TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE:
Inconsistencies in hyphenation and punctuation have not been corrected.Punctuation and Greek text in the index has been silently corrected.A list of other corrections can be found at the endof the document.
IN TEN BOOKS.
TRANSLATED BY
RICHARD CRESSWELL, M.A.,
ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE, OXFORD.
LONDON: GEORGE BELL & SONS, YORK STREET,
COVENT GARDEN.
1887.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, Limited,
STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.
The following Translation of Aristotle's History of Animalshas been made from the text of Schneider. In a workof considerable difficulty it is hardly possible entirely toavoid errors; but it is hoped that those which have escapedare neither numerous nor important. The notes ofSchneider have been consulted throughout; and in placesof difficulty the English translation by Taylor, the Frenchof Camus, and the German of Strack, have been severallyreferred to.
The work itself is the most ancient and celebrated contributionto science which has come down to us; and it ishardly possible, when we consider the means of observationwhich were accessible at the time, to imagine a work ofmore accurate observation. From the numerous quotationsin which our author avails himself of the experience ofhis predecessors in the same field, as well as correctstheir errors, there can be no doubt that Aristotle had theadvantage of many works which have perished in the lapseof ages. In the Appendix to the present Translationwill be found the Essay of Schneider on the sourceswhence Aristotle derived his knowledge of the animals hedescribes; and these sources, together with his own accurate[Pg iv]observations, are probably sufficient to account for thecorrect knowledge of the history of animals displayedthroughout the work.
It is right, perhaps, to observe in this place, that Dr.Smith, in his Dictionary of Biography, speaks of the 'Historyof Animals' as partly the result of the royal liberalityof Alexander; and doubtless Aristotle would gladly haveintroduced into his work any fresh materials which mighthave been made available to him either during his residenceat the Macedonian court, or by the subsequent victories ofAlexander in the East, if the information so obtained hadreached Athens in sufficient time to be incorporated. Butin the first instance he would naturally use the materialsready to his hand in the works of his predecessors,and these were not few. The animals also which he describesare principally those of Greece and of the countrieswith which the enterprising Greeks had frequent and commercialintercourse. He says little of the animals of theinterior of Asia and of India, and speaks very cautiously ofsuch as he does mention; and one who quotes his authoritiesso freely would hardly have failed to notice the sources ofhis information.
The study, or at least the knowledge of the classificationof animals appears to have been carefully pursued in theearliest period of man's history. The oldest records thatwe possess contain abundant notices of the peculiarities ofanimals. The Mosaic law abounds in them, in its distinctionsbetween the clean and the unclean, a distinction notthen first established, but of the most remote antiquity.Indeed it could hardly be otherwise than that men engagedin the pursuits of agriculture and the chase should studythe habits of the animals that were