Plutarch, De sollertia animalium, Harold Cherniss (Translator), William C. Helmbold (Translator), 13

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

← Previous Next →

[13] At this point in my discourse, I imagine that I shall do well not to omit the case of the fox, since it is so similar. Now the story-books¹ tell us that when Deucalion released a dove from the ark, as long as she returned, it was a certain sign that the storm was still raging; but as soon as she flew away, it was a harbinger of fair weather. So even to this day the Thracians,² whenever they propose crossing a frozen river, make use of a fox as an indicator of the solidity of the ice. The fox moves ahead slowly and lays her ear to the ice; if she perceives by the sound that the stream is running close underneath, judging that the frozen part has no great depth, but is only thin and insecure, she stands stock still and, if she is permitted, returns to the shore; but if she is reassured by the absence of noise, she crosses over. And let us not declare that this is a nicety of perception unaided by reason; it is, rather, a syllogistic conclusion developed from the evidence of perception: What makes noise must be in motion; what is in motion is not frozen; what is not frozen is liquid; what is liquid gives way. So logicians³ assert that a dog, at a point where many paths split off, makes use of a multiple disjunctive⁴ argument and reasons with himself: Either the wild beast has taken this path, or this, or this. But surely it has not taken this, or this. Then it must have gone by the remaining road. Perception here affords nothing but the minor premiss, while the force of reason gives the major premisses and adds the conclusion to the premisses. A dog, however, does not need such a testimonial, which is both false and fraudulent; for it is perception itself, by means of track and spoor,⁵ which indicates the way the creature fled; it does not bother with disjunctive and copulative propositions. The dog’s true capacity may be discerned from many other acts and reactions and the performance of duties, which are neither to be smelled out nor seen by the eye, but can be carried out or perceived only by the use of intelligence and reason.⁶ I should only make myself ridiculous if I described the dog’s self-control and obedience and sagacity on hunting parties to you who see and handle these matters every day.

There was a Roman named Calvus⁷ slain in the Civil Wars, but no one was able to cut off his head until they encircled and stabbed to death the dog who guarded his master and defended him. And King Pyrrhus⁸ on a journey chanced upon a dog guarding the body of a murdered man; in answer to his questions he was told that the dog had remained there without eating for three days and refused to leave. Pyrrhus gave orders for the corpse to be buried and the dog cared for and brought along in his train. A few days later there was an inspection of the soldiers, who marched in front of the king seated on his throne, while the dog lay quietly by his side. But when it saw its master’s murderers filing past, it rushed at them with furious barking and, as it voiced its accusation, turned to look at the king so that not only he, but everyone present, became suspicious of the men. They were at once arrested and when put to the question, with the help of some bits of external evidence as well, they confessed the murder and were punished.

The same thing is said to have been done by the poet Hesiod’s⁹ dog, which convicted the sons of Ganyctor the Naupactian, by whom Hesiod had been murdered. But a matter which carne to the attention of our fathers when they were studying at Athens is even plainer than anything so far mentioned. A certain fellow slipped into the temple of Asclepius,¹⁰ took such gold and silver offerings as were not bulky, and made his escape, thinking that he had not been detected. But the watchdog, whose name was Capparus, when none of the sacristans responded to its barking, pursued the escaping temple-thief. First the man threw stones at it, but could not drive it away. When day dawned, the dog did not approach close, but followed the man, always keeping him in sight, and refused the food he offered. When he stopped to rest, the dog passed the night on guard; when he struck out again, the dog got up and kept following, fawning on the other people it met on the road and barking at the man and sticking to his heels. When those who were investigating the robbery learned this from men who had encountered the pair and were told the colour and size of the dog, they pursued all the more vigorously and overtook the man and brought him back from Crommyon. On the return the dog led the procession, capering and exultant, as though it claimed for itself the credit for pursuing and capturing the temple-thief. The people actually voted it a public ration of food and entrusted the charge of this to the priests in perpetuity, thereby imitating the ancient Athenian kindness to the mule. For when Pericles was building the Hecatompedon¹¹ on the Acropolis, stones were naturally brought by numerous teams of draught-animals every day. Now one of the mules who had assisted gallantly in the work, but had now been discharged because of old age, used to go down every day to the Ceramicus and meet the beasts which brought the stones, turning back with them and trotting along by their side, as though to encourage and cheer them on. So the people of Athens, admiring its enterprise, gave orders for it to be maintained at the public expense, voting it free meals, as though to an athlete who had succumbed to old age.¹²

