{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_78000/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_78000","id":"gutenberg_78000","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/78000","summary":null,"tags":["Classical literature","Essays","Ethics","Philosophy"],"text":"Transcriber\u2019s notes:\n\nItalic text is denoted _thus_.\n\nThe spelling, hyphenation, punctuation and accentuation are as the\noriginal, except for apparent typographical errors which have been\ncorrected.\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration: _Circe._\n\n_From the painting by E. Burne-Jones._]\n\n\n\n\nPLUTARCH\u2019S ESSAYS AND MISCELLANIES\n\nComprising all his Works Collected\nunder the Title of \u201cMorals\u201d \u00b7 Translated\nfrom the Greek by Several Hands\nCorrected and Revised by WILLIAM\nW. GOODWIN, Ph.D., Professor of\nGreek Literature in Harvard University\nIn Five Volumes \u00b7 Volume Five\n\n[Illustration: HONOS ET VIRTUS]\n\n  BOSTON \u00b7 LITTLE, BROWN\n  AND COMPANY \u00b7 MCMXI\n\n\n\n\n  Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1870,\n  By LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY,\n  In the office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington.\n\n  Copyright, 1898, 1905,\n  By LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY.\n\n  Printers\n  S. J. PARKHILL & CO., BOSTON, U. S. A.\n\n\n\n\n  CONTENTS OF VOLUME FIFTH.\n\n  WITH THE TRANSLATORS\u2019 NAMES.\n\n\n\n  OF EATING OF FLESH.\n\n  BY WILLIAM BAXTER, GENT.\n\n  The very idea of eating the carcasses of slain animals is repulsive,\n  8. Who could have begun the practice, but from the direst necessity?\n  4. Men must have been driven to the deed of slaying animals for food,\n  because the supply of food from the vegetable world had utterly\n  failed, 4, 5. We have no such necessity, 5. Man is not by nature\n  a carnivorous animal, 7. Our conduct in slaying animals and then\n  preparing them for food is wholly against nature, 8. Animal food is\n  injurious: it clogs and confuses the mind and renders it stupid, 9.\n  It operates unfavorably on character, 9, 10. If we must eat flesh,\n  let it be with sorrow and pity; not tormenting and abusing the poor\n  animal before taking its life, 11. Passing the bounds of nature in\n  our feeding, intemperate appetites and shameful lusts are gratified,\n  12. Cruelty to mankind is induced, 12. Animals have senses; they\n  have faculties for seeing, hearing, understanding: is it right to\n  extinguish these faculties? 13. Who knows but the bodies of animals\n  may contain the souls of deceased men; of a father, brother, son, or\n  other friend? 14, 15.\n\n\n  LIVES OF THE TEN ORATORS.\n\n  BY CHARLES BARCROFT, LECTURER OF ST. MILDRED\u2019S, BREAD STREET.\n\n  1. Antiphon, 17-21. 2. Andocides, 21-23. 3. Lysias, 24-26. 4.\n  Isocrates, 27-33. 5. Isaeus, 33. 6. Aeschines, 34-36. 7. Lycurgus,\n  36-42. 8. Demosthenes, 43-53. 9. Hyperides, 53-57. 10. Dinarchus, 57,\n  58. Decrees proposed to the Athenians for statues to be set up to\n  Demosthenes, 58-63.\n\n\n  WHETHER AN AGED MAN OUGHT TO MEDDLE IN STATE AFFAIRS.\n\n  BY F. FETHERSTON, D.D.\n\n  It is maintained by some, that after a certain time men should not\n  employ themselves in public affairs, 64. The love of honor and zeal\n  for the public good never grows old, 65. It is not well for a man\n  who has never been accustomed to public business to commence such\n  employment late in life, 66. An aged man may usefully conduct public\n  affairs, as we see in the instances of Augustus Caesar, Pericles, and\n  Agesilaus, 67, 68. Simonides and Sophocles, in old age, were good\n  poets, 68. It is unworthy of a man who has served the public many\n  years, to descend, in the decline of life, to mean employments, 69,\n  70. Political life has pleasures very great and honorable, 71. A man\n  should not suffer his glory to wither in old age, 72. Reputation once\n  acquired is easily maintained, and the people readily trust their\n  old and faithful servants, 73. Envy and jealousy do not assail old\n  age, 73, 74. It is not easy to terminate a long and faithful public\n  service, 74. An old man staying at home, and spending his time in\n  small matters is not honored, 75. Old men, full of experience and\n  of wisdom, are often compelled by their fellow-citizens to conduct\n  difficult negotiations, 76. Old age of itself is not a good reason\n  for quitting the public service, 77, 78. Young men for war, but\n  old men for counsel, 78. The Roman council of state is called the\n  Senate, 79. The regal dignity has cares and toils, but who would\n  advise the king to abdicate? 80. Old men in office may instruct and\n  guide younger statesmen, 81, 82. Old men are often hale and vigorous,\n  and so not disabled for the service of the state, 83. Examples of\n  Phocion, Masinissa, and Cato, 83. Idleness enervates even great men,\n  as Lucullus, while constant employment invigorates, 84. Our country\n  has claims on our services, 85. Yet old age should have becoming\n  employment, 86. An aged man should abstain from small and frivolous\n  matters, 87. Offices of honor and dignity befit old men, 88. They\n  should not eagerly seek office, 88. Old men should not be forward to\n  speak in public, they should speak on grave occasions, 89. On other\n  occasions, let them yield to younger men, 89, 90. Let them comfort\n  and encourage deserving young men in their failures, 91. To be a\n  statesman is not only to hold office and conduct negotiations, but\n  also to guide, instruct, and assist those who conduct public affairs,\n  when occasion requires, 93, 94. Even men in private stations may do\n  this, and thus serve their country till death, 95, 96.\n\n\n\n\n  POLITICAL PRECEPTS.\n\n  BY SAMUEL WHITE, M.D.\n\n  Counsels to a politician, 97. In the administration of public\n  affairs, be guided by reason and judgment, 98. Act not from\n  vain-glory, emulation, or want of other employment, 98, 99.\n  Accommodate yourself to the temper and disposition of the citizens,\n  99, 100. Having obtained power among the people, endeavor to reform\n  their disposition, 101. Do not give them an opportunity of finding\n  fault with your own life or manners, 102. Beware of little faults,\n  102, 103. Cultivate the graces of speech, 104, 105. Orators sway the\n  multitude, as in the case of Pericles, 106, 107. What the speech of\n  a statesman should be, 107. How to use satire and invective, 108,\n  109. Think before you speak, and speak right on, 110. Speak in full,\n  round tones, 110, 111. Two ways of entering on public life, 111.\n  First, with a bold, vigorous hand, like Aratus, Alcibiades, Scipio,\n  Pompey, &c., 112. Secondly, by procuring the assistance of some man\n  of influence and authority, 114. Be careful in the choice of your\n  man, lest your success inspire him with jealousy, 115. Pompey owed\n  his success to Sylla, 115. Avoid flatterers and favorites, 116. Do\n  not gratify friends in derogation of law and right, 117. Grant favors\n  to friends when consistent with duty and public advantage, 120. Be\n  generous and just towards your enemies, 121, 123. Let patriotism\n  overshadow all private griefs, 122. How to meet invective, 124. Allow\n  others to assist in public affairs, 128. Undertake nothing for which\n  you lack qualification, 128, 129. Keep the helm in your own hand,\n  but carry yourself with moderation; do not forget the limits of your\n  power, 130, 131. As Greece is under the Roman sway, it is well to\n  remember that fact, and to cultivate the favor of some powerful man\n  at Rome, 132. Yet you should avoid, as much as possible, foreign\n  interference, 133. Let the affairs of every city be settled by its\n  own citizens, 133. When commotions arise, try to compose them, 134.\n  One man\u2019s virtue has often saved a state, 135. Treat colleagues in\n  office with honor and respect, 136. Plutarch relates an incident in\n  his own life, 137. Honor the magistrates, even if you are personally\n  their superior, 138. If a magistrate should be remiss in duty, do\n  what you can to supply the defect, 139. Yield to the multitude in\n  small things, that you may hinder their misdoings in greater, 140.\n  When the people desire something which would be injurious to the\n  state, use evasion and delay, 141. When about to undertake some\n  difficult affair, secure the assistance of well-qualified persons,\n  rather than of persons like yourself, 142. Divest yourself of the\n  desire for riches, and of a mean, ignoble ambition, 143, 144. Decline\n  not the honors which the people are disposed to bestow, 145, 146. The\n  good-will of the people towards a public servant helps him greatly\n  in the discharge of his duty, 147. If you are rich, and can give\n  largesses to the people, bestow them, but with due care, 148. If\n  you are poor, hesitate not to confess it, and incur no expense you\n  cannot afford, 149, 150. In case of a sedition, try to compose it,\n  152. Especially try to prevent seditions and commotions, 153. In the\n  present state of Greece, subject to the will of a Roman proconsul, no\n  good can arise from public commotions, 154.\n\n\n  WHICH ARE THE MOST CRAFTY, WATER-ANIMALS OR THOSE CREATURES THAT\n  BREED UPON THE LAND?\n\n  BY JOHN PHILIPS, GENT.\n\n  Field sports, the slaughter of wild and at length of tame animals,\n  prepared the way for men to kill one another, 158. Have brutes a\n  soul? they certainly have sense and imagination, 160. They learn to\n  desire some things and to avoid others, 161. They have expectation,\n  memory, design, hope, fear, desire, and grief, 161. If they have\n  sense, they have understanding, 161. They have what in men is\n  called understanding, 162. Men punish dogs and horses for their\n  faults, as if for the purpose of producing repentance, 162. Beasts\n  are susceptible of pleasure, joy, anger, fear, 163. But are they\n  capable of virtue? 163. They love their offspring, 164. They may have\n  reason, and yet not have it perfectly, or in a high degree, 164. As\n  sight and swiftness exist in different degrees, so may reason and\n  mental force, 165. Animals differ widely in their faculties, as in\n  their habits, 165. Many brute animals excel men in the faculties\n  of sight and hearing, as well as in swiftness and strength; but we\n  may not therefore say that men are blind, &c., 166. There are mad\n  dogs and horses; what is this but a disturbance of the reason? 167.\n  Mankind are chargeable with great injustice in dealing with beasts\n  as they do, 169. There is a necessary and convenient use of the\n  brute creation, 169, 170. Beyond this, we ought not to go, 170. In\n  the exercise of what so nearly resembles reason, do land animals\n  excel those that live in the water? 172. There is sufficient reason\n  to believe that they do, 173. Observe the habits of bulls, lions,\n  and elephants, 173. Of the ichneumon, of swallows, and spiders,\n  174. Of bees, crows, geese, and cranes, 175. The contrivances and\n  labors of emmets, 176, 177. The sagacity of the elephant and the fox,\n  178, 179. The affection of the dog for his master; some striking\n  instances related, 180, 181. Story of a mule at Athens, 182. Another\n  dog story, 182, 183. The elephant that carried King Porus, 183. The\n  horse Bucephalus, 183. Where there is one virtue in a brute, there\n  are commonly others, 183, 184. Instances of subtlety and cunning,\n  184-186. Elephants and lions have a taste for society, 187. Amorous\n  propensities of some brutes towards mankind; singular instances\n  given, 188. Starlings, magpies, and parrots learn to talk, 188, 189.\n  Swans and nightingales sing, 189. Story of a magpie at Rome imitating\n  the music of trumpets exactly, 190. Wonderful docility of a dog, 191.\n  Men have learned of the spider to weave; of the swallow to build;\n  and have acquired from other animals skill in medicine, 191, 192.\n  Some oxen have learned to count, 193. Soothsaying and divination is\n  by means of birds, 194. What now can be said of the sagacity and\n  intelligence of fishes and other water-animals? living in the sea,\n  and remote from our observation, they are but little known to us,\n  195. Crocodiles come when called, 196. Fish are not easily caught,\n  a proof of great cunning and wariness, 197, 198. Fish stand by and\n  defend each other in danger, 199. Sagacity of the dolphin and the\n  cuttle-fish, 200. Subtlety of the fish in taking their own prey,\n  the torpedo, polypus, and others, 201, 202. Sagacity of the tunny,\n  203, 204. Mutual affection of the crocodile and the trochilus, 206.\n  Sagacity of fish in depositing their spawn, 207, 208. Care of the\n  tortoise and crocodile for their young, 209, 210. Intelligence and\n  conjugal affection of the halcyon, 211, 212. Story of a dolphin\n  which served as a guide to messengers of Ptolemy Soter, king of\n  Egypt, 213, 214. The dolphin, a solitary instance among the brutes of\n  disinterested love for man, 214. Stories of affectionate dolphins,\n  215, 216.\n\n\n  THAT BRUTE BEASTS MAKE USE OF REASON.\n\n  BY SIR A. J.\n\n  A satire on the boasted wisdom, fortitude, magnanimity, and\n  temperance of man, in the form of a dialogue between Ulysses in the\n  island of Circe, and Gryllus, whom she had changed into a swine, and\n  who now prefers his swinish condition to a return to the human form;\n  Ulysses asks Circe for permission to restore his companions to the\n  human shape, 218. Circe will grant the request if the men themselves\n  desire it, 219. Gryllus, one of them, is brought forward to answer in\n  behalf of the entire company, 219. He refuses, and gives his reasons,\n  220, et seq. He says that by making him and his companions beasts,\n  Circe has done them a great favor, 220. Beasts have more fortitude\n  than men; they fight in fair, open combat, without trick or artifice;\n  they are no cowards, they never cry for mercy, 222. Beasts are\n  courageous and daring, even the females; while the courage of men is\n  artificial, and women are timid, 223, 224. Beasts are more temperate\n  and chaste than men; they indulge their appetites only in a natural\n  way, and at the proper season, 225, 226, 228. Beasts do not value\n  silver or gold, 227. They have no adventitious desires, 227. Their\n  senses are more accurate, 227. Men are incontinent: they indulge\n  unnatural and excessive appetites; are never satisfied, 229, 230.\n  Beasts are satisfied with one kind of food, and this procured without\n  difficulty; they have nature for their teacher, and could teach men\n  many useful lessons, 231, 232.\n\n\n  OF THE FACE APPEARING WITHIN THE ORB OF THE MOON.\n\n  BY A. G., GENT.\n\n  In abstruse speculations, if we fail of satisfaction in one\n  direction, we must inquire in another, 234. A face or form is seen\n  in the moon; how is this to be explained? 234. The appearance of a\n  form in the moon is not the result of any acuteness or dulness of\n  our vision, 234, 235. The appearance in question some think may be\n  a reflection of the ocean from the moon\u2019s disc, 236. This opinion\n  refuted, 236, 237. Some think the moon to be a compound of air and\n  fire, a disturbance of which causes the appearance in question, 238.\n  This notion disproved, 238, 239, 242. That the earth is a larger body\n  than the moon, is shown by eclipses of the moon, 241. The moon must\n  be a solid body, though much lighter than the earth, 241, 242. The\n  spherical form of the earth, the antipodes, and all motion tending\n  towards the earth\u2019s centre, are pronounced absurdities, 243, 244.\n  The moon is not far from the earth, and feels its influence, though\n  not of the same substance, 245, 246. Computation of the respective\n  distances of the sun and moon from the earth, 246. The spherical form\n  of the earth again denied, 247. If the earth is in the middle, of\n  what is it the middle? not of the universe, surely, 247. Relations\n  of bodies _above_ and _beneath_, 248. We are not, in our philosophy,\n  to reduce every thing to the place to which it naturally belongs,\n  249, 250. All things do not follow their natural course, 250. In the\n  human body the heaviest parts are not placed lowermost, 251. So it\n  may be in the structure of the world, 252. The moon, though placed in\n  high heaven, may be a heavy body, 253. It is not therefore composed\n  of fire and air, 253. But has the moon the nature of earth? 254.\n  Does the moon reflect the light of the sun? 255. Reasons why this is\n  probable, 256. When the moon appears only half-enlightened, ought not\n  the light reflected to come at right angles? and is it so? 256-258.\n  Aspect of the moon when gibbous or crescent, 258. Only solid bodies\n  reflect light; the moon therefore must be a solid body, 259, 260.\n  That the moon is a solid body is farther proved by eclipses of the\n  sun, 260-262. Size of the moon; as large as Peloponnesus, 261. Its\n  proportionate size in relation to the earth, 261. Further arguments\n  from eclipses, 263-265. Objections answered, 266-268. The moon is\n  not a star, or a burning body, 266. Its nature is like that of the\n  earth, 268. This need not impugn her divinity, 268. There may be\n  cavities and other inequalities on the surface of the moon, and these\n  may be immensely large, so as to be seen by us, 269. The shadow of\n  Mount Athos falls on Lemnos, the shadow being immensely larger than\n  the mountain, 270. An objection from this answered, 270-273. Is the\n  moon inhabited? is it fit for the abode of animated beings? 274,\n  275. Answer, (1.) If it be not, it does not prove that the moon was\n  made in vain, 276. (2.) The moon may be inhabited: we can see no\n  reasons to the contrary, 277-279. Objections considered, 277, 278.\n  That the moon is inhabited is not more incredible than that the ocean\n  should be inhabited, 280. A description of the isle Ogygia, in the\n  Western Ocean, the abode of Saturn; its inhabitants; the phenomena\n  and customs of the place, 281-283. Man is compounded of three parts:\n  the body, the soul, and the understanding, 286. The understanding is\n  from the sun, the soul from the moon, that is from Proserpine, 286.\n  Every soul, dismissed from the body, wanders for a time between the\n  earth and the moon, 286. When they reach the moon, they behold its\n  greatness and beauty, 288. The moon described as it appears to them,\n  289. The Elysian fields are there, 289. If any of the dwellers there\n  commit a fault, they are thrust down to earth again, 289. After a\n  long time, they come back to the moon, 291. This about the moon may\n  be taken for what one pleases, 292.\n\n\n  OF FATE.\n\n  BY THE SAME HAND.\n\n  Fate is either (1) an energy, a law, an act, 293; or (2) a substance,\n  the soul of the world, 294. Though comprehending infinite, it is\n  itself finite, for law is in its nature finite, 294, 295. Every\n  thing moves in a circle; all beings and all actions that now exist\n  will come around again: we shall again do what we are now doing, and\n  in the same manner, 295. Fate, the Divine Law, the Law of Nature,\n  determines all things, 296. It determines both conditionally and\n  universally, 297. What relation has Fate to Divine Providence?\n  what to fortune? what to human ability? what to contingent events?\n  298. As the civil law comprehends and relates to many things which\n  are not lawful, so it is with Fate, 298. The words _possible_ and\n  _contingent_ defined; also _power_, _necessity_, &c., 299, 300. Of\n  causes: some are causes _per se_, others are causes by accident, 301.\n  Fortune is a cause by accident, 302. Fortune is not the same thing\n  as Chance, though Chance comprehends Fortune, 303. Fortune relates\n  to men only; Chance includes things animate and inanimate, 303. Of\n  Divine Providence: (1) the will of the Supreme Deity; (2) the will\n  of the subordinate deities; (3) the will of the Daemons, 304. Of the\n  Providence of the Supreme God, 305. Of the Providence of the inferior\n  gods, 306. Of the Providence of the Daemons, 307, 308.\n\n\n  CONCERNING THE FIRST PRINCIPLE OF COLD.\n\n  BY F. FETHERSTON, D.D.\n\n  Is cold the mere privation of heat? 309. This is denied, for cold\n  seems to act on fluids and on solids: like heat or other actual\n  substances, it has a productive power, 310. Further, a mere privation\n  is not capable of degrees; but cold exists in different degrees,\n  310. A privation is nothing; cold is something, 311. A privation\n  is not the object of any of our senses; but cold can be felt,\n  311. Privation is something single and simple; substances have\n  differences, continually varying; and thus it is with cold, therefore\n  cold must be a substance, 312. Cold acts as a substance; it resists\n  heat, and overcomes it or is vanquished by it, 312. As there are four\n  elements, of which all things are composed, so there should be four\n  qualities, heat and cold, drought and moisture, 313. What sort of\n  substance is cold? 314. The air, when it becomes dark, becomes also\n  cold, 315. The freezing of water is caused by cold air, 316. Great\n  rivers and lakes are not frozen to the bottom, because the air does\n  not reach so far; the power of cold is therefore as many think, from\n  the air, 317; but this is doubtful, 318. Water makes things black;\n  air makes them white, 318. Oil is transparent because so much air is\n  in it, 318. It does not easily freeze, 319. Cold things are always\n  heavy, 319. Fire and water are opposites, 320. In winter, heat is\n  driven inward by cold, 321. It is driven downward from the surfaces\n  of great rivers, 321. Several considerations show that water, and\n  not air, is the cause of cold, 322. Water is cold of itself, being\n  the opposite of fire, 323. Opinion of Chrysippus combated, 324. The\n  earth, because it is dark, might be considered the cause of cold,\n  324, 325. But many hot things are dark, 326. Cold makes things hard,\n  heavy, rigid, and capable of resistance: the earth is therefore the\n  source of cold, 326, 327. Several considerations which seem to prove\n  that heat exists in every thing except the earth, and that cold\n  proceeds as a substance from the earth; which, and the whole subject,\n  in conclusion, is left in doubt, to be decided as the reader pleases.\n  327-330.\n\n\n  WHETHER WATER OR FIRE BE MOST USEFUL.\n\n  BY THE SAME HAND.\n\n  1. Arguments of the superior usefulness of Water: We need it at all\n  times and in all places; it is not so with fire. Water was given to\n  man at his first creation; fire was introduced by Prometheus. Some\n  men and all brute animals can live without fire, but not without\n  water. Fire is often pernicious; water never. Fire cannot be kept up\n  without expense; water requires no expense. Water, or the sea, is the\n  great civilizer of man, 331-334. 2. Arguments in behalf of Fire: Heat\n  is the exciting cause of vegetation; water becomes putrid when fire\n  leaves it; animals perish without heat; death is only the absence\n  of heat; water is made more useful by fire; the arts cannot exist\n  without fire, 334-337.\n\n\n  AGAINST COLOTES, THE DISCIPLE AND FAVORITE OF EPICURUS.\n\n  BY A. G., GENT.\n\n  Occasion of this tract; a book written by Colotes, 338. Plutarch\n  undertakes to answer it, and why, 339, 340. Colotes wrongly\n  represents Democritus, 341. Our senses give us true information, but\n  it does not follow that the different qualities which are perceived\n  in the same object by different persons prove that nothing is of one\n  nature more than another, 341-343. This argument further applied,\n  344. Does color exist in the dark? 344, 345. Doctrine of Democritus\n  concerning atoms, 346. Are atoms immutable and impassible? 347,\n  348. How then can any thing be generated? 348. Is generation the\n  mere union of atoms? 348. According to Colotes life cannot exist,\n  349. His doctrines virtually abolish nature, 349. Is nature nothing\n  distinct from bodies and their place? 350. Is death nothing but that\n  which dies? 350. Empedocles defended from the misrepresentations\n  of Colotes, 350, 351. Parmenides also defended, 352-354. A thing\n  positively existing distinguished from its sensible qualities, 354.\n  Aristotle and the Peripatetics differed from Plato, 355. Colotes\n  misrepresents Plato, 355, 356. Difference between that which exists\n  by itself, and that which participates of something else; or between\n  essence and form, 356-359. Colotes falls at the feet of Epicurus,\n  360. Epicurus accepts the homage, 360. Disparagement of Socrates by\n  Colotes, 361. Though our senses are not perfect, they may in general\n  be safely relied on, 362. If self-knowledge is valuable, Colotes is\n  blamable for scoffing at those who seek it, 363. Stilpo defended\n  against Colotes, 365-367. That one thing cannot be predicated of\n  another may not endanger life, 365. It is bad to withhold reverence\n  and worship from the gods, as Colotes and the Epicureans do, 366.\n  Colotes assaults the philosophers of his own time, 367. He condemns\n  even the opinions of Epicurus, when he finds them held by others,\n  368, 369. The Cyrenaic philosophers ridiculed, 369. Arcesilaus\n  unfairly treated by Colotes, 371. Three sorts of motions in the soul:\n  what they are; their influence, 371, 372. Absurdity of Epicureanism,\n  373. The opinions of Epicurus tend to universal scepticism, 374. It\n  is well and safe in some cases to withhold our assent, and to doubt\n  in matters which do not appear credible, as did Arcesilaus and his\n  followers, 371-376. Safety of believing and following the doctrines\n  of Socrates, Plato, and the Academy, 377. Degradation and danger\n  resulting from the doctrines of Epicurus, 377, 378. Those doctrines\n  fatal to the state, 379. No people, no city, is found without some\n  religion, but Epicureanism subverts all religion, 380. Great public\n  spirit of Democritus, Parmenides, Socrates, Plato, and others, who\n  are reviled by Colotes and other Epicureans, 381, 382. Men of the\n  school of Epicurus do not contribute to the public welfare, 383-385.\n\n\n  PLUTARCH\u2019S CONSOLATORY LETTER TO HIS WIFE.\n\n  BY ROBERT MIDGLEY, M.D., AND COLL. MED. LOND. CAND.\n\n  He counsels patience, 386. The child was affectionate and\n  interesting; her memory should be cherished, 387. The mother is\n  commended for controlling her grief; excessive grief is unreasonable,\n  388. The mother\u2019s admirable conduct on the previous death of her\n  eldest son, 389. Women are frantic with joy at the birth of their\n  children, and mourn excessively at their death, 389, 390. The body\n  should not suffer through grief, 390. Women nourish and increase the\n  grief of bereaved wives and mothers, by their tears and lamentations\n  when visiting them; Plutarch does not fear this in the present case,\n  390. We should remember the pleasure our deceased child has afforded\n  us, 391. True happiness arises from the mind itself, and not from\n  external circumstances, 392. You have much left to comfort you, 392.\n  State of the soul after death; the soul will return to earth in a new\n  body; an early death is desirable, 393, 394.\n\n\n  OF THE THREE SORTS OF GOVERNMENT,\u2014MONARCHY, DEMOCRACY, AND OLIGARCHY.\n\n  BY R. SMITH, M.A.\n\n  Which of these three sorts is best? 395. The word _policy_ or\n  government defined, 396. The Persians had monarchy; Sparta had\n  an oligarchy; Athens was a democracy: and all were powerful and\n  prosperous, 397. The author prefers monarchy, 398.\n\n\n  WHETHER THE ATHENIANS WERE MORE RENOWNED FOR THEIR WARLIKE\n  ACHIEVEMENTS OR THEIR LEARNING.\n\n  BY THE SAME HAND.\n\n  Historians, even the most admired and popular, only relate the\n  actions of other men, 399. Athens was the nurse of History, of\n  Painting, and of Poetry; and has derived great reputation thereby,\n  400, 401. But what are historians, painters, and poets, compared\n  with the generals, admirals, and statesmen, whom they commemorate?\n  402, 403. Athens not renowned for epic or lyric verse, 404. Tragedy\n  flourished there, but what benefit did tragedy procure for the\n  Athenians? 405. They lavished money on scenes and shows, to the\n  neglect of more important interests, 406. True renown belongs to\n  those commanders who have upheld the honor of their country, and\n  they merit a lasting remembrance, 407, 408. But not so poets,\n  rhetoricians, and orators, 408-411. Miltiades and other commanders,\n  compared with Demosthenes and other orators, to the disadvantage of\n  the latter 408-411.\n\n\n  AGAINST RUNNING IN DEBT, OR TAKING UP MONEY UPON USURY.\n\n  BY THE SAME HAND.\n\n  Running in debt should not be resorted to but in the last necessity,\n  412. To avoid it, practise the closest economy, 413. The borrower\n  is slave to the lender, 414, 415. Usurers are chargeable with\n  oppression, fraud, and falsehood, 416, 417. They take a man\u2019s money\n  without an equivalent, 417. It is shameful to be in the power of\n  another, 418. We incur debt, not to procure necessaries, but to\n  purchase ornaments and superfluities, 420. We must avoid the usurer\n  or be ruined, 421-424.\n\n\n  PLATONIC QUESTIONS.\n\n  BY R. BROWN, M.L.\n\n  1. Why did Socrates act the midwife\u2019s part, rather than the parent\u2019s?\n  in other words, why did he prefer to develop in the minds of others\n  the germs of knowledge, rather than communicate knowledge to them?\n  425-427. 2. Why does Plato call the supreme God the Father and Maker\n  of all things? 428, 429. 3. What does Plato, in his Republic, mean\n  by dividing the universe into unequal parts? and of the sections,\n  thus made, which is the greater, the Intelligible or the Sensible?\n  429-432. 4. Plato always says that the Soul is elder than the Body,\n  and the cause and principle of its rise. Yet he also says that\n  neither could the Soul exist without the Body, nor the Reason without\n  the Soul, but the Soul in the Body, and the Reason in the soul. How\n  can this be explained? 432. 5. Since geometrical figures and solids\n  are contained, partly by Rectilinears and partly by Circles, why does\n  Plato make Isosceles Triangles and Triangles of unequal sides the\n  Principles of Rectilinears, &c.? 433-435. 6. Why does Plato say that\n  the nature of a Wing participates most of the Body of God? 435. 7.\n  In what sense does Plato say that the Antiperistasis, or Reaction,\n  of Motion, is the cause of the effect, in using cupping-glasses, in\n  swallowing, in throwing of weights, in the use of the loadstone, &c.?\n  435-438. 8. What does he mean in the Timaeus when he says that Souls\n  are dispersed into the Earth, the Moon, and into other instruments\n  of time? Is the Earth, is the Sun, an instrument of time? 438-441.\n  9. Did Plato, in his Republic, place the Rational or the Irascible\n  Faculty in the middle chord of the human faculties? 441-444. 10.\n  Why did he say that Speech is composed of Nouns and Verbs? 444-449.\n  Because they are the principal elements, _ib._\n\n\n  PARALLELS, OR A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE GREEK AND ROMAN HISTORIES.\n\n  BY JOHN OSWALD, M.A.\n\n  1. Invasion of Attica by Datis; the story of Cynaegirus, matched with\n  the story of a Roman, 450, 451. 2. Invasion of Greece by Xerxes; war\n  of Porsena against Rome; a story under each, 451, 452. 3. Combat\n  of the Argives with the Lacedaemonians in Thyreatis; defeat of the\n  Romans at the Caudine Forks, 452, 453 4. Leonidas at Thermopylae;\n  Fabius Maximus in the Punic War, 453. 5. Chasms in the earth closed\n  by men leaping into them, 454. 6. Amphiaraus, and Valerius Conatus,\n  swallowed up alive by the earth, 455. 7. A king of Euboea, and a king\n  of Alba, drawn in pieces by horses, 455. 8. Philip of Macedon and\n  Aster the archer, Porsena of Clusium and Horatius Cocles, 456. 9.\n  Saturn and his four children, 456, 457. 10. Pausanias, the Spartan\n  traitor, and Cassius, a Roman traitor, both starved to death, 457.\n  11. Filial treachery in Persian and in Roman history, and its\n  punishment, 458. 12. A son of Epaminondas, the Theban general, and a\n  son of Manlius, the Roman consul, beheaded for disobeying the orders\n  of their fathers, 458, 459. 13. Iole, the beloved of Hercules, threw\n  herself from a wall without hurt; this story matched from Roman\n  history, 459. 14. The sacrifice of Iphigenia at Aulis, matched among\n  the Romans, 459, 460. 15. The story of Tarpeia, promising to betray\n  the Roman capitol, matched at Ephesus, 460. 16. The combat of the\n  Horatii and Curiatii in Roman history has a parallel in Tegea, 460,\n  461. 17. The Palladium in Ilium and in Rome, 461. 18. Codrus of\n  Athens, and Decius of Rome, 462. 19. A Syracusan and a Roman, each\n  having refused worship to Bacchus, are intoxicated to commit incest,\n  and are slain, 462, 463. 20. A daughter of Erechtheus, and a daughter\n  of Marius, sacrificed by their fathers to procure victory, 463. 21.\n  A Thessalian wife, and a Sybarite wife, torn in pieces by dogs of\n  their husbands, 463, 464. 22. Two maidens, a Greek and a Roman, who\n  had carnal knowledge of their fathers; their punishment, 464, 465.\n  23. Diomedes and Calpurnius Crassus liberated from captivity by women\n  who loved them, 465. 24. Priam commits his son to the care of one\n  who murdered him; the story matched in Roman history, 465, 466. 25.\n  Aeacus and his two sons; Caius Maximus and his two sons, 466. 26.\n  Mars, and his lascivious misdoings in Greece and Italy, 466, 467.\n  27. Telamon deflowers a virgin, whose father orders her to be thrown\n  into the sea; a parallel at Rome, 467. 28. Six sons and six daughters\n  in two different families; incest of a brother with a sister, 467,\n  468. 29. Two cases of men having carnal knowledge of brutes, and\n  what followed, 468. 30. As the price of peace women are given up to\n  the embraces of the enemy, 468, 469. 31. The allowance of soldiers\n  shortened in war, and the fatal result to him who did it, 469. 32.\n  Romulus murdered in the senate, and his body carried away in pieces;\n  a parallel in the Peloponnesian war, 470. 33. Pelops and his two\n  sons, Atreus and Thyestes, their story; a parallel in Italy, 470,\n  471. 34. Theseus and his son Hippolytus; the latter is killed by\n  his horses running away: a parallel in Italy, 471, 472. 35. A noble\n  virgin to be sacrificed to obtain relief from pestilence: an instance\n  in Lacedaemon, another in Falerii, 472, 473. 36. The story of Romulus\n  and Remus suckled by a she-wolf: a parallel in Arcadia, 473. 37.\n  Orestes slays his mother, in revenge of his father\u2019s death: a similar\n  story from Rome, 474. 38. Strangers murdered by Busiris in Egypt,\n  and by Faunus in Italy, 474. 39. A brazen cow made for Phalaris of\n  Agrigentum, a brazen horse for a tyrant of Egesta, 474, 475. 40.\n  Evenus cannot keep his daughter a virgin: neither can Anius, king of\n  the Tuscans, 475.\n\n\n  OF THE NAMES OF RIVERS AND MOUNTAINS, AND OF SUCH THINGS AS ARE TO BE\n  FOUND THEREIN.\n\n  BY R. WHITE, M.A.\n\n  1. Hydaspes, a river in India, why it received the name, &c., 477,\n  478. 2. Ismenus, a river of Boeotia, Cadmus, mount Cithaeron,\n  Tisiphone, &c., 478-480. 3. Hebrus, a river of Thrace; mount\n  Pangaeus, 480, 481. 4. Ganges, the mountain Anatole, 481, 482. 5.\n  Phasis, a river of Thrace; mount Caucasus, 482-484. 6. Arar, a river\n  of Gaul; mount Lugdunum, 484, 485. 7. Pactolus, in Lydia; mount\n  Tmolus, 485-487. 8. Lycormas, in Aetolia, 487. 9. Maeander, in Asia;\n  mount Sipylus, 488, 489. 10. Marsyas, in Phrygia, 490. 11. Strymon,\n  in Thrace; the mountains Rhodope and Haemus, 491, 492. 12. Sagaris,\n  in Phrygia, 492. 18. Scamander, in Troas; mount Ida, 493. 14. Tanais,\n  in Scythia; mount Brixaba, 494. 15. Thermodon, in Scythia, 495. 16.\n  Nile, formerly Melas and Aegyptus, 495-497. 17. Eurotas, in Laconia;\n  mount Taygetus, 497, 498. 18. Inachus, in Argolis; mount Mycenae,\n  &c., 498-501. 19. Alpheus, in Arcadia; mount Cronium, 501, 502. 20.\n  Euphrates, 502. 21. Caicus, in Mysia; mount Teuthras, 503, 504.\n  22. Achelous, in Aetolia; mount Calydon, 504, 505. 23. Araxes, in\n  Armenia; mount Diorphus, 506, 507. 24. Tigris; mount Gauran, 507,\n  508. 25. Indus; mount Lilaeus, 508, 509.\n\n\n  INDEX. 511\n\n\n\n\n  PLUTARCH\u2019S MORALS.\n\n  VOL. V.\n\n\n\n\n  PLUTARCH\u2019S MORALS.\n\n\n\n\nOF EATING OF FLESH.\n\n\nTRACT I.\n\n1. You ask of me then for what reason it was that Pythagoras abstained\nfrom eating of flesh. I for my part do much admire in what humor, with\nwhat soul or reason, the first man with his mouth touched slaughter,\nand reached to his lips the flesh of a dead animal, and having set\nbefore people courses of ghastly corpses and ghosts, could give\nthose parts the names of meat and victuals, that but a little before\nlowed, cried, moved, and saw; how his sight could endure the blood of\nslaughtered, flayed, and mangled bodies; how his smell could bear their\nscent; and how the very nastiness happened not to offend the taste,\nwhile it chewed the sores of others, and participated of the saps and\njuices of deadly wounds.\n\n    Crept the raw hides, and with a bellowing sound\n    Roared the dead limbs; the burning entrails groaned.[1]\n\nThis indeed is but a fiction and fancy; but the fare itself is truly\nmonstrous and prodigious,\u2014that a man should have a stomach to creatures\nwhile they yet bellow, and that he should be giving directions which of\nthings yet alive and speaking is fittest to make food of, and ordering\nthe several manners of the seasoning and dressing them and serving them\nup to tables. You ought rather, in my opinion, to have enquired who\nfirst began this practice, than who of late times left it off.\n\n2. And truly, as for those people who first ventured upon eating of\nflesh, it is very probable that the whole reason of their so doing was\nscarcity and want of other food; for it is not likely that their living\ntogether in lawless and extravagant lusts, or their growing wanton and\ncapricious through the excessive variety of provisions then among them,\nbrought them to such unsociable pleasures as these, against Nature.\nYea, had they at this instant but their sense and voice restored to\nthem, I am persuaded they would express themselves to this purpose.\n\n\u201cOh! happy you, and highly favored of the Gods, who now live! Into what\nan age of the world are you fallen, who share and enjoy among you a\nplentiful portion of good things! What abundance of things spring up\nfor your use! What fruitful vineyards you enjoy! What wealth you gather\nfrom the fields! What delicacies from trees and plants, which you may\ngather! You may glut and fill yourselves without being polluted. As\nfor us, we fell upon the most dismal and affrighting part of time,\nin which we were exposed by our first production to manifold and\ninextricable wants and necessities. As yet the thickened air concealed\nthe heaven from our view, and the stars were as yet confused with a\ndisorderly huddle of fire and moisture and violent fluxions of winds.\nAs yet the sun was not fixed to an unwandering and certain course,\nso as to distinguish morning and evening, nor did he bring back the\nseasons in order crowned with wreaths from the fruitful harvest. The\nland was also spoiled by the inundations of disorderly rivers; and a\ngreat part of it was deformed with sloughs, and utterly wild by reason\nof deep quagmires, unfertile forests, and woods. There was then no\nproduction of tame fruits, nor any instruments of art or invention\nof wit. And hunger gave no time, nor did seed-time then stay for the\nyearly season. What wonder is it if we made use of the flesh of beasts\ncontrary to Nature, when mud was eaten and the bark of wood, and when\nit was thought a happy thing to find either a sprouting grass or a\nroot of any plant! But when they had by chance tasted of or eaten an\nacorn, they danced for very joy about some oak or esculus, calling it\nby the names of life-giver, mother, and nourisher. And this was the\nonly festival that those times were acquainted with; upon all other\noccasions, all things were full of anguish and dismal sadness. But\nwhence is it that a certain ravenousness and frenzy drives you in these\nhappy days to pollute yourselves with blood, since you have such an\nabundance of things necessary for your subsistence? Why do you belie\nthe earth as unable to maintain you? Why do you profane the lawgiver\nCeres, and shame the mild and gentle Bacchus, as not furnishing you\nwith sufficiency? Are you not ashamed to mix tame fruits with blood\nand slaughter? You are indeed wont to call serpents, leopards, and\nlions savage creatures; but yet yourselves are defiled with blood, and\ncome nothing behind them in cruelty. What they kill is their ordinary\nnourishment, but what you kill is your better fare.\u201d\n\n3. For we eat not lions and wolves by way of revenge; but we let those\ngo, and catch the harmless and tame sort, and such as have neither\nstings nor teeth to bite with, and slay them; which, so may Jove help\nus, Nature seems to us to have produced for their beauty and comeliness\nonly. [2][Just as if one seeing the river Nilus overflowing its banks,\nand thereby filling the whole country with genial and fertile moisture,\nshould not at all admire that secret power in it that produces plants\nand plenteousness of most sweet and useful fruits, but beholding\nsomewhere a crocodile swimming in it, or an asp crawling along, or\nmice (savage and filthy creatures), should presently affirm these to\nbe the occasion of all that is amiss, or of any want or defect that\nmay happen. Or as if indeed one contemplating this land or ground, how\nfull it is of tame fruits, and how heavy with ears of corn, should\nafterwards espy somewhere in these same cornfields an ear of darnel or\na wild vetch, and thereupon neglect to reap and gather in the corn,\nand fall a complaining of these. Such another thing it would be, if\none\u2014hearing the harangue of some advocate at some bar or pleading,\nswelling and enlarging and hastening towards the relief of some\nimpending danger, or else, by Jupiter, in the impeaching and charging\nof certain audacious villanies or indictments, flowing and rolling\nalong, and that not in a simple and poor strain, but with many sorts\nof passions all at once, or rather indeed with all sorts, in one and\nthe same manner, into the many and various and differing minds of\neither hearers or judges that he is either to turn and change, or else,\nby Jupiter, to soften, appease, and quiet\u2014should overlook all this\nbusiness, and never consider or reckon upon the labor or struggle he\nhad undergone, but pick up certain loose expressions, which the rapid\nmotion of the discourse had carried along with it, as by the current of\nits stream, and so had slipped and escaped the rest of the oration, and\nhereupon undervalue the orator.]\n\n4. But we are nothing put out of countenance, either by the beauteous\ngayety of the colors, or by the charmingness of the musical voices,\nor by the rare sagacity of the intellects, or by the cleanliness and\nneatness of diet, or by the rare discretion and prudence of these\npoor unfortunate animals; but for the sake of some little mouthful of\nflesh, we deprive a soul of the sun and light, and of that proportion\nof life and time it had been born into the world to enjoy. And then we\nfancy that the voices it utters and screams forth to us are nothing\nelse but certain inarticulate sounds and noises, and not the several\ndeprecations, entreaties, and pleadings of each of them, as it were\nsaying thus to us: \u201cI deprecate not thy necessity (if such there be),\nbut thy wantonness. Kill me for thy feeding, but do not take me off\nfor thy better feeding.\u201d O horrible cruelty! It is truly an affecting\nsight to see the very table of rich people laid before them, who keep\nthem cooks and caterers to furnish them with dead corpses for their\ndaily fare; but it is yet more affecting to see it taken away, for the\nmammocks left are more than that which was eaten. These therefore were\nslain to no purpose. Others there are, who are so sparing of what is\nset before them that they will not suffer it to be cut or sliced; thus\nabstaining from them when dead, while they would not spare them when\nalive.\n\n5. Well then, we understand that that sort of men are used to say, that\nin eating of flesh they follow the conduct and direction of Nature. But\nthat it is not natural to mankind to feed on flesh, we first of all\ndemonstrate from the very shape and figure of the body. For a human\nbody no ways resembles those that were born for ravenousness; it hath\nno hawk\u2019s bill, no sharp talon, no roughness of teeth, no such strength\nof stomach or heat of digestion, as can be sufficient to convert or\nalter such heavy and fleshy fare. But even from hence, that is, from\nthe smoothness of the tongue, and the slowness of the stomach to\ndigest, Nature seems to disclaim all pretence to fleshy victuals. But\nif you will contend that yourself was born to an inclination to such\nfood as you have now a mind to eat, do you then yourself kill what you\nwould eat. But do it yourself, without the help of a chopping-knife,\nmallet, or axe,\u2014as wolves, bears, and lions do, who kill and eat at\nonce. Rend an ox with thy teeth, worry a hog with thy mouth, tear a\nlamb or a hare in pieces, and fall on and eat it alive as they do.\nBut if thou hadst rather stay until what thou eatest is become dead,\nand if thou art loath to force a soul out of its body, why then dost\nthou against Nature eat an animate thing? Nay, there is nobody that\nis willing to eat even a lifeless and a dead thing as it is; but they\nboil it, and roast it, and alter it by fire and medicines, as it were,\nchanging and quenching the slaughtered gore with thousands of sweet\nsauces, that the palate being thereby deceived may admit of such\nuncouth fare. It was indeed a witty expression of a Lacedaemonian, who,\nhaving purchased a small fish in a certain inn, delivered it to his\nlandlord to be dressed; and as he demanded cheese, and vinegar, and oil\nto make sauce, he replied, if I had had those, I would not have bought\nthe fish. But we are grown so wanton in our bloody luxury, that we have\nbestowed upon flesh the name of meat (\u1f44\u03c8\u03bf\u03bd), and then require another\nseasoning (\u1f44\u03c8\u03bf\u03bd), to this same flesh, mixing oil, wine, honey, pickle,\nand vinegar, with Syrian and Arabian spices, as though we really meant\nto embalm it after its disease. Indeed when things are dissolved and\nmade thus tender and soft, and are as it were turned into a sort\nof a carrionly corruption, it must needs be a great difficulty for\nconcoction to master them, and when it hath mastered them, they must\nneeds cause grievous oppressions and qualmy indigestions.\n\n6. Diogenes ventured once to eat a raw pourcontrel, that he might\ndisuse himself from meat dressed by fire; and as several priests and\nother people stood round him, he wrapped his head in his cassock, and\nso putting the fish to his mouth, he thus said unto them: It is for\nyour sake, sirs, that I undergo this danger, and run this risk. A noble\nand gallant risk, by Jupiter! For far otherwise than as Pelopidas\nventured his life for the liberty of the Thebans, and Harmodius and\nAristogiton for that of the Athenians, did this philosopher encounter\nwith a raw pourcontrel, to the end he might make human life more\nbrutish. Moreover, these same flesh-eatings not only are preternatural\nto men\u2019s bodies, but also by clogging and cloying them, they render\ntheir very minds and intellects gross. For it is well known to most,\nthat wine and much flesh-eating make the body indeed strong and lusty,\nbut the mind weak and feeble. And that I may not offend the wrestlers,\nI will make use of examples out of my own country. The Athenians are\nwont to call us Boeotians gross, senseless, and stupid fellows, for\nno other reason but our over-much eating; and Pindar calls us also\nhogs, for the same reason. Menander the comedian calls us \u201cfellows\nwith long jaws.\u201d It is observed also that, according to the saying of\nHeraclitus, \u201cthe wisest soul is like a dry light.\u201d[3] Earthen jars, if\nyou strike them, will sound; but if they be full, they perceive not\nthe strokes that are given them. Copper vessels also that are thin\ncommunicate the sound round about them, unless some one stop and dull\nthe ambient stroke with his fingers. Moreover, the eye, when seized\nwith an over-great plenitude of humors, grows dim and feeble for its\nordinary work. When we behold the sun through a humid air and a great\nquantity of gross and indigested vapors, we see it not clear and\nbright, but obscure and cloudy, and with glimmering beams. Just so in a\nmuddy and clogged body, that is swagged down with heavy and unnatural\nnourishments; it must needs happen that the gayety and splendor of the\nmind be confused and dulled, and that it ramble and roll after little\nand scarce discernible objects, since it wants clearness and vigor for\nhigher things.\n\n7. But to pass by these considerations, is not accustoming one\u2019s self\nto mildness and a human temper of mind an admirable thing? For who\ncould wrong or injure a man that is so sweetly and humanly disposed\nwith respect to the ills of strangers that are not of his kind? I\nremember that three days ago, as I was discoursing, I made mention\nof a saying of Xenocrates, and how the Athenians gave judgment upon a\ncertain person who had flayed a living ram. For my part I cannot think\nhim a worse criminal that torments a poor creature while living, than\na man that shall take away its life and murder it. But (as it seems)\nwe are more sensible of what is done against custom than against\nNature. There, however, I discoursed on these matters in a more popular\nstyle. But as for that grand and mysterious principle which (as Plato\nspeaks) is incredible to base minds and to such as affect only mortal\nthings, I as little care to move it in this discourse as a pilot doth\na ship in a storm, or a comedian his machine while the scenes are\nmoving; but perhaps it would not be amiss, by way of introduction and\npreface, to proclaim certain verses of Empedocles.... For in these,\nby way of allegory, he hints at men\u2019s souls, as that they are tied to\nmortal bodies, to be punished for murders, eating of flesh and of one\nanother, although this doctrine seems much ancienter than his time.\nFor the fables that are storied and related about the discerption of\nBacchus, and the attempts of the Titans upon him, and of their tasting\nof his slain body, and of their several punishments and fulminations\nafterwards, are but a representation of the regeneration. For what\nin us is unreasonable, disorderly, and boisterous, being not divine\nbut demoniac, the ancients termed Titans, that is _tormented_ and\n_punished_ (from \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03c9)....\n\n\nTRACT II\n\n1. Reason persuades us now to return with fresh cogitations and\ndispositions to what we left cold yesterday of our discourse about\nflesh-eating. It is indeed a hard and a difficult task to undertake\n(as Cato once said) to dispute with men\u2019s bellies, that have no ears;\nsince most have already drunk that draught of custom, which is like\nthat of Circe,\n\n    Of groans and frauds and sorcery replete.[4]\n\nAnd it is no easy task to pull out the hook of flesh-eating from the\njaws of such as have gorged themselves with luxury and are (as it\nwere) nailed down with it. It would indeed be a good action, if as\nthe Egyptians draw out the stomach of a dead body, and cut it open\nand expose it to the sun, as the only cause of all its evil actions,\nso we could, by cutting out our gluttony and blood-shedding, purify\nand cleanse the remainder of our lives. For the stomach itself is not\nguilty of bloodshed, but is involuntarily polluted by our intemperance.\nBut if this may not be, and we are ashamed by reason of custom to live\nunblamably, let us at least sin with discretion. Let us eat flesh; but\nlet it be for hunger and not for wantonness. Let us kill an animal; but\nlet us do it with sorrow and pity, and not abusing and tormenting it,\nas many nowadays are used to do, while some run red-hot spits through\nthe bodies of swine, that by the tincture of the quenched iron the\nblood may be to that degree mortified, that it may sweeten and soften\nthe flesh in its circulation; others jump and stamp upon the udders of\nsows that are ready to pig, that so they may trample into one mass,\n(O Piacular Jupiter!) in the very pangs of delivery, blood, milk, and\nthe corruption of the crushed and mangled young ones, and so eat the\nmost inflamed part of the animal; others sew up the eyes of cranes and\nswans, and so shut them up in darkness to be fattened, and then souse\nup their flesh with certain monstrous mixtures and pickles.\n\n2. By all which it is most manifest, that it is not for nourishment,\nor want, or any necessity, but for mere gluttony, wantonness, and\nexpensiveness, that they make a pleasure of villany. Just as it happens\nin persons who cannot satiate their intemperance upon women, and having\nmade trial of every thing else and falling into vagaries, at last\nattempt things not to be mentioned; even so inordinateness in feeding,\nwhen it hath once passed the bounds of nature and necessity, studies at\nlast to diversify the lusts of its intemperate appetite by cruelty and\nvillany. For the senses, when they once quit their natural measures,\nsympathize with each other in their distempers, and are enticed by each\nother to the same consent and intemperance. Thus a distempered ear\nfirst debauched music, the soft and effeminate notes of which provoke\nimmodest touches and lascivious tickling. These things first taught\nthe eye not to delight in Pyrrhic dances, gesticulations of hands, or\nelegant pantomimes, nor in statues and fine paintings; but to reckon\nthe slaughtering and death of mankind and wounds and duels the most\nsumptuous of shows and spectacles. Thus unlawful tables are accompanied\nwith intemperate copulations, with unmusician-like balls, and theatres\nbecome monstrous through shameful songs and rehearsals; and barbarous\nand brutish shows are again accompanied with an unrelenting temper and\nsavage cruelty towards mankind. Hence it was that the divine Lycurgus\nin his Three Books of Laws gave orders that the doors and ridges of\nmen\u2019s houses should be made with a saw and an axe, and that no other\ninstrument should so much as be brought to any house. Not that he\ndid hereby intend to declare war against augers and planes and other\ninstruments of finer work; but because he very well knew that with such\ntools as these you will never bring into your house a gilded couch,\nand that you will never attempt to bring into a slender cottage either\nsilver tables, purple carpets, or costly stones; but that a plain\nsupper and a homely dinner must accompany such a house, couch, table,\nand cup. The beginning of a vicious diet is presently followed by all\nsorts of luxury and expensiveness,\n\n    Ev\u2019n as a mare is by her thirsty colt.\n\n3. And what meal is not expensive? That for which no animal is put\nto death. Shall we reckon a soul to be a small expense. I will not\nsay perhaps of a mother, or a father, or of some friend, or child,\nas Empedocles did; but one participating of feeling, of seeing, of\nhearing, of imagination, and of intellection; which each animal hath\nreceived from Nature for the acquiring of what is agreeable to it, and\nthe avoiding what is disagreeable. Do but consider this with yourself\nnow, which sort of philosophers render us most tame and civil, they\nwho bid people to feed on their children, friends, fathers, and wives,\nwhen they are dead; or Pythagoras and Empedocles, that accustom men to\nbe just towards even the other members of the creation. You laugh at a\nman that will not eat a sheep: but we (they will say again)\u2014when we see\nyou cutting off the parts of your dead father or mother, and sending\nit to your absent friends, and calling upon and inviting your present\nfriends to eat the rest freely and heartily\u2014shall we not smile? Nay,\nperadventure we offend at this instant time while we touch these books,\nwithout having first cleansed our hands, eyes, feet, and ears; if it\nbe not (by Jupiter) a sufficient purgation of them to have discoursed\nof these matters in potable and fresh language (as Plato speaketh),\nthereby washing off the brackishness of hearing. Now if a man should\nset these books and discourses in opposition to each other, he will\nfind that the philosophy of the one sort suits with the Scythians,\nSogdians, and Melanchlaenians, of whom Herodotus\u2019s relation is scarce\nbelieved; but the sentiments of Pythagoras and Empedocles were the laws\nand customs of the ancient Grecians.\n\n4. Who then were the first authors of this opinion, that we owe no\njustice to dumb animals?\n\n    Who first beat out accursed steel,\n    And made the lab\u2019ring ox a knife to feel.\n\nIn the very same manner oppressors and tyrants begin first to shed\nblood. For example, the first man that the Athenians ever put to death\nwas one of the basest of all knaves, whom all thought deserving of\ndeath; after him they put to death a second and a third. After this,\nbeing now accustomed to blood, they patiently saw Niceratus the son\nof Nicias, and their own general Theramenes, and Polemarchus the\nphilosopher suffer death. Even so, in the beginning, some wild and\nmischievous beast was killed and eaten, and then some little bird or\nfish was entrapped. And the love of slaughter, being first experimented\nand exercised in these, at last passed even to the laboring ox, and the\nsheep that clothes us, and to the poor cock that keeps the house; until\nby little and little, unsatiableness being strengthened by use, men\ncame to the slaughter of men, to bloodshed and wars. Now even if one\ncannot demonstrate and make out, that souls in their regenerations make\na promiscuous use of all bodies, and that that which is now rational\nwill at another time be irrational, and that again tame which is now\nwild,\u2014for that Nature changes and transmutes every thing.\n\n    With different fleshy coats new clothing all,\u2014\n\nthis thing should be sufficient to change and reclaim men, that it is\na savage and intemperate habit, that it brings sickness and heaviness\nupon the body, and that it inclines the mind the more brutishly to\nbloodshed and destruction, when we have once accustomed ourselves\nneither to entertain a guest nor keep a wedding nor to treat our\nfriends without blood and slaughter.\n\n5. And if what is argued about the return of souls into bodies is\nnot of force enough to beget faith, yet methinks the very uncertainty\nof the thing should fill us with apprehension and fear. Suppose, for\ninstance, one should in some night-engagement run on with his drawn\nsword upon one that had fallen down and covered his body with his arms,\nand should in the mean time hear one say, that he was not very sure,\nbut that he fancied and believed, that the party lying there was his\nown son, brother, father, or tent-companion; which were more advisable,\nthink you,\u2014to hearken to a false suggestion, and so to let go an enemy\nunder the notion of a friend, or to slight an authority not sufficient\nto beget faith, and to slay a friend instead of a foe? This you will\nall say would be insupportable. Do but consider the famous Merope in\nthe tragedy, who taking up a hatchet, and lifting it at her son\u2019s head,\nwhom she took for her son\u2019s murderer, speaks thus as she was ready to\ngive the fatal blow,\n\n    Villain, this pious blow shall cleave thy head;[5]\n\nwhat a bustle she raises in the whole theatre while she raises herself\nto give the blow, and what a fear they are all in, lest she should\nprevent the old man that comes to stop her hand, and should wound the\nyouth. Now if another old man should stand by her and say, \u201cStrike, it\nis thy enemy,\u201d and this, \u201cHold, it is thy son;\u201d which, think you, would\nbe the greater injustice, to omit the punishing of an enemy for the\nsake of one\u2019s child, or to suffer one\u2019s self to be so transported with\nanger at an enemy as to kill one\u2019s child? Since then neither hatred\nnor wrath nor any revenge nor fear for ourselves carries us to the\nslaughter of a beast, but the poor sacrifice stands with an inclined\nneck, only to satisfy thy lust and pleasure, and then one philosopher\nstands by and tells thee, \u201cCut him down, it is but an unreasonable\nanimal,\u201d and another cries, \u201cHold, what if there should be the soul of\nsome kinsman or God inclosed in him\u201d?\u2014good Gods! is there the like\ndanger if I refuse to eat flesh, as if I for want of faith murder my\nchild or some other friend?\n\n6. The Stoics\u2019 way of reasoning upon this subject of flesh-eating is\nno way equal nor consonant with themselves. Who is this that hath so\nmany mouths for his belly and the kitchen? Whence comes it to pass,\nthat they so very much womanize and reproach pleasure, as a thing\nthat they will not allow to be either good or preferable, or so much\nas agreeable, and yet all on a sudden become so zealous advocates\nfor pleasures? It were indeed but a reasonable consequence of their\ndoctrine, that, since they banish perfumes and cakes from their\nbanquets, they should be much more averse to blood and to flesh. But\nnow, just as if they would reduce their philosophy to their day-books,\nthey lessen the expenses of their suppers in certain unnecessary and\nneedless matters, but the untamed and murderous part of their expense\nthey nothing boggle at. \u201cWell! What then?\u201d say they. \u201cWe have nothing\nto do with brute beasts.\u201d Nor have you any with perfumes, nor with\nforeign sauces, may some one answer; therefore expel these from your\nbanquets, if you are driving out every thing that is both useless and\nneedless.\n\n7. Let us therefore in the next place consider, whether we owe any\njustice to the brute beasts. Neither shall we handle this point\nartificially, or like subtle sophisters, but by casting our eye into\nour own breasts, and conversing with ourselves as men, we will weigh\nand examine the whole matter....\n\n\n\n\nLIVES OF THE TEN ORATORS.\n\n\nI. ANTIPHON.\n\nANTIPHON, the son of Sophilus, by descent a Rhamnusian, was his\nfather\u2019s scholar; for Sophilus kept a rhetoric school, to which it is\nreported that Alcibiades himself had recourse in his youth. Having\nattained to competent measure of knowledge and eloquence,\u2014and that, as\nsome believe, from his own natural ingenuity,\u2014he dedicated his study\nchiefly to affairs of state. And yet he was for some time conversant\nin the schools, and had a controversy with Socrates the philosopher\nabout the art of disputing,\u2014not so much for the sake of contention as\nfor the profit of arguing, as Xenophon tells us in his Commentaries of\nSocrates. At the request of some citizens, he wrote orations by which\nthey defended their suits at law. Some say that he was the first that\never did any thing of this nature. For it is certain there is not one\njuridical oration extant written by any orator that lived before him,\nnor by his contemporaries either, as Themistocles, Aristides, and\nPericles; though the times gave them opportunity, and there was need\nenough of their labor in such business. Not that we are to impute it\nto their want of parts that they did nothing in this way, for we may\ninform ourselves of the contrary from what historians relate of each\nof them. Besides, if we inspect the most ancient of those known in\nhistory who had the same form and method in their pleadings, such as\nAlcibiades, Critias, Lysias, and Archinous, we shall find that they\nall followed Antiphon when he was old. For being a man of incomparable\nsagacity, he was the first that published institutions of oratory;\nand by reason of his profound learning, he was surnamed Nestor.\nCaecilius, in a tract which he wrote of him, supposes him to have\nbeen Thucydides\u2019s pupil, from what Antiphon delivered in praise of\nhim. He is most accurate in his orations, in invention subtle; and he\nwould frequently baffle his adversary at unawares, by a covert sort of\npleading; in troublesome and intricate matters he was very judicious\nand sharp; and as he was a great admirer of ornamental speaking, he\nwould always adapt his orations to both law and reason.\n\nHe lived about the time of the Persian war and of Gorgias the\nrhetorician, being somewhat younger than he. And he lived to see the\nsubversion of the popular government in the commonwealth which was\nwrought by the four hundred conspirators, in which he himself is\nthought to have had the chiefest hand, being sometimes commander of\ntwo galleys, and sometimes general, and having by the many and great\nvictories he obtained gained them many allies, he armed the young men,\nmanned out sixty galleys, and on all their occasions went ambassador\nto Lacedaemon at the time when Eetionia was fortified. But when those\nFour Hundred were overcome and taken down, he with Archeptolemus, who\nwas likewise one of the same number, was accused of the conspiracy,\ncondemned, and sentenced to the punishment due to traitors, his body\ncast out unburied, and all his posterity infamous on record. But there\nare some who tell us, that he was put to death by the Thirty Tyrants;\nand among the rest, Lysias, in his oration for Antiphon\u2019s daughter,\nsays the same; for he left a little daughter, whom Callaeschrus claimed\nfor his wife by the law of propinquity. And Theopompus likewise, in\nhis Fifteenth Book of Philippics, tells us the same thing. But this\nmust have been another Antiphon, son of Lysidonides, whom Cratinus\nmentions in his Pytine as a rascal. But how could he be executed in the\ntime of the Four Hundred, and afterward live to be put to death by the\nThirty Tyrants? There is likewise another story of the manner of his\ndeath: that when he was old, he sailed to Syracuse, when the tyranny\nof Dionysius the First was most famous; and being at table, a question\nwas put, what sort of brass was best. When others had answered as they\nthought most proper, he replied, That is the best brass, of which the\nstatues of Harmodius and Aristogiton were made. The tyrant hearing\nthis, and taking it as a tacit exhortation to his subjects to contrive\nhis ruin, he commanded Antiphon to be put to death; and some say that\nhe put him to death for deriding his tragedies.\n\nThis orator is reported to have written sixty orations; but Caecilius\nsupposes twenty-five of them to be spurious and none of his. Plato,\nin his comedy called Pisander, traduces him as a covetous man. He is\nreported to have composed some of his tragedies alone, and others with\nDionysius the tyrant. While he was poetically inclined, he invented\nan art of curing the distemper of the mind, as physicians are wont\nto provide cure of bodily diseases. And having at Corinth built him\na little house, in or near the market, he set a postscript over the\ngate, to this effect: that he had a way to cure the distemper of men\u2019s\nminds by words; and let him but know the cause of their malady, he\nwould immediately prescribe the remedy, to their comfort. But after\nsome time, thinking that art not worth his while, he betook himself to\nthe study and teaching of oratory. There are some who ascribe the book\nof Glaucus of Rhegium concerning Poets to him as author. His orations\nconcerning Herodes, against Erasistratus concerning Peacocks,[6]\nare very much commended, and also that which, when he was accused,\nhe penned for himself against a public indictment, and that against\nDemosthenes the general for moving an illegal measure. He likewise had\nanother against Hippocrates the general; who did not appear on the day\nappointed for his trial, and was condemned in his absence.\n\nCaecilius has recorded the decree of the senate for the judicial\ntrial of Antiphon, passed in the year[7] in which Theopompus was\nchief magistrate of Athens, the same in which the Four Hundred were\noverthrown,\u2014in these words:\n\n\u201cEnacted by the senate on the twenty-first day of the prytany.\nDemonicus of Alopece was clerk; Philostratus of Pallene was president.\n\n\u201cAndron moved in regard to those men,\u2014viz. Archeptolemus, Onomacles,\nand Antiphon, whom the generals had declared against, for that they\nwent in an embassage to Lacedaemon, to the great damage of the city\nof Athens, and departed from the camp in an enemies\u2019 ship, and went\nthrough Decelea by land,\u2014that they should be apprehended and brought\nbefore the court for a legal trial.\n\n\u201cTherefore let the generals, with others of the senate, to the number\nof ten, whom it shall please the generals to name and choose, look\nafter these men to present them before the court, that they may be\npresent during the proceedings. Then let the Thesmothetes summon the\ndefendants to appear on the morrow, and let them open the proceedings\nin court at the time at which the summonses shall be returnable. Then\nlet the chosen advocates, with the generals and any others who may have\nany thing to say, accuse the defendants of treason; and if any one\nof them shall be found guilty, let sentence be passed upon him as a\ntraitor, according to the law in such case made and provided.\u201d\n\nAt the bottom of this decree was subscribed the sentence.\u2014\n\n\u201cArcheptolemus son of Hippodamus, the Agrylian, and Antiphon son of\nSophilus, the Ramnusian, being both present in court, are condemned\nof treason. And this was to be their punishment: that they should be\ndelivered to the eleven executioners, their goods confiscated, the\ntenth part of them being first consecrated to Minerva; their houses to\nbe levelled with the ground, and in the places where they stood this\nsubscription to be engraven on brass, '[The houses] of Archeptolemus\nand Antiphon, traitors.\u2019...[8] That Archeptolemus and Antiphon should\nneither of them be buried in Athens, nor anywhere else under that\ngovernment. And besides all this, that their posterity should be\naccounted infamous, bastards as well as their lawful progeny; and he\ntoo should be held infamous who should adopt any one of their progeny\nfor his son. And that all this should be engrossed and engraven on a\nbrass column, and that column should be placed where that stands on\nwhich is engraven the decree concerning Phrynichus.\u201d\n\n\nII. ANDOCIDES.\n\nANDOCIDES, the son of Leogoras, [and grandson of that Andocides] who\nonce made a peace between the Athenians and the Lacedaemonians, by\ndescent a Cydathenian or Thorian, of a noble family, and, as Hellanicus\ntells us, the offspring of Mercury himself, for the race of Heralds\nbelongs to him. On this account he was chosen by the people to go with\nGlaucon, with twenty sail of ships, to aid the Corcyraeans against the\nCorinthians. But in process of time he was accused of some notorious\nacts of impiety, as that he was of the number of those who defaced the\nstatues of Mercury and divulged the sacred mysteries of Ceres. And\nwithal, he had been before this time wild and intemperate, and had\nonce been seen in the night in masquerade to break one of the statues\nof Mercury; and when on his trial he refused to bring his servant\nto examination whom his accusers named, he not only remained under\nthis reproach, but was also on this account very much suspected to\nbe guilty of the second crime too. This later action was laid to his\ncharge soon after the expedition of the navy sent by the Athenians into\nSicily. For, as Cratippus informs us, when the Corinthians sent the\nLeontines and Egestians to the Athenians, who hesitated to lend them\nassistance, they in the night defaced and brake all the statues of\nMercury which were erected in the market. To which offence Andocides\nadded another, that of divulging the mysteries of Ceres. He was brought\nto his trial, but was acquitted on condition he would discover who were\ncompanions with him in the crime. In which affair being very diligent,\nhe found out who they were that had been guilty, and among the rest he\ndiscovered his own father. He proved all guilty, and caused them all\nto be put to death except his father, whom he saved, though in prison,\nby a promise of some eminent service he would do to the commonwealth.\nNor did he fail of what he promised; for Leogoras accused many who had\nacted in several matters against the interest of the commonwealth, and\nfor this was acquitted of his own crime.\n\nNow, though Andocides was very much esteemed of for his skill in the\nmanagement of the affairs of the commonwealth, yet his inclinations\nled him rather to traffic by sea; and by this means he contracted\nfriendship with the kings of Cyprus and other great princes. At which\ntime he privily stole a damsel of the city, the daughter of Aristides,\nand his own niece, and sent her as a present to the king of Cyprus. But\nsuspecting he should be called in question for it, he again stole her\nfrom Cyprus, for which the king of Cyprus took him and clapped him up\nin prison; whence he brake loose, and returned to Athens, just at that\ntime when the four hundred conspirators had usurped the government. By\nwhom being confined, he again escaped when the oligarchical government\nwas broken up.... But when the Thirty Tyrants were uppermost, he\nwithdrew to Elis, and there lived till Thrasybulus and his faction\nreturned into the city, and then he also repaired thither. And after\nsome time, being sent to Lacedaemon to conciliate a peace, he was again\nsuspected to be faulty, and on that suspicion banished.\n\nHe himself has given an account of all these transactions, in his\norations, which he has left behind him. For some of them contain his\ndefence of himself in regard to the mysteries; others his petition\nfor restoration from exile; there is one extant on _Endeixis_ (or\ninformation laid against a criminal); also a defence against Phaeax,\nand one on the peace. He flourished at the same time with Socrates\nthe philosopher. He was born in the seventy-eighth Olympiad, when\nTheogenides was chief magistrate of Athens, so that he should seem to\nbe about ten years before Lysias. There is an image of Mercury, called\nfrom his name, being given by the tribe Aegeis; and it stood near the\nhouse where Andocides dwelt, and was therefore called by his name.\nThis Andocides himself was at the charge of a cyclic chorus for the\ntribe Aegeis, at the performance of a dithyrambus. And having gained a\nvictory, he erected a tripod on an ascent opposite to the tuffstone\nstatue of Silenus. His style in his orations is plain and easy, without\nthe least affectation or any thing of a figurative ornament.\n\n\nIII. LYSIAS.\n\nLYSIAS was the son of Cephalus, grandson of Lysanias, and\ngreat-grandson of Cephalus. His father was by birth a Syracusan; but\npartly for the love he had to the city, and partly in condescension\nto the persuasions of Pericles the son of Xanthippus, who entertained\nhim as his friend and guest, he went to live at Athens, being a man of\ngreat wealth. Some say that he was banished Syracuse when the city was\nunder the tyranny of Gelo. Lysias was born at Athens when Philocles,\nthe successor of Phrasicles, was chief magistrate, in the second year\nof the eightieth Olympiad.[9] At his first coming, he was educated\namong the most noble of the Athenians. But when the city sent a colony\nto Sybaris, which was afterwards called Thurii, he went thither with\nhis other brother Polemarchus, his father being now dead (for he had\ntwo other brothers, Euthydemus and Brachyllus), that he might receive\nhis portion of his father\u2019s estate. This was done in the fifteenth year\nof his age, when Praxiteles was chief magistrate.[10] There then he\nstayed, and was brought up under Nicias and Tisias, both Syracusans.\nAnd having purchased a house and received his estate, he lived as a\ncitizen for thirty-three years, till the year of Cleocritus.[11] In\nthe year following, in the time of Callias, viz. in the ninety-second\nOlympiad, when the Athenians had met with their disasters in Sicily,\nand when other of their allies revolted, and especially the Italians,\nhe, being accused of favoring the Athenians, was banished with three\nother of his association; when coming to Athens, in the year wherein\nCallias succeeded Cleocritus, the city then laboring under the tyranny\nof the four hundred conspirators, he there sat down. But after\nthe fight at Aegospotami, when the Thirty Tyrants had usurped the\ngovernment, he was banished thence, after he had remained in Athens\nseven years. His goods were confiscated; and having likewise lost his\nbrother Polemarchus, he himself escaped by a back door of the house\nin which he was kept for execution, fled to Megara and there lived.\nBut when the citizens endeavored to return from Phyle, he also behaved\nhimself very well, and appeared very active in the affair, having,\nto forward this great enterprise, deposited two thousand drachms of\nsilver and two hundred targets, and being commissioned with Hermas, he\nmaintained three hundred men in arms, and prevailed with Thrasylaeus\nthe Elean, his old friend and host, to contribute two talents. Upon\nentering the city, Thrasybulus proposed that, for a consideration\nof his good service to the public, he should receive the rights of\ncitizenship: this was during the so-called time of anarchy before\nEuclides. Which proposal being ratified by the people, Archinus\nobjected that it was against the laws, and a decree without authority\nof the senate. The decree was thereupon declared void, and Lysias lost\nhis citizenship. He led the remainder of his life in the rank of an\n_Isoteles_ (or citizen who had no right to vote or hold office), and\ndied at last at Athens, being fourscore and three years old, or as some\nwould have it, seventy-six; and others again say, that he lived above\nfourscore years, till after the birth of Demosthenes. It is supposed he\nwas born in the year of Philocles.\n\nThere are four hundred and twenty-five orations which bear his name,\nof which Dionysius and Caecilius affirm only two hundred and thirty\nto be genuine, and he is said to have been overcome but twice in all.\nThere is extant also the oration which he made in defence of the\nfore-mentioned decree against Archinus, who indicted it and thereby\nprevented Lysias from receiving the citizenship, as also another\nagainst the Thirty Tyrants. He was very cogent in his persuasions, and\nwas always very brief in what he delivered. He would commonly give\norations to private persons. There are likewise his institutions of\noratory, his public harangues, his epistles, his eulogies, funeral\norations, discourses of love, and his defence of Socrates, accommodated\nto the minds of the judges. His style seems plain and easy, though\nhardly imitable. Demosthenes, in his oration against Neaera, says that\nhe was in love with one Metanira, Neaera\u2019s serving-maid, but afterwards\nmarried his brother Brachyllus\u2019s daughter. Plato in his Phaedrus makes\nmention of him, as a most eloquent orator and ancienter than Isocrates.\nPhiliscus, his companion, and Isocrates\u2019s votary, composed an epigram\nconcerning him, whence the same that we have urged from Plato is\ndeducible; and it sings to this effect:\n\n    Calliope\u2019s witty daughter, Phrontis, show\n    If aught of wit or eloquence thou hast;\n    For \u2019tis decreed that thou shalt bear a son,\n    Lysias by name, to spread the name of him\n    Whose great and generous acts do fill the world,\n    And are received for glorious above.\n    Let him who sings those praises of the dead,\n    Let him, my friend, too, praise our amity.\n\nHe likewise wrote two orations for Iphicrates,\u2014one against Harmodius,\nand another accusing Timotheus of treason,\u2014in both which he overcame.\nBut when Iphicrates made himself responsible for Timotheus\u2019s actions,\nand would purge himself of the allegation of treason made also against\nhim, Lysias wrote an oration for him to deliver in his defence; upon\nwhich he was acquitted, but Timotheus was fined in a considerable sum\nof money. He likewise delivered an oration at the Olympic games, in\nwhich he endeavored to convince the Greeks of how great advantage it\nwould be to them, if they could but unanimously join to pull down the\ntyrant Dionysius.\n\n\nIV. ISOCRATES.\n\nISOCRATES was the son of Theodorus, of Erchia, reckoned among the\nmiddle class of citizens, and a man who kept servants under him to\nmake flutes, by which he got so much money as enabled him not only to\nbring up his children after the most genteel manner, but likewise to\nmaintain a choir. For besides Isocrates, he had other sons, Telesippus\nand Diomnestus, and one daughter. And hence, we may suppose, those\ntwo comical poets, Aristophanes and Stratis, took occasion to bring\nhim on the stage. He was born in the eighty-sixth Olympiad,[12]\nLysimachus being archon, about two and twenty years after Lysias, and\nseven before Plato. When he was a boy, he was as well educated as any\nof the Athenian children, being under the tuition of Prodicus the\nCean, Gorgias the Leontine, Tisias the Syracusan, and Theramenes the\nrhetorician. And when Theramenes was to be apprehended by the order of\nthe Thirty Tyrants, and flying for succor to the altar of the senate,\nonly Isocrates stood his friend, when all others were struck with\nterror. For a long time he stood silent; but after some time Theramenes\nadvised him to desist, because, he told him, it would be an aggravation\nof his grief, if any of his friends should come into trouble through\nhim. And it is said that he made use of certain institutions of\nrhetoric composed by Theramenes, when he was slandered in court; which\ninstitutions have since borne Boton\u2019s name.