¹ The lists in Diogenes Laertius (third century a.d.) and the Vita Hesychii (sixth century a.d.) may well go back to the Hellenistic period, though much about these lists is uncertain and disputed. See Moraux, P., Listes anciennes des ouvrages d'Aristote (Louvain, 1951)Google Scholar.

² For the Arabic text (with German translation) of the list of Aristotle's works, transmitted by Ptolemy al-Gharib, see Hein, C., Definition und Einleitung in der Philosophie: Von der spätantiken Einleitungsliteratur zur arabischen Enzyklopädie (Frankfurt, 1985)Google Scholar. This list is ultimately derived from Andronicus of Rhodes (first century b.c.). Regarding the title Προβλημάτων Ὁμηρικῶν, cf. the extant Ὁμηρικῶν προβλημάτων of Heraclitus ‘the Allegorist’ (c. first–second centuries a.d.). See Russell, D. and Konstan, D., Heraclitus: Homeric Problems (Atlanta, 2005)Google Scholar. Aristotle is never mentioned in this work, perhaps because Heraclitus' allegorical interpretation is at odds with Aristotle's more straightforward approach.

³ Cf. the title of the Ὁμηρικῶν ζητηματῶν of Porphyry (third century a.d.; see below n. 8).

⁴ Ἀλκαῖόν φασι τὸν κωμῳδοποιὸν καὶ Ἀριστοτέλην ἐν τοῖς Ὁμήρου ἀπορήμασιν εἰρηκέναι. Anecdota Graeca (vol. 1, p. 84 Bekker) = Aristotle fr. 404 Gigon.

⁵ ‘Homer’ is shorthand for ‘the poet(s) who composed the Iliad and the Odyssey’.

⁶ Gigon, O., Aristotelis opera, vol. 3: Librorum deperditorum fragmenta (Berlin, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar has superseded Rose, V., Aristotelis qui ferebantur librorum fragmenta (Leipzig, 1886 ³)Google Scholar.

⁷ For brief accounts of the Homeric scholia, see Kirk, G.S., The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 1: Books 1–4 (Cambridge, 1985), 38–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Janko, R., The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 3: Books 13–16 (Cambridge, 1992), 20–8Google Scholar; and Dickey, E., Ancient Greek Scholarship: A Guide to Finding, Reading, and Understanding Scholia, Commentaries, Lexica, and Grammatical Treatises, from their Beginning to the Byzantine Period (Oxford, 2007), 18–23Google Scholar. I have made use of the following editions: H. van Thiel, Scholia D in Iliadem (Köln, 2000), available online only (http://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/1810/); Erbse, H., Scholia Graeca in Homeri Iliadem (scholia vetera), 5 vols. (Berlin, 1969–88)Google Scholar; N. Ernst, Die D-Scholien zur Odysee: Kritische Ausgabe (Köln, 2006), available online only (http://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/1831/); Dindorf, W., Scholia Graeca in Homeri Odysseam (Oxford, 1855)Google Scholar.

⁸ The first book of Porphyry's Homeric Questions on the Iliad is extant in one manuscript (Vaticanus gr. 305); see Sodano, R., Porphyrii Quaestionum Homericum Liber I (Naples, 1970)Google Scholar. For the rest, extracts from Porphyry's Homeric Questions (on the Iliad and the Odyssey) have survived among the Homeric scholia. It is not always clear what material is MacPhail, Porphyrian. J., Porphyry's Homeric Questions on the Iliad: Text, Translation, Commentary (Berlin, 2011)Google Scholar replaces the obsolete (and far too inclusive) Schrader, H., Quaestionum Homericarum ad Iliadem pertinentium reliquiae (Leipzig, 1882)Google Scholar. Schrader, H., Quaestionum Homericarum ad Odysseam pertinentium reliquiae (Leipzig, 1890)Google Scholar, however, is the sole edition of these fragments. (On the one Aristotle ‘fragment’ in the extant first book of Porphyry's Homeric Questions on the Iliad – which does not come from his Homeric Puzzles – see the Appendix.)

⁹ On Homeric scholarship before and contemporary with Aristotle, see Richardson, N., ‘Aristotle's Reading of Homer and Its Background’, in Lamberton, R. and Keaney, J. (edd)., Homer's Ancient Readers: The Hermeneutics of Greek Epic's Earliest Exegetes (Princeton, 1992), 30–40Google Scholar. In what follows, I use the expression ‘Homeric scholar’ quite loosely as shorthand for anyone who expressed opinions about the Homeric epics.

