Search the Perseus Catalog for:

← Previous Next →

BOOK VII

I

1arg

How Chrysippus replied to those who denied the existence of Providence.

1 Those who do not believe that the world was created for God and mankind, or that human affairs are ruled by Providence, think that they are using a strong argument when they say:

If there were a Providence, there would be no evils.

For they declare that nothing is less consistent with Providence than the existence of such a quantity of troubles and evils in a world which He is said to have made for the sake of man. Chrysippus, arguing against such views in the fourth book of his treatise On Providence¹ says:

There is absolutely nothing more foolish than those men who think that good could exist, if there were at the same time no evil. For since good is the opposite of evil, it necessarily follows that both must exist in opposition to each other, supported as it were by mutual adverse forces; since as a matter of fact no opposite is conceivable without something to oppose it. For how could there be an idea of justice if there were no acts of injustice? or what else is justice than the absence of injustice? How too can courage be understood except by contrast with cowardice? Or temperance except by contrast with intemperance? How also could there be wisdom, if folly did not exist as its opposite? Therefore,

said he,

why do not the fools also wish that there may be truth, but no falsehood? For it is in the same way that good and evil exist, happiness and unhappiness, pain and pleasure. For, as Plato says, ² they are bound one to the other by their opposing extremes; if you take away one, you will have removed both.

In the same book ³ Chrysippus also considers and discusses this question, which he thinks worth investigating: whether men's diseases come by nature; that is, whether nature herself, or Providence, if you will, which created this structure of the universe and the human race, also created the diseases, weakness, and bodily infirmities from which mankind suffers. He, however, does not think that it was nature's original intention to make men subject to disease; for that would never have been consistent with nature as the source and mother of all things good.

But,

said he,

when she was creating and bringing forth many great things which were highly suitable and useful, there were also produced at the same time troubles closely connected with those good things that she was creating

; and he declared that these were not due to nature, but to certain inevitable consequences, a process that he himself calls kata\ parakolou/qhsin.

Exactly as,

he says,

when nature fashioned men's bodies, a higher reason and the actual usefulness of what she was creating demanded that the lead be made of very delicate and small bones. But this greater usefulness of one part was attended with an external disadvantage; namely, that the head was but slightly protected and could be damaged by slight blows and shocks. In the same way diseases too and illness were created at the same time with health. Exactly, by Heaven!

said he,

as vices, through their relationship to the opposite quality, are produced at the same time that virtue is created for mankind by nature's design.

II

2arg

How Chrysippus also maintained the power and inevitable nature of fate, but at the same time declared that we had control over our plans and decisions.

1 CHRYSIPPUS, the leader of the Stoic philosophy, defined fate, which the Greeks call ei(marme/nh, in about the following terms: ⁴

Fate,

he says,

is an eternal and unalterable series of circumstances, and a chain rolling and entangling itself through an unbroken series of consequences, from which it is fashioned and made up.

But I have copied Chrysippus' very words, as exactly as I could recall them, in order that, if my interpretation should seem too obscure to anyone, he may turn his attention to the philosopher's own language. For in the fourth book of his work On Providence, he says that ei(marme/nh is

an orderly series, established by nature, of all events, following one another and joined together from eternity, and their unalterable interdependence.

But the authors of other views and of other schools of philosophy openly criticize this definition as follows:

If Chrysippus,

they say,

believes that all things are set in motion and directed by fate, and that the course of fate and its coils cannot be turned aside or evaded, then the sins and faults of men too ought not to cause anger or be attributed to themselves and their inclinations, but to a certain unavoidable impulse which arises from fate,

which is the mistress and arbiter of all things, and through which everything that will happen must happen; and that therefore the establishing of penalties for the guilty by law is unjust, if men do not voluntarily commit crimes, but are led into them by fate.

Against these criticisms Chrysippus argues at length, subtilely and cleverly, but the purport of all that he has written on that subject is about this: ⁵

Although it is a fact,

he says,

that all things are subject to an inevitable and fundamental law and are closely linked to fate, yet the peculiar properties of our minds are subject to fate only according to their individuality and quality. For if in the beginning they are fashioned by nature for health and usefulness, they will avoid with little opposition and little difficulty all that force with which fate threatens them from without. But if they are rough, ignorant, crude, and without any support from education, through their own perversity and voluntary impulse they plunge into continual faults and sin, even though the assault of some inconvenience due to fate be slight or non-existent. And that this very thing should happen in this way is due to that natural and inevitable connection of events which is called 'fate.' For it is in the nature of things, so to speak, fated and inevitable that evil characters should not be free from sins and faults.

A little later he uses an illustration of this statement of his, which is in truth quite neat and appropriate: ⁶

For instance,

he says,

if you roll a cylindrical stone over a sloping, steep piece of ground, you do indeed furnish the beginning and cause of its rapid descent, yet soon it speeds onward, not because you make it do so, but because of its peculiar form and natural tendency to roll; just so the order, the law, and the inevitable quality of fate set in motion the various classes of things and the beginnings of causes, but the carrying out of our designs and thoughts, and even our actions, are regulated by each individual's own will and the characteristics of his mind.

Then he adds these words, in harmony with what I have said: ⁷

Therefore it is said by the Pythagoreans also: ⁸

You'll learn that men have ills which they themselves

Bring on themselves,

for harm comes to each of them through themselves, and they go astray through their own impulse and are harmed by their own purpose and determination.

Therefore he says that wicked, slothful, sinful and reckless men ought not to be endured or listened to, who, when they are caught fast in guilt and sin, take refuge in the inevitable nature of fate, as if in the asylum of some shrine, declaring that their outrageous actions must be charged, not to their own heedlessness, but to fate.

The first to express this thought was the oldest and wisest of the poets, in these verses: ⁹

Alas! how wrongly mortals blame the gods!

From us, they say, comes evil; they themselves

By their own folly woes unfated bear.

Therefore Marcus Cicero, in the book which he wrote On Fate¹⁰ after first remarking that this question is highly obscure and involved, declares that even the philosopher Chrysippus ¹¹ was unable to extricate himself from its difficulties, using these words:

Chrysippus, in spite of all efforts and labour, is perplexed how to explain that everything is ruled by fate, but that we nevertheless have some control over our conduct.

III

3arg

An account, taken from the works of Tubero, of a serpent of unprecedented length.

1 TUBERO in his Histories has recorded ¹² that in the first Punic war the consul Atilius Regulus, when encamped at the Bagradas river in Africa, ¹³ fought a stubborn and fierce battle with a single serpent of extraordinary size, which had its lair in that region; that in a mighty struggle with the entire army the reptile was attacked for a long time with hurling engines and catapults; and that when it was finally killed, its skin, a hundred and twenty feet long, was sent to Rome.

IV

4arg

A new account, written by the above-mentioned Tubero, of the capture of Regulus by the Carthaginians; and also what Tuditanus wrote about that same Regulus.

1 I RECENTLY read in the works of Tuditanus the well-known story about Atilius Regulus: ¹⁴ That Regulus, when a prisoner, in addition to the advice which he gave in the senate at Rome against making an exchange of prisoners with the Carthaginians, also declared that the Carthaginians had given him a poison, not of immediate effect, but such as to delay his death for a season; that their design was that he should live for a time, until the exchange was accomplished, but afterwards should waste away as the drug gradually took effect.

Tubero in his Histories says ¹⁵ that this Regulus returned to Carthage and was put to death by the Carthaginians with tortures of a novel kind:

They confined him,

he says,

in a dark and deep dungeon, and a long time afterwards suddenly brought him out, when the sun was shining most brightly, and exposed him to its direct rays, holding him and forcing him to fix his gaze upon the sky. They even drew his eyelids apart upward and downward and sewed them fast, so that he could not close his eyes.

Tuditanus, however, reports that Regulus was for a long time deprived of sleep and so killed, and that when this became known at Rome, Carthaginian captives of the highest rank were handed over by the senate to his sons, who shut them in a chest studded within with spikes; ¹⁶ and that they too were tortured to death by lack of sleep.

V

5arg

An error of the jurist Alfenus in the interpretation of early words.

1 THE jurist Alfenus, a pupil of Servius Sulpicius and a man greatly interested in matters antiquarian, in the thirty-fourth book of his Digests and the second of his Miscellanies, says: ¹⁷

In a treaty which was made between the Roman people and the Carthaginians the provision is found, that the Carthaginians should pay each year to the Roman people a certain weight of argenti puri puti, and the meaning of puri puti was asked. I replied,

he says,

that putus meant very pure,' just as we say novicius for novus (new) and propicius for proprius (proper), when we wish to augment and amplify the meaning of novus and proprius.