\n\nWhen Isocrates was come to man\u2019s estate, he meddled with nothing of\nstate affairs, both because he had a very weak voice and because he\nwas something timorous; and besides these two impediments, his estate\nwas much impaired by the loss of a great part of his patrimony in the\nwar with the Lacedaemonians. It is evident that he composed orations\nfor others to use, but delivered only one, that concerning Exchange of\nProperty. Having set up a school, he gave himself much to writing and\nthe study of philosophy, and then he wrote his Panegyrical oration, and\nothers which were used for advice, some of which he delivered himself,\nand others he gave to others to pronounce for him; aiming thereby to\npersuade the Greeks to the study and practice of such things as were of\nmost immediate concern to them. But his endeavors in that way proving\nto no purpose, he gave those things over, and opened a school in Chios\nfirst, as some will have it, having for a beginning nine scholars;\nand when they came to him to pay him for their schooling, he weeping\nsaid, \u201cNow I see plainly that I am sold to my scholars.\u201d He admitted\nall into his acquaintance who desired it. He was the first that made a\nseparation between wrangling pleas and political arguments, to which\nlatter he rather addicted himself. He instituted a form of magistracy\nin Chios, much the same with that at Athens. No schoolmaster ever got\nso much; so that he maintained a galley at his own charge. He had more\nthan a hundred scholars, and among others Timotheus the son of Conon\nwas one, with whom he visited many cities, and composed the epistles\nwhich Timotheus sent to the Athenians; who for his pains gave him a\ntalent out of that which he got at Samos. Theopompus likewise the\nChian, Ephorus the Cumaean, Asclepiades who composed arguments for\ntragedies, and Theodectes of Phaselis, who afterwards wrote tragedies,\nwere all Isocrates\u2019s scholars. The last of these had a monument in the\nway to the shrine of Cyamites, as we go to Eleusis by the Sacred Way,\nof which now remains only rubbish. There also he set up with his own\nthe statues of other famous poets, of all which only Homer\u2019s is to be\nseen. Leodamas also the Athenian, and Lacritus who gave laws to the\nAthenians, were both his scholars; and some say, Hyperides and Isaeus\ntoo. They add likewise, that Demosthenes also was very desirous to\nlearn of him, and because he could not give the full rate, which was\na thousand drachms, he offered him two hundred, the fifth part, if he\nwould teach him but the fifth part of his art proportionable: to whom\nIsocrates answered, We do not use, Demosthenes, to impart our skill by\nhalves, but as men sell good fish whole, or altogether, so if thou hast\na desire to learn, we will teach thee our full art, and not a piece of\nit. He died in the year when Charondas was chief magistrate,[13] when,\nbeing at Hippocrates\u2019s public exercise, he received the news of the\nslaughter at Chaeronea; for he was the cause of his own death by a four\ndays\u2019 fast, which he then made, pronouncing just at his departure the\nthree verses which begin three tragedies of Euripides:\n\n    Danaus, father of the fifty sisters,\u2014\n    Pelops, son of Tantalus, in quest of Pisa,\u2014\n    Cadmus, in time past, going from Sidon.\n\nHe lived ninety-eight years, or, as some say, a hundred, not being\nable to behold Greece the fourth time brought into slavery. The year\n(or, as some say, four years) before he died, he wrote his Panathenaic\noration. He labored upon his Panegyric oration ten years, or, as some\ntell us, fifteen, which he is supposed to have borrowed out of Gorgias\nthe Leontine and Lysias. His oration concerning Exchange of Property he\nwrote when he was eighty-two years old, and those to Philip a little\nbefore his death. When he was old, he adopted Aphareus, the youngest\nof the three sons of Plathane, the daughter of Hippias the orator. He\nwas very rich, both in respect of the great sums of money he exacted\nof his scholars, and besides that, having at one time twenty talents of\nNicocles, king of Cyprus, for an oration which he dedicated to him. By\nreason of his riches he became obnoxious to the envy of others, and was\nthree times named to maintain a galley; which he evaded twice by the\nassistance of his son and a counterfeit sickness, but the third time\nhe undertook it, though the charge proved very great. A father telling\nhim that he had allowed his son no other companion than one slave,\nIsocrates replied, Go thy way then, for one slave thou shalt have two.\nHe strove for the prize which Aretemisia dedicated to the honor and\nmemory of her husband Mausolus; but that oration is lost. He wrote also\nanother oration in praise of Helen, and one called Areopagiticus. Some\nsay that he died when he had fasted nine days,\u2014some again, at four\ndays\u2019 end,\u2014and his death took its date from the funeral solemnities of\nthose that lost their lives at Chaeronea. His son Aphareus likewise\nwrote several orations.\n\nHe lies buried with all his family near Cynosarges, on the left hand of\nthe hill. There are interred Isocrates and his father Theodorus, his\nmother and her sister Anaco, his adoptive son Aphareus, Socrates the\nson of Anaco, Theodorus his brother, bearing his father\u2019s name, his\ngrandsons, the sons of his adopted Aphareus, and his wife Plathane,\nthe mother of Aphareus. On these tombs were erected six tables, which\nare now demolished. And upon the tomb of Isocrates himself was placed\na column thirty cubits high, and on that a mermaid of seven cubits,\nwhich was an emblem of his eloquence; there is nothing now extant.\nThere was also near it a table, having poets and his schoolmasters\non it; and among the rest, Gorgias inspecting a celestial globe, and\nIsocrates standing by him. There is likewise a statue of his of bronze\nin Eleusis, dedicated by Timothy the son of Conon, before the entry of\nthe porch, with this inscription:\n\n    To the fame and honor of Isocrates,\n    This statue\u2019s sacred to the Goddesses;\n    The gift of Timothy.\n\nThis statue was made by Leochares. There are threescore orations which\nbear his name; of which, if we credit Dionysius, only five and twenty\nare genuine; but according to Caecilius, twenty-eight; and the rest are\naccounted spurious. He was an utter stranger to ostentation, insomuch\nthat, when there came at one time three persons to hear him declaim,\nhe admitted but two of them, desiring the third to come the next day,\nfor that two at once were to him as a full theatre. He used to tell\nhis scholars that he taught his art for ten minas; but he would give\nany man ten thousand, that could teach him to be bold and give him a\ngood utterance. And being once asked how he, who was not very eloquent\nhimself, could make others so, he answered, Just as a whetstone cannot\ncut, yet it will sharpen knives for that purpose. Some say that he\nwrote institutions to the art of oratory; others are of opinion that\nhe had no method of teaching, but only exercise. He would never ask\nany thing of a free-born citizen. He used to enjoin his scholars\nbeing present at public assemblies to repeat to him what was there\ndelivered. He conceived no little sorrow for the death of Socrates,\ninsomuch that the next day he put himself in mourning. Being asked\nwhat was the use and force of rhetoric, he answered, To make great\nmatters small, and small great. At a feast with Nicoceon, the tyrant\nof Cyprus, being desired by some of the company to declaim upon some\ntheme, he made answer, that that was not a season for him to speak what\nhe knew, and he knew nothing that was then seasonable. Happening once\nto see Sophocles the tragedian amorously eying a comely boy, he said to\nhim, It will become thee, Sophocles, to restrain not only thy hands,\nbut thine eyes. When Ephorus of Cumae left his school before he had\narrived at any good proficiency, his father Demophilus sent him again\nwith a second sum of money in his hand; at which Isocrates jocosely\ncalled him Diphorus, that is, _twice bringing_ his fee. However, he\ntook a great deal of pains and care with him, and went so far as to put\nhim in the way of writing history.\n\nHe was wantonly given; and used to lie upon a ... mat for his bed, and\nhis bolster was commonly made moist with saffron. He never married\nwhile he was young; but in his old age he kept a miss, whose name was\nLagisce, and by her he had a daughter, who died in the twelfth year of\nher age, before she was married. He afterwards married Plathane, the\nwife of Hippias the rhetorician, who had three sons, the youngest of\nwhich, Aphareus by name, he adopted for his own, as we said before.\nThis Aphareus erected a bronze statue to him near the temple of\nJupiter, as may be seen from the inscription:\n\n    In veneration of the mighty Jove,\n    His noble parents, and the Gods above,\n    Aphareus this statue here has set,\n    The statue of Isocrates his father.\n\nHe is said to have run a race on a swift horse, when he was but a\nboy; for he is to be seen in this posture in the Citadel, in the\ntennis court of the priestesses of Minerva, in a statue. There were\nbut two suits commenced against him in his whole life. One whereof\nwas with Megaclides, who provoked him to exchange of property; at\nthe trial of which he could not be personally present, by reason of\nsickness; but sending Aphareus, he nevertheless overcame. The other\nsuit was commenced against him by Lysimachus, who would have him come\nto an exchange or be at the charge of maintaining a galley for the\ncommonwealth. In this case he was overthrown, and forced to perform the\nservice. There was likewise a painting of him in the Pompeum.\n\nAphareus also wrote a few orations, both judicial and deliberative;\nas also tragedies to the number of thirty-seven, of which two\nare contested. He began to make his works public in the year of\nLysistratus, and continued it to the year of Sosigenes, that is, eight\nand twenty years.[14] In these years he exhibited dramas six times\nat the city Dionysiac festivals, and twice went away with the prize\nthrough the actor Dionysius; he also gained two other victories at the\nLenaean festival through other actors.\n\nThere were to be seen in the Citadel the statues of the mother of\nIsocrates, of Theodorus, and of Anaco his mother\u2019s sister. That of\nthe mother is placed just by the image of Health, the inscription\nbeing changed; that of Anaco is no longer there. [Anaco] had two sons,\nAlexander by Coenes, and Lysicles by Lysias.\n\n\nV. ISAEUS.\n\nISAEUS was born in Chalcis. When he came to Athens, he read Lysias\u2019s\nworks, whom he imitated so well, both in his style and in his skill in\nmanaging causes, that he who was not very well acquainted with their\nmanner of writing could not tell which of the two was author of many\nof their orations. He flourished after the Peloponnesian war, as we\nmay conjecture from his orations, and was in repute till the reign of\nPhilip. He taught Demosthenes\u2014not at his school, but privately\u2014who gave\nhim ten thousand drachms, by which business he became very famous. Some\nsay that he composed orations for Demosthenes, which he pronounced in\nopposition to his guardians. He left behind him sixty-four orations,\nof which fifty are his own; as likewise some peculiar institutions of\nrhetoric. He was the first that used to speak or write figuratively,\nand that addicted himself to civil matters; which Demosthenes chiefly\nfollowed. Theopompus the comedian makes mention of him in his Theseus.\n\n\nVI. AESCHINES.\n\nHE was the son of Atrometus\u2014who, being banished by the Thirty Tyrants,\nwas thereby a means of reducing the commonwealth to the government\nof the people\u2014and of his wife Glaucothea; by birth a Cothocidian. He\nwas neither nobly born nor rich; but in his youth, being strong and\nwell set, he addicted himself to all sorts of bodily exercises; and\nafterwards, having a very clear voice, he took to playing of tragedies,\nand if we may credit Demosthenes, he was a petty clerk, and also served\nAristodemus as a player of third parts at the Bacchanalian festivals,\nin his times of leisure rehearsing the ancient tragedies. When he was\nbut a boy, he was assisting to his father in teaching little children\ntheir letters, and when he was grown up, he listed himself a private\nsoldier. Some think he was brought up under Socrates and Plato; but\nCaecilius will have it that Leodamas was his master. Being concerned\nin the affairs of the commonwealth, he openly acted in opposition to\nDemosthenes and his faction; and was employed in several embassies,\nand especially in one to Philip, to treat about articles of peace. For\nwhich Demosthenes accused him for being the cause of the overthrow and\nruin of the Phocians, and the inflamer of war; which part he would\nhave him thought to have acted when the Amphictyons chose him one of\ntheir deputies to the Amphissians who were building up the harbor\n[of Crissa]. On which the Amphictyons put themselves under Philip\u2019s\nprotection, who, being assisted by Aeschines, took the affair in hand\nand soon conquered all Phocis.[15] But Aeschines, notwithstanding\nall that Demosthenes could do, being favored by Eubulus the son of\nSpintharus, a Probalisian, who pleaded in his behalf, carried his cause\nby thirty voices, and so was cleared. Though some tell us, that there\nwere orations prepared by the orators, but the news of the conquest of\nChaeronea put a stop to the present proceedings, and so the suit fell.\n\nSome time after this, Philip being dead, and his son Alexander marching\ninto Asia, Aeschines impeached Ctesiphon for acting against the laws,\nin passing a decree in favor of Demosthenes. But he having not the\nfifth part of the voices of the judges on his side, was forced to go\nin exile to Rhodes, because he would not pay his mulct of a thousand\ndrachms. Others say, that he incurred disfranchisement also, because he\nwould not depart the city, and that he went to Alexander at Ephesus.\nBut upon the death of Alexander, when a tumult had been excited, he\nwent to Rhodes, and there opened a school and taught. And on a time\npronouncing the oration which he had formerly made against Ctesiphon,\nto pleasure the Rhodians, he did it with that grace, that they wondered\nhow he could fail of carrying his cause if he pleaded so well for\nhimself. But ye would not wonder, said he, that I was overthrown, if\nye had heard Demosthenes pleading against me. He left a school behind\nhim at Rhodes, which was afterwards called the Rhodian school. Thence\nhe sailed to Samos, and there in a short time died. He had a very good\nvoice, as both Demosthenes and Demochares testified of him.\n\nFour orations bear his name, one of which was against Timarchus,\nanother concerning false embassage, and a third against Ctesiphon,\nwhich three are really his own; but the fourth, called Deliaca, is\nnone of his; for though he was named to plead the cause of the temple\nat Delos, yet Demosthenes tells us that Hyperides was chosen in his\nstead.[16] He says himself, that he had two brothers, Aphobetus and\nPhilochares. He was the first that brought the Athenians the news of\nthe victory obtained at Tamynae, for which he was crowned for the\nsecond time. Some report that Aeschines was never any man\u2019s scholar,\nbut having passed his time chiefly in courts of justice, he raised\nhimself from the office of clerk to that of orator. His first public\nappearance was in a speech against Philip; with which the people being\npleased, he was immediately chosen to go ambassador to the Arcadians;\nand being come thither, he excited the Ten Thousand against Philip. He\nindicted Timarchus for profligacy; who, fearing the issue, deserted his\ncause and hanged himself, as Demosthenes somewhere informs us. Being\nemployed with Ctesiphon and Demosthenes in an embassage to Philip to\ntreat of peace, he appeared the most accomplished of the three. Another\ntime also he was one of ten men sent in embassage to conclude a peace;\nand being afterwards called to answer for it, he was acquitted, as we\nsaid.\n\n\nVII. LYCURGUS.\n\nLYCURGUS was the son of Lycophron, and grandson of that Lycurgus whom\nthe Thirty Tyrants put to death, by the procurement of Aristodemus\nthe Batesian, who, also being treasurer of the Greeks, was banished\nin the time of the popular government. He was a Butadian by birth,\nand of the line or family of the Eteobutades. He received his first\ninstitutions of philosophy from Plato the philosopher. But afterward\nentering himself a scholar to Isocrates the orator, he employed his\nstudy about affairs of the commonwealth. And to his care was committed\nthe disposal and management of the city stock, and so he executed the\noffice of treasurer-general for the space of twelve years; in which\ntime there went through his hands fourteen thousand talents, or (as\nsome will have it) eighteen thousand six hundred and fifty. It was the\norator Stratocles that procured him this preferment. At first he was\nchosen in his own name; but afterwards he nominated one of his friends\nto the office, while he himself performed the duties; for there was\na law just passed, that no man should be chosen treasurer for above\nthe term of four years. But Lycurgus plied his business closely,\nboth summer and winter, in the administration of public affairs. And\nbeing entrusted to make provision of all necessaries for the wars, he\nreformed many abuses that were crept into the commonwealth. He built\nfour hundred galleys for the use of the public, and prepared and fitted\na place for public exercises in Lyceum, and planted trees before it;\nhe likewise built a wrestling-court, and being made surveyor of the\ntheatre of Bacchus, he finished this building. He was likewise of so\ngreat repute among all sorts, that he was entrusted with two hundred\nand fifty talents of private citizens. He adorned and beautified the\ncity with gold and silver vessels of state, and golden images of\nvictory. He likewise finished many things that were as yet imperfect,\nas the dock-yards and the arsenal. He built a wall also about the\nspacious Panathenaic race-course, and made level a piece of uneven\nground, given by one Dinias to Lycurgus for the use of the city. The\nkeeping of the city was committed wholly to his care, and power to\napprehend malefactors, of whom he cleared the city utterly; so that\nsome sophisters were wont to say, that Lycurgus did not dip his pen in\nink, but in blood. And therefore it was, that when Alexander demanded\nhim of the people, they would not deliver him up. When Philip made\nthe second war upon the Athenians, he was employed with Demosthenes\nand Polyeuctus in an embassy to Peloponnesus and other cities. He\nwas always in great repute and esteem with the Athenians, and looked\nupon as a man of that justice and integrity, that in the courts of\njudicature his good word was at all times prevalent on the behalf of\nthose persons for whom he undertook to speak. He was the author of\nseveral laws; one of which was, that there should be certain comedies\nplayed at the Chytrian solemnities, and whoever of the poets or players\nshould come off victor, he should thereby be invested with the freedom\nof the city, which before was not lawful; and so he revived a solemnity\nwhich for want of encouragement had for some time before been out of\nrequest. Another of his laws was, that the city should erect statues\nto the memory of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides; and that their\ntragedies, being fairly engrossed, should be preserved in the public\nconsistory, and that the public clerks should read these copies as\nthe plays were acted, that nothing might be changed by the players;\nand that otherwise it should be unlawful to act them. A third law\nproposed by him was, that no Athenian, nor any person inhabiting in\nAthens, should be permitted to buy a captive, who was once free, to be\na slave, without the consent of his former master. Further, that in\nthe Piraeus there should be at least three circular dances played to\nNeptune; and that to the victor in the first should be given not less\nthan ten minas; in the second, eight; in the third, six. Also, that no\nwoman should go to Eleusis in a coach, lest the poor should appear more\ndespicable than the rich, and so be dejected and cast down; and that\nwhoever should ride in a coach contrary to this law should be fined six\nthousand drachms. And when even his own wife was taken in the violation\nof it, he paid to the discoverers of it a whole talent; for which being\nafterwards called in question by the people: See therefore, said he, I\nam called to answer for giving, and not for receiving money.\n\nAs he was walking one day in the streets, he saw an officer lay hand\non Xenocrates the philosopher; and when nothing would serve his turn\nbut the philosopher must to prison, because he had not deposited the\ntribute due from strangers, he with his staff struck the officer on the\nhead for his unmannerly roughness toward a person of that character,\nand freeing Xenocrates, cast the other into prison in his stead. And\nnot many days after, Xenocrates meeting with the children of Lycurgus\nsaid: I have returned thanks unto your father right speedily, my good\nchildren, for his friendship towards me, for I hear his kindness\ncommended by all people where I go. He made likewise several decrees,\nin which he made use of the help of an Olynthian named Euclides, one\nvery expert in such matters. Though he was rich enough, yet he was\nused to wear the same coat every day, both summer and winter; but he\nwore shoes only when he was compelled to do it. Because he was not\nready to speak extempore, he used to practise and study day and night.\nAnd to the end he might not at any time oversleep himself and so lose\ntime from his study, he used to cover himself on his bed only with a\nsheepskin with the wool on, and to lay a hard bolster under his head.\nWhen one reproached him for being in fee with rhetoricians when he\nstudied his orations, he answered, that, if a man would promise to\nrestore his sons better, he would give him not only a thousand drachms,\nbut half what he was worth. He took the liberty of speaking boldly upon\nall occasions, by reason of his greatness; as when once the Athenians\ninterrupted him in his speaking, he cried out, O thou Corcyraean whip,\nhow many talents art thou worth? And another time, when some would rank\nAlexander among the Gods, What manner of God, said he, must he be, when\nall that go out of his temple had need to be dipped in water to purify\nthemselves?\n\nAfter his death Menesaechmus accusing and indicting them by virtue\nof an instrument drawn by Thracycles, his sons were delivered to the\neleven executioners of Justice. But Demosthenes, being in exile,\nwrote to the Athenians, to let them know that they were wrongfully\naccused, and that therefore they did not well to hear their accusers;\nupon which they recanted what they had done, and set them at liberty\nagain,\u2014Democles, who was Theophrastus\u2019s scholar, likewise pleading in\ntheir defence. Lycurgus and some of his posterity were buried publicly,\nat or near the temple of Minerva Paeonia, where their monuments stand\nin the garden of Melanthius the philosopher, on which are inscriptions\nto Lycurgus and his children, which are yet extant. The greatest thing\nhe did while he lived was his raising the revenue of the commons\ntotally from sixty talents, as he found it, to twelve hundred. When\nhe found he must die, he was by his own appointment carried into the\ntemple of the Mother of the Gods, and into the senate-house, being\nwilling before his death to give an account of his administration. And\nno man daring to accuse him of any thing except Menesaechmus, having\npurged himself from those calumnies which he cast upon him, he was\ncarried home again, where in a short time he ended his life. He was\nalways accounted honest; his orations were commended for the eloquence\nthey carried in them; and though he was often accused, yet he never was\noverthrown in any suit.\n\nHe had three children by Callisto, the daughter of Abron, and sister\nof Callias, Abron\u2019s son, by descent a Batesian,\u2014I mean, of him who,\nwhen Chaerondas was magistrate, was paymaster to the army. Of this\naffinity Dinarchus speaks in his oration against Pastius. He left\nbehind him three sons, Abron, Lycurgus, and Lycophron; of which,\nAbron and Lycurgus died without issue, though the first, Abron, did\nfor some time act very acceptably and worthily in affairs of the\ncommonwealth. Lycophron, marrying Callistomacha, the daughter of\nPhilip of Aexone, begat Callisto, who married Cleombrotus the son\nof Dinocrates the Acharnian, to whom she bare Lycophron, who, being\nadopted by his grandfather, died without issue. He being dead, Socrates\nmarried Callisto, of whom he had his son Symmachus. To him was born\nAristonymus; to Aristonymus, Charmides, who was the father of Philippe.\nOf her and Lysander came Medeius, who also was an interpreter, one\nof the Eumolpids. He begat two children of Timothea, the daughter\nof Glaucus, viz. Laodamia and Medius, who were priests of Neptune\nErechtheus; also Philippe a daughter, who was afterward priestess of\nMinerva; for before, she was married to Diocles of Melite, to whom\nshe bare a son named Diocles, who was a colonel of a regiment of\nfoot. He married Hediste, the daughter of Abron, and of her begat\nPhilippides and Nicostrata, whom Themistocles the torch-bearer, son of\nTheophrastus, married, and by her had Theophrastus and Diocles; and he\nlikewise constituted the priesthood of Neptune Erechtheus.\n\nIt is said that he penned fifteen orations. He was often crowned by the\npeople, and had statues dedicated to him. His image in brass was set\nup in Ceramicus by order of the public, in the year of Anaxicrates; in\nwhose time also it was ordered that he and his eldest son should be\nprovided for with diet in the Prytaneum; but he being dead, Lycophron\nhis eldest son was forced to sue for that donation. This Lycurgus also\nwas used frequently to plead on the account of sacred things; and\naccused Autolycus the Areopagite, Lysicles the general, Demades the\nson of Demeas, Menesaechmus, and many others, all whom he caused to be\ncondemned as guilty. Diphilus also was called in question by him, for\nimpairing and diminishing the props of the metal mines, and unjustly\nmaking himself rich therefrom; and he caused him to be condemned to\ndie, according to the provision made by the laws in that case. He gave\nout of his own stock fifty drachms to every citizen, the sum total of\nwhich donation amounted to one hundred and sixty talents;[17] but some\nsay he gave a mina of silver to each. He likewise accused Aristogiton,\nLeocrates, and Autolycus for cowardice. He was called the Ibis:...\n\n    The ibis to Lycurgus, to Chaerephon the bat.[18]\n\nHis ancestors derived their pedigree from Erechtheus, the son of the\nEarth and of Vulcan; but he was nearest to Lycomedes and Lycurgus,\nwhom the people honored with public solemnities. There is a succession\nof those of the race who were priests of Neptune, in a complete table\nplaced in the Erechtheum, painted by Ismenias the Chalcidian; in the\nsame place stood wooden images of Lycurgus, and of his sons, Abron,\nLycurgus, and Lycophron; made by Timarchus and Cephisodotus, the\nsons of Praxiteles. His son Abron dedicated the table; and coming to\nthe priesthood by right of succession, he resigned to his brother\nLycophron, and hence he is painted as giving a trident. But Lycurgus\nhad made a draught of all his actions, and hung it on a column before\nthe wrestling-court built by himself, that all might read that would;\nand no man could accuse him of any peculation. He likewise proposed to\nthe people to crown Neoptolemus, the son of Anticles, and to dedicate\nstatues to him, because he had promised and undertaken to cover the\naltar of Apollo in the market with gold, according to the order of the\noracle. He decreed honors likewise to Diotimus, the son of Diopithes\nof Euonymus, in the year when Ctesicles was magistrate.\n\n\nVIII. DEMOSTHENES.\n\nDEMOSTHENES, the son of Demosthenes by Cleobule, the daughter of\nGylon, was a Paeanian by descent. He was left an orphan by his father,\nwhen he was but seven years old, together with a sister of the age of\nfive. Being kept by his mother during his nonage, he went to school\nto Isocrates, say some; but the generality are of opinion that he was\npupil to Isaeus the Chalcidian, who lived in Athens and was Isocrates\u2019s\nscholar. He imitated Thucydides and Plato, and some affirm that he more\nespecially attended the school of Plato. Hegesias the Magnesian writes,\nthat he entreated his master\u2019s leave to go to hear Callistratus the son\nof Empaedus, an Amphidnean, a noble orator, and sometime commander of\na troop of horse, who had dedicated an altar to Mercury Agoraeos, and\nwas to make an oration to the people. And when he heard him, he became\na lover of oratory, and so long as he continued at Athens, remained his\ndisciple.\n\nBut Callistratus being soon banished to Thrace, and Demosthenes arrived\nat some years of maturity, he joined with Isocrates and Plato. After\nthis, he took Isaeus into his house, and for the space of four years\nlabored very hard in imitation of his orations. Though Ctesibius in his\nbook of philosophy affirms that, by the help of Callias the Syracusan,\nhe got the orations of Zoilus the Amphipolite, and by the assistance\nof Charicles the Carystian those also of Alcidamas, and devoted\nhimself to the imitation of them. When he came to age, in the year of\nTimocrates[19] he called his tutors and guardians to account for their\nmaladministration, in not allowing him what was fitting and requisite\nout of his estate. And these tutors or guardians were three, Aphobus,\nTherippides, and Demophon (or Demeas), the last of whom, being his\nuncle, he charged more severely than the other two. He arrested each of\nthem in an action of ten talents, and cast them, but did not exact of\nthem what the law had given him, releasing some for money and others\nfor favor.\n\nWhen Aristophon, by reason of his age, could not hold the office any\nlonger, he was chosen choregus, or overseer of the dances. During the\nexecution of which office, Midias the Anagyrasian striking him as he\nwas ordering the dances in the theatre, he sued him upon it, but let\nfall his suit upon Midias\u2019s paying him three thousand drachms.\n\nIt is reported of him that, while he was a youth, he confined himself\nto a den or cave, and there studied his orations, and shaved half of\nhis head that he might not be allured to divert himself from it; and\nthat he lay upon a very narrow bed, that he might awake and rise the\nsooner. And for that he could not very well pronounce the letter R,\nhe accustomed himself very much to that, that he might master it if\npossible; and using likewise an unseemly motion of his shoulder when\nhe spake at any time, he remedied that by a spit (or, as some say, a\nsword) stuck in the ceiling just over his shoulder, that the fear of\nbeing pricked with it might break him of that indecent gesture. They\nreport of him further that, when he could declaim pretty well, he had a\nsort of mirror made as big as himself, and used always in declaiming to\nlook in that, to the end that he might see and correct what was amiss.\nHe used likewise at some certain times to go down to the Phalerian\nshore, to the end that, being accustomed to the surges and noise of the\nwaves, he might not be daunted by the clamors of the people, when he\nshould at any time declaim in public. And being naturally short-winded,\nhe gave Neoptolemus a player ten thousand drachms to teach him to\npronounce long sentences in one breath.\n\nAfterwards, betaking himself to the affairs of the commonwealth, and\nfinding the people divided into two different factions, one in favor\nof Philip, and the other standing for the liberty and properties of\nthe people, he took part with them that opposed Philip, and always\npersuaded the citizens to help those who were in danger and trouble by\nPhilip\u2019s oppression; taking for his companions in council Hyperides,\nNausicles, Polyeuctus, and Diotimus; and then he drew the Thebans,\nEuboeans, Corcyraeans, Corinthians, Boeotians, and many more into\na league with the Athenians. Being in the assembly one day and his\nmemory failing him, his oration was hissed; which made him return home\nvery heavy and melancholy; and being met by Eunomus the Thriasian, an\nold man, by him he was comforted and encouraged. But he was chiefly\nanimated by Andronicus the player, who told him that his orations were\nexcellent, but that he wanted something of action, thereupon rehearsing\ncertain places out of his oration which he had delivered in that same\nassembly. Unto which Demosthenes gave good ear and credit, and he then\nbetook himself to Andronicus. And therefore, when he was afterwards\nasked what was the first part of oratory, he answered, \u201cAction;\u201d and\nwhich was the second, he replied, \u201cAction;\u201d and which was the third,\nhe still answered, \u201cAction.\u201d Another time, declaiming publicly, and\nusing expressions too youthful for one of his years and gravity, he was\nlaughed at, and ridiculed by the comedians, Antiphanes and Timocles,\nwho in derision used to repeat such phrases as these, as uttered by him:\n\n    By the earth, by the fountains, by the rivers, by the floods!\n\nFor having sworn thus in presence of the people, he raised a tumult\nabout him. He likewise used to swear by Asclepius, and accented\nthe second syllable (\u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03ae\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2)[20] through some mistake, and yet\nafterwards defended it; for this Asclepius, he said, was called \u1f24\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2,\nthat is a _mild_ God. This also often caused him to be interrupted.\nBut all these things he reformed in time, being sometime conversant\nwith Eubulides, the Milesian philosopher. Being on a time present at\nthe Olympic games, and hearing Lamachus the Myrrhinaean sound the\npraises of Philip and of Alexander the Great, his son, and decry the\ncowardice of the Thebans and Olynthians, he stood up in their defence\nagainst him, and from the ancient poets he proclaimed the great and\nnoble achievements of the Thebans and Olynthians; and so elegantly he\nbehaved himself in this affair, that he at once silenced Lamachus,\nand made him convey himself immediately out of the assembly. And even\nPhilip himself, when he had heard what harangues he made against him,\nreplied, that if he had heard him, he should have chosen him general\nin the war against himself. He was used to compare Demosthenes\u2019s\norations to soldiers, for the force they carried along with them; but\nthe orations of Isocrates to fencers, because of the theatrical delight\nthat accompanied them.\n\nBeing about the age of seven and thirty, reckoning from Dexitheus\nto Callimachus,[21]\u2014in whose time the Olynthians sent to beg aid\nof the Athenians against Philip, who then made war upon them,\u2014he\npersuaded them to answer the Olynthians\u2019 request; but in the following\nyear, in which Plato died,[22] Philip overthrew and destroyed the\nOlynthians. Xenophon also, the scholar of Socrates, had some knowledge\nof Demosthenes, either at his first rise, or at least when he was\nmost famous and flourishing; for he wrote the Acts of the Greeks,\nas touching what passed at the battle of Mantinea, in the year of\nChariclides;[23] our Demosthenes having sometime before overthrown\nhis guardians in a suit he had commenced against them, in the year\nof Timocrates. When Aeschines, being condemned, fled from Athens,\nDemosthenes hearing of it took horse and rode after him; which\nAeschines understanding, and fearing to be apprehended again, he came\nout to meet Demosthenes, and fell at his feet, covered his face, and\nbegged his mercy; upon which Demosthenes bid him stand up, be assured\nof his favor, and as a pledge of it, gave him a talent of silver. He\nadvised the people to maintain a company of mercenary soldiers in\nThasos, and thither sailed himself as captain of the galleys. Another\ntime, being entrusted to buy corn, he was accused of defrauding the\ncity, but cleared himself of the accusation and was acquitted. When\nPhilip had seized upon Elatea, Demosthenes with others went to the war\nof Chaeronea, where he is said to have deserted his colors; and flying\naway, a bramble caught hold of his vest behind, when turning about in\nhaste, thinking an enemy had overtaken him, he cried out, Save my life,\nand say what shall be my ransom. On his buckler he had engraven for\nhis motto, To Good Fortune. And it was he that made the oration at the\nfunerals of such as died in that battle.\n\nAfter these things, he bent his whole care and study for the reparation\nof the city and wall; and being chosen commissary for repairing the\nwalls, besides what money he expended out the city stock, he laid out\nof his own at least a hundred minas. And besides this, he gave ten\nthousand drachms to the festival fund; and taking ship, he sailed\nfrom coast to coast to collect money of the allies; for which he was\noften by Demotelus, Aristonicus, and Hyperides crowned with golden\ncrowns, and afterwards by Ctesiphon. Which last decree had like to have\nbeen retracted, Diodotus and Aeschines endeavoring to prove it to be\ncontrary to the laws; but he defended himself so well against their\nallegations, that he overcame all difficulties, his enemies not having\nthe fifth part of the votes of the judges.\n\nAfter this, when Alexander the Great made his expedition into Asia,\nand Harpalus fled to Athens with a great sum of money, at first he\nwould not let him be entertained, but afterwards, Harpalus being landed\nand having given him a thousand darics he was of another mind; and\nwhen the Athenians determined to deliver Harpalus up to Antipater,\nhe opposed it, proposing to deposit the money in the Citadel, still\nwithout declaring the amount to the people. Thereupon Harpalus declared\nthat he had brought with him from Asia seven hundred talents, and that\nthis sum had been deposited in the Citadel; but only three hundred and\nfifty or a little more could be found, as Philochorus relates. But\nwhen Harpalus broke out of the prison wherein he was kept till some\nperson should come from Alexander, and was escaped into Crete,\u2014or, as\nsome will have it, into Taenarum in Laconia,\u2014Demosthenes was accused\nthat he had received from him a sum of money, and that therefore he\nhad not given a true account of the sum delivered to him, nor had\nimpeached the negligence of the keepers. So he was judicially cited\nby Hyperides, Pytheus, Menesaechmus, Himeraeus, and Patrocles, who\nprosecuted him so severely as to cause him to be condemned in the\ncourt of Areopagus; and being condemned, he went into exile, not being\nable to pay fivefold; for he was accused of receiving thirty talents.\nOthers say, that he would not run the risk of a trial, but went into\nbanishment before the day came. After this tempest was over, when the\nAthenians sent Polyeuctus to the republic of Arcadia to draw them off\nfrom the alliance with the Macedonians, he not succeeding, Demosthenes\nappeared to second him, where he reasoned so effectually that he easily\nprevailed. Which procured him so much credit and esteem, that after\nsome time a galley was dispatched to call him home again. And the\nAthenians decreed that, whereas he owed the state thirty talents, as a\nfine laid on him for the misdemeanor he was accused of, he should be\nexcused for only building an altar to Jupiter Servator in the Piraeus;\nwhich decree was first proposed by Demon his near kinsman. This\nbeing agreed on, he returned to the administration of affairs in the\ncommonwealth again.\n\nBut when Antipater was blocked up in Lamia, and the Athenians offered\nsacrifices for the happy news, he happened, being talking with\nAgesistratus, one of his intimate friends, to say, that his judgment\nconcerning the state of affairs did not jump with other men\u2019s, for that\nhe knew the Greeks were brisk and ready enough to run a short course\nbut not to hold on a long race. When Antipater had taken Pharsalus, and\nthreatened to besiege Athens itself if they refused to deliver up such\norators as had declaimed against him, Demosthenes, suspecting himself\nto be one of the number, left the city, and fled first into Aegina,\nthat he might take sanctuary in the temple of Aeacus; but being afraid\nto trust himself long there, he went over to Calauria; and when the\nAthenians had decreed to deliver up those orators, and him especially\nas one of them, he continued a suppliant in the temple of Neptune. When\nArchias came thither,\u2014who, from his office of pursuing fugitives, was\ncalled Phygadotheres and was the scholar of Anaximines the orator,\u2014when\nhe, I say, came to him, and persuaded him to go with him, telling\nhim that no doubt he should be received by Antipater as a friend, he\nreplied: When you played a part in a tragedy, you could not persuade\nme to believe you the person you represented; no more shall you now\npersuade me by your counsel. And when Archias endeavored to force him\nthence, the townsmen would not suffer it. And Demosthenes told them,\nthat he did not flee to Calauria to save his life, but that he might\nconvince the Macedonians of their violence committed even against the\nGods themselves. And with that he called for a writing-table; and if we\nmay credit Demetrius the Magnesian, on that he wrote a distich, which\nafterwards the Athenians caused to be affixed to his statue; and it was\nto this purpose:\u2014\n\n    Hadst thou, Demosthenes, an outward force\n      Great as thy inward magnanimity.\n    Greece should not wear the Macedonian yoke.\n\nThis statue, made by Polyeuctus, is placed near the cloister where the\naltar of the twelve Gods is erected. Some say this writing was found:\n\u201cDemosthenes to Antipater, Greeting.\u201d Philochorus tells us that he died\nby drinking of poison; and Satyrus the historiographer will have it,\nthat the pen was poisoned with which he wrote his epistle, and putting\nit into his mouth, soon after he tasted it he died. Eratosthenes is of\nanother opinion, that being in continual fear of the Macedonians, he\nwore a poisoned bracelet on his arms. Others say again, that he died\nwith holding his breath; and others, lastly, say that he carried strong\npoison in his signet. He lived to the age of seventy, according to\nthose who give the highest number,\u2014of sixty-seven, according to other\nstatements. And he was in public life two and twenty years.\n\nWhen King Philip was dead, he appeared publicly in a glorious robe or\nmantle, as rejoicing for his death, though he but just before mourned\nfor his daughter. He assisted the Thebans likewise against Alexander,\nand animated all the other Greeks. So that when Alexander had conquered\nThebes, he demanded Demosthenes of the Athenians, threatening them if\nthey refused to deliver him. When he went against Persia, demanding\nships of the Athenians, Demosthenes opposed it, saying, who can\nassure us that he will not use those ships we should send him against\nourselves?\n\nHe left behind him two sons by one wife, the daughter of one\nHeliodorus, a principal citizen. He had but one daughter, who died\nunmarried, being but a child. A sister too he had, who married with\nLaches of Leuconoe, his kinsman, and to him bore Demochares, who proved\ninferior to none in his time for eloquence, conduct, and courage. His\nstatue is still standing in the Prytaneum, the first on the right as\nyou approach the altar, clothed with a mantle and girt with a sword,\nbecause in this habit he delivered an oration to the people, when\nAntipater demanded of them their orators.\n\nAfterwards, in process of time, the Athenians decreed nourishment to\nbe given to the kindred of Demosthenes in the Prytaneum, and likewise\nset up a statue to his memory, when he was dead, in the market, in\nthe year of Gorgias,[24] which honors were paid him at the request of\nDemochares his sister\u2019s son. And ten years after, Laches, the son of\nDemochares of Leuconoe, in the year of Pytharatus, required the same\nhonor for himself, that his statue should be set up in the market, and\nthat both he and the eldest of his line for the future should have\ntheir allowance in the Prytaneum, and the highest room at all public\nshows. These decrees concerning both of them are engrossed, and to be\nfound among the statute laws. The statue of Demochares, of which we\nhave spoken before, was afterwards removed out of the market into the\nPrytaneum.\n\nThere are extant sixty-five orations which are truly his. Some report\nof him, that he lived a very dissolute and vicious life, appearing\noften in women\u2019s apparel, and being frequently conversant at masks\nand revellings, whence he was surnamed Batalus; though others say,\nthat this was a pet name given him by his nurse, and that from this\nhe was called Batalus in derision. Diogenes the Cynic espying him one\nday in a victualling-house, he was very much ashamed, and to shun\nhim, went to withdraw; but Diogenes called after him, and told him,\nThe more you shrink inward, the more you will be in the tavern. The\nsame Diogenes once upon the banter said of him, that in his orations\nhe was a Scythian, but in war a delicate nice citizen. He was one of\nthem who received gold of Ephialtes, one of the popular orators, who,\nbeing sent in an embassy to the king of Persia, took money privily, and\ndistributed it among the orators of Athens, that they might use their\nutmost endeavors to kindle and inflame the war against Philip; and it\nis said of Demosthenes, that he for his part had at once three thousand\ndarics of the king. He apprehended one Anaxilas of Oreus, who had been\nhis friend, and caused him to be tortured for a spy; and when he would\nconfess nothing, he procured a decree that he should be delivered to\nthe eleven executioners.\n\nWhen once at a meeting of the Athenians they would not suffer him to\nspeak, he told them he had but a short story to tell them. Upon which\nall being silent, thus he began: A certain youth, said he, hired an\nass in summer time, to go from hence to Megara. About noon, when the\nsun was very hot, and both he that hired the ass and the owner were\ndesirous of sitting in the shade of the ass, they each thrust the\nother away,\u2014the owner arguing that he let him only his ass and not the\nshadow, and the other replying that, since he had hired the ass, all\nthat belonged to him was at his dispose. Having said thus, he seemed to\ngo his way. But the Athenians willing now to hear his story out, called\nhim back, and desired him to proceed. To whom he replied: How comes it\nto pass that ye are so desirous of hearing a story of the shadow of an\nass, and refuse to give ear to matters of greater moment? Polus the\nplayer boasting to him that he had gotten a whole talent by playing but\ntwo days, he answered, and I have gotten five talents by being silent\nbut one day. One day his voice failing him when he was declaiming\npublicly, being hissed, he cried out to the people, saying, Ye are to\njudge of players, indeed, by their voice, but of orators by the gravity\nof their sentences.\n\nEpicles upbraiding him for his premeditating what he was to say, he\nreplied, I should be ashamed to speak what comes uppermost to so great\nan assembly. They say of him that he never put out his lamp\u2014that is,\nnever ceased polishing his orations\u2014until he was fifty years old. He\nsays of himself, that he drank always fair water. Lysias the orator\nwas acquainted with him; and Isocrates knew him concerned in the\nmanagement of public affairs till the battle of Chaeronea; as also some\nof the Socratical sect. [He delivered most of his orations extempore,\nNature having well qualified him for it.][25] The first that proposed\nthe crowning him with a coronet of gold was Aristonicus, the son\nof Nicophanes, the Anagyrasian; though Diondas interposed with an\nindictment.\n\n\nIX. HYPERIDES.\n\nHYPERIDES was son of Glaucippus, and grandson of Dionysius, of the\nborough of Colyttus. He had a son, who bare the same name with his\nfather Glaucippus, an orator, who wrote many orations, and begat a son\nnamed Alphinous. At the same time with Lycurgus, he had been a scholar\nof the philosopher Plato and of the orator Isocrates. In Athens his\nconcern in the commonwealth was at that time when Alexander accosted\nGreece, whom he vigorously opposed in his demands made of the Athenians\nfor the generals as well as for galleys. He advised the people not to\ndischarge the garrison of Taenarum, and this he did for the sake of a\nfriend of his, Chares, who was commander of it. At first he used to\nplead causes for a fee. He was suspected to have received part of\nthe money which Ephialtes brought out of Persia, and was chosen to\nmaintain a galley, and was sent to assist the Byzantines, when Philip\nwas besieging their city. Nevertheless, in the same year he took the\ncharge of defraying the expense of the solemn dances, whereas the rest\nof the captains were exempt from all such public burdens for that year.\nHe obtained a decree for some honors to be paid to Demosthenes; and\nwhen that decree was indicted at the instance of Diondas, as being\ncontrary to the laws, he, being called in question upon it, cleared\nhimself. He did not continue his friendship with Demosthenes, Lysicles,\nand Lycurgus to the last; for, Lysicles and Lycurgus being dead, and\nDemosthenes being accused of having received money of Harpalus, he,\namong all the rest, was pitched upon, as the only person who was not\ncorrupted with bribery, to draw up his indictment, which he accordingly\ndid. Being once accused at the instance of Aristogiton of publishing\nacts contrary to the laws after the battle of Chaeronea,\u2014that all\nforeign inhabitants of Athens should be accounted citizens, that\nslaves should be made free, that all sacred things, children, and\nwomen should be confined to the Piraeus,\u2014he cleared himself of all and\nwas acquitted. And being blamed by some, who wondered how he could\nbe ignorant of the many laws that were directly repugnant to those\ndecrees, he answered, that the arms of the Macedonians darkened his\nsight, and it was not he but the battle of Chaeronea that made that\ndecree. But Philip, being affrighted at somewhat, gave leave to carry\naway their dead out of the field, which before he had denied to the\nheralds from Lebadea.\n\nAfter this, at the overthrow at Crannon, being demanded by Antipater,\nand the people being resolved to deliver him up, he fled out of the\ncity with others who were under the same condemnation to Aegina;\nwhere meeting with Demosthenes, he excused himself for the breach\nof friendship between them. Going from thence, he was apprehended by\nArchias, surnamed Phygadotheres, by country a Thurian, formerly a\nplayer, but at that time in the service of Antipater; by this man, I\nsay, he was apprehended, even in the very temple of Neptune, though\nhe grasped the image of that God in his arms. He was brought before\nAntipater, who was then at Corinth; where being put upon the rack, he\nbit out his tongue, because he would not divulge the secrets of his\ncountry, and so died, on the ninth day of October. Hermippus tells us\nthat, as he went into Macedonia, his tongue was cut out and his body\ncast forth unburied; but Alphinous his cousin-german (or, according to\nthe opinion of others, his grandson, by his son Glaucippus) obtained\nleave, by means of one Philopithes a physician, to take up his body,\nwhich he burnt, and carried the ashes to Athens to his kinsfolk there,\ncontrary to the edicts both of the Athenians and Macedonians, which not\nonly banished them, but likewise forbade the burial of them anywhere\nin their own country. Others say, that he was carried to Cleonae with\nothers, and there died, having his tongue cut out, as above; however,\nhis relations and friends took his bones, when his body was burned, and\nburied them among his ancestors before the gate Hippades, as Heliodorus\ngives us the relation in his Third Book of Monuments. His monument is\nnow altogether unknown and lost, being thrown down with age and long\nstanding.\n\nHe is said to have excelled all others in his way of delivering himself\nin his orations to the people. And there are some who prefer him even\nto Demosthenes himself. There are seventy-seven orations which bear his\nname, of which only two and fifty are genuine and truly his. He was\nmuch given to venery, insomuch that he turned his son out of doors, to\nentertain that famous courtesan Myrrhina. In Piraeus he had another,\nwhose name was Aristagora; and at Eleusis, where part of his estate\nlay, he kept another, one Philte a Theban, whom he ransomed for twenty\nminas. His usual walk was in the fish-market. It is thought that he\nwas accused of impiety with one Phryne, a courtesan likewise, and so\nwas sought after to be apprehended, as he himself seems to intimate in\nthe beginning of an oration; and it is said, that when sentence was\njust ready to be passed upon her, he produced her in court, opened\nher clothes before, and discovered her naked breasts, which were so\nvery white, that for her beauty\u2019s sake the judges acquitted her. He\nat leisure times drew up several declamations against Demosthenes,\nwhich were thus discovered: Hyperides being sick, Demosthenes came\none day to visit him, and caught him with a book in his hand written\nagainst him; at which seeming somewhat displeased, Hyperides told him:\nThis book shall hurt no man that is my friend; but as a curb, it may\nserve to restrain my enemy from offering me any injury. He obtained a\ndecree of some honors to be paid to Iolas, who gave the poisoned cup\nto Alexander. He joined with Leosthenes in the Lamian war, and made an\nadmirable oration at the funerals of those who lost their lives therein.\n\nWhen Philip was prepared to embark for Euboea, and the Athenians heard\nthe news of it with no little consternation, Hyperides in a very short\ntime, by the voluntary contributions of the citizens, fitted out\nforty sail, and was the first that set an example, by sending out two\ngalleys, one for himself and another for his son, at his own charge.\n\nWhen there was a controversy between the Delians and the Athenians,\nwho should have the pre-eminence in the temple at Delos; Aeschines\nbeing chosen on the behalf of the Athenians for their advocate, the\nAreopagites refused to ratify the choice and elected Hyperides; and his\noration is yet extant, and bears the name of the Deliac oration.[26]\n\nHe likewise went ambassador to Rhodes; where meeting other ambassadors\nfrom Antipater, who commended their master very highly for his goodness\nand virtue. We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we have no\nneed of a good master at present.\n\nIt is said of him, that he never affected much action in his orations\nto the people, his chief aim being to lay down the matter plainly, and\nmake the case as obvious to the judges as he could.\n\nHe was sent likewise to the Eleans, to plead the cause of Callippus\nthe fencer, who was accused of carrying away the prize at the public\ngames unfairly; in which cause he got the better. But when he opposed\nthe sentence of paying honors to Phocion, obtained by Midias the son of\nMidias the Anagyrasian, he was in that cause overthrown. This cause was\npleaded on the twenty-fourth day of May, in the year when Xenius was\nmagistrate.\n\n\nX. DINARCHUS.\n\nDINARCHUS, the son of Socrates or Sostratus,\u2014born, as some think, at\nAthens, but according to others, at Corinth,\u2014came to Athens very young,\nand there took up his dwelling, at that time when Alexander made his\nexpedition into Asia. He used to hear Theophrastus, who succeeded\nAristotle in his school. He was frequently conversant with Demetrius\nthe Phalerian too. He betook himself more especially to the affairs of\nthe commonwealth after the death of Antipater, when some of the orators\nwere killed and others banished. Having contracted friendship with\nCassander, he became in a short time vastly rich, by exacting great\nrates for his orations of those for whom he wrote them. He opposed\nhimself to the greatest and most noble orators of his time, not by\nbeing overforward to declaim publicly,\u2014for his faculty did not lie that\nway,\u2014but by composing orations for their adversaries. And when Harpalus\nhad broken out of prison, he wrote several orations, which he gave to\ntheir accusers to pronounce against those that were suspected to have\ntaken bribes of him.\n\nSome time after, being accused of a conspiracy with Antipater and\nCassander about the matter of Munychia, when it was surprised by\nAntigonus and Demetrius, who put a garrison into it, in the year of\nAnaxicrates,[27] he turned the greatest part of his estate into money,\nand fled to Chalcis, where he lived in exile about fifteen years, and\nincreased his stock; but afterwards, by the mediation of Theophrastus,\nhe and some other banished persons returned to Athens. Then he took up\nhis abode in the house of one Proxenus, his intimate friend; where,\nbeing very aged and withal dim-sighted, he lost his gold. And because\nProxenus refused to make inquiry after the thief, he apprehended him;\nand this was the first time that ever he appeared in court. That\noration against Proxenus is extant; and there are sixty-four that bear\nhis name, whereof some are believed to be Aristogiton\u2019s. He imitated\nHyperides; or, as some incline to judge, rather Demosthenes, because\nof that vigor and force to move the affections, and the rhetorical\nornaments that are evident in his style.\n\n\nDECREES PROPOSED TO THE ATHENIANS.\n\nI.\n\nDEMOCHARES, the son of Laches of Leuconoe, requires that a statue\nof brass be set up for Demosthenes, the son of Demosthenes the\nPaeanian, in the market-place, as likewise that provision of diet\nbe made in the Prytaneum for himself and the eldest of his progeny\nsuccessively, and the chief seat in all public shows; for that he had\ndone many good offices for the Athenians, had on most occasions been\na good counsellor, and had spent his patrimony in the commonwealth;\nhad expended eight talents for the fitting out and maintenance of\none galley, when they delivered Euboea, another, when Cephisodorus\nsailed into the Hellespont, and a third, when Chares and Phocion were\ncommissioned by the people to go captains to Byzantium; that he at his\nown charge had redeemed many who had been taken prisoners by Philip at\nPydna, Methone, and Olynthus; that himself had maintained a choir of\nmen, when no provision had been made therefor through the neglect of\nthe tribe Pandionis; that he had furnished many indigent citizens with\narms; that being chosen by the people to oversee the city works, he\nhad laid out three talents of his own stock towards the repairing of\nthe walls, besides all that he gave for making two trenches about the\nPiraeus; that after the battle of Chaeronea he deposited one talent\nfor the use of the public, and after that, another to buy corn in time\nof scarcity and want; that by his beneficence, wholesome counsels and\neffectual persuasions, he allured the Thebans, Euboeans, Corinthians,\nMegarians, Achaeans, Locrians, Byzantines, and Messenians to a league\nwith the Athenians; that he raised an army of ten thousand foot and a\nthousand horse, and contracted plenty to the people and their allies;\nthat being ambassador, he had persuaded the allies to the contribution\nof above five hundred talents; that in the same quality, by his\ninfluence and the free gift of money, he obtained of the Peloponnesians\nthat they should not send aid to Alexander against the Thebans; and\nin consideration of many other good offices performed by him, either\nas to his counsels, or his personal administration of affairs in the\ncommonwealth, in which, and in defending the rights and liberties of\nthe people, no man in his time had done more or deserved better; and\nin regard of his sufferings when the commonwealth was ruined, being\nbanished by the insolence of the oligarchy, and at last dying at\nCalauria for his good-will to the public, there being soldiers sent\nfrom Antipater to apprehend him; and that notwithstanding his being in\nthe hands of his enemies, in so great and imminent danger, his hearty\naffection to his countrymen was still the same, insomuch that he never\nto the last offered any unworthy thing to the injury of his people.\n\n\nII.\n\nIN the magistracy of Pytharatus,[28] Laches, the son of Demochares of\nLeuconoe requires of the Athenian senate that a statue of brass be set\nup for Demochares, the son of Laches of Leuconoe, in the market-place,\nand table and diet in the Prytaneum for himself and the eldest of his\nprogeny successively, and the first seat at all public shows; for that\nhe had always been a benefactor and good counsellor to the people, and\nhad done these and the like good offices to the public: he had gone in\nembassies in his own person; had proposed and carried in bills relating\nto his embassage; had been chief manager of public matters; had\nrepaired the walls, prepared arms and machines; had fortified the city\nin the time of the four years\u2019 war, and composed a peace, truce, and\nalliance with the Boeotians; for which things he was banished by those\nwho overturned and usurped the government;\u2014and being called home again\nby a decree of the people, in the year of Diocles, he had contracted\nthe administration, sparing the public funds; and going in embassage\nto Lysimachus, he had at one time gained thirty, and at another time a\nhundred talents of silver, for the use of the public; he had moved the\npeople to send an embassage to Ptolemy, by which means the people got\nfifty talents; he went ambassador to Antipater, and by that got twenty\ntalents, and brought it to Eleusis to the people,\u2014all which measures\nhe persuaded the people to adopt while he himself carried them out;\nfurthermore, he was banished for his love for the commonwealth, and\nwould never take part with usurpers against the popular government;\nneither did he, after the overthrow of that government, bear any public\noffice in the state; he was the only man, of all that had to do in\nthe public administration of affairs in his time, who never promoted\nor consented to any other form of government but the popular; by his\nprudence and conduct, all the judgments and decrees, the laws, courts,\nand all things else belonging to the Athenians, were preserved safe\nand inviolate; and, in a word, he never said or did any thing to the\nprejudice of the popular government.\n\n\nIII.\n\nLYCOPHRON, the son of Lycurgus of Butadae, requires that he may have\ndiet in the Prytaneum, according to a donation of the people to\nLycurgus. In the year of Anaxicrates,[29] in the sixth prytany,\u2014which\nwas that of the tribe Antiochis,\u2014Stratocles, the son of Euthydemus\nof Diomea, proposed; that,\u2014since Lycurgus, the son of Lycophron of\nButadae, had (as it were) an ingenerated good-will in him towards the\npeople of Athens; and since his ancestors Diomedes and Lycurgus lived\nin honor and esteem of all people, and when they died were honored\nfor their virtue so far as to be buried at the public charge in the\nCeramicus; and since Lycurgus himself, while he had the management of\npublic affairs, was the author of many good and wholesome laws, and\nwas the city treasurer for twelve years together, during which time\nthere passed through his own hands eighteen thousand and nine hundred\ntalents, besides other great sums of money that he was entrusted with\nby private citizens for the public good, to the sum of six hundred and\nfifty talents; in all which concerns he behaved himself so justly,\nthat he was often crowned by the city for his fidelity; besides, being\nchosen by the people to that purpose, he brought much money into the\nCitadel, and provided ornaments, golden images of victory, and vessels\nof gold and silver for the Goddess Minerva, and gold ornaments for a\nhundred Canephoroe;[30] since, being commissary-general, he brought\ninto the stores a great number of arms and at least fifty thousand shot\nof darts, and set out four hundred galleys, some new built, and others\nonly repaired; since, finding many buildings half finished, as the\ndock-yards, the arsenal, and the theatre of Bacchus, he completed them;\nand finished the Panathenaic race, and the court for public exercises\nat the Lyceum, and adorned the city with many fair new buildings;\nsince, when Alexander, having conquered Asia, and assuming the empire\nof all Greece, demanded Lycurgus as the principal man that confronted\nand opposed him in his affairs, the people refused to deliver him up,\nnotwithstanding the terror inspired by Alexander; and since, being\noften called to account for his management of affairs in so free a\ncity, which was wholly governed by the people, he never was found\nfaulty or corrupt in any particular;\u2014that all people, therefore, may\nknow, not only that the people do highly esteem all such as act in\ndefence of their l\u00efberties and rights while they live, but likewise\nthat they pay them honors after death, in the name of Good Fortune it\nis decreed by the people, that such honors be paid to Lycurgus, the son\nof Lycophron of Butadae, for his justice and magnanimity, as that a\nstatue of brass be erected in memory of him in any part of the market\nwhich the laws do not prohibit; as likewise that there be provision for\ndiet in the Prytaneum for every eldest son of his progeny, successively\nfor ever. Also, that all his decrees be ratified, and engrossed by the\npublic notary, and engraven on pillars of stone, and set up in the\nCitadel just by the gifts consecrated to Minerva; and that the city\ntreasurer shall deposit fifty drachms for the engraving of them, out of\nthe money set apart for such uses.\n\n\n\n\nWHETHER AN AGED MAN OUGHT TO MEDDLE IN STATE AFFAIRS.\n\n\n1. WE are not ignorant, O Euphanes, that you, being an extoller of\nPindar, have often in your mouth this saying of his, as a thing well\nand to the purpose spoken by him:\n\n    When as the combat\u2019s once agreed,\n    Who by pretence seeks to be freed\n    Obscures his virtue quite.\n\nBut since sloth and effeminacy towards civil affairs, having many\npretences, do for the last, as if it were drawn from the sacred\nline, tender to us old age, and thinking by this chiefly to abate\nand cool our honorable desire, allege that there is a certain decent\ndissolution, not only of the athletical, but also of the political\nperiod, or that there is in the revolution of our years a certain set\nand limited time, after which it is no more proper for us to employ\nourselves in the conduct of the state than in the corporeal and robust\nexercises of youth; I esteem myself obliged to communicate also to\nyou those sentiments of mine concerning old men\u2019s intermeddling with\npublic matters, which I am ever and anon ruminating on by myself; so\nthat neither of us may desert that long course we have to this day\nheld together, nor rejecting the political life, which has been (as it\nwere) an intimate friend of our own years, change it for another to\nwhich we are absolute strangers, and with which we have not time to\nbecome acquainted and familiar, but that we may persist in what we had\nchosen and have been inured to from the beginning, putting the same\nconclusion to our life and our living honorably; unless we would, by\nthe short space of life we have remaining, disgrace that longer time\nwe have already lived, as having been spent idly and in nothing that\nis commendable. For tyranny is not an honorable sepulchre, as one told\nDionysius, whose monarchy, obtained by and administered with injustice,\ndid by its long continuance bring on him but a more perfect calamity;\nas Diogenes afterwards let his son know, when, seeing him at Corinth,\nof a tyrant become a private person, he said to him: \u201cHow unworthy of\nthyself, Dionysius, thou actest! For thou oughtest not to live here\nat liberty and fearless with us, but to spend thy life, as thy father\ndid, even to old age, immured within a tyrannical fortress.\u201d But the\npopular and legal government of a man accustomed to show himself no\nless profitable in obeying than in commanding is an honorable monument,\nwhich really adds to death the glory accruing from life. For this\nthing, as Simonides says, \u201cgoes last under the ground;\u201d unless it be\nin those in whom humanity and the love of honor die first, and whose\nzeal for goodness sooner decays than their covetousness after temporal\nnecessaries; as if the soul had its active and divine parts weaker than\nthose that are passive and corporeal; which it were neither honest to\nsay, nor yet to admit from those who affirm that only of gaining we are\nnever weary. But we ought to turn to a better purpose the saying of\nThucydides, and believe that it is not the desire of honor only that\nnever grows old,[31] but much more also the inclinations to society\nand affection to the state, which continue even in ants and bees to\nthe very last. For never did any one know a bee to become by age a\ndrone, as some think it requisite of statesmen, of whom they expect\nthat, when the vigor of their youth is past, they should retire and\nsit mouldy at home, suffering their active virtue to be consumed by\nidleness, as iron is by rust. For Cato excellently well said, that we\nought not willingly to add the shame proceeding from vice to those\nmany afflictions which old age has of its own. For of the many vices\neverywhere abounding, there is none which more disgraces an old man\nthan sloth, delicacy, and effeminateness, when, retiring from the court\nand council, he mews himself up at home like a woman, or getting into\nthe country oversees his reapers and gleaners; for of such a one we may\nsay,\n\n    Where\u2019s Oedipus, and all his famous riddles?\n\nBut as for him who should in his old age, and not before, begin to\nmeddle with public matters,\u2014as they say of Epimenides, that having\nfallen asleep while he was a young man, he awakened fifty years\nafter,\u2014and shaking off so long and so close-sticking a repose, should\nthrust himself, being unaccustomed and unexercised, into difficult and\nlaborious employs, without having been experienced in civil affairs,\nor inured to the conversations of men, such a man may perhaps give\noccasion to one that would reprehend him, to say with the prophetess\nPythia\n\n    Thou com\u2019st too late,\n\nseeking to govern in the state and rule the people, and at an unfit\nhour knocking at the palace gate, like an ill-bred guest coming late to\na banquet, or a stranger, thou wouldst change, not thy place or region,\nbut thy life for one of which thou hast made no trial. For that saying\nof Simonides,\n\n    The state instructs a man,\n\nis true in those who apply themselves to the business of the commonweal\nwhilst they have yet time to be taught, and to learn a science which\nis scarce attained with much labor through many strugglings and\nnegotiations, even when it timely meets with a nature that can easily\nundergo toil and difficulty. These things seem not to be impertinently\nspoken against him who in his old age begins to act in the management\nof the state.\n\n2. And yet, on the contrary, we see how young men and those of unripe\nyears are by persons of judgment diverted from meddling in public\nmatters; and the laws also testify the same, when by the crier in the\nassemblies they summon not first the men like Alcibiades and Pytheas to\ncome to the desk, but those who have passed the age of fifty years, to\nmake speeches and consult together for the good of the people. For the\nbeing unused to boldness and the want of experience are not so much to\nevery soldier....\n\n[Here is a defect in the original.]\n\nBut Cato, when above eighty years of age he was to plead his own cause,\nsaid, that it was a difficult thing for a man to make his apology and\njustify his life before others than those with whom he had lived and\nbeen conversant.\n\nAll men indeed confess, that the actions of Augustus Caesar, when\nhe had defeated Antony, were no less royal and useful to the public\ntowards the end of his life, than any he had done before. And himself\nseverely reprehending the dissoluteness of young men by establishing\ngood customs and laws, when they raised an uproar, he only said to\nthem: Young men, refuse not to hear an old man, to whom old men not\nunwillingly gave ear when he was young. The government also of Pericles\nexerted itself with most vigor in his old age, when he both persuaded\nthe Athenians to make war, and at another time, when they were eagerly\nbent unseasonably to go forth and fight sixty thousand armed men\nwithstood and hindered them, sealing up in a manner the arms of the\npeople and the keys of the gates. Now as for what Xenophon has written\nof Agesilaus, it is fit it should be set down in his own words. \u201cWhat\nyouth,\u201d says he, \u201cwas ever so gallant but that his old age surpassed\nit? Who was ever so terrible to his enemies in the very flower of his\nvirility, as Agesilaus in the declension of his days? At whose death\nwere adversaries ever seen more joyful than at that of Agesilaus,\nthough he departed not this life till he was stooping under the burden\nof his years? Who more emboldened his confederates than Agesilaus,\nthough being at the utmost period of his life? What young man was ever\nmissed more by his friends than Agesilaus, who died not till he was\nvery old?\u201d\n\n3. Age then hindered not these men from performing such gallant\nactions; and yet we, forsooth, being at our ease in states which have\nneither tyranny, war, nor siege to molest them, are afraid of such\nbloodless debates and emulations, as are for the most part terminated\nwith justice only by law and words; confessing ourselves by this not\nonly worse than those ancient generals and statesmen, but even than\npoets, sophisters, and players. Since Simonides in his old age gained\nthe victory by his choral songs, as the epigram testifies in these\nconcluding verses:\n\n    Fourscore years old was Leoprepes\u2019 son,\n    Simonides, when he this glory won.\n\nAnd it is said of Sophocles, that, to avoid being condemned of dotage\nat the instance of his children, he repeated the entrance song of the\nChorus in his tragedy of Oedipus in Colonus, which begins thus:\n\n      Welcome, stranger, come in time\n      To the best place of this clime,\n      White Colonus, which abounds\n      With brave horses. In these grounds,\n      Spread with Nature\u2019s choicest green,\n      Philomel is often seen.\n    Here she her hearers charms with sweetest lays,\n      Whilst with shrill throat\n      And warbling note\n    She moans the sad misfortunes of her former days:[32]\n\nand that, this song appearing admirable, he was dismissed from the\ncourt, as from the theatre, with the applause and acclamations of all\nthat were present. And this short verse is acknowledged to be written\nof him:\n\n    When Sophocles framed for Herodotus\n    This ode, his years were fifty-five.\n\nPhilemon also the comedian and Alexis were snatched away by death,\nwhilst they were acting on the stage and crowned with garlands. And as\nfor Polus the tragedian, Eratosthenes and Philochorus related of him\nthat, being seventy years of age, he a little before his death acted in\nfour days eight tragedies.\n\n4. Is it not then a shame, that those who have grown old in councils\nand courts of judicature should appear less generous than such as have\nspent their years on the stage, and forsaking those exercises which are\nreally sacred, cast off the person of the statesman, to put on instead\nof it I know not what other? For to descend from the state of a prince\nto that of a ploughman is all over base and mean. For since Demosthenes\nsays that the Paralus, being a sacred galley, was unworthily used in\nbeing employed to carry timber, pales, and cattle to Midias; would not\na man who should, after his having quitted the office of superintendent\nat the public solemnities, governor of Boeotia, or president in the\ncouncil of the Amphictyons, be seen measuring of corn, weighing of\nraisins, and bargaining about fleeces and wool-fells,\u2014would not such\na one, I say, wholly seem to have brought on himself, as the proverb\nhas it, the old age of a horse, without any one\u2019s necessitating him to\nit? For to set one\u2019s self to mechanical employments and trafficking,\nafter one has borne office in the state, is the same as if one\nshould strip a well-bred virtuous gentlewoman out of her matron-like\nattire, and thrust her with an apron tied about her into a public\nvictualling-house. For the dignity and greatness of political virtue\nis overthrown, when it is debased to such mean administrations and\ntraffics for gain. But if (which is the only thing remaining) they\nshall, by giving effeminacies and voluptuousness the name of living at\nquiet and enjoying one\u2019s self, exhort a statesman leisurely to waste\naway and grow old in them, I know not to which of the two shameful\npictures his life will seem to have the greater resemblance,\u2014whether to\nthe mariners who, leaving their ship for the future not in the harbor\nbut under sail, spend all their time in celebrating the feasts of\nVenus; or to Hercules, whom some painters merrily but yet ridiculously\nrepresent wearing in Omphale\u2019s palace a yellow petticoat, and giving\nhimself up to be boxed and combed by the Lydian damsels. So shall\nwe, stripping a statesman of his lion\u2019s-skin, and seating him at a\nluxurious table, there be always cloying his palate with delicacies,\nand filling his ears with effeminate songs and music; being not a whit\nput to the blush by the saying of Pompey the Great to Lucullus, who\nafter his public services both in camp and council, addicted himself\nto bathing, feasting, conversing with women in the day, and much other\ndissoluteness, even to the raising and extravagantly furnishing of\nsumptuous buildings, and who, once upbraiding Pompey with an ambition\nand desire of rule unsuitable to his age, was by him answered, that it\nwas more misbecoming an old man to live voluptuously than to govern?\nThe same Pompey, when in his sickness his physician had prescribed him\nthe eating of a thrush, which was then hard to be got, as being out of\nseason, being told that Lucullus bred great store of such birds, would\nnot send to him for one, but said: What! Cannot Pompey live, unless\nLucullus be luxurious?\n\n5. For though Nature seeks by all means to delight and rejoice\nherself, yet the bodies of old men are incapacitated for all pleasures,\nexcept a few that are absolutely necessary. For not only\n\n    Venus to old men is averse,[33]\n\nas Euripides has it; but their appetite also to their meat and drink is\nfor the most part dull, and as one would say, toothless; so that they\nhave but little gust and relish in them.\n\nThey ought therefore to furnish themselves with pleasures of the mind,\nnot ungenerous or illiberal, like those of Simonides, who said to those\nwho reproached him with covetousness, that being by his years deprived\nof other pleasures, he recreated his old age with the only delight\nwhich remained, that of heaping up riches. But political life has in\nit pleasures exceeding great, and no less honorable, being such as it\nis probable the very Gods do only or at least chiefly enjoy themselves\nin; and these are the delights which proceed from doing good and\nperforming what is honest and laudable. For if Nicias the painter took\nsuch pleasure in the work of his hands, that he often was fain to ask\nhis servants whether he had washed or dined; and if Archimedes was so\nintent upon the table in which he drew his geometrical figures, that\nhis attendants were obliged by force to pluck him from it and strip him\nof his clothes that they might anoint him, whilst he in the mean time\ndrew new schemes on his anointed body; and if Canus the piper, whom you\nalso know, was wont to say that men knew not how much more he delighted\nhimself with his playing than he did others, for that then his hearers\nwould rather demand of him than give him a reward; do we not thence\nconceive how great pleasures the virtues afford to those who practise\nthem, from their honest actions and public-spirited works tending to\nthe benefit of human society? They do not tickle or weaken, as do\nsuch sweet and gentle motions as are made on the flesh; for these\nindeed have a furious and unconstant itching, mixed with a feverish\ninflammation; whereas those which accompany the state is worker of, not\nlike the golden plumes of Euripides, but like those celestial wings of\nPlato, elevate the soul which has received a greatness of courage and\nwisdom accompanied with joy.\n\n6. Call to mind a little, I entreat you, those things you have so often\nheard. For Epaminondas indeed, being asked what was the most pleasant\nthing that ever befell him, answered, his having gained the victory at\nLeuctra whilst his father and mother were yet living. And Sylla, when,\nhaving freed Italy from civil wars, he came to Rome, could not the\nfirst night fetch the least wink of sleep, having his soul transported\nwith excessive joy and content, as with a strong and mighty wind; and\nthis he himself has written in his Commentaries. For be it indeed so,\nas Xenophon says, that there is no sound more pleasing than one\u2019s own\npraises; yet there is no sight, remembrance, or consideration which\ngives a man so much satisfaction as the contemplation of his own\nactions, performed by him in offices of magistracy, and management of\nthe state, in eminent and public places.