¹⁰ In general, the Homeric Puzzles has received little attention over the past century. Some exceptions: H. Hintenlang, ‘Untersuchungen zu den Homer-Aporien des Aristoteles’ (Diss., University of Heidelberg, 1961); Huxley, G., ‘Historical criticism in Aristotle's “Homeric Questions”’, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 79 (1979), 73–81Google Scholar; Breitenberger's, B. German translation of the fragments, with commentary, in Flashar, H., Dubielzig, U., and Breitenberger, B. (edd.), Aristoteles: Fragmente zu Philosophie, Rhetorik, Poetik, Dichtung (Berlin, 2006), 305–21Google Scholar, 369–430.

¹¹ Poet. 25 is notoriously difficult; but I think the points I here adumbrate are uncontroversial.

¹² Another proper object of representation is the way things should be (Poet. 25, 1460b32–5). This alternative is of capital importance in Aristotle's aesthetics; but it will not concern me here, as my interest is the portrayal of or claims about animals. And even a portrayal of a horse, say, which stretches the truth in a way that is aesthetically defensible, according to Aristotle, would not be considered the presentation of a horse as it ought to be.

¹³ Poet. 25.1460b35–1461a1. There are, however, aesthetic limits to the representation of the gods. See, for example, Aristotle's criticism of the deus ex machina ending in Euripides’ Medea: Poet. 15.1454a37–b2.

¹⁴ Poet. 25, 1460b17–21. Aristotle explains this aspect of equine motion in IA 14, 712a23–b9.

¹⁵ Poet. 25, 1460b31–2. On does lacking antlers, see Part. an. 3.1, 662a1–2 and Hist. an. 4.11, 538b18–19. There was in antiquity a debate over this biological fact, and the artists who were ignorant of it (though, judging by the extant relevant texts, the debate did not involve Homer). See Aristophanes of Byzantium, Epitome of the History of Animals 2.488–9 (127.9–15 Lampros) and Aelian, NA 7.39, both of whom disagree with Aristotle.

¹⁶ I use the text of Balme, D., Aristotle: Historia Animalium, vol. 1: Books I–X: Text, prepared for publication by Gotthelf, A. (Cambridge, 2002)Google Scholar. Note that Balme re-established the manuscript order of the books, which had been changed by Theodore Gaza and subsequently accepted by modern editors, including Bekker. See Balme (this note), 1, and Beullens, P. and Gotthelf, A., ‘Theodore Gaza's translation of Aristotle's De animalibus: content, influence, and date’, GRBS 47 (2007), 469–513Google Scholar. Following Balme's notation, ‘7(8)’, for example, means Book 7 according to the manuscript tradition, Book 8 in modern editions.

¹⁷ I do not discuss De motu an. 4.699b32–700a6 (cf. Il. 8.19–22), as its subject is not biological.

¹⁸ The texts of Homer that I have used are: West, M.L., Homeri Ilias, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1998 and 2000)Google Scholar and von der Mühll, P., Homeri Odyssea (Basel, 1962)Google Scholar.

¹⁹ It may be more natural to translate ἀπὸ … ἔκερσεν ‘cut away’ or ‘cut off’, but ‘cut through’ is possible (and seems to be required for sense). See Cunliffe, R., A Lexicon of the Homeric Dialect (London, 1924)Google Scholar, s.v. ἀπό: ‘In reference to severing or cutting, away, off, through.’ Zenodotus of Alexandria (third century b.c.) would disagree (Σ^AIl. 13.546: Zηνόδοτος “διὰ δὲ φλέβα”). He thought ἀπό should be emended to διά – I assume on the grounds that he believed διά was needed to convey that the vessel was being cut through, i.e. severed. Kelly, A., A Referential Commentary and Lexicon to Homer, Iliad VIII (Oxford, 2007)Google Scholar, 127, understanding ‘cut away/off’, describes this as ‘the removal of the φλέψ running up Thoon's back’.

²⁰ Saunders, K., ‘The wounds in Iliad 13–16’, CQ 49 (1999), 345–63CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed, at 349–51, writes of Il. 13.545–7: ‘There is no such vein’; and ‘the effort of the scholiasts, supported by Aristotle …, to identify it with the main artery (aorta …) or vena cava … are futile, since they are both immediately in front of the spine and protected thereby from a stab wound from behind’. He considers other scholarly suggestions before concluding: ‘[Friedrich, W.-H., Verwundung und Tod in der Ilias (Gottingen, 1956)Google Scholar, 43] thought the vein was simply a Homeric fantasy, and Friedrich is probably right.’

