Attic Nights

That of the five senses of the body two in particular we share with beasts; and that pleasure which comes from hearing, sight and smell is base and reprehensible, but that which comes from taste and touch is the most shameful of all, since the last two are felt also by beasts, the others only by mankind.

MEN have five senses, which the Greeks call ai)sqh/seis, by which mental or bodily pleasure is evidently sought: taste, touch, smell, sight, hearing. From all of these the enjoyment of any immoderate pleasure is regarded as base and reprehensible. But excessive pleasure from taste or touch in the opinion of philosophers is the basest of all things, and those in particular who have given themselves up to those two animal pleasures the Greeks call by terms of the gravest reproach either a)kratei=s or a)ko/lastoi; we call them either incontinences (incontinent) or intemperantes (intemperate); for if you should desire to have a closer translation of a)ko/lastoi, the equivalent will be too unusual. But those two pleasures of taste and touch, namely, gluttony and venery, are the only ones common to man with the lower animals, and therefore whoever is enslaved to these beastly pleasures is regarded as in the number of brutes and beasts; the remaining pleasures proceeding from the other three senses seem to be peculiar to man alone.

I have added the words of Aristotle the philosopher on this subject, in order that the authority of that renowned and illustrious man might turn us from such shameful pleasures: Why are they called incontinent who indulge to excess in the pleasures of taste and touch? For both those who are immoderate in venery and those who are immoderate in the enjoyment of food are such. But of the latter, some find this gratification in the tongue and others in the throat, and it was for that reason that Philoxenos prayed to have the throat of a crane. Is it because the pleasures derived from such sources are common to us with the other animals? And being thus common they are the most dishonourable and more than the other pleasures, or alone, objects of reproach, so that we censure a man who is addicted to them and call him incontinent and incorrigible because he is enslaved to the meanest of pleasures. Now, there being five senses, the other animals are gratified by the two which have been mentioned only, but from the others they either enjoy no pleasure at all, or they merely experience it incidentally. Who, then, having any human modesty, would take pleasure in those two delights of venery and gluttony, which are common to man with the hog and the ass? Socrates indeed used to say that many men wish to live in order to eat and drink, but that he ate and drank in order to live. Hippocrates, moreover, a man of divine wisdom, believed of venery that it was a part of the horrible disease which our countrymen call comitialis, or the election disease; for these are his very words as they have come down to us: that coition is a brief epilepsy.

That it is more disgraceful to be praised coldly than to be accused bitterly.

FAVORINUS the philosopher used to say that it was more shameful to be praised faintly and coldly than to be censured violently and severely: For, said he, the man who reviles and censures you is regarded as unjust and hostile towards you in proportion to the bitterness of his invective, and therefore he is usually not believed. But one who praises grudgingly and faintly seems to lack a theme; he is regarded as the friend of a man whom he would like to praise but as unable to find anything in him which he can justly commend.

Why the bowels are loosened by sudden terror; also why fire provokes urine.

THERE is a work of Aristotle, entitled Physical Questions, which is most delightful, and filled with choice knowledge of all kinds. In this book he inquires why it happens that those who are seized with sudden fear of some great catastrophe commonly suffer at once from looseness of the bowels. He also inquires why it happens that one who has stood for some time before a fire is overtaken with a desire to make water. And he says that the cause of the loosening and discharge of the bowels because of fear is due to the fact that all terror is cold producing, or yuxropoio/s, as he calls it, and that by the effect of that cold it drives and expels all the blood and heat from the surface of the skin and at the same time causes those who fear to grow pale, because the blood leaves the face. Now this blood and heat, he says, being driven inwards, usually moves the bowels and stimulates them. For the frequent urinating caused by nearness to a fire he gave this reason: The fire dissolves the solid matter, as the sun does snow.

A statement from the works of Aristotle, that snow-water is a very bad thing to drink; and that ice is formed from snow.

IN the hottest season of the year with some companions and friends of mine who were students of eloquence or of philosophy, I had withdrawn to the country-place of a rich friend at Tibur. There was with us a good man of the Peripatetic school, well trained and especially devoted to Aristotle. When we drank a good deal of water made of melted snow, he tried to restrain us and rather severely scolded us. He cited us the authority of famous physicians and in particular of the philosopher Aristotle, a man skilled in all human knowledge, who declared that snow-water was indeed helpful to grain and trees, but was a very unwholesome drink for human beings, and that it gradually produced wasting diseases in the body, which made their appearance only after a long time.

