy; but in the moister and less
hot the
yolk is more in quantity and more fluid.
This is what we find in lake birds,
for they
are of a moister nature and are colder
than
the land birds, so that the so-called
‘lecithus’
or yolk in the eggs of such birds is
large
and less yellow because the white is
less
separated off from it. But when we
come to
the ovipara which are both of a cold
nature
and also moister (such is the fish
kind)
we find the white not separated at
all because
of the small size of the eggs and the
quantity
of the cold and earthy matter; therefore
all fish eggs are of one colour, and
white
compared with yellow, yellow compared
with
white. Even the wind-eggs of birds
have this
distinction of colour, for they contain
that
out of which will come each of the
two parts,
alike that whence arises the principle
of
life and that whence comes the nutriment;
only both these are imperfect and need
the
influence of the male in addition;
for wind-eggs
become fertile if impregnated by the
male
within a certain period. The difference
in
colour, however, is not due to any
difference
of sex, as if the white came from the
male,
the yolk from the female; both on the
contrary
come from the female, but the one is
cold,
the other hot. In all cases then where
the
hot part is considerable it is separated
off, but where it is little it cannot
be
so; hence the eggs of such animals,
as has
been said, are of one colour. The semen
of
the male only puts them into form;
and therefore
at first the egg in birds appears white
and
small, but as it advances it is all
yellow
as more of the sanguineous material
is continually
mixed with it; finally as the hot part
is
separated the white takes up a position
all
round it and equally distributed on
all sides,
as when a liquid boils; for the white
is
naturally liquid and contains in itself
the
vital heat; therefore it is separated
off
all round, but the yellow and earthy
part
is inside. And if we enclose many eggs
together
in a bladder or something of the kind
and
boil them over a fire so as not to
make the
movement of the heat quicker than the
separation
of the white and yolk in the eggs,
then the
same process takes place in the whole
mass
of the eggs as in a single egg, all
the yellow
part coming into the middle and the
white
surrounding it.
We have thus stated why some eggs are
of
one colour and others of two.
2 The principle of the male is separated
off in eggs at the point where the
egg is
attached to the uterus, and the reason
why
the shape of two-coloured eggs is unsymmetrical,
and not perfectly round but sharper
at one
end, is that the part of the white
in which
is contained this principle must differ
from
the rest. Therefore the egg is harder
at
this point than below, for it is necessary
to shelter and protect this principle.
And
this is why the sharp end of the egg
comes
out of the hen later than the blunt
end;
for the part attached to the uterus
comes
out later, and the egg is attached
at the
point where is the said principle,
and the
principle is in the sharp end. The
same is
the case also in the seeds of plants;
the
principle of the seed is attached sometimes
to the twig, sometimes to the husk,
sometimes
to the pericarp. This is plain in the
leguminous
plants, for where the two cotyledons
of beans
and of similar seeds are united, there
is
the seed attached to the parent plant,
and
there is the principle of the seed.
A difficulty may be raised about the
growth
of the egg; how is it derived from
the uterus?
For if animals derive their nutriment
through
the umbilical cord, through what do
eggs
derive it? They do not, like a scolex,
acquire
their growth by their own means. If
there
is anything by which they are attached
to
the uterus, what becomes of this when
the
egg is perfected? It does not come
out with
the egg as the cord does with animals;
for
when its egg is perfected the shell
forms
all round it. This problem is rightly
raised,
but it is not observed that the shell
is
at first only a soft membrane, and
that it
is only after the egg is perfected
that it
becomes hard and brittle; this is so
nicely
adjusted that it is still soft when
it comes
out (for otherwise it would cause pain
in
laying), but no sooner has it come
out than
it is fixed hard by cooling, the moisture
quickly evaporating because there is
but
little of it, and the earthy part remaining.
Now at first a certain part of this
membrane
at the sharp end of eggs resembles
an umbilical
cord, and projects like a pipe from
them
while they are still small. It is plainly
visible in small aborted eggs, for
if the
bird be drenched with water or suddenly
chilled
in any other way and cast out the egg
too
soon, it appears still sanguineous
and with
a small tail like an umbilical cord
running
through it. As the egg becomes larger
this
is more twisted round and becomes smaller,
and when the egg is perfected this
end is
the sharp end. Under this is the inner
membrane
which separates the white and the yolk
from
this. When the egg is perfected, the
whole
of it is set free, and naturally the
umbilical
cord does not appear, for it is now
the extreme
end of the egg itself.
The egg is discharged in the opposite
way
from the young of vivipara; the latter
are
born head-first, the part where is
the first
principle leading, but the egg is discharged
as it were feet first; the reason of
this
being what has been stated, that the
egg
is attached to the uterus at the point
where
is the first principle.
The young bird is produced out of the
egg
by the mother’s incubating and aiding
the
concoction, the creature developing
out of
part of the egg, and receiving growth
and
completion from the remaining part.
For Nature
not only places the material of the
creature
in the egg but also the nourishment
sufficient
for its growth; for since the mother
bird
cannot perfect her young within herself
she
produces the nourishment in the egg
along
with it. Whereas the nourishment, what
is
called milk, is produced for the young
of
vivipara in another part, in the breasts,
Nature does this for birds in the egg.
The
opposite, however, is the case to what
people
think and what is asserted by Alcmaeon
of
Crotona. For it is not the white that
is
the milk, but the yolk, for it is this
that
is the nourishment of the chick, whereas
they think it is the white because
of the
similarity of colour.
The chick then, as has been said, comes
into
being by the incubation of the mother;
yet
if the temperature of the season is
favourable,
or if the place in which the eggs happen
to lie is warm, the eggs are sufficiently
concocted without incubation, both
those
of birds and those of oviparous quadrupeds.
For these all lay their eggs upon the
ground,
where they are concocted by the heat
in the
earth. Such oviparous quadrupeds as
do visit
their eggs and incubate do so rather
for
the sake of protecting them than of
incubation.
