332 Ulisse Aldrovandi

which therefore strikes those who behold it with great wonder. Indeed, if we follow Aristotle’s view that a monster is a failure of nature—occurring when it cannot achieve its goal because some principle has been corrupted—then we must undoubtedly conclude that monsters can occur in every class of natural things, except for the basic elements. It is clear to everyone that nature occasionally deviates from its goal; however, this error of nature is more obscure and less recognized in inanimate things because it is less observed. In animals and plants, it is more obvious, and it occurs more frequently in animals for two reasons. First, the seed of animals is softer and more humid than the seed of plants, making it more liable to alteration and corruption, and more suited to receiving various conditions. Second, the generation of animals is much more difficult than the procreation of plants and requires more factors; if these are lacking, a monstrous animal must necessarily be born.

Nature

If we now investigate the character and behavior of monsters, I believe this is not at all foreign to our purpose. This inquiry is directed not at the behavior of brute monsters, but only at human ones, especially since a monstrous human cannot possess a moderate character. This is particularly true given that Aristotle, writing to Alexander on the subject of physiognomy, stated that a livid or yellowish paleness indicates a deceitful person; if a monstrous appearance is added to these traits, he declares the person to be diminished in both nature and mind. Therefore, he proclaimed that one must beware of such a person, or one mutilated in any part, as if they were a persistent enemy. Thus, according to Aristotle’s doctrine, monstrous, deformed, and mutilated men abound in recklessness; they utter everything without judgment and are prone to behaving lewdly and inappropriately with their words. This is not without reason, as the common proverb teaches: "he who limps in his step also limps in his soul." Today we say that men marked by God with shameful signs should be greeted only from a distance. Indeed, those who are hunchbacked, scrofulous, or filled with other bodily defects easily circumvent others, deceive them, practice impostures, and use tricks, illusions, and cunning to influence the minds of others. It is well established that a defective body is the most certain reflection of a defective nature. Homer confirmed all of this in his description of Thersites, than whom no one more foul or seditious could be found. A Greek distich about him translates as follows: "As you are lame in foot, so you are in soul; for your outer limbs are the images of your internal mind." As for what should be said regarding the behavior of other kinds of monsters, nothing further is available at present; it must only be kept in mind that monsters will be imbued with those traits that depend on the dominance of their parts.

Terms and Names

There are certain adjectives derived from the word "monster," such as "monstrous" and "most monstrous," which signify anything contrary to nature, as do "monstriferous" and "monstrific," terms indicating something that carries a monstrous quality. Occasionally, by way of metaphor, a "monstrous man" is used to describe a wicked one, and a "monstrous tale" for a shameful one. Similarly, among the Greeks, *teratodes*, *teratikos*, and *terasis* mean "monstrous," and from these, *terateia* is used for a monstrous narrative. Otherwise, *teratophoros* corresponds to "monstriferous," and *teratopos* refers to something monstrous and portentous in appearance. Since a *teratoskopos*