De sollertia animalium. Plutarch. Harold Cherniss (Translator), William C. Helmbold (Translator). Cambridge, MA. 1957.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The National Endowment for the Humanities.

Current edition Perseus

Whether land or sea animals are cleverer (English) (Plutarch. Moralia, Vol. XII. Cherniss, Harold, and Helmbold, William C., translators. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1957 (printing).)

Editions (1)

Πότερα τῶν ζῴων φρονιμώτερα τὰ χερσαῖα ἢ τὰ ἔνυδρα Perseus (Plutarch. Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia, Vol. VI. Vernardakēs, Grēgorios N., editor. Leipzig: Teubner, 1895.) — 13 focus

[13] ἐνταῦθα τοῦ λόγου γεγονὼς οὐ δοκῶ μοι παρήσειν διʼ ὁμοιότητα τὸ τῆς ἀλώπεκος. οἱ μὲν οὖν μυθολόγοι τῷ Δευκαλίωνί φασι περιστερὰν ἐκ 25 τῆς λάρνακος ἀφιεμένην δήλωμα γενέσθαι χειμῶνος μὲν εἴσω πάλιν ἐνδυομένην, εὐδίας δʼ ἀποπτᾶσαν οἱ δὲ Θρᾷκες ἔτι νῦν, ὅταν παγέντα ποταμὸν διαβαίνειν 969a ἐπιχειρῶσιν, ἀλώπεκα ποιοῦνται γνὡμθνα τῆς τοῦ πάγου στερρότητος· ἡσυχῆ γὰρ ὑπάγουσα παραβάλλει τὸ οὖς κἂν μὲν αἴσθηται ψόφῳ τοῦ ῥεύματος ἐγγὺς ὑποφερομένου, τεκμαιρομένη μὴ γεγονέναι διὰ βάθους τὴν πῆξιν ἀλλὰ λεπτὴν καὶ ἀβέβαιον ἵσταται, κἂν ἐᾷ τις, ἐπανέρχεται τῷ δὲ 5 μὴ ψοφεῖν θαρροῦσα διῆλθε. καὶ τοῦτο μὴ λέγωμεν αἰσθήσεως ἄλογον ἀκρίβειαν, ἀλλʼ ἐξ αἰσθήσεως συλλογισμὸν ὅτι τὸ ψοφοῦν κινεῖται, τὸ δὲ κινούμενον οὐ πέπηγε, τὸ δὲ μὴ πεπηγὸς ὑγρόν ἐστι, τὸ δʼ ὑγρὸν ἐνδίδωσιν οἱ δὲ διαλεκτικοί φασι τὸν 10 969b κύνα τῷ διὰ πλειόνων διεζευγμένῳ χρώμενον ἐν ταῖς πολυσχιδέσιν ἀτραποῖς συλλογίζεσθαι πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ἤτοι τήνδε τὸ θηρίον ὥρμηκεν ἢ τήνδε ἢ τήνδε· ἀλλὰ μὴν οὔτε τήνδε οὔτε τήνδε τὴν λοιπὴν ἄρα· τῆς μὲν αἰσθήσεως οὐδὲν ἢ τὴν πρόσληψιν 15 διδούσης, τοῦ δὲ λόγου τὰ λήμματα καὶ τὸ συμπέρασμα τοῖς λήμμασιν ἐπιφέροντος. οὐ μὴν δεῖταὶ γε τοιαύτης μαρτυρίας ὁ κύων· ψευδὴς γάρ ἐστι καὶ κίβδηλος ἡ γὰρ αἴσθησις αὐτὴ τοῖς ἴχνεσι καὶ τοῖς ῥεύμασι τοῦ θηρίου τὴν