The eggs of these quadrupeds are formed
in
the same way as those of birds, for
they
are hard-shelled and two-coloured,
and they
are formed near the hypozoma as are
those
of birds, and in all other respects
resemble
them both internally and externally,
so that
the inquiry into their causes is the
same
for all. But whereas the eggs of quadrupeds
are hatched out by the mere heat of
the weather
owing to their strength, those of birds
are
more exposed to destruction and need
the
mother-bird. Nature seems to wish to
implant
in animals a special sense of care
for their
young: in the inferior animals this
lasts
only to the moment of giving birth
to the
incompletely developed animal; in others
it continues till they are perfect;
in all
that are more intelligent, during the
bringing
up of the young also. In those which
have
the greatest portion in intelligence
we find
familiarity and love shown also towards
the
young when perfected, as with men and
some
quadrupeds; with birds we find it till
they
have produced and brought up their
young,
and therefore if the hens do not incubate
after laying they get into worse condition,
as if deprived of something natural
to them.
The young is perfected within the egg
more
quickly in sunshiny weather, the season
aiding
in the work, for concoction is a kind
of
heat. For the earth aids in the concoction
by its heat, and the brooding hen does
the
same, for she applies the heat that
is within
her. And it is in the hot season, as
we should
expect, that the eggs are more apt
to be
spoilt and the so-called ‘uria’ or
rotten
eggs are produced; for just as wines
turn
sour in the heats from the sediment
rising
(for this is the cause of their being
spoilt),
so is it with the yolk in eggs, for
the sediment
and yolk are the earthy part in each
case,
wherefore the wine becomes turbid when
the
sediment mixes with it, and the like
applies
to the eggs that are spoiling because
of
the yolk. It is natural then that such
should
be the case with the birds that lay
many
eggs, for it is not easy to give the
fitting
amount of heat to all, but (while some
have
too little) others have too much and
this
makes them turbid, as it were by putrefaction.
But this happens none the less with
the birds
of prey though they lay few eggs, for
often
one of the two becomes rotten, and
the third
practically always, for being of a
hot nature
they make the moisture in the eggs
to overboil
so to say. For the nature of the white
is
opposed to that of the yolk; the yolk
congeals
in frosts but liquefies on heating,
and therefore
it liquefies on concoction in the earth
or
by reason of incubation, and becoming
liquid
serves as nutriment for the developing
chick.
If exposed to heat and roasted it does
not
become hard, because though earthy
in nature
it is only so in the same way as wax
is;
accordingly on heating too much the
eggs
become watery and rotten, [if they
be not
from a liquid residue]. The white on
the
contrary is not congealed by frost
but rather
liquefies (the reason of which has
been stated
before), but on exposure to heat becomes
solid. Therefore being concocted in
the development
of the chick it is thickened. For it
is from
this that the young is formed (whereas
the
yolk turns to nutriment) and it is
from this
that the parts derive their growth
as they
are formed one after another. This
is why
the white and the yolk are separated
by membranes,
as being different in nature. The precise
details of the relation of the parts
to one
another both at the beginning of generation
and as the animals are forming, and
also
the details of the membranes and umbilical
cords, must be learnt from what has
been
written in the Enquiries; for the present
investigation it is sufficient to understand
this much clearly, that, when the heart
has
been first formed and the great blood-vessel
has been marked off from it, two umbilical
cords run from the vessel, the one
to the
membrane which encloses the yolk, the
other
to the membrane resembling a chorion
which
surrounds the whole embryo; this latter
runs
round on the inside of the membrane
of the
shell. Through the one of these the
embryo
receives the nutriment from the yolk,
and
the yolk becomes larger, for it becomes
more
liquid by heating. This is because
the nourishment,
being of a material character in its
first
form, must become liquid before it
can be
absorbed, just as it is with plants,
and
at first this embryo, whether in an
egg or
in the mother’s uterus, lives the life
of
a plant, for it receives its first
growth
and nourishment by being attached to
something
else.
The second umbilical cord runs to the
surrounding
chorion. For we must understand that,
in
the case of animals developed in eggs,
the
chick has the same relation to the
yolk as
the embryo of the vivipara has to the
mother
so long as it is within the mother
(for since
the nourishment of the embryo of the
ovipara
is not completed within the mother,
the embryo
takes part of it away from her). So
also
the relation of the chick to the outermost
membrane, the sanguineous one, is like
that
of the mammalian embryo to the uterus.
At
the same time the egg-shell surrounds
both
the yolk and the membrane analogous
to the
uterus, just as if it should be put
round
both the embryo itself and the whole
of the
mother, in the vivipara. This is so
because
the embryo must be in the uterus and
attached
to the mother. Now in the vivipara
the uterus
is within the mother, but in the ovipara
it is the other way about, as if one
should
say that the mother was in the uterus,
for
that which comes from the mother, the
nutriment,
is the yolk. The reason is that the
process
of nourishment is not completed within
the
mother.
As the creature grows the umbilicus
running
the chorion collapses first, because
it is
here that the young is to come out;
what
is left of the yolk, and the umbilical
cord
running to the yolk, collapse later.
For
the young must have nourishment as
soon as
it is hatched; it is not nursed by
the mother
and cannot immediately procure its
nourishment
for itself; therefore the yolk enters
within
it along with its umbilicus and the
flesh
grows round it.
This then is the manner in which animals
produced from perfect eggs are hatched
in
all those, whether birds or quadrupeds,
which
lay the egg with a hard shell. These
details
are plainer in the larger creatures;
in the
smaller they are obscure because of
the smallness
of the masses concerned.
3 The class of fishes is also oviparous.
Those among them which have the uterus
low
down lay an imperfect egg for the reason
previously given,’ but the so-called
‘selache’
or cartilaginous fishes produce a perfect
egg within themselves but are externally
viviparous except one which they call
the
‘frog’; this alone lays a perfect egg
externally.
The reason is the nature of its body,
for
its head is many times as large as
the rest
of the body and is spiny and very rough.
This is also why it does not receive
its
young again within itself nor produce
them
alive to begin with, for as the size
and
roughness of the head prevents their
entering
so it would prevent their exit. And
while
the egg of the cartilaginous fishes
is soft-shelled
(for they cannot harden and dry its
circumference,
being colder than birds), the egg of
the
frog-fish alone is solid and firm to
protect
it outside, but those of the rest are
of
a moist and soft nature, for they are
sheltered
within and by the body of the mother.