Upon reading this, I was surprised that Alfenus should think that the relation of purus and putus was the same as that of novicius and novus; for if the word were puricius, then it would indeed appear to be formed like novicius. It was also surprising that he thought that novicius was used to imply amplification, since in fact novicius does not mean

more new,

but is merely a derivative and variant of novus. Accordingly, I agree with those who think that putus is derived from puto and therefore pronounce the word with the first syllable short, not long as Alfenus seems to have thought it, since he wrote that putus came from purus. Moreover, the earlier writers used putare of removing and pruning away from anything whatever was superfluous and unnecessary, or even injurious and foreign, leaving only what seemed useful and without blemish. For that was the meaning of putare,

to prune,

as applied to trees and vines, and so too as used of accounts. ¹⁸ The verb puto itself also, which we use for the purpose of stating our opinion, certainly means nothing else than that in an obscure and difficult matter we do our best, by cutting away and lopping off false views, to retain what seems true and pure and sound. Therefore in the treaty with Carthage silver was called putum, as having been thoroughly purified and refined, as free from all foreign matter, and as spotless and whitened by the removal from it of all impurities.

But the expression purum putum occurs, not only in the treaty with Carthage, but also in many other early writings, including the tragedy of Quintus Ennius entitled Alexander,¹⁹ and the satire of Marcus Varro called Di\s Pai=des oi( Ge/rontes,²⁰ or Old Men are Children for a Second Time.

VI

6arg

That Julius Hyginus was hasty and foolish in his criticism of Virgil for calling the wings of Daedalus praepetes; also a note on the meaning of aves praepetes and of those birds which Nigidius called inferae.

FROM Minos' realms in flight brave Daedalus

On pinion swift ( praepetibus), 'tis said, did dare the sky.

In these lines of Virgil ²¹ Julius Hyginus ²² criticizes the use of pennis praepetibus as an improper and ignorant expression.

For,

says he,

those birds are called praepetes by the augurs which either fly onward auspiciously or alight in suitable places.

Therefore he thought it inappropriate in Virgil to use an augural term in speaking of the flight of Daedalus, which had nothing to do with the science of the augurs.

But of a truth it was Hyginus who was altogether foolish in supposing that the meaning of praepetes was known to him, but unknown to Virgil and to Gnaeus Matius, a learned man, who in the second book of his Iliad called winged Victory praepes in the following line: ²³

While Victory swift ( praepes) the victor's palm bestows.

Furthermore, why does he not find fault also with Quintus Ennius, who in his Annals uses praepes, not of the wings of Daedalus, but of something very different, in the line: ²⁴

Brundisium girt with fair, propitious ( praepete) port?

But if Hyginus had regarded the force and origin of the word rather than merely noting the meaning given to it by the augurs, he would certainly pardon the poets for using words in a figurative and metaphorical sense rather than literally. For since not only the birds themselves which fly auspiciously, but also the places which they take, since these are suitable and propitious, are called praepetes, therefore Virgil called the wings of Daedalus praepetes, since he had come from places in which he feared danger into safer regions. Furthermore, the augurs call places praepetes, and Ennius in the first book of his Annals said: ²⁵

In fair, propitious ( praepetibus) places they alight.

But birds that are the opposite of praepetes are called inferae, or

low,

²⁶ according to Nigidius Figulus, who says in the first book of his Private Augury: ²⁷

The right is opposed to the left, praepes to infera.

From this we may infer that birds were called praepetes which have a higher and loftier flight, since Nigidius said that the praepetes were contrasted with the inferae.

In my youth in Rome, when I was still in attendance on the grammarians, I gave special attention to Sulpicius Apollinaris. Once when there was a discussion about augural law and mention had been made of praepetes aves, I heard him say to Erucius Clarus, the city prefect, that in his opinion praepetes was equivalent to Homer's tanupte/ruges, or

wide-winged,

since the augurs had special regard to those birds whose flight was broad and wide because of their great wings. And then he quoted these verses of Homer: ²⁸

You bid me trust the flight of wide-winged birds,

But I regard them not, nor think of them.

VII

7arg

On Acca Larentia and Gaia Taracia; and on the origin of the priesthood of the Arval Brethren.

1 THE names of Acca Larentia and Gaia Taracia, or Fufetia as she is sometimes called, are frequent in the early annals. To the former of these after her death, but to Taracia while she still lived, the Roman people paid distinguished honours. And that Taracia, at any rate, was a Vestal virgin is proved by the Horatian law which was laid before the people with regard to her. By this law very many honours are bestowed upon her and among them the right of giving testimony is granted her, and that privilege is given to no other woman in the State. The word testabilis is used in the Horatian law itself, and its opposite occurs in the Twelve Tables: ²⁹

Let him be infamous and intestabilis, or 'forbidden to testify.'

Besides, if at the age of forty she should wish to leave the priesthood and marry, the right and privilege of withdrawing from the order and marrying were allowed her, in gratitude for her generosity and kindness in presenting to the people the campus Tiberinus or Martius.

But Acca Larentia was a public prostitute and by that trade had earned a great deal of money. In her will she made king Romulus heir to her property, according to Antias' History;³⁰ according to some others, the Roman people. Because of that favour public sacrifice was offered to her by the priest of Quirinus and a day was consecrated to her memory in the Calendar. But Masurius Sabinus, in the first book of his Memorialia, following certain historians, asserts that Acca Larentia was Romulus' nurse. His words are: ³¹

This woman, who had twelve sons, lost one of them by death. In his place Romulus gave himself to Acca as a son, and called himself and her other sons ' Arval Brethren.' Since that time there has always been a college of Arval Brethren, twelve in number, and the insignia of the priesthood are a garland of wheat ears and white fillets.

VIII

8arg

Some noteworthy anecdotes of King Alexander and of Publius Scipio.

1 APION, a Greek, called Pleistoneices, ³² possessed a fluent and lively style. Writing in praise of king Alexander, he says: ³³

He forbade the wife of his vanquished foe, a woman of surpassing loveliness, to be brought into his presence, in order that he might not touch her even with his eyes.

We have then the subject for a pleasant discussion—which of the two shall justly be considered the more continent: Publius Africanus the elder, who after he had stormed Carthage, ³⁴ a powerful city in Spain, and a marriageable girl of wonderful beauty, the daughter of a noble Spaniard, had been taken prisoner and brought to him, restored her unharmed to her father; or king Alexander, who refused even to see the wife of king Darius, who was also his sister, when he had taken her captive in a great battle and had heard that she was of extreme beauty, but forbade her to be brought before him.

But those who have an abundance of talent, leisure and eloquence may use this material for a pair of little declamations on Alexander and Scipio; I shall be satisfied with relating this, which is a matter of historical record: Whether it be false or true is uncertain, but at any rate the story goes that your Scipio in his youth did not have an unblemished reputation, and that it was all but generally believed that it was at him that the following verses were aimed by the poet Gnaeus Naevius: ³⁵

E'en he who oft-times mighty deeds hath done,

Whose glory and exploits still live, to whom

The nations bow, his father once led home,

Clad in a single garment, from his love.

I think it was by these verses that Valerius Antias was led to hold an opinion opposed to that of all other writers about Scipio's character, and to write, ³⁶ contrary to what I said above, that the captured maiden was not returned to her father, but was kept by Scipio and possessed by him in amorous dalliance.

IX

9arg

A passage taken from the Annals of Lucius Piso, highly diverting in content and graceful in style.

1 BECAUSE the action of Gnaeus Flavius, ³⁷ the curule aedile, son of Annius, which Lucius Piso described in the third book of his Annals, seemed worthy of record, and because the story is told by Piso in a very pure and charming style, I have quoted the entire passage from Piso's Annals:³⁸

Gnaeus Flavius, the son of a freedman,

he says, "was a scribe by profession and was in the service of a curule aedile at the time of the election of the succeeding aediles. The assembly of the tribes ³⁹ named Flavius curule aedile, but the magistrate who presided at the election refused to accept him as an aedile, not thinking it right that one who followed the profession of scribe should be made an aedile. Gnaeus Flavius, son of Annius, is said to have laid aside his tablets and resigned his clerkship, and he was then made a curule aedile.

This same Gnaeus Flavius, son of Annius, is said to have come to call upon a sick colleague. When he arrived and entered the room, several young nobles were seated there. They treated Flavius with contempt and none of them was willing to rise in his presence. Gnaeus Flavius, son of Annius, the aedile, laughed at this rudeness; then he ordered his curule chair to be brought and placed it on the threshold, in order that none of them might be able to go out, and that all of them against their will might see him sitting on his chair of state.

X

10arg

A story about Euclides, the Socratic, by whose example the philosopher Taurus used to urge his pupils to be diligent in the pursuit of philosophy.

1 THE philosopher Taurus, a celebrated Platonist of my time, used to urge the study of philosophy by many other good and wholesome examples and in particular stimulated the minds of the young by what he said that Euclides the Socratic used to do.