This counsel he gave us repeatedly in a spirit of prudence and goodwill. But when the drinking of snow-water went on without interruption, from the library of Tibur, which at that time was in the temple of Hercules and was well supplied with books, he drew out a volume of Aristotle and brought it to us, saying: At least believe the words of this wisest of men and cease to ruin your health.

In that book it was written that water from snow was very bad to drink, as was also that water which was more solidly and completely congealed, which the Greeks call kru/stallos, or clear ice; and the following reason was there given for this: That when water is hardened by the cold air and congeals, it necessarily follows that evaporation takes place and that a kind of very thin vapour, so to speak, is forced from it and comes out of it. But its lightest part, he said, is that which is evaporated; what remains is heavier and less clean and wholesome, and this part, beaten upon by the throbbing of the air, takes on the form and colour of white foam. But that some more wholesome part is forced out and evaporated from the snow is shown by the fact that it becomes less than it was before it congealed.

I have taken a few of Aristotle's own words from that book, and I quote them: Why is the water made from snow or ice unwholesome? Because from all water that is frozen the lightest and thinnest part evaporates. And the proof of this is that when it melts after being frozen, its volume is less than before. But since the most wholesome part is gone, it necessarily follows that what is left is less wholesome. After I read this, we decided to pay honour to the learned Aristotle. And so I for my part immediately declared war upon snow and swore hatred against it,1 while the others made truces with it on various terms.

That shame drives the blood outward, while fear checks it.

IN the Problems of the philosopher Aristotle is the following passage: Why do men who are ashamed turn red and those who fear grow pale; although these emotions are similar? Because the blood of those who feel shame flows from the heart to all parts of the body, and therefore comes to the surface; but the blood of those who fear rushes to the heart, and consequently leaves all the other parts of the body.

When I had read this at Athens with our friend Taurus and had asked him what he thought about that reason which had been assigned, he answered: He has told us properly and truly what happens when the blood is diffused or concentrated, but he has not told us why this takes place. For the question may still be asked why it is that shame diffuses the blood and fear contracts it, when shame is a kind of fear and is defined by the philosophers as 'the fear of just censure.' For they say: ai)sxu/nh e)sti\n fo/bos dikai/ou yo/gou.

The meaning of obesus and of some other early words.

THE poet Julius Paulus, a worthy man, very learned in early history and letters, inherited a small estate in the Vatican district. He often invited us there to visit him and entertained us very pleasantly and generously with vegetables and fruits. And so one mild day in autumn, when Julius Celsinus and I had dined with him, and after hearing the Alcestis of Laevius read at his table were returning to the city just before sunset, we were ruminating on the rhetorical figures and the new or striking use of words in that poem of Laevius', and as each word occurred that was worthy of notice with reference to its future use by ourselves, we committed it to memory.

Now the passages which then came to mind were of this sort: Of chest and body wasted (obeso) everywhere, Of mind devoid of sense and slow of pace, With age o'ercome. Here we noticed that obesus is used, rather in its proper than in its common signification, to mean slender and lean; for the vulgar use obesus, a)ku/rws (improperly), or kata\ a)nti/frasin (by contraries), for uber (bulky) and pinguis (fat). We also observed that he spoke of an extinct race as oblittera instead of oblitterata, and that he characterized enemies who broke treaties as foedifragi, not foederifragi; that he called the blushing Aurora pudoricolor, or shame-coloured and Memnon, nocticolor, or night-coloured; also that he used forte for hesitatingly, and said silenta loca, or silent places, from the verb sileo; further, that he used pulverulenta for dusty and pestilenta for pestilent, the genitive case instead of the ablative with careo; magno impete, or mighty onset, instead of impetu; that he used fortescere for fortem fieri, or become brave, dolentia for dolor, or sorrow, avens for libens, or desirous; that he spoke of curae intolerantes, or unendurable cares, instead of intolerandae, manciolae tenellae, or tender hands, instead of manus, and quis tam siliceo for who is of so flinty a heart? He also says fiere inpendio infit, meaningfieri inpense incipit, or the expense begins to be great, and he used accipetret for laceret, or rends.

We entertained ourselves on our way with these notes on Laevius' diction. But others we passed over as too poetic and unsuited to use in prose; for example, when he calls Nestor trisaeclisenex, or an old man who had lived three generations and dulciorelocus isle, or that sweet-mouthed speaker, when he calls great swelling waves multigruma, or great-hillocked, and says that rivers congealed by the cold have an onychinum tegimen, or an onyx covering; also his many humorous multiple compounds, as when he calls his detractors subductisupercilicarptores, or carpers with raised eye-brows.