The young are produced from the egg
in the
same way both with those externally
perfected
(the frog-fishes) and those internally,
and
the process in these eggs is partly
similar
to, partly different from that in birds’
eggs. In the first place they have
not the
second umbilicus which runs to the
chorion
under the surrounding shell. The reason
of
this is that they have not the surrounding
shell, for it is no use to them since
the
mother shelters them, and the shell
is a
protection to the eggs against external
injury
between laying and hatching out. Secondly,
the process in these also begins on
the surface
of the egg but not where it is attached
to
the uterus, as in birds, for the chick
is
developed from the sharp end and that
is
where the egg was attached. The reason
is
that the egg of birds is separated
from the
uterus before it is perfected, but
in most
though not all cartilaginous fishes
the egg
is still attached to the uterus when
perfect.
While the young develops upon the surface
the egg is consumed by it just as in
birds
and the other animals detached from
the uterus,
and at last the umbilicus of the now
perfect
fish is left attached to the uterus.
The
like is the case with all those whose
eggs
are detached from the uterus, for in
some
of them the egg is so detached when
it is
perfect.
The question may be asked why the development
of birds and cartilaginous fishes differs
in this respect. The reason is that
in birds
the white and yolk are separate, but
fish
eggs are one-coloured, the corresponding
matter being completely mixed, so that
there
is nothing to stop the first principle
being
at the opposite end, for the egg is
of the
same nature both at the point of attachment
and at the opposite end, and it is
easy to
draw the nourishment from the uterus
by passages
running from this principle. This is
plain
in the eggs which are not detached,
for in
some of the cartilaginous fish the
egg is
not detached from the uterus, but is
still
connected with it as it comes downwards
with
a view to the production of the young
alive;
in these the young fish when perfected
is
still connected by the umbilicus to
the uterus
when the egg has been consumed. From
this
it is clear that previously also, while
the
egg was still round the young, the
passages
ran to the uterus. This happens as
we have
said in the ‘smooth hound’.
In these respects and for the reasons
given
the development of cartilaginous fishes
differs
from that of birds, but otherwise it
takes
place in the same way. For they have
the
one umbilicus in like manner as that
of birds
connecting with the yolk,—only in these
fishes
it connects with the whole egg (for
it is
not divided into white and yolk but
all one-coloured),—
and get their nourishment from this,
and
as it is being consumed the flesh in
like
manner encroaches upon and grows round
it.
Such is the process of development
in those
fish that produce a perfect egg within
themselves
but are externally viviparous.
4 Most of the other fish are externally
oviparous,
all laying an imperfect egg except
the frog-fish;
the reason of this exception has been
previously
stated, and the reason also why the
others
lay imperfect eggs. In these also the
development
from the egg runs on the same lines
as that
of the cartilaginous and internally
oviparous
fishes, except that the growth is quick
and
from small beginnings and the outside
of
the egg is harder. The growth of the
egg
is like that of a scolex, for those
animals
which produce a scolex give birth to
a small
thing at first and this grows by itself
and
not through any attachment to the parent.
The reason is similar to that of the
growth
of yeast, for yeast also grows great
from
a small beginning as the more solid
part
liquefies and the liquid is aerated.
This
is effected in animals by the nature
of the
vital heat, in yeasts by the heat of
the
juice commingled with them. The eggs
then
grow of necessity through this cause
(for
they have in them superfluous yeasty
matter),
but also for the sake of a final cause,
for
it is impossible for them to attain
their
whole growth in the uterus because
these
animals have so many eggs. Therefore
are
they very small when set free and grow
quickly,
small because the uterus is narrow
for the
multitude of the eggs, and growing
quickly
that the race may not perish, as it
would
if much of the time required for the
whole
development were spent in this growth;
even
as it is most of those laid are destroyed
before hatching. Hence the class of
fish
is prolific, for Nature makes up for
the
destruction by numbers. Some fish actually
burst because of the size of the eggs,
as
the fish called ‘belone’, for its eggs
are
large instead of numerous, what Nature
has
taken away in number being added in
size.
So much for the growth of such eggs
and its
reason.
5 A proof that these fish also are
oviparous
is the fact that even viviparous fish,
such
as the cartilaginous, are first internally
oviparous, for hence it is plain that
the
whole class of fishes is oviparous.
Where,
however, both sexes exist and the eggs
are
produced in consequence of impregnation,
the eggs do not arrive at completion
unless
the male sprinkle his milt upon them.
Some
erroneously assert that all fish are
female
except in the cartilaginous fishes,
for they
think that the females of fish differ
from
what are supposed to be males only
in the
same way as in those plants where the
one
bears fruit but the other is fruitless,
as
olive and oleaster, fig and caprifig.
They
think the like applies to fish except
the
cartilaginous, for they do not dispute
the
sexes in these. And yet there is no
difference
in the males of cartilaginous fishes
and
those belonging to the oviparous class
in
respect of the organs for the milt,
and it
is manifest that semen can be squeezed
out
of males of both classes at the right
season.
The female also has a uterus. But if
the
whole class were females and some of
them
unproductive (as with mules in the
class
of bushy-tailed animals), then not
only should
those which lay eggs have a uterus
but also
the others, only the uterus of the
latter
should be different from that of the
former.
But, as it is, some of them have organs
for
milt and others have a uterus, and
this distinction
obtains in all except two, the erythrinus
and the channa, some of them having
the milt
organs, others a uterus. The difficulty
which
drives some thinkers to this conclusion
is
easily solved if we look at the facts.
They
say quite correctly that no animal
which
copulates produces many young, for
of all
those that generate from themselves
perfect
animals or perfect eggs none is prolific
on the same scale as the oviparous
fishes,
for the number of eggs in these is
enormous.
But they had overlooked the fact that
fish-eggs
differ from those of birds in one circumstance.
Birds and all oviparous quadrupeds,
and any
of the cartilaginous fish that are
oviparous,
produce a perfect egg, and it does
not increase
outside of them, whereas the eggs of
fish
are imperfect and do so complete their
growth.
Moreover the same thing applies to
cephalopods
also and crustacea, yet these animals
are
actually seen copulating, for their
union
lasts a long time, and it is plain
in these
cases that the one is male and the
other
has a uterus. Finally, it would be
strange
if this distinction did not exist in
the
whole class, just as male and female
in all
the vivipara. The cause of the ignorance
of those who make this statement is
that
the differences in the copulation and
generation
of various animals are of all kinds
and not
obvious, and so, speculating on a small
induction,
they think the same must hold good
in all
cases.