\n\nIt is moreover true, that the courteous thanks attending as a witness\non such virtuous acts, and the emulous praise conferred on them, which\nis as a guide conducting us in the way of just benevolence, add a\ncertain lustre and shining gloss to the joy of virtue. Neither ought a\nman negligently to suffer his glory to wither in his old age, like a\nwrestler\u2019s garland; but, by adding always something new and fresh, he\nshould awaken, meliorate, and confirm the grace of his former actions.\nFor as those workmen on whom was incumbent the charge of keeping in\nrepair the Delian ship, by supplying and putting into the place of\nthe decayed planks and timber others that were new and sound, seem\nto have preserved it from ancient times, as if it were eternal and\nincorruptible; so the preserving and upholding of one\u2019s glory is as\nthe keeping in of a fire, a work of no difficulty, as requiring only\nto be supplied with a little fuel, but when either of them is wholly\nextinct and suppressed, one cannot without great labor rekindle it\nagain. Lampis, the sea commander, being asked how he got his wealth,\nanswered: \u201cMy greatest estate I gained easily enough, but the smaller\nslowly and with much labor.\u201d In like manner, it is not easy at the\nbeginning to acquire reputation and power in the state; but to augment\nand conserve it, when it is grown great, is not at all hard for those\nwho have obtained it. For neither does a friend, when he is once had,\nrequire many and great services that he may so continue, but assiduity\ndoes by small signs preserve his good-will; nor do the friendship\nand confidence of the people expect to have a man always bestowing\nlargesses, defending their causes, or executing of magistracy, but\nthey are maintained by a readiness, and by not failing or being\nweary of carefulness and solicitude for the public. For even wars\nthemselves have not always conflicts, fights, and sieges; but there\nsometimes intervene sacrifices and parleys, and abundance of leisure\nfor sports and pastimes. Whence then comes it, that the administration\nof the commonwealth should be feared as inconsolable, laborious, and\nunsupportable, where theatres, processions, largesses, music, joy, and\nat every turn the service and festival of some God or other, unbending\nthe brows of every council and senate, yield a manifold pleasure and\ndelight?\n\n7. As for envy, which is the greatest evil attending the management\nof public affairs, it least attacks old age. For dogs indeed, as\nHeraclitus has it, bark at a stranger whom they do not know; and\nenvy opposes him who is a beginner on the very steps of the tribune,\nhindering his access, but she meekly bears an accustomed and familiar\nglory, and not churlishly or difficultly. Wherefore some resemble envy\nto smoke; for it arises thick at first, when the fire begins to burn;\nbut when the flame grows clear, it vanishes away. Now men usually\nquarrel and contend about other excellences, as virtue, nobility,\nand honor, as if they were of opinion that they took from themselves\nas much as they give to others; but the precedency of time, which is\nproperly called by the Greeks \u03a0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd (or the honor of old age), is\nfree from jealousy, and willingly granted by men to their companions.\nFor to no honor is it so incident to grace the honorer more than the\nhonored, as to that which is given to persons in years. Moreover, all\nmen do not expect to gain themselves authority from wealth, eloquence,\nor wisdom; but as for the reverence and glory to which old age brings\nmen, there is not any one of those who act in the management of the\nstate but hopes to attain it.\n\nHe therefore who, having a long time contended against envy, shall when\nit ceases and is appeased withdraw himself from the state, and together\nwith public actions desert communities and societies, differs nothing\nfrom that pilot who, having kept his ship out at sea when in danger\nof being overwhelmed by contrary and tempestuous waves and winds,\nseeks to put into harbor as soon as ever the weather is grown calm and\nfavorable. For the longer time there has been, the more friends and\ncompanions he has made; all which he cannot carry out with him, as a\nsinging-master does his choir, nor is it just to leave them. But as\nit is not easy to root up old trees, so neither is it to extirpate a\nlong-continued practice in the management of the state, which having\nmany roots is involved in a tangled mass of affairs, which create more\ntroubles and vexations to those who retire from them than to those who\ncontinue in them. And if there is any remainder of envy and emulation\nagainst old men from former contentions about civil affairs, they\nshould rather extinguish it by authority, than turn their backs on it\nand go away naked and disarmed. For envious persons do not so much\nassail those who contend against them, as they do by contempt insult\nover such as retire.\n\n8. And to this bears witness that saying of the great Epaminondas to\nthe Thebans, when in the winter the Arcadians requested them to come\ninto their city and dwell in their houses,\u2014which he would not permit,\nbut said to them: Now the Arcadians admire you, seeing you exercise\nyourselves, and wrestle in your armor; but if they shall behold you\nsitting by the fire and pounding of beans, they will think you to\ndiffer nothing from themselves. So an old man speaking to the people,\nacting in the state, and honored, is a venerable spectacle; but he who\nwastes away his days in his bed, or sits discoursing of trivial matters\nand wiping his nose in the corner of a gallery, easily renders himself\nan object of contempt. And this indeed Homer himself teaches those\nwho hear him aright. For Nestor, who fought before Troy, was highly\nvenerated and esteemed; whilst Peleus and Laertes, who stayed at home,\nwere slighted and despised. For the habit of prudence does not continue\nthe same in those who give themselves to their ease; but by little and\nlittle diminishes and is dissolved by sloth, as always requiring some\nexercise of the thought to rouse up and purify the rational, active\nfaculty of the soul. For,\n\n    Like glittering brass, by being used it shines.[34]\n\nFor the infirmity of the body does not so much incommode the\nadministrations of those who, almost spent with age, go to the tribune\nor to the council of war, as they are advantageous by the caution\nand prudence which attend their years, and keep them from thrusting\nthemselves precipitately into affairs, abused partly by want of\nexperience and partly by vain-glory, and hurrying the people along with\nthem by violence, like a sea agitated by the winds; causing them mildly\nand moderately to manage those with whom they have to do.\n\nWhence cities, when they are in adversity and fear, desire the\ngovernment of grave and ancient personages; and often having drawn out\nof his field some old man who had not so much as the least thought of\nit, have compelled him, though unwilling, to put his hand to the helm,\nand conduct the ship of the state into the haven of security, rejecting\ngenerals and orators, who not only knew how to speak loud and make long\nharangues without drawing their breath, but were able also valiantly\nto march forth and fight their enemies. So when the orators one day\nat Athens, before Timotheus and Iphicrates uncovering Chares the son\nof Theochares, a vigorous and stout-bodied young man, said they were\nof opinion that the general of the Athenians ought to be such a one;\nNot so, by all the Gods, answered Timotheus, but such a one he should\nbe that is to carry the general\u2019s bedding; but the general himself\nought to be such a one as can at the same time see both forwards and\nbackwards, and will suffer not his reasonings about things convenient\nto be disturbed by any passion.\n\nSophocles indeed said, he was glad that he was got free from the\ntyranny of wanton love, as being a furious and raging master; but in\nthe administrations of state, we are not to avoid this one only master,\nthe love of women or boys, but many who are madder than he, such as\nobstinacy in contending ambition, and a desire of being always the\nfirst and greatest, which is a disease most fruitful in bringing forth\nenvy, jealousy, and conspiracies; some of which vices old age abates\nand dulls, while it wholly extinguishes and cools the others, not so\nmuch detracting from the practical impulse of the mind, as repressing\nits impetuous and over-hot passions, that it may apply a sober and\nsettled reasoning to its considerations about the management of affairs.\n\n9. Nevertheless let this speech of the poet,\n\n    Lie still at ease, poor wretch, in thy own bed,[35]\n\nboth be and seem to be spoken for the dissuading of him who shall, when\nhe is now grown gray with age, begin to play the youth; and for the\nrestraining an old man who, rising from a long administration of his\ndomestic affairs, as from a lingering disease, shall set himself to\nlead an army to the field, or perform the office of secretary of state.\n\nBut altogether senseless, and nothing like to this, is he who will not\nsuffer one that has spent his whole time in political administrations,\nand been thoroughly beaten to them, to go on to his funeral torch and\nthe conclusion of his life, but shall call him back, and command him\n(as it were) to turn out of the long road he has been travelling in. He\nwho, to draw off from his design an old fellow who is crowned and is\nperfuming himself to go a wooing, should say to him, as was heretofore\nsaid to Philoctetes,\n\n    What virgin will her blooming maidenhead\n    Bestow on such a wretch? Why would\u2019st thou wed?\n\nwould not be at all absurd, since even old men break many such jests\nupon themselves, and say,\n\n    I, old fool, know, I for my neighbors wed;\n\nbut he who should think, that a man which has long co-habited and\nlived irreprehensibly with his wife ought, because he is grown old,\nto dismiss her and live alone, or take a concubine in her place,\nwould have attained the utmost excess of perverseness. So he would\nnot act altogether unreasonably, that should admonish an old man\nwho is making his first approaches to the people, whether he be\nsuch a one as Chlidon the farmer, or Lampon the mariner, or some old\ndreaming philosopher of the garden, and advise him to continue in\nhis accustomed unconcernedness for the public; but he who, taking\nhold of Phocion, Cato, or Pericles, should say to him, My Athenian or\nRoman friend, who art come to thy withered old age, make a divorce,\nand henceforth quit the state; and dismissing all conversations and\ncares about either council or camp, retire into the country, there\nwith an old maid-servant looking after thy husbandry, or spending the\nremainder of thy time in managing thy domestic affairs and taking thy\naccounts,\u2014would persuade a statesman to do things misbeseeming him and\nunacceptable.\n\n10. What then! may some one say; do we not hear the soldier in the\ncomedy affirming,\n\n    Henceforth my gray hairs exempt me from wars?\n\nYes indeed, my friend, it is altogether so; for it becomes the servants\nof Mars to be young and vigorous, as managing\n\n    War, and war\u2019s toilsome works;[36]\n\nin which, though an helmet may also hide the old man\u2019s gray hairs,\n\n    Yet inwardly his limbs are all decayed,[37]\n\nand his strength falls short of his good-will. But from the ministers\nof Jupiter, the counsellor, orator, and patron of cities, we expect\nnot the works of feet and hands, but those of counsel, providence, and\nreason,\u2014not such as raises a noise and shouting amongst the people, but\nsuch as has it in understanding, prudent solicitousness, and safety;\nby which the derided hoariness and wrinkles appear as witnesses of his\nexperience, and add to him the help of persuasion, and the glory of\ningenuity. For youth is made to follow and be persuaded, age to guide\nand direct; and that city is most secure, where the counsels of the old\nand the prowess of the young bear sway. And this of Homer,[38]\n\n    A council first of valiant old men\n    He called in Nestor\u2019s ship,\n\nis wonderfully commended. Wherefore the Pythian Apollo called the\naristocracy or council of noblemen in Lacedaemon, joined as assistants\nto their kings, \u03a0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03c5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 (or the _ancients_), and Lycurgus named\nit plainly \u0393\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 (or the _council of old men_); and even to this\nday the council of the Romans is called the senate (from _senium_,\nsignifying _old age_). And as the law places the diadem and crown, so\ndoes Nature the hoariness of the head, as an honorable sign of princely\ndignity. And I am of opinion, that \u03b3\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 (signifying _an honorable\nreward_) and \u03b3\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd (signifying _to honor_) continue still in use\namongst the Greeks, being made venerable from the respect paid to old\nmen, not because they wash in warm water and sleep on softer beds than\nothers, but because they have as it were a king-like esteem in states\nfor their prudence, from which, as from a late-bearing tree, Nature\nscarcely in old age brings forth its proper and perfect good. Therefore\nnone of those martial and magnanimous Achaeans blamed that king of\nkings, Agamemnon, for praying thus to the Gods,\n\n    O that among the Greeks I had but ten\n    Such counsellors as Nestor;[39]\n\nbut they all granted, that not in policy only, but in war also, old age\nhas great influence;\n\n    For one discreet advice is much more worth\n    Than many hands,[40]\n\nand one rational and persuasive sentence effects the bravest and\ngreatest of public exploits.\n\n11. Moreover, the regal dignity, which is the perfectest and greatest\nof all political governments, has exceeding many cares, labors, and\ndifficulties; insomuch that Seleucus is reported ever and anon to\nhave said: If men knew how laborious are only the writing and reading\nof so many epistles, they would not so much as stoop to take up a\ndiadem thrown on the ground. And Philip, when, being about to pitch\nhis camp in a fair and commodious place, he was told that there was\nnot there forage for his regiments, cried out: O Hercules, what a life\nis ours, if we must live for the conveniency of asses! It is then time\nto persuade a king, when he is now grown into years, to lay aside his\ndiadem and purple, and putting on a coarse coat, with a crook in his\nhand, to betake himself to a country life, lest he should seem to act\nsuperfluously and unseasonably by reigning in his old age. But if the\nvery mentioning such a thing to an Agesilaus, a Numa, or a Darius would\nbe an indignity; let us not, because they are in years, either drive\naway Solon from the council of the Areopagus, or remove Cato out of the\nsenate; nor yet let us advise Pericles to abandon the democracy. For it\nis besides altogether unreasonable and absurd, that he who has in his\nyouth leaped into the tribunal should, after he has discharged all his\nfurious ambitions and impetuous passions on the public, when he is come\nto that maturity of years which by experience brings prudence, desert\nand abandon the commonwealth, having abused it as if it were a woman.\n\n12. Aesop\u2019s fox indeed would not permit the hedge-hog, who offered it,\nto take from him the ticks that fed upon his body. For, said he, if\nthou remov\u2019st those that are full, other hungry ones will succeed them.\nSo it is of necessity, that a commonwealth which is always casting\noff those who grow old must be replenished with young men, thirsting\nafter glory and power, and void of understanding in state affairs. For\nwhence, I pray, should they have it, if they shall have been neither\ndisciples nor spectators of any ancient statesman? For if treatises of\nnavigation cannot make those skilful pilots who have not often in the\nstern been spectators of the conflicts against the waves, winds, and\npitchy darkness of the night,\n\n    When the poor trembling seaman longs to see\n    The safety-boding twins, Tyndaridae;\n\nhow should a raw young man take in hand the government of a city, and\nrightly advise both the senate and the people, having only read a book\nor written an exercise in the Lyceum concerning policy, though he\nhas seldom or never stood by the reins or helm, when grave statesmen\nand old commanders have in debating alleged both their experiences\nand fortunes, whilst he was wavering on both sides, that so he might\nwith dangers and transacting of affairs gain instruction? This is not\nto be said. But if it were for nothing else, yet ought an old man to\nmanage in public affairs, that he may instruct and teach those who\nare young. For as those who teach children reading and music do, by\npronouncing and by singing notes and tunes before them, lead and bring\non their scholars; so an old statesman, not by speaking and dictating\nexteriorly, but by acting and administering public affairs, directs\nand breeds up a young one, who is by his deeds joined with his words\ninteriorly formed and fashioned. For he who is exercised after this\nmanner, not amongst the disputes of nimble tongued sophisters, as in\nthe wrestling-schools and anointings, where there is not the least\nappearance of any danger, but really, and as it were in the Olympian\nand Pythian games, will tread in his teacher\u2019s steps,\n\n    Like a young colt, which runs by th\u2019 horse\u2019s side,\u2014\n\nas Simonides has it. Thus Aristides followed Clisthenes, Cimon\nAristides, Phocion Chabrias, Cato Fabius Maximus, Pompey Sylla,\nand Polybius Philopoemen; for these, when they were young, joining\nthemselves with their elders, and afterwards as it were flourishing and\ngrowing up by their administrations and actions, gained experience, and\nwere inured to the management of public affairs with reputation and\npower.\n\n13. Aeschines therefore the Academic, being charged by certain\nsophisters that he pretended himself a disciple of Carneades when he\nwas not so, said: I was then a hearer of Carneades, when his discourse,\nhaving dismissed contention and noise by reason of his old age,\ncontracted itself to what was useful and fit to be communicated. Now an\naged man\u2019s government being not only in words but in deeds far remote\nfrom all ostentation and vain-glory,\u2014as they say of the bird ibis, that\nwhen she is grown old, having exhaled all her venomous and stinking\nsavor, she sends forth a most sweet and aromatical one,\u2014so in men grown\ninto years, there is no opinion or counsel disturbed, but all grave and\nsettled. Wherefore, even for the young men\u2019s sake, as has been said,\nought an old man to act in the government of the state; that, (as Plato\nsaid of wine allayed with water, that the furious God was made wise,\nbeing chastised by another who was sober) so the caution of old age,\nmixed among the people with the fervency of youth, transported by glory\nand ambition, may take off that which is furious and over-violent.\n\n14. But besides all this, they are under a mistake who think that, as\nsailing and going to the wars, so also acting in the state is done for\na certain end, and ceases when that is obtained. For the managing of\nstate affairs is not a ministry which has profit for its end; but the\nlife of gentle, civil, and sociable animals, framed by nature to live\ncivilly, honestly, and for the benefit of mankind. Wherefore it is fit\nhe should be such a one as that it may be said of him, he is employed\nin state affairs, and not he has been so employed; as also, that he is\ntrue, and not he has been true; he acts justly, and not he has acted\njustly; and that he loves his country and fellow-citizens, and not\nhe has loved them. For to these things does Nature direct, and these\nvoices does she sound to those who are not totally corrupted with sloth\nand effeminacy:\n\n    Thy father has engendered thee a man,\n    Worthy of much esteem with men:\n\nand again,\n\n    Let us not cease to benefit mankind.\n\n15. Now as for those who pretend weakness and impotency, they accuse\nrather sickness and infirmity of body than old age; for there are many\nyoung men sickly, and many old ones lusty; so that we are not to remove\nfrom the administration of the state aged, but impotent persons; nor\ncall to it such as are young, but such as are able. For Aridaeus was\nyoung, and Antigonus old; and yet the latter conquered in a manner\nall Asia, whereas the former, as if he had only been to make a dumb\nshow with his guards upon a stage, was but the bare name of a king, a\npuppet always mocked by those who were in power. As therefore he would\nbe a very fool that should think Prodicus the sophister and Philetas\nthe poet\u2014men indeed young, but withal weak, sickly, and almost always\nconfined by their infirmity to their beds\u2014fit to be concerned in the\nmanagement of the state; so he would be no less absurd that should\nhinder such vigorous old men as were Phocion, Masinissa the Libyan, and\nCato the Roman, from governing or leading forth of armies. For Phocion,\nwhen the Athenians were at an unseasonable time hurrying to war, made\nproclamation that all who were not above sixty years of age should take\nup arms and follow him; and when they were offended at it, he said,\nThere is no hardship put upon you, for I, who am above fourscore years\nold, will be your general. And Polybius relates, that Masinissa, dying\nat the age of ninety years, left behind him a young son of his own\nbegetting, not above four years old; and that, having a little before\nbeen in a great fight, he was the next day seen at the door of his tent\neating a dirty piece of bread, and that he said to those who wondered\nat it, that he did this....\n\n    For brass by use and wear its gleam displays,\n    But every house untenanted decays;[41]\n\nas Sophocles has it; we all say the same of that light and lustre of\nthe soul, by which we reason, remember, and think.\n\n16. Wherefore also they say, that kings become better in wars and\nmilitary expeditions than when they live at ease. Attalus therefore,\nthe brother of Eumenes, being enervated with long idleness and peace,\nwas with little skill managed by Philopoemen, one of his favorites,\nwho fattened him like a hog in the sty; so that the Romans were wont\nin derision to ask those who came out of Asia, whether the king had\nany power with Philopoemen. Now one cannot find amongst the Romans\nmany stouter generals than Lucullus, as long as he applied his mind\nto action; but when he gave himself up to an unactive life, to a\ncontinuing lazily at home, and an unconcernedness for the public,\nbeing dulled and mortified, like sponges in calm weather, and then\ndelivering his old age to be dieted and ordered by Callisthenes one\nof his freedmen, he seemed bewitched by him with philters and other\nincantations; till such time as his brother Marcus, having driven away\nthis fellow, did himself govern and conduct the remainder of his life,\nwhich was not very long. But Darius, father of Xerxes, said, that\nby difficulties he grew wiser than himself. And the Scythian Ateas\naffirmed, that he thought there was no difference between himself and\nhis horse-keepers, when he was idle. And Dionysius the Elder, when\none asked him whether he was at leisure, answered, May that never\nbefall me. For a bow, they say, will break, if over-bent; and a soul,\nif too much slackened. For even musicians, if they over-long omit to\nhear accords, geometricians, if they leave off demonstrating their\npropositions, and arithmeticians, if they discontinue their casting up\nof accounts, do, together with the actions, impair by their progress\nin age the habits, though they are not practical but speculative arts;\nbut the habit of statesmen\u2014being wise counsel, discretion, and justice,\nand besides these, experience which seizes upon the right opportunities\nand words, the very faculty which works persuasion\u2014is maintained by\nfrequent speaking, acting, reasoning, and judging. And a hard thing it\nwould be, if by avoiding to do these things it should suffer such and\nso great virtues to run out of the soul. For it is probable also that\nhumanity, friendly society, and beneficence will then also decay, of\nwhich there ought to be no end or limit.\n\n17. If then you had Tithonus to your father, who was indeed immortal,\nbut yet by reason of his old age stood perpetually in need of much\nattendance, I do think you would shun or be weary of looking to him,\ndiscoursing with him, and helping him, as having a long time done\nhim service. Now our fatherland (or, as the Cretans call it, our\n_motherland_), being older and having greater rights than our parents,\nis indeed long lasting, yet neither free from the inconveniences of\nold age nor self-sufficient; but standing always in need of a serious\nregard, succor, and vigilance, she pulls to her and takes hold of a\nstatesman,\n\n    And with strong hand restrains him, who would go.[42]\n\nAnd you indeed know that I have these many Pythiads served the Pythian\nApollo; but yet you would not say to me: Thou hast sufficiently, O\nPlutarch, sacrificed, gone in procession, and led dances in honor of\nthe Gods; it is now time that, being in years, thou shouldst in favor\nof thy old age lay aside the garland and leave the oracle. Therefore\nneither do you think that you, who are the chief priest and interpreter\nof religious ceremonies in the state, may leave the service of Jupiter,\nthe protector of cities and governor of assemblies, for the performance\nof which you were long since consecrated.\n\n18. But leaving, if you please, this discourse about withdrawing old\nmen from performing their duties to the state, let us make it a little\nthe subject of our consideration and philosophy, how we may enjoin them\nno exercise unfitting or grievous to their years, the administration\nof a commonwealth having many parts beseeming and suitable for such\npersons. For as, if we were obliged to persevere in the practice of\nsinging to the end of our days, it would behoove us, being now grown\nold, of the many tones and tensions there are of the voice, which the\nmusicians call harmonies, not to aim at the highest and shrillest,\nbut to make choice of that in which there is an easiness joined with\na decent suitableness; so, since it is more natural for men to act\nand speak even to the end of their lives, than for swans to sing, we\nmust not reject action, like a harp that is set too high, but rather\nlet it a little down, accommodating it to such employs in the state as\nare easy, moderate, and fitting for men in years. For neither do we\nsuffer our bodies to be altogether motionless and unexercised because\nwe cannot any longer make use of spades and plummets, nor yet throw\nquoits or skirmish in armor, as we have formerly done; but some of\nus do by swinging and walking, others by playing gently at ball, and\nsome again by discoursing, stir up our spirits and revive our natural\nheat. Therefore neither let us permit ourselves to be wholly chilled\nand frozen by idleness, nor yet on the contrary let us, by burthening\nourselves with every office or intermeddling with every public\nbusiness, force on old age, convinced of its disability, to break forth\ninto these exclamations:\n\n    The spear to brandish, thou, right hand, art bent;\n    But weak old age opposes thy intent.\n\nSince even that man is not commended who, in the vigor and strength\nof his years, imposing all public affairs in general on himself,\nand unwilling to leave any thing for another (as the Stoics say of\nJupiter), thrusts himself into all employs, and intermeddles in every\nbusiness, through an insatiable desire of glory, or through envy\nagainst those who are in some measure partakers of honor and authority\nin the state. But to an old man, though you should free him from the\ninfamy, yet painful and miserable would be an ambition always laying\nwait at every election of magistrates, a curiosity attending for every\nopportunity of judicature or assembling in counsel, and a humor of\nvain-glory catching at every embassy and patronage. For the doing of\nthese things, even with the favor and good liking of every one, is too\nheavy for that age. And yet the contrary to this happens; for they are\nhated by the young men, as leaving them no occasions of action, nor\nsuffering them to put themselves forth; and their ambitious desire of\nprimacy and rule is no less odious to others than the covetousness and\nvoluptuousness of other old men.\n\n19. Therefore, as Alexander, unwilling to tire his Bucephalus when he\nnow began to grow old, did before the fight ride on other horses, to\nview his army and draw it up for battle, and then, after the signal\nwas given, mounting this, marched forth and charged the enemy; so\na statesman, if he is wise, moderating himself when he finds years\ncoming on, will abstain from intermeddling in unnecessary affairs, and\nsuffering the state to make use of younger persons in smaller matters,\nwill readily exercise himself in such as are of great importance.\nFor champions indeed keep their bodies untouched and unemployed in\nnecessary matters, that they may be in a readiness for unprofitable\nengagements; but let us on the contrary, letting pass what is little\nand frivolous, carefully preserve ourselves for worthy and gallant\nactions. For all things perhaps, as Homer says, equally become a young\nman;[43] all men now esteem and love him; so that for undertaking\nfrequently little and many businesses, they say he is laborious and\na good commonwealths-man; and for enterprising none but splendid and\nnoble actions, they style him generous and magnanimous; nay, there\nare also some occurrences when even contention and rashness have a\ncertain seasonableness and grace, becoming such men. But an old man\u2019s\nundertaking in a state such servile employs as the farming out of the\ncustoms, and the looking after the havens and market-place, or else\nhis running on embassies and journeys to princes and potentates when\nthere are no necessary or honorable affairs to be treated of, but only\ncompliments and a maintaining of correspondence,\u2014such management, dear\nfriend, seems to me a thing miserable and not to be imitated, but to\nothers, perhaps, odious and intolerable.\n\n20. For it is not even seasonable for such men to be employed in\nmagistracies, unless it be such as bear somewhat of grandeur and\ndignity; such is the presidency in the council of Areopagus, which\nyou now exercise, and such also, by Jove, is the excellency of the\nAmphictyonic office, which your country has conferred on you for your\nlife, having an easy labor and pleasant pains. And yet old men ought\nnot ambitiously to affect even these honors, but accept them with\nrefusal, not seeking but being sought; nor as taking government on\nthemselves, but bestowing themselves on government. For it is not,\nas Tiberius Caesar said, a shame for those that are above threescore\nyears old to reach forth their hands to the physician; but it far more\nmisbeseems them to hold up their hands to the people, to beg their\nvotes or suffrages for the obtaining offices; for this is ungenerous\nand mean, whereas the contrary has a certain majesty and comeliness,\nwhen, his country choosing, inviting, and expecting him, he comes down\nwith honor and courtesy to welcome and receive the present, truly\nbefitting his old age and acceptance.\n\n21. After the same manner also ought he that is grown old to use his\nspeech in assemblies, not ever and anon climbing up to the desk to\nmake harangues, nor always, like a cock, crowing against those that\nspeak, nor letting go the reins of the young men\u2019s respect to him by\ncontending against them and provoking them, nor breeding in them a\ndesire and custom of disobedience and unwillingness to hear him; but he\nshould sometimes pass them by, and let them strut and brave it against\nhis opinion, neither being present nor concerning himself much at\nit, as long as there is no great danger to the public safety nor any\noffence against what is honest and decent. But in such cases, on the\ncontrary, he ought, though nobody call him, to run beyond his strength,\nor to deliver himself to be led or carried in a chair, as historians\nreport of Appius Claudius in Rome. For he having understood that the\nsenate, after their army had been in a great fight worsted by Pyrrhus,\nwere debating about receiving proposals of peace and alliance, could\nnot bear it, but, although he had lost both his eyes, caused himself to\nbe carried through the common place straight to the senate house, where\nentering among them and standing in the midst, he said, that he had\nformerly indeed been troubled at his being deprived of his sight, but\nthat he now wished he had also lost his ears, rather than to have heard\nthat the Roman senators were consulting and acting things so ungenerous\nand dishonorable. And then partly reprehending, and partly teaching\nand exalting them, he persuaded them to betake themselves presently\nto their arms, and fight with Pyrrhus for the dominion of Italy. And\nSolon, when the popularity of Pisistratus was discovered to be only a\nplot for the obtaining of a tyranny, none daring to oppose or impeach\nit, did himself bring forth his arms, and setting them before the\ndoors of his house, called out to the people to assist him; and when\nPisistratus sent to ask him what gave him the confidence to act in that\nmanner, \u201cMy old age,\u201d answered he.\n\n22. For matters that are so necessary as these inflame and rouse up\nold men who are in a manner extinct, so that they have but any breath\nyet left them; but in other occurrences, an old man, as has been said,\nshould be careful to avoid mean and servile offices, and such in which\nthe trouble to those who manage them exceeds the advantage and profit\nfor which they are done. Sometimes by expecting also till the citizens\ncall and desire and fetch him out of house, he is thought more worthy\nof credit by those who request him. And even when he is present, let\nhim for the most part silently permit the younger men to speak, as if\nhe were an arbitrator, judging to whom the reward and honor of this\ntheir debate about public matters ought to be given; but if any thing\nshould exceed a due mediocrity, let him mildly reprehend it, and with\nsweetness cut off all obstinate contentions, all injurious and choleric\nexpressions, directing and teaching without reproof him that errs in\nhis opinions, boldly praising him that is in the right, and often\nwillingly suffering himself to be overcome, persuaded, and brought to\ntheir side, that he may hearten and encourage them; and sometimes with\ncommendations supplying what has been omitted, not unlike to Nestor,\nwhom Homer makes to speak in this manner:\n\n    There is no Greek can contradict or mend\n    What you have said; yet to no perfect end\n    Is your speech brought. No wonder, for\u2019t appears.\n    You\u2019re young, and may my son be for your years.[44]\n\n23. And it were yet more civil and politic, not only in reprehending\nthem openly and in the face of the people, to forbear that sharpness\nof speech which exceedingly dashes a young man and puts him out of\ncountenance, but rather, wholly abstaining from all such public\nreproofs, privately to instruct such as have a good genius for\nthe managing of state affairs, drawing them on by setting gently\nbefore them useful counsels and political precepts, inciting them to\ncommendable actions, enlightening their understanding, and showing\nthem, as those do who teach to ride, how at their beginning to render\nthe people tractable and mild, and if any young man chances to fall,\nnot to suffer him to lie gasping and panting on the ground, but to help\nhim up and comfort him, as Aristides dealt by Cimon, and Mnesiphilus by\nThemistocles; whom they raised up and encouraged, though at first they\nwere harshly received and ill spoken of in the city, as audacious and\nintemperate. It is said also, that Demosthenes being rejected by the\npeople and taking it to heart, there came to him a certain old man, who\nhad in former years been an hearer of Pericles, and told him, that he\nnaturally resembled that great man, and did unjustly cast down himself.\nIn like manner Euripides exhorted Timotheus, when he was hissed at for\nintroducing of novelty, and thought to transgress against the law of\nmusic, to be of good courage, for that he should in a short time have\nall the theatres subject to him.\n\n24. In brief, as in Rome the Vestal virgins have their time divided\ninto three parts, in one of which they are to learn what belong to the\nceremonies of their religion, in the second to execute what they have\nlearned, and in the third to teach the younger; and as in like manner\nthey call every one of those who are consecrated to the service of\nDiana in Ephesus, first Mell-hiere (one that is to be a priestess),\nthen Hiere (priestess), and thirdly Par-hiere (or one that has been\na priestess), so he that is a perfect statesman is at first a learner\nin the management of public affairs, then a practitioner, and at last\na teacher and instructor in the mysteries of government. For indeed he\nwho is to oversee others that are performing their exercise or fighting\nfor prizes cannot judge at the same exercise and fight himself. Thus\nhe who instructs a young man in public affairs and negotiations of the\nstate, and prepares him\n\n    Both to speak well and act heroicly[45]\n\nfor the service of his country, is in no small or mean degree useful to\nthe commonwealth, but in that at which Lycurgus chiefly and principally\naimed himself, when he accustomed young men to persist in obedience to\nevery one that was elder, as if he were a lawgiver. For to what, think\nyou, had Lysander respect, when he said that in Lacedaemon men most\nhonorably grew old? Was it because old men could most honorably grow\nold there enjoying idleness, putting out money to use, sitting together\nat tables, and after their game taking a cheerful cup? You will not,\nI believe, say any such thing. But it was because all such men, being\nafter some sort in the place of magistrates, fatherly governors, or\ntutors of youth, inspected not only the public affairs, but also made\ninquiry\u2014and that not slightly\u2014into every action of the younger men,\nboth as concerning their exercises, recreations, and diet, being\nterrible indeed to offenders, but venerable and desirable to the good.\nFor young men indeed always venerate and follow those who increase and\ncherish the neatness and generosity of their disposition without any\nenvy.\n\n25. For this vice, though beseeming no age, is nevertheless in young\nmen veiled with specious names, being styled emulation, zeal, and\ndesire of honor; but in old men, it is altogether unseasonable, savage,\nand unmanly. Therefore a statesman that is in years must be very\nfar from being envious, and not act like those old trees and stocks\nwhich, as with a certain charm, manifestly withdraw the nutritive juice\nfrom such young plants as grow near them or spring up under them, and\nhinder their growth; but he should kindly admit and even offer himself\nto those that apply themselves to him and seek to converse with him,\ndirecting, leading, and educating them, not only by good instructions\nand counsels, but also by affording them the means of administering\nsuch public affairs as may bring them honor and repute, and executing\nsuch unprejudicial commissions as will be pleasing and acceptable to\nthe multitude. But for such things as, being untoward and difficult,\ndo like medicines at first gripe and molest, but afterwards yield\nhonor and profit,\u2014upon these things he ought not to put young men, nor\nexpose those who are inexperienced to the mutinous clamors of the rude\nand ill-natured multitude, but he should rather take the odium upon\nhimself for such things as (though harsh and unpleasing) may yet prove\nbeneficial to the commonwealth; for this will render the young men both\nmore affectionate to him, and more cheerful in the undertaking other\nservices.\n\n26. But besides all this, we are to keep in mind, that to be a\nstatesman is not only to bear offices, go on embassies, talk loud in\npublic meetings, and thunder on the tribune, speaking and writing such\nthings in which the vulgar think the art of government to consist; as\nthey also think that those only philosophize who dispute from a chair\nand spend their leisure time in books, while the policy and philosophy\nwhich is continually exercised in works and conspicuous in actions is\nnowise known to them. For they say, as Dicaearchus affirmed, that they\nwho fetch turns to and fro in galleries walk, but not they who go into\nthe country or to visit a friend. But the being a statesman is like\nthe being a philosopher. Wherefore Socrates did philosophize, not only\nwhen he neither placed benches nor seated himself in his chair, nor\nkept the hour of conference and walking appointed for his disciples,\nbut also when, as it happened, he played, drank, went to war with some,\nbargained, finally, even when he was imprisoned and drank the poison;\nhaving first shown that man\u2019s life does at all times, in every part,\nand universally in all passions and actions, admit of philosophy. The\nsame also we are to understand of civil government, to wit, that fools\ndo not administer the state, even when they lead forth armies, write\ndispatches and edicts, or make speeches to the people; but that they\neither endeavor to insinuate themselves into the favor of the vulgar\nand become popular, seek applause by their harangues, raise seditions\nand disturbances, or at the best perform some service, as compelled by\nnecessity. But he that seeks the public good, loves his country and\nfellow-citizens, has a serious regard to the welfare of the state, and\nis a true commonwealths-man, such a one, though he never puts on the\nmilitary garment or senatorial robe, is yet always employed in the\nadministration of the state, by inciting to action those who are able,\nguiding and instructing those that want it, assisting and advising\nthose that ask counsel, deterring and reclaiming those that are\nill-given, and confirming and encouraging those that are well-minded;\nso that it is manifest, he does not for fashion\u2019s sake apply himself to\nthe public affairs, nor go then to the theatre or council when there is\nany haste or when he is sent for by name, that he may have the first\nplace there, being otherwise present only for his recreation, as when\nhe goes to some show or a concert of music; but on the contrary, though\nabsent in body, yet is he present in mind, and being informed of what\nis done, approves some things and disapproves others.\n\n27. For neither did Aristides amongst the Athenians, nor Cato amongst\nthe Romans often execute the office of magistrate; and yet both the one\nand the other employed their whole lives perpetually in the service of\ntheir country. And Epaminondas indeed, being general, performed many\nand great actions; but yet there is related an exploit of his, not\ninferior to any of them, performed about Thessaly when he had neither\ncommand in the army nor office in the state. For, when the commanders,\nhaving through inadvertency drawn a squadron into a difficult and\ndisadvantageous ground, were in amaze, for that the enemies pressed\nhard upon them, galling them with their arrows, he, being called up\nfrom amongst the heavy-armed foot, first by his encouraging them\ndissipated the trouble and fright of the army, and then, having ranged\nand brought into order that squadron whose ranks had been broken, he\neasily disengaged them out of those straits, and placed them in front\nagainst their enemies, who, thereupon changing their resolutions,\nmarched off. Also when Agis, king of Sparta, was leading on his army,\nalready put in good order for fight, against the enemies, a certain old\nSpartan called out aloud to him, and said, that he thought to cure one\nevil by another; meaning that he was desirous the present unseasonable\npromptness to fight should salve the disgrace of their over-hasty\ndeparture from before Argos, as Thucydides says. Now Agis, hearing\nhim, took his advice, and at that present retreated; but afterwards\ngot the victory. And there was every day a chair set for him before\nthe doors of the government house, and the Ephori, often rising from\ntheir consistory and going to him, asked his advice and consulted him\nabout the greatest and most important affairs; for he was esteemed\nvery prudent, and is recorded to have been a man of great sense. And\ntherefore, having now wholly exhausted the strength of his body, and\nbeing for the most part tied to his bed, when the Ephori sent for him\nto the common hall of the city, he strove to get up and go to them;\nbut walking heavily and with great difficulty, and meeting by the way\ncertain boys, he asked them whether they knew any thing stronger than\nthe necessity of obeying their master; and they answering him that\ninability was of greater force, he, supposing that this ought to be\nthe limit of his service, turned back again homewards. For a readiness\nand good will to serve the public ought not to fail, whilst ability\nlasts; but when that is once gone, it is no longer to be forced. And\nindeed Scipio, both in war and peace, always used Caius Laelius for\na counsellor; insomuch that some said, Scipio was the actor of those\nnoble exploits, and Caius the poet or author. And Cicero himself\nconfessed, that the honorablest and greatest of his counsels, by the\nright performance of which he in his consulship preserved his country,\nwere concerted with Publius Nigidius the philosopher.\n\n28. Thus is there nothing that in any manner of government hinders\nold men from helping the public by the best things, to wit, by their\nreason, sentences, freedom of speech, and solicitous care, as the poets\nterm it. For not only our hands, feet, and corporeal strength are the\npossession and share of the commonwealth; but chiefly our soul, and\nthe beauties of our soul, justice, temperance, and prudence; which\nreceiving their perfection late and slowly, it were absurd that men\nshould remain in charge of house and land and other wealth, and yet not\nbe beneficial to their common country and fellow-citizens by reason\nof their age, which does not so much detract from their ministerial\nabilities as it adds to their directive and political. And this is the\nreason why they portrayed the Mercuries of old without hands and feet,\nbut having their natural parts stiff, enigmatically representing that\nthere is no great need of old men\u2019s corporeal services, if they have\nbut their reason (as is convenient) active and fruitful.\n\n\n\n\nPOLITICAL PRECEPTS.\n\n\n1. If ever, O Menemachus, that saying of Nestor\u2019s in Homer,\n\n    There is no Greek can contradict or mend\n    What you have said, yet to no perfect end\n    Is your speech brought,[46]\n\nmight pertinently be made use of and applied, it is against those\nexhorting, but nothing teaching nor any way instructing, philosophers.\nFor they do (in this respect) resemble those who are indeed careful in\nsnuffing the lamps, but negligent in supplying them with oil. Seeing\ntherefore that you, being by reason moved to engage yourself in the\naffairs of the state, desire, as becomes the nobility of your family,\n\n    Both to speak and act heroicly[47]\n\nin the service of your country, and that, not having attained to\nsuch maturity of age as to have observed the life of a wise and\nphilosophical man openly spent in the transactions of the state and\npublic debates, and to have been a spectator of worthy examples\nrepresented not in word but in deed, you request me to lay you down\nsome political precepts and instructions; I think it no ways becoming\nme to give you a denial, but heartily wish that the work may be worthy\nboth of your zeal and my forwardness. Now I have, according to your\nrequest, made use in this my discourse of sundry and various examples.\n\n2. First then for the administration of state affairs, let there\nbe laid, as a firm and solid foundation, an intention and purpose,\nhaving for its principles judgment and reason, and not any impulse\nfrom vain-glory, emulation, or want of other employment. For as those\nwho have nothing grateful to them at home frequently spend their\ntime in the forum, though they have no occasion that requires it; so\nsome men, because they have no business of their own worth employing\nthemselves in, thrust themselves into public affairs, using policy\nas a divertisement. Many also, having been by chance engaged in the\nnegotiations of the commonweal, and being cloyed with them, cannot yet\neasily quit them; in which they suffer the same with those who, going\non board a ship that they may be there a little tossed, and being after\ncarried away into the deep, send forth many a long look towards the\nshore, being sea-sick and giddy-headed, and yet necessitated to stay\nand accommodate themselves to their present fortune.\n\n      Past is the lovely pleasure\n    They took, when th\u2019 sea was calm and weather bright,\n      In walking at their leisure\n        On the ship\u2019s deck,\n        Whilst her sharp beak\n        With merry gale,\n        And full blown sail,\n    Did through the surging billows cut its course aright\n\nAnd these do most of all discredit the matter by their repenting\nand being discontented, when either hoping for glory they fall into\ndisgrace, or expecting to become formidable to others by their power\nthey are engaged in affairs full of dangers and troubles. But he who on\na well grounded principle of reason undertakes to act in the public,\nas an employ very honorable and most beseeming him, is dismayed by\nnone of these things; nor does he therefore change his opinion. For\nwe must not come to the management of the commonweal on a design of\ngaining and growing rich by it, as Stratocles and Dromoclides exhorted\none another to the golden harvest,\u2014so in mirth terming the tribunal,\nor place of making harangues to the people,\u2014nor yet as seized with\nsome sudden fit of passion, as did heretofore Caius Gracchus, who\nhaving, whilst his brothers\u2019 misfortunes were hot, withdrawn himself\nto a retired life most remote from public affairs, did afterwards,\ninflamed by indignation at the injuries and affronts put on him by some\npersons, thrust himself into the state, where being soon filled with\naffairs and glory, when he sought to desist and desired change and\nrepose, he could not (so great was it grown) find how to lay down his\nauthority, but perished with it. And as for those who through emulation\nframe themselves for the public as actors for the stage, they must\nneeds repent of their design, finding themselves under a necessity of\neither serving those whom they think themselves worthy to govern, or\ndisobliging those whom they desire to please. Now I am of opinion, that\nthose who by chance and without foresight stumble upon policy, falling\nas it were into a pit, cannot but be troubled and repent; whereas they\nthat go leisurely into it, with preparation and a good resolution,\ncomfort themselves moderately in all occurrences, as having no other\nend of their actions but the discharging of their duty with honor.\n\n3. Now they that have thus grounded their choice within themselves, and\nrendered it immovable and difficult to be changed, must set themselves\nto contemplate that disposition of the citizens which, being compounded\n(as it were) of all their natures, appears most prevalent among them.\nFor the endeavoring presently to form the manners and change the nature\nof a people is neither easy nor safe, but a work requiring much time\nand great authority. But as wine in the beginning is overcome by the\nnature of the drinker, but afterwards, gently warming him and mixing\nitself in his veins, assimilates and changes him who drinks it into its\nown likeness, so must a statesman, till he has by his reputation and\ncredit obtained a leading power amongst the people, accommodate himself\nto the dispositions of the subjects, knowing how to consider and\nconjecture those things with which the people are naturally delighted\nand by which they are usually drawn. The Athenians, to wit, are easily\nmoved to anger, and not difficultly changed to mercy, more willing to\nsuspect quickly than to be informed by leisure; and as they are readier\nto help mean and inconsiderable persons, so do they embrace and esteem\nfacetious and merry speeches; they are exceedingly delighted with those\nthat praise them, and very little offended with such as jeer them; they\nare terrible even to their governors, and yet courteous to their very\nenemies. Far other is the disposition of the Carthaginians, severe,\nrigid, obsequious to their rulers, harsh to their subjects, most abject\nin their fear, most cruel in their anger, firm in their resolutions,\nuntractable, and hard to be moved by sportive and pleasant discourse.\nShould Cleon have requested them to defer their assembly, because he\nhad sacrificed to the Gods and was to feast certain strangers, they\nwould not have risen up, laughing and clapping their hands for joy;\nnor, if Alcibiades, as he was making an harangue to them, had let\nslip a quail from under his cloak, would they have striven who should\ncatch her and restore her to him again, but would rather have killed\nthem both on the place, as contemning and deriding them; since they\nbanished Hanno for making use of a lion to carry his baggage to the\narmy, accusing him of affecting tyranny. Neither do I think, that the\nThebans, if they had been made masters of their enemies\u2019 letters, would\nhave foreborne looking into them, as did the Athenians, when, having\ntaken the messengers of Philip who were carrying a letter superscribed\nto Olympias, they would not so much as open it, or discover the\nconjugal secrets of an absent husband, written to his wife. Nor yet do\nI believe that the Athenians on the other side would have patiently\nsuffered the haughtiness and disdain of Epaminondas, when, refusing to\nanswer an accusation brought against him, he rose up from the theatre,\nand went away through the midst of the assembly to the place of public\nexercises. And much less am I of opinion that the Spartans would have\nendured the contumely and scurrility of Stratocles, who persuaded the\npeople to offer sacrifices of thanksgiving to the Gods, as having\nobtained the victory, and afterwards, when, being truly informed of\nthe loss they had received, they were angry with him, asked them what\ninjury they had sustained in having through his means spent three days\nmerrily.\n\nCourtly flatterers indeed, like to quail-catchers, by imitating the\nvoices and assimilating themselves to the manners of kings, chiefly\ninsinuate into their favors and entrap them by deceit; but it is not\nconvenient for a statesman to imitate the people\u2019s manners, but to know\nthem, and make use of those things toward every person by which he is\nmost likely to be taken. For the ignorance of men\u2019s humors brings no\nless disorders and obstacles in commonweals than in the friendships of\nkings.\n\n4. When therefore you shall have already gotten power and authority\namongst the people, then must you endeavor to reform their disposition,\ntreating them gently, and by little and little drawing them to what is\nbetter. For the changing of a multitude is a difficult and laborious\nwork. But as for your own manners and behavior, so compose and adorn\nthem, as knowing that you are henceforth to lead your life on an open\nstage; and if it is no easy task for you wholly to extirpate vice out\nof your soul, at least take away and retrench those offences which\nare most notorious and apparent. For you cannot but have heard how\nThemistocles, when he designed to enter upon the management of public\naffairs, withdrew himself from drinking and revelling, and fell to\nwatching, fasting, and studying, saying to his intimate friends, that\nMiltiades\u2019s trophy suffered him not to sleep. And Pericles also so\nchanged himself, both as to the comportment of his body and his manner\nof living, that he walked gravely, discoursed affably, always showed\na staid and settled countenance, continually kept his hand under his\nrobe, and went only that way which led to the assembly and the senate.\nFor a multitude is not so tractable as that it should be easy for every\none to take it with safety, but it is a service much to be valued, if,\nbeing like a suspicious and skittish beast, it can be so managed that,\nwithout being frighted either by sight or voice, it will submit to\nreceive instruction.\n\nThese things therefore are not slightly to be observed; nor are we to\nneglect taking such care of our own life and manners that they may\nbe clear from all stain and reprehension. For statesmen are not only\nliable to give an account of what they say or do in public; but there\nis a busy enquiry made into their very meals, beds, marriages, and\nevery either sportive or serious action. For what need we speak of\nAlcibiades, who, being of all men the most active in public affairs,\nand withal an invincible commander, perished by his irregularity in\nliving and his audaciousness, and who by his luxury and prodigality\nrendered the state unbenefited by all his other good qualities?\u2014since\nthe Athenians blamed Cimon\u2019s wine; the Romans, having nothing else to\ncavil at, found fault with Scipio\u2019s sleeping; and the enemies of Pompey\nthe Great, having observed that he scratched his head with one finger,\nupbraided him with it. For as a freckle or wart in the face is more\nprejudicial than stains, maims, and scars in the rest of the body; so\nlittle faults, discerned in the lives of princes and statesmen, appear\ngreat, through an opinion most men have conceived of government and\npolicy, which they look on as a great and excellent thing, and such\nas ought to be pure from all absurdity and imperfection. Therefore\nnot unjustly is Livius Drusus commended, who, when several parts of\nhis house lay open to the view of his neighbors, being told by a\ncertain workman that he would for the expense only of five talents\nalter and remedy that fault, said: I will give thee indeed ten, to\nmake my whole house so transparent that all the city may see how I\nlive. For he was a temperate and modest man. And yet perhaps he had\nno need of this perspicuity; for many persons pry into those manners,\ncounsels, actions, and lives of statesmen which seem to be most deeply\nconcealed, no less loving and admiring one, and hating and despising\nanother, for their private than for their public transactions. What\nthen! perhaps you may say: Do not cities make use also of such men\nas live dissolutely and effeminately? True; for as women with child\nfrequently long for stones and chalk, as those that are stomach-sick\ndo for salt-fish and such other meats, which a little after they spit\nout again and reject; so also the people sometimes through wantonness\nand petulancy, and sometimes for want of better guides, make use of\nthose that come first to hand, though at the same time detesting and\ncontemning them, and after rejoice at such things spoken against them\nas the comedian Plato makes the people themselves to say,\n\n    Quick, take me by the hand, and hold me fast,\n    Or I\u2019ll Agyrrius captain choose in haste.\n\nAnd again he brings them in, calling for a basin and feather that they\nmay vomit, and saying,\n\n    A chamber-pot by my tribunal stands.\n\nAnd a little after,\n\n    It feeds a stinking pest, foul Cephalus.\n\nAnd the Roman people, when Carbo promised them something, and (to\nconfirm it) added an oath and execration, unanimously swore on the\ncontrary that they would not believe him. And in Lacedaemon, when a\ncertain dissolute man named Demosthenes had delivered a very convenient\nopinion, the people rejected it; but the Ephori, who approved of his\nadvice, having chosen by lot one of the ancient senators, commanded him\nto repeat the same discourse, pouring it (as it were) out of a filthy\nvessel into a clean one, that it might be acceptable to the multitude.\nOf so great moment either way in political affairs is the belief\nconceived of a person\u2019s disposition and manners.\n\n5. Yet are we not therefore so to lay the whole stress on virtue,\nas utterly to neglect all gracefulness and efficacy of speech; but\nesteeming rhetoric, though not the worker, yet a coadjutor and\nforwarder of persuasion, we should correct that saying of Menander,\n\n    The speaker\u2019s manners, not his speech, persuade.\n\nFor both manners and language ought to concur, unless any one forsooth\nshall say that\u2014as it is the pilot who steers the ship, and not the\nrudder, and the rider that turns the horse, and not the bridle\u2014so\npolitical virtue, using not eloquence but manners as an helm and\nbridle, persuades and guides a city, which is (to speak with Plato)\nan animal most easy to be turned, managing and directing it (as\nit were) from the poop. For since those great and (as Homer calls\nthem) Jove-begotten kings, setting themselves out with their purple,\nsceptres, guards, and the very oracles of the Gods, and subjecting to\nthem by their majesty the multitude, as if they were of a better nature\nand more excellent mould than other men, desired also to be eloquent\norators, and neglected neither the gracefulness of speech,\n\n    Nor public meeting, that more perfect they\n    Might be for feats of war,[48]\n\nnot only venerating Jupiter the counsellor, Mars the slaughterer, and\nPallas the warrior, but invocating also Calliope,\n\n    Who still attends on regal Majesty,[49]\n\nby her persuasive oratory appeasing and moderating the fierceness\nand violence of the people; how is it possible that a private man\nin a plebeian garb and with a vulgar mien, undertaking to conduct a\ncity, should ever be able to prevail over and govern the multitude,\nif he is not endowed with alluring and all-persuading eloquence? The\ncaptains indeed and pilots of ships make use of others to deliver their\ncommands; but a statesman ought to have in himself not only a spirit\nof government, but also a commanding faculty of speech, that he may\nnot stand in need of another\u2019s voice, nor be constrained to say, as\ndid Iphicrates when he was run down by the eloquence of Aristophon,\n\u201cMy adversaries have the better actors, but mine is the more excellent\nplay,\u201d nor yet be often obliged to make use of these words of Euripides,\n\n    O that the race of miserable men\n    Were speechless!\n\nand again,\n\n    Alas! Why have not men\u2019s affairs a tongue,\n    That those fine pleaders who of right make wrong\n    Might be no longer in request?[50]\n\nFor to these evasions perhaps might an Alcamenes, a Nesiotes, an\nIctinus, and any such mechanical persons as get their bread by their\nhands, be permitted on their oath to have recourse. As it sometime\nhappened in Athens, where, when two architects were examined about\nthe erecting a certain public work, one of them, who was of a free\nand voluble speech and had his tongue (as we say) well hung, making\na long and premeditated harangue concerning the method and order of\nraising such a fabric, greatly moved the people; but the other, who was\nindeed the better workman though the worse speaker, coming forth into\nthe midst, only said, \u201cYe men of Athens, what this man has spoken, I\nwill do.\u201d For those men venerate only Minerva surnamed Ergane (or the\nArtisan), who, as Sophocles says of them,\n\n    Do on the massy anvil lay\n    A lifeless iron bar, where they\n    With blows of heavy hammer make\n    It pliant to the work they undertake.\n\nBut the prophet or minister of Minerva Polias (that is, the protectress\nof cities) and of Themis (or Justice) the counsellor,\n\n    Who both convenes assemblies, and again\n    Dissolves them,[51]\n\nmaking use of no other instrument but speech, does, by forming and\nfashioning some things and smoothing and polishing others that, like\ncertain knots in timber or flaws in iron, are averse to his work,\nembellish and adorn a city. By this means the government of Pericles\nwas in name (as Thucydides[52] says) a democracy, but in effect\nthe rule of one principal man through the power of his eloquence.\nFor there were living at the same time Cimon, and also Ephialtes\nand Thucydides,[53] all good men; now Thucydides, being asked by\nArchidamus, king of the Spartans, whether himself or Pericles were the\nbetter wrestler, thus answered: \u201cThat is not easily known; for when I\nin wrestling overthrow him, he, by his words persuading the spectators\nthat he did not fall, gains the victory.\u201d And this did not only bring\nglory to himself, but safety also to the city; for being persuaded\nby him, it preserved the happiness it had gotten, and abstained from\nintermeddling with foreign affairs. But Nicias, though having the\nsame design, yet falling short in the art of persuasion, when he\nendeavored by his speech, as by a gentle curb, to restrain and turn\nthe people, could not compass it or prevail with them, but was fain to\ndepart, being violently hurried and dragged (as it were) by the neck\nand shoulders into Sicily. They say, that a wolf is not to be held by\nthe ears; but a people and city are chiefly to be drawn by the ears,\nand not as some do who, being unpractised in eloquence, seek other\nabsurd and unartificial ways of taking them, and either draw them by\nthe belly, making them feasts and banquets, or by the purse, bestowing\non them gifts and largesses, or by the eye, exhibiting to them masks\nand prizes or public shows of dancers and fencers,\u2014by which they do\nnot so much lead as cunningly catch the people. For to lead a people\nis to persuade them by reason and eloquence; but such allurements of\nthe multitude nothing differ from the baits laid for the taking of\nirrational animals.\n\n6. Let not yet the speech of a statesman be youthful and theatrical,\nas if he were making an harangue composed, like a garland, of curious\nand florid words; nor again\u2014as Pytheas said of an oration made by\nDemosthenes, that it smelt of the lamp and sophistical curiosity\u2014let\nit consist of over-subtle arguments and periods, exactly framed by\nrule and compass. But as musicians require that the strings of their\ninstruments should be sweetly and gently touched, and not rudely\nthrummed or beaten; so in the speech of a statesman, both when he\ncounsels and when he commands, there should not appear either violence\nor cunning, nor should he think himself worthy of commendation for\nhaving spoken formally, artificially, and with an exact observation of\npunctualities; but his whole discourse ought to be full of ingenuous\nsimplicity, true magnanimity, fatherly freedom, and careful providence\nand understanding, joined with goodness and honesty, gracefulness\nand attraction, proceeding from grave expressions and proper and\npersuasive sentences. Now a political oration does much more properly\nthan a juridical one admit of sententious speeches, histories, fables,\nand metaphors, by which those who moderately and seasonably use them\nexceedingly move their hearers; as he did who said, Make not Greece\none-eyed; and Demades, when he affirmed of himself, that he was to\nmanage the wreck of the state; and Archilochus, when he said\n\n    Nor let the stone of Tantalus\n    Over this isle hang always thus;\n\nand Pericles, when he commanded the eyesore[54] of the Piraeus to be\ntaken away; and Phocion, when he pronounced of Leosthenes\u2019s victory,\nthat the beginning or the short course of the war was good, but that he\nfeared the long race that was to follow. But in general, majesty and\ngreatness more benefit a political discourse, a pattern of which may be\nthe Philippics, and (amongst the orations set down by Thucydides) that\nof Sthenelaidas the Ephor, that of Archidamus at Plataea, and that of\nPericles after the plague. But as for those rhetorical flourishes and\nharangues of Ephorus, Theopompus, and Anaximenes, which they made after\nthey had armed and set in order the battalions, it may be said of them,\n\n    None talks thus foolishly so near the sword.[55]\n\n7. Nevertheless, both taunts and raillery may sometimes be part of\npolitical discourse, so they proceed not to injury or scurrility, but\nare usefully spoken by him who either reprehends or scoffs. But these\nthings seem most to be allowed in answers and replies. For in that\nmanner to begin a discourse as if one had purposely prepared himself\nfor it, is the part of a common jester, and carries with it an opinion\nof maliciousness; as was incident to the biting jests of Cicero, Cato\nthe Elder, and Euxitheus, an intimate acquaintance of Aristotle,\u2014all of\nwhom frequently began first to jeer; but in him, who does it only in\nrevenge, the seasonableness of it renders it not only pardonable but\nalso graceful. Such was the answer of Demosthenes, when one that was\nsuspected of thievery derided him for writing by night: I know that\nthe keeping my candle burning all night is offensive to you. So when\nDemades bawled out, Demosthenes forsooth would correct me: thus would\nthe sow (as the proverb has it) teach Minerva;\u2014That Minerva, replied\nDemosthenes, was not long since taken in adultery. Not ungraceful also\nwas that of Xenaenetus to those citizens who upbraided him with flying\nwhen he was general, \u2019Twas with you, my dear hearts. But in raillery\ngreat care is to be taken for the avoiding of excess, and of any thing\nthat may either by its unseasonableness offend the hearers or show the\nspeaker to be of an ungenerous and sordid disposition;\u2014such as were\nthe sayings of Democrates. For he, going up into the assembly, said\nthat, like the city, he had little force but much wind; and after the\noverthrow at Chaeronea, going forth to the people, he said: I would\nnot have had the state to be in so ill a condition that you should\nbe contented to hear me also giving you counsel. For this showed a\nmean-spirited person, as the other did a madman; but neither of them\nwas becoming a statesman. Now the succinctness of Phocion\u2019s speech was\nadmired; whence Polyeuctus affirmed, that Demosthenes was the greatest\norator, but that Phocion spake most forcibly, for that his discourse\ndid in very few words contain abundance of matter. And Demosthenes, who\ncontemned others, was wont, when Phocion stood up, to say, The hatchet\n(or pruning-knife) of my orations arises.\n\n8. Let your chief endeavor therefore be, to use to the multitude a\npremeditated and not empty speech, and that with safety, knowing that\nPericles himself, before he made any discourse to the people, was\nwont to pray that there might not a word pass from him foreign to\nthe business he was to treat of. It is requisite also, that you have\na voluble tongue, and be exercised in speaking on all occurrences;\nfor occasions are quick, and bring many sudden things in political\naffairs. Wherefore also Demosthenes was, as they say, inferior to many,\nwithdrawing and absconding himself when sudden occasion offered. And\nTheophrastus relates that Alcibiades, desirous to speak not only what\nhe ought but as he ought, often hesitated and stood still in the midst\nof his speech, seeking and composing expressions fit for his purpose.\nBut he who, as matters and occasions present themselves, rises up to\nspeak, most of all moves, leads, and disposes of the multitude. Thus\nLeo Byzantius came to make an harangue to the Athenians, being then at\ndissension amongst themselves; by whom when he perceived himself to\nbe laughed at for the littleness of his stature, What would you do,\nsaid he, if you saw my wife, who scarce reaches up to my knees? And\nthe laughter thereupon increasing, Yet, went he on, as little as we\nare, when we fall out with one another, the city of Byzantium is not\nbig enough to hold us. So Pytheas the orator, who declaimed against\nthe honors decreed to Alexander, when one said to him, Dare you, being\nso young, discourse of so great matters? made this answer, And yet\nAlexander, whom you decree to be a God, is younger than I am.\n\n9. It is requisite also for the champion of the commonweal to bring to\nthis not slight but all-concerning contest a firm and solid speech,\nattended with a strong habit of voice and a long lasting breath, lest,\nbeing tired and spent with speaking, he chance to be overcome by\n\n    Some ravening crier, with a roaring voice,\n    Loud as Cycloborus.[56]\n\nCato, when he had no hopes of persuading the people or senate, whom\nhe found prepossessed by the courtships and endeavors of the contrary\nparty, was wont to rise up and hold them a whole day with an oration,\nby that means depriving his adversaries of their opportunity. And thus\nmuch concerning the preparation and use of speech may be sufficient for\nhim who can of himself find out and add what necessarily follows from\nit.\n\n10. There are, moreover, two avenues or ways of entering into the\ngovernment of the state; the one short and expeditious to the lustre\nof glory, but not without danger; the other more obscure and slow, but\nhaving also greater security. For some there are who, beginning with\nsome great and illustrious action which requires a courageous boldness,\ndo, like to those that from a far extended promontory launch forth\ninto the deep, steer directly into the very midst of public affairs,\nthinking Pindar to have been in the right when he said,\n\n    If you a stately fabric do design,\n    Be sure that your work\u2019s front with lustre shine.[57]\n\nFor the multitude do, through a certain satiety and loathing of those\nto whom they have been accustomed, more readily receive a beginner;\nas the beholders do a fresh combatant, and as those dignities and\nauthorities which have a splendid and speedy increase dazzle and\nastonish envy. For neither does that fire, as Ariston says, make a\nsmoke, nor that glory breed envy, which suddenly and quickly shines\nforth; but of those who grow up slowly and by degrees, some are\nattacked on this side, others on that; whence many have withered away\nabout the tribunal, before ever they came to flourish. But when, as\nthey say of Ladas,\n\n    The sound o\u2019 th\u2019 rope[58] yet rattled in his ear,\n    When Ladas having finished his career\n    Was crowned,\n\nany one suddenly and gloriously performs an embassy, triumphs, or leads\nforth an army, neither the envious nor the disdainful have like power\nover him as over others. Thus did Aratus ascend to glory, making the\noverthrow of the tyrant Nicocles his first step to the management of\nthe commonweal. Thus did Alcibiades, settling the alliance with the\nMantineans against the Lacedaemonians. Pompey also required a triumph,\nbeing not yet admitted into the senate; and when Sylla opposed it, he\nsaid to him, More adore the rising than the setting sun; which when\nSylla heard, he yielded to him. And the people of Rome on a sudden,\ncontrary to the ordinary course of the law, declared Cornelius Scipio\nconsul, when he stood candidate for the aedileship, not from any vulgar\nreason, but admiring the victory he had got, whilst he was but a youth,\nin a single combat fought in Spain, and his conquests a little after,\nperformed at Carthage, when he was a tribune of foot; in respect of\nwhich Cato the Elder cried out with a loud voice,\n\n    He only\u2019s wise, the rest like shadows fly.[59]\n\nNow then, since the affairs of the cities have neither wars to be\nmanaged, tyrannies to be overthrown, nor leagues and alliances to be\ntreated, what can any one undertake for the beginning of an illustrious\nand splendid government? There are yet left public causes and embassies\nto the emperor, which require the courage and prudence of an acute and\ncautious person. There are also in the cities many good and laudable\nusages neglected, which may be restored, and many ill practices\nbrought in by custom, to the disgrace or damage of the city, which\nmay be redressed, to gain him the esteem of the people. Moreover, a\ngreat suit rightly determined, fidelity in defending a poor man\u2019s\ncause against a powerful adversary, and freedom of speech in behalf of\njustice to some unjust nobleman, have afforded some a glorious entrance\ninto the administration of the state. Not a few also have been advanced\nby enmity and quarrels, having set themselves to attack such men whose\ndignity was either envied or terrible. For the power of him that is\noverthrown does with greater glory accrue to his overthrower. Indeed,\nthrough envy to contend against a good man, and one that has by virtue\nbeen advanced to the chiefest honor,\u2014as Simmias did against Pericles,\nAlcmaeon against Themistocles, Clodius against Pompey, and Meneclides\nthe orator against Epaminondas,\u2014is neither good for one\u2019s reputation\nnor otherwise advantageous. For when the multitude, having outraged\nsome good man, soon after (as it frequently happens) repent of their\nindignation, they think that way of excusing this offence the easiest\nwhich is indeed the justest, to wit, the destroying of him who was the\npersuader and author of it. But the rising up to humble and pull down\na wicked person, who has by his audaciousness and cunning subjected\nthe city to himself (such as heretofore Cleon and Clitophon were in\nAthens), makes a glorious entrance to the management of public affairs,\nas it were to a play. I am not ignorant also that some, by opposing\u2014as\nEphialtes did at Athens, and Phormio amongst the Eleans\u2014an imperious\nand oligarchical senate, have at the same time obtained both authority\nand honor; but in this there is great danger to him who is but entering\nupon the administration of state. Wherefore Solon took a better\nbeginning; for the city of Athens being divided into three parts, the\nDiacrians (or inhabitants of the hill), the Pedieans (or dwellers on\nthe plain), and the Paralians (or those whose abode was by the water\nside), he, joining himself with none of them, but acting for the common\ngood of them all, and saying and doing all things for to bring them to\nconcord, was chosen the lawgiver to take away their differences, and by\nthat means settled the state.\n\nSuch then and so many beginnings has the more splendid way of entering\nupon state affairs.\n\n11. But many gallant men have chosen the safe and slow method, as\nAristides, Phocion, Pammenes the Theban, Lucullus in Rome, Cato, and\nAgesilaus the Lacedaemonian. For as ivy, twining about the strongest\ntrees, rises up together with them; so every one of these, applying\nhimself, whilst he was yet young and inglorious, to some elder and\nillustrious personage, and growing up and increasing by little and\nlittle under his authority, grounded and rooted himself in the\ncommonweal. For Clisthenes advanced Aristides, Chabrias preferred\nPhocion, Sylla promoted Lucullus, Maximus raised Cato, Pammenes\nforwarded Epaminondas, and Lysander assisted Agesilaus. But this\nlast, injuring his own reputation through an unseasonable ambition\nand jealousy, soon threw off the director of his actions; but the\nrest honestly, politically, and to the end, venerated and magnified\nthe authors of their advancement,\u2014like bodies which are opposed to\nthe sun,\u2014by reflecting back the light that shone upon them, augmented\nand rendered more illustrious. Certainly those who looked asquint\nupon Scipio called him the player, and his companion Laelius the\npoet or author of his actions; yet was not Laelius puffed up by any\nof these things, but continued to promote the virtue and glory of\nScipio. And Afranius, the friend of Pompey, though he was very meanly\ndescended, yet being at the very point to be chosen consul, when he\nunderstood that Pompey favored others, gave over his suit, saying that\nhis obtaining the consulship would not be so honorable as grievous\nand troublesome to him, if it were against the good-will and without\nthe assistance of Pompey. Having therefore delayed but one year, he\nenjoyed the dignity and preserved his friendship. Now those who are\nthus by others led, as it were, by the hand to glory do, in gratifying\none, at the same time also gratify the multitude, and incur less odium,\nif any inconvenience befalls them. Wherefore also Philip (king of\nMacedon) exhorted his son Alexander, whilst he had leisure during the\nreign of another, to get himself friends, winning their love by kind\nand affable behavior.\n\n12. Now he that begins to enter upon the administration of state\naffairs should choose himself a guide, who is not only a man of credit\nand authority but is also such for his virtue. For as it is not every\ntree that will admit and bear the twining of a vine, there being some\nwhich utterly choke and spoil its growth; so in states, those who are\nno lovers of virtue and goodness, but only of honor and sovereignty,\nafford not young beginners any opportunities of performing worthy\nactions, but do through envy keep them down and let them languish\nwhom they regard as depriving them of their glory, which is (as it\nwere) their food. Thus Marius, having first in Afric and afterwards in\nGalatia done many gallant exploits by the assistance of Sylla, forbare\nany farther to employ him, and utterly cast him off, being really vexed\nat his growing into repute, but making his pretence the device engraven\non his seal. For Sylla, being paymaster under Marius when he was\ngeneral in Afric, and sent by him to Bocchus, brought with him Jugurtha\nprisoner; but as he was an ambitious young man, who had but just\ntasted the sweetness of glory, he received not his good fortune with\nmoderation; but having caused the representation of the action to be\nengraven on his seal, wore about him Jugurtha delivered into his hands;\nand this did Marius lay to his charge, when he turned him off. But\nSylla, passing over to Catulus and Metellus, who were good men and at\ndifference with Marius, soon after in a civil war drove away and ruined\nMarius, who wanted but little of overthrowing Rome. Sylla indeed, on\nthe contrary, advanced Pompey from a very youth, rising up to him and\nuncovering his head as he passed by, and not only giving other young\nmen occasions of doing captain-like actions, but even instigating some\nthat were backward and unwilling. He filled the armies with emulation\nand desire of honor; and thus he had the superiority over them all,\ndesiring not to be alone, but the first and greatest amongst many great\nones. These therefore are the men to whom young statesmen ought to\nadhere, and with these they should be (as it were) incorporated, not\nstealing from them their glory,\u2014like Aesop\u2019s wren, which, being carried\nup on the eagle\u2019s wings, suddenly flew away and got before her,\u2014but\nreceiving it of them with friendship and good-will, since they can\nnever, as Plato says, be able to govern aright, if they have not been\nfirst well practised in obedience.