title: Plutarch on Anaximander’s Zoogony (Quaest. Conv. VII 8. 4 730E = 12 A 30 DK)
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Pimenova, Alexandra A.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2019-01-16T16:17:55Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2019-01-16T16:17:55Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2018-12
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Alexandra A. Pimenova. Plutarch on Anaximander’s Zoogony (Quaest. Conv. VII 8. 4 730E = 12 A 30 DK). Philologia Classica 2018, 13(2), 213–219.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: 10.21638/11701/spbu20.2018.202
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/15252
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: In Quaestiones Convivales (730E), Plutarch notes that according to Anaximander’s zoogony
  first living creatures originated in fish, like οἱ γαλεοί, one species of Selachia, which corresponds
  to modern dogfish. Plutarch describes this kind of fish also in two other treatises (De
  sollertia animalium 982A and De amore prolis 494C). In the two latter instances Plutarch refers
  to two peculiarities of the dogfishes, namely their way of breeding which resembles the mammals
  and the way of nursing their youth — mother lets it swim around, feed itself and then
  takes the offspring back inside her body. Aristotle duly observed both peculiarities (HA I 5.
  489b11 f.; VI 10. 565b24) as typical for the majority of Selachia (a broader class than modern
  Selachii, or sharks), including γαλεοί, and it is almost certain that Plutarch depends on this
  report. On the contrary, there is no reason to believe with some scholars that Plutarch had in
  view Aristotle’s famous description of one species of γαλεοί, namely γαλεὸς λεῖος (mustelus
  levis) with its unusual mode of breeding the youth (HA 565b2–9). In his testimony for Anaximander
  Plutarch does not have nursing in view– his point is only the womb-like conditions
  in which the young develop before birth within mother’s body. The comparison with the dogfishes
  is thus more trivial than often assumed and might, of course, stem from Anaximander.
  More probable, nevertheless, that it was added by Plutarch himself in order to make his discourse
  about abstinence from fish more impressive.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Philologia Classica;Volume 13; Issue 2
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Anaximander
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Plutarch
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Aristotle
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: zoogony
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: dog-fish
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: mustelus levis
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Plutarch on Anaximander’s Zoogony (Quaest. Conv. VII 8. 4 730E = 12 A 30 DK)
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 02-Pimenova.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/15252/1/02-Pimenova.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 687,02 kB