So also those who assert that conception
in female fishes is caused by their
swallowing
the semen of the male have not observed
certain
points when they say this. For the
males
have their milt and the females their
eggs
at about the same time of year, and
the nearer
the female is to laying the more abundant
and the more liquid is the milt formed
in
the male. And just as the increase
of the
milt in the male and of the roe in
the female
takes place at the same time, so is
it also
with their emission, for neither do
the females
lay all their eggs together, but gradually,
nor do the males emit all the milt
at once.
All these facts are in accordance with
reason.
For just as the class of birds in some
cases
has eggs without impregnation, but
few and
seldom, impregnation being generally
required,
so we find the same thing, though to
a less
degree, in fish. But in both classes
these
spontaneous eggs are infertile unless
the
male, in those kinds where the male
exists,
shed his fluid upon them. Now in birds
this
must take place while the eggs are
still
within the mother, because they are
perfect
when discharged, but in fish, because
the
eggs are imperfect and complete their
growth
outside the mother in all cases, those
outside
are preserved by the sprinkling of
the milt
over them, even if they come into being
by
impregnation, and here it is that the
milt
of the males is used up. Therefore
it comes
down the ducts and diminishes in quantity
at the same time as this happens to
the eggs
of the females, for the males always
attend
them, shedding their milt upon the
eggs as
they are laid. Thus then they are male
and
female, and all of them copulate (unless
in any kind the distinction of sex
does not
exist), and without the semen of the
male
no such animal comes into being.
What helps in the deception is also
the fact
that the union of such fishes is brief,
so
that it is not observed even by many
of the
fishermen, for none of them ever watches
anything of the sort for the sake of
knowledge.
Nevertheless their copulation has been
seen,
for fish [when the tail part does not
prevent
it] copulate like the dolphins by throwing
themselves alongside of one another.
But
the dolphins take longer to get free
again,
whereas such fishes do so quickly.
Hence,
not seeing this, but seeing the swallowing
of the milt and the eggs, even the
fishermen
repeat the same simple tale, so much
noised
abroad, as Herodotus the storyteller,
as
if fish were conceived by the mother’s
swallowing
the milt,—not considering that this
is impossible.
For the passage which enters by way
of the
mouth runs to the intestines, not to
the
uterus, and what goes into the intestines
must be turned into nutriment, for
it is
concocted; the uterus, however, is
plainly
full of eggs, and from whence did they
enter
it?
6 A similar story is told also of the
generation
of birds. For there are some who say
that
the raven and the ibis unite at the
mouth,
and among quadrupeds that the weasel
brings
forth its young by the mouth; so say
Anaxagoras
and some of the other physicists, speaking
too superficially and without consideration.
Concerning the birds, they are deceived
by
a false reasoning, because the copulation
of ravens is seldom seen, but they
are often
seen uniting with one another with
their
beaks, as do all the birds of the raven
family;
this is plain with domesticated jackdaws.
Birds of the pigeon kind do the same,
but,
because they also plainly copulate,
therefore
they have not had the same legend told
of
them. But the raven family is not amorous,
for they are birds that produce few
young,
though this bird also has been seen
copulating
before now. It is a strange thing,
however,
that these theorists do not ask themselves
how the semen enters the uterus through
the
intestine, which always concocts whatever
comes into it, as the nutriment; and
these
birds have a uterus like others, and
eggs
are found them near the hypozoma. And
the
weasel has a uterus in like manner
to the
other quadrupeds; by what passage is
the
embryo to get from it to the mouth?
But this
opinion has arisen because the young
of the
weasel are very small like those of
the other
fissipeds, of which we shall speak
later,
and because they often carry the young
about
in their mouths.
Much deceived also are those who make
a foolish
statement about the trochus and the
hyena.
Many say that the hyena, and Herodorus
the
Heracleot says that the trochus, has
two
pudenda, those of the male and of the
female,
and that the trochus impregnates itself
but
the hyena mounts and is mounted in
alternate
years. This is untrue, for the hyena
has
been seen to have only one pudendum,
there
being no lack of opportunity for observation
in some districts, but hyenas have
under
the tail a line like the pudendum of
the
female. Both male and female have such
a
mark, but the males are taken more
frequently;
this casual observation has given rise
to
this opinion. But enough has been said
of
this.
7 Touching the generation of fish,
the question
may be raised, why it is that in the
cartilaginous
fish neither the females are seen discharging
their eggs nor the males their milt,
whereas
in the non-viviparous fishes this is
seen
in both sexes. The reason is that the
whole
cartilaginous class do not produce
much semen,
and further the females have their
uterus
near hypozoma. For the males and females
of the one class of fish differ from
the
males and females of the other class
in like
manner, for the cartilaginous are less
productive
of semen. But in the oviparous fish,
as the
females lay their eggs on account of
their
number, so do the males shed their
milt on
account of its abundance. For they
have more
milt than just what is required for
copulation,
as Nature prefers to expend the milt
in helping
to perfect the eggs, when the female
has
deposited them, rather than in forming
them
at first. For as has been said both
further
back and in our recent discussions,
the eggs
of birds are perfected internally but
those
of fish externally. The latter, indeed,
resemble
in a way those animals which produce
a scolex,
for the product discharged by them
is still
more imperfect than a fish’s egg. It
is the
male that brings about the perfection
of
the egg both of birds and of fishes,
only
in the former internally, as they are
perfected
internally, and in the latter externally,
because the egg is imperfect when deposited;
but the result is the same in both
cases.
In birds the wind-eggs become fertile,
and
those previously impregnated by one
kind
of cock change their nature to that
of the
later cock. And if the eggs be behindhand
in growth, then, if the same cock treads
the hen again after leaving off treading
for a time, he causes them to increase
quickly,
not, however, at any period whatever
of their
development, but if the treading take
place
before the egg changes so far that
the white
begins to separate from the yolk. But
in
the eggs of fishes no such limit of
time
has been laid down, but the males shed
their
milt quickly upon them to preserve
them.