\n\n13. After this follows the judgment that is to be had in the choice\nof friends, in which neither the opinion of Themistocles nor that of\nCleon is to be approved. For Cleon, when he first knew that he was to\ntake on him the government, assembling his friends together, brake\noff friendship with them, as that which often disables the mind, and\nwithdraws it from its just and upright intention in managing the\naffairs of the state. But he would have done better, if he had cast\nout of his soul avarice and contention, and cleansed himself from\nenvy and malice. For cities want not men that are friendless and\nunaccompanied, but such as are good and temperate. Now he indeed drove\naway his friends; but a hundred heads of fawning flatterers were, as\nthe comedian speaks, licking about him;[60] and being harsh and severe\nto those that were civil, he again debased himself to court the favor\nof the multitude, doing all things to humor them in their dotage, and\ntaking rewards at every man\u2019s hand,[61] and joining himself with\nthe worst and most distempered of the people against the best. But\nThemistocles, on the contrary, said to one who told him that he would\ngovern well if he exhibited himself alike to all: May I never sit on\nthat throne on which my friends shall not have more power with me than\nthose who are not my friends. Neither did he well in pinning the state\nto his friendship, and submitting the common and public affairs to his\nprivate favors and affections. And farther, he said to Simonides, when\nhe requested somewhat that was not just: Neither is he a good poet or\nmusician, who sings against measure; nor he an upright magistrate, who\ngratifies any one against the laws. And it would really be a shameful\nand miserable thing, that the pilot should choose his mariners, and the\nmaster of a ship the pilot,\n\n    Who well can rule the helm, and in good guise\n    Hoist up the sails, when winds begin to rise,\n\nand that an architect should make choice of such servants and workmen\nas will not prejudice his work, but take pains in the best manner to\nforward it; but that a statesman\u2014who, as Pindar has it,\n\n    The best of artists and chief workman is\n    Of equity and justice\u2014\n\nshould not presently choose himself like-affected friends and\nministers, and such as might co-inspire into him a love of honesty;\nbut that one or other should be always unjustly and violently bending\nhim to other uses. For then he would seem to differ in nothing from a\ncarpenter or mason who, through ignorance or want of experience, uses\nsuch squares, rules, and levels as will certainly make his work to\nbe awry. Since friends are the living and intelligent instruments of\nstatesmen, who ought to be so far from bearing them company in their\nslips and transgressions, that they must be careful they do not, even\nunknown to them, commit a fault.\n\nAnd this it was, that disgraced Solon and brought him into disrepute\namongst his citizens; for he, having an intention to ease men\u2019s debts\nand to bring in that which was called at Athens the Seisachtheia (for\nthat was the name given by way of extenuation to the cancelling of\ndebts), communicated this design to some of his friends, who thereupon\ndid a most unjust act; for having got this inkling, they borrowed\nabundance of money, and the law being a little after brought to light,\nthey appeared to have purchased stately houses, and great store of land\nwith the wealth they had borrowed; and Solon, who was himself injured,\nwas accused to have been a partaker of their injustice. Agesilaus also\nwas most feeble and mean-spirited in what concerned the suits of his\nfriends, being like the horse Pegasus in Euripides,\n\n    Who, frighted, bowed his back, more than his rider would,[62]\n\nso that, being more ready to help them in their misfortunes than was\nrequisite, he seemed to be privy to their injustices. For he saved\nPhoebidas, who was accused for having without commission surprised\nthe castle of Thebes, called Cadmea, saying that such enterprises\nwere to be attempted without expecting any orders. And when Sphodrias\nwas brought to trial for an unlawful and heinous act, having made\nan incursion into Attica at such time as the Athenians were allies\nand confederates of the Spartans, he procured him to be acquitted,\nbeing softened by the amorous entreaties of his son. There is also\nrecorded a short epistle of his to a certain prince, written in\nthese words: If Nicias is innocent, discharge him; if he is guilty,\ndischarge him for my sake; but however it is, discharge him. But\nPhocion (on the contrary) would not so much as appear in behalf of\nhis son-in-law Charicles, when he was accused for having taken money\nof Harpalus; but having said, Only for acts of justice have I made\nyou my son-in-law,\u2014went his way. And Timoleon the Corinthian, when he\ncould not by admonitions or requests dissuade his brother from being a\ntyrant, confederated with his destroyers. For a magistrate ought not to\nbe a friend even to the altar (or till he comes to the point of being\nforsworn), as Pericles sometime said, but no farther than is agreeable\nto all law, justice, and the utility of the state; any of which being\nneglected brings a great and public damage, as did the not executing of\njustice on Sphodrias and Phoebidas, who did not a little contribute to\nthe engaging of Sparta in the Leuctrian war.\n\nOtherwise, reason of state is so far from necessitating one to show\nhimself severe on every peccadillo of his friends, that it even permits\nhim, when he has secured the principal affairs of the public, to assist\nthem, stand by them, and labor for them. There are, moreover, certain\nfavors that may be done without envy, as is the helping a friend to\nobtain an office, or rather the putting into his hands some honorable\ncommission or some laudable embassy, such as for the congratulating or\nhonoring some prince or the making a league of amity and alliance with\nsome state. But if there be some difficult but withal illustrious and\ngreat action to be performed, having first taken it upon himself, he\nmay afterwards assume a friend to his assistance, as did Diomedes, whom\nHomer makes to speak in this manner:\n\n    Since a companion you will have me take,\n    How can I think a better choice to make,\n    Than the divine Ulysses?[63]\n\nAnd Ulysses again as kindly attributes to him the praise of the\nachievement, saying:\n\n    These stately steeds, whose country you demand,\n    Nestor, were hither brought from Thracian land,\n    Whose king, with twelve of his best friends, lies dead,\n    All slain by th\u2019 hand of warlike Diomed.[64]\n\nFor this sort of concession no less adorns the praiser than the\npraised; but self-conceitedness, as Plato says, dwells with solitude.\nHe ought moreover to associate his friends in those good and kind\noffices which are done by him, bidding those whom he has benefited\nto love them and give them thanks, as having been the procurers and\ncounsellors of his favors to them. But he must reject the dishonest and\nunreasonable request of his friends, yet not churlishly but mildly,\nteaching and showing them that they are not beseeming their virtue\nand honor. Never was any man better at this than Epaminondas, who,\nhaving denied to deliver out of prison a certain victualler, when\nrequested by Pelopidas, and yet a little after dismissing him at the\ndesire of his miss, said to his friend, These, O Pelopidas, are favors\nfit for wenches to receive, and not for generals. Cato on the other\nside acted morosely and insolently, when Catulus the censor, his most\nintimate and familiar friend, interceded with him for one of those\nagainst whom he, being quaestor, had entered process, saying: It would\nbe a shame if you, who ought to reform young men for us, should be\nthrust out by our servants. For he might, though in effect refusing\nthe requested favor, have yet forborne that severity and bitterness\nof speech; so that his doing what was displeasing to his friend might\nhave seemed not to have proceeded from his own inclination, but to\nhave been a necessity imposed upon him by law and justice. There are\nalso in the administration of the state methods, not dishonorable, of\nassisting our poorer friends in the making of their fortune. Thus did\nThemistocles, who, seeing after a battle one of those which lay dead\nin the field adorned with chains of gold and jewels, did himself pass\nby him; but turning back to a friend of his, said, Do you take these\nspoils, for you are not yet come to be Themistocles. For even the\naffairs themselves do frequently afford a statesman such opportunities\nof benefiting his friends; for every man is not a Menemachus. To one\ntherefore give the patronage of a cause, both just and beneficial; to\nanother recommend some rich man, who stands in need of management and\nprotection; and help a third to be employed in some public work, or\nto some gainful and profitable farm. Epaminondas bade a friend of his\ngo to a certain rich man, and ask him for a talent by the command of\nEpaminondas, and when he to whom the message was sent came to enquire\nthe reason of it; Because, said Epaminondas, he is a very honest man\nand poor; but you, by converting much of the city\u2019s wealth to your own\nuse, are become rich. And Xenophon reports, that Agesilaus delighted in\nenriching his friends, himself making no account of money.\n\n14. Now since, as Simonides says, all larks must have a crest, and\nevery eminent office in a commonweal brings enmities and dissensions,\nit is not a little convenient for a statesman to be forewarned also\nof his comportment in these rencounters. Many therefore commend\nThemistocles and Aristides, who, when they were to go forth on an\nembassy or to command together the army, laid down their enmity at\nthe confines of the city, taking it up again after their return. Some\nagain are highly pleased with the action of Cretinas the Magnesian. He,\nhaving for his rival in the government one Hermias, a man not powerful\nand rich, but ambitious and high-spirited, when the Mithridatic war\ncame on, seeing the city in danger, desired Hermias either to take the\ngovernment upon himself and manage the affairs whilst he retired, or,\nif he would have him take the command of the army, to depart himself\nimmediately, lest they should through their ambitious contention\ndestroy the city. The proposal pleased Hermias, who, saying that\nCretinas was a better soldier than himself, did with his wife and\nchildren quit the city. Cretinas then escorted him as he went forth,\nfurnishing him out of his own estate with all such things as are more\nuseful to those that fly from home than to those that are besieged; and\nexcellently defending the city, unexpectedly preserved it, being at\nthe point to be destroyed. For if it is generous and proceeding from a\nmagnanimous spirit to cry out,\n\n    I love my children, but my country more,\n\nwhy should it not be readier for every one of them to say, I hate this\nman, and desire to do him a diskindness, but the love of my country\nhas greater power over me? For not to condescend to be reconciled to\nan enemy for those very causes for which we ought to abandon even a\nfriend, is even to extremity savage and brutish. But far better did\nPhocion and Cato, who grounded not any enmity at all on their political\ndifferences, but being fierce and obstinate only in their public\ncontests not to recede from any thing they judged convenient for the\nstate, did in their private affairs use those very persons friendly and\ncourteously from whom they differed in the other. For one ought not to\nesteem any citizen an enemy, unless it be one like Aristion, Nabis, or\nCatiline, the disease and plague of the city: but as for those that\nare otherwise at discord, a good magistrate should, like a skilful\nmusician, by gently setting them up or letting them down, bring them to\nconcord; not falling angrily and reproachfully upon those that err, but\nmildly reprehending them in such like terms as these of Homer\u2019s,\n\n    Good friend, I thought you wiser than the rest;[65]\n\nand again,\n\n    You could have told a better tale than this;[66]\n\nnor yet repining at their honors, or sparing to speak freely in\ncommendation of their good actions, if they say or do any thing\nadvantageous to the public. For thus will our reprehension, when it\nis requisite, be credited, and we shall render them averse to vice,\nincreasing their virtue, and showing, by comparing them, how much the\none is more worthy and beseeming them than the other.\n\nBut I indeed am also of opinion, that a statesman should in just causes\ngive testimony to his enemies, stand by them when they are accused by\nsycophants, and discredit imputations brought against them if they are\nrepugnant to their characters; as Nero himself, a little before he put\nto death Thraseas, whom of all men he both most hated and feared, when\none accused him for giving a wrong and unjust sentence, said: I wish\nThraseas was but as great a lover of me, as he is a most upright judge.\nNeither is it amiss for the daunting of others who are by Nature more\ninclined to vice, when they offend, to make mention of some enemy of\ntheirs who is better behaved, and say, Such a one would not have spoken\nor acted thus. And some again, when they transgress, are to be put in\nmind of their virtuous progenitors. Thus Homer says,\n\n    Tydeus has left a son unlike himself.[67]\n\nAnd Appius, contending in the Comitia with Scipio Africanus, said, How\ndeeply, O Paulus, wouldst thou sigh amongst the infernal shades, wert\nthou but sensible that Philonicus the publican guards thy son, who is\ngoing to stand for the office of censor. For such manner of speeches do\nboth admonish the offender, and become their admonishers. Nestor also\nin Sophocles, being reproached by Ajax, thus politicly answers him:\n\n    I blame you not, for you act well, although\n    You speak but ill.\n\nAnd Cato, who had opposed Pompey in his joining with Caesar to force\nthe city, when they fell to open wars, gave his opinion that the\nconduct of the state should be committed to Pompey, saying, that those\nwho are capable to do the greatest mischiefs are fittest to put a\nstop to them. For reprehension mixed with praise, and accompanied not\nwith opprobriousness but liberty of speech, working not animosity but\nremorse and repentance, appears both kind and salutary; but railing\nexpressions do not at all beseem statesmen. Do but look into the\nspeeches of Demosthenes against Aeschines, and of Aeschines against\nhim; and again into what Hyperides has written against Demades,\nand consider whether Solon, Pericles, Lycurgus the Lacedaemonian,\nor Pittacus the Lesbian would have spoken in that manner. And yet\nDemosthenes used this reproachful manner of speaking only in his\njuridical orations or pleadings; for his Philippics are clean and free\nfrom all scoffing and scurrility. For such discourses do not only more\ndisgrace the speakers than the hearers, but do moreover breed confusion\nin affairs, and disturb counsels and assemblies. Wherefore Phocion did\nexcellently well, who, having broken off his speech to give way to one\nthat railed against him, when the other with much ado held his peace,\ngoing on again where he had left off, said: You have already heard what\nhas been spoken of horsemen and heavy armed foot; I am now to treat of\nsuch as are light armed and targeteers.\n\nBut since many persons can hardly contain themselves on such occasions,\nand since railers have often their mouths not impertinently stopped\nby replies; let the answer be short and pithy, not showing any\nindignation or bitterness of anger, but mildness joined with raillery\nand gracefulness, yet somewhat tart and biting. Now such especially are\nthe retortings of what has been spoken before. For as darts returning\nagainst their caster seem to have been repulsed and beaten back by a\ncertain strength and solidity in that against which they were thrown;\nso what was spoken seems by the strength and understanding of the\nreproached to have been turned back upon the reproacher. Such was that\nreply of Epaminondas to Callistratus, who upbraided the Thebans with\nOedipus, and the Argives with Orestes,\u2014one of which had killed his\nfather and the other his mother,\u2014Yet they who did these things, being\nrejected by us, were received by you. Such also was the repartee of\nAntalcidas the Spartan to an Athenian, who said to him, We have often\ndriven you back and pursued you from the Cephissus; But we (replied\nAntalcidas) never yet pursued you from the Eurotas. Phocion also, when\nDemades cried out, The Athenians if they grow mad, will kill thee;\nelegantly replied, And thee, if they come again to their wits. So, when\nDomitius said to Crassus the orator, Did not you weep for the death of\nthe lamprey you kept in your fish-pond?\u2014Did not you, said Crassus to\nhim again, bury three wives without ever shedding a tear? These things\ntherefore have indeed their use also in other parts of a man\u2019s life.\n\n15. Moreover, some, like Cato, thrust themselves into every part of\npolity, thinking a good citizen should not omit any care or industry\nfor the obtaining authority. And these men greatly commend Epaminondas;\nfor that being by the Thebans through envy and in contempt appointed\ntelearch, he did not reject it, but said, that the office does not show\nthe man, but the man also the office. He brought the telearchate into\ngreat and venerable repute, which was before nothing but a certain\ncharge of the carrying the dung out of the narrow streets and lanes\nof the city, and turning of watercourses. Nor do I doubt but that I\nmyself afford matter of laughter to many who come into this our city,\nbeing frequently seen in public employed about such matters. But\nthat comes into my assistance which is related of Antisthenes; for,\nwhen one wondered to see him carry a piece of stock-fish through the\nmarket, \u2019Tis for myself, said he. But I, on the contrary, say to\nthose who upbraid me for being present at and overseeing the measuring\nof tiles, or the bringing in and unloading of clay and stones: It is\nnot for myself, but for my country, that I perform this service. For\nthough he who in his own person manages and does many such things for\nhimself may be judged mean-spirited and mechanical, yet if he does them\nfor the public and for his country, he is not to be deemed sordid;\nbut on the contrary, his diligence and readiness, extending even to\nthese small matters, is to be esteemed greater and more highly to be\nvalued. But others there are, that hold Pericles\u2019s manner of acting\nto have been more magnanimous and august; amongst which Critolaus the\nPeripatetic, who is of opinion that, as at Athens the Salaminian ship\nand the Paralus were not launched forth for every service, but only on\nnecessary and great occasions, so a statesman ought to employ himself\nin the chiefest and greatest affairs, like the King of the universe,\nwho, as Euripides says,\n\n    Reserves great things for his own government,\n    But small things leaves to Fortune\u2019s management.\n\nFor neither do we approve the excessively ambitious and contentious\nspirit of Theagenes, who, having obtained the victory not only through\nthe whole course of public games, but also in many other contests, and\nnot only in wrestling but in buffeting and running of long races, at\nlast, being at the anniversary festival supper of a certain hero, after\nevery one was served, according to the custom, he started up, and fell\nto wrestling, as if it were necessary that no other should conquer when\nhe was present; whence he got together twelve hundred coronets, most of\nwhich one would have taken for rubbish.\n\nNow nothing do they differ from him, who strip themselves for every\npublic affair, and render themselves reprehensible by many, becoming\ntroublesome, and being, when they do well, the subject of envy, and\nwhen they do ill, of rejoicing. And that industry which was at the\nbeginning admired turns afterwards to contempt and laughter. In this\nmanner it was said; Metiochus leads forth the army, Metiochus oversees\nthe highways, Metiochus bakes the bread, Metiochus bolts the meal,\nMetiochus does all things, Metiochus shall suffer for it at last. This\nMetiochus was a follower of Pericles, and made use, it seems, of the\npower he had with him invidiously and disdainfully. For a statesman\nought to find the people when he comes to them (as they say) in love\nwith him, and leave in them a longing after him when he is absent;\nwhich course Scipio Africanus also took, dwelling a long time in the\ncountry, at the same time both removing from himself the burthen of\nenvy, and giving those leisure to breathe, who seemed to be oppressed\nby his glory. But Timesias the Clazomenian, who was otherwise a good\ncommonwealths-man, was ignorant of his being envied and hated for\ndoing all things by himself, till the following accident befell him.\nIt happened that, as he passed by where certain boys were striking\na cockal-bone out of an hole, some of them said, that the bone was\nstill left within; but he who had stricken it cried out, I wish I had\nas certainly beaten out Timesias\u2019s brains, as this bone is out of the\nhole. Timesias, hearing this, and thereby understanding the envy and\nspite borne him by every one, returned home, where he imparted the\nmatter to his wife, and having commanded her to pack up all and follow\nhim, immediately left both his house and the city. And Themistocles\nseems to have been in some such condition amongst the Athenians, when\nhe said: How is it, O ye blessed ones, that you are tired with the\nfrequent receiving of benefits?\n\nNow some of those things have indeed been rightly spoken, others not\nso well. For a statesman ought not to withdraw his affection and\nprovidential care from any public affair whatever, nor reserve himself\nsacred, like the anchor in a ship, for the last necessities and hazards\nof the state. But as the masters of ships do some things with their\nown hands, and perform others, sitting afar off, by other instruments,\nturning and winding them by the hands of others, and making use of\nmariners; boatswains, and mates, some of which they often call to the\nstern, putting the helm into their hands; so it is convenient for a\nstatesman sometimes to yield the command to his companions, and to\ninvite them kindly and civilly to the tribunal, not managing all the\naffairs of the commonweal by his own speeches, decrees, and actions,\nbut having good and faithful men, to employ every one of them in that\nproper and peculiar station which he finds to be most suitable for\nhim. Thus Pericles used Menippus for the conduct of the armies, by\nEphialtes he humbled the council of the Areopagus, by Charinus he\npassed the law against the Megarians, and sent Lampon to people the\ncity of Thurii. For not only is the greatness of authority less liable\nto be envied by the people, when it seems to be divided amongst many;\nbut the business also is more exactly done. For as the division of the\nhand into fingers has not weakened it, but rendered it more commodious\nand instrumental for the uses to which it serves; so he who in the\nadministration of a state gives part of the affairs to others renders\nthe action more efficacious by communicating it. But he who, through\nan unsatiable desire of glory or power, lays the whole burthen of the\nstate upon his own shoulders, and applies himself to that for which he\nis neither fitted by nature nor exercise,\u2014as Cleon did to the leading\nforth of armies, Philopoemen to the commanding of navies, and Hannibal\nto haranguing the people,\u2014has no excuse for his errors; but hears that\nof Euripides objected against him,\n\n    Thou, but a carpenter, concernd\u2019st thyself\n    With works not wrought in wood;\u2014\n\nbeing no good orator, you went on an embassage; being of a lazy temper,\nyou thrust yourself into the stewardship; being ignorant in keeping\naccounts, you would be treasurer; or, being old and infirm, you took\non you the command of the army. But Pericles divided his authority\nwith Cimon, reserving to himself the governing within the city, and\ncommitting to him the manning of the navy and making war upon the\nbarbarians; for the other was naturally fitted for war, and himself for\ncivil affairs. Eubulus also the Anaphlystian is much commended, that,\nhaving credit and authority in matters of the greatest importance,\nhe managed none of the Grecian affairs, nor betook himself to the\nconducting of the army; but employing himself about the treasure, he\naugmented the public revenues, and greatly benefited the city by them.\nBut Iphicrates, practising to make declamations at his own house in\nthe presence of many, rendered himself ridiculous; for though he had\nbeen no bad orator but an excellently good one, yet ought he to have\ncontented himself with the glory got by arms, and abstaining from the\nschool, to have left it to the sophisters.\n\n16. But since it is incident to every populacy to be malicious and\ndesirous to find fault with their governors, and since they are apt\nto suspect that many, even useful things, if they pass without being\nopposed or contradicted, are done by conspiracy, and since this\nprincipally brings societies and friendships into obloquy; they must\nnot indeed leave any real enmity or dissension against themselves,\nas did Onomademus, a demagogue of the Chians, who, having mastered a\nsedition, suffered not all his adversaries to be expelled the city;\nlest, said he, we should begin to differ with our friends, when we\nare wholly freed from our enemies; for this would be indeed a folly.\nBut when the multitude shall have conceived a suspicion against\nany important beneficial project, they must not, as if it were by\nconfederacy, all deliver the same opinion; but two or three of them\nmust dissent, and mildly oppose their friend, and afterwards, as if\nthey were convinced by reason, change their sentiments; for by this\nmeans they draw along with them the people, who think them moved by\nthe beneficialness of the thing. But in small matters, and such as are\nof no great consequence, it is not amiss to suffer his friends really\nto differ, every one following his own private reason; that so in the\nprincipal and greatest concerns, they may not seem to act upon design,\nwhen they shall unanimously agree to what is best.\n\n17. The politician therefore is by nature always the prince of the\ncity, as the king among the bees; and in consideration of this, he\nought always to have the helm of public affairs in his hand. But as\nfor those dignities and offices to which persons are nominated and\nchosen by the suffrages of the people, he should neither too eagerly\nnor too often pursue them,\u2014the seeking after offices being neither\nvenerable nor popular,\u2014nor yet should he reject them, when the people\nlegally confer them on him and invite him to them, but even though they\nare below his reputation, he should accept them and willingly employ\nhimself in them; for it is but just that they who have been honored by\noffices of greater dignity should in return grace those of inferior\nrank. And in those more weighty and superior employs, such as are the\ncommanding of the armies in Athens, the Prytania in Rhodes, and the\nBoeotarchy amongst us, he should carry himself with such moderation\nas to remit and abate something of their grandeur, adding somewhat of\ndignity and venerableness to those that are meaner and less esteemed,\nthat he may be neither despised for these nor envied for those.\n\nNow it behooves him that enters upon any office, not only to have at\nhand those arguments of which Pericles put himself in mind when he\nfirst received the robe of state: Bethink thyself, Pericles, thou\ngovern\u2019st freemen, thou govern\u2019st Grecians, yea, citizens of Athens;\nbut farther also, he ought to say thus with himself: Thou, being a\nsubject, govern\u2019st a city which is under the obedience of Caesar\u2019s\nproconsul or lieutenant. Here is no fight in a fair field, this is not\nthe ancient Sardis, nor is this the puissance of the Lydians. Thou must\nmake thy robe scantier, look from the pavilion to the tribunal, and not\nplace too great confidence in thy crown, since thou see\u2019st the Roman\u2019s\nshoes over thy head. But in this the stage-players are to be imitated,\nwho add indeed to the play their own passionate transports, behavior,\nand countenance, suitable to the person they represent, but yet give\near to the prompter, and transgress not the rhyme and measures of the\nfaculty granted them by their masters. For an error in government\nbrings not, as in the acting of a tragedy, only hissing and derision;\nbut many have by this means subjected themselves to that\n\n    Severe chastiser, the neck-cutting axe.\n\nAs it befell your countryman Pardalas, when he forgot the limits of\nhis power. Another, being banished from home and confined to a little\nisland, as Solon has it,\n\n    Became at last from an Athenian\n    A Pholegandrian or Sicinitan.\n\nFor we laugh indeed, when we see little children endeavoring to fasten\ntheir father\u2019s shoes on their own feet, or setting their crowns on\ntheir own heads in sport. But the governors of cities, foolishly\nexhorting the people to imitate those works, achievements, and actions\nof their ancestors which are not suitable to the present times and\naffairs, elevate the multitude, and although they do things that are\nridiculous, they yet meet with a fate which is not fit to be laughed\nat, unless they are men altogether despised. For there are many other\nfacts of the ancient Greeks, the recital of which to those who are\nnow living may serve to form and moderate their manners; as would be\nthe relating at Athens, not the warlike exploits of their progenitors,\nbut (for example) the decree of amnesty after the expulsion of the\nThirty Tyrants; the fining of Phrynicus, who represented in a tragedy\nthe taking of Miletus; how they wore garlands on their heads when\nCassander rebuilt Thebes; how, having intelligence of the Scytalism (or\nslaughter) at Argos in which the Argives put to death fifteen hundred\nof their own citizens, they commanded a lustration (or expiatory\nsacrifice) to be carried about in a full assembly; and how, when\nthey were searching of houses for those that were confederated with\nHarpalus, they passed by only one, which was inhabited by a man newly\nmarried. For by the imitating of such things as these, they may even\nnow resemble their ancestors; but the fights at Marathon, Eurymedon,\nand Plataea, and whatever examples vainly puff up and heighten the\nmultitude, should be left to the schools of the sophisters.\n\n18. Now a statesman ought not only to exhibit himself and his country\nblameless to the prince, but also to have always for his friend some\none of those that are most powerful above, as a firm support of polity;\nfor the Romans are of such a disposition, that they are most ready to\nassist their friends in their political endeavors. It is good also,\nwhen we have received benefit from friendship with princes, to apply\nit to the advancement of our country; as did Polybius and Panaetius,\nwho through the favor of Scipio to them greatly advantaged their\ncountries for the obtaining felicity. So Caesar Augustus, when he had\ntaken Alexandria, made his entry into it, holding Arius by the hand,\nand discoursing with him alone of all his familiars; after which he\nsaid to the Alexandrians, who expecting the utmost severity supplicated\nhis favor, that he pardoned them first for the greatness of their\ncity, secondly for its builder, Alexander, and thirdly, added he, to\ngratify this my friend. Is it then fit to compare to this benefit those\nexceeding gainful commissions and administrations of provinces, in\nthe pursuit of which many even grow old at other men\u2019s doors, leaving\ntheir own domestic affairs in the mean time unregarded? Or should we\nrather correct Euripides, singing and saying that, if one must watch\nand sue at another\u2019s court and subject one\u2019s self to some great man\u2019s\nfamiliarity, it is most commendable so to do for the sake of one\u2019s\ncountry; but otherwise, we should embrace and pursue friendships on\nequal and just conditions.\n\n19. Yet ought not he who renders and exhibits his country obsequious\nto potent princes to contribute to the oppressing of it, nor having\ntied its legs to subject also its neck, as some do who, referring all\nthings both great and little to these potentates, upbraid it with\nservitude, or rather wholly take away the commonwealth, rendering it\nastonished, timorous, and without command of any thing. For as those\nwho are accustomed neither to sup nor bathe without the physician do\nnot make so much use of their health as Nature affords them; so they\nwho introduce the prince\u2019s judgment into every decree, council, favor,\nand administration, necessitate the princes to be more masters of them\nthan they desire. Now the cause of this is principally the avarice\nand ambition of the chief citizens. For either, by injuring their\ninferiors, they compel them to fly out of the city; or in such things\nwherein they differ from one another, disdaining to be worsted by their\nfellow-citizens, they bring in such as are more powerful, whence both\nthe council, people, courts of judicature, and whole magistracy lose\ntheir authority. But he ought to appease private citizens by equality,\nand mightier men by mutual submissions, so as to keep peace within the\ncommonweal, and coolly to determine their affairs; making for these\nthings, as it were for secret diseases, a certain political medicine,\nboth being himself rather willing to be vanquished amongst his\nfellow-citizens, than to get the better by the injury and dissolution\nof his country\u2019s rights, and requesting the same of every one else,\nand teaching them how great a mischief this obstinacy in contending\nis. But now, rather than they will with honor and benignity mutually\nyield to their fellow-citizens, kinsmen, neighbors, and colleagues in\noffice, they do, with no less prejudice than shame, carry forth their\ndissensions to the doors of the pleaders, and put them into the hands\nof pragmatical lawyers.\n\nPhysicians indeed turn and drive forth into the superficies of the\nbody such diseases as they are not able utterly to extirpate; but a\nstatesman, though he cannot keep a city altogether free from internal\ntroubles, yet should, by concealing its disturbance and sedition,\nendeavor to cure and compose it, so that it may least stand in need of\nphysicians and medicines from abroad. For the intention of a statesman\nshould be fixed upon the public safety, and should shun, as has been\nsaid, the tumultuous and furious motion of vain-glory; and yet in his\ndisposition there should be magnanimity,\n\n    And undaunted courage,\u2014as becomes\n    The men, who are for their dear country\u2019s right\n    Prepared till death \u2019gainst stoutest foes to fight,[68]\n\nand who are bravely resolved, not only to hazard their lives against\nthe assaults of invading enemies, but also to struggle with the most\ndifficult affairs, and stem the torrent of the most dangerous and\nimpetuous times. For as he must not himself be a creator of storms and\ntempests, so neither must he abandon the ship of the state when they\ncome upon it; and as he ought not to raise commotions and drive it into\ndanger, so is he obliged, when it is tossed and is in peril, to give\nit his utmost assistance, putting forth all his boldness of speech, as\nhe would throw out a sacred anchor when affairs are at the greatest\nextremity.\n\nSuch were the difficulties that befell the Pergamenians under Nero, and\nthe Rhodians lately under Domitian, and the Thessalians heretofore in\nthe time of Augustus, when they burned Petraeus alive.\n\n    You shall not in this case demurring see,[69]\n\nor starting back for fear, any one who is truly a statesman; neither\nshall you find him accusing others and withdrawing himself out of\nharm\u2019s way; but you shall have him rather going on embassies, sailing\nto foreign parts, and not only saying first,\n\n    We\u2019re here, Apollo, who the murther wrought,\n    No longer plague our country for our fault,\n\nbut also ready to undergo perils and dangers for the multitude, even\nthough he has not been at all partaker of their crime. For this indeed\nis a gallant action; and besides its honesty, one only man\u2019s virtue and\nmagnanimity has often wonderfully mitigated the anger conceived against\na whole multitude, and dissipated the terror and bitterness with which\nthey were threatened. Such an influence with a king of Persia had the\ndeportment of Sperchis and Bulis, two noble Spartans; and equally\nprevalent was the speech of Stheno with Pompey, when, being about to\npunish the Mamertines for their defection, he was told by Stheno, that\nhe would not act justly if he should for one guilty person destroy\nabundance of innocents; for that he himself had caused the revolt of\nthe city, by persuading his friends and forcing his enemies to that\nattempt. This speech did so dispose Pompey, that he both pardoned the\ncity and courteously treated Stheno. But Sylla\u2019s host, having used the\nlike virtue towards an unlike person, generously ended his days. For\nwhen Sylla, having taken the city of Praeneste, determined to put all\nthe rest of the inhabitants to the sword, and to spare only him for the\nhospitality that had been between them, he, saying that he would not be\nindebted for his preservation to the destroyer of his country, thrust\nhimself in amongst his fellow-citizens, and was massacred with them. We\nought therefore indeed to deprecate such times as these, and hope for\nbetter things.\n\n20. Moreover, we should honor, as a great and sacred thing, every\nmagistracy and magistrate. Now the mutual concord and friendship of\nmagistrates with one another is a far greater honor of magistracy\nthan their diadems and purple-garded robes. Now those who lay for a\nfoundation of friendship their having been fellow-soldiers or having\nspent their youth together, and take their being joint commanders or\nco-magistrates for a cause of enmity, cannot avoid being guilty of\none of these three evils. For either, regarding their colleagues in\ngovernment as their equals, they brangle with them; or looking on them\nas their superiors, they envy them; or esteeming them their inferiors,\nthey despise them; whereas, indeed, one ought to court his superior,\nadvance his inferior, honor his equal, and love and embrace all, as\nhaving been made friends, not by eating at the same table, drinking in\nthe same cup, or meeting at the same solemn feast, but by a common and\npublic bond, and having in some sort an hereditary benevolence derived\nfrom their country. Scipio therefore was ill spoken of in Rome, for\nthat, making a feast for his friends at the dedication of a temple\nto Hercules, he invited not to it his colleague Mummius; for, though\nin other things they took not one another for friends, yet in such\noccurrences as these they should have mutually honored and caressed\neach other, for the sake of their common magistracy. If then the\nomission of so small a civility brought Scipio, who was otherwise an\nadmirable man, under a suspicion of arrogancy; how can he who seeks\nto impair the dignity of his colleague, or to obfuscate the lustre of\nhis actions, or through insolency to draw and attribute all things to\nhimself, taking them wholly from his companion, be esteemed reasonable\nand moderate? I remember that, when I was yet but a young man, being\njointly with another sent on an embassy to the proconsul, and my\ncompanion\u2014I know not on what occasion\u2014stopping by the way, I went on\nalone and performed the affair. Now when at my return I was to render\nan account of my charge, my father, taking me aside, admonished me not\nto say _I went_ but _We went_, not _I spoke_ but _We spoke_, and so\nthrough all the rest to make my report by associating my companion, and\nrendering him a sharer in my actions. For this is not only decent and\ncourteous, but also takes from glory what is offensive, that is, envy.\nWhence it is that great men generally co-ascribe their most glorious\nactions to their Daemon or Fortune; as did Timoleon, who having\ndestroyed the tyrannies in Sicily, consecrated a temple to Chance;\nand Python, when, being admired and honored by the Athenians for\nhaving slain Cotys, he said, God did this, making use of my hand. But\nTheopompus, king of the Lacedaemonians, when one said that Sparta was\npreserved because its kings were well skilled in governing, replied:\n\u2019Tis rather because the people are well versed in obeying.\n\n21. These two things then are affected by each other; yet most men both\nsay and think that the business of political instruction is to render\nthe people pliable to be governed. For there are in every city more\ngoverned than governors, and every one who lives in a democracy rules\nonly a short time, but is subject all his life, so that it is the most\nexcellent and useful lesson we can learn, to obey those who are set\nover us, though they are less furnished with authority and reputation.\n\nFor it is absurd that a Theodorus or a Polus, the principal actor in\na tragedy, should often obey a hireling who plays the third part, and\nspeak humbly to him because he wears a diadem and a sceptre; and that\nin real actions and in the government of the state, a rich and mighty\nman should undervalue and contemn a magistrate because he is simple\nand poor, thus injuring and degrading the dignity of the commonweal by\nhis own; whereas he should rather by his own reputation and authority\nhave increased and advanced that of the magistrate. As in Sparta the\nkings rose up out of their thrones to the ephors, and whoever else\nwas sent for by them did not slowly obey, but running hastily and\nwith speed through the forum, gave a pattern of obedience to his\nfellow-citizens, whilst he gloried in honoring the magistrates; not\nlike to some ill-bred and barbarous persons, who, priding themselves in\nthe abundance of their power, affront the judges of the public combats,\nrevile the directors of the dances in the Bacchanals, and deride\nmilitary commanders and these that preside over the exercises of youth,\nneither knowing nor understanding that to honor is sometimes more\nglorious than to be honored. For to a man of great authority in a city,\nhis accompanying and attending on the magistrate is a greater grace\nthan if he were himself accompanied and attended on by him; or rather\nthis indeed would bring trouble and envy, but that brings real glory,\nand such as proceeds from kindness and good-will. And such a man, being\nseen sometimes at the magistrate\u2019s door, and saluting him first, and\ngiving him the middle place in walking, does, without taking any thing\nfrom himself, add ornament to the city.\n\n22. It is also a popular thing and wins greatly on the multitude, to\nbear patiently the reproaches and indignation of a magistrate, saying\neither with Diomedes,\n\n    Great glory soon will follow this,[70]\n\nor this, which was sometime said by Demosthenes,\u2014that he is not now\nDemosthenes only, but a magistrate, or a director of public dances,\nor a wearer of a diadem. Let us therefore lay aside our revenge for a\ntime; for either we shall come upon him when he is dismissed from his\noffice, or shall by delaying gain a cessation of anger.\n\n23. Indeed one should in diligence, providence, and care for the\npublic always strive with every magistrate, advising them,\u2014if they are\ngracious and well behaved,\u2014of such things as are requisite, warning\nthem, and giving them opportunities to make use of such things as\nhave been rightly counselled, and helping them to advance the common\ngood; but if there is in them any sloth, delay, or ill-disposedness\nto action, then ought one to go himself and speak to the people, and\nnot to neglect or omit the public on pretence that it becomes not one\nmagistrate to be curious and play the busybody in another\u2019s province.\nFor the law always gives the first rank in government to him who\ndoes what is just and knows what is convenient. \u201cThere was,\u201d says\nXenophon,[71] \u201cone in the army named Xenophon, who was neither general\nnor inferior commander;\u201d but yet this man, by his skill in what was fit\nand boldness in attempting, raising himself to command, preserved the\nGrecians. Now of all Philopoemen\u2019s deeds this is the most illustrious,\nthat Agis[72] having surprised Messene, and the general of the Achaeans\nbeing unwilling and fearful to go and rescue it, he with some of the\nforwardest spirits did without a commission make an assault and recover\nit. Yet are we not to attempt innovations on every light or trivial\noccasion; but only in cases of necessity, as did Philopoemen, or for\nthe performance of some honorable actions, as did Epaminondas when he\ncontinued in the Boeotarchy four months longer than was allowed by\nthe law, during which he brake into Laconia and re-edified Messene.\nWhence, if any complaint or accusation shall on this occasion happen,\nwe may in our defence against such accusation plead necessity, or have\nthe greatness and gallantry of the action as a comfort for the danger.\n\n24. There is recorded a saying of Jason, monarch of the Thessalians,\nwhich he always had in his mouth when he outraged or molested any, that\nthere is a necessity for those to be unjust in small matters who will\nact justly in great ones. Now that speech one may presently discern\nto have been made by a despot. But more political is this precept, to\ngratify the populacy with the passing over small things, that we may\noppose and hinder them when they are like to offend in greater. For\nhe that will be exact and earnest in all things, never yielding or\nconniving, but always severe and inexorable, accustoms the people to\nstrive obstinately, and behave themselves perversely towards him.\n\n    But when the waves beat high, the sheet should be\n    A little slackened,\u2014\n\nsometimes by unbending himself and sporting graciously with them,\nas in the celebrating of festival sacrifices, assisting at public\ngames, and being a spectator at the theatres, and sometimes by seeming\nneither to see nor hear, as we pass by the faults of such children in\nour houses; that the faculty of freely chastising and reprehending,\nbeing\u2014like a medicine\u2014not antiquated or debilitated by use, but having\nits full vigor and authority, may more forcibly move and operate on the\nmultitude in matters of greater importance.\n\nAlexander, being informed that his sister was too familiarly acquainted\nwith a certain handsome young man, was not displeased at it, but said,\nthat she also must be permitted to have some enjoyment of the royalty;\nacting in this concession neither rightly nor as beseemed himself; for\nthe dissolution and dishonoring of the state ought not to be esteemed\nan enjoyment. But a statesman will not to his power permit the people\nto injure any private citizens, to confiscate other men\u2019s estates,\nor to share the public stock amongst them; but will by persuading,\ninstructing, and threatening oppugn such irregular desires, by the\nfeeding and increasing of which Cleon caused many a stinging drone, as\nPlato says, to breed in the city. But if the multitude, taking occasion\nfrom some solemn feast of the country or the veneration of some God,\nshall be inclined either to exhibit some show, to make some small\ndistribution, to bestow some courteous gratification, or to perform\nsome other magnificence, let them in such matters have an enjoyment\nboth of their liberality and abundance. For there are many examples of\nsuch things in the governments of Pericles and Demetrius; and Cimon\nadorned the market-place by planting rows of plane-trees and making\nof walks. Cato also, seeing the populacy in the time of Catiline\u2019s\nconspiracy put in a commotion by Caesar, and dangerously inclined to\nmake a change in the government, persuaded the senate to decree some\ndistributions of money amongst the poor, and this being done appeased\nthe tumult and quieted the sedition. For, as a physician, having taken\nfrom his patient great store of corrupt blood, gives him a little\ninnocent nourishment; so a statesman, having taken from the people some\ngreat thing which was either inglorious or prejudicial, does again by\nsome small and courteous gratuity still their morose and complaining\nhumor.\n\n25. It is not amiss also dexterously to turn aside the eager desires\nof the people to other useful things, as Demades did when he had the\nrevenues of the city under his management. For they being bent to\nsend galleys to the assistance of those who were in rebellion against\nAlexander, and commanding him to furnish out money for that purpose,\nhe said to them: You have money ready, for I have made provision\nagainst the Bacchanals, that every one of you may receive half a mina;\nbut if you had rather have it employed this way, make use as you\nplease of your own. And by this means taking them off from sending\nthe fleet, lest they should be deprived of the dividend, he kept the\npeople from offending Alexander. For there are many prejudicial things\nto which we cannot directly put a stop, but we must for that end make\nuse of turning and winding; as did Phocion, when he was required at an\nunseasonable time to make an incursion into Boeotia. For he immediately\ncaused proclamation to be made, that all from sixteen years of age to\nsixty should prepare to follow him; and when there arose upon it a\nmutiny amongst the old men, he said: There is no hardship put upon you,\nfor I, who am above fourscore years old, shall be your general. In this\nmanner also is the sending of embassies to be put off, by joining in\nthe commission such as are unprepared; and the raising of unprofitable\nbuildings, by bidding them contribute to it; and the following of\nindecent suits, by ordering the prosecutors to appear together and go\ntogether from the court. Now the proposers and inciters of the people\nto such things are first to be drawn and associated for the doing them;\nfor so they will either by their shifting it off seem to break the\nmatter, or by their accepting of it have their share in the trouble.\n\n26. But when some great and useful matter, yet such as requires much\nstruggling and industry, is to be taken in hand, endeavor to choose\nthe most powerful of your friends, or rather the mildest of the most\npowerful; for they will least thwart you and most co-operate with you,\nhaving wisdom without a contentious humor. Nevertheless, thoroughly\nunderstanding your own nature, you ought, in that for which you are\nnaturally less fit, rather to make choice of such as are of suitable\nabilities, than of such as are like yourself; as Diomedes, when he\nwent forth to spy, passing by the valiant, took for his companion\none that was prudent and cautious. For thus are actions better\ncounterpoised, and there is no contention bred betwixt them, when they\ndesire honor from different virtues and qualities. If therefore you are\nyourself no good speaker, choose for your assistant in a suit or your\ncompanion in an embassy an eloquent man, as Pelopidas did Epaminondas;\nif you are unfit to persuade and converse with the multitude, being too\nhigh-minded for it, as was Callicratidas, take one that is gracious\nand courtly; if you are infirm of body and unable to undergo fatigues,\nmake choice of one who is robust and a lover of labor, as Nicias did\nof Lamachus. For thus Geryon would have become admirable, having many\nlegs, hands, and eyes, if only they had been all governed by one soul.\nBut it is in the power of statesmen\u2014by conferring together, if they are\nunanimous, not only their bodies and wealth, but also their fortunes,\nauthorities, and virtues, to one common use\u2014to perform the same action\nwith greater glory than any one person; not as did the Argonauts, who,\nhaving left Hercules, were necessitated to have recourse to female\nsubtleties and be subject to enchantments and sorceries, that they\nmight save themselves and steal away the fleece.\n\nMen indeed entering into some temples leave their gold without; but\niron, that I may speak my mind in a word, they never carry into any.\nSince then the tribunal is a temple common to Jupiter the counsellor\nand protector of cities, to Themis, and to Justice, from the very\nbeginning, before thou enterest into it, stripping thy soul of avarice\nand the love of wealth, cast them into the shops of bankers and usurers,\n\n    And from them turn thyself,[73]\n\nesteeming him who heaps up treasures by the management of public\naffairs to rob the temples, plunder graves, and steal from his friends,\nand enriching himself by treachery and bearing of false witness, to be\nan unfaithful counsellor, a perjured judge, a bribe-taking magistrate,\nand in brief, free from no injustice. Whence it is not necessary to say\nmuch concerning this matter.\n\n27. Now ambition, though it is more specious than covetousness, brings\nyet no less plagues into a state. For it is usually more accompanied\nwith boldness, as being bred, not in slothful and abject spirits,\nbut chiefly in such as are vigorous and active; and the vogue of the\npeople, frequently extolling it and driving it by their praises,\nrenders it thereby headstrong and hard to be managed. As therefore\nPlato advised, that we should even from our infancy inculcate into\nyoung people, that it is not fit for them to wear gold about them\nabroad nor yet to be possessors of it, as having a peculiar treasure\nof their own, immixed with their souls,\u2014enigmatically, as I conceive,\ninsinuating the virtue propagated in their natures from the race\nor stock of which they are descended,\u2014so let us also moderate our\nambition by saying, that we have in ourselves uncorrupted gold, that\nis, honor unmixed, and free from envy and reprehension, which is still\naugmented by the consideration and contemplation of our acts and jests\nin the service of the commonweal. Wherefore we stand not in need of\nhonors painted, cast, or engraven in brass, in which what is most\nadmired frequently belongs to another. For the statue of a trumpeter\nor halberdier is not commended or esteemed for the sake of the person\nwhom it is made to represent, but for that of the workman by whom it is\nmade. And Cato, when Rome was in a manner filled with statues, would\nnot suffer his to be erected, saying, I had rather men should ask why\nmy statue is not set up, than why it is. For such things are subject\nto envy, and the people think themselves obliged to those who have\nnot received them; whereas those who have received them are esteemed\nburthensome, as seeking public employs for a reward. For as he does\nno great or glorious act who, having without danger sailed along the\nSyrtis, is afterwards cast away in the harbor; so he who, having kept\nhimself safe in passing through the treasury and the management of\nthe public revenues, is caught with a presidency or a place in the\nPrytaneum, not only dashes against an high promontory, but is likewise\ndrowned.\n\nHe then is best, who desires none of these things, but shuns and\nrefuses them all. But if perhaps it is not easy wholly to decline a\nfavor or testimonial of the people\u2019s amity, when they are fully bent to\nbestow it, yet for those who have in the service of the state contended\nnot for silver or presents, but have fought a fight truly sacred and\ndeserving a crown, let an inscription, a tablet, a decree, or a branch\nof laurel or olive suffice, such as Epimenides received out of the\ncastle of Athens for having purified the city. So Anaxagoras, putting\nback the other honors that were given him, desired that on the day of\nhis death the children might have leave to play and intermit their\nstudies. And to the seven Persians who killed the Magi it was granted\nthat they and their posterity should wear their turban on the fore part\nof the head; for this, it seems, they had made the signal, when they\nwent about that attempt. The honor also which Pittacus received had\nsomething political; for being bid to take what portion he would of the\nland he had gotten for his citizens, he accepted as much as he could\nreach with the cast of his dart. So Cocles the Roman took as much as he\nhimself, being lame, could plough in a day. For the honor should not be\na recompense of the action, but an acknowledgment of gratitude, that\nit may continue also long, as those did which we have mentioned. But\nof the three hundred statues erected to Demetrius Phalereus, not one\nwas eaten into by rust or covered with filth, they being all pulled\ndown whilst himself was yet alive; and those of Demades were melted\ninto chamber-pots. Many other honors also have undergone the like fate,\nbeing regarded with an ill eye, not only for the wickedness of the\nreceiver, but also for the greatness of the gift. A moderation in the\nexpense is therefore the best and surest preservative of honors; for\nsuch as are great, immense, and ponderous are like to unproportioned\nstatues, soon overthrown.\n\n28. Now I here call those honors which the people,\n\n    Whose right it is, so name; with them I speak:\n\nas Empedocles has it; since a wise statesman will not despise true\nhonor and favor, consisting in the good-will and friendly disposition\nof those who gratefully remember his services; nor will he contemn\nglory by shunning to please his neighbors, as Democritus would have\nhim. For neither the fawning of dogs nor the affection of horses is to\nbe rejected by huntsmen and jockeys; nay, it is both profitable and\npleasant to breed in those animals which are brought up in our houses\nand live with us, such a disposition towards one\u2019s self as Lysimachus\u2019s\ndog showed to his master, and as the poet relates Achilles\u2019s horses to\nhave had towards Patroclus.[74] And I am of opinion that bees would\nfare better if they would make much of those who breed them and look\nafter them, and would admit them to come near them, than they do by\nstinging them and driving them away; for now their keepers punish\nthem by smothering them with smoke; so they tame unruly horses with\nshort bits; and dogs that are apt to run away, by collaring them and\nfastening them to clogs. But there is nothing which renders one man\nso obsequious and submissive to another, as the confidence of his\ngood-will, and the opinion of his integrity and justice. Wherefore\nDemosthenes rightly affirmed, that the greatest preservative of\nstates against tyrants is distrust. For the part of the soul by which\nwe believe is most apt to be caught. As therefore Cassandra\u2019s gift of\nprophecy was of no advantage to the citizens of Troy, who would not\nbelieve her:\n\n    The God (says she) would have me to foretell\n    Things unbelieved; for when the people well\n    Have smarted, groaning under pressures sad,\n    They style me wise, till then they think me mad;\n\nso the confidence the citizens had in Archytas, and their good-will\ntowards Battus, were highly advantageous to those who would make use of\nthem through the good opinion they had of them.\n\nNow the first greatest benefit which is in the reputation of statesmen\nis the confidence that is had in them, giving them an entrance into\naffairs; and the second is, that the good-will of the multitude is an\narmor to the good against those that are envious and wicked; for,\n\n    As when the careful mother drives the flies\n    From her dear babe, which sweetly sleeping lies,[75]\n\nit chases away envy, and renders the plebeian equal in authority\nto the nobleman, the poor man to the rich, and the private man to\nthe magistrates; and in a word, when truth and virtue are joined\nwith it, it is a strange and favorable wind, directly carrying men\ninto government. And on the other side behold and learn by examples\nthe mischievous effects of the contrary disposition. For those of\nItaly slew the wife and children of Dionysius, having first violated\nand polluted them with their lusts; and afterwards burning their\nbodies, scattered the ashes out of the ship into the sea. But when\none Menander, who had reigned graciously over the Bactrians, died\nafterwards in the camp, the cities indeed by common consent celebrated\nhis funeral; but coming to a contest about his relics, they were\ndifficultly at last brought to this agreement, that his ashes being\ndistributed, every one of them should carry away an equal share, and\nthey should all erect monuments to him. Again, the Agrigentines,\nbeing got rid of Phalaris, made a decree, that none should wear a\nblue garment; for the tyrant\u2019s attendants had blue liveries. But the\nPersians, because Cyrus was hawk-nosed, do to this day love such men\nand esteem them handsomest.\n\n29. That is of all loves the strongest and divinest, which is by cities\nand states borne to any man for his virtue. But those false-named\nhonors and false testimonials of amity, which have their rise from\nstage-plays, largesses, and fencings, are not unlike the flatteries\nof whores; the people always with smiles bestowing an unconstant and\nshort-lived glory on him that presents them and gratifies them.\n\nHe therefore who said, the people were first overthrown by him which\nfirst bestowed largesses on them, very well understood that the\nmultitude lose their strength, being rendered weaker by receiving. But\nthese bestowers must also know that they destroy themselves, when,\npurchasing glory at great expenses, they make the multitude haughty and\narrogant, as having it in their power to give and take away some very\ngreat matter.\n\n30. Yet are we not therefore to act sordidly in the distribution of\nhonorary presents, when there is plenty enough. For the people more\nhate a rich man who gives nothing of his own, than they do a poor man\nthat robs the public treasury; attributing the former to pride and a\ncontempt of them, but the latter to necessity. First, therefore, let\nthese largesses be made gratis, for so they more oblige the receivers,\nand strike them with admiration; then, on some occasion that has a\nhandsome and laudable pretence, with the honor of some God wholly\ndrawing the people to devotion; for so there is at the same time bred\nin them a strong apprehension and opinion that the Deity is great\nand venerable, when they see those whom they honor and highly esteem\nso bountifully and readily expending their wealth upon his honor. As\ntherefore Plato forbade young men who were to be liberally educated\nto learn the Lydian and Phrygian harmony,\u2014one of which excites the\nmournful and melancholy part of our soul, whilst the other increases\nits inclination to pleasure and sensual delight,\u2014so do you, as much\nas possibly you can, drive out of the city all such largesses as\neither foster and cherish brutality and savageness, or scurrility and\nlasciviousness; and if that cannot be, at least shun them, and oppose\nthe many when they desire such spectacles; always making the subjects\nof our expenses useful and modest, having for their end what is good\nand necessary, or at least what is pleasant and acceptable, without any\nprejudice or injury.\n\n31. But if your estate be but indifferent, and by its centre and\ncircumference confined to your necessary use, it is neither ungenerous\nnor base to confess your poverty and give place to such as are provided\nfor those honorary expenses, and not, by taking up money on usury,\nto render yourself at the same time both miserable and ridiculous by\nsuch services. For they whose abilities fall short cannot well conceal\nthemselves, being compelled either to be troublesome to their friends,\nor to court and flatter usurers, so that they get not any honor or\npower, but rather shame and contempt by such expenses. It is therefore\nalways useful on such occasions to call to mind Lamachus and Phocion.\nFor Phocion, when the Athenians at a solemn sacrifice called upon him,\nand often importuned him to give them something, said to them, I should\nbe ashamed to give to you, and not pay this Callicles,\u2014pointing to an\nusurer who was standing by. And as for Lamachus, he always put down in\nhis bill of charges, when he was general, the money laid out for his\nshoes and coat. And to Hermon, when he refused the undertaking of an\noffice because of his poverty, the Thessalians ordained a puncheon of\nwine a month, and a bushel and a half of meal every four days. It is\ntherefore no shame to confess one\u2019s poverty; nor are the poor in cities\nof less authority than those who feast and exhibit public shows, if\nthey have but gotten freedom of speech and reputation by their virtue.\n\nA statesman ought therefore chiefly to moderate himself on such\noccasions, and neither, being himself on foot, go into the field\nagainst well-mounted cavaliers, nor, being himself poor, vie with those\nthat are rich about race matches, theatrical pomps, and magnificent\ntables and banquets; but he should rather strive to be like those who\nendeavor to manage the city by virtue and prudence, always joined with\neloquence; in which there is not only honesty and venerableness, but\nalso a gracefulness and attractiveness,\n\n    Far more to be desired than Croesus\u2019 wealth.\n\nFor a good man is neither insolent nor odious; nor is a discreet person\nself-conceited,\n\n    Nor with a look severe walks he amongst\n    His fellow-citizens;\n\nbut he is, on the contrary, courteous, affable, and of easy access\nto all, having his house always open, as a port of refuge to those\nthat will make use of him, and showing his care and kindness, not\nonly by being assistant in the necessities and affairs of those that\nhave recourse to him, but also by condoling with those that are in\nadversity, and congratulating and rejoicing with such as have been\nsuccessful; neither is he troublesome or offensive by the multitude and\ntrain of domestics attending him at bath, or by taking up of places\nin the theatres, nor remarkable by things invidious for luxury and\nsumptuousness; but he is equal and like to others in his clothes, diet,\neducation of his children, and the garb and attendance of his wife, as\ndesiring in his comportment and manner of living to be like the rest\nof the people. Then he exhibits himself an intelligent counsellor, an\nunfeed advocate and courteous arbitrator between men and their wives,\nand friends at variance amongst themselves; not spending a small part\nof the day for the service of the commonweal at the tribunal or in the\nhall of audience, and employing all the rest, and the whole remainder\nof his life, in drawing to himself every sort of negotiations and\naffairs, as the north-east wind does the clouds; but always employing\nhis cares on the public, and reputing polity (or the administration\nof the state) as a busy and active life, and not, as it is commonly\nthought, an easy and idle service; he does by all these and such\nlike things turn and draw the many, who see that all the flatteries\nand enticements of others are but spurious and deceitful baits, when\ncompared to his care and providence. The flatterers indeed of Demetrius\nvouchsafed not to give the other potentates of his time, amongst\nwhom Alexander\u2019s empire was divided, the title of kings, but styled\nSeleucus master of the elephants, Lysimachus treasurer, Ptolemaeus\nadmiral, and Agathocles governor of the isles. But the multitude,\nthough they may at the beginning reject a good and prudent man, yet\ncoming afterwards to understand his veracity and the sincerity of his\ndisposition, esteem him a public-spirited person and a magistrate; and\nof the others, they think and call one a maintainer of choruses, a\nsecond a feaster, and a third a master of the exercises. Moreover, as\nat the banquets made by Callias or Alcibiades, Socrates only is heard,\nand to Socrates all men\u2019s eyes are directed; so in sound and healthy\nstates Ismenias bestows largesses, Lichas makes suppers, and Niceratus\nprovides choruses; but it is Epaminondas, Aristides, and Lysander\nthat govern, manage the state, and lead forth the armies. Which if\nany one considers, he ought not to be dejected or amazed at the glory\ngotten amongst the people from theatres, banqueting-halls, and public\nbuildings; since it lasts but a short time, being at an end as soon as\nthe prizes and plays are over, and having in them nothing honorable or\nworthy of esteem.\n\n32. Those that are versed in the keeping and breeding of bees look\non that hive to be healthiest and in best condition, where there is\nmost humming, and which is fullest of bustle and noise; but he to\nwhom God has committed the care of the rational and political hive,\nreputing the felicity of the people to consist chiefly in quietness\nand tranquillity, will receive and to his power imitate the rest of\nSolon\u2019s ordinances, but will doubt and wonder what it was that induced\nhim to decree, that he who, when there arises a sedition in the city,\nadheres to neither party should be reputed infamous. For in the body,\nthe beginning of its change from sickness to health is not wrought by\nthe parts that are infected with the disease, but when the temperature\nof such parts as are sound, growing powerful, drives away what is\ncontrary to nature; and in a state, where the people are disturbed by\na sedition not dangerous and mortal, but which will after a while be\ncomposed and allayed, it is of necessity that there be a mixture of\nmuch that is uninfected and sound, and that it continue and cohabit in\nit. For thither flows from the wise what is fit and natural, and passes\ninto the part that is diseased. But when cities are in an universal\ncommotion, they are in danger of being utterly destroyed, unless, being\nconstrained by some necessity and chastisement from abroad, they are by\nthe force of their miseries reduced to wisdom. Yet does it not become\nyou in the time of a sedition to sit as if you were neither sensible\nnor sorry, praising your own unconcernedness as a quiet and happy\nlife, and taking delight in the error of others. But on such occasions\nchiefly should you put on the buskin of Theramenes, and conferring\nwith both parties, join yourself to neither. For you will not seem a\nstranger by not being a partaker in injustice, but a common friend\nto them all by your assistance; nor will you be envied for your not\nsharing in the calamity, when you appear equally to condole with every\none of them. But the best is, by your providential care to prevent\nthe raising of any sedition; and in this consists the greatest and\nmost excellent point, as it were, of the political art. For you are\nto consider that, the greatest benefits a city can enjoy being peace,\nliberty, plenty, abundance of men, and concord, the people have at this\ntime no need of statesmen for the procuring of peace; since all war,\nwhether with Greeks or barbarians, is wholly taken away and banished\nfrom us. As for liberty, the people have as much as the emperors think\nfit to grant them, and more perhaps would not be expedient. The prudent\nman therefore will beg the Gods to grant to his fellow-citizens the\nunenvied plenty of the earth, and the kind temper of the seasons, and\nthat wives may bear \u201cchildren like to their parents,\u201d[76] and also\nsafety for all that is born and produced.\n\nThere remains therefore to a statesman, of all those things that are\nsubject to his charge, this alone, which is inferior to none of the\nother benefits, the keeping of those who are co-inhabitants of the\nsame city in perpetual concord and friendship, and the taking away of\nall contentions, animosities, and heart-burnings. In which he shall,\nas in the differences between friends, so converse with the party\nappearing to be most injured, as if he himself seemed also a sharer\nin the injury and equally offended at it, endeavoring afterwards so\nto appease him, by showing him how much those who pass by injuries\nexcel such as strive to contend and conquer, not only in good-nature\nand sweetness of disposition, but also in prudence and magnanimity,\nand how, by remitting a little of their right in small matters, they\nget the better in the greatest and most important. He shall afterwards\nadmonish them both in general and apart, instructing them in the\nweakness of the Grecian affairs, which it is better for intelligent men\nto make the best of, and to live in peace and concord, than to engage\nin a contest for which fortune has left no reward. For what authority,\nwhat glory is there remaining for the conquerors? What power is there,\nwhich the least decree of a proconsul cannot abolish or transfer\nelsewhere, and which, though it should continue, would yet have any\nthing worth our pains? But since, as a conflagration in a town does not\nfrequently begin in sacred and public places, but a lamp negligently\nleft in a house, or the burning of a little trash or rubbish, raises a\ngreat fire and works a common mischief; so sedition in a state is not\nalways kindled by contentions about public affairs, but oftentimes the\ndifferences arising from private concerns and jangles, being propagated\ninto the public, have disturbed a whole city. It is no less becoming\na statesman to remedy and prevent all these, so that some of them may\nnever have any being, others may quickly be extinguished, and others\nhindered from increasing or taking hold of the public, and confined\namongst the adversaries themselves. And as himself ought to take care\nfor this, so should he advertise others, that private disturbances are\nthe occasion of public ones, and little of great ones, if they are\nneglected and suffered to proceed without taking care to apply fit\nremedies to them in the beginning.\n\nIn this manner is the greatest and most dangerous disturbance that\never happened in Delphi said to have been occasioned by Crates, whose\ndaughter Orgilaus, the son of Phalis, being about to marry, it happened\nthat the cup they were using in the espousals brake asunder of itself;\nwhich he taking for an ill omen, left his bride, and went away with\nhis father. Crates a little after, charging them with taking away a\ncertain golden vessel, used in the sacrifices, caused Orgilaus and his\nbrother, unheard, to be precipitated from the top of a rock to the\nbottom, and afterwards slew several of their most intimate friends,\nas they were at their devotions in the temple of Providence. After\nmany such things were perpetrated, the Delphians, putting to death\nCrates and his companions in the sedition, out of their estates which\nthey called excommunicated, built the temples in the lower part of\nthe town. In Syracuse also there were two young men, betwixt whom\nthere was an extraordinary intimacy, one of which, having taken into\nhis custody his friend\u2019s catamite, vitiated him in his absence. The\nother at his return, by way of retaliation, debauched his companion\u2019s\nwife. Then one of the ancient senators, coming into the council,\nproposed the banishing of them both before the city was ruined by\ntheir filling it with enmity. Yet did not he prevail; but a sedition\narising on this occasion by very great calamities overturned a most\nexcellently constituted commonweal. You have also a domestical example\nin the enmity between Pardalus and Tyrrhenus, which wanted little of\ndestroying Sardis by embroiling it in revolt and war on little and\nprivate differences. A statesman therefore is not to slight the little\noffences and heart-burnings which, as diseases in a body, pass speedily\nfrom one to another, but to take them in hand, suppress, and cure them.\nFor, as Cato says, by attention and carefulness great matters are made\nlittle, and little ones reduced to nothing. Now there is no better\nartifice of inuring men to this, than the showing one\u2019s self easily\npacified in his own private differences, persisting without rancor in\nmatters of the first importance, and managing none with obstinacy,\ncontending wrath, or any other passion, which may work sharpness or\nbitterness in necessary disputes. For as they bind certain round\nmuffles about the hands of those who combat at buffets, that in their\ncontests there may not arrive any fatal accident, the blows being soft\nand such as can do no great harm; so in such suits and processes with\none\u2019s fellow-citizens, it is best to manage the dispute by making use\nof pure and simple pretences, and not by sharpening and empoisoning\nmatters, as if they were weapons, with calumnies, malice, and threats,\nto render them pernicious, great, and public. For he who in this\nmanner carries himself with those with whom he has affairs will have\nothers also subject to him. But contentions about public matters,\nwhere private grudges are taken away, are soon appeased, and bring no\ndifficult or fatal mischiefs.\n\n\n\n\nWHICH ARE THE MOST CRAFTY, WATER-ANIMALS OR THOSE CREATURES THAT\nBREED UPON THE LAND?\n\n\nAUTOBULUS, SOCLARUS, OPTATUS, PHAEDIMUS, ARISTOTIMUS, HERACLEO.\n\n1. AUTOBULUS. Leonidas, being asked the question what he thought\nof Tyrtaeus, made answer, that he was a good poet to whet minds of\nyoung men; as a person who, by the vigor and spirit of his poetical\nraptures, kindled that wrathful indignation and ambition of honor,\nwhich emboldened them in combat to the contempt of death and danger.\nWhich makes me afraid, my dearest friends, lest the encomium of hunting\nyesterday recited may have inflamed our young gentlemen beyond the\nbounds of moderation, so as to deem all other things fruitless and of\nlittle worth, while they rendezvous from all parts to this exercise.\nSo much the rather, because I myself, when I was but very young,\neven beyond the strength of my age, seemed to be more than became\nme addicted to this sport, and to be over desirous with Phaedra in\nEuripides,\n\n    With hounds and horn and merry hollow,\n    The spotted hart and hind to follow\n\nSo did that discourse affect me, fortified with many and probable\narguments.\n\nSOCLARUS. You say very truly, Autobulus. For that same poet seems to\nme to have awakened the force of rhetoric, for a long time lulled\nasleep, to gratify the inclinations of the youthful gentry, and to\nmake himself their spring companion. But I am most pleased with him\nfor introducing the example of single combatants, from whence he takes\noccasion to praise the sport of hunting, as being that which for the\nmost part draws to itself whatever is natural in us, or what we have by\nuse acquired, of that delight which men take in fighting with single\nweapons one against another, thus affording an evident prospect of\nartifice and daring courage, endued with understanding, encountering\nbrutish force and strength, and applauding that of Euripides:\n\n    Small is the nerveless strength of feeble man,\n    Yet through the cunning of his reaching brain,\n    By various slights and sundry stratagems,\n    Whatever land or th\u2019 Ocean breeds he tames.[77]\n\n2. AUTOBULUS. And hence it was, as they say, my dearest Soclarus, that\nmen at first became insensible and inhuman, having once tasted of\nmurder, and being all accustomed, by hunting and following the chase,\nnot only to behold without remorse the wounds and blood of wild beasts,\nbut to rejoice at their being killed and slaughtered. Afterwards, as at\nAthens, some sycophant was by the Thirty Tyrants set apart for death,\nas a proper object of capital punishment, then a second, and a third;\ntill, proceeding by degrees, they seized upon good men, and at length\nspared not the best and most worthy citizens. In like manner the first\nthat slew a bear or a wolf obtained applause, then the ox and hog were\nappointed to be killed, under pretence of having tasted the sacred\nthings that lay before them. Next to them deer, hares, and goats were\nmade use of for food, and in some places the flesh of sheep, dogs, and\nhorses grew familiar to human taste. The tame goose also and pigeon,\nman\u2019s familiar domestic, according to Sophocles,\u2014not for nourishment or\nto assuage hunger, as cats and weasels do, but to indulge voluptuous\nappetites,\u2014they dressed and mangled to pieces. This gave strength and\nvigor to whatever was in nature bloodthirsty and savage, and rendering\nthe disposition of man inflexible to pity, had almost erased out of\nhis breast whatever was inclinable to humanity and mildness. Whereas,\non the other side, the Pythagoreans, that they might accustom men to\nthe love of humanity and compassion, still inculcated into their minds\na particular care of being mild and gentle towards beasts. For there\nis nothing more powerful than custom to win upon all the affections\nof man, and to draw them from moderation to extremity. But I know not\nhow it comes to pass, that being entered into this discourse, we have\nforgot not only the subject we were yesterday upon, but what we had\nalso this day agreed to make the theme of our colloquy. For yesterday,\nas you well know, having thrown out a proposition, that all creatures\nwere in some manner partakers of understanding and reason, we gave an\noccasion to you, young huntsmen, for a fair dispute, which of the two\nexcelled in craft and cunning, the land animals, or the creatures that\nbreed in the sea? Which, if you please, we will determine this day, if\nAristotimus and Phaedimus will stand to their agreement; of which two\ngentlemen, the one has offered himself to his friends to be the patron\nof the land animals, the other reserves the honor of being more crafty\nto those of the sea.