The Athenians,

said he,

had provided in one of their decrees that any citizen of Megara who should be found to have set foot in Athens should for that suffer death; so great,

says he,

was the hatred of the neighbouring men of Megara with which the Athenians were inflamed. Then Euclides, who was from that very town of Megara and before the passage of that decree had been accustomed both to come to Athens and to listen to Socrates, after the enactment of that measure, at nightfall, as darkness was coming on, clad in a woman's long tunic, wrapped in a parti-coloured mantle, and with veiled head, used to walk from his home in Megara to Athens, to visit Socrates, in order that he might at least for some part of the night share in the master's teaching and discourse. And just before dawn he went back again, a distance of somewhat over twenty miles, disguised in that same garb. But nowadays,

said Taurus,

we may see the philosophers themselves running to the doors of rich young men, to give them instruction, and there they sit and wait until nearly noonday, for their pupils to sleep off all last night's wine.

XI

11arg

A passage from a speech of Quintus Metellus Numidicus, which it was my pleasure to recall, since it draws attention to the obligation of self-respect and dignity in the conduct of life.

1 ONE should not vie in abusive language with the basest of men or wrangle with foul words with the shameless and wicked, since you become like them and their exact mate so long as you say things which match and are exactly like what you hear. This truth may be learned no less from an address of Quintus Metellus Numidicus, a man of wisdom, than from the books and the teachings of the philosophers. These are the words of Metellus from his speech Against Gaius Manlius, Tribune of the Commons,⁴⁰ by whom he had been assailed and taunted in spiteful terms in a speech delivered before the people:

Now, fellow citizens, so far as Manlius is concerned, since he thinks that he will appear a greater man, if he keeps calling me his enemy, who neither count him as my friend nor take account of him as an enemy, I do not propose to say another word. For I consider him not only wholly unworthy to be well spoken of by good men, but unfit even to be reproached by the upright. For if you name an insignificant fellow of his kind at a time when you cannot punish him, you confer honour upon him rather than ignominy.

XII

12arg

That neither testamentum, as Servius Sulpicius thought, nor sacellum, as Gaius Trebatus believed, is a compound, but the former is an extended form of testatio, the latter a diminutive of sacrum.

1 I DO not understand what reason led Servius Sulpicius the jurist, the most learned man of his time, to write in the second book of his work On the Annulling of Sacred Rites⁴¹ that testamentum is a compound word; for he declared that it was made up of mentis contestatio, or

an attesting of the mind.

What then are we to say about calciamentum (shoe), paludamentum (cloak), pavimentum (pavement), vestimentum (clothing), and thousands of other words that have been extended by a suffix of that kind? Are we to call all these also compounds? As a matter of fact, Servius, or whoever it was who first made the statement, was evidently misled by a notion of the presence of mens in testamentum, an idea that is to be sure false, but neither inappropriate nor unattractive, just as indeed Gaius Trebatius too was misled into a similar attractive combination. For he says in the second book of his work On Religions:⁴²

A sacellum, or 'shrine,' is a small place consecrated to a god and containing an altar.

Then he adds these words:

Sacellum, I think, is made up of the two words sacer and cella, as if it were sacra cella, or 'a sacred clamber.'

This indeed is what Trebatius wrote, but who does not know both that sacellum is not a compound, and that it is not made up of sacer and cella, but is the diminutive of sacrum?

XIII

13arg

On the brief topics discussed at the table of the philosopher Taurus and called Sympoticae, or Table Talk.⁴³

1 THIS custom was practised and observed at Athens by those who were on intimate terms with the philosopher Taurus; when he invited us to his home, in order that we might not come wholly tax-free, ⁴⁴ as the saying is, and without a contribution, we brought to the simple meal, not dainty foods, but ingenious topics for discussion. Accordingly, each one of us came with a question which he had thought up and prepared, and when the eating ended, conversation began. The questions, however, were neither weighty nor serious, but certain neat but trifling e)nqumhma/tia, or problems, which would pique a mind enlivened with wine; for instance, the examples of playful subtlety which I shall quote.

The question was asked, when a dying man died—when he was already in the grasp of death, or while he still lived? And when did a rising man rise—when he was already standing, or while he was still seated? And when did one who was learning an art become an artist—when he already was one, or when he was still learning? For whichever answer you make, your statement will be absurd and laughable, and it will seem much more absurd, if you say that it is in either case, or in neither.

But when some declared that all these questions were pointless and idle sophisms, Taurus said:

Do not despise such problems, as if they were mere trifling amusements. The most earnest of the philosophers have seriously debated this question. ⁴⁵ Some have thought that the term 'die' was properly used, and that the moment of death came, while life still remained; others have left no life in that moment, but have claimed for death all that period which is termed dying.' Also in regard to other similar problems they have argued for different times and maintained opposite opinions. But our master Plato,

⁴⁶ said he,

assigned that time neither to life nor to death, and took the same position in every discussion of similar questions. For he saw that the alternatives were mutually contrary, that one of the two opposites could not be maintained while the other existed, and that the question arose from the juxtaposition of two opposing extremes, namely life and death. Therefore he himself devised, and gave a name to, a new period of time, lying on the boundary between the two, which he called in appropriate and exact language h( e)cai/fnhs fu/sis, or 'the moment of sudden separation.' And this very term, as I have given it,

said he,

you will find used by him in the dialogue entitled Parmenides.

Of such a kind were our

contributions

⁴⁷ at Taurus' house, and such were, as he himself used to put it, the traghma/tia or

sweetmeats

of our desserts.

XIV

14arg

The three reasons given by the philosophers for punishing crimes; and why Plato mentions only two of these, and not three.

1 IT has been thought that there should be three reasons for punishing crimes. One of these, which the Greeks call either ko/lasis or nouqesi/a, is the infliction of punishment for the purpose of correction and reformation, in order that one who has done wrong thoughtlessly may become more careful and scrupulous. The second is called timwri/a by those who have made a more exact differentiation between terms of this kind. That reason for punishment exists when the dignity and the prestige of the one who is sinned against must be maintained, lest the omission of punishment bring him into contempt and diminish the esteem in which he is held; and therefore they think that it was given a name derived from the preservation of honour ( timh/). A third reason for punishment is that which is called by the Greeks para/deigma, when punishment is necessary for the sake of example, in order that others through fear of a recognized penalty may be kept from similar sins, which it is to the common interest to prevent. Therefore our forefathers also used the word exempla, or

examples,

for the severest and heaviest penalties. Accordingly, when there is either strong hope that the culprit will voluntarily correct himself without punishment, or on the other hand when there is no hope that he can be reformed and corrected; or when there is no need to fear loss of prestige in the one who has been sinned against; or if the sin is not of such a sort that punishment must be inflicted in order that it may inspire a necessary feeling of fear—then in the case of all such sins the desire to inflict punishment does not seem to be at all fitting.

Other philosophers have discussed these three reasons for punishment in various places, and so too had our countryman Taurus in the first book of the Commentaries which he wrote On the Gorgias of Plato. But Plato himself says in plain terms that there are only two reasons for punishment: one being that which I put first—for the sake of correction; the second, that which I gave in the third place—as an example to inspire fear. These are Plato's own words in the Gorgias:⁴⁸

It is fitting that everyone who suffers punishment, when justly punished by another, either be made better and profit thereby, or serve as an example to others, in order that they, seeing his punishment, may be reformed through fear.

In these words you may readily understand that Plato used timwri/a, not in the sense that 1 said above is given it by some, but with the general meaning of any punishment. But whether he omitted the maintenance of the prestige of an injured person as a reason for inflicting punishment, on the ground that it was altogether insignificant and worthy of contempt, or rather passed over it as something not germane to his subject, since he was writing about punishments to be inflicted after this life and not during life and among men, this question I leave undecided.

XV

15arg

On the verb quiesco, whether it should be pronounced with a long or a short e.

1 A FRIEND of mine, a man of much learning and devoted to the liberal arts, pronounced the verb quiescit (

be quiet

) in the usual manner, with a short e. Another man, also a friend of mine, marvellous in the use of grammatical rules as jugglers' tricks, so to say, and excessively fastidious in rejecting common words, thought that the first man had been guilty of a barbarism, maintaining that he ought to have lengthened the e, rather than shortened it. For he asserted that quiescit ought to be pronounced like calescit, nitescit, stupescit and many other words of that kind. He also added the statement that quies (quiet) is pronounced with the e long, not short. But my first-named friend, with the unassuming modesty which was characteristic of him in all matters, said that not even if the Aelii, the Cincii and the Santrae ⁴⁹ had decided that the word ought to be so pronounced, would he follow their ruling against the universal usage of the Latin language, nor would he speak in such an eccentric fashion as to be discordant and strange in his diction. Nevertheless he wrote a letter on the subject, among some exercises for his own amusement, in which he tried to prove that quiesco is not like those words which I have quoted above; that it is not derived from quies but rather quies from quiesco. He also maintained that quiesco has the form and derivation of a Greek word, ⁵⁰ and he tried to show, by reasons that were by no means without force, that the word should not be pronounced with a long e.⁵¹

XVI

16arg

On a use by the poet Catullus of the word deprecor, which is unusual, it is true, but appropriate and correct; and on the origin of that word, with examples from early writers.