The reason is that these eggs are not
two-coloured,
and hence there is no such limit of
time
fixed with them as with those of birds.
This
fact is what we should expect, for
by the
time that the white and yolk are separated
off from one another, the birds egg
already
contains the principle that comes from
the
male parent.... for the male contributes
to this.
Wind-eggs, then, participate in generation
so far as is possible for them. That
they
should be perfected into an animal
is impossible,
for an animal requires sense-perception;
but the nutritive faculty of the soul
is
possessed by females as well as males,
and
indeed by all living things, as has
been
often said, wherefore the egg itself
is perfect
only as the embryo of a plant, but
imperfect
as that of an animal. If, then, there
had
been no male sex in the class of birds,
the
egg would have been produced as it
is in
some fishes, if indeed there is any
kind
of fish of such a nature as to generate
without
a male; but it has been said of them
before
that this has not yet been satisfactorily
observed. But as it is both sexes exist
in
all birds, so that, considered as a
plant,
the egg is perfect, but in so far as
it is
not a plant it is not perfect, nor
does anything
else result from it; for neither has
it come
into being simply like a real plant
nor from
copulation like an animal. Eggs, however,
produced from copulation but already
separated
into white and yolk take after the
first
cock; for they already contain both
principles,
which is why they do not change again
after
the second impregnation.
8 The young are produced in the same
way
also by the cephalopoda, e. g. sepias
and
the like, and by the crustacea, e.
g. carabi
and their kindred, for these also lay
eggs
in consequence of copulation, and the
male
has often been seen uniting with the
female.
Therefore those who say that all fish
are
female and lay eggs without copulation
are
plainly speaking unscientifically from
this
point of view also. For it is a wonderful
thing to suppose that the former animals
lay eggs in consequence of copulation
and
that fish do not; if again they were
unaware
of this, it is a sign of ignorance.
The union
of all these creatures lasts a considerable
time, as in insects, and naturally
so, for
they are bloodless and therefore of
a cold
nature.
In the sepias and calamaries or squids
the
eggs appear to be two, because the
uterus
is divided and appears double, but
that of
the poulps appears to be single. The
reason
is that the shape of the uterus in
the poulp
is round in form and spherical, the
cleavage
being obscure when it is filled with
eggs.
The uterus of the carabi is also bifid.
All
these animals also lay an imperfect
egg for
the same reason as fishes. In the carabi
and their like the females produce
their
eggs so as to keep them attached to
themselves,
which is why the side-flaps of the
females
are larger than those of the males,
to protect
the eggs; the cephalopoda lay them
away from
themselves. The males of the cephalopoda
sprinkle their milt over the females,
as
the male fish do over the eggs, and
it becomes
a sticky and glutinous mass, but in
the carabi
and their like nothing of the sort
has been
seen or can be naturally expected,
for the
egg is under the female and is hard-shelled.
Both these eggs and those of the cephalopoda
grow after deposition like those of
fishes.
The sepia while developing is attached
to
the egg by its front part, for here
alone
is it possible, because this animal
alone
has its front and back pointing in
the same
direction. For the position and attitude
of the young while developing you must
look
at the Enquiries.
9 We have now spoken of the generation
of
other animals, those that walk, fly,
and
swim; it remains to speak of insects
and
testacea according to the plan laid
down.
Let us begin with the insects. It was
observed
previously that some of these are generated
by copulation, others spontaneously,
and
besides this that they produce a scolex,
and why this is so. For pretty much
all creatures
seem in a certain way to produce a
scolex
first, since the most imperfect embryo
is
of such a nature; and in all animals,
even
the viviparous and those that lay a
perfect
egg, the first embryo grows in size
while
still undifferentiated into parts;
now such
is the nature of the scolex. After
this stage
some of the ovipara produce the egg
in a
perfect condition, others in an imperfect,
but it is perfected outside as has
been often
stated of fish. With animals internally
viviparous
the embryo becomes egg-like in a certain
sense after its original formation,
for the
liquid is contained in a fine membrane,
just
as if we should take away the shell
of the
egg, wherefore they call the abortion
of
an embryo at that stage an ‘efflux’.
Those insects which generate at all
generate
a scolex, and those which come into
being
spontaneously and not from copulation
do
so at first from a formation this nature.
I say that the former generate a scolex,
for we must put down caterpillars also
and
the product of spiders as a sort of
scolex.
And yet some even of these and many
of the
others may be thought to resemble eggs
because
of their round shape, but we must not
judge
by shapes nor yet by softness and hardness
(for what is produced by some is hard),
but
by the fact that the whole of them
is changed
into the body of the creature and the
animal
is not developed from a part of them.
All
these products that are of the nature
of
a scolex, after progressing and acquiring
their full size, become a sort of egg,
for
the husk about them hardens and they
are
motionless during this period. This
is plain
in the scolex of bees and wasps and
in caterpillars.
The reason of this is that their nature,
because of its imperfection, oviposits
as
it were before the right time, as if
the
scolex, while still growing in size,
were
a soft egg. Similar to this is also
what
happens with all other insects which
come
into being without copulation in wool
and
other such materials and in water.
For all
of them after the scolex stage become
immovable
and their integument dries round them,
and
after this the latter bursts and there
comes
forth as from an egg an animal perfected
in its second metamorphosis, most of
those
which are not aquatic being winged.
Another point is quite natural, which
may
wondered at by many. Caterpillars at
first
take nourishment, but after this stage
do
so no longer, but what is called by
some
the chrysalis is motionless. The same
applies
to the scolex of wasps and bees, but
after
this comes into being the so-called
nymph....
and have nothing of the kind. For an
egg
is also of such a nature that when
it has
reached perfection it grows no more
in size,
but at first it grows and receives
nourishment
until it is differentiated and becomes
a
perfect egg. Sometimes the scolex contains
in itself the material from which it
is nourished
and obtains such an addition to its
size,
e. g. in bees and wasps; sometimes
it gets
its nourishment from outside itself,
as caterpillars
and some others.
It has thus been stated why such animals
go through a double development and
for what
reason they become immovable again
after
moving. And some of them come into
being
by copulation, like birds and vivipara
and
most fishes, others spontaneously,
like some
plants.