\n\nSOCLARUS. They will be as good as their words, I assure you, Autobulus,\nand will be here presently; for I saw them both early this morning\npreparing for the combat. In the mean time, if you please, before they\nbegin, let us resume something of what was yesterday not so fully\ndiscoursed of for want of time, or not so carefully argued in our\nwine, as it ought to have been. For there seemed a dispute to resound\nin my ears from the Stoics\u2019 portico, that, as immortal is opposite to\nmortal, incorruptible to corruptible, incorporeal to corporeal, in like\nmanner things void of reason ought to be opposed to those beings that\nare endued with reason, lest among so many pairs of contraries this\nalone should be found maimed and imperfect.\n\n3. AUTOBULUS. Good now, friend Soclarus, who was he that maintained\nthat, because there are certain beings endued with reason, therefore\nthere is nothing void of reason? For we abound with examples in\nall things that are destitute of a soul; nor do we want any other\nantithesis to irrational, but only to oppose whatever is deprived of\na soul\u2014as being void of reason and understanding\u2014to that which is\nendued with reason and understanding together with a soul. But if any\none will assert, that Nature is not defective, and that therefore\nanimated Nature is partly rational, partly without reason; another\nmay at the same time allege, that animated Nature is partly endued\nwith imagination, partly deprived of it; partly sensible, partly\ninsensible; to the end that Nature may not want these opposite habits\nand privations, as it were, equally balanced in the same kind. For, as\nit would be absurd to expect to find some living creatures sensible\nand others without sense, and equally ridiculous to grant imagination\nto some living creatures and not allow it to others,\u2014since there is\nno living creature that comes into the world but what is presently\nendued with sense and imagination,\u2014thus would he be as much out of the\nway, who should require one living creature to be rational and another\nvoid of reason, and that too when he is disputing with men who hold\nthat nothing whatever can partake of sense which does not also partake\nof understanding, and that there is no animal not endued by Nature\nwith opinion and ratiocination, as well as with sense and instinct.\nFor Nature, which, as they truly say, made all things for the sake\nof something and to some end, did not make a sensible creature to be\nmerely sensible of barely suffering something; but since there are\nmany things familiar and agreeable, and other things as baneful and\npernicious, no one of them could survive for a moment, did they not\nlearn to avoid some things and covet the use and benefit of others.\nSense it is, therefore, that affords to every creature the knowledge\nboth of useful and hurtful; but the discretion which accompanies the\nsaid sense, choosing and seizing upon things profitable, and discerning\nand avoiding things pernicious or troublesome, can never be thought to\nreside in any creature not capable to reason, to judge, remember, and\nconsider. Therefore, if you will deprive the creatures of expectation,\nmemory, design, preparation, hope, fear, desire, and grief, you must at\nthe same time deny them the use either of eyes or ears, and indeed of\nall sense and imagination; which it is better for them to be without,\nsince they cannot make use of them, than to labor under grief and pain,\nwith no means present of averting them.\n\nThere is an oration of Strato the philosopher, demonstrating that\nwithout sense there can be no understanding. For many times letters\ncursorily glanced upon by the eye, and speeches little regarded by the\near, escape our knowledge, our minds being intent on other matters.\nAfterwards by recollection the same things return into our mind, for us\nto run through and pursue them in our thoughts as we please. Whence we\nsay proverbially, \u201cThe mind sees, the mind hears; all other things are\ndeaf and blind,\u201d in regard there can be no sense in the eyes and ears,\nif understanding be wanting. Therefore King Cleomenes, after great\ncommendations given to a copy of verses recited at a banquet where he\nwas present, being asked whether it were not an admirable piece, bid\nthem that heard it give their judgment, for that his mind was in the\nPeloponnesus. Therefore of necessity, whatever creatures are capable of\nsense must also be capable of understanding, if we can no otherwise be\nsensible than by the force of understanding.\n\nBut suppose we should grant that sense has no need of the understanding\nfor the performance of the duty incumbent upon it; nevertheless, when\nthat same sense which has shown an animal the difference between what\nis grateful and what is averse to Nature has departed, where is that\nfaculty which retains this difference in the memory,\u2014dreading things\nthat are abominable, and longing after things that are useful, and if\nthey are wanting, seeking means to compass them,\u2014which provides animals\nreceptacles and places of refuge, that they may look out after their\nprey, and avoid the snares and gins of the hunters? And yet those very\nauthors inculcate these things in their introductions, even to the\nteasing our ears: defining purpose to be an indication that something\nis to be brought to completion; design to be an impulse before an\nimpulse; preparation to be an action before an action; memory to be\nthe comprehension of some certain past impression, which at first was\napprehended by sense. In all which things there is nothing which may\nnot rightly be said to partake of reason, and yet all these things\nare common to all creatures; as indeed are certainly all cogitations;\nwhich, while they lie concealed in the brain, we call thoughts, but\nwhen they come to be in motion, we name conceptions. In the mean time\nthey acknowledge all passions and perturbations of the mind to be\nfalse judgments and erroneous opinions; so that it is a wonder to me,\nthat the same men should oversee so many operations and motions, some\nof desire, others of fear, nay, by Jupiter, many times of envy and\nemulation itself. And many times they themselves punish their dogs\nand horses when they commit a fault, and this not to no purpose, but\nto chastise them by causing in them through pain that trouble of mind\nwhich we call repentance. Now the tickling the ear by pleasing sounds\nis called enchantment, but the bewitching the eye is called bewitching;\nboth which we make use of in the domesticating of wild beasts. Harts\nand horses are allured by the sounds of pipes and flutes. And there\nare a sort of crabs which are charmed out of their holes by fifes; and\nit is reported that the shadfish are drawn to show themselves above\nwater by singing and clapping of hands. The otus also, which is a bird\nnot much unlike a night-raven, is taken by allurement of the sight;\nfor that while he stands staring upon the fowlers dancing before him\nin measure and figure, and out of affection will be striving to act\nhis part by aping their motions with his wings and shoulders, he is\nfrequently surprised and taken.\n\nBut as for those that more foolishly affirm that beasts are not\naffected with joy or anger or fear, that the swallow does not build,\nthat the bee does not remember, that the lion is not angry, that the\nhart is not timorous, but that they do all these things only as it were\nand apparently; I would fain know what answer they will make to those\nwho say, that beasts neither see nor hear, but as it were see and as it\nwere hear; that they neither neigh nor bleat, but as it were send forth\na certain sound; lastly, that they do not absolutely live, but live\nas it were? For, in my opinion, to aver this is as contrary to plain\ndemonstration as the rest.\n\n4. SOCLARUS. Well then, Autobulus, suppose me to be one of those that\naffirm these things. For it is great folly for men to compare the\nactions of beasts with the customs, actions, and manner of living men,\nand above all, to deny that beasts have the least inclination or aim at\nany progress towards virtue, to which we bent our discourse. Indeed, I\ndoubt whether Nature gave them a beginning or no, since they are so\nincapable to attain the end.\n\nAUTOBULUS. Why truly, Soclarus, this is not a thing that seems so\nabsurd to those men. For that while they assert the extreme love of\nparents towards their children to be the principle of society and\njustice, and find at the same time this virtue apparent and surpassing\nin brute animals, yet they will not allow them in the least to partake\nof justice; like mules, which, though they are furnished with genital\nparts, as wanting neither privities nor wombs, and mixing with delight\nand pleasure, yet cannot attain the end of generation. But then again\nI would have you consider, whether they be not ridiculous, that affirm\nSocrates or Plato to be no less vicious than the meanest of slaves,\u2014nay\nmore, that they were fools, intemperate, and unjust,\u2014and then find\nfault with the nature of beasts, as being impure and no way accurately\nframed for the reception of virtue; as if this were proof of utter\nwant of reason, and not of depravedness and imbecility of reason.\nAnd all the while, they acknowledge that there are vices of reason,\nof which all brute beasts are guilty; many of which we plainly find\nto be intemperate, fearful, malicious, and unjust. Therefore he that\ndenies that reason exists by Nature in a creature, because it is not\nframed by Nature to attain to the perfection of reason, little differs\nfrom one that should deny a monkey to partake of deformity by Nature,\nor a tortoise of slowness, as being neither susceptible of beauty or\nswiftness. Nor do they observe the distinction that lies before their\neyes. For reason is in the creature by Nature, but right and perfect\nreason is attained by industry and education; so that naturally all\ncreatures may be said to be rational. But if they look for perfection\nof reason and true wisdom, they will hardly find those perfections\nin any man whatever. For as there is a difference between sight and\nsight, and between flight and flight,\u2014for hawks and grasshoppers\ndo not see alike, neither do eagles and partridges fly with equal\nswiftness,\u2014so neither in all rational creatures is there to be found\nthe same perfection of cunning and acuteness. For as there are many\nexamples to be produced of several brute creatures, excelling in the\nobservance of society, fortitude, and foresight as to their particular\neconomy and making provision for themselves; so on the other side,\nthere may be found among them as many of injustice, cowardice, and\nfolly. Which is evident from the present contest wherein these young\ngentlemen have engaged themselves, while the one has undertaken to\nmaintain that land-animals, the other that creatures bred in the\nsea, are most inclined to virtue. Which is plainly demonstrated by\ncomparing river-horses with storks. For the one support and cherish\ntheir fathers, the others kill them that they may enjoy their dams. So\nlikewise, if you compare doves with partridges. For the cock partridge\nwill not suffer the hen to sit, but breaks her eggs and throws them\nout of the nest if she refuses to be trod. But the cock pigeon takes\nupon him part of the female\u2019s duty, in brooding over the eggs and\nfeeding the young ones; and if the hen happens to be too long absent,\nhe corrects her with his bill, till he forces her to return to her\nnest. So that, while Antipater found fault with sheep and asses for\ntheir nastiness, I wonder how he came to pass by lynxes and swallows,\nof which the one are so cleanly that they always remove and hide their\nexcrements, the others teach their young ones to turn their tails out\nof their nest, before they let fall their defilement. And indeed, why\nmay we not say that one tree is more docible than another, as dogs are\nmore docible than sheep; or one pot-herb more timorous than another,\nas harts are more fearful than lions? Or otherwise, as among things\nimmovable, there is not one thing slower in motion than another; nor\namong things that are mute, one thing more vocal than another; so\nneither, among things to which Nature has not afforded a faculty of\nunderstanding, is there one thing more timorous, more slothful, or more\nintemperate than another. But as to those creatures where that faculty\nis present, the difference is manifest in the degrees of more or less.\n\n5. SOCLARUS. However, it is a wonderful thing to observe, how much man\ndiffers from all other creatures in probity of manners, in industry,\nand in all those things that relate to justice and common society.\n\nAUTOBULUS. Nevertheless, my dear friend, this cannot be denied,\nthat there are many brute beasts that surpass men both in bulk and\nswiftness, others that far surpass him in strength of sight and\nexactness of hearing; and yet for all this we are not to say that man\nis blind, without strength, or wants ears. For Nature has not deprived\nus either of hands or eyes or strength or bulk, though we must not\ncompare with camels or elephants. In like manner we must not say that\nbrute beasts are altogether deprived of reason and understanding,\nbecause they are more dull of understanding, and not so quick at\nratiocination as we are, as only enjoying a weak and muddy sort of\nreason, like a dim and clouded eye. And did I not presently expect\nthese young gentlemen, being persons both studious and learned, to\nbring together an infinite number of examples in reference to both land\nand sea-animals, I could produce a thousand examples of docility and a\nthousand more of good nature in beasts, which the famous city of Rome\nhas given us an opportunity to fetch from her imperial theatres; but we\nwill leave these things fresh and untouched, for them to embellish with\ntheir eloquent discourse.\n\nIn the mean time I have something to offer by the by, which is this,\nthat I am of opinion that there is a mutilation, disease, and defect\npeculiar to every part and faculty,\u2014as blindness of the eye, lameness\nof the leg, and stuttering of the tongue,\u2014which defects cannot be\nappropriated to any other members. For that blindness can never be\nattributed to that which was never created to see, nor lameness to that\nwhich never could go, nor can any thing be said to stammer that wants\na tongue, or to lisp or stutter that has not a vocal utterance. And\nnothing can be said to be a changeling or beside his wits or mad, to\nwhich Nature never gave the use of thought, reason, and understanding;\nfor it is impossible to be so without some faculty that can suffer\neither privation or mutilation or some other defect. But you have seen\ndogs that were mad, and I have seen horses under the same predicament;\nand some there are who say that bulls and foxes will be mad. But the\nexample of dogs is sufficient, which is unquestionable. This makes it\nevident, that those creatures have a sort of reason and understanding\nnot to be despised, which being once confused and troubled, the\naffection arises which is called madness. For we do not find either\ntheir sight or their hearing diminished. Now, as when a man is affected\nwith hypochondriac melancholy, or in a delirium, it would be absurd\nto say that he was not beside himself, or that his sense, reason, and\nmemory were not disturbed,\u2014for custom tells that they who are in a\nraving condition are not in their right senses, but are fallen from\ntheir reason,\u2014so whoever believes that there is any other cause why\ndogs run mad, but only that their natural senses, reason, and memories\nare disturbed, while they cease to know faces the most familiar to them\nbefore, and abandon their most usual food, and overlook what is just\nbefore their eyes, such a man, I say, seems to me either to overlook\nwhat is just before his eyes, or else, seeing the conclusions that\nfollow, to fight against the truth itself.\n\n6. SOCLARUS. You seem to me to be very much in the right, for the\nStoics and Peripatetics are led to affirm the contrary upon this\nsupposition, that justice could have no certain original, but would\nbe altogether incomprehensible and inexistent if all brute creatures\nshould partake of reason. For either of necessity we must do a very\ngreat piece of injustice when we devour and feed upon them; or if we\nforbear the use of them, it will be impossible for us to live, or\nrather we shall in some measure live the lives of beasts, rejecting the\nuse of brute creatures. I pass by those innumerable myriads of nomades\nand Troglodytes that know no other food but flesh. But as for us that\nseem to live lovingly and in friendship together, what necessity would\nthere be of laboring on the earth, toiling upon the sea, or mining in\nthe mountains, what ornament would there be in our life, if it were so\nthat we must be bound to live, as it would then become us, not only\nwithout injury but rather with all civility and humanity toward all\nthe sorts of beasts, as being our fellow rational creatures? We have\nno cure, no remedy for an unquestionable necessity that deprives us\neither of life or justice, unless we observe that ancient bound and\ndispensation which, according to Hesiod, distinguishing natures and\nseparating every kind by themselves, commands\n\n    The fish, wild beasts, and all the winged fowl,\n    To prey upon their kinds without control,\n    For among them no law nor justice reigns;\n    Only by justice man from man abstains.[78]\n\nAnd therefore, as brutes can extend no act of justice to us, so neither\ncan we commit any act of injustice against them. Which argument they\nwho reject have left us no benefit of life, nor any the smallest\nentrance for justice into the world.\n\n7. AUTOBULUS. These things, dear friend, you utter as the opinion\nof those people. But we are not to allow philosophers a remedy to\nprocure easy delivery, as they do to women that are subject to hard\nlabors, merely that they may bring us forth justice without any pain\nor trouble. For the same persons, even in the greatest matters, will\nnot allow to Epicurus so small and pitiful a thing as the slightest\ninclination of one only atom, for to make way for the stars and\nliving creatures and Fortune to come into the world, and that thereby\nour free will might be saved. For we ought either to prove what is\ndoubtful or to assume what of itself is manifest; so we ought not to\ntake for granted this doctrine touching beasts as regards justice,\nunless it is either confessed or otherwise proved by demonstration. For\njustice has another way to establish itself, neither so steep nor so\nslippery, nor leading to the subversion of evident truths; but which,\naccording to Plato\u2019s instruction, my son and thy friend, Soclarus,\nhas showed to such as are not captiously contentious but willing to\nlearn. For certain it is, that both Empedocles and Heraclitus held it\nfor a truth, that man could not be altogether cleared from injustice\nin dealing with beasts as he now does; often bewailing and exclaiming\nagainst Nature, as if she were nothing else but necessity and war,\nhaving neither any thing unmixed nor any thing truly pure, but still\narriving at her end by many, and those unjust and unlawful passions.\nWhence they affirm that generation itself originally proceeded from\ninjustice by the conjunction of immortal with mortal, and that the\nthing engendered is still contrary to Nature delighted with the parts\nof that which engenders, dismembered from the whole. But this seems to\nbe too luxuriant and severe an accusation of Nature. For there is yet a\nmore moderate excuse, which does not altogether deprive the beasts of\nreason, yet justifies the necessary and convenient use of them; which\nwhen the ancients introduced, they detested and utterly discountenanced\nvoracious and voluptuous gluttony. Pythagoras also resumed the\nargument, teaching how we might reap the benefit of the creatures\nwithout doing injustice. For they do no injustice, that chastise and\nkill such savage beasts that are both hurtful to man and never will be\ntame. But taming such as are gentle and loving to men, they thereby\nmake them assistant in the several uses to which they were ordained,\u2014\n\n    The horse and ass, that backs to load resign,\n    And race of bulls,\n\nwhich, as Prometheus in Aeschylus[79] observes,\n\n    Kind Heaven vouchsafed to men by toil distrest,\n    With servile limbs his labors to assist.\n\nThus we make use of dogs to guard our goats and sheep, while they are\nmilked and shorn. For life does not presently forsake a man unless\nhe have his platters of fish or livers of geese, or unless he may\nkill whole oxen or kids to supply his banquets, or unless\u2014that he may\ndisport himself in the theatre or take his pleasure in hunting\u2014he may\ncompel some beasts to be daring and to fight against their wills, and\nkill others whom Nature has not armed to defend themselves. For, in my\nopinion, he that is for sport and pastime ought to seek out for such\nas will sport and be merry with him. And as it was the saying of Bion,\nthat, though boys throw stones at frogs in sport, yet the frogs do not\ndie in sport but in earnest; so in hunting and fishing, the fault is\nin the men delighting in the torments and cruel deaths of beasts, and\ntearing them without compassion from their whelps and their young ones.\nFor it is not in the making use of beasts that men do them wrong, but\nin the wastefully and cruelly destroying them.\n\n8. SOCLARUS. Contain yourself, my dearest Autobulus, and forbear these\naccusations; for here are several gentlemen coming, all great huntsmen,\nwhom it will be very difficult to bring over to your opinion; neither\nis it convenient to offend them.\n\nAUTOBULUS. You give me good advice. However, I know Eubiotus very\nwell, and my kinsman Ariston; nor am I less acquainted with Aeacides\nand Aristotimus, the sons of Dionysius the Delphian, as also with\nNicander the son of Euthydamus, all expert in the chase by land, as\nHomer expresses it; and therefore likely to take part with Aristotimus.\nOn the other side, yonder comes Phaedimus too, bringing along with\nhim the islanders and neighbors to the sea, Heracleon of Megara, and\nPhilostratus of Euboea,\n\n    Whose whole delight is all the day\n    The toilsome pastime of the sea.[80]\n\nBut as for Optatus, our equal in years (like Tydides),\u2014\n\n    Which of the sides to range him well,\n    So versed in both, we cannot tell.[81]\n\nFor he is one that offers as well the first-fruits of his fishery to\nDictynna, as of his forest spoils to Diana; so that it is apparent\nhe comes among us as one that intends not to be partial to one side\nmore than the other; or else our conjecture is amiss, dear Optatus,\nthat your design is only to be an impartial umpire between these young\ngentlemen.\n\nOPTATUS. You conjecture very truly, Autobulus. For the ancient law of\nSolon is out of date, that punished those who stood neuters and refused\nto adhere to either side.\n\nAUTOBULUS. Seat yourself then here by us, that if there should be any\noccasion for a testimony, we may not be troubled to run to Aristotle\u2019s\nwritings, but acquiescing in your experience, may give our suffrages\naccording to what you aver for truth.\n\nOPTATUS. Go to then, young gentlemen: are ye agreed upon the method and\norder of the dispute?\n\nPHAEDIMUS. Truly, worthy Soclarus, that very thing occasioned a great\ndebate among us; but at length, according to that of Euripides,\n\n    The child of Fortune, Chance, the point agreed,\n    And fixed the method how we should proceed,\n\nby giving the precedence to the land animals to plead their cause\nbefore marine creatures.\n\nSOCLARUS. Then, Aristotimus, it is high time for you to speak and for\nus to hear.\n\n9. ARISTOTIMUS. The court is open to all concerned in the\ncontroversy.... Others there are that kill their young ones by leaping\nthe females at the very instant of their bringing forth. There are a\nsort of mullets, called pardiae, that feed upon their own slime. But\nthe polypus sits all the winter feeding upon itself,\n\n    In fireless house, and domicils forlorn;[82]\n\nso slothful, or so stupid, or so given to his gut he is, or else so\nabandoned to all those vices together. And therefore Plato again and\nagain forbids, or rather makes it his wish, in his laws, that young\nmen might not be permitted to addict themselves to marine fishery,\nwherein there is no exercise of strength, no cogitation of wisdom,\nnor any thing that contributes to fortitude, swiftness, or agility,\nin combating against pikes, congers, or scates; whereas, in the chase\nof wild beasts, the fiercer sort accustom the huntsman to contempt\nof danger, the more subtle sort exercise and sharpen his wit and\ncunning, the swifter sort exercise his strength, and render him more\napt to endure labor. These are the advantages that accrue to a man by\nhunting; but in fishing, there is nothing worth his while. For never\nany of the Gods got honor by the surname of a conger-killer; as Apollo\nwas surnamed the wolf-slayer; never any of the Deities gloried in\nbeing a darter of mullets, as Diana is honored with the addition of\nhart-darting.\n\nAnd what wonder is it, when it is accounted more noble for a man to\nkill than to buy a wild boar, a hart, a goat, or a hare, but more\nhonorable to buy a tunny, a lobster, or an amy, than to kill one?\nAnd therefore, because there is nothing in fishing that is noble, no\nusing of gins and slight of cunning, it is accounted a sorry, pitiful\nexercise, not worth a man\u2019s labor.\n\n10. In general then, since the usual arguments by which philosophers\ndemonstrate that beasts partake of reason are these following,\u2014purpose,\ncontrivance, memory, passions, care of their young ones, gratefulness\nto those from whom they receive kindnesses, and the remembrance of\nshrewd turns, to which we may add the search after and choice of what\nis needful and beneficial for them, together with apparent shows of\nvirtue, as of fortitude, society, continence, and magnanimity,\u2014if we\nconsider the marine creatures, we shall not find that our strictest\nobservation can perceive in them any of these excellences, or at\nbest they are such obscure and imperfect glimmerings as are scarce\ndiscernible. But in terrestrial and land animals, there is not any man\nbut may behold the most luculent, the most evident and uncontrollable\ndemonstrations in the world of all that has been said. In the first\nplace, observe the designs and preparations of bulls provoked to\ncombat, and of wild boars whetting their teeth. Again, elephants\u2014since,\nby digging up or tearing down the trees which they intend to feed\nupon, they blunt and wear out their tushes\u2014make use of only one for\nthose purposes, but reserve the other strong and sharp for their own\ndefence. The lion also always walks with his feet inverted, hiding his\nclaws withinside his paw, to prevent the hunter from tracing him easily\nby his footing. For the track of a lion\u2019s claw is not easily to be\nfound, so that the hunters are frequently at a loss, and wander after\nthe obscure and scarce discernible footsteps of those beasts. You have\nheard also, I suppose, of the ichneumon, how that he arms himself as\ncompletely as a soldier with his breastplate and cuirass prepared for\nbattle; in such a manner does that creature surround and wrap himself\nabout with a coat of mail, when he attacks the crocodile.\n\nAdmirable are the preparations of swallows before they go to lay their\neggs, how they place the more solid stubble for foundations, and upon\nthat build up the slighter straws; and if they perceive that the\nnest wants mud to serve as glue, you may observe how they fly to the\nnext lake or sea, and after they have skimmed the superficies of the\nwater with their wings,\u2014so as to make them moist, yet not heavy with\nwet,\u2014they lick up the dust, and so daub and bind together the loose and\nill-cohering parts of the nest. As for the form of their architecture,\nit is composed neither of angles nor of many sides, but smooth and,\nas much as may be, spherical; for that such a figure is lasting and\ncapacious, and not easily affording entrance to creatures that lie in\nwait for their destruction from without.\n\nWho is there that does not admire, for more reasons than one, the labor\nof the spiders, which seems as pattern for the threads that women spin\nand the nets that are used in hunting? For the extraordinary fineness\nof the spinning, and the evenness of the thread, not discontinued or\nsnapped off like the yarn upon a quill, but having the smooth and\nsubtle texture of a thin membrane, and knit and spun together with a\ncertain clammy moisture imperceptibly mixed; besides the tincture of\nit, causing a kind of airy and misty color, the better to deceive; but\nabove all, the conduct and governing of this little engine, in which\nwhen any thing happens to be entangled, you see how presently, like\nan expert huntsman, the subtle artist contracts her net and binds her\nprey within it;\u2014all this being every day obvious to our sight and\ncontemplation gives credit to my discourse, which otherwise might be\naccounted no less fabulous than what is reported of certain Libyan\ncrows, that, when they are a-thirsty, throw stones into the water, by\nthat means to raise it to such a height that they may be able to reach\nit with their bills. Then again, when I saw a ship dog, in the absence\nof the seamen, putting in stones in a half-empty jar of oil, it was to\nme a wonder how that dog should understand that the pressure of the\nheavier weight would make the lighter rise.\n\nAnd the same artifices are reported of Cretan bees and Cilician geese.\nFor the first of these, being to take their flight about some windy\npromontory, ballast themselves with little stones, to prevent their\nbeing carried away by the stronger blasts. And as for the geese, they\nbeing afraid of the eagles, every time they cross the mountain Taurus,\ncarry great stones in their mouths, to the end that by that means (as\nit were) bridling their gaggling tongues, they may cross the mountain\nin silence, without alarming their enemies.\n\nExtraordinary also is the caution which the cranes observe in their\nflight. For they fly, when the wind is very high and the air very\ntempestuous, not as in fair weather, all afront or in manner of the\nhalf-moon; but forming a triangular body, with the sharp angle of that\nfigure they penetrate the wind that ruffles round about them, and by\nthat means preserve their order unbroken. On the other side, when they\nfall upon the ground, those that are upon the night-watch stand with\nthe whole weight of their bodies upon one leg, holding a stone in the\nclaw of the other foot. For the holding of the stone keeps them awake\nfor a long time together, and wakes them again with the noise of the\nfall if they happen to drop asleep. So that it was no wonder that\nHercules laid his quiver under his arm-pit, and with his strenuous arm\nembracing his bow,\n\n    Slept all the night, where\u2019er he laid his load,\n    With his right-handed weight upon the wood.\n\nNor do I so much admire at him who was the first that hit upon the way\nto open an oyster, when I meet with and consider the artifices of the\nherons. For a heron, when he has swallowed a closed oyster, endures\nthe trouble and vexation of it for so long time, till he perceives it\nsoften and relaxed by the heat of his stomach; then casting it up again\ngaping and divided, he takes out that which is fit for food.\n\n11. But as it is a task of great labor accurately to relate the\neconomy and contrivances of the emmets, so it would argue too much of\nnegligence to pass them over in silence. For there is not in Nature a\nsmaller creature; and yet it is a most absolute mirror of the greatest\nand most noble performances, and (as it were) in a transparent drop\nthe appearance of all virtue. There is friendship to be discerned in\ntheir mutual society. There is the image of fortitude in the patient\nundergoing of labor. In them are to be seen many seeds of continence,\nmany of wisdom and justice. Insomuch that Cleanthes, who denied that\nbeasts were endued with reason, could not forbear reporting how he met\nwith the following accident of a crowd of emmets, that came to another\nant-hill, bringing along with them a dead emmet. Presently other emmets\nascending out of their ant-hill seemed (as it were) to meet them, and\nthen disappeared again; and this was done twice or thrice. Till at\nlength the one side brought up from under ground a worm, as the price\nof the dead emmet\u2019s redemption, which the other party of pismires\nreceiving, delivered the dead emmet, and so departed. But that which\nis apparent to all is their equity to each other when they meet one\nanother, while they that carry nothing always give way to those that\nare burdened; nor are their divisions and partitions of things too\nweighty for single carriage less remarkable, to the end the burdens may\nbe divided among many. But when they bring forth their little eggs and\nexpose them to the cold, Aratus makes it a sign of rainy weather.\n\n    When from her hollow cells th\u2019 industrious ant\n    Her hidden store of eggs brings forth\n\nFor in that sense many read \u1f24\u03b9\u03b1 (_provision_) for \u1f64\u03b5\u03b1 (_eggs_),\nreferring it to the providence of those little creatures, who, when\nthey find their provision in their magazines to begin to taint and\ngrow rotten, bring it forth and expose it to the open air, to prevent\nthe progress of the putrefaction. But that which above all things\ndemonstrates the surpassing excellency of their understanding is their\npre-apprehension of the germinating of wheat. For the wheat does not\nremain dry and void of putrefaction, but grows moist and turns into\na kind of milky substance, when it changes from seed to become an\nherb. For fear therefore that preserving the quality it should become\nuseless for food, they eat out the very principal part of the grain,\nfrom whence the wheat sends forth its blossom. I must confess, I do\nnot approve of those who dig up ant-hills on purpose to improve their\nlearning (as it were) by anatomy. However, they tell us by virtue of\nthat cruel information, that the passage or descent from the top of the\nhill to the nest is not directly straight nor easily penetrated by any\nother creature, but intercepted with several turnings and windings,\nleading through several underminings and perforations into three\ncavities; of which the one is the common place of feeding and converse\nfor the whole community, the next is the general magazine of their\nprovision, and the third is the apartment where they dispose of their\ndead.\n\n12. I am afraid you may deem me too impertinent in joining elephants\nwith pismires, and yet I cannot but think it seasonable to show the\nnature and force of understanding, as well in the smallest as in the\ngreatest bodies, neither obscured in the one nor deficient in the other.\n\nSome there are that admire in an elephant his aptness to learn and to\nbe taught, and the many various postures and alterations of movement\nwhich he shows upon the theatres, not easily to be equalled by human\nassiduity, as subtle and abounding in memory and retention as man is.\nBut for my part, I rather choose to prove his evident understanding\nfrom the passions and inclinations of the creature, that were never\ntaught him, but only infused by Nature, as being altogether unmixed and\npure without the help of art.\n\nAt Rome, not very long ago, there were many elephants that were taught\nmany dangerous postures, many windings and turnings and circular\nscrewings of their bulky bodies, hard to be expressed; among which\nthere was one, which, being duller than the rest, and therefore often\nrated and chastised for his stupidity, was seen in the night-time, by\nmoonlight, without being forced to it, to practise over his lessons\nwith all the industry imaginable.\n\nAgno tells a story of an elephant in Syria, that was bred up in a\ncertain house, who observed that his keeper took away and defrauded him\nevery day of half the measure of his barley; only that once, the master\nbeing present and looking on, the keeper poured out the whole measure;\nwhich was no sooner done, but the elephant, extending his proboscis,\nseparated the barley and divided it into two equal parts, thereby\ningeniously discovering, as much as in him lay, the injustice of his\nkeeper.\n\nAnother in revenge that his keeper mixed stones and dirt with his\nbarley, as the keeper\u2019s meat was boiling upon the fire, took up the\nashes and flung them into the pot.\n\nAnother being provoked by the boys in Rome, that pricked his proboscis\nwith the sharp ends of their writing steels, caught one of them in his\nproboscis, and mounted him up into the air, as if he intended to have\nsquashed out his guts; but upon the loud outcries of the spectators,\nset him gently down again upon his feet, and so went on, believing he\nhad sufficiently punished the boy in scaring him. Many other things are\nreported of the wild elephants that feed without control, but nothing\nmore to be admired than their passing of great rivers. For first of\nall the youngest and the least flounces into the stream; whom the rest\nbeholding from the shore, if they see that the less bulky leader keeps\nsteady footing with his back above water, they are then assured and\nconfident that they may boldly adventure without any danger.\n\n13. Having thus far proceeded in our discourse, I cannot think it well\ndone to pass by the cunning of the fox, by reason of the similitude\nit has with the former. The mythologists tell us that the dove which\nDeucalion sent out of his ark, returning back again, was to him a\ncertain sign of the storm not ceased; but of serene and fair weather,\nwhen she flew quite away. But the Thracians to this day, when they\ndesign to pass a river that is frozen over, make use of a fox to try\nwhether the ice will bear or no. For the fox, treading gently, lays\nhis ear to the ice, and if he perceive by the noise of the water that\nthe stream runs very close underneath, conjecturing from thence that\nthe congelation is not deep but thin, and no way steadfastly solid,\nhe makes a stop, and if he be suffered, returns back again; but if he\nperceive no noise, he goes on boldly. Nor can we say that this is only\nan exquisiteness of sense without reason; but it is a syllogistical\ndeduction from sense, concluding that whatever makes a noise is moved;\nwhatever is moved, cannot be frozen; what is not frozen, is moist; what\nis moist, gives way. The logicians say that a dog, making use of the\nargument drawn from many disjunctive propositions, thus reasons with\nhimself, in places where several highways meet: Either the wild beast\nis gone this way, or that, or that way; but not that way, nor that way,\ntherefore this way: the force of sense affording nothing but the minor\npremise, but the force of reason affording the major proposition, and\ninferring the conclusion of the assumption. But a dog stands in no need\nof any such testimonial; in regard it is both false and adulterate.\nFor sense itself shows which way the beast is fled, by his tracks and\nfootsteps, bidding farewell to disjunctive and copulative propositions.\nThe nature of dogs is palpably to be discerned by many other actions,\naffections, and dutiful service, neither the effects of hearing or\nseeing, but practicable only by reason and understanding. It would\nbe ridiculous for me to discourse of the continence, obedience, and\nindustry of dogs in hunting, to you that are so well confirmed in the\nknowledge of those things by daily experience and practice.\n\nThere was a Roman named Calvus, slain in the civil wars, whose head\nnobody durst cut off before they killed the dog that guarded his body\nand fought in defence of his master. It happened that King Pyrrhus,\ntravelling one day, lit upon a dog watching over the carcass of a\nperson slain; and hearing that the dog had been there three days\nwithout meat or drink, yet would not forsake his dead master, ordered\nthat the man should be buried, but that the dog should be preserved and\nbrought to him. A few days after, there was a muster of the soldiers,\nso that they were forced to march all in order by the king, with\nthe dog quietly lying by him for a good while. But when he saw the\nmurderers of his master pass by him, he flew upon them with a more than\nordinary fury, barking and baying and tearing his throat, and ever and\nanon turning about to the king; which did not only rouse the king\u2019s\nsuspicion, but the jealousy of all that stood about him. Upon which the\nmen were presently apprehended; and though the circumstances were very\nslight which otherwise appeared against them, yet they confessed the\nfact and were executed.\n\nThe same thing is reported to have been done by a dog that belonged to\nHesiod, surnamed the wise, which discovered the sons of Ganyctor the\nNaupactian, by whom Hesiod was murdered. But that which came to the\nknowledge of our parents, when they were students at Athens, is yet\nmore evident than any thing we have said. For a certain person getting\ninto the temple of Aesculapius, after he had stolen all the massy\nofferings of gold and silver, made his escape, not believing he was\ndiscovered. But the dog which belonged to the temple, who was called\nCapparus, when he found that none of the sacristans took any notice\nof his barking, pursued himself the sacrilegious thief; and though at\nfirst the fellow pelted him with stones, he could not beat him off.\nSo soon as it was day, the dog still followed him, though at such a\ndistance that he always kept him in his eyes. When the fellow threw\nhim meat he refused it; when the thief went to bed, the dog watched at\nhis door; and when he rose in the morning, the dog still followed him,\nfawning upon the passengers on the road, but still barking and baying\nat the heels of the thief. These things when they who were in pursuit\nof the sacrilegious person heard, and were told withal by those they\nmet the color and bigness of the dog, they were the more vigorous in\nthe pursuit; and by that means overtaking the thief, brought him back\nfrom Crommyon, while the dog ran before, leaping and capering and\nfull of joy, as it were challenging to himself the praise and reward\nof apprehending the temple-robber. And indeed the Athenians were so\ngrateful to him, that they decreed him such a quantity of meat to\nbe publicly measured to him, and ordered the priests to take care to\nsee it done; in imitation of the kindness of the ancient Athenians in\nrewarding the mule.\n\nFor when Pericles built the temple Hecatompedon (or Parthenon) in the\ntower of Athens, it so fell out that the stones were to be fetched\nevery day many furlongs off, and a world of carriages were made use\nof for that purpose. Among the rest of the mules that labored hard in\nthis employment, there was one that, though dismissed by reason of\nage, would still go down to the Ceramicus, and meeting the carts that\nbrought the stones, would be always in their company running by their\nsides, as it were by the way of encouragement and to excite them to\nwork cheerfully. So that the people, admiring the zeal of the mule,\nordered him to be fed at the public charge, as they were wont to decree\npublic alms to the superannuated wrestlers.\n\n14. And therefore they who deny that there is any thing of justice\ndue from us towards dumb animals may be said to speak true, so far\nas concerns them that live in the sea and haunt the abysses of the\ndeep. For those kind of creatures are altogether unsociable, without\naffection for their young ones, void of all softness of disposition;\nand therefore it was well said of Homer, speaking to a person whom he\nlooked upon as a mere savage,\n\n    But as for thee, so little worth,\n    The gleaming sea did bring thee forth;[83]\n\nin regard the sea brings forth nothing friendly, nothing mansuete or\ngentle. But he that uses the same discourse and arguments against\nland animals is himself a brute and savage creature; unless any man\nwill affirm that there was nothing of justice due from Lysimachus to\nthe Hyrcanian dog, that would not stir from the body of his deceased\nmaster, and when he saw his master\u2019s carcass burning, ran and threw\nhimself into the flames. The same is reported to have been done by the\ndog Astus, that was kept by one Pyrrhus, not the king, but a private\nperson of that name. For upon the death of his master, he would not\nstir from the body, but when it was carried forth, leaped upon the\nbier, and at length threw himself into the funeral pile, and was burnt\nalive with his master\u2019s body.\n\nThe elephant also which carried King Porus, when the king was wounded\nin the battle against Alexander, pulled out several darts out of his\nwounds with his proboscis, with no less tenderness and care than the\nchirurgeon could have done; and though the elephant himself was but in\na very bad condition, yet would he not give over till he perceived the\nking was ready to reel and sink down by reason of the blood which he\nhad lost; and then fearing lest the king should fall, he stooped down\ngently, to ease the king in sliding to the ground.\n\nSuch was the humor of Bucephalus, who, before he was accoutred, would\nsuffer his groom to back him, but when he had all his royal trappings\nand housings about him, would permit nobody but Alexander to bestride\nhim. But if any other persons approached him in curiosity to try what\nthey could do, he encountered them open-mouthed, and neighing out his\nfury, leaped upon their shoulders, bore them down, and trampled them\nunder his feet, unless prevented by keeping at a distance or by speedy\nflight.\n\n15. Nor am I ignorant but that there is something of variety in every\none of these examples, which you must acknowledge. And indeed it is not\neasy to find out the natural dexterity of any one ingenious and docible\nanimal, which is not accompanied with more than one single virtue.\nThus, where there is affection toward their young ones, there is desire\nof praise. Where there is generosity, there is also moderation of\nanger. Cunning likewise and understanding are rarely parted from daring\nboldness and fortitude. But as for those that rather choose to divide\nand distinguish every one of these virtues particularly by themselves,\nthey shall find in dogs a fair demonstration of a gentle and yet lofty\nmind at the same time, in turning away from such as sit quietly upon\nthe ground; according to that of Homer,\n\n    With hideous noise the dogs upon him flew;\n    But sly Ulysses, who the danger knew,\n    Sate husht and still, and from his royal hand\n    His sceptre dropt, as useless in command.[84]\n\nFor dogs never bite or worry those that prostrate themselves at their\nmercy and put on a face of humility. Thus they say the bravest of those\nIndian dogs that fought against Alexander never stirred or so much\nas looked about them upon the letting loose of a hart, a boar, and a\nbear; but when they saw a lion, then they began to rouse, to shake,\nand prepare themselves for the combat. By which it was plain that\nthey thought only the lion an antagonist worthy of their courage, but\ndespised all the rest as below their anger.\n\nYour hounds that usually hunt hares, if they kill the hares themselves,\ntake great delight in tearing them to pieces and lapping up the blood.\nBut if the hare despairing of her life, as many times it happens, runs\nherself to death, the hounds finding her dead will never touch her, but\nstand wagging their tails, as if they did hunt not so much for the love\nof the food as for victory and triumph\u2019s sake.\n\n16. There are many examples of cunning and subtlety abounding in\nland creatures; but to omit slights and artifices of foxes, cranes,\nand jackdaws, of which I shall say nothing, because they are things\nalready so well known, I shall make use of the testimony of Thales, the\nancientest of our philosophers, who is reported to have chiefly admired\nthe most excellent in any art or cunning.\n\nA certain mule that was wont to carry salt, in fording a river, by\naccident happened to stumble, by which means the water melting away the\nsalt, when the mule rose again he felt himself much lighter; the cause\nof which the mule was very sensible of, and laid it up in his memory,\ninsomuch that every time he forded the same river, he would always\nstoop when he came into the deepest part, and fill his vessels with\nwater, crouching down, and leaning sometimes to one side, sometimes to\nthe other. Thales hearing this, ordered the vessels to be well filled\nwith wool and sponges, and to drive the mule laden after that manner.\nBut then the mule, as he was wont, filling his burthens with water,\nreasoned with himself that he had ill consulted his own benefit, and\never afterwards, when he forded the same river, was so careful and\ncautious, that he would never suffer his burthens so much as to touch\nthe water by accident.\n\nAnother piece of cunning, joined with an extraordinary affection to\ntheir young ones, is to be observed in partridges, which instruct\ntheir young ones, ere they are able to fly, when they are pursued by\nthe fowlers, to lay themselves upon their backs, their breasts covered\nwith some clod of earth or little heap of dirt, under which they may\nlie concealed. On the other side, the old partridges do deceive the\nfowlers, and draw them quite a contrary way, make short flights from\none place to another, thereby enticing the fowlers to follow them; till\nthus allured from their young ones, the fowlers give over all hopes of\nbeing masters of their game.\n\nIn like manner, hares returning to their forms dispose their leverets\none to one place, another to another, at the distance many times of\nan acre of ground; so that, upon the tracing either of men or hounds,\nthey are sure not to be all in danger at one time,\u2014themselves in the\nmean time not easy to be tracked, by reason of the various windings and\nturnings which they make, until at length, by giving a large leap, they\ndiscontinue the print of their feet, and so betake themselves to their\nrest.\n\nA bear, when she perceives her winter sleep coming upon her, before\nshe grows stiff and unwieldy, cleanses the place where she intends\nto conceal herself, and in her passage thither lifts up her paws as\nhigh as she can, and treads upon the ground with the top of her toes,\nand at length turning herself upon her back, throws herself into her\nreceptacle.\n\nYour hinds generally calve at a distance from all places frequented by\nflesh-devouring beasts; and stags, when they find themselves unwieldy\nthrough surplusage of flesh and fat, get out of the way and hide\nthemselves, hoping to secure themselves by lurking, when they dare not\ntrust to their heels.\n\nThe means by which the land hedge-hogs defend and guard themselves\noccasioned the proverb,\n\n    Many sly tricks the subtle Reynard knows,\n    But one the hedge-hog greater than all those\n\nFor the hedge-hog, as Ion the poet says,[85] when he spies the fox\ncoming,\n\n    Round as a pine-nut, or more sphere-like ball,\n    Lies with his body palisaded all\n    With pointed thorns, which all the fox\u2019s slight\n    Can find no way to touch, much less to bite.\n\nBut the provision which the hedge-hogs make for their young ones is\nmuch more ingenious. For when autumn comes, they creep under vines, and\nshake off the grapes with their feet; which done they roll themselves\nup and down, and take them up with their prickles, so that when they\ncreep away again, you would think it a walking cluster (and this we\nhave looked on and seen them do); after which returning to their holes,\nthey lay themselves down for their young ones to feed. Their holes have\ntwo openings, one to the south, the other to the north. So that when\nthey perceive the alteration of the air, like pilots shifting their\nsails, they stop up that which lies to the wind and open the other.\nWhich a certain person that lived at Cyzicus observing, took upon him\nfrom thence at any time to tell in what corner the wind would sit.\n\n17. As for love and observance of society joined with understanding\nand prudence, Juba produces many examples of it in elephants. For it\nis the usual practice of the elephant-hunters to dig large pits in the\nelephants\u2019 walks, and cover them slightly over with dry twigs or other\nmaterials; into which if any elephant happens to fall, the rest fetch\nwood and stones to fill up the cavity of the pit, that the other may\nthe more easily get out again. And some report of the elephants, that\nthey make prayers to the Gods by natural instinct, that they perform\ndivine ceremonies to the sea, and worship the rising sun, lifting up\nthe proboscis to heaven instead of hands. For which reason they are\ncreatures the most beloved of any by the Gods, as Ptolemy Philopator\ntestified. For having vanquished Antiochus, and being desirous to pay\na more than ordinary honor to the Deity, among many other oblations\nof thanksgivings for his victory, he sacrificed four elephants. After\nwhich being terrified with a dream, which threatened him with the wrath\nof the Deity for that prodigious sacrifice, he sought out several ways\nto expiate his offence, and among the rest by way of propitiation, he\nerected four elephants of brass to atone for the four elephants he had\nslaughtered.\n\nExamples not inferior of the observance of society are to be found\namong lions. For the younger carry forth the slow and aged, when they\nhunt abroad for their prey. When the old ones are weary and tired, they\nrest and stay for the younger that hunt on; who, when they have seized\nupon any thing, call to the old ones, making a noise like the bleating\nof a calf. They presently hear, and so meeting all together, they feed\nin common upon the prey.\n\n18. In the amours of many animals there is much variety. Some are\nfurious and mad; others observe a kind of human decency, and tricking\nof themselves to set off their beauty, not without a courtly kind\nof conversation. Such was the amour of the elephant at Alexandria,\nthat rivalled Aristophanes the grammarian. For they were both in love\nwith a girl that sold garlands; nor was the elephant\u2019s courtship\nless conspicuous than the other\u2019s. For as he passed through the\nfruit-market, he always brought her apples, and stayed with her for\nsome time, and thrusting his proboscis within her waistcoat, instead of\na hand, took great delight in gently feeling her breasts.\n\nNo less remarkable was the serpent in love with the Aetolian woman.\nHe came to her in the night, and getting under her garments to her\nvery skin, embraced her naked body; and never either willingly or\nunwillingly did he do her any harm, but always about break of day\ndeparted; which the kindred of the woman observing to be the common\ncustom of the animal, removed her a great way off. After that, the\nserpent came not again for three or four days together, being all the\nwhile, as it seemed, wandering about in search of her. But at length,\nhaving with much ado found her out, he did not approach her with that\nmildness as he was wont to do, but after a rougher manner; with his\nfolds having first bound her hands to her body, with the end of his\ntail he lashed the calves of her legs; expressing thereby a gentle and\nloving anger, which had more in it of indulgent expostulation than\npunishment.\n\nI say nothing of a goose in Egypt in love with a boy, nor of the ram\nin love with Glauce who played on the harp; for the stories are in all\npeople\u2019s mouths. And besides, I am apt to think you are satiated with\nexamples of this nature.\n\n19. But as for starlings, magpies, and parrots, that learn to talk,\nand afford their teachers such a spirit of voice, so well tempered and\nso adapted for imitation, they seem to me to be patrons and advocates\nin behalf of other creatures, by their talent of learning what they\nare taught; and in some measure to teach us that those creatures also,\nas well as we, partake of vocal expression and articulate sound. From\nwhence I conclude it a most ridiculous thing in them that would compare\nthese creatures with a sort of mute animals, I mean the fish, that\nhave not voice enough to howl or make a mournful noise. Whereas, in\nthe natural and untaught notes of these creatures, what music, what a\ncharming grace do we observe! To which the famous poets and choicest\nsingers among men bear testimony, while they compare their sweetest\nodes and poems to the singing of swans and melody of nightingales. Now\nin regard there is more of reason in teaching than in learning, we\nare to believe Aristotle,[86] who assures us that terrestrial animals\ndo that likewise, in regard that nightingales have been observed\ninstructing their young ones to sing. Of which this may be a sufficient\nproof, that such nightingales are known to sing worse that are taken\nvery young from the nest and deprived of the education of the old one.\nFor they both learn and are taught from the old one, not for hire\nor to get reputation, but merely out of a delight in mixing their\nnotes together, and because they have a greater love for that which\nis excellent and curious in the voice than for what is profitable.\nConcerning which I have a story to tell you, which I heard from several\nGreeks and Romans, who were eye-witnesses of the thing.\n\nA certain barber in Rome, who had a shop right against the temple which\nis called the Greeks\u2019 Market, bred in his house a kind of a prodigy of\na magpie, whose tongue would be always going with the greatest variety\nimaginable, sometimes imitating human speech, sometimes chattering her\nwild notes, and sometimes humoring the sounds of wind instruments;\nneither was this by any constraint, but as she accustomed herself, with\na more than ordinary ambition, to leave nothing unspoken, nothing that\nher imitation should not master.\n\nIt happened a certain person of the wealthier sort, newly dead in the\nneighborhood, was carried forth to be buried with a great number of\ntrumpets before him. Now in regard it was the custom of the bearers\nto rest themselves before the barber\u2019s shop, the trumpeters being\nexcellent in their art, and withal commanded so to do, made a long\nstop, sounding all the while.\n\nAfter that day the magpie was altogether mute, not so much as uttering\nher usual notes by which she called for what she wanted, insomuch that\nthey who before admired as they passed to and fro at the chattering and\nprating of the bird now much more wondered at her sudden silence; and\nmany suspected her to have been poisoned by some that affected peculiar\nskill in teaching this kind of birds. But the greatest number were of\nopinion, that the noise of the trumpets had stupefied her hearing,\nand that by the loss of her hearing the use of her voice was likewise\nextinguished. But her unusual silence proceeded from neither of these\ncauses, but from her retiring to privacy, by herself to exercise the\nimitation of what she had heard, and to fit and prepare her voice as\nthe instrument to express what she had learned. For soon after she came\nof a sudden to sight again, but had quitted all her former customary\nimitations, and sounded only the music of the trumpets, observing all\nthe changes and cadences of the harmony, with such exactness of time as\nwas not to be imagined; an argument, as I have said before, that the\naptness in those creatures to learn of themselves is more rational\nthan readiness to be taught by others. Nor do I think it proper to pass\nby in silence one wonderful example of the docility of a dog, of which\nI myself was a spectator at Rome. This dog belonged to a certain mimic,\nwho at that time had the management of a farce wherein there was great\nvariety of parts, which he undertook to instruct the actors to perform,\nwith several imitations proper for the matters and passions therein\nrepresented. Among the rest there was one who was to drink a sleepy\npotion, and after he had drunk it, to fall into a deadly drowsiness and\ncounterfeit the actions of a dying person. The dog, who had studied\nseveral of the other gestures and postures, more diligently observing\nthis, took a piece of bread that was sopped in the potion, and after\nhe had ate it, in a short time counterfeited a trembling, then a\nstaggering, and afterwards a drowsiness in his head. Then stretching\nout himself, he lay as if he had been dead, and seemed to proffer\nhimself to be dragged out of the place and carried to burial, as the\nplot of the play required. Afterwards understanding the time from what\nwas said and acted, in the first place he began gently to stir, as\nit were waking out of a profound sleep, and lifting up his head, he\ngazed about him. Afterwards to the amazement of the beholders, he rose\nup, and went to his master to whom he belonged, with all the signs\nof gladness and fawning kindness, insomuch that all the spectators,\nand even Caesar himself (for old Vespasian was present in Marcellus\u2019s\ntheatre) were taken with the sight.\n\n20. But perhaps we may seem ridiculous for signalizing beasts in this\nmanner because they learn, since we find that Democritus affirms us\nto have been their scholars in the greatest matters;\u2014of the spider,\nin weaving and repairing what we tear or wear out; of the swallow, in\nbuilding houses; and of the mournful swan and nightingale, in singing\nand imitation. Moreover in others we observe a threefold practice of\nphysic, both natural and inbred. For tortoises make use of marjoram\nand weasels eat rue, when they have devoured a serpent; and dogs purge\nthemselves from abounding gall with a certain sort of grass. The dragon\nquickens the dimness of his sight with fennel; and the bear, coming\nforth of her cave after long emaciation, feeds upon the wild arum,\nfor the acrimony of that herb opens and separates her guts when clung\ntogether. At other times, being overcloyed with food, she repairs to\nthe emmet-hills, and thrusting forth her tongue all soft and unctuous,\nby reason of the sweet kind of slime that all besmears it, till it be\ncrowded with emmets, at length swallows them down her throat, and so\nrecovers. And it is reported that the Egyptians observe and imitate the\nbird called ibis, in purging and cleansing her bowels with the briny\nsea-water. For which reason the priests, when they hallow themselves,\nmake use of the water of which the ibis has drunk; for that those birds\nwill not drink the water, if it be medicinal or otherwise infected.\nSome beasts there are that cure themselves by abstinence; as wolves and\nlions, who, when they are gorged with flesh, lie still and digest their\ncrudities by the warmth of one another\u2019s bodies. It is reported also\nof the tiger, that if a kid be thrown to her, she will not eat in two\ndays; but growing almost famished the third day, if she be not supplied\nwith another, she will tear down the cage that holds her, if she have\nstrength enough; yet all this while she will not meddle with the first\nkid, as being her companion and fellow-housekeeper.\n\nMore than this, the elephants are said to make use of chirurgery; for\nthat being brought to persons wounded, they will draw forth the heads\nof spears and arrows out of their bodies with little pain, and without\ndilacerating and mangling the flesh.\n\nThe Cretan goats, which by eating dittany expel the arrows shot into\ntheir bodies, taught women with child to understand the virtue of that\nherb, so prevalent to expel the birth. For those goats being wounded\nseek no other cure, but presently seek out and hunt for dittany.\n\n21. But these things, though wonderful, are not so much to be admired\nas are those beasts that understand the use of numbers and have the\npower of reckoning, like the oxen about Susa. For there are oxen in\nthat place that water the king\u2019s gardens with portable buckets, of\nwhich the number is fixed. For every ox carries a hundred buckets every\nday, and more you cannot force them to take or carry, would you never\nso fain; insomuch that, when constraint has been used for experiment\u2019s\nsake, nothing could make them stir after they had carried their full\nnumber. Such an accurate account do they take, and preserve the same in\ntheir memory, as Ctesias the Cnidian relates it.\n\nThe Libyans deride the Egyptians for the fables which they report of\nthe oryx, which, as they say, makes a great noise upon the same day,\nat the very hour, when the Dog-star, which they call Sothes, rises.\nHowever, this is certain, that all their goats, when that star rises\ntruly with the sun, turn themselves and stand gazing toward the east;\nwhich is a most unquestionable argument of that star\u2019s having finished\nits course, and agrees exactly with the astronomer\u2019s observations.\n\n22. But that my discourse may draw to a conclusion, let us (as the\nsaying is) move the stone over the sacred line, and add something\nconcerning the divinity and prophetic nature with which our terrestrial\ncreatures are endued. Which when we consider, we shall find that that\npart of soothsaying which is founded upon the observation of birds is\nnot the meanest or most ignoble, but very ancient and in great esteem.\nFor the smartness and intelligible faculty of birds, together with\ntheir capability to receive all impressions of fancy, afford the Deity\na convenience to make use of those faculties as instruments, that he\nmay turn them into motion, sounds, chirpings, and forms, now to stop\nand stay, anon to drive forward like the winds; by means of some of\nthese stopping short, by the means of others directing to their end,\nthe actions and impetuous impulses of men. Therefore Euripides in\ngeneral calls birds the criers of the Gods; and particularly Socrates\nstyles himself a fellow-servant with the swans. As among princes,\nPyrrhus was pleased with the surname of Eagle; and Antiochus loved to\nbe called Antiochus the Falcon. But they who deride men as insipid\nand void of ingenuity call them by the names of fish. And whereas we\ncan produce millions of things and accidents which are foretold us by\nland and flying creatures, there is not any one such example that the\npatrons of water-animals can produce in their behalf; but being all\nvoid of hearing, perfectly sottish, and without any sight, discerning,\nor providence, they are all thrown apart into that same place, unblest\nand hideous, called the sea, as it were into the region of the ungodly,\nwhere the rational and intellectual part of the soul is extinguished;\nbeing animated with only some diminutive portion, the lowest that may\nbe imagined, of a confused and overwhelmed sense, so that they rather\nseem to palpitate than breathe.\n\n23. HERACLEO. Pluck up your brows then, friend Phaedimus; after all\nthis, it is time to rouse thyself in the defence of the islanders,\nand others that live by the seaside. For this has been no frivolous\ndiscourse, but a hard fought contest, and a continued piece of rhetoric\nthat wanted only lattices and a pulpit to give it the honor it deserved.\n\nPHAEDIMUS. Therefore, you see, it is plain here has been foul play and\ntreachery in the case, for a person sober and upon premeditation to\nset upon us when we were stomach-sick and dozed with our last night\u2019s\ncompotation. But there is no way to avoid the combat; for that, being\nan imitator of Pindar, it shall never be said of me.\n\n    Combats refused, when nobly set upon,\n    Have virtue into deepest darkness thrown.\n\nFor we have leisure enough, as having not only allowed ourselves a\nvacation from jollity and balls, but our hounds and horses a relaxation\nfrom their labors, and withal having hung up our drag-nets and spears,\nas having also this day granted, for disputation\u2019s sake, a general\ntruce to all creatures, as well upon the land as in the sea. However,\nfear not; for I will use it moderately, without producing either\nthe opinions of philosophers or the fables of the Egyptians, or the\nrelations either of the Indians or Libyans, wanting testimony; but\nsuch as shall be verified by good witnesses, who have made it their\nbusiness to toil upon the ocean, and such as are evident to the eye.\nFor to say truth, there is not any one of those examples produced from\nthe land which is not apparent and openly manifested to our sense.\nWhereas the sea affords few but such as are difficult to be discerned,\nas concealing the generation and nourishment of most of her creatures,\ntheir antipathies, and ways of preserving themselves; in reference to\nwhich many acts of understanding, memory, and community are unknown\nto us, so that we cannot be so copious in our discourse. Then again,\nland animals, by reason of their familiarity and cohabitation, being\nin some measure accustomed to the conditions of men, become capable of\ntheir nutriture, education, and imitation; which sweetens and allays\nall their acerbity and moroseness, like the mixture of fresh water\nwith sea brine, and awakening that which is slow and disordered in\nthem, inflames it with human motions. Whereas the living of sea animals\nbeing by many degrees remote from the converse of men, and having\nnothing adventitious or that may be said to be acquired by custom and\nfamiliarity, is altogether peculiar, genuine, and unmixed with manners\nstrange and foreign to them; which proceeds not from Nature, but\nfrom the place itself. For Nature, receiving and cherishing whatever\nknowledge comes to herself, affords it also to fish, and makes many\neels tame and familiar to men, which for that reason are called sacred,\nlike those in the fountain Arethusa; so that in many places there are\nfish that will hear and obey when called by their names, as the story\ngoes of Crassus\u2019s mullet, upon the death of which he wept. For which\nwhen Domitius twitted him in these words, Did not you weep when your\nmullet died?\u2014he retorted upon him again, Did you not bury three wives\nand never weep at all? The crocodiles belonging to the priests not only\nknow the voices of those that call them, and suffer themselves to be\nstroked and handled, but gaping hold out their teeth to be cleansed and\nwiped by the hands of the priests.\n\nLately Philinus, after he had been long travelling in Egypt, returning\nto us, told us how he saw, in the city which derives its name from\nAnteus, an old woman sleeping by the side of a crocodile, upon a low\nsoft bed well and decently dressed up.\n\nIn ancient histories we find that when King Ptolemy called the sacred\ncrocodile, and when the crocodile neither vouchsafed to appear at his\ncall nor would answer to the earnest expostulations of the priests, it\nwas looked upon as a prognostication of the death of the king, which\nhappened soon after. Which shows that the race of water-animals is\nneither without a share of that inestimable thing called prophetic\nsignification, nor undeserving those honors ascribed to land creatures.\nFor that about Sura, which is a village in Lycia between Phellus and\nMyra, I have heard it credibly reported, that there are certain persons\nwho make it their business to watch the turns, flights, and pursuits\nof the fish, whence, by a certain art which they have, they gather\npredictions, as others from the observation of birds.\n\n24. But let these examples suffice to show, that fish are not\naltogether strangers to mankind, nor altogether void of human\naffection. But for a great and common demonstration of their unmixed\nand natural understanding, we find that there is not any fish that\nswims, unless they be such as stick and cling to the rocks, which is so\neasily taken by men, as asses are seized by wolves, bees by bee-eaters,\ngrasshoppers by swallows, serpents by harts. And these last are\ntherefore called \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03b9, not from their swiftness (\u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2), but from\na faculty which they have of drawing serpents to them (\u1f15\u03bb\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f44\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2).\nSo sheep call the wolf by the sound of their feet, and the panther\nallures to her paws both apes and other creatures by the fragrant smell\nof her body. But so suspicious is the sense of all water animals, and\nso watchful are they to avoid all baits and treacheries against them,\nby reason of their extraordinary cunning, that fishing thereby becomes\nno easy or single labor, but a toil that requires various instruments\nand many tricks of human cunning and deceit. This is apparent from\nexamples near at hand. For no man desires an angling-rod too thick,\nthough strong enough to hold against the twitches of the fish when\ntaken; but rather they require it slender, lest by casting too great a\nshadow upon the water, it should frighten the suspicious creature. In\nthe next place, they never knit too many knots in the line, but make it\nas smooth as may be, for that would too much discover the deceit; and\nthen for the hairs which are next the hook, they endeavor to get the\nwhitest they can meet with; for so, by reason of the likeness of color,\nthey lie the more easily concealed in the water. Therefore some there\nare who, wrongly expounding the following verses of Homer,[87]\n\n    She to the bottom quickly sinks, like lead,\n    Which fixt to horn[88] of rustic ox descends,\n    And brings destruction to the greedy fish,\n\nbelieve that the ancients made use of ox-hair for their lines with\nwhich they angled, alleging that \u03ba\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 then signified hair,\u2014from whence\n\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, _to be shaved_, and \u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03ac, _shaving_,\u2014and that \u03ba\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\nin Archilochus signified one who takes delight in trimming and decking\nthe hair. But this is an error. For they made use of horse-hair, more\nespecially that of male horses. For mares, by moistening their tails\nwith their urine, render the hair weak and brittle. Though Aristotle\nwill not allow any thing to be said in all this that requires such\nextraordinary subtlety. Only he says, that the lower piece of the line\nwas fortified with a little hollow piece of horn, lest the fish should\ncome at the line itself and bite it off; moreover, that they made use\nof round hooks to catch mullets and tunnies, in regard they had but\nsmall mouths, for that they were afraid of a straight hook. He also\nfurther says, that the mullet many times suspecting the round hook,\nwill swim round about it, flapping the bait with his tail, and then\nturning round, secures to himself so much as he has broken off. Or if\nhe cannot do that, he shuts his mouth close; and with the extremities\nof his lips nibbles off some part of the bait.\n\nThe fish called labrax behaves himself more stoutly than the elephant;\nfor when he perceives himself struck with the hook, without assistance\nhe sets himself at liberty, widening the wound by flinging his head to\nand fro, and enduring the painful twingings of the hook, till he have\nfreed himself from it with the loss of his flesh. The sea fox (or the\nfish called alopex) seldom bites, but avoids the deceit; but if he\nchance to be taken, he presently turns the inside of his body outward.\nFor by reason of the strength and moisture of his body, he has a\npeculiar faculty to turn it so that, the inside coming to be outermost,\nthe hook falls off. These things demonstrate understanding, and a\nsubtle and extraordinary use of it in the nick and juncture of time.\n\n25. Other examples there are which show not only this same\nunderstanding and knowledge, but the community and mutual affection of\nfish. Thus, if one scate happen to swallow the hook, all the rest of\nthe scates that are in the same shoal presently crowd together and bite\nthe line in pieces. The same scates, if any of their companions fall\ninto the net, give the prisoners their tails to take hold of with their\nteeth, and so draw them forth by main force.\n\nBut the fish called anthiae with far more courage assist their fellows\nin distress. For getting under the line with their backs, and setting\nup their fins, with these, as with sharp saws, they endeavor to cut it\nin two.\n\nNow we know no land animal that will assist and defend his kind in\ndanger; neither the bear, nor the wild boar, nor the lion, nor the\npanther. True it is that, when they are in herds together, they will\ngather into a circle and defend each other in common; but no single\nland animal either knows or cares to assist a single companion, but\nflies and shifts for himself as far off as he can from the beast that\nis wounded and lies a dying. For as for that old story of elephants\nfilling up the ditches with heaps of adjoining materials, whether wood\nor earth, for the unfortunate elephant the more easily to get up again,\nthis, my good friend, is extremely uncouth and foreign to us, as if we\nwere bound to believe Juba\u2019s books by virtue of a royal edict. However,\nif it is true, it does but serve to show that many of the marine\ncreatures are nothing inferior in understanding and community to the\nmost intelligent of the land animals. But as for their mutual society,\nwe shall discourse apart of that by itself.\n\n26. Now the fishermen, observing how that most fish avoided the casts\nof their hooks by cunning or by striving with the tackling, betook\nthemselves to force,\u2014as the Persians use to serve their enemies in\ntheir wars,[89]\u2014making use of nets, that there might be no escape for\nthose that were caught either by the help of reason or subtlety. Thus\nmullets and the fish called julides are taken with sweep-nets and\ndrag-nets, as are also several other sorts of fish called mormuri,\nsargi, gobii, and labraces; those that are called casting-nets catch\nthe mullet, the gilthead, and the scorpion fish; and therefore Homer\ncalls this sort of net \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1, or the _all-sweeper_.[90] And yet there\nare some fish that are too cunning for these nets. Thus the labrax,\nperceiving the drawing of the sweep-net, with the force of his body\nbeats a hollow place in the mud, where he lays himself close till the\nnet be gone over him. But as for the dolphin, when he finds himself\ntaken and in the midst of the net, he remains there without being in\nthe least perplexed, but falls to with a great deal of joy, and feasts\nupon the numerous fry within the meshes; but so soon as he comes near\nthe shore, he bites his way through the net with his teeth and swims\naway. Or if he chance to be taken, the fishermen do him no other harm\nthe first time, but only sew a sort of large bulrush to the finny crown\nupon his head, and so let him go. If they take him a second time, they\npunish him with stripes, well knowing him again by the prints of the\nneedle. But that rarely happens. For having got pardon the first time,\nfor the most part of them, they acknowledge the favor, and abstain from\nspoil for the future.\n\nMoreover, among the many examples that make evident the wariness of\nfish in avoiding the deceits and craft of the fishermen, it would\nnot be convenient to pass by that of the cuttle-fish. For this fish,\ncarrying near his neck a certain black and inky sort of liquor, so\nsoon as he perceives himself discovered, throws that liquor forth,\nand darkens all the water round about him in such a manner that, the\nfisherman losing sight of him, by that means he makes his escape;\nimitating therein Homer\u2019s Deities, who, when they had a mind to save\nany of their heroes, hid them in an azure cloud. But of this enough.\n\n27. Now for the extraordinary subtlety of fish in hunting and catching\ntheir own prey, we shall meet with several examples of it in several\nfish. Particularly the star-fish, understanding his own nature to be\nsuch that whatever he touches dissolves and liquefies, readily offers\nhis body, and permits himself to be touched by all that come near him.\n\nYou know yourself the property of the torpedo or crampfish, which not\nonly benumbs all those that touch it, but also strikes a numbness\nthrough the very net into the hands of them that go about to take him.\nAnd some that have had greater experience of this fish report that,\nif it happen to fall alive upon the land, they that pour water upon\nit shall presently perceive a numbness seizing upon their hands and\nstupefying their feeling, through the water affected with the quality\nof the fish. And therefore, having an innate sense of this faculty, it\nnever makes any resistance against any thing, nor ever is it in danger.\nOnly swimming circularly about his prey, he shoots forth the effluviums\nof his nature like so many darts, and first infects the water, then the\nfish through the water, which is neither able to defend itself nor to\nescape, being (as it were) held in chains and frozen up.\n\nThe fish called the fisherman is well known to many, who has his name\ngiven him from his manner of catching fish; whose art, as Aristotle\nwrites, the cuttle-fish makes use of, for he lets down, like a line, a\ncertain curl which Nature has given him, so ordered as to let it run\nout at length or draw it to him again, as he sees occasion. This, when\nhe sees any of the lesser fish approach, he offers them to bite, and\nthen by degrees pulls the curl nearer and nearer by virtue of the bait,\ntill he has drawn his prey within the reach of his mouth. And as for\nthe polypus\u2019s changing his color, Pindar has made it famous in these\nwords:\n\n    In any city may that man expose\n    His safety, who well knows\n    Like sea-bred polypus to range,\n    And vary color upon every change.