φυγὴν ἐπιδείκνυσι, 20 χαίρειν λέγουσα διεζευγμένοις ἀξιώμασι καὶ συμπεπλεγμένοις. διʼ ἄλλων δὲ πολλῶν ἔργων καὶ 969c παθῶν καὶ καθηκόντων οὔτʼ ὀσφραντῶν οὔθʼ ὁρατῶν ἀλλὰ διανοίᾳ καὶ λόγῳ μόνον πρακτῶν καὶ θεατῶν ὄντων κατιδεῖν ἔστι τὴν κυνὸς φύσιν· οὗ 25 τὰς μὲν ἐν ἄγραις ἐγκρατείας καὶ πειθαρχίας καὶ ἀγχινοίας γελοῖος ἔσομαι λέγων πρὸς ὑμᾶς τοὺς τοῦ Ἀσκληπιοῦ τὰ εὔογκα τῶν ἀργυρῶν καὶ χρυσῶν ἔλαβεν ἀναθημάτων καὶ λεληθέναι νομίζων ὑπεξῆλθεν 969f ὁ δὲ φρουρὸς κύων, ὄνομα Κάππαρος, ἐπεὶ μηδεὶς ὑλακτοῦντι τῶν ζακόρων ὑπήκουσεν αὐτῷ, 5 φεύγοντα τὸν ἱερόσυλον ἐπεδίωκε· καὶ πρῶτον μὲν βαλλόμενος λίθοις οὐκ ἀπέστη γενομένης δʼ ἡμέρας, ἐγγὺς οὐ προσιὼν ἀλλʼ ἀπʼ ὀφθαλμοῦ παραφυλάττων εἵπετο καὶ τροφὴν προβάλλοντος οὐκ ἐλάμβανεν ἀναπαυομένῳ δὲ παρενυκτέρευε καὶ βαδίζοντος 10 πάλιν ἀναστὰς ἐπηκολούθει, τοὺς δʼ ἀπαντῶντας ὁδοιπόρους ἔσαινεν, ἐκείνῳ δʼ ἐφυλάκτει καὶ προσέκειτο. ταῦτα δʼ οἱ διώκοντες πυνθανόμενοι παρὰ τῶν ἀπαντώντων ἅμα καὶ τὸ χρῶμα φραζόντων καὶ τὸ μέγεθος; τοῦ κυνὸς προθυμότερον 15 ἐχρήσαντο τῇ διώξει, καὶ καταλαβόντες 970a τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἀνήγαγον ἀπὸ Κρομμυῶνος. ὁ δὲ κύων ἀναστρέψας προηγεῖτο γαῦρος καὶ περιχαρής, οἷον ἑαυτοῦ ποιούμενος; ἄγραν καὶ θήραμα τὸν ἱερόσυλον. ἐψηφίσαντο δὴ σῖτον αὐτῷ δημοσίᾳ 20 μετρεῖσθαι καὶ παρεγγυᾶσθαι τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν εἰς ἀεὶ τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν, ἀπομιμησάμενοι τὸ πρὸς τὸν ἡμίονον φιλανθρώπευμα τῶν παλαιῶν Ἀθηναίων. τὸν γὰρ ἑκατόμπεδον νεὼν Περικλέους ἐν ἀκροπόλει κατασκευάζοντος, ὡς εἰκός, λίθοι προσήγοντο πολλοῖς 25 ζεύγεσι καθʼ ἡμέραν· τῶν οὖν συνειργασμένων μὲν προθύμως ἢδη δὲ διὰ γῆρας ἀφειμένων ὀρέων εἷς· κατερχόμενος εἰς Κεραμεικόν, καὶ τοῖς ἀνάγουσι 970b ζεύγεσι τοὺς λίθους ὑπαντῶν ἀεὶ συνανέστρεφε καὶ συμπαρετρόχαζεν, οἷον ἐγκελευόμενος καὶ παρορμῶν διὸ θαυμάσας αὐτοῦ τὴν φιλοτιμίαν ὁ δῆμος ἐκέλευσε δημοσίᾳ τρέφεσθαι, καθάπερ ἀθλητῇ σίτησιν ὑπὸ γήρως; ἀπειρηκότι ψηφισάμενος.