An inquiry whether harena, caelum and triticum are found in the plural; also whether quadrigae, inimicitiae, and some other words, occur in the singular.

WHEN I was a young man at Rome, before I went to Athens, I often paid a visit to Cornelius Fronto, when I had leisure from my masters and my lectures, and enjoyed his refined conversations, which abounded besides in excellent information. Whenever I saw him and heard him speak, I almost never failed to come away improved and better informed. An example is the following little talk of his, held one day on a trivial subject, it is true, but yet not without importance for the study of the Latin language. For when an intimate friend of his, a learned man and an eminent poet of the day, said that he had been cured of dropsy by the use of hot sand (calentes harenae), thereupon Fronto in jesting fashion said: "You are indeed freed of your complaint, but not of the complaint of improper language. For Gaius Caesar, the famous life-dictator and father-in-law of Gnaeus Pompeius, from whom the family and the name of the Caesars are derived, a man of wonderful talent, surpassing all others of his time in the purity of his diction, in the work On Analogy, which he dedicated to Marcus Cicero, wrote that harenae is an improper term, since harena ought never to be used in the plural, any more than caelum (heaven) and triticum (wheat). But on the other hand he thinks that quadrigae, even though it be a single chariot, that is, one team of four horses yoked together, ought always to be used in the plural number, like arma (arms), moenia (walls), comitia (election) and inimicitiae (hostility)—unless, my finest of poets, you have anything to say in reply, to excuse yourself and show that you have not made an error."

With regard to caelum, said the poet, and triticum I do not deny that they ought always to be used in the singular, nor with regard to arma, moenia and comitia, that their use ought to be confined to the plural; but we will inquire rather about inimicitiae and quadigae. And perhaps in the case of quadrigae I shall yield to the authority of the early writers: but what reason is there why Caesar should think that inimicitia was not used by the ancients, as were inscientia (ignorance) and impotentia (impotence) and iniuria (injury), and ought not to be used by us, when Plautus, that glory of the Latin tongue, even used delicia in the singular number instead of deliciae? For he says: O my delight, my darling (delicia). Furthermore Quintus Ennius, in that most famous book of his, said: Such is my habit; plain upon my brow Friendship I bear and enmity (inmicitiam) to see. But pray, who else has written or said that harenae is not good Latin? And therefore I beg of you, if Gaius Caesar's book is accessible, that you have it brought, in order that you may judge with how much confidence he makes this statement.

At the time, the first book On Analogy being brought, I committed to memory these few words from it; for, first asserting that neither caelum, triticum, nor harena admitted a plural meaning, Caesar said: Do you not think that it happens from the nature of these things that we say ' one land' and 'several lands,' 'city' and 'cities,' 'command' and 'commands,' and that we cannot convert quadrigae into the form of a singular noun or harena into a plural?

When these words had been read, Fronto said to the poet: Does it not seem to you that Gaius Caesar has decided against you as to the status of this word with sufficient clearness and force? Thereupon the poet, greatly impressed by the authority of the book, said: If it were lawful to appeal from Caesar, I would now appeal from this book of his. But since he has neglected to give the reason for his opinion, I now ask you to tell on what ground you think it an error to say quadriga and harenae. Then Fronto replied as follows: Quadrigae is always confined to the plural number, even though there be only one horse, since four horses yoked together are called quadrigae, from quadriugae, and certainly a term which designates many horses ought not to be included under the oneness expressed by the singular number. The same reasoning must be applied to harena, but in a different form; for since harena, though used in the singular number, nevertheless indicates the multiplicity and abundance of the minute parts of which it consists, harenae seems to be an ignorant and improper usage, as if the word needed a plural form,. when its collective nature makes it natural for it to be used in the singular. But, said he, I have said this, not in order to give my authority and signature to this opinion and rule, but that I might not leave the view of that learned man, Caesar, unsupported. For while caelum, or 'sky,' is always used in the singular, but mare, or 'sea,' and terra, or 'land,' not always, and pulvis, or 'dust,' ventus, or 'wind,' and fumus, or 'smoke,' not always, why did the early writers sometimes use indutiae, or 'truce,' and caerimoniae, or 'ceremony,' in the singular, but never feriae, or 'holiday,' nundinae, or 'market day,' inferiae, or 'offering to the dead,' and exsequiae, or ' obsequies'? Why may mel, or 'honey,' and vinum, or 'wine,' and other words of that kind, be used in the plural, but not lacte (milk)? All these questions, I say, cannot be investigated, unravelled, and thrashed out by men of affairs in so busy a city; indeed, I see that you have been delayed even by these matters of which I have spoken, being intent, I suppose, on some business. So go now and inquire, when you chance to have leisure, whether any orator or poet, provided he be of that earlier band—that is to say, any classical or authoritative writer, not one of the common herd—has used quadriga or harenae. Now Fronto asked us to look up these words, I think, not because he thought that they were to be found in any books of the early writers, but to rouse in us an interest in reading for the purpose of hunting down rare words. The one, then, which seemed the rarest, quadriga, I found used in the singular number in that book of Marcus Varro's Satires which is entitled Ecdemeticus. But I sought with less interest for an example of the plural harenae, because, except Gaius Caesar, no one among learned men has used that form, so far as I can recall.

