# A History of Monsters. 397

and endure, He bestowed upon them. Procopius supports this view in his commentary on Genesis, where he states that while humans received a spiritual blessing, the blessing given to animals pertains to the procreation of offspring and the continuation of their species. Since hybrid and monstrous species lack fertility—being generally sterile—this blessing did not apply to them, as they were not created at that time. Although we understand that a mule occasionally reproduces, this is an extremely rare occurrence; furthermore, if such a creature is born, it is not called a mule, but a *ginnus* by Aristotle. Even though Aristotle notes that in Syria mules may propagate their own kind, it is important to observe, according to that same philosopher, that the Syrian variety differs from our own, as our mules share only a certain outward resemblance with them.

It is no counter-argument to claim that the divine blessing granted animals not just fertility but also preservation, given that these hybrid species have persisted from the world’s beginning until now. This objection assumes something not yet proven: that hybrid species can always be preserved indefinitely. It further assumes a method of preservation other than reproduction, which contradicts philosophical doctrine. Although Sacred Scripture says there is "nothing new under the sun," implying these species existed at the start, we must respond that they existed in their causes, but not formally. This distinction is quite clear among theologians and is confirmed by Saint Thomas Aquinas. He explains that while certain animals of a new species occasionally arise from the mixing of different species—as when a mule is born from a donkey and a mare—these existed only "causally" within the works of the six days of creation. We must conclude, therefore, that animals born from the intermingling of different species were not created by God as independent entities, but only through the other species from which they are later generated and, in a sense, composed. Consequently, one must not assert that monsters existed at the world's first beginning.

The second argument for those who place monsters at the world's beginning is based primarily on the teachings of Plato. In his *Symposium*, he mentions a triple human nature—male, female, and the Androgynous—who lived at the start of the world. Since the Androgynous person participates in both sexes, they must be classified among monsters. Empedocles followed a similar view, mentioning "ox-headed men" and "swine-men" at the dawn of creation, as Aristotle recounts in the *Physics*. However, to speak the truth, we join other learned men in dismissing Plato’s opinion as ridiculous, especially since he does not describe this Androgynous being as a single individual, but as a creature with two faces, four hands, and both sexes. From his description, we understand that two complete individuals were joined together. We recognize this as a mere fable, told alongside the story of these beings attacking Heaven and declaring war on Jupiter, who, in his anger, split them into male and female. Furthermore, Marsilio Ficino’s commentary on this passage of Plato persuades us that it is a myth; he asserts that Aristophanes recounts these and many other monster-like portents as "veils" beneath which divine mysteries are hidden. Indeed, it was the custom of ancient theologians to shroud their sacred secrets in the shadows of allegorical figures to prevent them from being defiled by the profane.

Finally, there are those who, to support the opposite view—that monsters existed at the beginning—bring the Hebrew "Androgynous Adam" into the field. They believe Adam was created both male and female and only later divided into man and woman. We conclude that this opinion must be rejected based on the writings of Willem Hamer on Genesis, as he interprets the words: "Male and female He created them." He remains uncertain whether to call a third human sex (a sort of neutral gender) true or false, but he maintains it is certain that androgynes, as portents of a wandering Nature, are loathed by all. He considers it unbelievable that an entire race of people could consist of such shameful beings. The truth of Scripture supports this view, describing humans as divided into two sexes to prevent the monstrous and execrable suspicion of lust that would arise if both sexes were combined in one person. To this