![]()
1
TAXONOMIES
Making sense of animals
Taxonomy is the science of naming, describing and classifying living organisms. The system most scientists use today classes each living creature into a series of seven or eight taxa which are organised from the most general to the most specific: these are Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus and Species. About 1,250,000 individual species are identified, most of which are invertebrates (Gibson 2016). In practice, however, few people apart from scientists find such classification very meaningful in day-to-day life: we tend to think about and describe animals in simple and functional ways, in categories such as ‘farm animals’, ‘wild animals’ or ‘bugs’, and we pay much more attention to large animals than we do to small. So in looking at the ancient world, it is important not to fixate on the question of how close to modern scientific theories ancient categories appear to be: the taxonomies which people used actually tell us a great deal about how animals and people interacted. How, then, did ancient peoples make sense of the animal world, in all its astonishing variety?
Ancient theories of animal classification certainly existed in the pre-classical world and something of this idea can be seen in a definitive feature of Egyptian hieroglyphic script called the ‘determinative’ – pictorial classifiers or supplementary pictographs which provide semantic information to the final meaning of a written word. Hieroglyphic script has a variety of categories including ‘TREE’, ‘BIRD’, ‘FISH’, ‘DIVINE’, ‘SENSES and EMOTION’ and ‘ABSTRACT’. Within these categories there are numerous divisions. For instance, all mammals or quadrupeds take on the ‘HIDE and TAIL’ determinative (based perhaps on a leopard skin: see LEOPARD no. 1) and this was considered to be a suitable marker for a range of animals, including crocodile, turtle, mouse, pig, dog, goat, panther, horse, lion, cat, monkey, hippopotamus, giraffe, bull and fly. Subordinate levels of categorisation operated too: under the basic level of mammal or quadruped a determinative sign of a ‘DOG’ could represent the tjesm, mastiff or pariah types of the species (for the hieroglyphic taxonomic system see Goldwasser 2002; for complications regarding ‘flying things’ see further BAT no. 2).
In Mesopotamia, Sumerian and Akkadian literature distinguished animals from humans, gods and daemons and ancient lexica presented words for animals in long lists (Foster 2002: 272–4). The most obvious distinction between animal types was the division into domestic animals and wild animals. The lists of domestic animals are detailed and subdivided into numerous categories mainly based upon sex, age and appearance (see DONKEY, GOAT, OX, SHEEP); wild animals are listed with fewer differences in sex, age or appearance. Some animals like the pig and the dog are variously categorised as domestic or wild given that they were often thought of as domestic and yet not productive in the same way as goats, sheep and cattle were. The Mesopotamian category ‘wild animal’ was conveyed in Akkadian by the term būl sēri or umām sēri, ‘animals of the steppe’, suggesting in particular quadrupeds. But wild animals could also be referred to as ‘animals of the mountain’ (i.e. ‘foreign’) or even by the specific name of a foreign land such as ‘the ox of Lullubum (Kurdistan)’ or ‘the elephant of Barashe (Iran/Pakistan)’.
The history of taxonomy in classical antiquity is somewhat anomalous: Aristotle of course stands as the originator of the classifying tradition, as he brought his formidable intelligence to bear on the issue of how animals can usefully be grouped. He did not aim to produce a finished system of classification, but made great steps in setting the parameters for comparing animals by their physical characteristics, including birds, insects and marine animals as well as terrestrial mammals. So great was his achievement, however, that it seems to have stifled research in subsequent generations: Theophrastus, his successor at the Academy, among his many works wrote thematic treatises on animals which seem deliberately to resist taxonomic categories (e.g. Of Animals Which Change Colour; Of Animals Which Burrow (Diog. Laert. V.43–4; see also FISH no. 8)). The classifying baton was not picked up again until Linnaeus in the 1700s. Yet, for all his achievements, Aristotle’s preoccupations were those of a tiny educated class: his taxonomy was partially reproduced by some later scientific writers such as Pliny, but even specialists did not attempt to emulate his approach. Popular writers show no sign of understanding or using Aristotelian categories, as they were not immediately relevant to everyday experience; instead folk taxonomies remained dominant, with animals categorised in ways which were meaningful to farmers, hunters, religious authorities or other groups. We should not deny the high level of specialised knowledge about animals which developed in Greek and Roman society, but grand overall theories remained an abstract concern.
