§1.2.1Διερευνήσωμεν οὖν καὶ τοῦτο, ὃ προηγήσατο ἐν τῷ ἡμετέρῳ λόγῳ, περὶ ἐπιθυμίας φυτοῦ καὶ κινήσεως αὐτοῦ καὶ ψυχῆς ἰδίας, καὶ εἴ τι ἀναλύεται ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ τοῦ φυτοῦ, ὅσον εἰς πνοήν.
Let us therefore investigate this also, which preceded in our discourse, concerning the desire of the plant and its movement and its own soul, and whether anything is released from the plant itself, as far as respiration is concerned.
Ἀναξαγόρας γὰρ εἶπε ταῦτα ἔχειν καὶ πνοήν.
For Anaxagoras said that these also have respiration.
Καὶ πῶς, εἴπερ εὑρίσκομεν πολλὰ ζῷα μὴ ἔχοντα πνοήν, καὶ πάλιν εὐρίσκομεν ἀκριβῶς ὅτι τὰ φυτὰ οὔτε ὑπνώττουσιν οὔτε γρηγοροῦσιν.
And how can this be, if indeed we find many animals not having respiration, and again we find precisely that plants neither sleep nor wake?
§1.2.2Τὸ γὰρ γρηγορεῖν οὐδέν ἐστιν εἰ μὴ ἀπὸ διαθέσεως τῆς αἰσθήσεως, τὸ δὲ ὑπνώττειν οὐδὲν εἰ μὴ ἀσθένεια αὐτῆς· καὶ οὐχ εὑρίσκεταί τι τούτων ἐν πράγματι τρεφομένῳ μὲν πάσαις ὥραις κατὰ διοίκησιν μίαν, ἐν τῇ οἰκείᾳ δὲ φύσει μὴ αἰσθανομένῳ.
For waking is nothing but from a disposition of sensation, and sleeping is nothing but a weakness of it; and neither of these is found in a thing that is nourished indeed at all times according to one administration, but in its own nature does not perceive.
§1.2.3Τὸ γὰρ ζῷον ὅτε τρέφεται, τί συμβαίνει;
For when the animal is nourished, what happens?
τὸ ἀναβαίνειν ἀναθυμίασιν ἀπὸ τῆς τροφῆς πρὸς τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ὑπνώττειν ἐντεῦθεν πάντως· καὶ ὅταν καταναλωθῇ ἡ ἀναθυμίασις ἡ ἀναβαίνουσα πρὸς τὴν κεφαλήν, τότε γρηγορεῖ.
An exhalation rises from the food to its head, and hence sleep certainly ensues; and when the exhalation rising to the head is consumed, then it wakes.
Ἔν τισι δὲ τῶν ζῴων ἐστὶν αὕτη ἡ ἀναθυμίασις πολλή, καὶ τέως ὀλίγον ὑπνώττουσιν.
But in some of the animals this exhalation is abundant, and yet they sleep little.
§1.2.4Ὁ δὲ νυσταγμός ἐστι συνοχὴ τῆς κινήσεως, ἡ δὲ συνοχὴ πάλιν ἠρεμία πράγματος κινουμένοῦ.
And drowsiness is a constraint of movement, and this constraint again is the rest of a moving thing.
Ὃ δὲ μάλιστα καὶ κυρίως ἐστὶ ζητητέον ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ ἐπιστήμῃ, τοῦτο ἐστὶν ὅπερ εἶπεν ὁ Ἐμπεδοκλῆς, ἤγουν εἰ εὑρίσκεται ἐν τοῖς φυτοῖς γένος θῆλυ καὶ γένος ἄρρεν, καὶ εἰ ἔστιν εἶδος κεκραμένον ἐκ τούτων τῶν δύο γενῶν.
But what is most of all and properly to be investigated in this science, is this which Empedocles said, namely, whether there is found in plants a female gender and a male gender, and whether there is a form mixed from these two genders.
§1.2.5Λέγομεν τοίνυν ὅτι τὸ ἄρρεν, ὅτε γεννᾷ, εἰς ἄλλο γεννᾶ, καὶ εἰσὶν ἄμφω κεχωρισμένα ἀπ’ ἀλλήλων.
We say then that the male, when it generates, generates into another, and both are separated from each other.