²¹ Σ^bTIl. 13.547: ἀνὰ νῶτα θέουσα: ἀνατομικῶς. οἶδε τὴν καλουμένην κοίλην φλέβα, τὴν ἐκ δεξιῶν τῆς ῥάχεως ἀνερχομένην ἀπὸ τοῦ ἥπατος καὶ κατὰ τὸ διάφραγμα χωροῦσαν ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν καὶ ἀπὸ ταύτης ἐπὶ τὸν τράχηλον. Homer ‘knew it was the so-called hollow vessel’ (i.e. the vena cava). This is the Hippocratic term for it (see Loc. Hom. 3, which contains identical language: τὴν κοίλην φλέβα καλουμένην). Aristotle does not use this terminology; but note that Galen explicitly identifies ‘the greatest vessel’ with the one named ‘hollow’: μεγίστη φλέψ, ἣν κοίλην ὀνομάζουσι (in Hp. Nat. Hom. [15.135 Kühn]). More on Galen and this work shortly.

²² De signis Iliadis 13.546–9 (ex Σ^A): ἡ διπλῆ ὅτι πᾶσαν ἀντὶ τοῦ ὅλην καὶ ὅτι ἐπὶ τὴν πληγὴν πέπτωκε διὰ τὸ παραλελύσθαι τὴν νωτιαίαν φλέβα καὶ μηκέτι εἶναι τὸ ἀντέχον νεῦρον. Σ^DIl. 13.546: ‘he severed the whole spinal vessel’ (ὅλην δὲ ἀπέτεμε τὴν νωτιαίαν φλέβα). See Saunders (n. 20), 350. Janko (n. 7), 114 claims that this vessel is the spinal cord.

²³ Gal. in Hp. Nat. Hom. (15.138 Kühn): τὸ δὲ τῆς μεγίστης φλεβὸς οὕτως ἐστὶ πρόδηλον, ὡς μήτε τινὰ λαθεῖν δύνασθαι τῶν δυνηθέντων ἐξ ἀνατομῆς τι μαθεῖν, ὡμολόγηταί τε πᾶσιν ἄχρι τοῦ καὶ τοὺς ποιητὰς αὐτοὺς γινώσκειν. Ὅμηρος γοῦν φησιν· “ἀπὸ δὲ φλέβα πᾶσαν ἔκερσεν, ἥ τ' ἀνὰ νῶτα θέουσα διαμπερὲς αὐχέν' ἱκάνει”. μίαν οὖν αὐτὴν οἶδεν, ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ ἔστιν, οὐ τέτταρας …

²⁴ Cf. Pl. Cra. 391e–392a (though Plato's interest is in why one name is more correct – that is to say, divine – than the other).

²⁵ Eustathius of Thessalonica (twelfth century a.d.) wrote massive commentaries on the Iliad and the Odyssey. ‘Their value consists particularly in the assemblage of material drawn from the old scholia and the lost works of earlier scholars and lexicographers’ (OCD ⁴ s.v. Eustathius). I have made use of the standard editions: van der Valk, M., Eustathii archiepiscopi Thessalonicensis commentarii ad Homeri Iliadem pertinentes, 4 vols. (Leiden, 1971–87)Google Scholar; Stallbaum, G., Eustathii archiepiscopi Thessalonicensis commentarii ad Homeri Odysseam, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1825–6)Google Scholar.

²⁶ A river with the same name, which ran through ancient Lycia.

²⁷ Eust. Il. 20.73–4 (vol. 4, p. 374): Ξάνθος δὲ λέγεται, ἐπεί, φασί, διαφερόντως τοὺς λουομένους ξανθίζει, ὡς καὶ ὁ Λύκιος Ξάνθος, ἢ καὶ τοὺς παραπεφυκότας πιαίνων καρποὺς λευκαίνει καὶ οὕτω ξανθὴν … ἢ ὅτι Ἀφροδίτη πρὸ τῆς κρίσεως ἐν αὐτῷ λουσαμένη ξανθὰς ἔσχε τρίχας. Cf. Σ^bTIl. 20.73–4, Etym.Gud. s.vv. Ξανθός and Σκαμάνδριος πηγή, and Etym.Magn. s.v. Ξάνθος.

²⁸ That seems like the obvious answer. But it has been argued that, etymologically, Scamander and Xanthus have the same root, which is in fact unconnected to ξανθός (‘yellow’). This interpretation is described in Edwards, M., The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 5: Books 17–20 (Cambridge, 1991), 297–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Note also West, M.L., The Making of the Iliad: Disquisition and Analytical Commentary (Oxford, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 366: ‘Scamander was evidently the name in use in P's [i.e. the author's] time, Xanthos one current in poetic tradition.’ See also Janko (n. 7), 197.

²⁹ Eust. Od. 17.326–7 (vol. 2, p. 146).

³⁰ Ar. Byz. Epit. 2.180 (Lampros): ζῇ δὲ ὁ μὲν Λακωνικὸς ἔτη δέκα, ἡ δὲ θήλεια δώδεκα· αἱ δὲ ἄλλαι ζῶσι δεκατέσσαρα. τὸ δὲ μυθολογούμενον περὶ τοῦ τοῦ Ὀδυσσέως κυνός, ὡς εἴκοσιν ἔτη ἔζησε, τῶν εἰκῇ πεπιστευμένων ἐστίν.