1 As we chanced to be strolling one evening in the Lyceum, ⁵² we were furnished with sport and amusement by a certain man, of the kind that lays claim to a reputation for eloquence by a superficial and ill-regulated use of language, without having learned any of the usages and principles of the Latin tongue. For while Catullus in one of his poems had used the word deprecor rather cleverly, that fellow, unable to appreciate this, declared that the following verses which I have quoted were very flat, although in the judgment of all men they are most charming: ⁵³

My Lesbia constantly speaks ill of me

And ceases not. By Jove! she cares for me!

How do I know? 'Tis just the same with me;

I rail at, but by Jove! I worship, her.

Our good man thought that deprecor in this passage was used in the sense that is commonly given the word by the vulgar; that is,

I pray earnestly,

I beseech,

I entreat,

where the preposition de is used intensively and emphatically. And if that were so, the verses would indeed be flat. But as a matter of fact the sense is exactly the opposite; for the preposition de, since it has a double force, contains two meanings in one and the same word. For deprecor is used by Catullus in the sense of

denounce, execrate, drive away,

avert by prayers

; but it also has the opposite meaning, when Cicero In Defence of Publius Sulla speaks as follows: ⁵⁴

How many men's lives did he beg off ( est deprecatus) from Sulla.

Similarly in his speech Against the Agrarian Law Cicero says: ⁵⁵

If I do any wrong, there are no masks of ancestors to intercede ( deprecentur,

beg off

) for me with you by their prayers.

But Catullus was not alone in using this word with that meaning. Indeed, the books are full of cases of its occurrence in the same sense, and of these I have quoted one or two which had come to mind. Quintus Ennius in the Erectheus, not differing greatly from Catullus, says: ⁵⁶

Who now win freedom by my own distress

For those whose slavery I by woe avert ( deprecor).

He means

I drive away

and

remove,

either by resort to prayer or in some other way. Similarly in the Chresphontes Ennius writes: ⁵⁷

When I my own life spare, may I avert ( deprecer)

Death from mine enemy.

Cicero, in the sixth book of his Republic, wrote: ⁵⁸

Which indeed was so much the more remarkable, because, while the colleagues were in the same case, they not only did not incur the same hatred, but the affection felt for Gracchus even averted ( deprecabatur) the unpopularity of Claudius.

Here too the meaning is not

earnestly entreated,

but

warded off

unpopularity, so to speak, and defended him against it, a meaning which the Greeks express by the parallel word paraitei=sqai.

Cicero also uses the word in the same way in his Defence of Aulus Caecina, saying: ⁵⁹

What can you do for a man like this? Can you not sometimes permit one to avert ( deprecetur) the odium of the greatest wickedness by the excuse of the most abysmal folly?

Also in the first book of his second Arraignment of Verres:⁶⁰

Now what can Hortensius do? Will he try to avert ( deprecetur) the charge of avarice by the praise of economy? But he is defending a man who is utterly disgraced and sunk in lust and crime.

So then Catullus means that he is doing the same as Lesbia, in publicly speaking ill of her, scorning and rejecting her, and constantly praying to be rid of her, and yet loving her to madness.

XVII

17arg

Who was the first of all to establish a public library; and how many books there were in the public libraries at Athens before the Persian invasions.

1 THE tyrant Pisistratus is said to have been the first to establish at Athens a public library of books relating to the liberal arts. Then the Athenians themselves added to this collection with considerable diligence and care; but later Xerxes, when he got possession of Athens and burned the entire city except the citadel, ⁶¹ removed that whole collection of books and carried them off to Persia. Finally, a long time afterwards, king Seleucus, who was surnamed Nicanor, had all those books taken back to Athens.

At a later time an enormous quantity of books, nearly seven hundred thousand volumes, was either acquired or written ⁶² in Egypt under the kings known as Ptolemies; but these were all burned during the sack of the city in our first war with Alexandria, ⁶³ not intentionally or by anyone's order, but accidentally by the auxiliary soldiers.

Noctes Atticae. Aulus Gellius. John C. Rolfe (Translator). Cambridge, Mass.. 1927.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by Tufts University.

Current edition Perseus

Attic Nights (English) (Gellius, Aulus. The Attic Nights of Aulus Gellius. Rolfe, John C., translator. Cambridge, Mass.; London: Harvard University Press; William Heinemann, 1927 (printing).)

Editions (1)

Noctes Atticae Perseus (Gellius, Aulus. The Attic Nights of Aulus Gellius. Rolfe, John C., editor. Cambridge, Mass.; London: Harvard University Press; William Heinemann, 1927 (printing).) — 7.1 focus

I

Argument

Quem in modum responderit Chrysippus adversum eos qui providentiam consistere negaverunt.

[1] QUIBUS non videtur mundus dei et hominum causa institutus neque res humanae providentia gubernari, gravi se argumento uti putant cum ita dicunt: Si esset providentia, nulla essent mala. Nihil enim minus aiunt providentiae congruere, quam in eo mundo quem propter homines fecisse dicatur tantam vim esse aerumnarum et malorum.

[2] Adversus ea Chrysippus cum in libro Περὶ Προνοίας quarto dissereret, Nihil est prorsus istis, inquit, insubidius, qui opinantur bona esse potuisse,

[3] si non essent ibidem mala. Nam cum bona malis contraria sint, utraque necessum est opposita inter sese et quasi mutuo adversoque fulta nisu consistere; nullum adeo contrarium est sine contrario altero.

[4] Quo enim pacto iustitiae sensus esse posset, nisi essent iniuriae? aut quid aliud iustitia est quam iniustitiae privatio? Quid item fortitudo intellegi posset, nisi ex ignaviae adpositione? Quid continentia, nisi ex intemperantiae? Quo item modo prudentia esset, nisi foret contra inprudentia?

[5] Proinde, inquit, homines stulti cur non hoc etiam desiderant, ut veritas sit et non sit mendacium? Namque itidem sunt bona et mala, felicitas et infortunitas, dolor et voluptas.

[6] Alterum enim ex altero, sicuti Plato ait, verticibus inter se contrariis deligatum est; si tuleris unum, abstuleris utrumque.

[7] Idem Chrysippus in eodem libro tractat consideratque dignumque esse id quaeri putat, εἰ αἱ τῶν ἀνθρώπων νόσοι κατὰ φύσιν γίνονται, id est, si ¹ natura ipsa rerum vel providentia, quae compagem hanc mundi et genus hominum fecit, morbos quoque et debilitates et aegritudines corporum, quas patiuntur homines, fecerit.

[8] Existimat autem non fuisse hoc principale naturae consilium, ut faceret homines morbis obnoxios, numquam enim hoc convenisse naturae auctori parentique omnium rerum bonarum.

[9] Sed cum multa, inquit, atque magna gigneret pareretque aptissima et utilissima, alia quoque simul adgnata sunt incommoda his ipsis quae faciebat cohaerentia; eaque non ² per naturam, sed per sequellas quasdam necessarias facta dicit, quod ipse appellat κατὰ παρακολούθησιν.

[10] Sicut, inquit, cum corpora hominum natura fingeret, ratio subtilior et utilitas ipsa operis postulavit ut tenuissimis minutisque ossiculis caput compingeret.

[11] Sed hanc utilitatem rei maiorem alia quaedam incommoditas extrinsecus consecuta est, ut fieret caput tenuiter munitum et ictibus offensionibusque parvis fragile.

[12] Proinde morbi quoque et aegritudines partae sunt, dum salus paritur.

[13] Sicut hercle, inquit, dum virtus hominibus per consilium naturae gignitur, vitia ibidem per adfinitatem contraria³ nata sunt.

II

Argument

Quo itidem modo et vim necessitatemque fati constituerit et esse tamen in nobis consilii iudiciique nostri arbitrium confirmaverit.

[1] FATUM, quod εἱμαρμένην Graeci vocant, ad hanc ferme sententiam Chrysippus, Stoicae princeps philosophiae, definit: Fatum est, inquit, sempiterna quaedam et indeclinabilis series rerum et catena, volvens semetipsa sese et inplicans per aeternos consequentiae ordines, ex quibus apta nexaque est.

[2] Ipsa autem verba Chrysippi, quantum valui memoria, ascripsi, ut, si cui meum istud interpretamentum videbitur esse obscurius, ad ipsius verba animadvertat.

[3] In libro enim Περὶ Προνοίας quarto εἱμαρμένην esse dicit φυσικήν τινα σύνταξιν τῶν ὅλων ἐξ ἀϊδίου τῶν ἑτέρων τοῖς ἑτέροις ἐπακολουθούντων καὶ μεταπολουμένων ἀπαραβάτου οὔσης τῆς τοιαύτης ἐπιπλοκῆς.