10 There is much difficulty about the
generation
of bees. If it is really true that
in the
case of some fishes there is such a
method
of generation that they produce eggs
without
copulation, this may well happen also
with
bees, to judge from appearances. For
they
must (1) either bring the young brood
from
elsewhere, as some say, and if so the
young
must either be spontaneously generated
or
produced by some other animal, or (2)
they
must generate them themselves, or (3)
they
must bring some and generate others,
for
this also is maintained by some, who
say
that they bring the young of the drones
only.
Again, if they generate them it must
be either
with or without copulation; if the
former,
then either (1) each kind must generate
its
own kind, or (2) some one kind must
generate
the others, or (3) one kind must unite
with
another for the purpose (I mean for
instance
(1) that bees may be generated from
the union
of bees, drones from that of drones,
and
kings from that of kings, or (2) that
all
the others may be generated from one,
as
from what are called kings and leaders,
or
(3) from the union of drones and bees,
for
some say that the former are male,
the latter
female, while others say that the bees
are
male and the drones female). But all
these
views are impossible if we reason first
upon
the facts peculiar to bees and secondly
upon
those which apply more generally to
other
animals also.
For if they do not generate the young
but
bring them from elsewhere, then bees
ought
to come into being also, if the bees
did
not carry them off, in the places from
which
the old bees carry the germs. For why,
if
new bees come into existence when the
germs
are transported, should they not do
so if
the germs are left there? They ought
to do
so just as much, whether the germs
are spontaneously
generated in the flowers or whether
some
animal generates them. And if the germs
were
of some other animal, then that animal
ought
to be produced from them instead of
bees.
Again, that they should collect honey
is
reasonable, for it is their food, but
it
is strange that they should collect
the young
if they are neither their own offspring
nor
food. With what object should they
do so?
for all animals that trouble themselves
about
the young labour for what appears to
be their
own offspring.
But, again, it is also unreasonable
to suppose
that the bees are female and the drones
male,
for Nature does not give weapons for
fighting
to any female, and while the drones
are stingless
all the bees have a sting. Nor is the
opposite
view reasonable, that the bees are
male and
the drones female, for no males are
in the
habit of working for their offspring,
but
as it is the bees do this. And generally,
since the brood of the drones is found
coming
into being among them even if there
is no
mature drone present, but that of the
bees
is not so found without the presence
of the
kings (which is why some say that the
young
of the drones alone is brought in from
outside),
it is plain that they are not produced
from
copulation, either (1) of bee with
bee or
drone with drone or (2) of bees with
drones.
(That they should import the brood
of the
drones alone is impossible for the
reasons
already given, and besides it is unreasonable
that a similar state of things should
not
prevail with all the three kinds if
it prevails
with one.) Then, again, it is also
impossible
that the bees themselves should be
some of
them male and some female, for in all
kinds
of animals the two sexes differ. Besides
they would in that case generate their
own
kind, but as it is their brood is not
found
to come into being if the leaders are
not
among them, as men say. And an argument
against
both theories, that the young are generated
by union of the bees with one another
or
with the drones, separately or with
one another,
is this: none of them has ever yet
been seen
copulating, whereas this would have
often
happened if the sexes had existed in
them.
It remains then, if they are generated
by
copulation at all, that the kings shall
unite
to generate them. But the drones are
found
to come into being even if no leaders
are
present, and it is not possible that
the
bees should either import their brood
or
themselves generate them by copulation.
It
remains then, as appears to be the
case in
certain fishes, that the bees should
generate
the drones without copulation, being
indeed
female in respect of generative power,
but
containing in themselves both sexes
as plants
do. Hence also they have the instrument
of
offence, for we ought not to call that
female
in which the male sex is not separated.
But
if this is found to be the case with
drones,
if they come into being without copulation,
then as it is necessary that the same
account
should be given of the bees and the
kings
and that they also should be generated
without
copulation. Now if the brood of the
bees
had been found to come into being among
them
without the presence of the kings,
it would
necessarily follow that the bees also
are
produced from bees themselves without
copulation,
but as it is, since those occupied
with the
tendance of these creatures deny this,
it
remains that the kings must generate
both
their own kind and the bees.
As bees are a peculiar and extraordinary
kind of animal so also their generation
appears
to be peculiar. That bees should generate
without copulation is a thing which
may be
paralleled in other animals, but that
what
they generate should not be of the
same kind
is peculiar to them, for the erythrinus
generates
an erythrinus and the channa a channa.
The
reason is that bees themselves are
not generated
like flies and similar creatures, but
from
a kind different indeed but akin to
them,
for they are produced from the leaders.
Hence
in a sort of way their generation is
analogous.
For the leaders resemble the drones
in size
and the bees in possessing a sting;
so the
bees are like them in this respect,
and the
drones are like them in size. For there
must
needs be some overlapping unless the
same
kind is always to be produced from
each;
but this is impossible, for at that
rate
the whole class would consist of leaders.
The bees, then, are assimilated to
them their
power of generation, the drones in
size;
if the latter had had a sting also
they would
have been leaders, but as it is this
much
of the difficulty has been solved,
for the
leaders are like both kinds at once,
like
the bees in possessing a sting, like
the
drones in size.
But the leaders also must be generated
from
something. Since it is neither from
the bees
nor from the drones, it must be from
their
own kind. The grubs of the kings are
produced
last and are not many in number.
Thus what happens is this: the leaders
generate
their own kind but also another kind,
that
of the bees; the bees again generate
another
kind, the drones, but do not also generate
their own kind, but this has been denied
them. And since what is according to
Nature
is always in due order, therefore it
is necessary
that it should be denied to the drones
even
to generate another kind than themselves.
This is just what we find happening,
for
though the drones are themselves generated,
they generate nothing else, but the
process
reaches its limit in the third stage.
And
so beautifully is this arranged by
Nature
that the three kinds always continue
in existence
and none of them fails, though they
do not
all generate.