³¹ Σ^AOd. 17.326, perhaps from Porphyry's Homeric Questions on the Odyssey.

³² See Eust. Od. (vol. 2, p. 145).

³³ Eust. Od. (vol. 2, p. 146): φασὶ δὲ οἱ παλαιοὶ ὡς τέθνηκεν οὕτω ταχὺ ὁ Ἄργος ὑφ' ἡδονῆς τῆς ἐπὶ τῷ ἀναγνωρισμῷ, σμικρὰ γάρ τοι ῥοπὴ εὐνάζει κατὰ Σοφοκλῆν τὰ παλαιὰ σώματα, ὅπου γε καὶ τῶν ἰσχυρῶν πολλάκις περιγίνονται ὥς περ σφοδραὶ λῦπαι, οὕτω καὶ ἡδοναί. τὸ δὲ πρᾶγμα καὶ σύμβολον ἦν, ὡς ἐῤῥέθη, αἴσιον τῷ Ὀδυσσεῖ. λευκὸς μὲν γὰρ ἴσως ἦν ὁ κύων, ὡς καὶ προεγράφη. πᾶν δὲ λευκὸν χρηστὸν σύμβολον. ὡς δὲ καὶ κύων καὶ ἀσθενὴς διὰ γῆρας καὶ ἅμα τῇ τοῦ Ὀδυσσέως θέᾳ θανὼν, τὸ τῶν μνηστήρων ἐδήλου ἀναιδὲς καὶ ἀσθενὲς καὶ ὠκύμορον, εἰ καὶ ἄλλως χρησταῖς ἐλπίσιν ἔσαινον ἑαυτούς.

³⁴ See fr. 369 Gigon = Σ^BIl. 2.305 = Porph. ad Il. 2.305–29 (pp. 44–7), on the prophecy of Calchas (Il. 2.323–9).

³⁵ See Porph. ad Il. 10.276 (pp. 178–9). Aristotle never mentions Zoilus; but he does mention this sort of critic (see e.g. Poet. 25, 1461b1–3; cf. Metaph. N.6, 1093a26–8.)

³⁶ West (n. 18) brackets Il. 7.315 as an interpolation.

³⁷ For the question and various solutions – including Aristotle's – see fr. 370 Gigon = Σ^BIl. 2.649 = Porph. ad Il. (pp. 68–9). On contradictions, see Poet. 25, 1461a31–b9.

³⁸ I take φασι τινές to govern δύνασθαι (as well as πεποιηκέναι): ‘they say these terms can be the same’. Most translators take Aristotle to be claiming that they are the same.

³⁹ E.g. Σ^DOd. 10.19, ἐννεώροιο: ἐνναετοῦς, cf. Apollon. Lex. (p. 68 Bekker).

⁴⁰ See Eust. Il. 2.402–3 (vol. 1, p. 374): καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης οὖν ἱστορήσας ἀκμάζειν μάλιστα τὸν βοῦν πέντε ἔτη ὄντα λέγει ὀρθῶς πεποιηκέναι τὸν Ὅμηρον βοῦν ἄρσενα πενταέτηρον. φησὶ δὲ καὶ τὸ “βοὸς ἐννεώροιο” ταὐτὸν δύνασθαι.

⁴¹ Eust. Od. 10.390 (vol. 1, p. 386); there is a problem with Eustathius' arithmetic. Heubeck, A. and Hoekstra, A., A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, vol. 2: Books IX–XVI (Oxford, 1990)Google Scholar, 44 remark, without further comment, that ἐννεώροισιν means ‘nine years’.

⁴² Fr. 385 Gigon = Σ^BIl. 10.252 = Porph. ad Il. (pp. 170–7): αὐτίκα τῶν παλαιῶν ζητημάτων ὡμολόγηται εἶναι τὸ τοιοῦτο, ἐν οἷς φησιν “ἄστρα δὲ δὴ προβέβηκε, παρῴχηκεν δὲ πλέον νὺξ τῶν δύο μοιράων, τριτάτη δ' ἔτι μοῖρα λέλειπται”. πῶς γὰρ εἰ αἱ δύο μοῖραι ἐξήκουσιν αὐταί τε καὶ ἔτι τούτων πλέον, ἡ τριτάτη μοῖρα λέλειπται ἀλλ' οὐχὶ τῆς τρίτης μόριον;

⁴³ This epithet makes more sense in a passage about Cyclopes, contrasting bread-eating humans with man-eating Polyphemus (ἀνδροφάγοιο, Od. 10.200). Perhaps as a contrast to wild pigs, σιτοφάγῳ means ‘grain-eating’ (as in herd animals and certain domesticated animals).