\n\nIn like manner Theognis:\n\n    Change manners with thy friends, observing thus\n    The many-colored, cunning polypus;\n    Who let him stick to whatsoever rock,\n    Of the same color does his body look.[91]\n\nIt is true the chameleon changes color, not out of any design or\nto conceal himself, but out of fear, being naturally timorous and\ntrembling at every noise he hears. And this is occasioned by the\nextraordinary abundance of breath which he enjoys, as Theophrastus\naffirms. For the whole body of this creature wants but little of being\nnothing else but lungs; which demonstrates him to be full of spirits,\nand consequently apt to change. But this same change of the polypus\nis no product of any affection of the mind, but a kind of action.\nFor he changes on purpose, making use of this artifice to escape\nwhat he fears, and to get the food which he lives by. For by fraud,\nthose things that he will take never avoid him, and those things he\nwill escape pass him by without taking any notice of him. For that\nhe devours his own claws is an untruth, but that he is afraid of\nthe lamprey and conger is certain; for by these he is ill treated,\nnot being able to return them any injury, by reason of their being\nso slippery. Though on the other side the crawfish, having once got\nthem within his claws, holds them with ease. For slenderness affords\nno help against roughness; but when the polypus comes to thrust his\nhorns into the body of the crawfish, then also the crawfish dies.\nAnd this same vicissitude of avoiding and pursuing one another has\nNature infused into them on purpose to exercise their subtlety and\nunderstanding.\n\n28. Then again we have heard Aristotimus relating how the land\nhedge-hog had a perception of the rising of the wind, and praising the\ntrigonal flight of cranes. But for my part, I produce no particular\nhedge-hog of Cyzicus or Byzantium, but all the sea hedge-hogs in\ngeneral; who, when they perceive a storm coming, ballast themselves\nwith little stones, lest they should be overturned by reason of their\nlightness or carried away by the rolling of the waves, which they\nprevent by the weight of their little stones.\n\nOn the other side, the cranes\u2019 order in their flight against the wind\nis not of one sort. But this is a general notion among all fish, that\nthey always swim against the waves and the tide, and always take care\nlest the wind being in their tails should force their fins from their\nbacks, and leave their naked bodies exposed to the cold and other\ninconveniences; and therefore they still oppose the prows of their\nbodies against the waves. For that while they thus cleave the waves at\nthe top, the sea keeps their fins close, and lightly flowing over the\nsuperficies of their bodies, becomes less burdensome, besides that it\nsuffers not their scales to rise.\n\nThis, I say, is common to all fish, except that fish which is called\nellops; which, as they report, always swims with the wind and tide, not\nminding the erection or opening of the scales, which do not lie towards\nthe tail, as in other fish.\n\n29. Moreover, the tunny is so sensible of the equinoxes and solstices,\nthat he teaches even men themselves without the help of any\nastrological table. For where the winter solstice overtakes him, there\nhe remains till the vernal equinox.\n\nAs for that same artifice of the cranes, that keep themselves waking\nby clutching a stone in their claws, how much more cunningly done is\nthat of the dolphin, for whom it is not lawful to stand still or to\nbe out of motion. For it is the nature of the dolphins to be always\nin motion; so that, when they cease to move, they also cease to live.\nAnd therefore when sleep seizes them, they raise their bodies to the\nsuperficies of the sea, and so sinking down again with their bellies\nupward, are carried along with the tide till they touch again the\nshore. Wakened in that manner, with an impetuous noise they mount\nupward again, designing thus a kind of rest still intermixed with\nmotion. And the same thing is reported of the tunnies for the same\nreason.\n\nHaving thus concluded their mathematical foreknowledge of the mutations\nof the sun, of which Aristotle gives testimony, let me now relate their\nskill in arithmetic; but first of all, their knowledge in optics, of\nwhich Aeschylus seems not to have been altogether ignorant. For these\nare his words:\n\n    Casting a squint-eye like the tunny.\n\nFor tunnies seem to be dim-sighted of one eye. And therefore, when they\nenter the Euxine Sea, they coast along the land on the right side, and\ncontrariwise when they come forth; prudently committing the care of\ntheir bodies to the best eye.\n\nBut wanting arithmetic in order to the preservation of mutual love\nand society one with another, they arrive in such a manner to the\nperfection of that science, that, in regard they are extremely desirous\nto enjoy the society of each other, they always make up their whole\nfry into the form of a cube, and make a solid of the whole number\nconsisting of six equal planes; and then they swim in such order as to\npresent an equal front in each direction. So then, if the observer of\nthe tunnies does but exactly take the number of the side that he sees,\nhe knows the whole number of the shoal; well knowing that the depth is\nequal to the breadth and length.\n\n30. The fish amiae, which are another sort of tunnies, are so called,\nbecause they swim in shoals, as also the pelamydes or summer whitings.\nAs for the rest that are seen to swim in shoals and to observe a mutual\nsociety, their number is not to be expressed. And therefore let us\nproceed to those that observe a kind of private and particular society\none with another. Among which is the pinoteras of Chrysippus, upon\nwhich he has expended so much ink, that he gives it the precedency in\nall his books, both physical and ethical. For Chrysippus never knew the\nspongotera, for he would not have passed it over out of negligence.\n\nThe pinoteras is so called, from watching the fish called pina or the\nnacre, and in shape resembles a crab; and cohabiting with the nacre,\nhe sits like a porter at his shell-side, which he lets continually to\nstand wide open until he spies some small fishes gotten within it,\nsuch as they are wont to take for their food. Then entering the shell,\nhe nips the flesh of the nacre, to give him notice to shut his shell;\nwhich being done, they feed together within the fortification upon the\ncommon prey.\n\nThe sponge is governed by a certain little creature more like a spider\nthan a crab. For the sponge wants neither soul nor sense nor blood;\nbut growing to the stones, as many other things do, it has a peculiar\nmotion from itself and to itself, which nevertheless stands in need as\nit were of a monitor or instructor. For being otherwise of a substance\nloose and open, and full of holes and hollowness, by reason of the\nsloth and stupidity of it the sponge-watcher assists to give notice\nwhen any thing of food enters the cavities of it, at which time the\nsponge contracts itself and falls to feeding.\n\nBut if a man approach and touch it, being nipped and admonished by the\nsponge-watcher, it seems to shudder and shut up the body of it, closing\nand condensing it in such a manner as makes it no easy thing to cut it\nfrom the place where it grows.\n\nThe purple shell-fish also, called porphyrae, clustering together in\na kind of mutual society, build up little combs for themselves like\nbees, wherein they are said to generate; and culling out the choicest\nsubstance of the moss and seaweed that stick to their shells, they seem\nto be in a circular commons among themselves, feeding the one upon the\nother\u2019s nourishment.\n\n31. But why should we admire society in these creatures, when the most\nsavage and most unsociable of all creatures which either lakes, rivers,\nor the ocean nourishes, the crocodile, shows himself the most sociable\nand grateful of water monsters in the banquets which he bestows upon\nthe trochilus? For the trochilus is a bird that haunts marshes and\nrivers, and he guards and watches over the crocodile, not as one\nthat feeds at his table, but as one that lives upon his scraps and\nleavings only. For when this bird observes the crocodile asleep, and\nthe ichneumon ready to assail him, smeared with mud for the conflict\nlike a wrestler covered with dust, he never leaves crying and pecking\nhim with his beak, till he rouse the drowsy monster. In return of which\nthe crocodile is so tame and gentle towards this bird, that he permits\nhim to enter his yawning chaps, and is pleased with his pecking out and\ncleansing away with his beak the remainders of the devoured flesh that\nsticks between his teeth. And when the monster has an inclination to\nshut his mouth, he gives the bird notice by a gentle lowering of his\njaw, nor will he close his chaps till he finds that the bird is flown\naway. The fish which the Greeks call hegemon (or the captain or leader)\nis a small fish, in bigness and shape not much unlike a gudgeon, but\nby reason of the roughness of his scales is said to resemble a bird\nwhen she shakes her feathers. This fish always keeps company with one\nof the huge whales, and swims before him to direct his course, lest he\nshould bruise himself upon the shallows, or fall into any marshy place\nor narrow haven whence he could not easily get out again. Therefore the\nwhale follows him, as the ship follows the helm, directing his course\nwith confidence. All other things whatever, whether skiff, whether\nbeast or stone, that chance to light into the gaping gulf of the\nwhale\u2019s mouth, immediately perish, being swallowed by the monster; but\nacknowledging his conductor, he receives him and lodges him, like an\nanchor, safely in his jaws. There he sleeps; and all the while he takes\nhis rest, the whale lies still, as if he were at anchor; and when his\nguide comes forth again, the whale proceeds, never forsaking him night\nor day; or if he wander without his leader, the monster shipwrecks,\nlike a vessel cast upon a rock without a helm. And this we saw not long\nago near Anticyra, where they report that in former times a whale being\ncast and putrefying caused a pestilence.\n\nIs it worth while then to compare these observations of community and\nassociation with those sympathies which, as Aristotle relates, exist\nbetween foxes and serpents because the eagle is an enemy to both?\nOr with those of the horn-owls with horses, whose dung they love to\nscrape about the field? For my part I observe no such care of one\nanother in bees and emmets, which, by reason of their multitude, carry\non and perfect their work in common, but have no particular care or\nconsideration one of another.\n\n32. We shall observe this difference more evidently, if we direct our\ndiscourses upon the most ancient and greatest works of common society,\nwhich are the works of generation and procreation of offspring. For in\nthe first place, those fish that frequent the shores next adjoining\nto vast lakes or great rivers, when they are near their time of\nbringing forth, retire up into those places, seeking the fresh waters\nwhich are more gentle and void of brine. For tranquillity is most\nconvenient for such as bring forth, and there is most safety in rivers\nand lakes for their young ones, as being freest from the devouring\nmonsters of the sea. Which is the reason that there is the greatest\nplenty of fish about the Euxine Sea, where there are no whales, but\nonly small sea-calves or little dolphins. Besides, the mixture of\nrivers, many in number, and those very large, that fall into the\nPontus, make the temperature more kindly and proper for breeding and\nbringing forth. And that is most wonderful which is reported of the\nanthias, which Homer[92] calls the sacred fish, though some interpret\nsacred to signify great in that place, as we call a certain great bone\n_os sacrum_, and the epilepsy, being a great disease, the _sacred\ndisease_, though others interpret that to be sacred which ought not\nto be touched, as being dedicated to holy use. And Eratosthenes seems\nto take the gilthead, so called from the golden hair about his eyes,\nfor the sacred fish; though many believe it to be the ellops,\u2014a fish\nseldom seen and difficult to be caught, yet many times it appears in\nthe rivers of Pamphylia. So they that catch them are crowned, and their\nboats are also adorned with garlands, and as they pass along they are\nreceived and honored with loud shouts and clapping of hands. However\nit be, most people take the anthias to be a sacred fish, because\nthat where the anthias appears, there are no sea-monsters, but the\nsponge-cutters dive boldly, and the fish as fearlessly spawn, as having\na pledge for their security. And the reason is twofold, either because\nthe sea-monsters dread the anthias, as elephants dread a hog, and lions\na cock; or else it is a sign that there are no sea-monsters in those\nplaces, which the anthias knows and observes, as being an intelligent\nfish, endued with sense and a good memory.\n\n33. Then again, the care of their young is common to both sexes. For\nthe males never devour their offspring, but remain and abide constantly\nby the spawn, protecting it with a diligent watchfulness, as Aristotle\nrelates; and those that accompany the females moisten the spawn with\na small quantity of milky seed; for that otherwise the spawn will not\ngrow, but remains imperfect and never arrives at the due proportion.\nParticularly the fish called phycides make themselves nests in the\nseaweed to preserve their spawn from the waves.\n\nBut the love of the galeus toward her young ones is beyond the\naffection and clemency of any the tamest of creatures; for they lay\nan egg, which being hatched, they nourish and carry the young about\nnot outwardly, but within their own bowels, as if they could not breed\ntheir young without a second birth.\n\nWhen the young ones are somewhat grown, they put them forth again, and\nteach them to swim close by themselves, then resume them again through\ntheir mouths into their bellies, and afford them nourishment and safe\nretirement in their bodies, till they are able to shift for themselves.\n\nNo less admirable is the care of the tortoise, as to the bringing\nforth and preserving her young. For she retires out of the sea to lay;\nbut not being able to stay long upon the land, she hides her eggs in\nthe sand, covering them over gently with the lightest of the gravel;\nand when she has thus sufficiently and assuredly concealed them, some\nreport that she marks and streaks the place with her feet, that she may\nbe able to know it again; others affirm that the female, being turned\nupon her back upon the sand by the male, leaves her particular marks\nand signatures behind her. However it be, this is most wonderful,\nthat after waiting forty days (for in so many the eggs come to break)\nshe returns, and knowing where the treasure lies, as well as any man\nunderstands where he hides his gold, she opens them with great joy and\nalacrity.\n\n34. Many observations like to these are made of the crocodile. But such\nis its skill in choosing a place for breeding, that no man can explain\nit by reason or conjecture. Whence it comes that the foreknowledge of\nthis creature is imputed more to divinity than reason. For neither\nfarther nor nearer, but just so far as the Nile that year will increase\nand cover the land, thither she goes forth and lays her eggs; which the\ncountrymen finding, are able to tell one another how far the river will\noverflow that year. So truly does that animal measure for herself, that\nthough she live in the water, she may lay her eggs dry. But the young\nones being hatched, whichsoever of them, so soon as they are come to\nlife, does not seize whatever comes next\u2014either upon a fly, or a worm,\nor a straw, or a tuft of grass\u2014with his mouth, the dam presently tears\nhim to pieces with her teeth. But those that are fierce and active\nshe loves and cherishes, according to the judgment of the wisest men,\nimparting her affection by the rules of judgment, not by the sway of\npassion.\n\nThe sea-calves also bring forth upon the dry lands; but then fetching\nout their young ones by degrees, they give them a taste of the\nsea-water, and presently lead them out again; and this they often do,\ntill custom has made them bold, and brought them to love a sea life.\n\nFrogs when they couple use a certain croaking invitation, which is\ncommonly called ololygon; and when the male has thus enticed the\nfemale, they abide together all night. For in the water they cannot,\nand in the daytime they are afraid to engender upon the land, which in\nthe night-time they do without control. At other times they croak more\nshrill and loud; and this is a sign of rain, and holds among the most\nassured prognostics of wet weather.\n\n35. But what absurdity, dearest Neptune, would this passion of mine\nlead me into! How ridiculous should I appear, if trifling among\nsea-calves and frogs, I should omit one of the marine animals, the\nwisest and most beloved by the Gods! For what nightingales are to be\ncompared with the halcyon for music? or who will presume to prefer the\nswallow\u2019s love of offspring, the dove\u2019s love of her mate, or the art\nand curiosity of the bees, to those virtues ascribed to the halcyon?\nOne only island, as history tells us, received and entertained Latona\nwhen she gave birth; which island, floating before, was then made firm\nland. But when the halcyon brings forth, about the winter solstice, the\nwhole ocean remains calm and undisturbed without the wrinkle of a wave.\nSo that there is not any other creature for which man has so great an\naffection, seeing that for her sake for seven days and seven nights\ntogether, in the depth of winter, they sail without fear of shipwreck,\nand make their voyages upon the sea with greater safety than they\ntravel upon the land.\n\nBut if it be required that we should make a brief recital of her\nparticular virtues, she is so great an example of conjugal affection,\nthat she does not keep company with her mate for a single season, but\nfor the whole year together, and that not for wantonness (for she never\ncouples but with her own), but out of affection and friendship, like\na truly virtuous married wife. And when her mate through age becomes\ninfirm and not able to bear her company, she takes care of him, and\nfeeds and carries him about in his old age, never forsaking nor leaving\nhim alone, but taking him upon her shoulders, carries him from place to\nplace, never abandoning him till death.\n\nAs to her affection towards her young ones and care of their\npreservation, so soon as she perceives herself near the time of her\nbringing forth, she presently betakes herself to the making of her\nnest. For the building of which, she neither makes use of mud and\ndirt nor props it up with walls and rafters, like the swallows; nor\ndoes she use several members of her body to work with, like the bees,\nthat employ their whole body to enter the wax and open their cells,\nwith their six feet fashioning their six-sided apartments. For the\nhalcyon having but one single instrument, one single tool, which is\nher bill, nor any other help to assist her in labor and her care of\nher young ones, what a wonderful master-piece of workmanship does\nshe erect? Insomuch that it is a difficult thing for them that have\nnot well considered it to believe their eyesight; her workmanship\nseeming rather the art of a shipwright than of a common builder; of\nall inventions being the only form not to be overwhelmed and washed\nby the waves. To this purpose she gathers together the thorns of the\nsea-needle\u2014some straight, others oblique, like the woof in the loom\u2014and\ntwists and binds them where the thread and yarn are interwoven one\nwithin another, till she has framed a nest round and oblong, resembling\nthe usual fisher-boats. This when she has finished she launches into\nthe sea, where the waves beating gently upon it direct to reform what\nis amiss, by consolidating the loose and ill compacted parts, where the\nwater has forced any entrance; insomuch that at length she fastens and\nstrengthens what she has put together in such a manner, that it is not\nto be broken or pierced either by stones or steel. Nor is the symmetry\nand form of the inside and cavity of the nest less to be admired. For\nit is so contrived as only to receive herself; the entrance into it not\nbeing to be found by any other creature, nor can the sea itself find a\nway into it. I am apt to believe that there is none of you who never\nsaw this nest. But for my own part, that have often seen and handled\none of them, I may safely say, that I\n\n    In Delos\u2019 temple near Apollo\u2019s shrine,\n    Something like this, a fabric most divine,\n\nhave seen. That is to say, the horned altar, celebrated for one of the\nseven wonders of the world, which without the help of parget, glue,\nsoder, paste, or any other binding, is framed only of horns that grew\non the right side of the head of the beast.\n\nNow may the Deity that is somewhat musical and an islander be\npropitious to me, ... while I deride the questions which those scoffers\nput,\u2014wherefore Apollo may not be called mullet-shooter, when we find\nthat Venus is called the mullet-protectrix; for which reason she is\nhonored with temples adjoining to the sea, and sacred rights; and\ncertain it is, that she is displeased when any mullet is killed.\nTherefore at Leptis the priests of Neptune never eat any thing that\nbreeds in the sea; and you know the mullet is in great veneration\namong the professors of the Eleusinian mysteries; moreover, that\nthe priestess of Juno at Argos abstains from the same fish; and the\nreason is because the mullets kill and destroy the sea-hare, which is\npernicious to man, and therefore they spare those creatures that are\nkind and beneficial to him.\n\n36. Then again, we find among many of the Greeks temples and altars\nfrequently dedicated to Diana Dictynna (so called from \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03c4\u03c5\u03bf\u03bd, _a\nnet_) and Delphinian Apollo. And that same place which Apollo has\npeculiarly chosen for himself was first of all inhabited by Cretans,\nhaving a dolphin for their leader. For the Deity did not swim before\nhis army in another shape (as the mythologists dream), but sending a\ndolphin to direct them in their course, the dolphin brought them to\nCirrha. Story also tells us that Soteles and Dionysius, who were sent\nto Sinope by Ptolemy Soter to fetch from thence Serapis, were driven by\ncontrary winds beyond Cape Malea, having the Peloponnesus upon their\nright hands; while they were thus wandering and out of their course,\na dolphin appeared before the prow of the headmost vessel, and (as\nit were) kindly inviting them, conducted them into safe harbors and\nroads, till by his good guidance and leading them he at length brought\nthe whole fleet to Cirrha. There, when they came to offer the usual\nsacrifices for their safe landing, they came to understand that, of\ntwo statues which were in the place, they were to take that of Pluto\nand carry it along with them; but as for that of Proserpina, they were\nonly to take the mould and leave the statue itself behind. Probable it\nis that the Deity had a kindness for the dolphin, considering how much\nhe delights in music. For which reason Pindar likens himself to the\ndolphin, and confesses himself to be moved in the same manner as that\nnoble creature,\n\n    Which flutes\u2019 beloved sound\n      Excites to play,\n    Upon the calm and placid sea.\n\nThough it is very probable that his affection to men is more pleasing\nto the Deity, he being the only creature that bears an affection to man\nas man. For as for the land animals, some kinds there are that fly him\naltogether, and the tamest and most gentle follow him and are familiar\nwith him, only for the benefit and nourishment which they receive from\nhim; as the dog, the horse, and elephant. The swallows, by necessity\nconstrained, build in houses, seeking shade and security, but are no\nless afraid of men than of the wild beasts. Only to the dolphin has\nNature bequeathed that excellent quality, so much sought for by the\nbest of philosophers, to love for no advantage; for that having no\nneed at all of man, he is a kind friend to all men, and has lent his\nassistance to many. There is no man that is ignorant of the famous\nstory of Arion. And you, my dear friend, have seasonably put us in mind\nof Hesiod; but\n\n    Thou didst not by a legal course\n    Rightly conclude thy long discourse.[93]\n\nFor when you had spoken so much in praise of the dog, you should not\nhave passed by the dolphin. For it would have been a blind story of the\ndog that barked and flew with violence upon the murderers, had it not\nbeen for the dolphins, that took the carcass of Hesiod, floating in the\nsea near Nemeum, and readily receiving it from one another, landed it\nat Rhium, whereby the murder came to be known.\n\nMyrtilus the Lesbian writes, that Enalus the Aeolian, being in love\nwith the daughter of Phineus, who, by the command of the oracle of\nAmphitrite was cast into the sea by the Penthilidae, when he understood\nit, threw himself also into the sea, but was saved by a dolphin, and\ncarried to Lesbos.\n\nBut the gentleness and kindness of the dolphin towards the lad of Jasus\nwas so extraordinary that it might be said to amount even to amorous\nlove. For he played and swam with him in the daytime, and suffered\nhimself to be handled and bestrid by him; nor did he swim away with\nhim, but joyfully carried him which way soever the lad by the motion\nof his body turned him, while the Iasians flocked from all parts to\nthe shore to behold the sight. At length the lad, being thrown from\nthe dolphin\u2019s back by a terrible shower of rain and hail, was drowned.\nWhich the dolphin perceiving took up the dead youth, and threw himself\nupon the land together with the body, from which he never stirred till\nhe died out of his own element; deeming it but just to partake of that\nend of which he seemed to have been the occasion to his friend and\nplayfellow. Nor can the Iasians forget the accident, but keep it still\nin remembrance by the stamp upon their coin, which is a lad upon a\ndolphin\u2019s back.\n\nAnd from hence it was that the fabulous stories of Coeranus gained\ncredit. He was a Parian by birth, who residing at Byzantium, when a\ndraught of dolphins caught in a net were exposed to sale and in danger\nof slaughter, bought them up all, and put them into the sea again. It\nhappened not long after that Coeranus took a voyage in a vessel of\nfifty oars, carrying, as the story goes, several pirates. But between\nNaxos and the Bay of Paros he suffered shipwreck; and when all the rest\nwere drowned, he alone was taken up by a dolphin that hastened to his\nsuccor, and carried to Sicynthus, and set ashore near the cave which to\nthis day bears the name of Coeraneum. Upon which Archilochus is said to\nhave made these lines:\n\n    Of fifty men, great Neptune gentle grown\n    Left courteous Coeranus alive alone.\n\nSome years after Coeranus dying, his relations burnt his body near the\nseaside; at what time several dolphins appeared near the shore, as if\nthey had come to his funeral; nor would they stir till the funeral was\nover. Moreover Stesichorus writes that Ulysses bore a dolphin painted\nupon his shield; and for what reason the Zacynthian records tell us,\nas Critheus testifies. For they say that Telemachus, when he was but\na boy, falling into the sea, was saved by the dolphins that took him\nup and set him ashore. And therefore he made use of a dolphin for the\nimpression of his seal and the ornament of his shield. But having\npromised before that I would produce no fabulous stories, and yet being\ncarried, I know not how, to discourse beyond probability of dolphins\nby this repetition of the stories of Coeranus and Ulysses, I will do\njustice upon myself by concluding here.\n\n37. ARISTOTIMUS. Now, gentlemen, it lies on your part that are judges,\nto pronounce sentence.\n\nSOCLARUS. Assuredly then, for our parts, we shall give the same\njudgment in this, as Sophocles did in another case:\n\n    Discourse upon discording arguments\n    Is then determined best, when what was said\n    Is duly weighed and stated on both sides.\n\nFor thus comparing what you have both discoursed one against another,\nit will be found that you have acquitted yourselves on both sides like\ntrue champions against those that would deprive brute animals of sense\nand understanding.\n\n\n\n\nTHAT BRUTE BEASTS MAKE USE OF REASON\n\n\nULYSSES, CIRCE, GRYLLUS.\n\n\n1. ULYSSES. All these things, Circe, I believe that I have learned and\nwell remember. But I would willingly ask thee, whether thou hast any\nGrecians here, which being men thou hast transformed into wolves and\nlions.\n\nCIRCE. Very many, dearest Ulysses, but wherefore do you ask the\nquestion?\n\nULYSSES. Because in good truth I am of opinion I should gain a high\nreputation among the Greeks, if by thy favor I could restore these men\nto human shape again, and not suffer them through any negligence of\nmine to wax old in the bodies of beasts, where they lead a miserable\nand ignominious life.\n\nCIRCE. Surely, this man, fool as he is, believes it requisite that his\nambition should be unfortunate not only to himself and his friends, but\nto those that nothing belong to him.\n\nULYSSES. Thou art now jumbling and mixing another villanous potion of\ntwittle twattle, and wouldst plainly turn me into a beast too, if thou\ncouldst make me believe that it were a misfortune to be transformed\nfrom a beast to a man.\n\nCIRCE. What hast thou made thyself better than a beast, who, forsaking\nan immortal life, free from the miseries of old age, with me, art\nmaking such haste through a thousand threatening calamities to a mortal\nand (as I may say) old wife, pursuing an empty good and a shadow\ninstead of real truth, and all this, thinking to be more conspicuous\nand famous than thou art.\n\nULYSSES. Well, Circe, let it be as thou sayest; for why should we be\nalways contending about the same thing? However, do me the favor to\nrestore these men, and give them into my custody.\n\nCIRCE. By Hecate, not so fast neither; these are no ordinary fellows.\nBut ask them first whether they are willing. If they refuse, do you,\nbeing such an eloquent gentleman, discourse them and persuade them; if\nyou cannot persuade them, being too hard for ye at your own weapon,\nthen let it suffice ye that you have ill consulted your own and the\ngood of your friends.\n\nULYSSES. Blessed woman, wherefore dost thou mock me thus? For how can\nthey either talk or hear reason, so long as they are asses, hogs, and\nlions?\n\nCIRCE. Be of good comfort, most ambitious of men; I will so order the\nbusiness, that they shall both understand and discourse; or rather, let\none suffice to hear and return answers instead of all the rest. Look\nye, here is one at hand; pray talk to him.\n\nULYSSES. Prithee, Circe, by what name shall we call him? Who is this\nfellow of all the men in the world?\n\nCIRCE. What\u2019s this to the purpose? Call him Gryllus, if you please; and\nfor my part, I\u2019ll leave ye together, that ye may not suspect him for\nspeaking contrary to his mind to please me.\n\n2. GRYLLUS. Save ye, Mr. Ulysses.\n\nULYSSES. And you too, by Jove, Mr. Gryllus.\n\nGRYLLUS. What is\u2019t your worship would have with me?\n\nULYSSES. Knowing you were all born men, I pity the condition ye are now\nin; and I pity ye the more, for that being Greeks ye are fallen under\nthis misfortune; and therefore I made it my request to Circe that she\nwould restore ye again to your former shape, as many of you as were\ndesirous, to the end ye might return home again with us.\n\nGRYLLUS. Hold, Mr. Ulysses, not a word more of this, I beseech your\nworship. For we all contemn thee, as one that none but fools call\ncunning, and as vainly vauntest thyself to be wiser than other men, and\nyet art afraid of being changed from worse to better; like children\nthat are frightened at physician\u2019s doses and hate going to school,\nalthough the medicines and the precepts make them healthy and learned\nof diseased and fools; just so thou refusest to be transformed out of\none thing into another. And now thy bones rattle in thy skin for dread\nof living with Circe, lest she should transform thee into a hog or a\nwolf; and thou wouldst persuade us living in plenty of all enjoyments\nnot only to forsake these blessings, but to abandon her that has so\nwell provided for us, to sail along with thee, and to become men again,\nthe most miserable of all creatures.\n\nULYSSES. In my opinion, Gryllus, this same wicked cup has not only\ndeprived thee of thy shape, but of thy sense and reason too; or else\nthou art got drunk with those opinions which are everywhere exploded\nas nasty and villanous, unless some voluptuous pleasure of custom and\nhabit has bewitched thee to this body.\n\nGRYLLUS. Neither of these, O king of the Cephallenians. But if thou\nart come hither to dispute, and not to rail and swagger, we shall soon\nconvince thee, having experience of both manners of living, that our\nway is to be preferred before that which thou so much applaudest.\n\nULYSSES. Nay, then go on; I\u2019ll listen with both ears to hear this\nparadox discussed.\n\n3. GRYLLUS. Have at ye then, sir. But it behooves us to begin first\nwith those virtues which you so presumptuously assume to yourselves,\nand for which you so highly advance yourselves before the beasts, such\nas justice, prudence, fortitude, &c. Now answer me, thou the wisest\namong mortals; for I have heard thee telling a story to Circe of the\nterritory of the Cyclops, that being neither ploughed nor planted by\nany person, it is so fertile and generously productive, that it bears\nall sorts of fruits and herbs spontaneously. Now which do you prefer,\nthis country, or your own goat-feeding stony Ithaca, which being\ncultivated with great labor and hardship, yet answers the expectations\nof the husbandmen with only a mean and scanty return? Now take it not\namiss that I forewarn ye lest your love to your country sway ye to give\nan answer contrary to truth.\n\nULYSSES. No, no, I will not lie for the matter; I must confess I love\nand honor my own country more; but I applaud and admire theirs far\nbeyond it.\n\nGRYLLUS. Hence we must conclude that it is so as the wisest of men has\naffirmed; that there are some things to be praised and approved, others\nto be preferred by choice and affection. And I suppose you believe the\nsame concerning the soul. For the same reasons hold in reference to\nthe soul as to the ground; that such a soul should be the best, that\nproduces virtue like spontaneous fruit, without labor and toil.\n\nULYSSES. Grant all this.\n\nGRYLLUS. Then you confess that the souls of beasts are the more\nperfect, and more fertilely endued for the production of virtue; seeing\nthat without any command or instruction\u2014as it were without sowing or\nploughing\u2014it produces and increases that virtue which is requisite for\nevery one.\n\nULYSSES. Prithee, Gryllus, don\u2019t rave, but tell me what those virtues\nare that beasts partake of?\n\n4. GRYLLUS. Rather what virtues do they not partake of in a higher\ndegree than the wisest of men? Look upon fortitude in the first\nplace, of which you vaunt and brag to have such a terrible share,\nbeing not ashamed of the magnificent titles of Ulysses the bold and\ncity-stormer, when indeed, like a pitiful knave as thou art, thou dost\nonly circumvent by tricks and artifices men that understand only the\nsimple and generous way of making war, ignorant altogether of fraud and\nfaith-breaking, and by that means coverest thy deceit with the name\nof virtue, which never admits of any such coney-catching devices. But\ndo you observe the combats and warfare of beasts, as well one against\nanother as against yourselves, how free from craft and deceit they\nare, and how with an open and naked courage they defend themselves by\nmere strength of body; and how, neither afraid of the law that calls\nthem forth to battle nor the severe edicts against deserters, but only\nout of scorn to be overcome, they fight with obstinacy to the last for\nconquest and victory. For they are not vanquished when their bodies are\nworsted, neither does despair cowardize them, but they die upon the\nspot. And you shall see many times that the strength of many, while\nthey are expiring, being retired and crowded together in some part of\nthe body, still makes resistance against the victor, and pants and\nfumes till at length it fails like extinguished fire that goes out for\nwant of fuel. But there is no crying for quarter, no begging of mercy,\nno acknowledgment of being beaten; nor will the lion be a slave to the\nlion, nor the horse to the horse, as one man is a slave to another,\nwillingly and patiently embracing servitude, which derives its name\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1) from that of cowardice (\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1). On the other side, such\nbeasts as men by nets and treacherous snares get into their power,\nif fully grown, rather choose to die than serve, refusing nourishment\nand suffering extremity of drought. But as for their young ones,\u2014being\ntractable and supple by reason of their age, and fed with the deceitful\nmixtures and food that men provide for them, their inbred fierceness\nlanguishing through the taste of preternatural delights,\u2014they suffer\nthat which is called domestication, which is only an effeminating of\ntheir natural fury.\n\nWhence it is apparent that beasts are naturally inclined to be\ncourageous and daring, but that the martial confidence of men is\npreternatural. Which, most noble Ulysses, you may chiefly observe from\nhence; for that in beasts Nature keeps an equal balance of strength;\nso that the female, being but little inferior to the male, undergoes\nall necessary toils, and fights in defence of her young ones. And thus\nyou hear of a certain Cromyonian sow, which, though a female, held\nTheseus tack, and found him work sufficient. Neither had the wisdom of\nthat same female Sphinx that sat on Phicium, with all her riddles and\nenigmas, availed her, had she not far excelled the Cadmeans in strength\nand fortitude. Not far from whence the Telmesian fox had his den, a\ngreat propounder of questions also; not to omit the female serpent that\nfought with Apollo for his oracle at Delphi. Your king also took the\nmare Aetha from the Sicyonian, as a bribe to discharge him from going\nto the wars; and he did well, thereby showing how much he esteemed a\nvaliant and generous mare above a timorous coward. You yourself have\nalso seen female panthers and lionesses little inferior to the males\nin strength and courage; when your own wife, though a Lacedaemonian,\nwhen you were hectoring and blustering abroad, sat at home in the\nchimney-corner, not daring to do so much as the very swallows in\nencountering those who plagued both her and her family. Why need I\nstill speak of the Carian and Maeonian women? Whence it is apparent\nthat fortitude is not natural to men, for then the women would partake\nof the same strength with men. So that the fortitude which you exercise\nis only constrained by law, not natural and voluntary, but subservient\nto the manners of the place and enslaved to reproach, a thing made up\nonly of glorious words and adventitious opinion. And you undergo labor\nand throw yourself into danger, not out of real valor and boldness, but\nbecause ye are more afraid of other things. Therefore, as among thy own\ncompanions he that first makes haste to snatch up the light oar does\nit not because he contemns it, but because he is loath to be troubled\nwith the more heavy; so he that endures a blow to avoid a wound, and\ndefends himself against an enemy to preserve himself from wounds and\ndeath, does it not out of daring courage against the one, but out of\nfear of the other. Thus your fortitude is only a prudent fear; and your\ncourage a knowing timidity, which understandingly does one thing to\navoid another.\n\nIn short, if you believe yourselves superior to the beasts in\nfortitude, why do your poets call those that behave themselves most\nvaliantly against their enemies wolf-breasted, lion-hearted, and\ncompare them to wild boars; but never call the courage of lions\nman-like, or resemble the strength of a wild boar to that of a man? But\nas they call the swift wind-footed, and the beautiful Godlike-formed,\nhyperbolizing in their similes; so when they extol the gallantry of\nthe stout in battle, they derive their comparisons from the superior\nin bravery. The reason is, because courage is as it were the tincture\nand edge of fortitude; which the beasts make use of unmixed in their\ncombats, but in you being mixed with reason, like wine diluted with\nwater, it gives way to danger and loses the opportunity. And some\nof you there are who deny that courage is requisite in battle, and\ntherefore laying it aside make use of sober reason; which they do well\nfor their preservation, but are shamefully beside the cushion, in point\nof strength and revenge. How absurd is it therefore for you to complain\nof Nature, because she did not furnish your bodies with goads and teeth\nand crooked claws to defend yourselves, when at the same time you would\ndisarm the soul of her natural weapons?\n\n5. ULYSSES. In good truth, Gryllus, you are grown, in my conceit, a\nnotable sophister, to discourse at this rate out of a hog\u2019s snout, and\nyet to handle your argument so strenuously. But why have you not all\nthis while spoke a word of temperance?\n\nGRYLLUS. Because I thought you would have contradicted first what I\nhave already said. But you are in haste to hear what I have to say\nconcerning temperance, because that, being the husband of a most\ntemperate and chaste wife, you believe you have set us an example of\ntemperance by abstaining from Circe\u2019s embraces. And yet in this you\ndiffer nothing from all the beasts; for neither do they desire to\napproach their superiors, but they pursue their pleasures and amours\namong those of their own tribe. No wonder is it then, if\u2014like the\nMendesian goat in Egypt, which is reported to have been shut up with\nseveral most beautiful women, yet never to have offered copulation with\nthem, but when he was at liberty, with a lustful fury flew upon the\nshe-goats\u2014so thou, though a man addicted greatly to venereal pleasures,\nyet being a man, hast no desire to sleep with a goddess. And for the\nchastity of thy Penelope, the ten thousand rooks and daws that chatter\nit abroad do but make it ridiculous and expose it to contempt, their\nbeing not one of those birds but, if she looses her mate, continues a\nwidow, not for a small time, but for nine ages of men; so that there\nis not one of those female rooks that does not surpass in chastity thy\nfair Penelope above nine times.\n\n6. But because thou believest me to be a sophister, I shall observe\na certain order in my discourse, first giving thee the definition of\ntemperance, and then dividing desire according to the several kinds of\nit. Temperance then is the contracting and well governing our desires,\npruning off those that are superfluous and encroaching upon our wills,\nand ruling those that are necessary by the standards of reason and\nmoderation. Now in desires you observe a vast number of distinctions.\nFor it is both natural and necessary to drink; but as for venereal\ndesires, which derive their originals from Nature, there is a time when\nthey may be restrained without any inconvenience; these are therefore\ncalled natural but not necessary. But there is another sort, which are\nneither natural nor necessary, but infused from without by vain opinion\nthrough the mistake of right and true; and it is these that want but\nvery little of ruining all your natural desires with their number, like\na multitude of foreigners outnumbering the natives and expelling them\nfrom their habitations. But the beasts, having their souls unmixed and\nnot to be overcome by these adventitious passions, and living lives\nas distant from vain opinion as from the sea, are inferior to you in\nliving elegantly and superfluously, but they are extremely wary in\npreserving temperance and the right government of their desires, as\nbeing neither troubled with many, nor those foreign to their natures.\nAnd therefore formerly I was no less smitten with the glister of gold\nthan thou art now, as believing nothing else that a man could possess\nto be comparable to it. Silver also and ivory inveigled me with the\nsame desires; and he that enjoyed these things in the greatest measure\nseemed to be a man most happy and beloved of God, whether a Phrygian or\na Carian, whether more meanly descended than Dolon or more miserable\nthan Priam. From thenceforward being altogether swayed by my desires,\nI reaped no other pleasure nor delight in any other blessings of my\nlife, with which I abounded, believing that I wanted still and missed\nmy share of those that were the chiefest and the greatest. Therefore,\nI remember, when I beheld thee in Crete, at some solemnity, most\npompously attired, I neither envied thy wisdom nor thy virtue; but\nthe extraordinary fineness and exquisite workmanship of thy tunic,\nand the glistering of thy purple upper garment, and the beauty of the\nornaments struck me with admiration. And the golden clasp, methought,\nwas a pretty toy that had something of extraordinary graving in it; and\nbewitched with these baubles, I followed thee as the women did. But\nnow being altogether estranged from those vain opinions, and having\nmy understanding purified, I tread both gold and silver under my feet\nas I do the common stones; nor did I ever sleep more soundly upon thy\ncarpets and tapestries, than now I do, rolled over head and ears in\nthe deep and soft mud. None of those adventitious desires reside in\nour souls, but for the most part our manner of living is accustomed\nto necessary pleasures and desires; and as for those pleasures which\nare not necessary but only natural, we make such a use of them as is\nneither without order nor moderation.\n\n7. And therefore let us consider these in the first place. The pleasure\nthen that affects the sense of smelling with sweet odors and fragrant\nexhalations, besides that it has something in it which is pure in\nitself, and as it were bestowed upon us gratis, contributes also in\nsome measure to the distinction of nourishment. For the tongue is said\nto be the judge of sweet, sour, and tart, only when the juices have\ncome to be mingled and concorporate with the tasting faculty, and not\nbefore. But our smell, before the taste, becoming sensible of the\nvirtue and qualities of every thing, and being more accurate than the\ntasters attending upon princes, admits what is familiar to Nature, and\nexpels whatever is disagreeable to it; neither will it suffer it to\ntouch or molest the taste, but accuses and declares the offensiveness\nof the thing smelt, before it do any harm. As to other things, it\ntroubles us not at all as it does you whom it constrains for the sake\nof the sweet scents of cinnamon nard, malobathrum, and Arabian reed,\nto seek out for things dissimilar, and to jumble them together with a\nkind of apothecary\u2019s or perfumer\u2019s art, and at vast expense to purchase\nan unmanly and effeminate delight, for nothing profitable or useful.\nNow being such, this sense of smelling has not only corrupted all the\nfemale sex but the greatest part of men, insomuch that they care not to\nconverse with their own wives, unless perfumed with precious ointments\nand odoriferous compositions. Whereas sows, she-goats, and other\nfemales attract the boars, he-goats, and the males of their own kind,\nby their own proper scents; and smelling of the pure dew, the meadows,\nand the fresh grass, they are incited to copulation out of common\naffection; the females without the coynesses of women, or the practice\nof little frauds and fascinations, to inflame the lust of their\nmates; and the males, not with amorous rage and frenzy stimulated,\nand enforced to purchase the act of generation with expensive hire\nor servile assiduity, but enjoying their seasonable amours without\ndeceit or purchase of the satisfaction of their venery. For Nature in\nthe spring-time, even as she puts forth the buds of plants, likewise\nawakens the desires of animals, but presently quenches them again,\nneither the female admitting the male nor the male attempting the\nfemale after conception. And thus pleasure has but a small and slender\nesteem among us; but Nature is all in all. So that even to this very\nday, we beasts were never yet tainted with coupling male with male, and\nfemale with female. Of which nevertheless there are many examples to be\nproduced among the greatest and most celebrated persons; for I pass by\nthose not worth remembrance.\n\nAgamemnon hunted all Boeotia in pursuit of Argynnus, who fled his\nembraces; and after he had falsely accused the sea and winds, bravely\nflung himself into the lake Copais, to quench his love and free himself\nfrom the ardor of his lust.\n\nHercules in like manner pursuing his beardless friend, forsook his\nchoicest associates and abandoned the fleet.\n\nIn the vaulted room belonging to Apollo surnamed Ptous, one of\nyou men secretly wrote this inscription, Achilles the fair; when\nAchilles at that time had a son. [And I hear the inscription is still\nremaining.][94] Yet if a cock tread a cock in the absence of the\nhen, he is burned alive, upon the signification of the soothsayer\nthat it portends some fatal calamity. This is a plain confession in\nmen themselves, that the beasts excel them in chastity, and that\nforce is not to be put upon Nature for the sake of pleasure. But\nyour incontinence is such, that Nature, though she have the law to\nassist her, is not able to keep it within bounds; insomuch that, like\na rapid inundation, those inordinate desires overwhelm Nature with\ncontinual violence, trouble, and confusion. For men have copulated with\nshe-goats, sows, and mares; and women have run mad after male beasts.\nAnd from such copulations sprang the Minotaurs and Silvans, and, as\nI am apt to believe, the Sphinxes and Centaurs. It is true, that\nsometimes, constrained by hunger, a dog or a bird has fed upon human\nflesh; but never yet did any beast attempt to couple with human kind.\nBut men constrain and force the beasts to these and many other unlawful\npleasures.\n\n8. Now being thus wicked and incontinent in reference to the aforesaid\nlustful desires, it is no less easy to be proved that men are more\nintemperate than beasts, even in those things which are necessary, that\nis to say, in eating and drinking, the pleasure of which we always\nenjoy with some benefit to ourselves. But you pursuing the pleasures\nof eating and drinking beyond the satisfaction of nature, are punished\nwith many and tedious diseases, which, arising from the single fountain\nof superfluous gormandizing, fill your bodies with all manner of wind\nand vapors not easy for purgation to expel. In the first place, all\nsorts of beasts, according to their kind, feed upon one sort of food,\nwhich is proper to their natures; some upon grass, some upon roots, and\nothers upon fruits. They that feed upon flesh never mind any other sort\nof food. Neither do they rob the weaker animals of their nourishment.\nBut the lion suffers the hart, and the wolf the sheep, to feed upon\nwhat Nature has provided for them. But man, such is his voracity, falls\nupon all, to satisfy the pleasures of his appetite; tries all things,\ntastes all things; and, as if he were yet to seek what was the most\nproper diet and most agreeable to his nature, among all the creatures\nis the only all-devourer. And first he makes use of flesh, not for\nwant, as having the liberty to take his choice of herbs and fruits,\nthe plenty of which is inexhaustible; but out of luxury and being\ncloyed with necessaries, he seeks after inconvenient and impure diet,\npurchased by the slaughter of living creatures; by that means showing\nhimself more cruel than the most savage of wild beasts. For blood,\nmurder, and flesh are proper to nourish the kite, the wolf, and dragon;\nbut to men they are delicious viands. Then making use of all, he does\nnot do like the beasts, which abstain from most creatures and are at\nenmity only with a few, and that only compelled by the necessities of\nhunger; but neither fowl nor fish nor any thing that lives upon the\nland escapes your tables, though they bear the epithets of human and\nhospitable.\n\n9. Let it be so, that nothing will serve ye but to devour whatever\ncomes near ye, to pamper and indulge your voracious appetites. Yet\nwhere is the benefit and pleasure of all this? But such is the prudence\nof the beasts, as not to admit of any vain and unprofitable arts. And\nas for those that are necessary, they do not acquire them, as being\nintroduced by others or taught for reward; neither do they make it\ntheir study to soder and fasten one contemplation to another, but they\nare supplied by their own prudence with such as are true-born and\ngenuine. It is true, we hear the Egyptians are generally physicians.\nBut the beasts are not only every one of them notionally endued with\nknowledge and art which way to cure themselves, but also to procure\ntheir food and repair their strength, to catch their prey by slight\nand cunning, to guard themselves from danger; neither are some of them\nignorant how to teach the science of music so far as is convenient\nfor them. For from whom did we hogs learn to run to the rivers, when\nwe are sick, to search for crawfish? Who taught the tortoises, when\nthey have eaten vipers, to physic themselves with origanum? Who taught\nthe Cretan goats, when shot with arrows that stick in their bodies,\nto betake themselves to dittany, which they have no sooner eaten, but\nthe heads of the darts fall out of the wound? Now if you say that\nNature is the schoolmistress that teaches them these things, you\nacknowledge the prudence of beasts to be derived from the chiefest and\nwisest original of understanding; which if you think not proper to\ncall reason and wisdom, it is time for ye to find out a more glorious\nand honorable name for it. Indeed by its effects it shows itself to\nbe greater and more wonderful in power; not illiterate or without\neducation, but instructed by itself and wanting nothing from without;\nnot weak and imperfect, but, through the vigor and perfection of its\nnatural virtue, supporting and cherishing that natural contribution of\nunderstanding which others attain to by instruction and education. So\nthat, whatever men acquire and contemplate in the midst of their luxury\nand wantonness, those things our understanding attains to through the\nexcellency of our apprehensions, even contrary to the nature of the\nbody. For not to speak of whelps that learn to draw dry foot, and colts\nthat will practise figure-dances; there are crows that will speak, and\ndogs that will leap through hoops as they turn around. You shall also\nsee horses and bulls upon the theatres lie down, dance, stop, and move\ntheir bodies after such a manner as would puzzle even men to perform\nthe same things; which, though they are of little use, yet being\nlearned and remembered by beasts, are great arguments of their docility.\n\nIf you doubt whether we learn arts, be convinced that we teach them.\nFor partridges teach their young ones to hide themselves by lying upon\ntheir backs just before a clod of earth, to escape the pursuit of the\nfowlers. And you shall observe the old storks, when their young ones\nfirst begin to take wing, what care they take to instruct them upon\nthe tops of houses. Nightingales also teach their young ones to sing;\ninsomuch that nightingales taken young out of the nest, and bred up\nby hand in cages, sing worse, as being deprived of their instructors\nbefore their time. So that after I had been a while transformed into\nthis shape, I admired at myself, that I was so easily persuaded by idle\narguments of the sophisters to believe that all other creatures were\nvoid of sense and reason except man.\n\n10. ULYSSES. What then, Gryllus? Does your transmutation inform ye also\nthat sheep and asses are rational creatures?\n\nGRYLLUS. From these very creatures, most worthy and best of men,\nUlysses, the nature of beasts is chiefly to be discerned to be as\nit is, neither void of reason nor understanding. For as one tree is\nneither more or less than another without a soul, but all are together\nin the same condition of insensibility (for there is no tree that is\nendued with a soul); so neither would one animal seem to be more slow\nto understand or more indocible than another, if all did not partake\nof reason and understanding, though some in a less, some in a greater\nmeasure. For you must consider that the stupidity and slothfulness of\nsome is an argument of the quickness and subtlety of others, which\neasily appears when you compare a fox, a wolf, or a bee with a sheep\nor ass; as if thou shouldest compare thyself to Polyphemus, or thy\ngrandfather Autolycus with the Corinthian [mentioned in] Homer. For I\ndo not believe there is such difference between beast and beast, in\npoint of reason and understanding and memory, as between man and man.\n\nULYSSES. Have a care, Gryllus; it is a dangerous thing to allow them\nreason that have no knowledge of a Deity.\n\nGRYLLUS. Must we then deny that thou, most noble Ulysses, being so wise\nand full of stratagems as thou art, wast begotten by Sisyphus?...\n\n\n\n\nOF THE FACE APPEARING WITHIN THE ORB OF THE MOON.\n\n\nLAMPRIAS, APOLLONIDES, LUCIUS, PHARNACES, SYLLA, ARISTOTELES, THEON,\nMENELAUS\n\n\n[_The beginning of this discourse is lost._]\n\n1. These things then, said Sylla, agree with my story, and are taken\nthence. But I should first willingly ask, what need there is of making\nsuch a preamble against these opinions, which are at hand and in every\nman\u2019s mouth, concerning the face that is seen within the orb of the\nmoon. Why should we not, said I, being, by the difficulty there is\nin these discourses, forced upon those? For, as they who have long\nlain lingering under chronical diseases, after they have been worn\nout and tired with experimenting all ordinary remedies and the usual\nrules of living and diet, have at last recourse to lustrations and\npurifications, to charms and amulets fastened about the neck, and to\nthe interpretation of dreams; so in such obscure and abstruse questions\nand speculations, when the common, apparent, and ordinary reasons are\nnot satisfactory, there is a necessity of trying such as are more\nextravagant, and of not contemning but enchanting ourselves (as one may\nsay) with the discourses of the ancients, and endeavoring always to\nfind out the truth.\n\n2. For you see at the very first blush, how impertinent his opinion\nis who said, that the form appearing in the moon is an accident of our\nsight, by its weakness giving way to her brightness, which we call the\ndazzling of our eyes; for he perceives not that this should rather\nbefall our looking against the sun, whose lustre is more resplendent,\nand whose rays are more quick and piercing; as Empedocles also in a\ncertain passage of his has not unpleasantly noted the difference of\nthese two planets, saying,\n\n    The sharp-rayed sun, and gently shining moon.\n\nFor thus does he call her alluring, favorable, and harmless light. No\nless absurd appears the reason he afterwards gives why dull and weak\neyes discern no difference of form in the moon, her orb appearing to\nthem plain and smooth, whereas those whose sight is more acute and\npenetrating better descry the lineaments and more perfectly observe the\nimpressions of a face, and more evidently distinguish its different\nparts. For it should, in my opinion, be quite contrary, if this were\na fancy caused by the weakness of the vanquished sight; so that where\nthe patient\u2019s eye is weaker, the appearance would be more express and\nevident. Moreover, the inequality every way confutes this reason; for\nthis face is not seen in a continuance and confused shadow, but the\npoet Agesianax not unelegantly describes it, saying,\n\n    With shining fire it circled does appear,\n    And in the midst is seen the visage clear\n    Of a young maid, whose eyes more gray than blue,\n    Her brow and cheeks a blushing red do show.\n\nFor indeed dark and shady things, encompassed with others that are\nbright and shining, sink underneath and reciprocally rise again,\nbeing repelled by them; and in a word, they are so interlaced one\nwithin another, that they represent the figure of a face painted to\nthe life; and there seems to have been great probability in that\nwhich was spoken against your Clearchus, my dear Aristotle. For he\nappears not inconveniently to be called yours, for he was intimately\nacquainted with the ancient Aristotle, although he perverted many of\nthe Peripatetic doctrines.\n\n3. Then Apollonides taking up the discourse, and asking what that\nopinion of Clearchus was; It would more, said I, beseem any man than\nyou to be ignorant of this discourse, as being grounded on the very\nfundamental principles of geometry. For he affirms, that what we call\na face, is the image and figure of the great ocean, represented in\nthe moon as in a mirror. For the circumference of a circle, when it\nis reflected back,[95] is wont in many places to touch objects which\nare not seen in a direct line. And the full moon is for evenness and\nlustre the most beautiful and purest of all mirrors. As then you hold,\nthat the heavenly bow appears, when the ray of light is reflected back\ntowards the sun, in a cloud which has got a little liquid smoothness\nand consistence; so, said he, there is seen in the moon the surface of\nthe sea, not in the place where it is situated, but from whence the\nreflection gives a sight of it by its reverberated and reflexed light,\nas Agesianax again says in another passage,\n\n    This flaming mirror offers to your eyes\n    The vast sea\u2019s figure, as beneath it lies\n    Foaming with raging billows.\n\n4. Apollonides therefore, being delighted with this, said: A singular\nopinion indeed is this of his, and (to speak in a word) strangely and\nnewly invented by a man sufficiently presumptuous, but not void of\nlearning and wit. But how, I pray, was it refuted?\n\nFirst, said I, the superficies of the sea is all of a nature, the\ncurrent of it being uniform and continuous; but the appearance of those\nblack and dark spots which are seen in the face of the moon is not\ncontinued, but has certain isthmuses or partitions clear and bright,\nwhich divide and separate what is dark and shady. Whence every place\nbeing distinguished and having its own limits apart, the conjunctions\nof the clear with the obscure, taking a resemblance of high and low,\nexpress and represent the similitude of a figure seeming to have eyes\nand lips; so that we must of necessity suppose, either that there are\nmain oceans and main seas, distinguished by isthmuses and continents\nof firm land, which is evidently absurd and false; or that if there\nis but one, it is not credible its image should appear so distracted\nand dissipated into pieces. And as for this, there is less danger in\nasking than in affirming in your presence, whether, since the habitable\nearth has both length and breadth, it is possible that the sight of all\nmen, when it is reflected by the moon, should equally touch the ocean,\neven of those that sail and dwell in it, as do the Britons; especially\nsince the earth, as you have maintained, has but the proportion of a\npoint, if compared to the sphere of the moon. This therefore, said I,\nit is your business to observe, but the reflection of the sight against\nthe moon belongs neither to you nor Hipparchus. And yet, my friend\nLamprias, there are many naturalists, who approve not this doctrine\nof his touching the driving back of the sight, but affirm it to be\nmore probable that it has a certain obedient and agreeing temperature\nand compactness of structure, than such beatings and repercussions as\nEpicurus feigned for his atoms.[96] Nor am I of opinion that Clearchus\nwould have us suppose the moon to be a massy and weighty body, but a\ncelestial and light-giving star, as you say it is, which must have the\nproperty of breaking and turning aside the sight; so that all this\nreflection would come to nothing. But if we are desired to receive\nand admit it, we shall ask why this face or image of the sea is to be\nseen only in the body of the moon; and not in any of the other stars?\nFor the laws of probability require that the sight should suffer this\nequally in all, or else in none.\n\nBut pray, sir, said I, casting mine eyes upon Lucius, call a little to\nmind what was said at first by those of our party.\n\n5. Nay rather, answered he,\u2014lest we should seem too injurious to\nPharnaces, in thus passing by the opinion of the Stoics, without\nopposing any thing against it,\u2014let us make some reply to this man, who\nsupposes the moon to be wholly a mixture of air and mild fire, and then\nsays that, as in a calm there sometimes arises on a sudden a breeze of\nwind which curls and ruffles the superficies of the sea, so, the air\nbeing darkened and rendered black, there is an appearance and form of a\nface.\n\nYou do courteously, Lucius, said I, thus to veil and cover with\nspecious expressions so absurd and false an opinion. But so did not\nour friend; but he said, as the truth is, that the Stoics disfigured\nand mortified the moon\u2019s face, filling it with stains and black spots,\none while invocating her by the name of Diana and Minerva, and another\nwhile making her a lump and mixture of dark air and charcoal-fire, not\nkindling of itself or having any light of its own, but a body hard to\nbe judged and known, always smoking and ever burning, like to those\nthunders which by the poets are styled lightless and sooty. Now that a\nfire of coals, such as they would have that of the moon to be, cannot\nhave any continuance nor yet so much as the least subsistence, unless\nit meets with some solid matter fit to maintain it, keep it in, and\nfeed it, has, I think, far better than it is by these philosophers,\nbeen understood by those poets who in merriment affirm that Vulcan was\ntherefore said to be lame because fire can no more go forward without\nwood or fuel than a cripple without a crutch. If then the moon is\nfire, whence has it so much air? For that region above, which is with\na continual motion carried round, consists not of air, but some more\nexcellent substance, whose nature it is to subtilize and set on fire\nall other things. And if it has been since engendered there, how comes\nit that it does not perish, being changed and transmuted by the fire\ninto an ethereal and heavenly substance? And how can it maintain and\npreserve itself, cohabiting so long with the fire, as a nail always\nfixed and fastened in one and the same place? For being rare and\ndiffused, as by Nature it is, it is not fitted for permanency and\ncontinuance, but for change and dissipation. Neither is it possible\nthat it should condense and grow compact, being mixed with fire, and\nutterly void of water and earth, the only two elements by which the\nnature of the air suffers itself to be brought to a consistency and\nthickness. And since the swiftness and violence of motion is wont to\ninflame the air which is in stones, and even in lead itself, as cold as\nit is; much more will it that which, being in fire, is with so great\nan impetuosity whirled about. For they are displeased with Empedocles\nfor making the moon a mass of air congealed after the manner of hail,\nincluded within a sphere of fire. And yet they themselves say, that\nthe moon, being a globe of fire, contains in it much air dispersed\nhere and there,\u2014and this, though it has neither ruptures, concavities,\nnor depths (which they who affirm it to be earthly admit), but the\nair lies superficially on its convexity. Now this is both against the\nnature of permanency, and impossible to be accorded with what we see\nin full moons; for it should not appear separately black and dark, but\neither be wholly obscured and concealed or else co-illuminated, when\nthe moon is overspread by the sun. For with us the air which is in\nthe pits and hollows of the earth, whither the rays of the sun cannot\npenetrate, remains dark and lightless; but that which is spread over\nits exterior parts has clearness and a lightsome color. For it is by\nreason of its rarity easily transformed into every quality and faculty,\nbut principally that of light and brightness, by which, being never\nso little touched, it incontinently changes and is illuminated. This\nreason therefore, as it seems greatly to help and maintain the opinion\nof those who thrust the air into certain deep valleys and caves in the\nmoon, so confutes you, who mix and compose her sphere, I know not how,\nof air and fire. For it is not possible that there should remain any\nshadow or darkness in the superficies of the moon, when the sun with\nhis brightness clears and enlightens whatsoever we can discern of her\nand ken with our sight.\n\n6. Whilst I was yet speaking, Pharnaces interrupting my discourse\nsaid: See here again the usual stratagem of the Academy brought into\nplay against us, which is to busy themselves at every turn in speaking\nagainst others, but never to afford an opportunity for reproving what\nthey say themselves; so that those with whom they confer and dispute\nmust always be respondents and defendants, and never plaintiffs or\nopponents. You shall not therefore bring me this day to give you an\naccount of those things you charge upon the Stoics, till you have first\nrendered me a reason for your turning the world upside down.\n\nThen Lucius smiling said: This, good sir, I am well contented to do,\nprovided only that you will not accuse us of impiety, as Cleanthes\nthought that the Greeks ought to have called Aristarchus the Samian\ninto question and condemned him of blasphemy against the Gods,\nas shaking the very foundations of the world, because this man,\nendeavoring to save the appearances, supposed that the heavens remained\nimmovable, and that the earth moved through an oblique circle, at the\nsame time turning about its own axis. As for us therefore, we say\nnothing that we take from them. But how do they, my good friend, who\nsuppose the moon to be earth, turn the world upside down more than you,\nwho say that the earth remains here hanging in the air, being much\ngreater than the moon, as the mathematicians measure their magnitude by\nthe accidents of eclipses, and by the passages of the moon through the\nshadow of the earth, gathering thence how great a space it takes up?\nFor the shadow of the earth is less than itself, by reason it is cast\nby a greater light. And that the end of this shadow upwards is slender\nand pointed, they say that Homer himself was not ignorant, but plainly\nexpressed it when he called the night \u03b8\u03bf\u03ae (that is, _acute_) from\nthe sharp-pointedness of the earth\u2019s shadow. And yet the moon in her\neclipses, being caught within this point of the shadow; can scarce get\nout of it by going forward thrice her own bigness in length. Consider\nthen, how many times the earth must needs be greater than the moon,\nif it casts a shadow, the narrowest point of which is thrice as broad\nas the moon. But you are perhaps afraid lest the moon should fall, if\nit were acknowledged to be earth; but as for the earth, Aeschylus has\nsecured you, when he says that Atlas\n\n    Stands shouldering the pillar of the heaven and earth,\n    A burden onerous.[97]\n\nIf then there runs under the moon only a light air, not firm enough\nto bear a solid burthen, whereas under the earth there are, as Pindar\nsays, columns and pillars of adamant for its support, therefore\nPharnaces himself is out of all dread of the earth\u2019s falling, but he\npities the Ethiopians and those of Taprobane, who lie directly under\nthe course of the moon, fearing lest so ponderous a mass should tumble\nupon their heads. And yet the moon has, for an help to preserve her\nfrom falling, her motion and the impetuosity of her revolution; as\nstones, pebbles, and other weights, put into slings, are kept from\ndropping out whilst they are swung round, by the swiftness of their\nmotion. For every body is carried according to its natural motion,\nunless it be diverted by some other intervening cause. Wherefore\nthe moon does not move according to the motion of her weight, her\ninclination being stopped and hindered by the violence of a circular\nrevolution. And perhaps there would be more reason to wonder, if\nthe moon continued always immovable in the same place, as does the\nearth. But now the moon has a great cause to keep herself from tending\nhither downwards; but for the earth, which has no other motion, it is\nprobable that it has also no other cause of its settlement but its\nown weight. For the earth is heavier than the moon, not only because\nit is greater, but also because the moon is rendered lighter by the\nheat and inflammation that is in it. In brief, it appears by what you\nsay, if it is true that the moon is fire, that it stands in need of\nearth or some other matter, which it may rest on and cleave to, for\nthe maintaining and nourishing of its power. For it is not possible to\nimagine how a fire can be preserved without some combustible matter.\nAnd you yourselves say that the earth continues firm without any basis\nor pedestal to support it.\n\nYes surely, said Pharnaces, being in its proper and natural place, the\nvery middle and centre of the universe. For this it is to which all\nheavy and ponderous things do from every side naturally tend, incline,\nand aspire, and about which they cling and are counterpoised. But every\nsuperior region, though it may perhaps receive some earthly and weighty\nthing sent by violence up into it, immediately repels and casts it down\nagain by force, or (to speak better) lets it follow its own proper\ninclination, by which it naturally tends downwards.\n\n7. For the refutation of which, being willing to give Lucius time for\nthe calling to mind his arguments, I addressed myself to Theon, and\nasked him which of the tragic poets it was who said that physicians\n\n    With bitter med\u2019cines bitter choler purge.\n\nAnd Theon having answered me that it was Sophocles; This, said I to\nhim, we must of necessity permit them to do; but we are not to give\near to those philosophers who would overthrow paradoxes by assertions\nno less strange and paradoxical, and for the oppugning strange and\nextravagant opinions, devise others yet more wonderful and absurd;\nas these men do, who broach and introduce this doctrine of a motion\ntending towards the middle, in which what sort of absurdity is\nthere not to be found? Does it not thence follow, that the earth is\nspherical, though we nevertheless see it to have so many lofty hills,\nso many deep valleys, and so great a number of inequalities? Does it\nnot follow that there are antipodes dwelling opposite to another,\nsticking on every side to the earth, with their heads downwards and\ntheir heels upwards, as if they were woodworms or lizards? That we\nourselves go not on the earth straight upright, but obliquely and\nbending aside like drunken men? That if bars and weights of a thousand\ntalents apiece should be let fall into the hollow of the earth, they\nwould, when they were come to the centre, stop and rest there, though\nnothing came against them or sustained them; and that, if peradventure\nthey should by force pass the middle, they would of themselves return\nand rebound back thither again? That if one should saw off the two\ntrunks or ends of a beam on either side of the earth, they would not\nbe always carried downwards, but falling both from without into the\nearth, they would equally meet, and hide themselves together in the\nmiddle? That if a violent stream of water should run downwards into\nthe ground, it would, when it came to the centre of the earth, which\nthey hold to be an incorporeal point, there gather together, and turn\nround like a whirlpool, with a perpetual and endless suspension?\nSome of which positions are so absurd, that none can so much as force\nhis imagination, though falsely, to conceive them possible. For this\nis indeed to make that which is above to be below; and to turn all\nthings upside down, by making all that is as far as the middle to be\n_downwards_, and all that is beyond the middle to be _upwards_; so that\nif a man should, by the sufferance and consent of the earth, stand with\nhis navel just against her centre, he would by this means have his feet\nand head both upwards; and if one, having digged through that place\nwhich is beyond the middle, should come to pull him out from thence,\nthat part which is below would at one and the same time be drawn\nupwards, and that which is above, downwards. And if another should be\nimagined to stand the contrary way, their feet, though the one\u2019s were\nopposite to the other\u2019s, would both be and be said to be upwards.\n\n8. Bearing then upon their shoulders, and drawing after them, I do\nnot say a little bag or box, but a whole pack of juggler\u2019s boxes,\nfull of so many absurdities, with which they play the hocus-pocus in\nphilosophy, they nevertheless accuse others of error for placing the\nmoon, which they hold to be earth, on high, and not in the middle or\ncentre of the world. And yet, if every heavy body inclines towards\nthe same place, and does from all sides and with every one of its\nparts tend to its own centre, the earth certainly will appropriate and\nchallenge to itself these ponderous masses\u2014which are its parts\u2014not\nbecause it is the centre of the universe, but rather because it is the\nwhole; and this gathering together of heavy bodies round about it will\nnot be a sign showing it to be the middle of the world, but an argument\nto prove and testify that these bodies which had been plucked from it\nand again return to it have a communication and conformity of nature\nwith the earth. For as the sun draws into himself the parts of which\nhe is composed, so the earth receives a stone as a part belonging to\nit, in such manner that every one of such things is in time united and\nincorporated with it. And if peradventure there is some other body\nwhich was not from the beginning allotted to the earth nor has been\nseparated from it, but had its own proper and peculiar consistence\nand nature apart, as these men may say of the moon, what hinders but\nit may continue separated by itself, being kept close, compacted, and\nbound together by its own parts? For they do not demonstrate that the\nearth is the middle of the universe; and this conglomeration of heavy\nbodies which are here, and their coalition with the earth, show us\nthe manner how it is probable that the parts which are assembled in\nthe body of the moon continue also there. But as for him who drives\nand ranges together in one place all earthly and ponderous things,\nmaking them parts of one and the same body, I wonder that he does not\nattribute also the same necessity and constraint to light substances,\nbut leaves so many conglomerations of fire separated one from another;\nnor can I see why he should not amass together all the stars, and think\nthat there ought to be but one body of all those substances which fly\nupwards.\n\n9. But you mathematicians, friend Apollonides, say that the sun is\ndistant from our upper sphere infinite thousands of miles, and after\nhim the day-star or Venus, Mercury, and other planets, which being\nsituated under the fixed stars, and separated from one another by great\nintervals, make their revolutions; and in the mean time you think that\nthe world affords not to heavy and terrestrial bodies any great and\nlarge place or distance one from another. You plainly see, it would\nbe ridiculous, if we should deny the moon to be earth because it is\nnot seated in the lowest region of the world, and yet affirm it to\nbe a star, though so many thousands of miles remote from the upper\nfirmament, as if it were plunged into some deep gulf. For she is so\nlow before all other stars, that the measure of the distances cannot be\nexpressed, and you mathematicians want numbers to compute and reckon\nit; but she in a manner touches the earth, making her revolution so\nnear the tops of the mountains, that she seems, as Empedocles has it,\nto leave even the very tracks of her chariot-wheels behind her. For\noftentimes she surpasses not the shadow of the earth, which is very\nshort through the excessive greatness of the sun that shines upon it,\nbut seems to turn so near the superficies, and (as one may say) between\nthe arms and in the bosom of the earth, that it withholds from her the\nlight of the sun, because she mounts that shady, earthly, and nocturnal\nregion which is the lot and inheritance of the earth. And therefore I\nam of opinion, we may boldly say that the moon is within the limits and\nconfines of the earth, seeing she is even darkened by the summits of\nits mountains.