Translations (1)

Which are the most crafty, water-animals or those creatures that breed upon the land? Perseus (Plutarch. Plutarch's Morals, Vol. V. Goodwin, William W., editor; Philips, John, translator. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1874.) — 13 focus

[13] Having thus far proceeded in our discourse, I cannot think it well done to pass by the cunning of the fox, by reason of the similitude it has with the former. The mythologists tell us that the dove which Deucalion sent out of his ark, returning back again, was to him a certain sign of the storm not ceased; but of serene and fair weather, when she flew quite away. But the Thracians to this day, when they design to pass a river that is frozen over, make use of a fox to try whether the ice will bear or no. For the fox, treading gently, lays his ear to the ice, and if he perceive by the noise of the water that the stream runs very close underneath, conjecturing from thence that the congelation is not deep but thin, and no way steadfastly solid, he makes a stop, and if he be suffered, returns back again; but if he perceive no noise, he goes on boldly. Nor can we say that this is only an exquisiteness of sense without reason; but it is a syllogistical deduction from sense, concluding that whatever makes a noise is moved; whatever is moved, cannot be frozen; what is not frozen, is moist; what is moist, gives way. The logicians say that a dog, making use of the argument drawn from many disjunctive propositions, thus reasons with himself, in places where several highways meet: Either the wild beast is gone this way, or that, or that way; but not that way, nor that way, therefore this way: the force of sense affording nothing but the minor premise, but the force of reason affording the major proposition, and inferring the conclusion of the assumption. But a dog stands in no need of any such testimonial; in regard it is both false and adulterate. For sense itself shows which way the beast is fled, by his tracks and footsteps, bidding farewell to disjunctive and copulative propositions. The nature of dogs is palpably to be discerned by many other actions, affections, and dutiful service, neither the effects of hearing or seeing, but practicable only by reason and understanding. It would be ridiculous for me to discourse of the continence, obedience, and industry of dogs in hunting, to you that are so well confirmed in the knowledge of those things by daily experience and practice.

There was a Roman named Calvus, slain in the civil wars, whose head nobody durst cut off before they killed the dog that guarded his body and fought in defence of his master. It happened that King Pyrrhus, travelling one day, lit upon a dog watching over the carcass of a person slain; and hearing that the dog had been there three days without meat or drink, yet would not forsake his dead master, ordered that the man should be buried, but that the dog should be preserved and brought to him. A few days after, there was a muster of the soldiers, so that they were forced to march all in order by the king, with the dog quietly lying by him for a good while. But when he saw the murderers of his master pass by him, he flew upon them with a more than ordinary fury, barking and baying and tearing his throat, and ever and anon turning about to the king; which did not only rouse the king’s suspicion, but the jealousy of all that stood about him. Upon which the men were presently apprehended; and though the circumstances were very slight which otherwise appeared against them, yet they confessed the fact and were executed.