⁴⁴ Eustathius, commenting on the Iliad passage, reports that the text of ‘the Geographer’ (i.e. Strabo) is different, which he says indicates that lines have dropped out of Homer's text (Il. 9.539; vol. 2, p. 793). The text he quotes is the same as Aristotle's. Heubeck and Hoekstra (n. 41), 133 write that Aristotle ‘contaminated these [Iliad] verses with Od. 9.190–1’, and Strabo cited Aristotle, ‘thus creating the mirage of a genuine paradosis’.

⁴⁵ See Chantraine, P., Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque: histoire des mots (Paris, 1977)Google Scholar, 1264 s.v. χλούνης, and e.g. Aristophanes of Byzantium apud Eust. Il. 9.539 (vol. 2, p. 794) and Σ^BIl. 9.539.

⁴⁶ This is not necessitated by Homer's text, as ἄρνες (masc./fem. nom. pl.) with κεραοί (masc. nom. pl.) could refer to males alone or to both males and females.

⁴⁷ See David Balme's comment on this passage (in Aristotle: Historia Animalium, vol. 2, Books I–VIII: Commentary, prepared for publication by A. Gotthelf [Cambridge, forthcoming]). I am grateful to Allan Gotthelf for giving me access to this work prior to publication.

⁴⁸ L. Dittmeyer, Aristotelis De animalibus historia (Leipzig, 1907), 346 (ex Hdt. 4.29).

⁴⁹ The first half of the passage would thus be rendered: ‘And in Libya the horned herd animals are born straightaway having horns – not only the lambs, as Homer says, but the others as well.’

⁵⁰ See Σ^DOd. 4.85, Σ^POd. 4.85 and Eust. Od. 4.83 (vol. 1, p. 150). Eustathius quotes both Aristotle and Herodotus in support of Homer.

⁵¹ According to Hdt. 4.29, a hot climate promotes the growth of horns, whereas a cold climate does the opposite.

⁵² As this Homeric line is inessential – it names one item in a list of examples of the many lands through which Menelaus travelled – its inaccuracy (if it were inaccurate) would not have been justifiable on aesthetic grounds. But correcting Homer here does not amount to levelling a major aesthetic criticism.

⁵³ See Janko (n. 7), 196–7, a valuable comment on all aspects of Il. 14.289–91.

⁵⁴ Παρὰ δέ τισι θηλυκῶς λέγεται (Σ^DIl. 14.291); ἔτι δὲ ὁ κύμινδις ἢ ἡ κύμινδις, ἑκατέρως γὰρ λέγεται (Eust. Il. 14.291; vol. 3, p. 643). I assume Aristotle is right that the word is feminine (ἡ κύμινδις), though perhaps it was sometimes written ὁ κύμινδις, since Homer presents it as Sleep (ὁ Ὕπνος) transformed.

⁵⁵ Cf. Pl. Cra. 392a – though, again, Plato's interest is in why one name is divine.

⁵⁶ One scholiast quotes Aristotle, and seems to connect his claim that the bird is black with its ‘being bronze in colour’: ἔστι δὲ μέλας, χαλκίζων τὴν χροιάν (Σ^DIl. 14.291). Cf. Σ^TIl. 14.291a: ἢ ὅτι χαλκίζει τὴν χροιάν.

⁵⁷ Σ^TIl. 14.291a. Cf. Eust. Il. 14.291 (vol. 3, p. 643).

⁵⁸ τινὲς δέ φασιν αὐτὴν εἶναι Ἁρπαλύκην, ἣ μιγεῖσα τῷ πατρὶ Κλυμένῳ κατὰ βίαν, ἑψήσασα τὸν υἱὸν Πρέσβωνα παρέθηκεν αὐτῷ. ἢ ὅτι Διῒ συνῆλθεν, Ἥρα δὲ ὠρνίθωσεν αὐτήν· ἐν Χαλκίδι δὲ διῆγεν ἄνθρωπος οὖσα. οἱ δὲ τὴν μητέρα τῶν Κορυβάντων Χαλκίδα φασίν.

⁵⁹ Σ^DIl. 14.291: καλεῖται κύμινδις ἀπὸ τῆς φωνῆς (‘is called kumindis from its sound’).

⁶⁰ Σ^DIl. 14.291: εὐεπίφορον δὲ εἰς ὕπνον τὸ ὄρνεον (‘the bird easily inclines towards sleep’); Σ^Gen.Il. 14.291: ἐκ τούτου δὲ καὶ κύμινδις καλεῖται, παρὰ τὸ κοιμᾶσθαι (‘and it is also called kumindis from this, from “falling asleep”’). Eustathius writes that some people claim κύμινδις comes from κοίμημα, ‘sleeping’ (Il. 14.291; vol. 3, p. 643).

