Aristotle s History (>/' Animals. 75 



enemies by darkening the water with its ink. He pursues this 

 examination into the class of insects, and speaks particularly of 

 some of them, and especially of the spiders. Then, passing to 

 birds, he points out the different ways in which they construct 

 their nests ; says that there are species which make no nests ; and, 

 finally, gives the history of the cuckoo, which lays its eggs in the 

 nest of another bird. 



From the above account it will be seen how rich and abundant 

 in matter is the History of Animals. There is a defect in it, how- 

 ever, which renders it much less useful to us than it might 

 otherwise be, for Aristotle, like all the ancient naturalists, seems 

 to have thought that the language which he spoke was never to 

 change, and generally contents himself with naming the species. 

 He gives no descriptions properly so called, excepting in refe- 

 rence to the elephant, the camel, the crocodile, and the cameleon. 

 Some other animals, it is true, are indicated by characteristic 

 traits, and cannot be misunderstood ; but in most cases we are 

 reduced to conjectures founded on some circumstances in the 

 history of the animal, or the properties which the author assigns 

 to it. We have to bring together the different passages which 

 refer to it, to compare them with each other, and with those 

 which occur in contemporary authors, and even to confront them 

 with passages that occur in authors of an after date. But, in 

 the latter case, great caution is necessary, the signification of 

 words being liable to vary with time. In fact, it is evident 

 that names have changed from the time of Aristotle to that of 

 Athenaeus, and the changes which they have since undergone 

 must necessarily be still greater. The zoological nomenclature 

 of the modern Greeks may, however, assist us in retracing the 

 animal of the ancients. 



Scaliger has published a good edition of the History of Ani- 

 mals, but the best of all is the one published in 1811 by Mr 

 Schneider. The Latin translation of Theodore of Gaza is often 

 quoted, but it is very inaccurate. This translator was a Greek, 

 who went to Italy when Constantinople was taken by the Turks. 

 He was a bad Latin scholar, so that, whenever he found a pas- 

 sage in Pliny that had been borrowed from Aristotle, he trans- 

 cribed it literally. It also appears that he had only a bad copy 

 of the Greek text. 