[4] Aliarum autem opinionum disciplinarumque auctores huic definitioni ita obstrepunt:

[5] Si Chrysippus, inquiunt, fato putat omnia moveri et regi nec declinari transcendique posse agmina fati et volumina, peccata quoque hominum et delicta non suscensenda neque inducenda sunt ipsis voluntatibusque eorum, sed necessitati cuidam et instantiae, quae oritur ex fato, omnium quae sit rerum domina et arbitra, per quam necesse sit fieri quicquid futurum fiturum est; et propterea nocentium poenas legibus inique constitutas, si homines ad maleficia non sponte veniunt, sed fato trahuntur.

[6] Contra ea Chrysippus tenuiter multa et argute disserit; sed omnium fere quae super ea re scripsit huiuscemodi sententia est:

[7] Quamquam ita sit, inquit, ut ratione quadam necessaria et principali coacta atque conexa sint fato omnia, ingenia tamen ipsa mentium nostrarum proinde sunt fato obnoxia, ut proprietas eorum est ipsa et qualitas.

[8] Nam si sunt per naturam primitus salubriter utiliterque ficta, omnem illam vim, quae de fato extrinsecus ingruit, inoffensius tractabiliusque transmittunt. Sin vero sunt aspera et inscita et rudia nullisque artium bonarum adminiculis fulta, etiamsi parvo sive nullo fatalis incommodi conflictu urgeantur, sua tamen scaevitate et voluntario impetu in assidua delicta et in errores se ruunt.

[9] Idque ipsum ut ea ratione fiat, naturalis illa et necessaria rerum consequentia efficit, quae fatum vocatur.

[10] Est enim genere ipso quasi fatale et consequens, ut mala ingenia peccatis et erroribus non vacent.

[11] Huius deinde fere rei exemplo non hercle nimis alieno neque inlepido utitur. Sicut, inquit, lapidem cylindrum si per spatia terrae prona atque derupta iacias, causam ⁴ quidem ei et initium praecipitantiae feceris, ⁵ mox tamen ille praeceps volvitur, non quia tu id etiam ⁶ facis, sed quoniam ita sese modus eius et formae volubilitas habet; sic ordo et ratio et necessitas fati genera ipsa et principia causarum movet, impetus vero consiliorum mentiumque nostrarum actionesque ipsas voluntas cuiusque propria et animorum ingenia moderantur.

[12] Infert deinde verba haec, his quae dixi congruentia: Διὸ καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν Πυθαγορείων εἴρηται.

Γνώσει δʼ ἀνθρώπους αὐθαίρετα πήματʼ ἔχοντας,

ὡς τῶν βλαβῶν ἑκάστοις παρʼ αὐτοῖς γινομένων καὶ καθʼ ὁρμὴν αὐτῶν ἁμαρτανόντων τε καὶ βλαπτομένων καὶ κατὰ τὴν αὐτῶν διάνοιαν καὶ θέσιν.

[13] Propterea negat oportere ferri audirique homines aut nequam aut ignavos et nocentes et audaces, qui, cum in culpa et in maleficio revicti sunt, perfugiunt ad fati necessitatem, tamquam in aliquod fani asylum et, quae pessime fecerunt, ea non suae temeritati, sed fato esse attribuenda dicunt.

[14] Primus autem hoc sapientissimus ille et antiquissimus poetarum dixit hisce versibus:

Ὢ πόποι, οἷον δή νυ θεοὺς βροτοὶ αἰτιόωνται.

Ἐξ ἡμέων γάρ φασι κάκʼ ἔμμεναι· οἱ δὲ καὶ αὐτοί

Σφῇσιν ἀτασθαλίῃσιν ὑπὲρ μόρον ἄλγεʼ ἔχουσιν.

[15] Itaque M. Cicero, in libro quem De Fato conscripsit, cum quaestionem istam diceret obscurissimam esse et inplicatissimam, Chrysippum quoque philosophum non expedisse se in ea ait ⁷ his verbis: Chrysippus aestuans laboransque quonam hoc modo ⁸ explicet, et fato omnia fieri et esse aliquid in nobis, intricatur.

III

Argument

Historia sumpta ex libris Tuberonis de serpente invisitatae longitudinis.

[1] TUBERO in Historiis scriptum reliquit, bello primo Poenico Atilium Regulum consulem in Africa, castris apud Bagradam flumen positis, proelium grande atque acre fecisse adversus unum serpentem in illis locis stabulantem invisitatae inmanitatis, eumque magna totius exercitus conflictione balistis atque catapultis diu oppugnatum, eiusque interfecti corium longum pedes centum et viginti Romam missum esse. ⁹

IV

Argument

Quid idem Tubero novae historiae de Atilio Regulo a Carthaginiensibus capto litteris mandaverit; quid etiam Tuditanus super eodem Regulo scripserit.

[1] QUOD satis celebre est de Atilio Regulo, id nuperrime legimus scriptum in Tuditani libris: Regulum captum ad ea quae in senatu Romae dixit, suadens ne captivi cum Carthaginiensibus permutarentur, id quoque addidisse, venenum sibi Carthaginienses dedisse, non praesentarium, sed eiusmodi quod mortem in diem proferret, eo consilio, ut viveret quidem tantisper quoad fieret permutatio, post autem grassante sensim veneno contabesceret.

[2] Eundem Regulum Tubero in Historiis redisse Carthaginem novisque exemplorum modis excruciatum a Poenis dicit:

[3] In atras, inquit, et profundas tenebras eum claudebant ac diu post, ubi erat visus sol ardentissimus, repente educebant et adversus ictus solis oppositum continebant atque intendere in caelum oculos cogebant. Palpebras quoque eius, ne conivere posset, sursum ac deorsum diductas insuebant.

[4] Tuditanus autem somno diu prohibitum atque ita vita privatum refert, idque ubi Romae cognitum est, nobilissimos Poenorum captivos liberis Reguli a senatu deditos et ab his in armario muricibus praefixo destitutos eademque insomnia cruciatos interisse.

V

Argument

Quod Alfenus iureconsultus in verbis veteribus interpretandis erravit.

[1] ALFENUS iureconsultus, Servii Sulpicii discipulus rerumque antiquarum non incuriosus, in libro Digestorum tricesimo et quarto, Coniectaneorum autem secundo: In foedere, inquit, quod inter populum Romanum et Carthaginienses factum est, scriptum invenitur ut Carthaginienses quotannis populo Romano darent certum pondus argenti puri puti, quaesitumque est quid esset purum putum. Respondi, inquit, ego putum esse valde purum, sicut novum novicium dicimus et proprium propicium, augere atque intendere volentes novi et proprii significationem.

[2] Hoc ubi legimus, mirabamur eandem adfinitatem visam esse Alfeno puri et puti, quae sit novicii et novi;

[3] nam, si esset puricium, tum sane videretur dici quasi novicium.

[4] Id etiam mirum fuit, quod novicium per augendi figuram dictum existimavit, cum sit novicium non quod magis novum sit, sed quod a novo dictum sit inclinatumque.

[5] His igitur assentimus, qui putum esse dicunt a putando dictum et ob eam causam prima syllaba brevi pronuntiant, non longa, ut existimasse Alfenus videtur, qui a puro id esse factum scripsit.

[6] Putare autem veteres dixerunt vacantia ex quaque re ac non necessaria aut etiam obstantia et aliena auferre et excidere, et quod esse utile ac sine vitio videretur relinquere.

[7] Sic namque arbores et vites et sic rationes etiam putari dictum.

[8] Verbum quoque ipsum puto, quod declarandae sententiae nostrae causa dicimus, non significat profecto aliud quam id agere nos in re dubia obscuraque, ut decisis amputatisque falsis opinionibus, quod videatur esse verum et integrum et incorruptum retineamus.

[9] Argentum ergo in Carthaginiensi foedere putum dictum est quasi exputatum excoctumque omnique aliena materia carens omnibusque ex eo vitiis detractis emaculatum et candefactum.

[10] Scriptum est autem purum putum, non in Carthaginiensi solum foedere, sed cum in multis aliis veterum libris, tum in Q. quoque Ennii tragoedia quae inscribitur Alexander, et in satira M. Varronis quae inscripta est Δὶς Παῖδες οἱ Γέροντες.

VI

Argument

Temere inepteque reprehensum esse a Iulio Hygino Vergilium, quod praepetes Daedali pennas dixit; atque inibi quid sint aves praepetes et quid illae sint aves quas Nigidius inferas appellavit.

DAEDALUS, ut fama est, fugiens Minoia regna,

Praepetibus pennis ausus se credere caelo.

[2] In his Vergilii versibus reprehendit Iulius Hyginus pennis praepetibus quasi inproprie et inscite dictum.

[3] Nam praepetes, inquit, aves ab auguribus appellantur, quae aut opportune praevolant aut idoneas sedes capiunt.

[4] Non apte igitur usum verbo augurali existimavit in Daedali volatu, nihil ad augurum disciplinam pertinente.