⁶¹ Σ^DIl. 14.291: ἀεὶ δὲ τὴν κεφαλὴν ὑπὸ τοὺς κλάδους κρύπτει (‘it always hides its head under branches’); Σ^TIl. 14.291a: ἢ ὅτι κατὰ νύκτα ὁρᾶται (‘or because she is seen [only] at night’). See also Eust. Il. 14.291 (vol. 3, p. 643).

⁶² In this context, τελειότατον may mean surest or most reliable of birds qua omen. See Richardson, N., The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 6: Books 21–24 (Cambridge, 1993), 305–6Google Scholar.

⁶³ Although περκνός is an unusual word, which required identification in scholia and lexical works, its meaning is clear enough (note Erotian: περκνόν· μέλαν). It is related to περκάζω, which means ‘become dark’ (Σ^bTIl. 24.316b: περκνὸν δὲ μέλανα, ὡς βότρυν, ὃν καὶ περκάζειν φασίν). So far as I can tell, it was not an object of discussion or debate among Homeric scholars; but see Eust. Il. 24.316 (vol. 4, p. 911).

⁶⁴ One issue, for which there is no evidence of interest on Aristotle's part, was the etymology of μόρφνος. According to Apollon. Lex. s.v. μόρφνον (p. 113 Bekker), it is a shortened form of μορόφονος (unlikely an actual word), which is said to come from τὸν διὰ τοῦ φόνου τὸν μόρον ἐπιφέροντα (‘the one who brings doom through killing’). Cf. Eust. Il. 24.316 (vol. 4, p. 910).

⁶⁵ I omit further details about this bird, as they are not relevant in the present context.

⁶⁶ I.e. Priam's ‘expedition’ in Iliad 24 to appeal to Achilles.

⁶⁷ Cf. Il. 24.311 (κράτος ἐστὶ μέγιστον) and Il. 21.253 (κάρτιστος) with Hist. an. 8(9).32, 618b27 (κράτιστος).

⁶⁸ MacPhail (n. 8), 271: ‘The name is surely owed to Aphrodite's role in Zeus’ seduction of Nemesis. Zeus disguises himself as a swan and Aphrodite as an eagle and has her pursue him into Nemesis' lap (Hyginus 2.8).'

⁶⁹ Πέλλος means ‘dusky’, ‘dark’ or ‘grey’. The bird Athena sends to Odysseus and Diomedes in Iliad 10 is a heron (ἐρωδιόν). Cf. Arist. Hist. an. 8(9).1.609b21–3. Porphyry is aware that this bird is a heron: see ad Il. 10.276 (pp. 178–9).

⁷⁰ Porph. ad Il. 24.315–6 (pp. 270–3): ἐζητήθη ποίου μέμνηται ἐνταῦθα Ὅμηρος αἰετοῦ, τοῦ πυγάργου ἢ τοῦ ἀφροδισίου ἢ πέλλου, περὶ ὧν φησιν ἐν τῇ Ἰλιάδι Κ, καὶ πάλιν “αἰετοῦ οἴματ' ἔχων μέλανος τοῦ θηρητῆρος” περὶ οὗ φησιν ἐν τῇ Ἰλιάδι Φ. ἔστι δὲ ὁ αὐτός, καλούμενος μορφνὸς ὀνόματι καὶ μέλας δὲ ὤν, περὶ οὗ φησιν Ἀριστοτέλης · “ἕτερος δὲ μέλας χρόαν καὶ μέγεθος ἐλάχιστος καὶ κράτιστος· οἰκεῖ δ' ὄρη καὶ ὕλας, καλεῖται δὲ μελαναίετος καὶ λαγωσφόνος. ἔστι δὲ ὠκυβόλος.”

⁷¹ Some modern scholars have doubts about how appropriate or effective the metaphor is in this latter case. See Edwards (n. 28), 126 and West (n. 28), 341.

⁷² See: Ath. 15.701A; Philoxenus, fr. 395 Theodoridis s.v. δετή; Σ^DIl. 11.554, Σ^TIl. 11.554 and Σ^bTIl. 17.663. This last paraphrases Aristotle: καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης ἐν τῷ Περὶ ζῴων φησὶ λέοντα μάλιστα τὸ πῦρ δεδοικέναι. δεταὶ δὲ ὀξυτόνως αἱ συνδεδεμέναι ἐκ ξύλων λαμπάδες.