Another fact is also natural, that
in fine
seasons much honey is collected and
many
drones are produced but in rainy reasons
a large brood of ordinary bees. For
the wet
causes more residual matter to be formed
in the bodies of the leaders, the fine
weather
in that of the bees, for being smaller
in
size they need the fine weather more
than
the kings do. It is right also that
the kings,
being as it were made with a view to
producing
young, should remain within, freed
from the
labour of procuring necessaries, and
also
that they should be of a considerable
size,
their bodies being, as it were, constituted
with a view to bearing young, and that
the
drones should be idle as having no
weapon
to fight for the food and because of
the
slowness of their bodies. But the bees
are
intermediate in size between the two
other
kinds, for this is useful for their
work,
and they are workers as having to support
not only their young but also their
fathers.
And it agrees with our views that the
bees
attend upon their kings because they
are
their offspring (for if nothing of
the sort
had been the case the facts about their
leadership
would be unreasonable), and that, while
they
suffer the kings to do no work as being
their
parents, they punish the drones as
their
children, for it is nobler to punish
one’s
children and those who have no work
to perform.
The fact that the leaders, being few,
generate
the bees in large numbers seems to
be similar
to what obtains in the generation of
lions,
which at first produce five, afterwards
a
smaller number each time at last one
and
thereafter none. So the leaders at
first
produce a number of workers, afterwards
a
few of their own kind; thus the brood
of
the latter is smaller in number than
that
of the former, but where Nature has
taken
away from them in number she has made
it
up again in size.
Such appears to be the truth about
the generation
of bees, judging from theory and from
what
are believed to be the facts about
them;
the facts, however, have not yet been
sufficiently
grasped; if ever they are, then credit
must
be given rather to observation than
to theories,
and to theories only if what they affirm
agrees with the observed facts.
A further indication that bees are
produced
without copulation is the fact that
the brood
appears small in the cells of the comb,
whereas,
whenever insects are generated by copulation,
the parents remain united for a long
time
but produce quickly something of the
nature
of a scolex and of a considerable size.
Concerning the generation of animals
akin
to them, as hornets and wasps, the
facts
in all cases are similar to a certain
extent,
but are devoid of the extraordinary
features
which characterize bees; this we should
expect,
for they have nothing divine about
them as
the bees have. For the so-called ‘mothers’
generate the young and mould the first
part
of the combs, but they generate by
copulation
with one another, for their union has
often
been observed. As for all the differences
of each of these kind from one another
and
from bees, they must be investigated
with
the aid of the illustrations to the
Enquiries.
11 Having spoken of the generation
of all
insects, we must now speak of the testacea.
Here also the facts of generation are
partly
like and partly unlike those in the
other
classes. And this is what might be
expected.
For compared with animals they resemble
plants,
compared with plants they resemble
animals,
so that in a sense they appear to come
into
being from semen, but in another sense
not
so, and in one way they are spontaneously
generated but in another from their
own kind,
or some of them in the latter way,
others
in the former. Because their nature
answers
to that of plants, therefore few or
no kinds
of testacea come into being on land,
e. g.
the snails and any others, few as they
are,
that resemble them; but in the sea
and similar
waters there are many of all kinds
of forms.
But the class of plants has but few
and one
may say practically no representatives
in
the sea and such places, all such growing
on the land. For plants and testacea
are
analogous; and in proportion as liquid
has
more quickening power than solid, water
than
earth, so much does the nature of testacea
differ from that of plants, since the
object
of testacea is to be in such a relation
to
water as plants are to earth, as if
plants
were, so to say, land-oysters, oysters
water-plants.
For such a reason also the testacea
in the
water vary more in form than those
on the
land. For the nature of liquid is more
plastic
than that of earth and yet not much
less
material, and this is especially true
of
the inhabitants of the sea, for fresh
water,
though sweet and nutritious, is cold
and
less material. Wherefore animals having
no
blood and not of a hot nature are not
produced
in lakes nor in the fresher among brackish
waters, but only exceptionally, but
it is
in estuaries and at the mouths of rivers
that they come into being, as testacea
and
cephalopoda and crustacea, all these
being
bloodless and of a cold nature. For
they
seek at the same time the warmth of
the sun
and food; now the sea is not only water
but
much more material than fresh water
and hot
in its nature; it has a share in all
the
parts of the universe, water and air
and
earth, so that it also has a share
in all
living things which are produced in
connexion
with each of these elements. Plants
may be
assigned to land, the aquatic animals
to
water, the land animals to air, but
variations
of quantity and distance make a great
and
wonderful difference. The fourth class
must
not be sought in these regions, though
there
certainly ought to be some animal corresponding
to the element of fire, for this is
counted
in as the fourth of the elementary
bodies.
But the form which fire assumes never
appears
to be peculiar to it, but it always
exists
in some other of the elements, for
that which
is ignited appears to be either air
or smoke
or earth. Such a kind of animal must
be sought
in the moon, for this appears to participate
in the element removed in the third
degree
from earth. The discussion of these
things
however belongs to another subject.
To return to testacea, some of them
are formed
spontaneously, some emit a sort of
generative
substance from themselves, but these
also
often come into being from a spontaneous
formation. To understand this we must
grasp
the different methods of generation
in plants;
some of these are produced from seed,
some
from slips, planted out, some by budding
off alongside, as the class of onions.
In
the last way produced mussels, for
smaller
ones are always growing off alongside
the
original, but the whelks, the purple-fish,
and those which are said to ‘spawn’
emit
masses of a liquid slime as if originated
by something of a seminal nature. We
must
not, however, consider that anything
of the
sort is real semen, but that these
creatures
participate in the resemblance to plants
in the manner stated above. Hence when
once
one such creature has been produced,
then
is produced a number of them. For all
these
creatures are liable to be even spontaneously
generated, and so to be formed still
more
plentifully in proportion if some are
already
existing. For it is natural that each
should
have some superfluous residue attached
to
it from the original, and from this
buds
off each of the creatures growing alongside
of it. Again, since the nutriment and
its
residue possess a like power, it is
likely
that the product of those testacea
which
‘spawn’ should resemble the original
formation,
and so it is natural that a new animal
of
the same kind should come into being
from
this also.
All those which do not bud off or ‘spawn’
are spontaneously generated. Now all
things
formed in this way, whether in earth
or water,
manifestly come into being in connexion
with
putrefaction and an admixture of rain-water.
For as the sweet is separated off into
the
matter which is forming, the residue
of the
mixture takes such a form. Nothing
comes
into being by putrefying, but by concocting;
putrefaction and the thing putrefied
is only
a residue of that which is concocted.
