In Generation of Animals 2.5, Aristotle says that ‘wind-eggs’, unfertilized eggs produced by some female birds or fish without male insemination, possess nutritive soul in potentiality—seemingly contradicting his doctrine of ‘reproductive hylomorphism’, on which the male provides the form or soul to the new animal being generated and the female provides the matter. This paper argues that when Aristotle’s comments about wind-eggs are placed in the context of his account of oviparous generation, t…
Read moreIn Generation of Animals 2.5, Aristotle says that ‘wind-eggs’, unfertilized eggs produced by some female birds or fish without male insemination, possess nutritive soul in potentiality—seemingly contradicting his doctrine of ‘reproductive hylomorphism’, on which the male provides the form or soul to the new animal being generated and the female provides the matter. This paper argues that when Aristotle’s comments about wind-eggs are placed in the context of his account of oviparous generation, they do not contradict the reproductive hylomorphic doctrine. Aristotle distinguishes between the production of an egg and the subsequent conception of the embryo that develops inside the egg, with eggs functioning as uterus analogues. I argue that this means eggs should be understood as parts of the animal that lays them, which possess potential nutritive soul insofar as they are potentially able to perform a reproductive function for the ensouled egg-layer.