⁷³ Σ^DIl. 11.547 begins with a question in the problemata tradition: διὰ τί ὁτὲ μὲν λέοντι ὁτὲ δὲ ὄνῳ παραβάλλει τὸν Αἴαντα; (‘Why at one point is Ajax compared to a lion, and at another to a donkey?’). Σ^AIl. 11.548a confirms that this was a topic of debate, and indicates that the passage was omitted by Zenodotus, in part for this same reason: ὅτι ἀπὸ τούτου Ζηνόδοτος ἀθετεῖ ἕως τοῦ “ἤιε πόλλ' ἀέκων”, ἴσως ὅτι νῦν μὲν λέοντι παραβέβληκεν, ἑξῆς δὲ ὄνῳ. Both scholiasts defend Homer on the grounds that the two comparisons make two different, and valid, points.

⁷⁴ Text: Bekker, I., Aristoteles Graece, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1831)Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ For example, here is Il. 10.457 as rendered in three well-known English translations: ‘suddenly his head, deceiv'd, fell speaking on the ground’ (Chapman); ‘Dolon's head still speaking dropped in the dust’ (Lattimore); ‘the shrieking head went tumbling in the dust’ (Fagle). I believe, however, that recent commentators have the right view: B. Hainsworth, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 3: Books 9–12 (Cambridge, 1993), 198: ‘φθεγγομένη (in agreement with the feminine κάρη) would imply the severed head is still pleading, a bizarre and gruesome thought, typical enough of this poet. Articulate speech is not in question in the Odyssean passage, and need not be foisted onto this’; see also Russo, J., Fernández-Galiano;, M.Heubeck, A., A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, vol. 3: Books 17–24 (Oxford, 1992)Google Scholar, 278.

⁷⁶ Eustathius (Il. 10.457; vol. 3, p. 110), however, reports that some people, claiming φθεγγομένου is unclear, posit φθεγγομένη instead; but he adds: οὐχ' Ὁμηρικὴ δὲ ἡ φράσις· οὐ γὰρ ἔστι θηλυκῶς ἡ κάρη παρ' Ὁμήρῳ (‘but the expression is not Homeric; for κάρη according to Homer is not feminine’). Elsewhere (Il. 8.83; vol. 2, p. 537) Eustathius writes that the ancients considered it neuter, more recent scholars feminine (οὕτω καὶ τὸ κάρα παρὰ τοῖς παλαιοῖς καὶ ἡ κάρα παρὰ τοῖς ὕστερον). According to LSJ (s.v. κάρα) κάρη is neuter epic ionic.

⁷⁷ Σ^bTIl. 10.457: “φθεγγομένου δ' ἄρα τοῦ γε”: ἅμα τῷ ἄρξασθαι φωνὴν ἀφεῖναι πρὶν σαφηνισθῆναι τὸ λεγόμενον …

⁷⁸ Eust. Od. 22.329 (vol. 2, p. 284).

⁷⁹ Eust. Il. 10.457 (vol. 3, p. 110): τὸ πνεῦμα μέχρι τοῦ στόματος ἀνελθὸν καὶ πληρῶσαν αὐτὸ ἐξεχύθη, καίτοι τμηθείσης τῆς κεφαλῆς, ὥστε ἔτι κινουμένης τῆς γλώττης δοκεῖν τὴν κεφαλὴν κάτω κειμένην φθέγγεσθαι. Cf. Eust. Od. 22.329 (vol. 2, p. 284). Eustathius is presenting or summarizing such views as are found in Σ^bTIl. 10.457 and Σ^DIl. 10.457.

⁸⁰ Text: Lulofs, H. Drossaart, Aristotelis de generatione animalium (Oxford, 1965)Google Scholar.

⁸¹ Heraclitus (19.1–4) took Il. 8.83–4 to be evidence that Homer located the rational part of the soul in the brain. See Russell and Konstan (n. 2), 36–7.

⁸² Eust. Il. 8.83 (vol. 2, p. 537–8); Σ^DIl. 8.83: πρώτας τρίχας λέγει τὸ καλούμενον προκόμιον. In this same passage, Eustathius also discusses many (forms of) words for (regions of) the head: κάρα, κορυφή, κράς, κεφαλή, κράας, κάρηαρ, κάρηνον, κρανίον, κράνος, κρήδεμνον, κόρση. He does not remark on their all beginning with kappa.

⁸³ See Σ^bTIl. 8.83a2: ‘This region is fatal by being close to the membranes of the brain’ (θανάσιμος δέ ἐστιν ὁ τόπος διὰ τὸ τὸν ἐγκέφαλον πλησιάζειν ταῖς μήνιγξιν).

⁸⁴ Halliwell, S., Aristotle's Poetics (Chicago, 1998 ²)Google Scholar, ‘Appendix 1: the date of the Poetics’, 324.