For
nothing comes into being out of the
whole
of anything, any more than in the products
of art; if it did art would have nothing
to do, but as it is in the one case
art removes
the useless material, in the other
Nature
does so. Animals and plants come into
being
in earth and in liquid because there
is water
in earth, and air in water, and in
all air
is vital heat so that in a sense all
things
are full of soul. Therefore living
things
form quickly whenever this air and
vital
heat are enclosed in anything. When
they
are so enclosed, the corporeal liquids
being
heated, there arises as it were a frothy
bubble. Whether what is forming is
to be
more or less honourable in kind depends
on
the embracing of the psychical principle;
this again depends on the medium in
which
the generation takes place and the
material
which is included. Now in the sea the
earthy
matter is present in large quantities,
and
consequently the testaceous animals
are formed
from a concretion of this kind, the
earthy
matter hardening round them and solidifying
in the same manner as bones and horns
(for
these cannot be melted by fire), and
the
matter (or body) which contains the
life
being included within it.
The class of snails is the only class
of
such creatures that has been seen uniting,
but it has never yet been sufficiently
observed
whether their generation is the result
of
the union or not.
It may be asked, if we wish to follow
the
right line of investigation, what it
is in
such animals the formation of which
corresponds
to the material principle. For in the
females
this is a residual secretion of the
animal,
potentially such as that from which
it came,
by imparting motion to which the principle
derived from the male perfects the
animal.
But here what must be said to correspond
to this, and whence comes or what is
the
moving principle which corresponds
to the
male? We must understand that even
in animals
which generate it is from the incoming
nourishment
that the heat in the animal makes the
residue,
the beginning of the conception, by
secretion
and concoction. The like is the case
also
in plants, except that in these (and
also
in some animals) there is no further
need
of the male principle, because they
have
it mingled with the female principle
within
themselves, whereas the residual secretion
in most animals does need it. The nourishment
again of some is earth and water, of
others
the more complicated combinations of
these,
so that what the heat in animals produces
from their nutriment, this does the
heat
of the warm season in the environment
put
together and combine by concoction
out of
the sea-water on the earth. And the
portion
of the psychical principle which is
either
included along with it or separated
off in
the air makes an embryo and puts motion
into
it. Now in plants which are spontaneously
generated the method of formation is
uniform;
they arise from a part of something,
and
while some of it is the starting-point
of
the plant, some is the first nourishment
of the young shoots.... Other animals
are
produced in the form of a scolex, not
only
those bloodless animals which are not
generated
from parents but even some sanguinea,
as
a kind of mullet and some other river
fishes
and also the eel kind. For all of these,
though they have but little blood by
nature,
are nevertheless sanguinea, and have
a heart
with blood in it as the origin of the
parts;
and the so-called ‘entrails of earth’,
in
which comes into being the body of
the eel,
have the nature of a scolex.
Hence one might suppose, in connexion
with
the origin of men and quadrupeds, that,
if
ever they were really ‘earth-born’
as some
say, they came into being in one of
two ways;
that either it was by the formation
of a
scolex at first or else it was out
of eggs.
For either they must have had in themselves
the nutriment for growth (and such
a conception
is a scolex) or they must have got
it from
elsewhere, and that either from the
mother
or from part of the conception. If
then the
former is impossible (I mean that nourishment
should flow to them from the earth
as it
does in animals from the mother), then
they
must have got it from some part of
the conception,
and such generation we say is from
an egg.
It is plain then that, if there really
was
any such beginning of the generation
of all
animals, it is reasonable to suppose
to have
been one of these two, scolex or egg.
But
it is less reasonable to suppose that
it
was from eggs, for we do not see such
generation
occurring with any animal, but we do
see
the other both in the sanguinea above
mentioned
and in the bloodless animals. Such
are some
of the insects and such are the testacea
which we are discussing; for they do
not
develop out of a part of something
(as do
animals from eggs), and they grow like
a
scolex. For the scolex grows towards
the
upper part and the first principle,
since
in the lower part is the nourishment
for
the upper. And this resembles the development
of animals from eggs, except that these
latter
consume the whole egg, whereas in the
scolex,
when the upper part has grown by taking
up
into itself part of the substance in
the
lower part, the lower part is then
differentiated
out of the rest. The reason is that
in later
life also the nourishment is absorbed
by
all animals in the part below the hypozoma.
That the scolex grows in this way is
plain
in the case of bees and the like, for
at
first the lower part is large in them
and
the upper is smaller. The details of
growth
in the testacea are similar. This is
plain
in the whorls of the turbinata, for
always
as the animal grows the whorls become
larger
towards the front and what is called
the
head of the creature.
We have now pretty well described the
manner
of the development of these and the
other
spontaneously generated animals. That
all
the testacea are formed spontaneously
is
clear from such facts as these. They
come
into being on the side of boats when
the
frothy mud putrefies. In many places
where
previously nothing of the kind existed,
the
so-called limnostrea, a kind of oyster,
have
come into being when the spot turned
muddy
through want of water; thus when a
naval
armament cast anchor at Rhodes a number
of
clay vessels were thrown out into the
sea,
and after some time, when mud had collected
round them, oysters used to be found
in them.
Here is another proof that such animals
do
not emit any generative substance from
themselves;
when certain Chians carried some live
oysters
over from Pyrrha in Lesbos and placed
them
in narrow straits of the sea where
tides
clash, they became no more numerous
as time
passed, but increased greatly in size.
The
so-called eggs contribute to generation
but
are only a condition, like fat in the
sanguinea,
and therefore the oysters are savoury
at
these periods. A proof that this substance
is not really eggs is the fact that
such
‘eggs’ are always found in some testacea,
as in pinnae, whelks, and purple-fish;
only
they are sometimes larger and sometimes
smaller;
in others as pectens, mussels, and
the so-called
limnostrea, they are not always present
but
only in the spring; as the season advances
they dwindle and at last disappear
altogether;
the reason being that the spring is
favourable
to their being in good condition. In
others
again, as the ascidians, nothing of
the sort
is visible. (The details concerning
these
last, and the places in which they
come into
being, must be learnt from the Enquiry.)
|