§1.2.6Ἐπεὶ γοῦν εὑρίσκεται ἐν τοῖς φυτοῖς ὅτι ἔχει τὰ φυτὰ γένος ἄρρεν καὶ θῆλυ, καὶ πάντως τὸ μὲν ἄρρεν ἐστὶ τραχύτερον καὶ σκληρότερον καὶ μᾶλλον φρίσσον, τὸ δὲ θῆλυ ἀσθενέστερον καὶ καρποφόρον πλέον, πάλιν ὀφείλομεν ζητεῖν πότερον εὑρίσκονται ταῦτα τὰ δύο γένη κεκραμένα ἅμα ἐν τοῖς φυτοῖς, ὡς εἶπεν Ἐμπεδοκλῆς,
Since therefore it is found in plants that plants have male and female gender, and certainly the male is rougher and harder and more bristly, while the female is weaker and more fruitful, we must again investigate whether these two genders are found mixed together in plants, as Empedocles said.
§1.2.7Ἀλλ’ ἐγὼ οὐχ ὑπολαμβάνω τοῦτο τὸ πρᾶγμα οὕτως ἔχειν.
But I do not suppose this matter to be so.
Τὰ γὰρ κεκραμένα ὀφείλουσιν εἶναι πρῶτον ἁπλᾶ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ εἶναι καθ’ αὑτὸ μὲν τὸ ἄρρεν καθ’ αὑτὸ δὲ τὸ θῆλυ, κἀντεῦθεν κιρνᾶσθαι.
For things mixed must first be simple in themselves, and the male must exist by itself and the female by itself, and from this be mixed.
Ἡ δὲ κρᾶσις οὐκ ἔσται εἰ μὴ διὰ τὴν οἰκείαν γένεσιν.
And mixture will not occur except for the sake of their own generation.
§1.2.8Εὐρέθη γοῦν ἐν τοῖς φυτοῖς πρὸ τῆς κράσεως κρᾶσις, ἣ καὶ ὀφείλει εἶναι αἰτία ποιητικὴ καὶ παθητικὴ ἐν μιᾷ ὥρᾳ· ἀλλ’ οὐχ εὑρίσκεται ἀρρενότης καὶ θηλύτης ἡνωμέναι ἔν τινι τῶν φυτῶν.
At any rate, in plants, a mixture was found prior to the mixture, which must also be an active and passive cause at one time; but maleness and femaleness are not found united in any of the plants.
Εἰ δὲ τοῦτο οὕτως ἦν, τάχα ἂν τὸ φυτὸν ἦν τελειότερον τοῦ ζῴου.
And if this were so, perhaps the plant would be more perfect than the animal.
§1.2.9Καὶ πῶς, εἴπερ τὸ ζῷον οὐ δεῖται ἐν τῇ οἰκείᾳ γενέσει πράγματός τινος ἐξωτερικοῦ, τὸ δὲ φυτὸν τοῦτο δεῖται ἐν τοῖς καιροῖς τοῦ ἔτους;
And how could this be, if indeed the animal does not need any external thing in its own generation, whereas the plant needs this at the seasons of the year?
Δεῖται γὰρ ἡλίου καὶ εὐκρασίας καὶ τοῦ ἀέρος πλέον· καὶ τούτων δεῖται μᾶλλον ἐν τῇ ὥρᾳ τῆς ἐκφύσεως αὑτοῦ.
For it needs the sun and mild temperature and air more; and of these it has greater need in the season of its budding.
§1.2.10Ἔστι δὲ καί τις ἀρχὴ τῆς μὲν τροφῆς τῶν φυτῶν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς, καὶ πάλιν ἀρχὴ ἑτέρα τῆς γενέσεως ἀπὸ τοῦ ἡλίου.
And there is also a certain principle of the nourishment of plants from the earth, and again another principle of generation from the sun.
Εἶπε δὲ καὶ Ἀναξαγόρας ὅτι ἡ ὑγρότης τούτων ἐστὶν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἔφη πρὸς Λεχίνεον ὅτι ἡ γῆ μήτηρ μέν ἐστι τῶν φυτῶν, ὁ δὲ ἥλιος πατήρ.
And Anaxagoras also said that their moisture is from the earth, and for this reason he said to Lechineus that the earth is the mother of plants, and the sun is the father.
§1.2.11Ἀλλὰ τὴν κρᾶσιν τοῦ ἄρρενος τῶν φυτῶν καὶ τοῦ θήλεος ὀφείλομεν διατυπώσασθαι οὐχ οὕτως ἀλλ’ ἄλλῳ τινὶ τρόπῳ, οἶον ὅτι τὸ σπέρμα τοῦ φυτοῦ ὅμοιόν ἐστιν ἐγκυμονήσει ζῴου, ἥτις ἐστὶ μίξις ἄρρενός τε καὶ θήλεος.
But we must formulate the mixture of the male and female of plants not in this way, but in some other way, such as that the seed of the plant is similar to the conception of an animal, which is a mixture of male and female.