[5] Sed Hyginus nimis hercle ineptus fuit, cum quid praepetes essent se scire ratus est, Vergilium autem et Cn. Matium, doctum virum, ignorasse, qui in secundo Iliadis Victoriam volucrem praepetem appellavit in hoc versu:

Dum dat vincendi praepes Victoria palmam.

[6] Cur autem non Q. quoque Ennium reprehendit, qui in Annalibus non pennas Daedali, sed longe diversius:

Brundisium (inquit) pulcro praecinctum praepete portu?

[7] Set si vim potius naturamque verbi considerasset neque id solum quod augures dicerent inspexisset, veniam prorsus poetis daret similitudine ac translatione verborum, non significatione propria utentibus.

[8] Nam quoniam non ipsae tantum aves quae prosperius praevolant, sed etiam loci quos capiunt, quod idonei felicesque sunt, praepetes appellantur, idcirco Daedali pennas praepetes dixit, quoniam ex locis in quibus periculum metuebat in loca tutiora pervenerat.

[9] Locos porro praepetes et augures appellant et Ennius in Annalium primo dixit:

praepetibus sese pulcrisque locis dant.

[10] Avibus autem praepetibus contrarias aves inferas appellari, Nigidius Figulus in libro primo Augurii Privati ita dicit: Discrepat dextra sinistrae, praepes inferae.

[11] Ex quo est coniectare praepetes appellatas quae altius sublimiusque volitent, cum differre a praepetibus Nigidius inferas dixerit.

[12] Adulescens ego Romae, cum etiamtum ad grammaticos itarem, audivi Apollinarem Sulpicium, quem inprimis sectabar, cum de iure augurio quaereretur et mentio praepetum avium facta esset, Erucio Claro praefecto urbi dicere, praepetes sibi videri esse alites, quas Homerus τανυπτέρυγας appellaverit, quoniam istas potissimum augures spectarent quae ingentibus alis patulae atque porrectae praevolarent. Atque ibi hos Homeri versus dixit:

Τύνη δʼ οἰωνοῖσι τανυπτερύγεσσι κελεύεις

Πείθεσθαι, τῶν οὔ τι μετατρέπομʼ οὐδʼ ἀλεγίζω.

VII

Argument

De Acca Larentia et Gaia Taracia; deque origine sacerdotii fratrum Fratruin Arvalium.

[1] ACCAE Larentiae et Gaiae Taraciae, sive illa Fufetia est, nomina in antiquis annalibus celebria sunt. Earum alterae post mortem, Taraciae autem vivae, amplissimi honores a populo Romano habiti.

[2] Et Taraciam quidem virginem Vestae fuisse lex Horatia testis est quae super ea ad populum lata. Qua lege ei plurimi honores fiunt, inter quos ius quoque testimonii dicendi tribuitur, testabilis que una omnium feminarum ut sit datur. Id verbum est legis ipsius Horatiae;

[3] contrarium est in Duodecim Tabulis scriptum: Inprobus intestabilisque esto.

[4] Praeterea si quadraginta annos nata sacerdotio abire ac nubere voluisset, ius ei potestasque exaugurandi atque nubendi facta est munificentiae et beneficii gratia, quod campum Tiberinum sive Martium populo condonasset.

[5] Sed Acca Larentia corpus in vulgus dabat pecuniamque emeruerat ex eo quaestu uberem.

[6] Ea testamento, ut in Antiatis Historia scriptum est, Romulum regem, ut quidam autem alii tradiderunt, populum Romanum bonis suis heredem fecit.

[7] Ob id meritum a flamine Quirinali sacrificium ei publice fit et dies e nomine eius in fastos additus.

[8] Sed Sabinus Masurius in primo Memorialium, secutus quosdam historiae scriptores, Accam Larentiam Romuli nutricem fuisse dicit. Ea, inquit, mulier ex duodecim filiis maribus unum morte amisit. In illius locum Romulus Accae sese filium dedit seque et ceteros eius filios fratres Arvales appellavit. Ex eo tempore collegium mansit fratrum Arvalium numero duodecim, cuius sacerdotii insigne est spicea corona et albae infulae.

VIII

Argument

Notata quaedam de rege Alexandro et de P. Scipione memoratu digna.

[1] Ἀπίων, Graecus homo, qui Πλειστονείκης appellatus est, facili atque alacri facundia fuit.

[2] Is cum de Alexandri regis laudibus scriberet: Victi, inquit, hostis uxorem, facie incluta mulierem, vetuit in conspectum suum deduci, ut eam ne oculis quidem suis contingeret.

[3] Lepide igitur agitari potest, utrum videri continentiorem par sit, Publiumne Africanum superiorem, qui, Carthagine ampla civitate in Hispania expugnata, virginem tempestivam, forma egregia, nobilis viri Hispani filiam captam perductamque ad se patri inviolatam reddidit, an regem Alexandrum, qui Darii regis uxorem eandemque eiusdem sororem, proelio magno captain, quam esse audiebat exuperanti forma, videre noluit perducique ad sese prohibuit.

[4] Sed hanc utramque declamatiunculam super Alexandro et Scipione celebraverint, quibus abunde et ingenii et otii et verborum est;

[5] nos satis habebimus, quod ex historia est, id dicere: Scipionem istum, verone an falso incertum, fama tamen, cum esset adulescens, haud sincera fuisse et propemodum constitisse, hosce versus a Cn. Naevio poeta in eum scriptos esse:

Etiám qui res magnás manu ¹⁰ saepe géssit glorióse,

Cuius fácta viva núnc vigent, qui apud géntes solus praéstat,

Eum súus pater cum pállio uno domum ¹¹ ab amíca abduxit.

[6] His ego versibus credo adductum Valerium Antiatem adversus ceteros omnis scriptores de Scipionis moribus sensisse et eam puellam captivam non redditam patri scripsisse, contra quam nos supra diximus, sed retentam a Scipione atque in deliciis amoribusque ab eo usurpatam usurlpatam.

IX

Argument

Locus exemptus ex Annalibus L. Pisonis historiae et orationis lepidissimae.

[1] QUOD res videbatur memoratu digna, quam fecisse Cn. Flavium, Anni filium, aedilem curulem, L. Piso in tertio Annali scripsit, eaque res perquam pure et venuste narrata a Pisone, locum istum totum huc ex Pisonis Annali transposuimus.

[2] Cn., inquit, Flavius, patre libertino natus, scriptum faciebat, isque in eo tempore aedili curuli apparebat, quo tempore aediles subrogantur, eumque pro tribu aedilem curulem renuntiaverunt.

[3] Aedilem qui comitia habebat negat accipere, neque sibi placere, qui scriptum faceret, eum aedilem fieri.

[4] Cn. Flavius, Anni filius, dicitur tabulas posuisse, scriptu sese abdicasse, isque aedilis curulis factus est.

[5] Idem Cn. Flavius, Anni filius, dicitur ad collegam venisse visere aegrotum. Eo in conclave postquam introivit, adulescentes ibi complures nobiles sedebant. Hi contemnentes eum, assurgere ei nemo voluit.

[6] Cn. Flavius, Anni filius, aedilis, id arrisit, sellam curulem iussit sibi afferri, eam in limine apposuit, ne quis illorum exire posset utique hi omnes inviti viderent sese in sella curuli sedentem.

X

Argument

Historia super Euclida Socratico, cuius exemplo Taurus philosophus hortari adulescentes suos solitus ad philosophiam naviter sectandam.

[1] PHILOSOPHUS TAURUS, vir memoria nostra in disciplina Platonica celebratus, cum aliis bonis multis salubribusque exemplis hortabatur ad philosophiam capessendam, tum vel maxime ista re iuvenum animos expergebat, Euclidem quam dicebat Socraticum factitavisse.

[2] Decreto, inquit, suo Athenienses caverant, ut qui Megaris civis esset, si intulisse Athenas pedem prensus esset, ut ea res ei homini capitalis esset;

[3] tanto Athenienses, inquit, odio flagrabant finitimorum hominum Megarensium.

[4] Tum Euclides, qui indidem Megaris erat quique ante id decretum et esse Athenis et audire Socratem consueverat, postquam id decretum sanxerunt, sub noctem, cum advesperasceret, tunica longa muliebri indutus et pallio versicolore amictus et caput rica velatus, e domo sua Megaris Athenas ad Socratem commeabat, ut vel noctis aliquo tempore consiliorum sermonumque eius fieret particeps, rursusque sub lucem milia passuum paulo amplius viginti eadem veste illa tectus redibat.

[5] At nunc, inquit, videre est philosophos ultro currere, ut doceant, ad fores iuvenum divitum eosque ibi sedere atque opperiri prope ad meridiem, donec discipuli nocturnum omne vinum edormiant.

XI

Argument

verba ex oratione Q. Metelli Numidici, quae libuit meminisse, ad officium gravitatis dignitatisque vitae ducentia.