\n\n10. But leaving the stars, as well erring as fixed, see what\nAristarchus proves and demonstrates in his treatise of magnitudes and\ndistances; that the distance of the sun is above eighteen times and\nunder twenty times greater than that of the moon from us. And yet they\nwho place the moon lowest say that her distance from us contains six\nand fifty of the earth\u2019s semidiameters, that is, that she is six and\nfifty times as far from us as we are from the centre of the earth;\nwhich is forty thousand stadia, according to those that make their\ncomputation moderately. Therefore the sun is above forty millions and\nthree hundred thousand stadia distant from the moon; so far is she from\nthe sun by reason of her gravity, and so near does she approach to the\nearth. So that if substances are to be distinguished by places, the\nportion and region of the earth challenges to itself the moon, which,\nby reason of neighborhood and proximity, has a right to be reputed and\nreckoned amongst the terrestrial natures and bodies. Nor shall we, in\nmy opinion, do amiss if, having given so vast an interval and distance\nto these bodies which are said to be above, we leave also to those\nwhich are below some space and room to turn them in, such as is that\nbetween the earth and the moon. For neither is he who calls only the\nutmost superficies of the heaven _above_ and all the rest _beneath_\nmoderate or tolerable; nor is he to be endured who confines _beneath_\nonly to the earth, or rather to its centre; seeing the vast greatness\nof the world may afford means for the assigning farther to this lower\npart some such space as is necessary for motion. Now against him who\nholds that whatever is above the earth is immediately high and sublime,\nthere is presently another opposition to encounter and contradict it,\nthat whatever is beneath the sphere of the fixed stars ought to be\ncalled low and inferior.\n\n11. In a word, how is the earth said to be the middle, and of what\nis it the middle? For the universe is infinite; and infiniteness\nhaving neither beginning nor end, it is convenient also that it should\nnot have any middle; for the middle is a certain end or limit, but\ninfiniteness is a privation of all sorts of limits. Now he that affirms\nthe earth to be the middle, not of the universe but of the world, is\ncertainly a pleasant man, if he does not think that the world itself\nis subject to the same doubts and difficulties. For the universe has\nnot left a middle even to the very world, but this being without any\ncertain seat or foundation, it is carried in an infinite voidness to no\nproper end; or if perhaps it has stopped, it has met with some other\ncause or stay, not according to the nature of the place. As much may be\nconjectured of the moon, that by the means of another soul and another\nNature, or (to say better) of another difference, the earth continues\nfirm here below, and the moon moves. Besides this, see whether they are\nnot ignorant of a great inconvenience and error. For if it is true\nthat all which is without the centre of the earth, however it be, is\nabove, there will then be no part of the world below; but the earth and\nall that is upon it will be above; and in brief, every body that shall\nbe placed about the centre will be above, and there will be nothing\nbelow or underneath, but one only point which has no body, which will\nof necessity make head against and oppose all the rest of the world\u2019s\nnature, if _above_ and _beneath_ are naturally opposite to one another.\nNor is this the only absurdity that will follow; but all heavy and\nponderous bodies will also lose the cause for which they move and\ntend downwards hither, for there will be no body below to which they\nshould move; and as for that which is incorporeal, it is not probable,\nneither will they themselves allow, that it should be so forcible as\nto draw and retain all things about itself. But if it is unreasonable\nand contrary to Nature that the whole world should be above, and that\nthere should be nothing below but an incorporeal and indivisible term\nor limit, then is this, as we say, yet more reasonable, that the\nregion above and that below being divided the one from the other, have\nnevertheless each of them a large and spacious room.\n\n12. Nevertheless, supposing, if you please, that it is against Nature\nfor earthly bodies to have any motions in heaven, let us consider\nleisurely and mildly\u2014and not violently, as is done in tragedies\u2014that\nthis is no proof of the moon\u2019s not being earth, but only that earth\nis in a place where by nature it should not be; for the fire of Mount\nAetna is indeed against nature under ground, nevertheless it ceases not\nto be fire. And the wind contained within bottles is indeed of its own\nnature light and inclined to ascend, but is yet by force constrained to\nbe there where naturally it should not be. And is not our very soul, I\nbeseech you in the name of Jupiter, which, as yourselves say, is light,\nof a fiery substance, and imperceptible to sense, included within\nthe body, which is heavy, cold, and palpable? Yet do we therefore say\nthat the soul does not belong to the body; or that it is not a divine\nsubstance under a gross and heavy mass, or that it does not in a moment\npass through heaven, earth, and sea, pierce into the flesh, nerves,\nand marrow, and into the humors which are the cause of a thousand\npassions? And even your Jupiter, such as you imagine him and depaint\nhim to be, is he not of his own nature a great and perpetual fire?\nYet now he submits, is pliable, and transformed into all things by\nseveral mutations. Take heed therefore, good sir, lest, by transferring\nand reducing every thing to the place assigned it by Nature, you so\nphilosophize as to bring in a dissolution of the whole world, and put\nall things again into that state of enmity mentioned by Empedocles, or\n(to speak more properly) lest you raise up again those ancient Titans\nand Giants to put on arms against Nature, and endeavor to introduce\nagain that fabulous disorder and confusion, where all that is heavy\ngoes one way apart, and all that is light another;\n\n    Where neither sun\u2019s bright face is seen,\n    Nor earth beheld, spread o\u2019er with green,\n    Nor the salt sea,\n\nas Empedocles has it. Then the earth felt no heat, nor the sea any\nwind; no heavy thing moved upwards, nor any light thing downwards;\nbut the principles of all things were solitary, without any mutual\nlove or dilection one to another, not admitting any society or\nmixture together; but shunning and avoiding all communication, moving\nseparately by particular motions, as being disdainful, proud, and\naltogether carrying themselves in such manner as every thing does from\nwhich (as Plato says) God is absent; that is, as those bodies do in\nwhich there is neither soul nor understanding; till such time as, by\nDivine Providence, desire coming into Nature engendered mutual amity,\nVenus, and Love,\u2014as Empedocles, Parmenides, and Hesiod have it,\u2014to the\nend that changing their natural places, and reciprocally communicating\ntheir faculties, some being by necessity bound to motion, others to\nquiet and rest, and all tending to the better, every thing remitting\na little of its power and yielding a little from its place, ... they\nmight make at length a harmony, accord, and society together.\n\n13. For if there had not been any other part of the world against\nNature, but every thing had been in the same place and quality it\nnaturally ought to be, without standing in need of any change or\ntransposition or having had any occasion for it from the beginning, I\nknow not what the work of Divine Providence is or in what it consists,\nor of what Jupiter has been the father, creator, or worker. For there\nwould not in a camp be any need of the art of ranging and ordering of\nbattles, if every soldier of himself knew and understood his rank,\nplace, and station, and the opportunity he ought to take and keep; nor\nwould there be any want of gardeners or builders, if water were of\nitself framed to flow where it is necessary, and irrigate such plants\nas stand in need of watering, or if bricks, timber, and stones would of\ntheir own inclinations and natural motion range and settle themselves\nin due and fitting places and orders. Now if this discourse manifestly\ntakes away Providence, and if the ordering and distinction of things\nthat are in the world belongs to God, why should we wonder at Nature\u2019s\nhaving been so disposed and ordained by him, that the fire should be\nhere, and the stars there, and again the earth should be situated here\nbelow, and the moon above, lodged in a prison found out by reason,\nmore sure and straight than that which was first ordained by Nature?\nFor if it were of absolute necessity that all things should follow\ntheir natural instinct and move according to the motion given them by\nNature, neither the Sun, Venus, nor any other planet would any more\nrun a circular course; for light and fiery substances have by Nature\ntheir motion directly upwards. And if perhaps Nature itself receives\nthis permutation and change by reason of the place, so that fire should\nhere in a direct line tend upwards, but being once arrived at heaven,\nshould turn round with the revolution of the heavens; what wonder would\nit be, if heavy and terrestrial bodies, being in like manner out of\ntheir natural place, were vanquished by the ambient air, and forced\nto take another sort of motion? For it cannot with any reason be said\nthat heaven has by Nature the power to take away from light things the\nproperty of mounting directly upwards, and cannot likewise have the\nforce to overcome heavy things and such as tend downwards; but that\nsometimes making use of this power, and sometimes of the proper nature\nof the things, it still orders every thing for the best.\n\n14. But if, laying aside those servile habits and opinions to which\nwe have enslaved ourselves, we must frankly and fearlessly deliver\nour judgment, it seems clear to me, that there is not any part of the\nuniverse which has a peculiar and separate rank, situation, or motion,\nthat can simply be said to be natural to it. But when every thing\nexhibits and yields up itself to be moved, as is most profitable and\nfit for that for whose sake it was made and to which it is by Nature\nappointed,\u2014suffering, doing, or being disposed, as is most expedient\nand meet for the safety, beauty, and power of the same,\u2014then it appears\nto have its place, motion, and disposition according to Nature. As\na proof of this, we may observe that man, who, if any thing in the\nworld be so, is made and disposed according to Nature, has upwards,\nespecially about his head, heavy and terrestrial things, and about\nthe middle of his body such as are hot and participate of fire; of\nhis teeth also some grow upwards and some downwards, and yet neither\nthe one nor the other are contrary to Nature; neither is the fire\nwhich shines in his eyes according to Nature, and that which is in his\nheart and stomach against it; but it is in each place properly and\nbeneficially seated. Moreover, consider the nature of all shell-fishes;\nand, that I may use the words of Empedocles,\n\n    Look on the crabs, the oysters of the sea,\n      And shell-fish all, which heavy coats enfold,\n    The tortoise too with arched back, whom we\n      Covered with crust, as hard as stone, behold.\n    View them but well, and plain it will appear,\n    They hardened earth above their bodies bear.\n\nAnd yet this crust, stone-like, hard, and heavy, as it is thus placed\nover their bodies, does not press and crush their natural habit, nor on\nthe contrary does their heat fly upwards by reason of its lightness,\nand vanish away, but they are mingled and composed one with another,\naccording to the nature of each one.\n\n15. Wherefore it is also probable that the world, if it is an animal,\nhas in many parts of its body earth, and in as many fire and water and\nair, not thrust and driven into it by force, but ordered and disposed\nby reason. For neither was the eye by its lightness forced into that\npart of the body where it is, nor the heart by its gravity pressed\ndown into the breast; but both the one and the other were thus placed\nbecause it was better and more expedient. In like manner we ought not\nto think of the parts of the world, either that the earth settled where\nit is, being beaten down thither by its ponderosity; or that the sun\nwas carried upwards by its levity, like a bottle or bladder full of\nwind (which, being plunged into the bottom of the water, immediately\nrises up again), as Metrodorus of Chios was persuaded; or that the\nother stars, as if they had been put into a balance, were swayed this\nway or that way, according to their weight or lightness, and so mounted\nhigher or lower to the places they now possess. But reason having\nprevailed in the constitution of the world, the stars have like to\nglittering eyes, been fixed in the firmament, as it were in the face\nof the universe, there to turn continually about; and the sun, having\nthe force and vigor of the heart, sends and distributes its heat and\nlight, like blood and spirits, throughout all; the earth and sea are in\nthe world, as the paunch and bladder in the body of a living creature;\nand the moon placed between the sun and the earth, as the liver, or\nsome other soft entrail between the heart and the belly, transmits down\nthither the heat of the superior bodies, and draws round about her the\nvapors which arise from hence, subtilizing them by way of concoction\nand purification. And whether its solid and terrestrial quality has\nany other property serving for some profitable use, is indeed unknown\nto us; but everywhere that which is better prevails over what is by\nnecessity. For what probability can we draw from that which they\naffirm? They say, that the most subtile and luminous part of the air,\nby reason of its rarity, became heaven; but what was thickened and\nclosely driven together was made into stars, of which the moon being\nthe heaviest is compacted of the grossest and muddiest matter. And yet\nit is plainly to be seen, that the moon is not separated or divided\nfrom the air, but moves and makes her revolution through that which\nis about her, to wit, the region of the winds, and where the comets\nare engendered and keep their course. These bodies then were not by a\nnatural inclination thus placed and situated as they are, but have by\nsome other reason been so ordered and disposed.\n\n16. These things being said, as I was giving Lucius his turn to follow\nand continue the discourse,\u2014there being nothing left to be added but\nthe demonstrations of this doctrine,\u2014Aristotle smiling said: I am a\nwitness, that you have directed all your contradictions and all your\nrefutations against those who, supposing the moon to be half fire,\naffirm in general that all bodies do of their own accord tend either\nupwards or downwards; but if there is any one who holds that the stars\nhave of their own nature a circular motion, and that they are of a\nsubstance wholly different from the four elements, you have not thought\nof saying any thing, so much as accidentally or by the way, against\nhim; and therefore I am wholly unconcerned in your discourse.\n\nIndeed, good sir, said Lucius, if you should suppose the other stars,\nand the whole heaven apart, to be of a pure and sincere nature, free\nfrom all change and alteration of passion, and should bring in also\na circle, in which they make their motion by a perpetual revolution,\nyou would not perhaps find any one now to contradict you, though there\nare in this infinite doubts and difficulties. But when the discourse\ndescends so far as to touch the moon, it cannot maintain in her that\nperfection of being exempt from all passion and alteration, nor that\nheavenly beauty of her body. But to let pass all other inequalities\nand differences, the very face which appears in the body of the\nmoon necessarily proceeds from some passion of her own substance or\nthe mixture of another; for what is mixed suffers, because it loses\nits first purity, being filled by force with that which is worse.\nBesides, as for the slowness and dulness of her course, her feeble and\ninefficacious heat, by which, as Ion says,\n\n    The black grape comes not to maturity,\n\nto what shall we attribute them but to her weakness and passion, if an\neternal and celestial body can be subject to passion?\n\nIn brief, my friend Aristotle, if the moon is earth, she is a most fair\nand admirable thing, and excellently well adorned; but if you regard\nher as a star or light or a certain divine and heavenly body, I am\nafraid she will prove deformed and foul, and disgrace that beautiful\nappellation, if of all bodies, which are in heaven so numerous, she\nalone stands in need of light borrowed of another, and, as Parmenides\nhas it,\n\n    Looks always backwards on the sun\u2019s bright rays.\n\nOur friend therefore indeed, having in a lecture of his demonstrated\nthis proposition of Anaxagoras, that the sun communicates to the moon\nwhat brightness she has, was well esteemed for it. As for me, I will\nnot say what I have learned of you or with you, but having taken it\nfor granted, will pass on to the rest. It is then probable that the\nmoon is illuminated, not like a glass or crystal, by the brightness\nof the sun\u2019s rays shining through her, nor yet again, by a certain\ncollustration and conjunction of light and brightness, as when many\ntorches set together augment the light of one another. For so she\nwould be no less full in her conjunction or first quarter than in her\nopposition, if she did not obstruct or repel the rays of the sun, but\nlet them pass through her by reason of her rarity, or if he did by a\ncontemperature shine upon her and kindle the light within her. For we\ncannot allege her declinations and aversions in the conjunction or new\nmoon, as when it is half-moon or when she appears crescent or in the\nwane; but being then perpendicularly (as Democritus says) under him\nthat illuminates her, she receives and admits the sun; so that then it\nis probable she should appear, and he shine through her. But this she\nis so far from doing, that she is not only then unseen, but also often\nhides the sun, as Empedocles has it:\n\n    The sun\u2019s bright beams from us she turns aside,\n    And of the earth itself as much doth hide,\n    As her orb\u2019s breadth can cover;\n\nas if the light of the sun fell not upon another star, but upon night\nand darkness. And as for what Posidonius says, that the depth of the\nmoon\u2019s body is the cause why the light of the sun cannot pierce through\nher to us, this is evidently refuted; for the air, which is infinite\nand of a far greater depth than the body of the moon, is nevertheless\nall over illustrated and enlightened by the rays of the sun.\n\nIt remains then that, according to the opinion of Empedocles, the\nlight of the moon which appears to us comes from the repercussion\nand reflection of the sun\u2019s beams. And for this reason it comes not\nto us hot and bright, as in all probability it would, if her shining\nproceeded either from inflammation or the commixtion of two lights. But\nas voices reverberated cause an echo more obscure and less express than\nthe speech that was pronounced, and as the blows of darts and arrows,\nrebounding from some wall against which they are shot, are more mild\nand gentle;\n\n    So Titan\u2019s lustre, smiting the moon\u2019s orb,\n\nyields but a faint and feeble reflection and repercussion of brightness\nupon us, its force being abated and weakened by the refraction.\n\n17. Sylla then, taking up the discourse, said: There is indeed a\ngreat deal of probability in all that you have spoken. But as to the\nstrongest objection that is brought against it, has it, think you, been\nany way weakened by this discourse? Or has our friend quite passed it\nover in silence?\n\nWhat opposition do you mean, said Lucius? Is it the difficulty about\nthe moon, when one half of her appears enlightened?\n\nThe very same, answered Sylla. For there is some reason, seeing that\nall reflection is made by equal angles, that when the half-moon is\nin the midst of heaven, the light proceeding from her should not be\ncarried upon the earth, but glance and fall beyond and on one side of\nit. For the sun, being placed in the horizon, touches the moon with\nits beams; which, being equally reflected, will therefore necessarily\nfall on the other bound of the horizon, and not send their light down\nhither; or else there will be a great distortion and difference of the\nangle, which is impossible.\n\nAnd yet, by Jupiter, replied Lucius, this has not been forgotten or\noverpassed, but already spoken to. And casting his eye, as he was\ndiscoursing, upon the mathematician Menelaus; I am ashamed, said\nhe, in your presence, dear Menelaus, to attempt the subverting and\noverthrowing of a mathematical position, which is supposed as a basis\nand foundation to the doctrine of the catoptrics concerning the causes\nand reasons of mirrors. And yet of necessity I must. For it neither\nappears of itself nor is confessed as true, that all reflections are at\nequal angles; but this position is first checked and contradicted in\nconcave mirrors, when they represent the images of things, appearing\nat one point of sight, greater than the things themselves. And it is\nalso disproved by double mirrors, which being inclined or turned one\ntowards the other, so that an angle is made within, each of the glasses\nor plain superficies yields a double resemblance; so that there are\nfour images from the same face, two answerable to the object without\non the left side, and two others obscure and not so evident on the\nright side in the bottom of the mirror. Of which Plato renders the\nefficient cause; for he says, that a mirror being raised on the one\nand the other side, the sight varies the reflection, falling from one\nside to the other. And therefore, since of the views or visions some\nimmediately have recourse to us, and others, sliding to opposite parts\nof the mirror, do again return upon us from thence, it is not possible\nthat all reflections should be made at equal angles. Though those who\nclosely impugn our opinion contend that, by these reflections of light\nfrom the moon upon the earth, the equality of angles is taken away,\nthinking this to be much more probable than the other.\n\nNevertheless, if we must of necessity yield and grant thus much to our\ndearly beloved geometry, first, this should in all likelihood befall\nthose mirrors which are perfectly smooth and exquisitely polished;\nwhereas the moon has many inequalities and roughnesses, so that the\nrays proceeding from a vast body, and carried to mighty altitudes,\nreceive one from another and intercommunicate their lights, which,\nbeing sent to and fro and reciprocally distributed, are refracted and\ninterlaced all manner of ways, and the counter-lights meet one another,\nas if they came to us from several mirrors. And then, though we should\nsuppose these reflections on the superficies of the moon to be made\nat equal angles, yet it is not impossible that the rays, coming down\nunto us by so long an interval, may have their flexions, fractions, and\ndelapsions, that the light being compounded may shine the more. Some\nalso there are who prove by lineary demonstration, that many lights\nsend a ray down by a line drawn below the line of reflection; but to\nmake the description and delineation of it publicly, especially where\nthere were many auditors, would not be very easy.\n\n18. But in brief, said he, I wonder how they come thus to allege\nagainst us the half-moon, there being the same reason when she is\ngibbous and crescent. For if the sun enlightened the moon, as a mass of\nethereal or fiery matter, he would never surely leave one hemisphere,\nor half of her globe always appearing dark and shadowy to sense, as it\nis seen to be; but how little soever he touched her superficies, it\nwould be agreeable to reason that it should be wholly replenished and\ntotally changed by that light of his, which by reason of its agility\nand swiftness so easily spreads and passes through all. For, since wine\ntouching water only in one point, or one drop of blood falling into\nany liquor, dyes and colors it all with a red or purple color; and\nsince they say, that the very air is altered and changed with light,\nnot by any defluxions or beams intermingled, but by a sudden conversion\nand change made in one only point; how can they imagine that one star\ntouching another star, and one light another light, should not be\nimmediately mingled, nor make any thorough confusion or change, but\nonly exteriorly illuminate that whose superficies it touches? For that\ncircle which the sun makes by fetching a compass and turning towards\nthe moon,\u2014sometimes falling upon the very line that distinguishes her\nvisible part from her invisible, and sometimes rising up directly, so\nthat it cuts her in two and is reciprocally cut by her, causing in her,\nby several inclinations and habitudes of the luminous to the dark,\nthose various forms by which she appears gibbous and crescent,\u2014that\nmore than any thing else demonstrates, that all this illumination\nof the moon is not a mixture, but only a touching; nor a conflux or\ngathering together of sundry lights, but only an illustration round\nabout.\n\nBut forasmuch as she is not only enlightened herself, but also sends\nback hither the image of her illumination, this confirms us yet\nfurther in what we say touching her substance. For reflections and\nreverberations are not made upon any thing which is rare, and of thin\nand subtile parts; nor is it easily to be imagined how light can\nrebound from light, or one fire from another. But that which is to make\nthe reverberation or reflection must be solid and firm, that a blow\nmay be given against it and a rebounding made from it. As a proof of\nthis, we see that the air transmits the sun, and gives him a way to\npierce quite through it, not obstructing or driving back his rays; but\non the contrary from wood, stones, or clothes put in the sun, there are\nmade many reflections of light and many illuminations round about. So\nwe see that the earth is illuminated by him, not to the very bottom,\nas the water, nor thoroughly and all over, as the air, through which\nthe beams of the sun have a clear passage; but just such a circle as\nsurrounds the moon surrounds also the earth; and as much of the earth\nas this circle includes, so much does the sun enlighten, the rest being\nleft without light; for what is illuminated both in the one and in the\nother is little more than an hemisphere. Permit me therefore now to\nconclude after the manner of geometricians by proportions. If there are\nthree things which the light of the sun approaches, the air, the moon,\nand the earth, and if we see that the moon is enlightened by him, not\nas the air, but as the earth, it is of necessity that those two things\nmust have one and the same nature, which of one and the same cause\nsuffer the same effects.\n\n19. Now when all the company began highly to commend Lucius\u2019s harangue;\nThis is excellently well done of you, Lucius (said I to him), that you\nhave to so fine a discourse added as fine a proportion, for you must\nnot be defrauded of that which is your due.\n\nThen Lucius, smiling, thus went on: I have yet a second proportion to\nbe added to the former, by which we will clearly demonstrate that the\nmoon altogether resembles the earth, not only because they suffer and\nreceive the same accidents from the same cause, but because they work\nthe same effect on the same object. For you will without difficulty,\nI suppose, grant me that, of all the accidents which befall the sun,\nthere is none so like to his setting as his eclipse, especially if you\nbut call to mind that recent conjunction which, beginning at noonday,\nshowed us many stars in many places of the heavens, and wrought a\ntemperature in the air like that of the twilight. But if you will not\ngrant me this, our friend Theon here will bring us a Mimnermus, a\nCydias, an Archilochus, and besides these, a Stesichorus and a Pindar,\nlamenting that in eclipses the world is robbed of its brightest light,\nand saying that night comes on in the midst of the day, and that the\nrays of the sun wander in the path of darkness; but above all he will\nproduce Homer, saying that the faces of men are in eclipses seized upon\nby night and darkness, and the sun is quite lost out of heaven by the\nconjunction of the moon. And ... it is natural that this should happen,\n\n    When one moon\u2019s going, and another comes.\n\nFor the rest of the demonstration is, in my opinion, as certain and\nexactly concluding, as are the acute arguments of the mathematics. As\nnight is the shadow of the earth, so the eclipse of the sun is the\nshadow of the moon, when it stands in the way of our sight. For the\nsun is at his setting kept from our sight by the interposition of the\nearth, and at his eclipse by that of the moon. Now both of these are\nobscurations; but that of his setting is from the earth, and that of\nhis being eclipsed from the moon, their shadows intercepting our sight.\nNow the consequences of these things are easily understood. For if the\neffect is alike, the efficient causes are also alike; because it is\nof necessity that the same effects, happening in the same subjects,\nproceed from the same efficients. Now if the darkness in eclipses is\nnot so profound, nor does so forcibly and entirely seize the air, as\ndoes the night, we are not to wonder at it; for the substance of the\nbody which makes the night, and of that which causes the eclipse,\nis indeed the same, though their greatness is not equal. For the\nEgyptians, if I am not mistaken, hold that the moon is in bigness the\ntwo and seventieth part of the earth; and Anaxagoras says, she is as\nbig as Peloponnesus. And Aristarchus shows the overthwart line or\ndiameter of the moon to have a proportion to that of the earth which\nis less than if sixty were compared to nineteen, and somewhat greater\nthan an hundred and eight compared to forty and three. Whence it\nhappens that the earth, by reason of its greatness, wholly withdraws\nthe sun from our sight, for it is a great obstacle and opposition, and\nlasts all the night. But although the moon sometimes hides all the\nsun, yet that eclipse continues not so long nor is so far extended,\nbut there always appears about the circumference a certain brightness,\nwhich permits not the darkness to be black, deep, and perfectly obscure.\n\nAnd Aristotle (I mean the ancient philosopher of that name) rendering\nthe reason why there are oftener seen to happen eclipses of the moon\nthan of the sun, among other causes alleges this, that the sun is\neclipsed by the interposition of the moon, and the moon by that of the\nearth, which is much greater and consequently oftener opposes itself.\nAnd Posidonius thus defines this accident: The eclipse of the sun is\nthe conjunction of the sun and moon, the shadow of which darkens our\nsight.[98] For there is no eclipse except to those whose sight the\nshadow of the moon intercepting hinders them from seeing the sun. Now\nin confessing that the shadow of the moon descends down to us, I know\nnot what he has left himself to say. It is certainly impossible for a\nstar to cast a shadow; for that which is not enlightened is called a\nshadow, and light makes no shadow, but on the contrary drives it away.\n\n20. But what arguments, said he, were alleged after this?\n\nThe moon, answered I then, suffered the same eclipse.\n\nYou have done well, replied he, to put me in mind of it. But would\nyou have me go on and prosecute the rest of the discourse, as if you\nhad already supposed and granted that the moon is eclipsed, being\nintercepted within the shadow of the earth? Or shall I take for\nthe subject of a declamation the making a demonstration of it, by\nrehearsing to you all the arguments, one after another?\n\nNay, by Jove, said Theon, let this be the argument of your discourse.\nFor I indeed stand in need of some persuasion, having only heard that\nwhen these three bodies, the earth, the moon, and the sun, are in a\ndirect line, then eclipses happen; for that either the earth takes the\nsun from the moon, or the moon takes him from the earth. For the sun\nsuffers an eclipse when the moon, and the moon when the earth, is in\nthe midst of the three; of which the one happens in the conjunction or\nnew moon, and the other in the opposition or when the moon is full.\n\nThen said Lucius: These are the principal points, and the summary of\nwhat is said. But in the first place, if you please, take the argument\ndrawn from the form and figure of the shadow. For this is a cone, as it\nmust be when a great fire or light that is spherical encompasses a mass\nthat is also globular but less; whence it comes that, in the eclipses\nof the moon, the circumscriptions of the black and dark from the clear\nand luminous have their sections always round. For the sections given\nor received by one round body applied to another, which way soever they\ngo, do by reason of the similitude always keep a circular form. Now as\nfor the second argument, I suppose you understand that the first part\nwhich is eclipsed in the moon is always that which looks towards the\neast, and in the sun that which regards the west. Now the shadow of the\nearth moves from the east to the west, but the sun and moon from the\nwest eastward. The experience of the appearances gives us a visible\nknowledge of this, nor is there need of many words to make us fully\nunderstand it; and from these suppositions the cause of the eclipse is\nconfirmed. For, inasmuch as the sun is eclipsed by being overtaken, and\nthe moon by meeting that which makes the eclipse, it probably or rather\nnecessarily follows that the one is surprised behind, and the other\nbefore. For the obstruction begins on that side whence that which\ncauses it first approaches. Now the moon comes upon the sun from the\nwest, as striving in course with him and hastening after him; but the\nshadow of the earth comes from the east, as that which has a contrary\nmotion.\n\nThe third argument is taken from the time and greatness of the\neclipses. For the moon, if she is eclipsed when she is on high in her\napogee (or at her farthest distance from the earth), continues but a\nlittle while in her defect or want of light; but when she suffers the\nsame accident being low and in her perigee (or near the earth), she\nis very much oppressed, and slowly gets out of the shadow; and yet,\nwhen she is low, she moves swifter, and when high, slower. But the\ncause of the difference is in the shadow, which is, like pyramids,\nbroadest at the bottom or basis; and, growing still narrower by little\nand little, terminates in a sharp point at the top. Whence it comes,\nthat when she is low, she is embarrassed within greater circles,\ntraversing the bottom of the shadow and what is most obscure and dark;\nbut when she is high, being through the narrowness of the shadow\n(as it were) but in a shallow puddle, by which she is sullied, she\nimmediately gets out again. I omit what was said particularly about\nthe bases and disposition of parts, for these admit of a rational\nexplanation, so far as this is possible; but I return to the subject\nproperly before us, which has its foundation in our senses. For we\nsee that fire shines forth and appears brighter out of a dark and\nshady place, through the thickness of the caliginous air, which admits\nno effluxions or diffusions of the fire\u2019s virtue, but keeps in and\ncontains its substance within itself. Or rather,\u2014if this is a passion\nof the senses,\u2014as hot things, when near to cold ones, are felt to be\nhotter, and pleasures immediately after pains are found more vehement,\nso things that are bright appear better when they are near to such as\nare obscure, the imagination being more strained and extended by means\nof different passions. But there seems to be a greater appearance of\nprobability in the first reason. For in the sun, all the nature of fire\nnot only loses its faculty of illuminating, but is also rendered duller\nand more unapt to burn, because the heat of the sun dissipates and\nscatters all its force.\n\nIf it were then true that the moon, being, as the Stoics say, a muddy\nand troubled star, has a weak and duskish fire, it would be meet that\nshe should suffer none of these accidents which she is now seen to\nsuffer, but altogether the contrary; to wit, that she should be seen\nwhen she is hidden, and absconded when she appears; that is, she should\nbe concealed all the rest of the time, being obscured by the environing\nair, and again shine forth and become apparent and manifest for six\nmonths together, and afterwards disappear again five months, entering\ninto the shadow of the earth. For of four hundred and sixty-five\nrevolutions of ecliptic full moons, four hundred and four are of six\nmonths\u2019 duration, and the rest of five. The moon then should all this\ntime appear shining in the shadow; but on the contrary we see, that in\nthe shadow she is eclipsed and loses her light, and recovers it again\nafter she is escaped and got forth of the shadow. Nay, she appears\noften in the daytime, so that she is rather any thing else than a fiery\nand starry body.\n\n21. As soon as Lucius had said these things, Pharnaces and Apollonides\nran both together upon him, to oppugn and refute his discourse; and\nthen Apollonides giving him way, Pharnaces said: This it is that\nprincipally shows the moon to be a star and of a fiery nature, that in\nher eclipses she is not wholly obscured and disappearing, but shows\nherself with a certain coal-resembling color, terrible to the sight,\nyet such as is proper to her.\n\nAs for Apollonides, he insisted much in opposition to the word shadow,\nsaying, that the mathematicians always give that name to the place\nwhich is not enlightened, and that heaven admits no shadow.\n\nTo this I thus answered: This instance is rather alleged obstinately\nagainst the name, than naturally or mathematically against the thing.\nFor if one will not call the place obfuscated by the opposition of\nthe earth a shadow, but a place deprived of light, yet be it what\nit will, you must of necessity confess that the moon being there\nbecomes obscure; and every way, said I, it is a folly to deny that\nthe shadow of the earth reaches thither from whence the shadow of the\nmoon, falling upon our sight here on earth, causes the eclipse of the\nsun. And therefore I now address myself to you, Pharnaces; for this\ncoal-like and burnt color of the moon, which you affirm to be proper\nto her, belongs to a body that has thickness and depth. For there is\nnot wont to remain any relic, mark, or print of flame in a body that\nis rare, nor can a coal be made where there is not a solid body which\nmay receive into it the heat of the fire; as Homer himself shows in a\ncertain passage, where he says,\n\n    Then, when the languid flames at length subside,\n    He strows a bed of glowing embers wide.[99]\n\nFor the coal seems not properly a fire, but a body enkindled and\naltered by the fire, which stays and remains in a solid firmly rooted\nmass; and whereas flames are the setting on fire and fluxions of a\nnutriment and matter, which is of a rare substance, and by reason of\nits weakness quickly dissolved and consumed; so that there could not\nbe any more evident and plain argument to demonstrate that the moon is\nsolid and earthly, than if her proper color were that of a coal. But\nit is not so, my friend Pharnaces; but in her eclipses she diversely\nchanges her colors, which the mathematicians, determining with respect\nto the time and hour, thus distinguish. If she is eclipsed in the\nevening, she appears horribly black until the middle of the fourth\nhour of the night; if about midnight, she sends forth this reddish and\nfire-resembling color, and after the middle of the eighth hour, the\nredness disappears; and finally, if about the dawning of the morning,\nshe takes a blue or grayish color; which is the cause why she is by the\npoets, and particularly by Empedocles, called Glaucopis.\n\nSince then they clearly see that the moon changes into so many colors\nin the shadow, they do ill to attribute to her only that of a burning\ncoal, which may be said to be less proper to her than any other, being\nonly a small remnant and semblance of light, appearing and shining\nthrough a shadow, her own proper color being black and earthy. And\nsince that here below, red and purple garments, and rivers and lakes,\nwhich receive the rays of the sun, cause neighboring shady places to\ntake the same appearances of colors and to be illuminated by them,\ncasting and sending back by reason of reflections several rebated\nsplendors; what wonder is it if a copious flux of shadow, falling as it\nwere into an immense celestial sea of light, not steady and quiet, but\nagitated by innumerable stars, and besides admitting several mixtures\nand mutations in itself, takes from the moon the impression sometimes\nof one color, sometimes of another, and sends them hither to us? For it\nis not to be denied but that a star of fire cannot appear in a shadow\nblack, gray, or violet; but there are seen upon hills, plains, and\nseas, several various resemblances of colors, caused by the reflection\nof the sun, which are the very tinctures that brightness mixed with\nshadows and mists, as if it were with painters\u2019 colors, brings upon\nthem. And as for the tincture or colors of the sea, Homer has indeed\nin some sort endeavored to name and express them, when he sometimes\nterms the sea violet-colored or red as wine, at other times the\nwaves purple, and again the sea blue, and the calm white. As for the\ndiversities of tinctures and colors appearing upon the earth, he has, I\nsuppose, omitted them, because they are in number infinite. Now it is\nnot probable that the moon has but one superficies all plain and even,\nas the sea; but rather that of its nature it principally resembles the\nearth, of which old Socrates in Plato seemed to mythologize at his\npleasure; whether it were, that under covert and enigmatical speeches\nhe meant it of the moon, or whether he spake it of some other. For it\nis neither incredible nor wonderful, if the moon, having in herself\nnothing corrupt or muddy, but enjoying a pure and clear light from\nheaven, and being full of heat, not of a burning and furious fire, but\nof such as is mild and harmless, has in her places admirably fair and\npleasant, resplendent mountains, purple-colored cinctures or zones,\nand store of gold and silver, not dispersed here and there within her\nbowels, but flourishing in great abundance on the superficies of her\nplains, or spread all over her smooth hills and mountains.\n\nAnd if the sight of all these things comes to us through a shadow,\nsometimes in one manner and sometimes in another, by reason of the\ndiversity and different change of the ambient air, the moon does\nnot therefore lose the venerable persuasion that is had of her, or\nthe reputation of divinity; being esteemed by men a heavenly earth,\nor rather (as the Stoics say) a troubled, thick, and dreggish fire.\nFor even the fire itself is honored with barbarian honors among the\nAssyrians and Medes, who through fear serve and adore such things as\nare hurtful, hallowing them even above such things as are of themselves\nindeed holy and honorable. But the very name of the earth is truly dear\nand venerable to every Greek, and there is through all Greece a custom\nreceived of adoring and revering it, as much as any of the Gods. And\nwe are very far from thinking that the moon, which we hold to be a\nheavenly earth, is a body without soul and spirit, exempt and deprived\nof all that is to be offered to the Gods. For both by law we yield her\nrecompenses and thanksgivings, for that we receive of her and by nature\nwe adore what we acknowledge to be of a more excellent virtue and a\nmore honorable power; and therefore we do not think that we offend in\nsupposing the moon to be earth.\n\nNow as to the face which appears in her, as this earth on which we\nare has in it many great sinuosities and valleys, so it is probable\nthat the moon also lies open, and is cleft with many deep caves and\nruptures, in which there is water or very obscure air, to the bottom of\nwhich the sun cannot reach or penetrate, but failing there, sends back\na dissipated reflection to us here below.\n\n22. Here Apollonides, taking up the discourse, said: Tell me then,\nI beseech you, good sir, even by the moon herself, do you think it\npossible that there should be there shadows of caves and chinks, and\nthat the sight of them should come even to our eyes? Or do you not\nregard what will come of it? And must I tell you what it is? But\nhearken to me, although you are not ignorant of it. The diameter of the\nmoon, according to that bigness which appears to us when she is in her\nmean and ordinary distances, is twelve digits, and every one of these\nblack and shady spots is above half a digit, that is above the four and\ntwentieth part of the diameter. Now if we suppose the circumference of\nthe moon to be only thirty thousand stadia; and the diameter according\nto that supposition to be ten thousand, every one of these shadowy\nmarks within her will not be less than five hundred stadia. Consider\nthen, first, whether there can possibly be in the moon such great gaps\nand such inequalities as may make such a shadow? And then how is it\npossible that, being so great, they are not seen by us?\n\nAt this I, smiling upon him, said: You have done me a pleasure, dear\nApollonides, in having found out such a demonstration by which you\nwill prove that you and I shall be bigger than those giant sons of\nAloeus,[100]\u2014not indeed every hour of the day, but principally morning\nand evening,\u2014if indeed you think that, when the sun makes our shadows\nso long, he suggests to our minds this goodly argument; if that which\nis shadowed is great, that which shadows must of necessity be yet\nexcessively greater. I know well that neither you nor I have ever been\nin Lemnos; yet we have often heard that Iambic verse, so frequent in\nevery one\u2019s mouth:\n\n    Mount Athos\u2019 shade shall hide the Lemnian cow.\n\nFor the shadow of that mountain falls, as it seems, on the image of a\nbrazen heifer which is in Lemnos, extending itself in length over the\nsea not less than seven hundred stadia.... The mountain which makes the\nshadow causes it, because the distance of the light renders the shadow\nof bodies manifoldly greater than the bodies themselves. Consider then\nhere, that when the moon is in the full, and shows us the form of a\nvisage most expressly, by reason of the profundity of the shadow, it is\nthen that she is most remote from the sun; for it is the distance of\nthe light that makes the shadow bigger, and not the greatness of the\ninequalities which are on the superficies of the moon. And you moreover\nsee, that the brightness of the sun\u2019s beams suffers not the tops of the\nmountains to be discerned in open day; but on the contrary, the deep\nhollow and shadowy parts appear from afar. It is not therefore any way\nabsurd or strange, if we cannot so exactly see how the illumination of\nthe moon and her reception of the sunbeams take place, while yet the\nconjunction of things that are obscure and dark to such as are clear\nand shining is by reason of this diversity apparent to our sight.\n\n23. But this, said I, seems rather to refute and check the reflection\nand reverberation which is said to rebound from the moon; because\nthose who are within retorted rays do not only see that which is\nenlightened, but also that which enlightens. For when, at the resulting\nof light from water upon a wall, the sight falls upon the place which\nis thus illuminated by the reflection, the eye there beholds three\nthings, to wit, the ray or light that is driven back, the water which\nmakes the reflection, and the sun himself, whose light, falling on\nthe superficies of the water, is repulsed and sent back. This being\nconfessed, as what is evidently seen, it is required of those who say\nthat the earth is enlightened from the moon by the reflections of the\nsun\u2019s rays upon it, that they show us by night the sun appearing upon\nthe superficies of the moon, in the same manner as he may be seen by\nday appearing in the water on which he shines when there is the said\nreflection of his beams. But since the sun does not so appear, they\nthence infer that the moon receives her illumination by some other\nmeans, and not by reflection; and if there is no reflection, the moon\nthen is not earth.\n\nWhat answer then is to be made them, said Apollonides? For the argument\nof this objection against reflection is common also to us.\n\nIt is indeed, answered I, in some sort common, and in some sort not.\nBut first consider the comparison, how perversely and against the\nstream they take it. For the water is here below on the earth, and the\nmoon there above in heaven. So that the reflected and reverberated rays\nmake the form of their angles quite opposite one to the other, the one\nhaving their point upwards towards the superficies of the moon, and the\nother downwards toward the earth. Let them not then require that from\nevery form of mirror, nor that from every distance and remoteness,\nthere should be a like and semblable reflection; for so doing they\nwould repugn notorious and apparent evidence. And as for those who\nhold the moon to be a body not smooth, even, and subtile as the water,\nbut solid, massy, and terrestrial, I cannot conceive why they should\nrequire to see the image of the sun in her as in a glass. For neither\ndoes milk itself render such peculiar images, nor cause reflection of\nthe sight, by reason of the inequality and ruggedness of its parts.\nHow then is it possible that the moon should send back the sight from\nher superficies, as mirrors do that are more polished? And if in these\nalso there is any scratch, filth, or dulness on their superficies\nwhence the reflected sight is wont to receive a form, they are dimmed,\nand although the mirrors may be seen, they yield no counterlight. He\nthen who requires that either the sun should appear in the moon, or\nelse the moon should not reflect the sun\u2019s light to us, might as well\nrequire that the eye be the sun, the sight light, and man heaven. For\nit is probable, that the reflection of the sun\u2019s beams which is made\nupon the moon does, by reason of their vehemence and great brightness,\nrebound with a stroke upon us. But our sight being weak and slender,\nwhat wonder is it, if it neither give such a stroke as may rebound, or\nif it rebounds, that it does not maintain its continuity, but is broken\nand fails, as not having such abundance of light that it should not\ndisgregate and be dissipated within those inequalities and asperities?\nFor it is not impossible, that the reflection upon water or other sorts\nof mirrors, being yet strong, powerful, and near its origin, should\nfrom thence return upon the eye; but though there may perhaps from the\nmoon be some glimmerings, yet they still will be weak and obscure, and\nwill fail in the way, by reason of so long a distance. For otherwise\nhollow and concave mirrors send back the reverberated and reflected\nrays stronger than they came, so that they frequently burn and set on\nfire; and those that are convex and embossed like a bowl, because they\nbeat them not back on all sides, render them dark and feeble. You see\nfor certain, when two rainbows appear together in the heaven, one cloud\ncomprehending another, that the rainbow which outwardly environs the\nother yields dim colors, and such as are not sufficiently distinguished\nand expressed, because the exterior cloud, being more remote, makes not\na strong and forcible reflection. And what needs there any more to be\nsaid, seeing that the very light of the sun, reverberated and sent back\nby the moon, loses all its heat; and of his brightness, there comes to\nus with much ado but a small remainder, and that very languishing and\nweak? Is it then possible, that our sight, turning the same course,\nshould bring back any part of the solar image from the moon? I for my\npart think it is not. But consider, I said, yourselves, that if our\nsight were in one and the same manner affected and disposed towards the\nwater and towards the moon, the full moon would of necessity represent\nto us the images of the earth, plants, men, and stars, as is done by\nthe water and all other sorts of mirrors. And if there is no such\nreflection of our sight as to bring us back these images, either by\nreason of our said sight\u2019s weakness, or through the rugged inequality\nof the moon\u2019s superficies, let us no longer require that it should\nrebound against the sun.\n\n24. We have then, said I, related, as far as our memory would carry\nit away, whatever was there said. It is now time to desire Sylla, or\nrather to exact of him, that he would make us his narration, as being\non such condition admitted to hear all this discourse. If you think\ngood therefore, let us give over walking, and sitting down on these\nseats, make him a quiet and settled audience.\n\nEvery one approved this motion. And therefore, when we had seated\nourselves, Theon thus began: I am indeed, O Lamprias, as desirous as\nany of you can be to hear what shall be said; but I would gladly first\nunderstand something concerning those who are said to dwell in the\nmoon; not whether there are any persons inhabiting it, but whether\nit is impossible there should be any; for if it is not possible for\nthe moon to be inhabited, it is also unreasonable to say that she is\nearth; otherwise she would have been created in vain and to no end, not\nbearing any fruits, not affording a place for the birth or education\nof any men, for which causes and ends this earth wherein we live was\nmade and created, being (as Plato says) our nurse and true guardian,\nproducing and distinguishing the day from the night. Now you know, that\nof this matter many things have been said, as well merrily and in jest\nas seriously and in earnest. For of those who dwell under the moon,\nit is said that she hangs over their heads, as if they were so many\nTantaluses; and on the contrary, of those who inhabit her, that being\ntied and bound to her, like a sort of Ixions, they are with violence\nturned and whirled about. Nor is the moon indeed moved by one only\nmotion, but is, as they were wont to call her, Trivia, or Three-wayed;\nperforming her course together according to length, breadth, and depth\nin the Zodiac; the first of which motions mathematicians call a direct\nrevolution, the second volutation, or an oblique winding and wheeling\nin and out; and the third (I know not why) an inequality; although they\nsee that she has no motion uniform, settled, and certain, in all her\ncircuits and reversions. Wherefore it is not greatly to be admired, if\nthrough violence of her motion there sometime fell a lion from her into\nPeloponnesus, but it is rather to be wondered, that we do not daily\nsee ten thousand falls of men and women and shocks of other animals\ntumbling down thence with their heels upwards on our heads; for it\nwould be a mockery to dispute about their habitation there, if they\ncan have there neither birth nor existence. For seeing the Egyptians\nand the Troglodytes, over whose heads the sun directly stands only one\nmoment of one day in the solstice, and then presently retires, can\nhardly escape being burnt, by reason of the air\u2019s excessive dryness;\nis it credible that those who are in the moon can bear every year\ntwelve solstices, the sun being once a month just in their zenith,\nwhen the moon is full? As for winds, clouds, and showers, without\nwhich the plants can neither come up nor, when they are come up, be\npreserved, it cannot be so much as imagined there should be any, where\nthe ambient air is so hot, dry, and subtile; since even here below,\nthe tops of mountains never feel those hard and bitter winters, but\nthe air, being there pure and clear, without any agitation, by reason\nof its lightness, avoids all that thickness and concretion which is\namongst us; unless, by Jupiter, we will say that, as Minerva instilled\nnectar and ambrosia into the mouth of Achilles, when he received no\nother food, so the moon, which both is called and indeed is Minerva,\nnourishes men, producing for them and sending them every day ambrosia,\nwith which, as old Pherecydes was wont to say, the Gods themselves are\nfed. For as touching that Indian root, which, as Megasthenes says, some\npeople in those parts, who neither eat nor drink, but have pure mouths,\nburn and smoke, living on the smell of its perfume; whence should they\nhave any of it there, the moon not being watered or refreshed with rain?\n\n25. When Theon had spoken these things; You have very dexterously\nand gently, said I to him, by this facetiousness of yours smoothed\nas it were the brow, and taken off the chagrin and sourness of this\ndiscourse; which encourages and emboldens us to return an answer,\nsince, however we may chance to fail, we expect not any severe or\nrigorous chastisement. For, to speak the truth, they who are extremely\noffended with these things and wholly discredit them, not being willing\nmildly to consider what probability and possibility there may be in\nthem, are not much less in fault than those that are too excessively\npersuaded of them. First then, I say, it is not necessary that the moon\nmust have been made in vain and to no end or purpose, if there are not\nmen who dwell in it; for we see that this very earth here is not all\ncultivated or inhabited, but that only a small part of it, like so many\npromontories or demi-islands arising out of the deep, engenders, brings\nforth, and breeds plants and animals; the rest being through excessive\ncold or heat wholly desert and barren, or (which is indeed the greatest\nshare of it) covered and plunged under the vast ocean. But you, who\nare always so great a lover and admirer of Aristarchus, give no ear to\nCrates when he reads in Homer,\n\n    The sea, which gave to Gods and men their birth,\n    Covers with waves the most part of the earth.[101]\n\nAnd yet those parts are far from having been made in vain. For the sea\nexhales and breathes out mild vapors; and the snow, leisurely melting\nfrom the cold and uninhabited regions, sends forth and spreads over all\nour countries those gentle breezes which qualify the scorching heat\nof summer; and in the midst, as Plato says, is placed the faithful\nguardian and operator of night and day. There is then nothing to\nhinder but that the moon may be without living creatures, and yet\ngive reflections to the light that is diffused about her, and afford\na receptacle to the rays of the stars, which have their confluence\nand temperature in her, for to digest the evaporation rising from the\nearth and moderate the over-violent and fiery heat of the sun. And\nattributing much to ancient fame, we will say that she is styled Diana,\nas being a virgin and fruitless, but otherwise greatly salutary,\nhelpful, and profitable to the world. Moreover, of all that has been\nsaid, my friend Theon, there is nothing which shows it impossible for\nthe moon to be inhabited. For her turning about, being gentle, mild,\nand calm, dulcifies and polishes the ambient air, and distributes it in\nso good order about her, that there is no occasion to fear the falling\nor slipping out of those who live in her. And as to the diversity and\nmultiplicity of her motion, it proceeds not from any inequality, error,\nor uncertainty, but the astrologers show in this an admirable order\nand course, enclosing her within circles, which are turned by other\ncircles; some supposing that she herself stirs not, others making her\nalways move equally, smoothly, and with the same swiftness. For it is\nthese ascensions of divers circles, with their turnings and habitudes,\none towards another and with respect to us, which most exactly make\nthose heights, depths, and depressions, that appear to us in her\nmotion, and her digressions in latitude, all joined with the ordinary\nrevolution she makes in longitude. As to the great heat and continual\ninflammation of the sun, you will cease to fear it, if first to the\neleven estival conjunctions you oppose the full moons, and then to\nthe excesses the continuity of change which permits them not to last\nlong, reducing them to a proper and peculiar temperature, and taking\nfrom them both what is over much; for the middle, or what is between\nthem, it is probable, has a season most like to the spring. And,\nmoreover, the sun sends his beams to us through a gross and troubled\nair, and casts on us an heat fed by exhalation; whereas the air, being\nthere subtile and transparent, dissipates and disperses his lustre,\nwhich has no nourishment nor body on which it may settle. Trees and\nfruits are here nourished by showers; but elsewhere, as in the higher\ncountries with you about Thebes and Syene, the earth drinking in\nnot aerial but earth-bred water, and being assisted with refreshing\nwinds and dew, will not (such is the virtue and temperature of the\nsoil) yield the first place for fertility to the best watered land in\nthe world. And the same sorts of trees which in our country, having\nsuffered a long and sharp winter, bring forth abundance of good fruit,\nare in Africa and with you in Egypt soon offended with cold and very\nfearful of the winter. And the provinces of Gedrosia and Troglodytis,\nwhich lie near the ocean sea, being by reason of drought barren and\nwithout any trees, there grow nevertheless in the adjacent sea trees\nof a wonderful height and bigness, and green even to the very bottom;\nsome of which they call olive-trees, others laurels, and others the\nhair of Isis. And those plants which are named anacampserotes, being\nhanged up after they are plucked out of the ground, not only live,\nbut\u2014which is more\u2014bud and put forth green leaves. Some seeds are sown\nin winter; and others in the heat of summer, like sesame and millet.\nAnd thyme or centaury, if it is sown in a rich and fat earth, and\nthere well drenched and watered, degenerates from its natural quality\nand all its virtue, because it loves dryness and thrives in its own\nproper natural soil. Others cannot bear so much as the least dew, of\nwhich kind are the most part of the Arabian plants, and if they are\nbut once wet, they wither, fade, and die. What wonder is it then, if\nthere grow in the moon roots, seeds, and plants which have no need\nof rains or winter colds, and are appropriated to a dry and subtile\nair, such as is that of summer? And why may it not be probable that\nthe moon sends forth warm winds, and that her shaking and agitation,\nas she moves, is accompanied by comfortable breezes, fine dews, and\ngentle moistures, which are everywhere dispersed to furnish nutriment\nfor the verdant plants?\u2014seeing she is not of her temperature ardent\nor parched with drought, but rather soft, moist, and engendering all\nhumidity. For there come not from her to us any effects of dryness,\nbut many of a feminine moisture and softness, such as are the growing\nof plants, the putrefaction of flesh, the changing and flatness of\nwines, the tenderness and rotting of wood, and the easy deliveries of\nchild-bearing women. But because I am afraid of irritating again and\nprovoking Pharnaces\u2014who all this while speaks not a word\u2014if I should\nallege the flowing and ebbing of the great ocean (as they themselves\nsay), and the increasings of the friths and straits, which swell and\nrise by the moon augmenting the moisture; therefore I will rather turn\nmyself to you, my friend Theon. For you, interpreting this verse of the\npoet Alcman,\n\n    Such things as dew, Jove\u2019s daughter and the moon\u2019s,\n    Does nourish,\n\ntell us, that in this place he calls the air Jupiter, which, being\nmoistened by the moon, is by Nature changed into dew. For she seems,\nmy good friend, to be of a nature almost wholly contrary to the sun,\nnot only in that she is wonted to moisten, dissolve, and soften what\nhe thickens, dries, and hardens; but moreover, in that she allays and\ncools his heat, when it lights upon her and is mingled with her.\n\nThose then who think the moon to be a fiery and burning body are in\nan error; and in like manner those who would have all such things to\nbe necessary for the generation, life, food, and entertainment of the\nanimals dwelling there as are requisite to those that are here below,\nconsider not the vast diversity and inequality there is in Nature; in\nwhich there are found greater varieties and differences between animals\nand animals, than there are between animals and other subjects that are\nnot animated. There are surely not in the world any men of such pure\nmouths that they feed only on smells.... But that power of Nature which\nAmmonius himself has shown us, and which Hesiod has obscurely signified\nin these words,\n\n    Nor how great virtue is in asphodels and mallows,[102]\n\nEpimenides has made plain to us in effect, teaching us that Nature\nsustains a living creature with very little food, and that, provided\nit has but the quantity of an olive, it stands in need of no other\nnourishment. Now, if any, those surely who dwell within the moon should\nbe active, light, and easy to be nourished with any thing whatsoever;\nsince they affirm that the moon herself, as also the sun, which is a\nfiery animal, and manifoldly greater than the earth, is nourished and\nmaintained by the moistures that come from the earth, as are also all\nthe other stars, whose number is in a manner infinite; such light and\nslender animals do they assign to the upper region, and with so small\nnecessaries do they think them contented and satisfied. But we neither\nsee these things, nor consider that a quite different region, nature,\nand temperature is accommodated to those lunar men.\n\nAs therefore, if we were unable to come near and touch the sea, but\ncould only see it at a distance, and had heard that its water is\nbrackish, salt, and undrinkable, any one who should tell us that there\nare in its depths many and great animals of various forms and shapes,\nand that it is full of great and monstrous beasts who make the same\nuse of the water as we do of the air, would be thought only to relate\na parcel of strange and uncreditable stories, newly found out and\ninvented for delight and amusement; in the same manner we seem to be\naffected and disposed towards the moon, not believing that there are\nany who inhabit it. And I am of opinion, that they themselves do much\nmore wonder, when they behold the earth,\u2014which is, as it were, the\ndregs and mud of the universe, appearing to them through moist and\nfoggy clouds and mists, a little place, a low, abject, and immovable\nthing without any brightness or light whatever,\u2014how this pitiful\ninconsiderable thing should be able to produce, nourish, and maintain\nanimals that have motion, respiration, and heat. And if peradventure\nthey had ever heard these verses of Homer,\n\n    A filthy squalid place, abhorred even by\n    The Gods themselves;[103]\n\nand again,\n\n    Hell is as far beneath, as heaven above\n    The earth;[104]\n\nthey would certainly think them to have been written of this place\nwhere we live, and that here is hell and Tartarus, and that the earth\nwhich is equally distant from heaven and hell is only the moon.\n\n26. I had not well ended my discourse, when Sylla interrupting me said:\nForbear Lamprias, and put a stop to your discourse, lest running (as\nthey say) the vessel of your story on ground, you confound and spoil\nall the play, which has at present another scene and disposition. I\nmyself therefore shall be the actor, but shall, before I enter upon\nmy part, make known to you the poet or author; beginning, if there is\nnothing to hinder, with that of Homer,\n\n    An isle Ogygia lies in Ocean\u2019s arms,[105]\n\ndistant about five days\u2019 sail westward from Britain; and before it\nthere are three others, of an equal distance from one another and also\nfrom that, bearing north-west, where the sun sets in summer. In one of\nthese the barbarians feign that Saturn is detained prisoner by Jupiter,\nwho, as his son, having the guard or keeping of those islands and the\nadjacent sea, named the Saturnian, has his seat a little below; and\nthat the continent, by which the great sea is circularly environed, is\ndistant from Ogygia about five thousand stadia, but from the others\nnot so far, men using to row thither in galleys, the sea being there\nlow and ebb, and difficult to be passed by great vessels because of\nthe mud brought thither by a multitude of rivers, which, coming from\nthe mainland, discharge themselves into it, and raise there great bars\nand shelves that choke up the river and render it hardly navigable;\nwhence anciently there arose an opinion of its being frozen. Moreover,\nthe coasts of this continent lying on the sea are inhabited by the\nGreeks about a bay not much smaller than the Maeotic, the mouth of\nwhich lies in a direct line over against that of the Caspian Sea. These\nname and esteem themselves the inhabitants of the firm land, calling\nall us others islanders, as dwelling in a land encompassed round about\nand washed by the sea. And they think that those who heretofore came\nthither with Hercules and were left there by him, mixing themselves\nwith the people of Saturn, raised up again the Greek nation, which was\nwell near extinguished, brought under and supplanted by the language,\nlaws, and manners of the barbarians, and made it again flourish and\nrecover its pristine vigor. And therefore in that place they give the\nfirst honor to Hercules, and the second to Saturn. Now when the star of\nSaturn, by us called Phaenon and by them Nycturus, comes to the sign\nof Taurus, as it does once in the time of thirty years, they, having\nbeen a long time preparing what is necessary for a solemn sacrifice and\na long voyage or navigation, send forth those on whom the lots fall\nto row in that vast sea, and make their abode for a great while in\nforeign countries. These men then, being embarked and departed, meet\nwith different adventures, some in one manner, others in another. Now\nsuch as have in safety passed the danger of the sea go first ashore in\nthose opposite, islands, which are inhabited by the Greeks, where they\nsee that the sun is scarce hidden one full hour during the space of\nthirty days, and that this is their night, of which the darkness is but\nsmall, as having a twilight from the going down of the sun not unlike\nthe dawning of the day; that having continued there ninety days,\nduring which they are highly caressed and honored, as being reputed\nand termed holy men, they are afterwards conducted by the winds,\nand transported into the isle of Saturn, where there are no other\ninhabitants but themselves and such as have been sent thither before\nthem. For though it is lawful for them, after they have served Saturn\nthirty years, to return home to their own countries and houses, yet\nmost of them choose rather to remain quietly there; some, because they\nare already accustomed to the place; others, because without any labor\nand trouble they have abundance of all things, as well for the offering\nof sacrifices and holding festival solemnities, as to support the\nordinary expenses of those who are perpetually conversant in the study\nof learning and philosophy. For they affirm the nature of the island\nand the mildness of the air which environs it to be admirable; and that\nthere have been some persons who, intending to depart thence, have been\nhindered by the Divinity or Genius of the place showing himself to\nthem, as to his familiar friends and acquaintance, not only in dreams\nand exterior signs, but also visibly appearing to them by the means of\nfamiliar spirits discoursing and conversing with them. For they say,\nthat Saturn himself is personally there, lying asleep in the deep cave\nof an hollow rock, shining like fine gold, Jupiter having prepared\nsleep instead of fetters and shackles to keep him from stirring;\nbut that there are on the top of this rock certain birds, which fly\ndown and carry him ambrosia; that the whole island is filled with an\nadmirable fragrancy and perfume, which is spread all over it, arising\nfrom this cave, as from an odoriferous fountain; that these Daemons\nserve and minister to Saturn, having been his courtiers and nearest\nattendants when he held the empire and exercised regal authority\nover men and Gods; and that having the science of divining future\noccurrences, they of themselves foretell many things; but the greatest\nand of the highest importance, when they return from assisting Saturn,\nand reveal his dreams; for whatever Jupiter premeditates, Saturn\ndreams; but his awakenings are Titanical passions or perturbations of\nthe soul in him, which sleep altogether controls, in order that the\nroyal and divine nature may be pure and incontaminate in itself.\n\nThis stranger then, having been brought thither, and there serving the\nGod in repose and at his ease, attained to as great skill in astrology\nas it is possible for any one to do that has made the greatest progress\nin geometry; as for the rest of philosophy, having given himself to\nthat which is called natural, he was seized with an extraordinary\ndesire and longing to visit and see the great island; for so they\ncall the continent inhabited by us. After therefore his thirty years\nwere passed and his successors arrived, having taken leave of all his\nrelations and friends, he put to sea, in other respects soberly and\nmoderately equipped, but having good store of voyage-provision in\nvessels of gold. Now one day would not suffice to relate unto you in\nparticular what adventures befell him, how many nations he visited,\nthrough how many countries he passed, how he searched into sacred\nwritings, and was initiated in all holy confraternities and religious\nsocieties, as he himself recounted it to us, exactly particularizing\nevery thing. But give ear, I pray you, to what concerns the present\ndispute. For he continued no small time at Carthage, a city not a\nlittle also esteemed by us, where he found certain sacred skins of\nparchment, which had been secretly conveyed thither when the old town\nwas sacked, and had there long lain hidden under ground. Now he told me\nthat, of all the Gods which appear to us in heaven, we ought chiefly to\nhonor the Moon, and earnestly exhorted me to be diligent in venerating\nof her, as having the principal influence and dominion over our life.\n\n27. At these things when I was amazed, and entreated him to declare and\nexplain them a little more fully to me, he said: The Greeks, O Sylla,\ndeliver many things concerning the Gods, but they are not always in\nthe right. For first, when they tell us that there is a Ceres and a\nProserpine, they say well; but not so well, when they put them both in\none and the same place. For one, to wit Ceres, is on the earth, and the\nlady and mistress of all earthly things. The other, to wit Proserpine,\nis in the moon, and the mistress of all lunar things; and she is called\nboth Cora and Persephone; Persephone, as being a bringer of light and\nbrightness, and Cora, because the apple of the eye, in which the image\nof him who looks into it is represented, as the brightness of the sun\nappears in the moon, is by the Greeks called \u03ba\u03cc\u03c1\u03b7. And as to what they\nsay concerning the wandering about of Ceres and Proserpine, and their\nmutual seeking of one another, there is in it somewhat of truth, for\nthey long after each other, being separated, and often embrace in\nshadow. And that Cora is sometimes in heaven and light, and sometimes\nin darkness and night, is not untrue; only there is some error in the\ncomputation of the time. For we see her not six whole months, but every\nsixth month, caught in the shadow by the earth, as by her mother; and\nthis rarely happens within five months, because it is impossible she\nshould forsake Pluto (Hades), being herself the bound or limit of\nHades; which Homer also covertly but not unelegantly signified, when he\nsaid,\n\n    Into th\u2019 Elysian fields, earth\u2019s utmost bounds,\n    The Gods will bring thee;[106]\n\nfor he has there placed the end and boundary of the earth, where the\nshadow ceases and goes no farther. Now into that place no wicked or\nimpure person can have access. But good folks, being after their\ndecease carried thither, lead there indeed an easy and quiet, but yet\nnot a blessed and divine life, till the second death.\n\n28. But what is that, O Sylla? said I. Ask me not, he replied, for I\nam of myself going to declare it to you. The common opinion, which\nmost persons hold, is that man is a compound subject, and this they\nhave reason to believe. But they are mistaken in thinking him to be\ncompounded of two parts only. For they imagine that the understanding\nis a part of the soul, but they err in this no less than those who\nmake the soul to be a part of the body; for the understanding as far\nexceeds the soul, as the soul is better and diviner than the body. Now\nthis composition of the soul with the understanding makes reason; and\nwith the body, passion; of which the one is the beginning or principle\nof pleasure and pain, and the other of virtue and vice. Of those three\nparts conjoined and compacted together, the earth has given the body,\nthe moon the soul, and the sun the understanding to the generation of\nman, ... as therefore brightness to the moon. Now of the deaths we\ndie, the one makes man two of three, and the other one of two. And the\nformer indeed is in the region and jurisdiction of Ceres, whence the\nname given to her mysteries (\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd) resembles that given to death\n(\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1fb6\u03bd). The Athenians also heretofore called the deceased sacred\nto Ceres. As for the other death, it is in the moon, or region of\nProserpine. And as with the one the terrestrial, so with the other\nthe celestial Mercury doth dwell. This suddenly and with force and\nviolence plucks the soul from the body; but Proserpine mildly and in\na long time disjoins the understanding from the soul. And for this\nreason is she called \u039c\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c2, that is, _only begotten_, or rather,\n_begetting one alone_; for the better part of man becomes alone when\nit is separated by her. Now both the one and the other happens thus\naccording to Nature. It is ordained by Fate that every soul, whether\nwith or without understanding, when gone out of the body, should\nwander for a time, though not all for the same, in the region lying\nbetween the earth and the moon. For those that have been unjust and\ndissolute suffer there the punishments due to their offences; but the\ngood and virtuous are there detained till they are purified, and have\nby expiation purged out of them all the infections they might have\ncontracted from the contagion of the body, as if from foul breath,\nliving in the mildest part of the air, called the meadows of Pluto,\nwhere they must remain for a certain perfixed and appointed time.\nAnd then, as if they were returning from a wandering pilgrimage or\nlong exile into their country, they have a taste of joy, such as they\nprincipally receive who are initiated in sacred mysteries, mixed with\ntrouble, admiration, and each one\u2019s proper and peculiar hope. For the\nmoon drives and chases out many souls which already long after it. And\nsome who are already come thither, and yet take pleasure in things\nbelow, are seen descending down as it were into an abyss. But those\nthat are got on high, and are there securely seated, first go about as\nvictors, crowned with garlands called the wings of constancy, because\nin their lives they restrained the unreasonable and passible part of\ntheir soul, rendering it subject and obedient to the curb of reason.\nSecondly, they are like to the rays of the sun in appearance, and like\nto fire in their soul, which is borne aloft by the clear air which is\nabout the moon,\u2014like fire here on the earth,\u2014from which they gather\nstrength and solidity, as iron and steel do by their being tempered\nand plunged in water. For that which was hitherto rare and loose is\ncompacted and made firm, and becomes bright and transparent; so that it\nis nourished with the least exhalation in the world. And this is what\nHeraclitus meant, when he said that the souls in Pluto\u2019s region have\ntheir smell exceeding quick.\n\n29. Now they first see the moon\u2019s greatness, beauty, and nature, which\nis not simple nor unmixed, but a composition as it were of earth and\nstar. For as the earth mixed with wind and moisture becomes soft, and\nas the blood tempered with the flesh gives it sense; so they say that\nthe moon, being mingled with an ethereal quintessence even to the very\nbottom, is animated, becomes fruitful, and generative, and is equally\ncounterpoised with ponderosity and lightness. For even the world\nitself, being composed of some things naturally moving upwards and\nothers by nature tending downwards, is exempt from all local motion or\nchange of place. These things also Xenocrates seems by a certain divine\nreasoning to have understood, having taken his first light from Plato.\nFor Plato it was who first affirmed that every star is compounded of\nfire and earth, by the means of certain intermediate natures given in\nproportion; forasmuch as nothing can be an object of human sense which\nhas not in some proportion a mixture of earth and light. Now Xenocrates\nsays that the stars and the sun are composed of fire and the first or\nprimitive solid; the moon of the second solid and its own peculiar\nair; and the earth, of water, fire, and the third solid. For neither\nis the solid alone by itself, nor the rare alone by itself, capable or\nsusceptible of a soul. And let thus much suffice for the substance of\nthe moon.