⁸⁵ Balme, D., ‘Date of HA and its relation to other treatises of Aristotle’, in his introduction to Aristotle: History of Animals: Books VII–X, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA and London, 1991), 21–6Google Scholar. This should be read in conjunction with Lennox, J., ‘Aristotle's biological development: the Balme hypothesis’, in Wians, W. (ed.), Aristotle's Philosophical Development: Problems and Prospects (Lanham, MD, 1996), 229–48Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ Balme, D., ‘Aristotle's use of division and differentiae’, in Gotthelf, A. and Lennox, J. (edd.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle's Biology (Cambridge, 1987), 69–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 80.

⁸⁷ Halliwell (n. 84), 330.

⁸⁸ Ibid., 327–8. See also Janko, R., Philodemus On Poems, Books 3–4, with fragments of Aristotle On Poets (Oxford, 2011), 388–9Google Scholar.

⁸⁹ See above, Sections 1, 5, 6, 9 and 11.

⁹⁰ See above, Sections 2–4.

⁹¹ See above, Sections 7, 8 and 10.

⁹² Balme (n. 85), 24. For a longer list of such specialists, see the index to this work (prepared by A. Gotthelf), under ‘Experts’ (pp. 563–4).

⁹³ Gotthelf, A., Teleology, First Principles, and Scientific Method in Aristotle's Biology (Oxford, 2012CrossRefGoogle Scholar), 383. Gotthelf goes on to describe, as a work from this stage of inquiry, Aristotle's lost Dissections (pp. 383–4; see frr. 295–324 Gigon). See also Gotthelf's comments on the work On Marvellous Things Heard, which is generally considered inauthentic (p. 385). The History of Animals is from the organization of data stage, the Parts of Animals and the Generation of Animals from the explanation of data stage (p. 383).

⁹⁴ Aristotle might have jotted down passages from his Homeric Puzzles into his notebooks, but in such cases I would still regard the Homeric Puzzles as the source.

⁹⁵ By ‘possible’ I do not mean merely that it is logically possible, but that there is some genuine support for the claim I am making and that nothing rules it out as impossible (though the case is no stronger than that and certainly not conclusive).

⁹⁶ I do not mean to suggest that Aristotle's discussion of biological issues in his Homeric Puzzles is limited to (at most) the eleven cases that I have discussed in this essay. Janko (n. 7), 23–4, 71–2, 339 notes a number of passages in Homer in which Zenodotus emends the text in the name of zoological accuracy. These could reflect ancient debates in which Aristotle took part, though no evidence for that participation survives.

⁹⁷ West brackets Il. 21.126–35 as an interpolation. His text reads ὑπαΐξει (with the manuscripts), and he accepts the conjecture ὥς over the manuscripts' ὅς (which I prefer).

⁹⁸ The only other reference to Aristotle in the extant first book is in §16 (pp. 115–16 Sodano): οὐδεὶς γὰρ τῶν παλαιῶν οὐδ' Ἀριστοτέλης βότρυν ζῶον ἔγραψε, κέχρηται δὲ Ὅμηρος ἐπ' ἀμπέλου τῷ “βότρυς” ὀνόματι (‘For none of the ancients, not even Aristotle, wrote βότρυς [to refer to] an animal, but Homer did use the word for a grape-vine’ [see Il. 23.562]).

⁹⁹ Not otherwise known; modern scholars (see n. 104) have suggested emendations.

¹⁰⁰ I argue that ζʹ here represents 7 (according to the Milesian system, in which the digamma [Ϝ] is used for 6).

¹⁰¹ I.e. if the rippling is caused by the North wind (βόρειος).

¹⁰² See n. 6. It was, however, included in Rose's second edition (fr. 333), which is volume 5 of Bekker's, Aristotelis Opera (Berlin, 1870)Google Scholar. In his first edition of the fragments (Rose, V., Aristoteles Pseudepigraphus, [Leipzig, 1863]Google Scholar), he quotes from this passage in a note on another text (cheating a bit by printing ἑβδόμῳ in place of ζʹ) and refers to Hist. an. 7(8).15 and Theophrastus' lost Περὶ τῶν φωλευόντων (On [Animals] that Hibernate, see Diogenes Laertius 5.44).

¹⁰³ In the book order of the manuscripts (see n. 16).

¹⁰⁴ This is not to deny that Aristotle might have discussed Il. 21.126–35 in his Homeric Puzzles. Note that this passage has received since antiquity and continues to receive scholarly attention. See the A-scholia – e.g. Σ^AIl. 21.126 = Philetas fr. 57 (Spanoudakis) = Aristonicus, De signis Iliadis ad 21.126 – and Eustathius (Il. 21.127; vol. 4, pp. 470–1), and (for modern scholarship) e.g. Hatzikosta, S., ‘Il., 21, 126 and its alleged interpretation by Philetas’, L'Antiquité Classique 63 (1994), 201–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.