86 DISTINCTION BETWEEN ANIMALS, 



he seems to rely on what was told him by others, probably 

 fishermen. I have not been able to find a passage in the 

 ancient writers showing that fishermen of Aristotle's time 

 believed that sponges were animals. At a much later time 

 Gesner was influenced by a popular belief of this kind, for 

 he says : " I do not think that the Sponge is an animal ; 

 indeed, it is scarcely a zoophyte ; since, however, some of 

 the common people think that it is some kind of animal 

 and, on this account, Eondelet and Belon have treated of it 

 in their histories of aquatic animals, I also shall deem it 

 worthy to be included in my supplement."* 



It is not easy to ascertain what is the general popular 

 opinion on the nature of sponges in the Greek area. Dr. 

 W. H. D. Rouse informs me that the sponge is spoken of in 

 terms which would suit an animal, and Mr. G. C. Zervos, 

 writing from Calymnos, on October 23rd, 1907, says: "The 

 Sponge is considered to be an animal, because the Sponge 

 fishermen say that e^opriaav ra crtpouyyapia = (the Sponges have 

 become dead), and the word >J'0<pai is used in modern Greek 

 to denote the death of animals only." Wishing to obtain 

 information as definite as possible, I wrote to Mr. W. R. 

 Halliday at the British School at Athens. He replied 

 (after his return from a journey which included Melos and 

 Paros) in a letter received June 24th, 1911, as follows: "I 

 think I can answer your question about sponges in the 

 negative. I have put it in the following forms on different 

 occasions : ' Are sponges animals or plants ? ' to which the 

 answer is 'Plants.' ' Are sponges animals?' * No, plants.' 

 ' Are sponges plants ? ' ' Yes, of the sea.' In no case have 

 I found any hesitation, or leaning towards the animal theory." 



Evidently, the popular opinion among some Greeks is 

 that sponges are plants, and it is possible that Aristotle was 

 not merely recording a popular belief when he said that 

 sponges are animals. 



The distinctions between animals and plants which 

 Aristotle attempted to make have long become insufficient ; 

 in fact, they were scarcely sufficient for the comparatively 

 very few lower forms of life known to him. The well- 

 known definitions of stones and like substances, plants, and 

 animals, made by Linnaeus, were like those of Aristotle, 

 except that stress was laid on the fact that animals and 

 plants are organised, while stones and the like are unor- 



"t Hist. Anim, iv. Corollarium, 1558, p. 106G. 