[1] CUM inquinatissimis hominibus non esse convicio decertandum neque in maledictis adversum inpudentes et inprobos velitandum, quia tantisper similis et compar eorum fias, dum paria et consimilia dicas atque audis, ¹² non minus ex oratione Q. Metelli Numidici, sapientis viri, cognosci potest quam ex libris et disciplinis philosophorum.

[2] Verba haec sunt Metelli Adversus C. Manlium, tribunum plebis, a quo apud populum in contione lacessitus iactatusque fuerat dictis petulantibus:

[3] Nunc quod ad ilium attinet, Quirites, quoniam se ampliorem putat esse, si se mihi inimicum dictitarit, quem ego mihi neque amicum recipio neque inimicum respicio, in eum ego non sum plura dicturus. Nam cum indignissimum arbitror cui a viris bonis benedicatur, tum ne idoneum quidem cui a probis maledicatur. Nam si in eo tempore huiusmodi homunculum nomines, in quo punire non possis, maiore honore quam contumelia adficias.

XII

Argument

Quod neque testamentum, sicuti Servius Sulpicius existimavit, neque sacellum. sicuti C. Trebatius, duplicia verba sunt, sed a testatione productum alterum, ¹³ alterum a sacro imminutum.

[1] SERVIUS SULPICIUS iureconsultus, vir aetatis suae doctissimus, in libro De Sacris Detestandis secundo, qua ratione adductus testamentum verbum esse duplex scripserit, non reperio;

[2] nam compositum esse dixit a mentis contestatione.

[3] Quid igitur calciamentum, quid paludamentum, quid pavimentum, quid vestimentum, quid alia mille per huiuscemodi formam producta, etiamne ista omnia composita dicemus?

[4] Obrepsisse autem videtur Servio, vel si quis est qui id prior dixit, falsa quidem, sed non abhorrens neque inconcinna quasi mentis quaedam in hoc vocabulo significatio, sicut hercle herele C. quoque Trebatio eadem concinnitas obrepsit.

[5] Nam in libro De Religionibus secundo: Sacellum. est, inquit, locus parvus deo sacratus cuin ara. Deinde addit verba haec: Sacellum ex duobus verbis arbitror compositum sacri et cellae, quasi sacra cella.

[6] Hoc quidem scripsit Trebatius; set quis ignorat, sacellum et simplex verbum esse et non ex sacro et cella copulatum, sed ex sacro deminutum?

XIII

Argument

De quaestiunculis apud Taurum philosophum in convivio agitatis, quae sympoticae vocantur.

[1] FACTITATUM observatumque hoc Athenis est ab his qui erant philosopho philosophy Tauro iunctiores;

[2] cum domum suam nos vocaret, ne omnino, ut dicitur, immunes et asymboli veniremus, coniectabamus ¹⁴ ad cenulam non cuppedias ciborum, sed argutias quaestionum.

[3] Unusquisque igitur nostrum commentus paratusque ibat quod quaereret, eratque initium loquendi edundi finis.

[4] Quaerebantur autem non gravia nec reverenda, sed ἐνθυμημάτια quaedam lepida et minuta et florentem vino animum lacessentia, quale hoc ferme est subtilitatis ludicrae, quod dicam.

[5] Quaesitum est quando moriens moreretur? cum iam in morte esset, an cum etiamtum in vita foret; et quando surgens surgeret? cum iam staret, an cum etiamtum sederet; et qui artem disceret, quando artifex fieret? cum iam esset, an cum etiamtum non esset.

[6] Utrum enim horum dices, absurde atque ridicule dixeris, multoque absurdius videbitur, si aut utrumque esse dicas aut neutrum.

[7] Sed ea omnia cum captiones esse quidam futtiles atque inanes dicerent, Nolite, inquit Taurus, haec quasi nugarum aliquem ludum aspernari.

[8] Gravissimi philosophorum super hac re serio quaesiverunt; et alii moriendi verbum atque momentum manente adhuc vita dici atque fieri putaverunt, alii nihil in eo tempore vitae reliquerunt totumque illud, quod mori dicitur, morti vindicaverunt;

[9] item de ceteris similibus in diversa tempora et in contrarias sententias discesserunt.

[10] Sed Plato, inquit, noster neque vitae id tempus neque morti dedit, idemque in omni consimilium rerum disceptatione fecit.

[11] Vidit quippe utrumque esse pugnans neque posse ex duobus contrariis, altero manente, alterum constitui quaestionemque fieri per diversorum inter se finium mortis et vitae cohaerentiam, et idcirco peperit ipse expressitque aliud quoddam novum in confinio tempus, quod verbis propriis atque integris τὴν ἐξαίφνης φύσιν appellavit idque ipsum ita, uti dico, inquit, in libro, cui Parmenides titulus est, scriptum ab eo reperietis.

[12] Tales aput Taurum symbolae taliaque erant mensarum secundarum, ut ipse dicere solitus erat, τραγημάτια.

XIV

Argument

Poeniendis peccatis tres esse rationes a philosophis attributas; et quamobrem Plato duarum ex his meminerit, non trium.

[1] POENIENDIS peccatis tres esse debere causas existimatum est.

[2] Una est causa, quae Graece vel κόλασις vel νουθεσία dicitur, cum poena adhibetur casti gandi atque emendandi gratia, ut is qui fortuito delinquit attentior fiat correctiorque.

[3] Altera est, quam hi qui vocabula ista curiosius diviserunt τιμωρίαν appellant. Ea causa animadvertendi est, cum dignitas auctoritasque eius in quem est peccatum tuenda est, ne praetermissa animadversio contemptum eius pariat et honorem levet; idcircoque id ei vocabulum a conservatione honoris factum putant.

[4] Tertia ratio vindicandi est quae παράδειγμα a Graecis nominatur cum poenitio propter exemplum necessaria est, ut ceteri a similibus peccatis, quae prohiberi publicitus interest, metu cognitae poenae deterreantur. Idcirco veteres quoque nostri exempla pro maximis gravissimisque poenis dicebant. Quando igitur aut spes magna est ut is qui peccavit citra poenam ipse sese ultro corrigat, aut spes contra nulla est emendari eum posse et corrigi, aut iacturam dignitatis, in quem peccatum est, metui non necessum est, aut non id peccatum est cuius exemplum necessario metu sanciendum sit: tum, quicquid ita delictum est non sane dignum esse imponendi poenae studium visum est.

[5] Has tris ulciscendi rationes et philosophi alii plurifariam et noster Taurus in primo commentariorum Commentartorum, quos in Gorgian Platonis composuit, scriptas reliquit.

[6] Plato autem ipse verbis apertis duas solas esse poeniendi causas dicit: unam, quam primo in loco propter corrigendum, alteram, quam in tertio propter exempli metum posuimus.

[7] Verba haec sunt Platonis in Gorgia: Προσήκει δὲ παντὶ τῷ ἐν τιμωρίᾳ ὄντι ὑπʼ ἄλλου ὀρθῶς τιμωρουμένῳ ἢ βελτίονι γίγνεσθαι καὶ ὀνίνασθαι, ἢ παραδείγματι ἄλλοις¹⁵ γίγνεσθαι, ἵνα ἄλλοι οἱ¹⁶ ὁρῶντες πάσχοντα φοβούμενοι βελτίους γίγνωνται.

[8] In hisce verbis facile intellegas τιμωρίαν Platonem dixisse, non ut supra scripsi quosdam dicere, sed ita ut promisce promisee dici solet pro omni punitione.

[9] Anne autem quasi omnino parvam et contemptu dignam praeterierit poenae sumendae causam propter tuendam laesi hominis auctoritatem, an magis quasi ei quam dicebat rei non necessariam praetermiserit, cum de poenis, non in vita neque inter homines, sed post vitae tempus capiendis scriberet, ego in medium relinquo.

XV

Argument

De verbo quiesco, an e littera corripi an produci debeat.

[1] AMicus noster, homo multi studii atque in bonarum disciplinarum opere frequens, verbum quiescit usitate e littera correpta dixit.

[2] Alter item amicus, homo in doctrinis, quasi in praestigiis, mirificus communiumque vocum respuens nimis et fastidiens, barbare eum dixisse opinatus est, quoniam producere debuisset, non corripere.

[3] Nam quiescit ita oportere dici praedicavit, ut calescit, nitescit, stupescit et alia huiuscemodi multa.

[4] Id etiam addebat, quod quies e producto, non brevi diceretur.

[5] Noster autem, qua est rerum omnium verecunda mediocritate, ne si Aelii quidem, Cincii et Santrae dicendum ita censuissent, obsecuturum se fuisse ait contra perpetuam Latinae linguae consuetudinem, neque se tam insignite locuturum, ut absona inauditaque diceret;

[6] litteras tamen super hac re fecit inter exercitia quaedam ludicra et quiesco non esse his simile quae supra posui, nec a quiete dictum, sed ab eo quietem quieterm, Graecaeque vocis et modum et originem verbum istud habere demonstravit, rationibusque haut sane frigidis docuit quiesco e littera longa dici non convenire.

XVI

Argument

Verbum deprecor a poeta Catullo inusitate quidem, sed apte positum et proprie; deque ratione eius verbi exemplisque veterum scriptorum.

[1] EIUSMODI quispiam qui tumultuariis et inconditis linguae exercitationibus ad famam sese facundiae promiserat proniiserat¹⁷ neque orationis Latinae usurpationes rationesve ¹⁸ ullas didicerat, cum in Lycio forte vespera ambularemus, ludo ibi et voluptati fuit.

[2] Nam cum esset verbum deprecor doctiuscule positum in Catulli carmine, quia id ignorabat, frigidissimos versus esse dicebat omnium quidem iudicio venustissimos, quos subscripsi:

Lesbia mi dicit semper male nec tacet umquam

De me; Lesbia me dispeream nisi amat.

Quo signo? quia sunt totidem mea; deprecor illam

Assidue, verum dispeream nisi amo.

[3] Deprecor hoc in loco vir bonus ita esse dictum putabat, ut plerumque a vulgo dicitur, quod significat valde precor et oro et supplico, in quo de praepositio ad augendum et cumulandum valet.

[4] Quod si ita esset, frigidi sane versus forent.

[5] Nunc enim contra omnino est; nam de praepositio, quoniam est anceps, in uno eodemque verbo duplicem vim ¹⁹ capit. Sic enim deprecor a Catullo dictum est, quasi detestor vel exsecror vel depello vel abominor;

[6] contra autem valet, cum Cicero Pro P. Sulla ita dicit: Quam ²⁰ multorum hic vitamst ²¹ a Sulla deprecatus.

[7] Item in dissuasione legis agrariae: Si quid deliquero, nullae sunt imagines, quae me a vobis deprecentur.

[8] Sed neque solus Catullus ita isto verbo usus est. Pleni sunt adeo libri similis in hoc verbo significationis, ex quibus unum et alterum, quae subpetierant, apposui.

[9] Q. Ennius in Erectheo non longe secus dixit quam Catullus Cattullus:

Qui núnc (inquit) aerumna meá libertatém paro,

Quibus sérvitutem meá miseria déprecor;

signat ²² abigo et amolior, vel prece adhibita vel quo alio modo.

[10] Item Ennius in Cresphonte:

Ego cum meae vitae parcam, létum inimico déprecer.

[11] Cicero in libro sexto De RepublIca ita scripsit: Quod quidem eo fuit maius, quia, cum causa pari collegae essent, non modo invidia pari non erant, sed etiam Claudi invidiam Gracchi caritas deprecabatur; hic quoque item non est valde precabatur, sed quasi propulsabat invidiam ²³ et defensabat invidiam, quod Graeci propinqua significatione παραιτεῖσθαι dicunt.

[12] Item Pro Aulo Caecina consimiliter Cicero verbo isto utitur. Quid, inquit, huic ²⁴ homini facias? Nonne concedas interdum ut excusatione summae stultitiae summae improbitatis odium deprecetur? Item In Verrem actionis secundae primo:

[13] Nunc vero quid faciat Hortensius? Avaritiaene crimina frugalitatis laudibus deprecetur? At hominem flagitiosissimum, libidinosissimum nequissimumque defendit. Sic igitur Catullus eadem se facere dicit quae Lesbiam, quod et malediceret ei palam respueretque et recusaret detestareturque assidue et tamen eam penitus deperiret.

XVII

Argument

Quis omnium primus libros publice praebuerit legendos; quantusque numerus numerous fuerit Athenis ante clades Persicas librorum in bibliothecis publicorum. ²⁵

[1] LIBROS Athenis disciplinarum liberalium publice ad legendum praebendos primus posuisse dicitur Pisistratus tyrannus. Deinceps studiosius accuratiusque ipsi Athenienses auxerunt; sed omnem illam postea librorum copiam Xerxes, Athenarum potitus, urbe ipsa praeter arcem incensa, abstulit asportavitque in Persas.

[2] Eos porro libros universos multis post tempestatibus Seleucus rex, qui Nicanor appellatus est, referendos Athenas curavit.

[3] Ingens postea numerus librorum in Aegypto ab Ptolemaeis regibus vel conquisitus vel confectus est ad milia ferme voluminum septingenta; ²⁶ sed ea omnia bello priore Alexandrino, dum diripitur ea civitas, non sponte neque opera consulta, sed a militibus forte auxiliaris incensa sunt.

Notes on the current edition

Attic Nights

1. Fr. ii. 1169, Aru.

2. Phaedo, 3, p. 60 B.

3. Fr. ii, 1170, Arn.

4. Fr. ii. 1000, Arn.

5. Fr. ii. 1000, Arn.

6. Fr. ii. 1000, Arn.

7. Fr. ii. 1000, Arn.

8. Xru/sea )/Eph, 54.

9. Homer, Odyss. i. 32.

10. Fr. 1, p. 582, Orelli 2.

11. Fr. ii, 977, Arn. 2

12. Fr. 8, Peter 2.

13. In 256 B.C.

14. Fr. 5, Peter 2.

15. Fr. 9, Peter.

16. See McCartney, The Figurative Use of Animal Names Univ. of Penna diss.), Lancaster, Pa., 1912.

17. Fr. 1, Huschke; Resp. 14, Dig. 99, Bremer (i, pp. 287,322, 330).

18. That is, to clear one's accounts.

19. 62, Ribbeck 3.

20. Fr. 91, Bücheler.

21. Aen. vi. 14 f.

22. Fr. 6, Fun.

23. Fr. 3, Bährens ( F.P.R.).

24. 488, Vahlen 2. Cf. Gell. ix. 4. 1.

25. 94, Vahlen 2.

26. That is, low-flying, as opposed to swift-, or high-, flying.

27. Fr. 80, Swoboda.

28. Iliad xii. 237 f.

29. viii. 22; the date of this privilegium (see x. 20. 4) is uncertain.

30. Fr. 1, Peter 2.

31. Fr. 14, Huschke; 1, Bremer (ii, p. 368).

32.

Of many quarrels,

a word coined in imitation of the epithet applied to famous athletes: pleistoni/khs,

of many victories.

33. F.H.G. iii. 515.

34. Really New Carthage, captured in 210 B.C.; the story is told by Livy, xxvi. 50.

35. ii. 108, Ribbeck 3.

36. Fr. 25, Peter 2.

37. He was the secretary of the censor Appius Claudius Caecus and became curule aedile in 303 B.C.

38. Fr. 27, Peter 2.

39. The expression pro tribu is difficult, but appears in Livy ix, 46. 2 in the same connection, cum fieri se pro tribu aedilem videret. Gronovius believed that it referred to the tribus praerogativa. which voted first in order.

40. O.R.F. p. 274, Meyer 2.

41. Fr. 3, Huschke; i, p. 225, Bremer.

42. Fr 4, Huschke; 5, Bremer (i, p. 405).

43. Really, talk

over the wine,

or after-dinner talk.

44. The reference is to a dinner to which each guest brought his contribution ( symbolon); cf. Hor. Odes, iv. 12. 14 f., non ego te meis immunem meditor tinguere poculis; Catull. xiii.

45. See Pease,

Things without Honor,

Class. Phil. xxi. (1926), pp. 97 ff.

46. Parm. 21, p. 156 D; cf. vi. 21, above.

47. See note 2, p. 125.

48. 81, p. 525 A.

49. Mentioned as typical grammarians. The gens Aelia included several famous jurists and men of letters; the reference here is to Lucius Aelius Stilo, the teacher of Varro and Cicero. Santra was a grammarian of the first century B.C.; the Cincii were less well known.

50. A fanciful derivation from Ionic e)/xw, e)/sxw.

51. The e is however long; quiésco occurs in C.1.L. vi, 6250 and 25521.

52. A gymnasium at Athens, the favourite resort of Aristotle and his pupils.

53. xcii.

54. § 72.

55. ii. 100.

56. 128, Ribbeck 3.

57. 121, Ribbeck 3.

58. 2.2.

59. § 30.

60. ii. 2. 192.

61. In 480 B.C.

62. i.e. copied from other manuscripts.

63. In 48 B.C. By no means all of the Alexandrian Library was destroyed at that time, and the losses were made good, at least in part, by Antony in 41 B.C. A part of the library was burned under Aurelian, in A.D. 272, and the destruction seems to have been completed in 391.

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

BOOK VII

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

VIII

IX

X

XI

XII

XIII

XIV

XV

XVI

XVII

Current edition Perseus

I

Argument

II

Argument

III

Argument

IV

Argument

V

Argument

VI

Argument

VII

Argument

VIII

Argument

IX

Argument

X

Argument

XI

Argument

XII

Argument

XIII

Argument

XIV

Argument

XV

Argument

XVI

Argument

XVII

Argument

Notes on the current edition

Stable identifiers