1. Babylonian animal-lists
Old Babylonian period, Sumerian and Akkadian glossary; Tablet XIV of the ḪAR .ra = ḫubullû (following Finkel 2014)
Snake (ṣēru: 40 types)
Turtle (šeleppû: 3 types) and young
Eel (kuppû)
Rodent (asqūdu)
Wild Bull (rīmu: 2 types) and wild cow (rīmtu: 2 types)
Elephant (pīlu: 2 types)
Camel, dromedary (ibilu: 2 types)
Cow (littu: 2 types)
Dog (kalbu: 19 types) and bitch (kalbutu)
Lion (nēsu, labbu, giru: 20 types) and lioness (nēštu)
Wolf (barbaru; parrisu)
Cheetah (or tiger?) (mindinu; dumāmu?; senkurru)
Leopard (dumāmu)
Badger (kalab urṣi)
Hyena (būṣu: 2 types)
Fox (šelebu)
Cat (šurānu)
Wild Cat (murašû)
Caracal (desert lynx) (zirqatu)
Lynx (azaru)
Zebu (?) (apsasû) and female zebu (apsasītu)
Monkey (ape) (pagû) and female monkey (ape) (pagītu)
Bear (asu)
Bull (lī’ȗ)
Leopard (nimru)
Eagle (erȗ: 5 types)
Jackal (zību: 3 types)
Wild Sheep (bibbu; atūdu)
Wild Ram (sappāru)
Steppe Bison (or aurochs?) (ditānu; kusarikku: 2 types)
Red Deer (lulīmu: 2 types)
Stag (ayyālu: 2 types)
Mountain Goat (turāḫu)
Roe Deer (nayyālu: 2 types)
Gazelle (ṣabītu: 2 types) and kid (ḫuzālu)
Buck (daššu)
Hare (arnabu) and female hare (arnabtu)
Bear (dabû) and she-bear (dabītu)
Pig (šaḫû: 23 types)
Sow (šaḫītu: 5 types) and piglet (kurkizannu)
Wild Boar (šaḫ api)
Porcupine (?) (burmāmu: 3 types)
Dormouse (arrabu; ušummu)
Small Rodent (piazu: 3 types)
Mongoose (šikkȗ: 2 types; puṣuddu; kāṣiru)
Mouse (humṣīru; pērūrūtu)
Dormouse (arrabu)
Rodent (iškarissu)
Rodent (kurusissu)
Vole (harriru)
Rodent (aštakissu)
Shrew (ḫulȗ: 2 types)
Jerboa (akkaru)
Rodent (asqudu: 3 types)
Otter (tarpašu)
Marten (šakadirru)
Chameleon (ḫurbabillu; ayyar-ili: 4 types)
Lizard (anduḫallatu: 2 types; ṣurārû: 5 types)
Tortoise (raqqu; usābu)
Crab (kušȗ: 2 types; alluttu: 2 types)
Locust or Grasshopper (erbu: 3 types; irgilum)
Large Locust or Grasshopper (ṣinnarabu)
Medium Locust or Grasshopper (ḫilammu)
Small Locust or Grasshopper (zīru)
Tiny Locust or Grasshopper (zerzerru)
Cricket (ṣāṣiru: 3 types; ṣarṣaru)
Praying mantis (šā’ilu: 2 types; sikdu; adudillu)
Insect (lallartu: 3 types)
Insect (išid-bukannu)
Head-louse (uplu)
Louse (nābu)
Insect (kalmatu: 13 types)
Insect (šīḫu)
Flea (perša’u)
Weevil (tal’ašu)
Termite (bušṭītu: 5 types)
Moth (ašāšu; sāsu: 7 types; miqqānu: 3 types; mēqiqānu)
Bug (ibḫu)
Worm (tūltu: 4 types; urbatu: 4 types)
Earthworm (išqippu)
Grub (mubattiru)
Caterpillar or larva (manu: 8 types; nappilu: 5 types; ākilu: 5 types; upinzir: 3 types; nāpû)
Insect (šassūru: 3 types)
Nit (nēbu)
Fly (zumbu: 9 types)
Horse Fly (lamṣatu)
Small Fly (baqqu: 3 types)
Mosquito (zaqqītu)
Gnat (ašturru: 2 types)
Wasp (kuzāzu; hāmitu; numbubtu)
Water Boatman (ēṣid pān mē)
Centipede (ḫallulāya: 2 types)
Spider (ettūtu: 4 types; anzūzu; lummū)
Jellyfish (ḫammu: 4 types)
Insect (mūr mē)
Water Insect (ummi mē)
Dragon Fly (kalilītu; kallat-Šamaš: 4 types)
Ant (kulbabu: 8 types)
Scorpion (zuqqaqipū: 11 types)
Gecko (pizalluru: 3 types)
Lizard (humbibittu)
Frog (muṣa’‘irānu)
Toad or Frog (kitturu: 7 types)
COMMENT: The ḪAR-ra=ḫubullu (Urra=hubullu, ur5-ra=ḫubullu, or Harra hubullu (Hh)) is an important Mesopotamian encyclopaedia which glosses Sumerian and Akkadian lexical lists which are separated into categories and extend across 24 cuneiform tablets (Finkel 2014: 198–202). Complied chiefly in the Old Babylonian period, and thereafter used for scribal practice, the title of the series is taken from the ...