The very neat reply of Antonius Julianus to certain Greeks at a banquet.

A YOUNG man of equestrian rank from the land of Asia, gifted by nature, well off in manners and fortune, with a taste and talent for music, was celebrating the anniversary of the day on which he began life by giving a dinner to his friends and teachers in a little country place near the city. There had come with us then to that dinner the rhetorician Antonius Julianus, a public teacher of young men, who spoke in the Spanish manner, but was very eloquent, besides being well acquainted with our early literature. When there was an end of eating and drinking, and the time came for conversation, Julianus asked that the singers and lyre-players be produced, the most skilful of both sexes, whom he knew that the young man had at hand. And when the boys and girls were brought in, they sang in a most charming way several odes of Anacreon and Sappho, as well as some erotic elegies of more recent poets that were sweet and graceful. But we were especially pleased with some delightful verses of Anacreon, written in his old age, which I noted down, in order that sometimes the toil and worry of this task of mine might find relief in the sweetness of poetical compositions:

Shaping the silver, Hephaestus,

Make me no panoply, pray;

What do I care for war's combats?

Make me a drinking cup rather,

Deep as you ever can make it;

Carve on it no stars and no wains;

What care I, pray, for the Pleiads,

What for the star of Bootes?

Make vines, and clusters upon them,

Treading them Love and Bathyllus,

Made of pure gold, with Lyaeus.

Then several Greeks who were present at that dinner, men of refinement and not without considerable acquaintance also with our literature, began to attack and assail Julianus the rhetorician as altogether barbarous and rustic, since he was sprung from the land of Spain, was a mere ranter of violent and noisy speech, and taught exercises in a tongue which had no charm and no sweetness of Venus and the Muse; and they asked him more than once what he thought of Anacreon and the other poets of that kind, and whether any of our bards had written such smooth-flowing and delightful poems; except, said they, perhaps a few of Catullus and also possibly a few of Calvus; for the compositions of Laevius were involved, those of Hortensius without elegance, of Cinna harsh, of Memmius rude, and in short those of all the poets without polish or melody.

Then Julianus, filled with anger and indignation, spoke as follows in behalf of his mother tongue, as if for his altars and his fires: I must indeed grant you that in such licentiousness and baseness you would outdo Alcinus and that as you outstrip us in the pleasures of adornment and of food, so you do also in the wantonness of your ditties. But lest you should condemn us, that is, the Latin race, as lacking in Aphrodite's charm, just as if we were barbarous and ignorant, allow me, I pray, to cover my head with my cloak (as they say Socrates did when making somewhat indelicate remarks), and hear and learn that our forefathers also were lovers and devoted to Venus before those poets whom you have named.

Then lying upon his back with veiled head, he chanted in exceedingly sweet tones some verses of Valerius Aedituus, an early poet, and also of Porcius Licinus and Quintus Catulus; and I think that nothing can be found neater, more graceful, more polished and more terse than those verses, either in Greek or in Latin:

The verses of Aedituus are as follows: When, Pamphila, I try to tell my love, What shall I ask of you? Words fail my lips, A sudden sweat o'erflows my ardent breast; Thus fond and silent, I refrain and die. And he also added other verses of the same poet, no less sweet than the former ones: O Phileros, why a torch, that we need not? Just as we are we'll go, our hearts aflame. That flame no wild wind's blast can ever quench, Or rain that falls torrential from the skies; Venus herself alone can quell her fire, No other force there is that has such power. He also recited the following verses of Porcius Licinus: O shepherds of the lambs, the ewes' young brood, Seek ye for fire? Come hither; man is fire. Touch I the wood with finger-tip, it burns; Your flock's a flame, all I behold is fire. The verses of Quintus Catulus were these: