performs to the Crocodile. 71 



which he has given them in chapter 95, in which he mentions 

 their numbers and their excessive inconvenience ; and since, 

 contrary to his usual precision, he has contented himself with 

 employing the word bdella, (vague in his time,) we ought to con- 

 clude, that he did not know which kind of sucker incommoded 

 the crocodile ; and this confirms M. Geoffroy in his idea, that 

 Herodotus had drawn up what he has said of the crocodile from 

 the information which he obtained from the priests of Mem- 

 phis. 



Herodotus is not the only ancient author who speaks of the 

 services which the crocodile receives from the Trochilos. Aris- 

 totle also mentions it, only he mistakes the nature of the ser- 

 vice which it performs. " When the crocodile, 1 ' say he, " has 

 his mouth open, the Trochilos flies in and cleans his teeth. 

 The trochilos finds there something that nourishes him. The 

 crocodile feels the benefit he derives from him, and he never 

 does any harm to the Trochilos. When he wishes him to fly 

 away, he moves his neck, in order that he may not bite him.'" * 



Pliny, speaking of the same fact, which he admits like his 

 predecessors, gives another explanation of the actions of the 

 Trochilos. " The crocodile," he says, " opens his mouth as 

 wide as he can, and it is deliciously affected by the pecking of 

 the bird." -f* M. Geoffroy St-Hilaire enters upon discussions 

 which we are not able to lay before our readers, respecting this 

 sort of compact between the most dangerous of the lizards, and 

 the very little bird which assists him ; that is to say, upon the 

 mutual harmony established between them, — a harmony so ne- 

 cessary, that the crocodile, incapable of sustaining alone the 

 attacks of these dangerous enemies, would behold his race ex- 

 tinct if the Trochilos were to cease to give them his assistance. 



It is proper to add, that the ties of good will which ex- 

 isted between the crocodile and the Trochilos were known to 

 the remotest antiquity, and never during succeeding ages 

 were they called in question. Herodotus, Aristotle, and in 

 later times Pliny, iElian, Philon, and many writers of the first 

 ages of the Christain era have described them without reserve, 

 and without trying to modify them. Of late it has been other- 



* Aristotle's Hist. Animal, lib. 9, cap. 6. 

 t Pliny, lib. 8, cap. 25. 