The same thing is reported to have been done by a dog that belonged to Hesiod, surnamed the wise, which discovered the sons of Ganyctor the Naupactian, by whom Hesiod was murdered. But that which came to the knowledge of our parents, when they were students at Athens, is yet more evident than any thing we have said. For a certain person getting into the temple of Aesculapius, after he had stolen all the massy offerings of gold and silver, made his escape, not believing he was discovered. But the dog which belonged to the temple, who was called Capparus, when he found that none of the sacristans took any notice of his barking, pursued himself the sacrilegious thief; and though at first the fellow pelted him with stones, he could not beat him off. So soon as it was day, the dog still followed him, though at such a distance that he always kept him in his eyes. When the fellow threw him meat he refused it; when the thief went to bed, the dog watched at his door; and when he rose in the morning, the dog still followed him, fawning upon the passengers on the road, but still barking and baying at the heels of the thief. These things when they who were in pursuit of the sacrilegious person heard, and were told withal by those they met the color and bigness of the dog, they were the more vigorous in the pursuit; and by that means overtaking the thief, brought him back from Crommyon, while the dog ran before, leaping and capering and full of joy, as it were challenging to himself the praise and reward of apprehending the temple-robber. And indeed the Athenians were so grateful to him, that they decreed him such a quantity of meat to be publicly measured to him, and ordered the priests to take care to see it done; in imitation of the kindness of the ancient Athenians in rewarding the mule.

For when Pericles built the temple Hecatompedon (or Parthenon) in the tower of Athens, it so fell out that the stones were to be fetched every day many furlongs off, and a world of carriages were made use of for that purpose. Among the rest of the mules that labored hard in this employment, there was one that, though dismissed by reason of age, would still go down to the Ceramicus, and meeting the carts that brought the stones, would be always in their company running by their sides, as it were by the way of encouragement and to excite them to work cheerfully. So that the people, admiring the zeal of the mule, ordered him to be fed at the public charge, as they were wont to decree public alms to the superannuated wrestlers.

Notes on the current edition

Whether land or sea animals are cleverer

1. The authorities on Deucalion’s Flood are assembled by Frazer on Apollodorus, i. 7. 2 (L.C.L.), and more completely in his Folk-Lore in the Old Testament, i, pp. 146 ff. Plutarch is the only Greek author to add the Semitic dove story, though Lucian ( De Dea Syria, 12 ff.) was to add to the other major contaminations.

2. Cf. 949 d supra and the note.

3. Specifically Chrysippus ( Cf. von Arnim, S.V.F. ii, pp. 726 f.). Cf. Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism, i. 69 (the whole passage i. 62-72 is worth reading); Aelian, De Natura Animal. vi. 59; Philo, 45 (p. 122).

4. For the form of the syllogism see Diogenes Laertius, vii. 81.

5. Cf. Shorey on Plato, Republic, 427 e (L.C.L., vol. I, p. 347, note e).

6. For the philosophic dog see Plato, op. cit. 376 b; the scholia of Olympiodorus add that Socrates’ famous oath by the dog was symbolic of the creature’s rational nature. See also Sinclair, Class. Rev. xlii (1948), p. 61; the parallel passages are collected by J. E. B. Mayor, Class. Rev. xii (1898), pp. 93 ff.

7. See Aelian, De Natura Animal. vii. 10.

8. Cf. Aelian, loc. cit.; Pliny, Nat. Hist. viii. 142.

9. Cf. 984 d infra. A different account, omitting the dog, will be found in Mor. 162 c-f (where see Wyttenbach’s note); Cf. also Pollux, Onomasticon, v. 42 and Gabathüler on Anth. Pal. vii. 55 ( Hellenistische Epigramme auf Dichter, p. 31).

10. The same story in Aelian, De Natura Animal. vii. 13, indicates a literary source. See now E. R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational, p. 114 and n. 65.

11. Better known as the Parthenon; cf. Mor. 349 d, Life of Pericles, xiii. 7 (159 e).

12. Cf . Life of Cato Maior, v. 3 (339 a-b). Aelian, De Natura Animal. vi. 49, agrees in the main with Plutarch’s account; Aristotle, Historia Animal. vi. 24 (577 b 34), says merely that a public decree was passed forbidding bakers to drive the creature away from their trays. He adds that the mule was 80 years old and is followed by Pliny, Nat. Hist. viii. 175.

Plutarch De sollertia animalium 13

Harold Cherniss (Translator), William C. Helmbold (Translator)

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

Current edition Perseus

Notes on the current edition

Stable identifiers