110 Terrance Callan if he can persuade the animals that this is best. So that Odysseus can make his argument, Circe enables one of the animals to talk (30). This is apparently a pig called Gryllus (= grunter or pig). Gryllus responds to Odysseus’ first effort to persuade by saying that Odysseus is trying to worsen, not improve, their situation by turning them back into humans, who are the most unfortunate of all animals. Odysseus answers by suggesting that it may have been a pre-existing inclination to swinishness that caused him to become a pig (986D-E). Later Odysseus expresses admiration of Gryllus’ argumentative ability despite his present swinishness (988E-F). These are instances of the negative comparison of humans to pigs. Gryllus rejects this slur and goes on to argue that beasts surpass humans in courage. In support of this Gryllus says that courage is found among both male and female beasts and so is natural to them; he cites as an example the sow of Crommyon (987F). Gryllus also points out that poets say a man is like a boar in valour, but never that a boar is like a man in valour (988D) (31). Later Gryllus argues that animals surpass humans in temperance. One example is that sows attract boars without the use of artificial fragrances. The two are attracted to the nuptial union by mutual affection. Both celebrate at the proper time a love without deceit or hire. After conception they cease sexual intercourse. Nor is homosexual mating found among beasts (990C-D) (32). Humans are compared with pigs negatively, as they are with dogs, with respect to their aggressiveness, their eating habits and their sexual behavior. The LXX of 2 Sam 17,8 compares David’s soldiers to a savage pig on the plain. In Somn. 2.87-89 Philo says that some humans are more fierce and malicious than wild boars. In LevR 13 (114c) the pig of Lev 11,7 is interpreted as referring to Rome because Rome is a thief, a housebreaker and a robber. Likewise in ARN 34 the wild boar of Ps 80,13 (Hebrew v. 14) is interpreted as referring to Rome because the boar injures and kills people (33). According to the Epistle of Barnabas 10.1-3, Moses prohibited eating pig (coi'ron) (34) in Lev 11,7 and Deut 14,8 to prohibit association with humans who are like pigs in ignoring their owner when they have food and squealing when they are hungry. Musonius Rufus says (18B, Lutz 116-117) that gluttons behave like pigs. In Spec. Leg. 3.36 and 113 Philo says that those who have sexual intercourse for pleasure rather than for procreation behave like pigs (35). (30) This ability to talk is referred to as producing and understanding speech (lovgon), something animals are ordinarily not able to do (986B). (31) Idomeneus is compared to a boar in this way in Iliad 13.470-475. In Pseudo- Aristotle, Physiognomica coarse hair is said to indicate courage as can be seen from the coarse hair of the wild boar (806B). (32) Similar positive presentations of the sexual temperance of animals, but without explicit reference to pigs, are found in Plato, Laws 840D-E, Philo, De Animalibus 48-49 and Plutarch, De amore prolis 493E-F. (33) Philo refers to the aggressive behavior of boars in Prov. 2.57; De Animalibus 51, 70 but without comparing it to human behavior. On the aggressive behavior of wild pigs in the ancient world see KELLER, Antike Tierwelt, 1.389-393. (34) That this word is synonymous with the more common u|"/su'" is indicated by the use of the two with the same meaning in the same context in Josephus, Ap. 2.137 and 141. (35) Pseudo-Aristotle, Physiognomica 808B says that violent sexual excitability is found in pigs.