Advertisement

Journal of the History of Biology

, Volume 52, Issue 1, pp 87–124 | Cite as

Seed (Sperma) and Kuêma in Aristotle’s Generation of Animals

  • Ignacio De Ribera-MartinEmail author
Article
  • 101 Downloads

Abstract

There are two different notions of seed (sperma) at work in the Generation of Animals: seed as the spermatic residue (perittôma), which concerns only the male and the female generative contributions, and seed as the kuêma and first mixture of the two generative contributions. The latter is a notion of seed common to plants and animals. The passage in GA I.18, 724b12–22 where Aristotle distinguishes between these two notions of seed has been mistakenly discredited as inauthentic or simply as irrelevant for understanding the seeds of animals. On the other hand, recent studies have rather focused on the seed as spermatic residue (in particular, the female contribution as seed), paying little attention to the notion of seed as kuêma. In this paper I defend the authenticity and relevance of this passage and show how understanding the notion of seed as kuêma is essential to have a complete picture of Aristotle’s account of seed. This common notion of seed makes sense of Aristotle’s otherwise puzzling use of the word “sperma” to designate the seeds of plants, the kuêma, the fertilized eggs, and the first mixture of the two generative contributions. It also proves helpful in determining what the word ‘sperma’ stands for in key passages, such as Metaph. IX.7.

Keywords

Aristotle Seed Sperma kuêma Generation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aristotle. 1942. The Generation of Animals. Edited and Translated by A.L. Peck. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  2. Aristotle. 1965. De Generatione Animalium. Edited by J. H. Drossaart Lulofs. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  3. Aristotle. 1992. De Partibus Animalium I and De Generatione Animalium I (with Passages from II.13). Translated with Notes by David M. Balme, with a Report on Recent Work and an Additional Bibliography by Allan Gotthelf. New York: OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Beere, Jonathan 2008. Doing and Being. New York: Oxford University PressBeere, Jonathan. 2008Google Scholar
  5. Bolton, Robert. 1987. “Definition and Scientific Method in Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics and Generation of Animals.” Allan Gotthelf and James G Lennox (eds.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology, pp. 120–166. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  6. Carraro, Nicola. 2017. “Aristotle’s Embryology and Ackrill’s Problem.” Phronesis 62: 274–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Code, Alan. 1987. “Soul as Efficient Cause in Aristotle’s Embryology.” Philosophical Topics 15: 51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coles, Andrew. 1995. “Biomedical Models of Reproduction in the Fifth Century BC and Aristotle’s Generation of Animals.” Phronesis 40: 48–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Connell, Sophia M. 2016. Aristotle on Female Animals: A Study of the Generation of Animals. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dean-Jones, Lesley. 1994. Women’s Bodies in Classical Greek Science. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
  11. Freeland, Cynthia A. 1987. “Aristotle on Bodies, Matter, and Potentiality.” Allan Gotthelf and James G. Lennox (eds.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology, pp. 392–407. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Furth, Montgomery. 1988. Substance, Form, and Psyche: An Aristotelian Metaphysics. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gelber, Jessica. 2010. “Form and Inheritance in Aristotle’s Biology.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 39: 183–212Google Scholar
  14. Henry, Devin. 2006. “Understanding Aristotle’s Reproductive Hylomorphism.” Apeiron 39: 257–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lefebvre, David. 2016. “Le Sperma: Forme, Matière ou les Deux? Aristote Critique de la Double Semence.” Philosophie Antique 16: 31–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mayhew, Robert. 2004. The Female in Aristotle’s Biology: Reason or Rationalization. Chicago: University of Chicago PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morsink, Johannes. 1982. Aristotle on the Generation of Animals: A Philosophical Study. Washington, D.C.: University Press of AmericaGoogle Scholar
  18. O’Connor, Scott. 2015. “The Subjects of Natural Generation in Aristotle’s Physics I.7.” Apeiron 48: 45–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Preus, Anthony. 1975. Science and Philosophy in Aristotle’s Biological Works. New York: G. OlmsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of PhilosophyThe Catholic University of AmericaWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations