by Aristotle
 antagonistic to fat, for it tends to melt it.
   Animals then, as a general rule, derive advantage from their kidneys
   being fat; and the fat is often very abundant and extends over the
   whole of these organs. But, should the like occur in the sheep,
   death ensues. Be its kidneys, however, as fat as they may, they are
   never so fat but that some part, if not in both at any rate in the
   right one, is left free. The reason why sheep are the only animals
   that suffer in this manner, or suffer more than others, is that in
   animals whose fat is composed of lard this is of fluid consistency, so
   that there is not the same chance in their case of wind getting shut
   in and causing mischief. But it is to such an enclosure of wind that
   rot is due. And thus even in men, though it is beneficial to them to
   have fat kidneys, yet should these organs become over-fat and
   diseased, deadly pains ensue. As to those animals whose fat consists
   of suet, in none is the suet so dense as in the sheep, neither is it
   nearly so abundant; for of all animals there is none in which the
   kidneys become so soon gorged with fat as in the sheep. Rot, then,
   is produced by the moisture and the wind getting shut up in the
   kidneys, and is a malady that carries off sheep with great rapidity.
   For the disease forthwith reaches the heart, passing thither by the
   aorta and the great vessel, the ducts which connect these with the
   kidneys being of unbroken continuity.
   10
   We have now dealt with the heart and the lung, as also with the
   liver, spleen, and kidneys. The latter are separated from the former
   by the midriff or, as some call it, the Phrenes. This divides off
   the heart and lung, and, as already said, is called Phrenes in
   sanguineous animals, all of which have a midriff, just as they all
   have a heart and a liver. For they require a midriff to divide the
   region of the heart from the region of the stomach, so that the centre
   wherein abides the sensory soul may be undisturbed, and not be
   overwhelmed, directly food is taken, by its up-steaming vapour and
   by the abundance of heat then superinduced. For it was to guard
   against this that nature made a division, constructing the midriff
   as a kind of partition-wall and fence, and so separated the nobler
   from the less noble parts, in all cases where a separation of upper
   from lower is possible. For the upper part is the more honourable, and
   is that for the sake of which the rest exists; while the lower part
   exists for the sake of the upper and constitutes the necessary element
   in the body, inasmuch as it is the recipient of the food.
   That portion of the midriff which is near the ribs is fleshier and
   stronger than the rest, but the central part has more of a
   membranous character; for this structure conduces best to its strength
   and its extensibility. Now that the midriff, which is a kind of
   outgrowth from the sides of the thorax, acts as a screen to prevent
   heat mounting up from below, is shown by what happens, should it,
   owing to its proximity to the stomach, attract thence the hot and
   residual fluid. For when this occurs there ensues forthwith a marked
   disturbance of intellect and of sensation. It is indeed because of
   this that the midriff is called Phrenes, as though it had some share
   in the process of thinking (Phronein). in reality, however, it has
   no part whatsoever itself in the matter, but, lying in close proximity
   to organs that have, it brings about the manifest changes of
   intelligence in question by acting upon them. This too explains why
   its central part is thin. For though this is in some measure the
   result of necessity, inasmuch as those portions of the fleshy whole
   which lie nearest to the ribs must necessarily be fleshier than the
   rest, yet besides this there is a final cause, namely to give it as
   small a proportion of humour as possible; for, had it been made of
   flesh throughout, it would have been more likely to attract and hold a
   large amount of this. That heating of it affects sensation rapidly and
   in a notable manner is shown by the phenomena of laughing. For when
   men are tickled they are quickly set a-laughing, because the motion
   quickly reaches this part, and heating it though but slightly
   nevertheless manifestly so disturbs the mental action as to occasion
   movements that are independent of the will. That man alone is affected
   by tickling is due firstly to the delicacy of his skin, and secondly
   to his being the only animal that laughs. For to be tickled is to be
   set in laughter, the laughter being produced such a motion as
   mentioned of the region of the armpit.
   It is said also that when men in battle are wounded anywhere near
   the midriff, they are seen to laugh, owing to the heat produced by the
   wound. This may possibly be the case. At any rate it is a statement
   made by much more credible persons than those who tell the story of
   the human head, how it speaks after it is cut off. For so some assert,
   and even call in Homer to support them, representing him as alluding
   to this when he wrote, 'His head still speaking rolled into the dust,'
   instead of 'The head of the speaker'. So fully was the possibility
   of such an occurrence accepted in Caria, that one of that country
   was actually brought to trial under the following circumstances. The
   priest of Zeus Hoplosmios had been murdered; but as yet it had not
   been ascertained who was the assassin; when certain persons asserted
   that they had heard the murdered man's head, which had been severed
   from the body, repeat several times the words, 'Cercidas slew man on
   mam.' Search was thereupon made and a man of those parts who bore
   the name of Cercidas hunted out and put upon his trial. But it is
   impossible that any one should utter a word when the windpipe is
   severed and no motion any longer derived from the lung. Moreover,
   among the Barbarians, where heads are chopped off with great rapidity,
   nothing of the kind has ever yet occurred. Why, again, does not the
   like occur in the case of other animals than man? For that none of
   them should laugh, when their midriff is wounded, is but what one
   would expect; for no animal but man ever laughs. So, too, there is
   nothing irrational in supposing that the trunk may run forwards to a
   certain distance after the head has been cut seeing that bloodless
   animals at any rate can live, and that for a considerable time,
   after decapitation, as has been set forth and explained in other
   passages.
   The purposes, then, for which the viscera severally exist have now
   been stated. It is of necessity upon the inner terminations of the
   vessels that they are developed; for humour, and that of a bloody
   character, cannot but exude at these points, and it is of this,
   solidified and coagulated, that the substance of the viscera is
   formed. Thus they are of a bloody character, and in substance resemble
   each other while they differ from other parts.
   11
   The viscera are enclosed each in a membrane. For they require some
   covering to protect them from injury, and require, moreover, 
that this
   covering shall be light. To such requirements membrane is well
   adapted; for it is close in texture so as to form a good protection,
   destitute of flesh so as neither to attract humour nor retain it,
   and thin so as to be light and not add to the weight of the body. Of
   the membranes those are the stoutest and strongest which invest the
   heart and the brain; as is but consistent with reason. For these are
   the parts which require most protection, seeing that they are the main
   governing powers of life, and that it is to governing powers that
   guard is due.
   12
   Some animals have all the viscera that have been enumerated;
   others have only some of them. In what kind of animals this latter
   is the case, and what is the explanation, has already been stated.
   Moreover, the self-same viscera present differences in different
   possessors. For the heart is not precisely alike in all animals that
   have one; nor, in fact, is any viscus whatsoever. Thus the liver is in
   some animals split into several parts, while in others it is
   comparatively undivided. Such differences in its form present
   themselves even among those sanguineous animals that are viviparous,
   but are more marked in fishes and in the oviparous quadrupeds, and
   this whether we compare them with each other or with the Vivipara.
   As for birds, their liver very nearly resembles that of the
   Vivipara; for in them, as in these, it is of a pure and blood-like
   colour. The reason of this is that the body in both these classes of
   animals admits of the freest exhalation, so that the amount of foul
   residual matter within is but small. Hence it is that some of the
   Vivipara are without any gall-bladder at all. For the liver takes a
   large share in maintaining the purity of composition and the
   healthiness of the body. For these are conditions that depend
   finally and in the main upon the blood, and there is more blood in the
   liver than in any of the other viscera, the heart only excepted. On
   the other hand, the liver of oviparous quadrupeds and fishes inclines,
   as a rule, to a yellow hue, and there are even some of them in which
   it is entirely of this bad colour, in accordance with the bad
   composition of their bodies generally. Such, for instance, is the case
   in the toad, the tortoise, and other similar animals.
   The spleen, again, varies in different animals. For in those that
   have horns and cloven hoofs, such as the goat, the sheep, and the
   like, it is of a rounded form; excepting when increased size has
   caused some part of it to extend its growth longitudinally, as has
   happened in the case of the ox. On the other hand, it is elongated
   in all polydactylous animals. Such, for instance, is the case in the
   pig, in man, and in the dog. While in animals with solid hoofs it is
   of a form intermediate to these two, being broad in one part, narrow
   in another. Such, for example, is its shape in the horse, the mule,
   and the ass.
   13
   The viscera differ from the flesh not only in the turgid aspect of
   their substance, but also in position; for they lie within the body,
   whereas the flesh is placed on the outside. The explanation of this is
   that these parts partake of the character of blood-vessels, and that
   while the former exist for the sake of the vessels, the latter
   cannot exist without them.
   14
   Below the midriff lies the stomach, placed at the end of the
   oesophagus when there is one, and in immediate contiguity with the
   mouth when the oesophagus is wanting. Continuous with this stomach
   is what is called the gut. These parts are present in all animals, for
   reasons that are self-evident. For it is a matter of necessity that an
   animal shall receive the incoming food; and necessary also that it
   shall discharge the same when its goodness is exhausted. This residual
   matter, again, must not occupy the same place as the yet unconcocted
   nutriment. For as the ingress of food and the discharge of the residue
   occur at distinct periods, so also must they necessarily occur in
   distinct places. Thus there must be one receptacle for the ingoing
   food and another for the useless residue, and between these,
   therefore, a part in which the change from one condition to the
   other may be effected. These, however, are matters which will be
   more suitably set forth when we come to deal with Generation and
   Nutrition. What we have at present to consider are the variations
   presented by the stomach and its subsidiary parts. For neither in size
   nor in shape are these parts uniformly alike in all animals. Thus
   the stomach is single in all such sanguineous and viviparous animals
   as have teeth in front of both jaws. It is single therefore in all the
   polydactylous kinds, such as man, dog, lion, and the rest; in all
   the solid-hoofed animals also, such as horse, mule, ass; and in all
   those which, like the pig, though their hoof is cloven, yet have front
   teeth in both jaws. When, however, an animal is of large size, and
   feeds on substances of so thorny and ligneous a character as to be
   difficult of concoction, it may in consequence have several
   stomachs, as for instance is the case with the camel. A similar
   multiplicity of stomachs exists also in the horned animals; the reason
   being that horn-bearing animals have no front teeth in the upper
   jaw. The camel also, though it has no horns, is yet without upper
   front teeth. The explanation of this is that it is more essential
   for the camel to have a multiple stomach than to have these teeth. Its
   stomach, then, is constructed like that of animals without upper front
   teeth, and, its dental arrangements being such as to match its
   stomach, the teeth in question are wanting. They would indeed be of no
   service. Its food, moreover, being of a thorny character, and its
   tongue necessarily made of a fleshy substance, nature uses the
   earthy matter which is saved from the teeth to give hardness to the
   palate. The camel ruminates like the horned animals, because its
   multiple stomach resembles theirs. For all animals that have horns,
   the sheep for instance, the ox, the goat, the deer, and the like, have
   several stomachs. For since the mouth, owing to its lack of teeth,
   only imperfectly performs its office as regards the food, this
   multiplicity of stomachs is intended to make up for its
   shortcomings; the several cavities receiving the food one from the
   other in succession; the first taking the unreduced substances, the
   second the same when somewhat reduced, the third when reduction is
   complete, and the fourth when the whole has become a smooth pulp. Such
   is the reason why there is this multiplicity of parts and cavities
   in animals with such dentition. The names given to the several
   cavities are the paunch, the honeycomb bag, the manyplies, and the
   reed. How these parts are related to each other, in position and in
   shape, must be looked for in the treatises on Anatomy and the
   Researches concerning Animals.
   Birds also present variations in the part which acts as a
   recipient
 of the food; and the reason for these variations is the same
   as in the animals just mentioned. For here again it is because the
   mouth fails to perform its office and fails even more completely-for
   birds have no teeth at all, nor any instrument whatsoever with which
   to comminute or grind down their food-it is, I say, because of this,
   that in some of them what is called the crop precedes the stomach
   and does the work of the mouth; while in others the oesophagus is
   either wide throughout or a part of it bulges just before it enters
   the stomach, so as to form a preparatory store-house for the unreduced
   food; or the stomach itself has a protuberance in some part, or is
   strong and fleshy, so as to be able to store up the food for a
   considerable period and to concoct it, in spite of its not having been
   ground into a pulp. For nature retrieves the inefficiency of the mouth
   by increasing the efficiency and heat of the stomach. Other birds
   there are, such, namely, as have long legs and live in marshes, that
   have none of these provisions, but merely an elongated oesophagus. The
   explanation of this is to be found in the moist character of their
   food. For all these birds feed on substances easy of reduction, and
   their food being moist and not requiring much concoction, their
   digestive cavities are of a corresponding character.
   Fishes are provided with teeth, which in almost all of them are of
   the sharp interfitting kind. For there is but one small section in
   which it is otherwise. Of these the fish called Scarus (Parrot-fish)
   is an example. And this is probably the reason why this fish
   apparently ruminates, though no other fishes do so. For those horned
   animals that have no front teeth in the upper jaw also ruminate.
   In fishes the teeth are all sharp; so that these animals can
   divide their food, though imperfectly. For it is impossible for a fish
   to linger or spend time in the act of mastication, and therefore
   they have no teeth that are flat or suitable for grinding; for such
   teeth would be to no purpose. The oesophagus again in some fishes is
   entirely wanting, and in the rest is but short. In order, however,