\n\nNow as to her breadth and magnitude, it is not such as the\ngeometricians deliver, but manifoldly greater. And she seldom measures\nthe shadow of the earth by her greatness, not because she is small, but\nbecause she adds to her motion by heat, that she may quickly pass the\nshady place, carrying with her the souls of the blessed, which make\nhaste and cry. For when they are in the shadow, they can no longer hear\nthe harmony of the heavenly bodies. And withal, the souls of the damned\nare from below presented to them, lamenting and wailing through this\nshadow. Wherefore also in eclipses, many are wont to ring vessels of\nbrass, and to make a noise and clattering to be heard by these souls.\nMoreover, that which is called the face of the moon affrights them\nwhen they draw near it, seeming to them a dreadful and terrible sight;\nwhereas indeed it is not so. But as our earth has deep and great bays,\none here running between Hercules\u2019s pillars into the land to us, and\nothers without, as the Caspian, and those about the Red Sea; so in\nthe moon also there are hollows and great depths. Now of these, the\ngreatest they call the gulf of Hecate, where the souls punish or are\npunished according to the evils they suffered or did whilst they were\nDaemons. The two others are long passages, through which the soul must\ngo sometimes to that part of the moon which is towards heaven, and\nsometimes to that which is towards earth. Now that part of the moon\nwhich is towards heaven is called the Elysian fields; and that which\nis towards the earth, the fields of Proserpine that is opposite to the\nearth.\n\n30. The Daemons do not always stay in the moon, but sometimes descend\ndown here below, to have the care and superintendency of oracles. They\nare assistant also, and join in celebrating the sublimest ceremonies,\nhaving their eye upon misdeeds, which they punish, and preserving the\ngood as well in perils of war as of the sea. And if in the performance\nof this charge they commit any fault, either through anger, envy, or\nany unjust grace or favor, they smart for it; for they are again thrust\ndown to the earth, and tied to human bodies. Now those who were about\nSaturn said, that themselves were some of the better of these Daemons;\nas were formerly those that were heretofore in Crete called Dactyli\nIdaei, the Corybantes in Phrygia, and the Trophoniades in Lebadea, a\ncity of Boeotia, and infinite others in several places of the habitable\nearth, whose names, temples, and honors continue to this day. But the\npowers of some fail, being by a most happy change translated to another\nplace; which translations some obtain sooner, others later, when the\nunderstanding comes to be separated from the soul; which separation is\nmade by the love and desire to enjoy the image of the sun, in which and\nby which shines that divine, desirable, and happy beauty, which every\nother nature differently longs after and seeks, one after one manner,\nanother after another. For the moon herself continually turns, through\nthe desire she has to be joined with him. But the nature of the soul\nremains in the moon, retaining only some prints and dreams of life. And\nof this I think it to have been well and truly said,\n\n    The soul, like to a dream, flies quick away;[107]\n\nwhich it does not immediately, as soon as it is separated from\nthe body, but afterwards, when it is alone and divided from the\nunderstanding. And of all that Homer ever writ, there is not any\npassage more divine than that in which, speaking of those who are\ndeparted this life, he says,\n\n    Next these, I saw Alcides\u2019 image move;\n    Himself is with th\u2019 immortal Gods above.[108]\n\nFor every one of us is neither courage, nor fear, nor desire,\u2014no more\nthan flesh or humors,\u2014but the part by which we think and understand.\nAnd the soul being moulded and formed by the understanding, and itself\nmoulding and forming the body, by embracing it on every side, receives\nfrom it an impression and form; so that although it be separated both\nfrom the understanding and the body, it nevertheless so retains still\nits figure and semblance for a long time, that it may with good right\nbe called its image.\n\nAnd of these souls (as I have already said) the moon is the element,\nbecause souls resolve into her, as the bodies of the deceased do into\nearth. Those indeed who have been virtuous and honest, living a quiet\nand philosophical life without embroiling themselves in troublesome\naffairs, are quickly resolved; because being left by the understanding,\nand no longer using corporeal passions, they incontinently vanish\naway. But the souls of the ambitious and such as have been busied\nin negotiations, of the amorous and such as have been addicted to\ncorporeal pleasures, as also of the angry and revengeful, calling to\nmind the things they did in their lives, as dreams in their sleep, walk\nwandering about here and there, like that of Endymion; because their\ninconstancy and their being over-subject to passions transports them,\nand draws them out of the moon to another generation, not letting them\nrest, but alluring them and calling them away. For there is nothing\nsmall, staid, constant, and accordant, after that being forsaken by\nthe understanding, they come to be seized by corporeal passions. And\nof such souls, destitute of reason and suffering themselves to be\ncarried away by the proud violence of passion, were bred the Tityi and\nTyphons; and particularly that Typhon who, having by force and violence\nseized the city of Delphi, overturned the sanctuary of the oracle\nthere. Nevertheless, after a long tract of time the moon receives those\nsouls and recomposes them; and the sun inspiring again and sowing\nunderstanding in them, the moon receives them by its vital power, and\nmakes them new souls; and the earth in the third place gives them a\nbody. For she gives nothing ... after death of all that she takes to\ngeneration. And the sun takes nothing, but reassembles and receives\nagain the understanding which he gave. But the moon gives and receives,\njoins and disjoins, unites and separates, according to divers faculties\nand powers; of which the one is named Ilithyia or Lucina (to wit,\nthat which joins), and the other Artemis or Diana (to wit, that which\nseparates and divides). And of the three fatal Goddesses or Parcae, she\nwhich is called Atropos is placed in the sun, and gives the principle\nof generation; and Clotho, being lodged in the moon, is she who joins,\nmingles, and unites; and the last, named Lachesis, is on the earth,\nwhere she adds her helping hand, and with her does Fortune very much\nparticipate. For that which is without a soul is weak in itself and\nliable to be affected by others. The understanding is sovereign over\nall the rest, and cannot be made to suffer by any. Now the soul is a\ncertain middle thing mixed of them both; as the moon was by God made\nand created a composition and mixture of things high and low, having\nthe same proportion to the sun as the earth has to her.\n\nThis (said Sylla) is what I understood from this guest of mine, who\nwas a stranger and a traveller; and this he said he learned from the\nDaemons who served and ministered to Saturn. And you, O Lamprias, may\ntake my relation in such part as you please.\n\n\n\n\nOF FATE.[109]\n\n\nI WILL endeavor, my dearest Piso, to send you my opinion concerning\nFate, written with all the clearness and compendiousness I am capable\nof; since you, who are not ignorant how cautious I am of writing, have\nthought fit to make it the subject of your request.\n\n1. You are first then to know that this word Fate is spoken and\nunderstood two manner of ways; the one as it is an energy, the other\nas it is a substance. First therefore, as it is an action, Plato[110]\nhas under a type described it, saying thus in his dialogue entitled\nPhaedrus: \u201cAnd this is a sanction of Adrastea (or an inevitable\nordinance), that whatever soul being an attendant on God,\u201d &c. And\nin his treatise called Timaeus: \u201cThe laws which God in the nature of\nthe universe has established for immortal souls.\u201d And in his book of\na Commonweal he calls Fate \u201cthe speech of the virgin Lachesis, who is\nthe daughter of Necessity.\u201d By which sentences he not tragically but\ntheologically shows us what his sentiments are in this matter. Now if\nany one, translating the fore-cited passages, would have them expressed\nin more familiar terms, the description in Phaedrus may be thus\nexplained: That Fate is a divine sentence, intransgressible because\nits cause cannot be divested or hindered. And according to what he has\nsaid in his Timaeus, it is a law ensuing on the nature of the universe,\naccording to which all things that are done are transacted. For this\ndoes Lachesis effect, who is indeed the daughter of Necessity,\u2014as we\nhave both already related, and shall yet better understand by that\nwhich will be said in the progress of our discourse. Thus you see what\nFate is, when it is taken for an action.\n\n2. But as it is a substance, it seems to be the universal soul of\nthe world, and admits of a threefold distribution; the first destiny\nbeing that which errs not; the second, that which is thought to err;\nand the third that which, being under the heaven, is conversant about\nthe earth. Of these, the highest is called Clotho, the next Atropos,\nand the lowest, Lachesis; who, receiving the celestial influences\nand efficacies of her sisters, transmits and fastens them to the\nterrestrial things which are under her government. Thus have we\ndeclared briefly what is to be said of Fate, taken as a substance;\nwhat it is, what are its parts, after what manner it is, how it is\nordained, and how it stands, both in respect to itself and to us. But\nas to the particularities of these things, there is another fable in\nhis Commonweal, by which they are in some measure covertly insinuated,\nand we ourselves have, in the best manner we can, endeavored to explain\nthem to you.\n\n3. But we now once again turn our discourse to Fate, as it is an\nenergy. For concerning this it is that there are so many natural,\nmoral, and logical questions. Having therefore already in some sort\nsufficiently defined what it is, we are now in the next place to say\nsomething of its quality, although it may to many seem absurd. I\nsay then that Fate, though comprehending as it were in a circle the\ninfinity of all those things which are and have been from infinite\ntimes and shall be to infinite ages, is not in itself infinite, but\ndeterminate and finite; for neither law, reason, nor any other divine\nthing can be infinite. And this you will the better understand, if\nyou consider the total revolution and the whole time in which the\nrevolutions of the eight circles (that is, of the eight spheres of the\nfixed stars, sun, moon, and five planets), having (as Timaeus[111]\nsays) finished their course, return to one and the same point, being\nmeasured by the circle of the Same, which goes always after one manner.\nFor in this order, which is finite and determinate, shall all things\n(which, as well in heaven as in earth, consist by necessity from above)\nbe reduced to the same situation, and restored again to their first\nbeginning. Wherefore the habitude of heaven alone, being thus ordained\nin all things, as well in regard of itself as of the earth and all\nterrestrial matters, shall again (after long revolutions) one day\nreturn; and those things that in order follow after, and being linked\ntogether in a continuity are maintained in their course, shall be\npresent, every one of them by necessity bringing what is its own. But\nfor the better clearing of this matter, let us understand that whatever\nis in us or about us is not wrought by the course of the heavens and\nheavenly influences, as being entirely the efficient cause both of my\nwriting what I now write, and of your doing also what you at present\ndo, and in the same manner as you do it. Hereafter then, when the same\ncause shall return, we shall do the same things we now do, and in the\nsame manner, and shall again become the same men; and so it will be\nwith all others. And that which follows after shall also happen by\nthe following cause; and in brief, all things that shall happen in\nthe whole and in every one of these universal revolutions shall again\nbecome the same. By this it appears (as we have said before) that\nFate, being in some sort infinite, is nevertheless determinate and\nfinite; and it may be also in some sort seen and comprehended, as we\nhave farther said, that it is as it were a circle. For as a motion of a\ncircle is a circle, and the time that measures it is also a circle; so\nthe order of things which are done and happen in a circle may be justly\nesteemed and called a circle.\n\n4. This therefore, though there should be nothing else, almost shows\nus what sort of thing Fate is; but not particularly or in every\nrespect. What kind of thing then is it in its own form? It is, as far\nas one can compare it, like to the civil or politic law. For first it\ncommands the most part of things at least, if not all, conditionally;\nand then it comprises (as far as is possible for it) all things that\nbelong to the public in general; and the better to make you understand\nboth the one and the other, we must specify them by an example. The\ncivil law speaks and ordains in general of a valiant man, and also of\na deserter and a coward; and in the same manner of others. Now this\nis not to make the law speak of this or that man in particular, but\nprincipally to propose such things as are universal or general, and\nconsequently such as fall under them. For we may very well say, that\nit is legal to reward this man for having demeaned himself valiantly,\nand to punish that man for flying from his colors; because the law has\nvirtually\u2014though not in express terms and particularly yet in such\ngeneral ones as they are comprehended under,\u2014so determined of them.\nAs the law (if I may so speak) of physicians and masters of corporal\nexercises potentially comprehends particular and special things within\nthe general; so the law of Nature, determining first and principally\ngeneral matters, secondarily and consequently determines such as are\nparticular. Thus, general things being decreed by Fate, particular and\nindividual things may also in some sort be said to be so, because\nthey are so by consequence with the general. But perhaps some one of\nthose who more accurately examine and more subtly search into these\nthings may say, on the contrary, that particular and individual things\nprecede the composition of general things, and that the general exist\nonly for the particular, since that for which another thing is always\ngoes before that which is for it. Nevertheless, this is not the proper\nplace to treat of this difficulty, but it is to be remitted to another.\nHowever, that Fate comprehends not all things clearly and expressly,\nbut only such as are universal and general, let it pass for resolved\non at present, as well for what we have already said a little before,\nas for what we shall say hereafter. For that which is finite and\ndeterminate, agreeing properly with divine Providence, is seen more in\nuniversal and general things than in particular; such therefore is the\ndivine law, and also the civil; but infinity consists in particulars\nand individuals.\n\nAfter this we are to declare what this term \u201cconditionally\u201d means; for\nit is to be thought that Fate is also some such thing. That then is\nsaid to be conditionally, which is supposed to exist not of itself or\nabsolutely, but as really dependent upon and joined to another; which\nsignifies a suit and consequence. \u201cAnd this is the sanction of Adrastea\n(or an inevitable ordinance), that whatever soul, being an attendant\non God, shall see any thing of truth, shall till another revolution be\nexempt from punishment; and if it is always able to do the same, it\nshall never suffer any damage.\u201d[112] This is said both conditionally\nand also universally. Now that Fate is some such thing is clearly\nmanifest, as well from its substance as from its name. For it is called\n\u03b5\u1f31\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 as being \u03b5\u1f30\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7, that is, dependent and linked; and it is\na sanction or law, because things are therein ordained and disposed\nconsequentially, as is usual in civil government.\n\n5. We ought in the next place to consider and treat of\n\nmutual relation and affection; that is, what reference and respect Fate\nhas to divine Providence, what to Fortune, what also to \u201cthat which\nis in our power,\u201d what to contingent and other such like things; and\nfurthermore we are to determine, how far and in what it is true or\nfalse that all things happen and are done by and according to Fate.\nFor if the meaning is, that all things are comprehended and contained\nin Fate, it must be granted that this proposition is true; and if any\nwould farther have it so understood, that all things which are done\namongst men, on earth, and in heaven are placed in Fate, let this also\npass as granted for the present. But if (as the expression seems rather\nto imply) the \u201cbeing done according to Fate\u201d signifies not all things,\nbut only that which is an immediate consequent of Fate, then it must\nnot be said that all things happen and are done by and according to\nFate, though all things are so according to Fate as to be comprised in\nit. For all things that the law comprehends and of which it speaks are\nnot legal or according to law; for it comprehends treason, it treats\nof the cowardly running away from one\u2019s colors in time of battle,\nof adultery, and many other such like things, of which it cannot be\nsaid that any one of them is lawful. Neither indeed can I affirm of\nthe performing a valorous act in war, the killing of a tyrant, or the\ndoing any other virtuous deed, that it is legal; because that only is\nproper to be called legal, which is commanded by the law. Now if the\nlaw commands these things, how can they avoid being rebels against\nthe law and transgressors of it, who neither perform valiant feats of\narms, kill tyrants, nor do any other such remarkable acts of virtue?\nAnd if they are transgressors of the law, why is it not just they\nshould be punished? But if this is not reasonable, it must then be\nalso confessed that these things are not legal or according to law;\nbut that legal and according to law is only that which is particularly\nprescribed and expressly commanded by the law, in any action\nwhatsoever. In like manner, those things only are fatal and according\nto Fate, which are the consequences of causes preceding in the divine\ndisposition. So that Fate indeed comprehends all things which are done;\nyet many of those things that are comprehended in it, and almost all\nthat precede, should not (to speak properly) be pronounced to be fatal\nor according to Fate.\n\n6. These things being so, we are next in order to show, how \u201cthat\nwhich is in our power\u201d (or free will), Fortune, possible, contingent,\nand other like things which are placed among the antecedent causes,\ncan consist with Fate, and Fate with them; for Fate, as it seems,\ncomprehends all things, and yet all these things will not happen by\nnecessity, but every one of them according to the principle of its\nnature. Now the nature of the possible is to presubsist, as the genus,\nand to go before the contingent; and the contingent, as the matter and\nsubject, is to be presupposed to free will; and our free will ought as\na master to make use of the contingent; and Fortune comes in by the\nside of free will, through the property of the contingent of inclining\nto either part. Now you will more easily apprehend what has been said,\nif you shall consider that every thing which is generated, and the\ngeneration itself, is not done without a generative faculty or power,\nand the power is not without a substance. As for example, neither the\ngeneration of man, nor that which is generated, is without a power;\nbut this power is about man, and man himself is the substance. Now\nthe power or faculty is between the substance, which is the powerful,\nand the generation and the thing generated, which are both possibles.\nThere being then these three things, the power, the powerful, and the\npossible; before the power can exist, the powerful must of necessity\nbe presupposed as its subject, and the power must also necessarily\nsubsist before the possible. By this deduction then may in some measure\nbe understood what is meant by possible; which may be grossly defined\nas \u201cthat which power is able to produce;\u201d or yet more exactly, if to\nthis same there be added, \u201cprovided there be nothing from without to\nhinder or obstruct it.\u201d Now of possible things there are some which\ncan never be hindered, as are those in heaven, to wit, the rising and\nsetting of the stars, and the like to these; but others may indeed be\nhindered, as are the most part of human things, and many also of those\nwhich are done in the air. The first, as being done by necessity, are\ncalled necessary; the others, which may fall one way or other, are\ncalled contingent; and they may both thus be described. The necessary\npossible is that whose contrary is impossible; and the contingent\npossible is that whose contrary is also possible. For that the sun\nshould set is a thing both necessary and possible, forasmuch as it is\ncontrary to this that the sun should not set, which is impossible;\nbut that, when the sun is set, there should be rain or not rain, both\nthe one and the other is possible and contingent. And then again of\nthings contingent, some happen oftener, others rarely and not so often,\nothers fall out equally or indifferently, as well the one way as the\nother, even as it happens. Now it is manifest that those are contrary\nto one another,\u2014to wit, those which fall out oftener and those which\nhappen but seldom,\u2014and they both for the most part depend on Nature;\nbut that which happens equally, as much one way as another, depends on\nourselves. For that under the Dog it should be either hot or cold, the\none oftener, the other seldomer, are both things subject to Nature; but\nto walk and not to walk, and all such things of which both the one and\nthe other are submitted to the free will of man, are said to be in us\nand our election; but rather more generally to be in us. For there are\ntwo sorts of this \u201cbeing in our power;\u201d the one of which proceeds from\nsome sudden passion and motion of the mind, as from anger or pleasure;\nthe other from the discourse and judgment of reason, which may properly\nbe said to be in our election. And some reason there is to believe that\nthis possible and contingent is the same thing with that which is said\nto be in us and according to our free will, although differently named.\nFor in respect to the future, it is styled possible and contingent; and\nin respect of the present, it is named \u201cin our power\u201d and \u201cin our free\nwill.\u201d So that these things may thus be defined: The contingent is that\nwhich is itself\u2014as well as its contrary\u2014possible; and \u201cthat which is in\nour power\u201d is one part of the contingent, to wit, that which now takes\nplace according to our will. Thus have we in a manner declared, that\nthe possible in the order of Nature precedes the contingent, and that\nthe contingent subsists before free will; as also what each of them\nis, whence they are so named, and what are the qualities adjoined or\nappertaining to them.\n\n7. It now remains, that we treat of Fortune and casual adventure, and\nwhatever else is to be considered with them. It is therefore certain\nthat Fortune is a cause. Now of causes, some are causes by themselves,\nand others by accident. Thus for example, the proper cause by itself\nof an house or a ship is the art of the mason, the carpenter, or the\nshipwright; but causes by accident are music, geometry, and whatever\nelse may happen to be joined with the art of building houses or ships,\nin respect either of the body, the soul, or any exterior thing. Whence\nit appears, that the cause by itself must needs be determinate and one;\nbut the causes by accident are never one and the same, but infinite and\nundetermined. For many\u2014nay, infinite\u2014accidents, wholly different one\nfrom the other, may be in one and the same subject. Now the cause by\naccident, when it is found in a thing which not merely is done for some\nend but has in it free will and election, is then called Fortune; as is\nthe finding a treasure while one is digging a hole to plant a tree, or\nthe doing or suffering some extraordinary thing whilst one is flying,\nfollowing, or otherwise walking, or only turning about, provided it be\nnot for the sake of that which happens, but for some other intention.\nHence it is, that some of the ancients have declared Fortune to be\na cause unknown, that cannot be foreseen by the human reason. But\naccording to the Platonics, who have approached yet nearer to the true\nreason of it, it is thus defined: Fortune is a cause by accident,\nin those things which are done for some end, and which are of our\nelection. And afterwards they add, that it is unforeseen and unknown\nto the human reason; although that which is rare and strange appears\nalso by the same means to be in this kind of cause by accident. But\nwhat this is, if it is not sufficiently evidenced by the oppositions\nand disputations made against it, will at least most clearly be seen by\nwhat is written in Plato\u2019s Phaedo, where you will find these words:\n\nPHAED. Have you not heard how and in what manner the judgment passed?\nECH. Yes indeed; for there came one and told us of it. At which we\nwondered very much that, the judgment having been given long before, it\nseems that he died a great while after. And what, Phaedo, might be the\ncause of it? PHAED. It was a fortune which happened to him, Echecrates.\nFor it chanced that, the day before the judgment, the stern of the\ngalley which the Athenians send every year to the isle of Delos was\ncrowned.[113]\n\nIn which discourse it is to be observed, that the expression _happened\nto him_ is not simply to be understood by _was done_ or _came to pass_,\nbut it much rather regards what befell him through the concurrence of\nmany causes together, one being done with regard to another. For the\npriest crowned the ship and adorned it with garlands for another end\nand intention, and not for the sake of Socrates; and the judges also\nhad for some other cause condemned him. But the event was strange,\nand of such a nature that it might seem to have been effected by the\nprovidence of some human creature, or rather of some superior powers.\nAnd so much may suffice to show with what Fortune must of necessity\nsubsist, and that there must be first some subject of such things as\nare in our free will: its effect is, moreover, like itself called\nFortune.\n\nBut chance or casual adventure is of a larger extent than Fortune;\nwhich it comprehends, and also several other things which may of their\nown nature happen sometimes one way, sometimes another. And this, as\nit appears by the derivation of its name, which is in Greek \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd,\n_chance_, is that which happens of itself, when that which is ordinary\nhappens not, but another thing in its place; such as cold in the\ndog-days seems to be; for it is sometimes then cold.... Once for all,\nas \u201cthat which is in our power\u201d is a part of the contingent, so Fortune\nis a part of chance or casual adventure; and both the two events are\nconjoined and dependent on the one and the other, to wit, chance on\ncontingent, and Fortune on \u201cthat which is in our power,\u201d\u2014and yet not on\nall, but on what is in our election, as we have already said. Wherefore\nchance is common to things inanimate, as well as to those which are\nanimated; whereas Fortune is proper to man only, who has his actions\nvoluntary. And an argument of this is, that to be fortunate and to be\nhappy are thought to be one and the same thing. Now happiness is a\ncertain well-doing, and well-doing is proper only to man, and to him\nperfect.\n\n8. These then are the things which are comprised in Fate, to wit,\ncontingent, possible, election, \u201cthat which is in our power,\u201d Fortune,\nchance, and their adjuncts, as are the things signified by the words\n_perhaps_ and _peradventure_; all which indeed are contained in Fate,\nyet none of them is fatal. It now remains, that we discourse of divine\nProvidence, and show how it comprehends even Fate itself.\n\n9. The supreme therefore and first Providence is the understanding\nor (if you had rather) the will of the first and sovereign God,\ndoing good to every thing that is in the world, by which all divine\nthings have universally and throughout been most excellently and most\nwisely ordained and disposed. The second Providence is that of the\nsecond Gods, who go through the heaven, by which temporal and mortal\nthings are orderly and regularly generated, and which pertains to the\ncontinuation and preservation of every kind. The third may probably\nbe called the Providence and procuration of the Daemons, which, being\nplaced on the earth, are the guardians and overseers of human actions.\nThis threefold Providence therefore being seen, of which the first and\nsupreme is chiefly and principally so named, we shall not be afraid to\nsay, although we may in this seem to contradict the sentiments of some\nphilosophers, that all things are done by Fate and by Providence, but\nnot also by Nature. But some are done according to Providence,\u2014these\naccording to one, those according to another,\u2014and some according to\nFate; and Fate is altogether according to Providence, while Providence\nis in no wise according to Fate. But let this discourse be understood\nof the first and supreme Providence. Now that which is done according\nto another, whatever it is, is always posterior to that according to\nwhich it is done; as that which is according to the law is after the\nlaw, and that which is according to Nature is after Nature, so that\nwhich is according to Fate is after Fate, and must consequently be more\nnew and modern. Wherefore supreme Providence is the most ancient of\nall things, except him whose will or understanding it is, to wit, the\nsovereign author, maker, and father of all things. \u201cLet us therefore,\u201d\nsays Timaeus, \u201cdiscourse for what cause the Creator made and framed\nthis machine of the universe. He was good, and in him that is good\nthere can never be imprinted or engendered any envy against any thing.\nBeing therefore wholly free from this, he desired that all things\nshould, as far as it is possible, resemble himself. He therefore,\nwho admits this to have been chiefly the principal original of the\ngeneration and creation of the world, as it has been delivered to us by\nwise men, receives that which is most right. For God, who desired that\nall things should be good, and nothing, as far as possibly might be,\nevil, taking thus all that was visible,\u2014restless as it was, and moving\nrashly and confusedly,\u2014reduced it from disorder to order, esteeming\nthe one to be altogether better than the other. For it neither was\nnor is convenient for him who is in all perfection good, to make any\nthing that should not be very excellent and beautiful.\u201d[114] This,\ntherefore, and all that follows, even to his disputation concerning\nhuman souls, is to be understood of the first Providence, which in the\nbeginning constituted all things. Afterwards he speaks thus: \u201cHaving\nframed the universe, he ordained souls equal in number to the stars,\nand distributed to each of them one; and having set them, as it were,\nin a chariot, showed the nature of the universe, and appointed them the\nlaws of Fate.\u201d[115] Who then will not believe, that by these words he\nexpressly and manifestly declares Fate to be, as it were, a foundation\nand political constitution of laws, fitted for the souls of men? Of\nwhich he afterwards renders the cause.\n\nAs for the second Providence, he thus in a manner explains it, saying:\n\u201cHaving prescribed them all these laws to the end that, if there should\nafterwards happen any fault, he might be exempt from being the cause of\nany of their evil, he dispersed some of them upon the earth, some into\nthe moon, and some into the other instruments of time. And after this\ndispersion, he gave in charge to the young Gods the making of human\nbodies, and the making up and adding whatever was wanting and deficient\nin human souls; and after they had perfected whatever is adherent and\nconsequent to this, they should rule and govern, in the best manner\nthey possibly could, this mortal creature, so far as it should not be\nthe cause of its own evils.\u201d[116] For by these words, \u201cthat he might\nbe exempt from being the cause of any of their evil,\u201d he most clearly\nsignifies the cause of Fate; and the order and office of the young\nGods manifests the second Providence; and it seems also in some sort\nto have touched a little upon the third, if he therefore established\nlaws and ordinances that he might be exempt from being the cause of any\nof their evil. For God, who is free from all evil, has no need of laws\nor Fate; but every one of these petty Gods, drawn on by the providence\nof him who has engendered them, performs what belongs to his office.\nNow that this is true and agreeable to the opinion of Plato, these\nwords of the lawgiver, spoken by him in his Book of Laws, seems to me\nto give sufficient testimony: \u201cIf there were any man so sufficient by\nNature, being by divine Fortune happily engendered and born, that he\ncould comprehend this, he would have no need of laws to command him.\nFor there is not any law or ordinance more worthy and powerful than\nknowledge; nor is it fitting that Mind, provided it be truly and really\nfree by Nature, should be a subject or slave to any one, but it ought\nto command all.\u201d[117]\n\n10. I therefore do for mine own part thus understand and interpret\nthis sentence of Plato. There being a threefold Providence, the first,\nas having engendered Fate, does in some sort comprehend it; the second,\nhaving been engendered with Fate, is with it totally comprehended and\nembraced by the first; the third, as having been engendered after Fate,\nis comprehended by it in the same manner as are free will and Fortune,\nas we have already said. \u201cFor they whom the assistance of a Daemon\u2019s\npower does aid in their intercourse with me\u201d says Socrates, declaring\nto Theages what is the almost inevitable ordinance of Adrastea\n\u201care those whom you also mean; for they grow and come forward with\nspeed.\u201d[118] In which words, what he says of a Daemon\u2019s aiding some\nis to be ascribed to the third Providence, and the growing and coming\nforward with speed, to Fate. In brief, it is not obscure or doubtful\nbut that this also is a kind of Fate. And perhaps it may be found much\nmore probable that the second Providence is also comprehended under\nFate, and indeed all things that are done; since Fate, as a substance,\nhas been rightly divided by us into three parts, and the fable of the\nchain comprehends the revolutions of the heavens in the number and\nrank of those things which happen conditionally. But concerning these\nthings I will not much contend, to wit, whether they should be called\nconditional, or rather conjoined with Fate, the precedent cause and\ncommander of Fate being also fatal.\n\n11. Our opinion then, to speak compendiously, is such. But the contrary\nsentiment does not only include all things in Fate, but affirms them\nall to be done by and according to Fate. It accords indeed in all\nthings to the other (the Stoic) doctrine; and that which accords to\nit, \u2019tis clear, is the same thing with it. In this discourse therefore\nwe have first spoken of the contingent; secondly, of \u201cthat which is\nin our power;\u201d thirdly, of Fortune and chance, and whatever depends on\nthem; fourthly, of praise, blame, and whatever depends on them; the\nfifth and last of all may be said to be prayers to the Gods, with their\nservices and ceremonies.\n\nFor the rest, as to those which are called idle and reaping arguments,\nand that which is named the argument against destiny, they are indeed\nbut vain subtleties and captious sophisms, according to this discourse.\nBut according to the contrary opinion, the first and principal\nconclusion seems to be, that there is nothing done without a cause, but\nthat all things depend upon antecedent causes; the second, that the\nworld is governed by Nature, and that it conspires, consents, and is\ncompatible with itself; the third seems rather to be testimonies,\u2014of\nwhich the first is divination, approved by all sorts of people, as\nbeing truly in God; the second is the equanimity and patience of wise\nmen, who take mildly and bear patiently whatever befalls, as happening\nby divine ordinance and as it ought; the third is the speech so common\nand usual in every one\u2019s mouth, to wit, that every proposition is true\nor false. Thus have we contracted this discourse into a small number of\nshort articles, that we might in few words comprehend the whole matter\nof Fate; into which a scrutiny ought to be made, and the reasons of\nboth opinions to be weighed with a most exact balance. But we shall\nhereafter come to discuss particulars.\n\n\n\n\nCONCERNING THE FIRST PRINCIPLE OF COLD.\n\n\n1. Is there then, Favorinus, any first or principal power or existence\nof cold, as fire is the principle of heat, by the presence and\nimparting of which all other things of the same nature become cold? Or\nrather is not cold the privation of heat, as they say darkness is the\nprivation of light, and rest the privation of motion? In regard that\ncold seems to be firm and stable, and heat always in motion; and for\nthat the refrigeration of hot things is not caused by the presence of\nany active power, but by the departure of the heat. For we find the\nheat go off in great quantity, and then that which remains grows cold.\nThus the vapor which boiling water sends forth ceases also when the\nheat is gone. Therefore refrigeration, expelling the heat, diminishes\nthe quantity, while nothing supplies the place of it.\n\n2. First, we might question this way of arguing, as being that which\nwould abolish several manifest faculties, as being neither qualities\nnor habits, but the privations of habits and qualities; so as to\nmake ponderosity the privation of levity, hardness the privation of\nsoftness, black of white, bitter of sweet, and so with other things\nwhich are naturally opposed to each other in their power and not as a\nprivation to a habit. Or else for this reason, because all privation\nis a thing altogether sluggish and without action, as blindness,\ndeafness, silence, and death; for they are the departure of forms, and\nthe utter defacings of substances, not being natures nor substances of\nthemselves; but cold, wherever it resides, causes no less affections\nand alterations in bodies than heat. For many things are congealed by\ncold, many things thereby condensed. So that whatever is solid in it\nand difficult to be moved cannot be said to be sluggish and void of\naction, but firm and ponderous, as being supported by its own strength,\nwhich is endued with a power to preserve it in its proper station.\nWherefore privation is the deficiency and departure of the opposite\npower, but many things are subject to be cold, though abounding with\nheat within themselves. And there are some things which cold the more\ncondenses and consolidates the hotter they are, as iron quenched in\nwater. The Stoics also affirm, that the spirit which is in the bodies\nof infants is quickened by refrigeration, and changing its Nature,\nturns to a soul. But this is a thing much to be disputed. Neither is it\nrational to believe that cold, which is the productive agent in many\nother things, can be a privation.\n\n3. Besides, no privation is capable of more and less. Neither can\nany man say, that one among those that cannot see is more blind than\nanother, or that one among those that cannot speak is more silent than\nanother, or that any thing is more dead than another among those things\nthat never had life. But in cold things there is more and less, and\nexcess and diminution to several degrees; in a word, there is both\nintensity and remission as well as in hot things; because the matter\nsuffers in some things more violently, in others more languidly, and\ntherefore some things are hotter, some things colder than others,\naccording to the nature of the matter. For there is no mixture of habit\nwith privation. Neither does any power admit of privation opposite to\nit, nor associate with it in the same subject, but it withstands it\naltogether. Hot things allow themselves to be mixed with cold things\nto a certain degree, as black with white, heavy with light, and sour\nwith sweet,\u2014this community and harmony of colors, sounds, medicaments,\nand sauces generating several tastes and pleasures grateful to the\nsenses. But the opposition of privation and habit is an antipathy never\nto be reconciled; the being of the one enforcing the destruction of\nthe other. Which destruction, if it fall out seasonably, according to\nthe opposition of contrary powers, the arts make great use of, but\nchiefly Nature, not only in her other creations, but especially in the\nalterations of the air, and in all other things of which the Deity\nbeing the adorner and dispenser obtains the attribute of harmonical and\nmusical. Not that those attributes are given him for the disposal of\ndeep and shrill, black and white, so as to make them agree together;\nbut for his governing in the world the sympathies and antipathies of\ncold and heat in such a manner that they may unite and separate again,\nand for reducing both to a decent order, by taking that which we called\n\u201cthe over-much\u201d from both.\n\n4. Then again, we find that there is the same sense and feeling of\ncold as of heat; but privation is neither to be seen, heard, or felt,\nneither is it known to any of the other senses. For the object of sense\nis substance; but where no substance appears, there we understand\nprivation to be,\u2014which is a negation of substance, as blindness of\nsight, silence of voice, and vacuity of corporeal substance. For\nthere is no sense or perception of vacuity by feeling; but where\nthere is no body to be felt, there a vacuity is implied. Neither do\nwe hear silence; but where we do not hear any thing at all, there we\nimply silence. In like manner we have no perception of blindness,\nnakedness, or being unarmed; but we know them from the negation of our\nsense. Therefore if cold were a privation of heat, there would be no\nbeing sensible of cold; but only where heat ceased to be, there cold\nwould be implied. But if, as heat is perceptible by the warmth and\nlaxative softness of the flesh, so cold is no less perceptible by the\ncontraction and condensation of it, it is from thence apparent, that\nthere is some peculiar original and fountain of cold as well as heat.\n\n5. Further then, privation of every kind is something single and\nsimply particular; but in substances there are several differences and\nefficacies. For silence is a thing but of one sort; but of sounds there\nare great variety, sometimes molesting, sometimes delightful to the\nsense. There are also the same differences in colors and figures, which\nvary as they occur to the senses. But that which is not to be felt,\nwhich is without color and void of quality, can never be distinguished,\nbut is always like itself.\n\n6. Is cold therefore to be numbered among those privations that are\nnot distinguished in their action? Rather the contrary, in regard that\npleasures very great and beneficial to our bodies arise from cold\nthings; as no less terrible mischiefs, pains, and stupefaction on the\nother side; which the heat does not always avoid and give way to, but\nmany times enclosed within the body, withstands and opposes. Which\ncontention of theirs is called quivering and shaking, at what time, if\nthe cold overcome the heat, thence proceed numbness and stiffness of\nthe limbs; but if the cold be vanquished by the heat, there follow a\npleasing warmth and opening of the skin, which Homer expresses by the\nword \u1f30\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. These things are past dispute; and chiefly by these\npassive qualities it is, that we find cold to be opposite to heat, as\nsubstance to substance, or passive quality to passive quality, not as\nnegation or privation; neither is it the destruction or abolishing\nof hot, but a kind of nature and power tending to its destruction.\nOtherwise we should exempt the winter out of the seasons, and the north\nwinds out of the number of the winds, as being privations of the warmer\nseasons and the southern gales, and not having any proper original.\n\n7. Now in regard there are four first bodies in the universe, which, by\nreason of their number, their being uncompounded, and their efficacy,\nare allowed for the most part to be the principles and beginnings of\nall other,\u2014that is to say, fire and water, air and earth,\u2014is there not\nthe same necessity that there should be as many first and uncompounded\nqualities? And what are they but heat and cold, drought and moisture,\nby virtue of which it comes to pass that all the principles act and\nsuffer? Thus, as there are in grammar lengthenings and shortenings\nof sounds, in music, deep and acute sounds, though not one of them\nis the privation of the other; we must leave the dry opposed to the\nmoist principles, and the hot to the cold, if we intend to have the\neffects answerable to reason and what is visible in Nature. Unless,\nas it was the opinion of the ancient Anaximenes, we will not allow\neither cold or hot to be in substance, but only to be common passive\nqualities accompanying the alterations of the matter. For he affirms\nthe contraction and condensation of the matter to be cold; but the\nrarefication and laxation of it (for by that word he calls it) to be\nhot. Whence it may not be improperly said, that a man breathes hot and\ncold at once. For the breath grows cold being compressed and thickened\nby the lips, but coming out of the open mouth it is hot, as being\nrarefied by that emission. But for this, Aristotle convinces the same\nperson of ignorance; for that when we blow with the mouth open, we blow\nhot from our own bodies; but when we blow with compressed lips, we do\nnot breathe forth the air from ourselves, but the air that is before\nour mouths, being cold, is thrust forward, and lights upon what is next\nit.\n\n8. But if we must grant that both heat and cold are substances, let us\nproceed a little farther in our discourse, and enquire what sort of\nsubstance is cold, and what is its first principle and nature.\n\nThey then who affirm that there are certain irregular triangular\nfigures in our body, and tell us also that shuddering, trembling, and\nquivering, and whatever else we suffer of the same nature, proceed\nfrom the roughness of those figures, if they mistake in the parts,\nnevertheless derive the beginning from whence they ought. For we ought\nto begin the question\u2014as it were from Vesta\u2014from the substance of all\nthings. By which it chiefly appears wherein a philosopher differs from\na physician, a husbandman, or a piper. For it is sufficient for these\nto contemplate the last causes. For if the consideration of the nearest\ncauses of the affection go no farther than to find that the cause of a\nfever is intenseness of heat, or the lighting of some humor where it\nought not to be, that the cause of blasting is the scorching heat of\nthe sun after rain, and that the cause why pipes give a bass sound is\nthe inclination of the pipes or the bringing them near one to another;\nthis is enough for the artist to know in reference to his business. But\nwhen a philosopher for contemplation\u2019s sake scrutinizes into the truth,\nthe knowledge of remote causes is not the end but the beginning of his\nproceeding in search of the first and ultimate causes. Wherefore Plato\nand Democritus, enquiring after the cause of heat and gravity, did\nnot stop at the consideration of earth and fire, but bringing things\nperceptible to sense to beginnings intelligible only by the mind, they\nwent on even to the smallest, as it were the seeds of what they sought\nfor.\n\n9. But it is much the better way for us in the first place to move\nforward upon those things which are perceptible to sense, wherein\nEmpedocles, Strato, and the Stoics placed the substances of active\nqualities; the Stoics ascribing primitive cold to the air, Empedocles\nand Strato to the water; and perhaps there might be somebody else who\nmight affirm the earth to be the substance of cold. But first let us\nconsider the opinions of those already named.\n\nSeeing then that fire is both hot and bright, therefore there must\nbe something opposite to fire which is cold and dark. For as dark is\nopposite to light, so is cold to hot. Besides, as dark confounds the\nsight, so cold confounds the feeling. But heat diffuses the sense of\nfeeling, as light diffuses the sense of seeing. Therefore that which is\nfirst dark in nature is first cold. Now that the air is first dark, was\nnot unknown to the poets; for that they call the air darkness:\n\n    The thickened air the fleet with darkness covered,\n    Nor could the moonlight be from heaven discovered.[119]\n\nAnd again:\n\n    Then darkness scattered and the fog dispelled,\n    The sun brake forth, and all the fight beheld.[120]\n\nThey also call the air, when it is without light \u03ba\u03bd\u03ad\u03c6\u03b1\u03c2, as being as\nit were \u03ba\u03b5\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 (_void of light_.) The air collected and condensed\ninto a cloud is called \u03bd\u03ad\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2, from its negation of light (\u03bd\u03ae-\u03c6\u03ac\u03bf\u03c2). The\nwords also \u1f00\u03c7\u03bb\u03cd\u03c2 and \u1f41\u03bc\u03af\u03c7\u03bb\u03b7 (_mist_), and whatever else restrains the\nperception of light from the sense, are but distinctions of the air;\ninsomuch that the same part of it which is invisible and without color\n(\u1f00\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ad\u03c2 and \u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd) is called Hades and Acheron. So that, as the air\ngrows dark when the splendor of it fails, in like manner when heat\nfails, that which is left is no more than cold air, which by reason of\nits coldness is called Tartarus. And this Hesiod makes manifest, when\nhe calls it \u03a4\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f20\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 (or _cloudy Tartarus_); and when a man\nquakes and shivers for cold, he is said to tartarize. And so much for\nthis.\n\n10. But in regard corruption is the alteration of those things that\nare corrupted into that which is contrary to every one of them, let\nus consider whether it be a true saying, \u201cThe death of fire is the\ngeneration of air.\u201d For fire dies like a living creature, being\nquenched by force or going out of its own accord. Now quenching makes\nthe alteration of it into air more conspicuous. For smoke is a sort\nof air, or, according to Pindar, a fuliginous vapor and exhalation,\n\u201clashing the air with steaming smoke.\u201d[121] On the other side, when\nfire goes out for want of fuel, as in candles, you shall observe a\nthick and cloudy air ascending from the top of them. Moreover, the\nvapor steaming from our bodies upon the pouring of cold water after\nhot bathing or sweating sufficiently declares the alteration of\nextinguished heat into air, as being naturally opposite to air; whence\nit follows that the air was at first dark and cold.\n\n11. Then again, congelation, which is the most forcible and violent of\nall things that befall our bodies by reason of cold, is the affection\nof water, but the action of air. For water of itself is easily\ndiffused, loose in its parts, and not readily congealed together; but\nit is thickened and compressed by the air, by reason of the coldness of\nit. Which is the reason of the proverb:\n\n    But if the southern wind provoke the north,\n    Snow straight will cover all the earth.\n\nFor the southern wind preparing the moisture as matter, presently the\nnorth wind receives and congeals it. And this is manifest from the\nconsideration of snow; for ere it falls, you shall observe a thin and\nsharp cold air breathing before it. Aristotle also tells us, that\nwhetstones of lead [?] will melt and run in the winter through excess\nof freezing cold, merely upon the setting of the water near them. For\nit is probable that the air compresses and gripes the bodies so close\ntogether, that at length it breaks and crumbles them in pieces.\n\n12. And therefore water drawn from a fountain soonest congeals; for\nthe more of cold in the air overcomes the less of cold in the water.\nThus if a man takes cold water out of a well and puts it into a vessel,\nand then lets the vessel down again into the well, so that it may not\ntouch the water but hang for some time in the air, the water will be\nmuch colder. Whence it is apparent, that the coldness of the water is\nnot the first cause of coldness, but the coldness of the air. For you\ndo not find that any of your great rivers are ever thoroughly frozen,\nby reason of their depth. For the air doth not pierce through the\nwhole; only so much as it can seize and embrace with its cold quality\ngenerally freezes, and no more. Therefore the barbarians never cross\nover frozen rivers till they have sent a fox before to try the depth\nof the ice. For if the ice be not very thick, but only superficial,\nthe fox, perceiving it by the noise of the water floating underneath,\nreturns. And some there are that melt the ice with hot water to make\nway for their lines, when they go to catch fish in winter. So that\nnothing suffers from cold in the depth of the water. Nevertheless,\nso great has been the alteration of the upper parts of the water by\ncongelation, that several vessels riding in the stream have been\nbruised and broken by the forcible compressure and griping of the\ncongelation; as we have heard from them who lately had their winter\nquarters with Caesar upon the Danube. And indeed, what happens to\nourselves is sufficient to demonstrate the truth of this. For after hot\nbathings and sweatings, we are most sensible of cold, at what time,\nour bodies being open and the skin relaxed, we give a freer entrance\nto the cold together with the ambient air. And after the very same\nmanner the water itself suffers. For it sooner freezes if it be first\nheated, as being thereby rendered more easy for the air to work upon.\nAnd therefore they who lade out scalding water, and let it fall again\nfrom a good height in the air, do it to no other purpose than to mix it\nwith a great deal of air. And therefore, Favorinus, the arguments that\nattribute the first power of cold to the air are grounded upon these\nprobabilities.\n\n13. Those that allow it to water lean upon principles of the same\nnature. And this was intimated by Empedocles, where he says:\n\n    Behold the sun, how warm he is,\n      And shining everywhere;\n    But rain and tempests cold and dark\n      With horror fill the air.\n\nAnd thus opposing cold to heat, and dark to bright, he gives us to\nunderstand that black and cold are both of the same substance, as also\nare bright and hot. Now that black is proper to the water and not to\nthe air, sense itself bears witness, nothing being darkened by the\nair, all things being clouded and blackened by water. So that if you\nthrow the whitest wool that is, or a white garment into the water, it\ncomes out black, and so remains, till the moisture be dried up again\nby the heat, or squeezed forth by presses or weights. Also when the\nground is watered, the places that receive the drops grow black, the\nrest retaining their former color. And therefore the deepest waters,\nby reason of their quantity, always appear blackest, but the parts\nwhich are next the air afford a lovely and smiling brightness. But\nof all liquids, oil is the most transparent, because of the great\nquantity of air that is in it. And of this, the lightness of it is an\nunquestionable proof; the reason why it swims above all things, as\ncarried upward by the air. Being poured forth upon the waves, it will\ncause calmness upon the sea, not because it is so slippery that the\nwinds can have no power over it, as Aristotle thought, but because the\nwaves will fall and sink when smitten by any moist body. And this is\nalso peculiar to oil, that it shines and causes a transparency at the\nbottom of the water, while the watery humors are dispersed by the air.\nFor being spurted out of the mouth into the sea, not only by those\nthat sail in the night, but also by those that dive for sponges to the\nbottom of the sea, it will cast a light in the water. Water therefore\nhas more of blackness than the air, but less of cold. Oil therefore,\npartaking more of air than most liquid things, is least cold, nor will\nit easily or suddenly freeze; for the air which is mixed with it will\nnot suffer the congelation to grow hard. And therefore, as for needles,\nsteel buckles, and such sort of small iron and steel wares, they never\nquench them in water but in oil, fearing lest the over-coldness of the\nwater should make them too brittle. And indeed the truth is more truly\nenquired into from the consideration of these experiments, than those\nof colors. For hail, snow, and ice, as they are most transparent, so\nare most cold; and pitch, as it is hotter, so it is blacker and darker\nthan honey.\n\n14. This makes me admire at those who affirm the air to be cold because\nit is dark and obscure, unless it be because they find others affirming\nit to be hot because it is light. For dark is not so proper and\nfamiliar to cold, as heavy and stable; for many things that are void\nof heat partake of splendor and light, but there is nothing cold that\nis light, nimble, or apt to ascend upward. Even the clouds themselves,\nwhile they preserve the nature of air tower aloft in the sky; but\nchanging into moisture, they presently fall down, and having admitted\ncoldness, they lose their lightness as well as their heat. And so\non the other side, having regained their heat, they again return to\nmotion, their substance being carried upward as soon as it is changed\ninto air.\n\nNeither is the argument produced from corruption true. For nothing\nthat perishes is corrupted _into_ what is opposite, but _by_ what\nis opposite to it; as fire extinguished by water changes into air.\nAnd therefore Aeschylus spake not merely like a tragedian but like a\nphilosopher, when he said,\n\n    The water curb, that punishment of fire.\n\nIn like manner Homer opposed in battle Vulcan to the river, and Apollo\nto Neptune, more like a philosopher than a poet or mythologist. And\nArchilochus spoke not amiss of a woman whose thoughts were contrary to\nher words, when he said,\n\n    She, weaving subtle trains and sly vagaries,\n    Fire in one hand, in th\u2019 other water carries.\n\nAmong the Persians there were several customs of supplication, of\nwhich the chiefest, and that which would admit of no refusal, was when\nthe suppliant, taking fire in his hand and entering into a river,\nthreatened, if his supplications were denied, to throw the fire into\nthe water. But though his suit were granted him, yet he was punished\nfor threatening, as being against the law and contrary to Nature. And\nthis is a vulgar proverb in everybody\u2019s mouth, to mix fire with water,\nspoken of those that would attempt impossibilities; to show that water\nis an enemy to fire, and being extinguished thereby, is destroyed and\npunished by it,\u2014not by the air, which, upon the change and destruction\nof it, receives and entertains the substance of it. For if that into\nwhich the thing destroyed is changed be contrary to it, why does fire\nseem contrary to air more than water? For air changes into water by\ncondensation, but into fire by dissipation; as, on the other side,\nwater is turned into air by separation, into earth by condensation.\nWhich, in my opinion, happens by reason of the propriety and near\naffinity between both, not from any thing of contrariety and hostility\none to another. Others there are, that, which way soever they maintain\nit, spoil the argument. For it is most irrational to say that water is\ncongealed by the air, when they never saw the air congealed in their\nlives. For clouds, fogs, and mists are no congelations, but thickenings\nand condensations of the air moist and full of vapors; but a dry air\nvoid of moisture never undergoes refrigeration to such a degree. For\nthere are some mountains that never admit of a cloud, nor dew, nor\nmist, their tops being so high as to reach into an air that is pure and\nvoid of moisture. Whence it is manifest that it is the condensation and\nconsistency below, which contributes that cold and moisture to the air\nwhich is mixed with it.\n\n15. Now that great rivers never freeze downwards is but consentaneous\nto reason. For those parts which are frozen above transmit no\nexhalation outward; for this, being penned up within and forced\ndownward, affords heat to the moisture at the bottom. A clear\ndemonstration of which is this, that when the ice is dissolved, you\nmay observe a steam arising out of the water upwards in a very great\nquantity. And therefore the bodies of living creatures are warmest\nwithin in the winter, for that the heat is driven inward by the ambient\ncold. Now those upward exhalations and ascensions of the vapors deprive\nthe waters not only of their heat but of their coolness. And therefore\nthey that vehemently desire their drink to be cold never move the snow\nnor the moisture that is pressed out of it; for motion would deprive\nthem both of the virtue which is required from them.\n\nNow that this virtue is not the virtue of air, but of water, a man\nmay collect by reasoning thus from the beginning. First, it is not\nprobable that the air, which is next the sky, and touching the fiery\nsubstance is also touched by it, should be endued with a contrary\nvirtue; for otherwise it is not possible that the extremities of the\none should touch and be contiguous to the extremities of the other.\nNor is it agreeable to reason that Nature should constitute that which\nis corrupted next in order to that which corrupts, as if she were not\nthe author of community and harmony but of combat and contention.\nFor she makes use of contrary things in sustaining the universe; but\nshe does not use them pure and unmixed, nor so that they will be in\nhostility; but she uses such as have alternately a certain position and\norder which is not destructive, but which inclines them to communicate\nand co-operate one with another, and to effect a harmony between\nthe opposing qualities. And this is the nature of the air, being\nexpanded under the fire above the water, contingent and adhering to\nboth, neither hot in itself nor cold, but containing an intermixture\nand communion of hot and cold, harmlessly intermixed in herself; and\nlightly cherishing the contrary extremities.\n\n16. Therefore the air is of an equal temper in all places, but winter\nis not in all places alike nor equally cold; but some parts of the\nhabitable world are cold and moist, others hot and dry, not by chance,\nbut because there is but one substance of heat and dryness. For the\ngreatest part of Africa is hot and without water. But they that have\ntravelled Scythia, Thrace, and the Pontic regions report them to\nbe full of vast lakes, and large and deep rivers. And as for those\nregions lying between, those parts that join upon lakes and marshes\nare most cold by reason of the exhalations from the water. Posidonius\ntherefore, affirming the freshness and moistness of the air of marshes\nto be the cause of its cold, has no way disturbed the probability of\nour argument, but rather added to the strength of it; for the air\nwould not always be the colder the fresher it is, unless cold has its\noriginal from moisture. And therefore Homer much more truly shows us\nthe fountain of cold, when he says,\n\n    Chill from the river blows the wind\n    Before the coming morn.[122]\n\nThen again it many times happens that our sense deceives us. So that\nwhen we feel cold garments or cold wool, we believe we feel them to\nbe moist, by reason of the substance which is common to both, and of\ntheir natures which are coherent and familiar one with another. But in\nclimates where the cold is extreme, it oftentimes breaks and cracks\nboth pots and vessels, whether made of earth or brass,\u2014none empty, but\nall full, the cold giving force and might to the liquor within,\u2014which\nmade Theophrastus say, that the air breaks those vessels, making use of\nthe cold as of a hammer; whether more eloquently or more truly spoken,\nI leave you to judge. For then vessels full of pitch or milk should be\nmore subject to be broken by the air.\n\nBut water seems to be cold of itself, and that primitively too; for\nin respect of the coldness of it, it is opposite to the heat of the\nfire; as to drought in respect of its moisture, and to ponderosity in\nregard of its lightness. Lastly, fire is altogether of a dissipating\nand dividing nature; water, of a nature to fasten and contain, holding\nand joining together by virtue of its moisture. Which was the reason\nwhy Empedocles called fire \u201ca pernicious contention,\u201d but water a\n\u201ctenacious friendship.\u201d For the nourishment of fire is that which\nchanges into fire, and it changes that which is as it were of kin and\nfamiliar to it. What is contrary to it, as water, cannot be changed by\nit, or at least only with great difficulty. True it is, that as for\nitself, as I may so say, it cannot be burned; but as for green wood\nand wet straw, it overcomes them with much struggling, while the heat\nand cold contending together, by reason of their moisture and their\nnatural antipathy, produce only a dull flame, clouded with smoke, that\nmakes little progress upon the materials.\n\n17. Compare these arguments with theirs, and consider them well. But\nChrysippus, believing the air to be the primitive cold, because it is\ndark, makes mention only of those that say the water lies at farther\ndistance from the sky than the air. And being desirous to give some\nanswer to them, \u201cIf so,\u201d says he, \u201cwe may as well affirm the earth to\nbe primitively cold, because it is the farthest distant from the sky;\u201d\nrejecting that, as altogether improbable and absurd. But for my part, I\nam of opinion that there might be many probable and rational arguments\nbrought for the earth; beginning with that which Chrysippus chiefly\nmakes use of for the air. What is this? First, that it is dark. For\nif he, assuming these two contrarieties of faculties, believes that\nthe one follows the other of necessity, then there might be produced\na thousand oppositions and repugnances of the earth in respect of the\nsky, which would of necessity follow upon this which we have mentioned.\nFor it is not to be opposed only as heavy to light, or as that which\ntends downward to that which moves upward, or as slow and stable to\nswift and full of motion; but as that which is heaviest to that which\nis most thin, or lastly, as that which is immovable of itself to that\nwhich moves spontaneously, and as possessing the middle space to that\nwhich is in a perpetual circular motion. Would it not be absurd to\naver that the opposition of heat to cold is accompanied with so many\nand such remarkable contrarieties? But fire is bright, the earth is\ndark, nay, the very darkest and most void of light of all things. The\nair first of all participates of light, is soonest altered, and being\nreplenished with radiancy, diffuses the splendor of it far and near,\nand shows itself a vast body of light. For the sun rising, as one of\nthe dithyrambic authors writes,\n\n                            Presently doth fill\n    The spacious house of the air-prancing winds.\n\nFrom thence the descending air disposes a part of her brightness to\nthe sea and lakes, and the hidden depths of profound rivers laugh and\nsmile so far as the air penetrates into them. Only the earth of all\nbodies remains without light, and impenetrable to the beams of the sun\nand moon. But it is cherished and comforted by them, and suffers a\nsmall part of it to be warmed and softened by entrance of the heat. But\nthe solidness of it will not admit the brightness of light, only the\nsurface of it is enlightened; but the innermost parts of it are called\nby the names of Darkness, Chaos, and Hades; and Erebus is nothing else\nbut that same perpetual darkness and horror in the body of the earth.\nBesides, the mythologists tell us that Night was the daughter of the\nEarth; and the mathematicians show that it is the shadow of the earth\neclipsing the body of the sun. For the air is filled with darkness by\nthe earth, as with light by the sun; and that part of the air which is\nvoid of all light is that same length of the night which is caused by\nthe shadow of the earth. And therefore both men and many beasts make\nuse of the exterior air, and ramble in the dark, guided only by some\nfootsteps of light and certain effluxes of a dim twinkling that are\nscattered through it; but he that keeps house and shuts himself up in\nhis chamber, as being encompassed by the earth, remains altogether\nblind and without light. Also the hides and horns of beasts will not\nadmit of light by reason of their solidness; but being burnished and\nshaved, they become transparent, the air being intermixed with them.\nMoreover, I am of opinion that the earth is everywhere by the poets\nsaid to be black, by reason of the darkness of it and want of light.\nSo that the antithesis of light and darkness is much more remarkable in\nreference to the earth, than in respect of the air.\n\n18. But this is nothing to the question. For we have shown that there\nare many cold things which are bright and transparent, and many hot\nthings which are obscure and dark. But ponderosity, stability, density,\nand immutability are qualities more properly belonging to cold, of\nnone of which the air partakes, but of all of which the earth has a\nfar greater share than the water. And yet in all these things cold, by\nthe judgment of sense itself, appears to be hard, to cause hardness,\nand to make resistance. For Theophrastus tells us of fish that have\nbeen frozen by extremity of cold, when they have chanced to bounce\nashore, that their bodies have been broken and crumbled to pieces like\na vessel of glass or potter\u2019s clay. You yourself have heard at Delphi,\nhow that certain persons ascending to the top of Parnassus to succor\nthe Thyades that were overtaken with a violent storm of wind and hail,\ntheir coats were frozen so hard and into a substance so like wood, that\nbeing spread upon the ground they broke and crumbled to pieces. It also\nstiffens the nerves and deprives the tongue of motion, congealing the\nmoist and softer parts of the body.\n\n19. This being obvious to sight, let us consider the effect. Every\nfaculty, wherever it prevails, changes into itself whatever it\novercomes. Thus whatever is overcome by heat is set on fire; that\nwhich is vanquished by wind is changed into air. That which falls into\nwater becomes well moistened, unless quickly saved. Of necessity,\ntherefore, those things which are violently affected by cold must\nbe changed into the primitive cold. For freezing is an excess of\nrefrigeration; which congelation ends in alteration and petrifaction,\nwhen the cold, prevailing every way, congeals the liquid substance\nand presses forth the heat; so that the bottom of the earth is, as\nit were, a kind of congelation, and altogether ice. For there the\ncold inhabits simple and unmixed, and removed hard and rigid at the\ngreatest distance from the sky. But as for those things which are\nconspicuous, as rocks and precipices, Empedocles believes them to be\nthrust forth and supported by the fire that burns in the bottom of\nthe earth. Which appears the more, in regard that, wherever the heat\nis pressed forth and vanishes away, all those things are congealed or\nstiffened by the cold; and therefore congelations are called \u03c0\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\n(_stiffened_). And the extremities of many things where heat fails,\ngrowing black, make them look like brands when the fire is out. For\ncold congeals some things more, some things less; more especially such\nthings wherein it is primitively existent. For as, if it be the nature\nof hot to render light, that which is hottest is lightest; if of moist\nto soften, that which is moistest is softest; so if it be the nature\nof cold to congeal, of necessity that which is coldest must be most\ncongealed,\u2014that is to say the earth,\u2014and that which is most cold must\nbe that which is by nature and primitively cold, which is no more than\nwhat is apparent to sense. For mud is colder than water, and earth\nbeing thrown upon fire puts it out. Your smiths also, when their iron\nis melted and red hot, strew upon it the dust of marble to cool it and\nstop the running of it too fluidly. Dust also cools the bodies of the\nwrestlers, and dries up their sweat.\n\n20. To go no farther, what means our own yearly practice to alter our\nlodgings and habitations, while we remove in the winter so far as we\ncan into the upper parts of our buildings, but in the summer descend\nagain and seek convenient refuge in the lower edifices, sometimes\nenjoying ourselves under ground in the very arms of the earth? Do we\nnot do it, as being guided by our senses for coolness\u2019s sake to the\nearth, and thereby acknowledging that to be the seat of primitive\ncold? And certainly our coveting to live near the sea in winter may be\nthought to be a kind of flight from the earth, since we seem to forsake\nit, as far as we can, by reason of the nipping frosts, and run to\nencircle themselves with the air of the sea for warmth\u2019s sake; and then\nagain in the summer, by reason of the scorching heat, we desire the\nearth-born upland air, not because it is cold of itself, but because it\nhad its original and blossomed from the primitive natural cold, and is\nimbued with that power which is in the earth, as iron is imbued with\nthe virtue of the water wherein it is quenched. Then again, of river\nwaters we find those are the coldest that flow upon gravel and stones\nand fall down from mountains; and of well-waters, those which are in\nthe deepest wells. For with these the exterior air is no longer mixed,\nby reason of the depth of the wells, and the other arise out of the\npure and unmixed earth; like the river that falls from the mountain\nTaenarum, which they call the water of Styx, rising out of a rock with\na parsimonious spring, but so cold that no other vessel except the hoof\nof an ass will hold it; for all other sorts of vessels it breaks and\ncracks to pieces.\n\n21. The physicians also tell us that the nature of all sorts of earth\nis binding and restrictive; and they number up several sorts of metals\nwhich are made use of in physic by reason of their styptic and binding\nqualities. For the element of earth is fit neither to cut nor to move,\nneither has it any points, neither is it subject to be softened or\nmelted, but is firm and stable like a cube; and therefore it has both\nponderosity and coldness, and the faculty to thicken and condense moist\nthings; and it causes tremblings and quiverings in bodies by reason\nof its inequality; and if it get the better by the utter expulsion\nand extinguishing of the heat, it occasions a frozen and deadly habit\nof body. Therefore earth either does not consume by burning, or else\nburns with a very slow and difficult progress. But the air many times\ndarts forth flame from itself; and being once set on fire, it grows\nfluid and flashes out in lightning. Heat also feeds upon moisture; for\nit is not the solid part of the wood, but the moist and oily part, that\nis combustible; which being consumed, the solid and dry is left behind\nin the ashes. Neither do they arrive at their mark, who, pretending\nto burn the ashes also, sprinkle them with oil and grease; for when\nthe liquid is consumed, the earthy part remains, do what they can.\nTherefore, because the earth is not only of a nature not to be moved\nfrom its station, but also unalterable in its substance and always\nabiding in the habitation of the Gods, the ancients well called it\nHestia or Vesta (from _standing_), by reason of its immobility and\nconcretion; of which cold is the bond or ligament, as Archelaus the\nphilosopher termed it, which nothing is able to unloosen or soften, as\nnot being capable of heat and warmth.\n\nAs for those who say they have been sensible of the cold of air and\nwater, but never felt the earth so cold, they consider only the surface\nof the earth, which is a mixture of air, water, sun, and heat. They\nare no better than people who deny the aether to be naturally and\nprimitively hot, but believe it to be either scalding water or red hot\niron, because they feel and handle the one, but are not sensible of the\npure and celestial fire. In like manner, neither do they see the earth\nwhich lies concealed at the bottom, though that be what is chiefly to\nbe taken for the earth, separated from all other things. We may see\nsome token of this lower earth in these rocks here about us, which from\ntheir depths send forth a cold vapor so sharp and vehement that it is\nhard to be endured. They also that desire cool drink throw small flint\nstones into water. For it becomes denser and quicker to the taste,\nthrough the cold which is carried upward fresh and unmixed from the\nstones.\n\n22. Therefore it was the opinion of the ancient philosophers and\nlearned men, that terrestrial and celestial things were not to be mixed\ntogether, not so much out of a local consideration of uppermost and\nlowermost, in respect of place, but with a respect to the difference\nof faculties attributing hot and splendent, swift and light to the\nimmortal and sempiternal Nature, but believing dark and cold and slow\nto be the unhappy portion of the dead under the shackles of corruption.\nSince the body of a living creature, while it breathes and flourishes\n(as the poets say), enjoys both heat and life; but being deprived of\nthese, and only the terrestrial parts remaining, presently cold and\nstiffness take place, as if heat were naturally existent in every thing\nelse but only the earth.\n\n23. These things, dear Favorinus, compare with what has been said by\nothers; and if they neither come too short of probability nor too much\nexceed it, bid all their opinions farewell, as believing it much more\nbecoming a philosopher to pause in dubious matters, rather than over\nhastily to side with any one particular party.\n\n\n\n\nWHETHER WATER OR FIRE BE MOST USEFUL.\n\n\n1. \u201cWater is the best of things, but gold is like burning fire,\u201d says\nPindar[123]. Therefore he positively assigns the second place to fire;\nwith whom Hesiod agrees, where he says,\n\n    First of all Chaos being had.[124]\n\nFor most believe that by the word chaos he meant water, from \u03c7\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2,\nsignifying _diffusion_. But the balance of argument as to this point\nseems to be equal. For there are some who will have it that fire is the\nprinciple of all things, and that like sperm it begets all things out\nof itself, and resolves all things again by conflagration. Therefore,\nnot to mention the persons, let us consider the arguments on both\nsides, which are to us the most convincing.\n\n2. Now then, is not that the most useful to us, which in all places\nand always and most of all we stand in need of,\u2014like a piece of\nhousehold-stuff or a tool, nay, like a friend that is ready at all\nhours and seasons? But fire is not always useful; for sometimes it is a\nprejudice to us and we avoid it if we can. But water is useful, winter\nand summer, to the healthy and sick, night and day; neither indeed is\nthere any time but that a man has need of it. Therefore it is that\nthe dead are called _alibantes_, as being without moisture (\u03bb\u03b9\u03b2\u03ac\u03c2)\nand by that means deprived of life; and man may be without fire, but\nnever was any man without water. Besides, that which was existent from\nthe beginning and with the first creation of man must be thought more\nuseful than what was afterwards invented. From whence it is apparent,\nthat Nature bestowed the one upon us as a thing absolutely necessary,\nthe other fortune and art found out for superfluity of uses. Nor\nwas the time ever known when man lived without water, nor was it an\ninvention of any of the Gods or heroes; for it was present almost at\ntheir generation, and it made their creation possible. But the use of\nfire was a late invention of Prometheus, at what time life was without\nfire, but not without water. And that this is no poetical fiction is\ndemonstrable from this, that there are many sorts of people that live\nwithout fire, without houses, and without hearths, in the open air. And\nDiogenes the Cynic made no use of fire; so that after he had swallowed\na raw fish, \u201cThis hazard,\u201d said he, \u201cdo I run for your sakes.\u201d But\nwithout water no man ever thought it convenient or possible to live.\n\n3. But why do I so meanly confine my discourse to the nature of men,\nseeing there are many, nay, infinite sorts of creatures? The race of\nman is almost the only one that knows the use of fire; the others live\nand feed without fire. Indeed, beasts, birds, and creeping things live\nupon roots, fruits, and raw flesh, without fire; but without water\nneither fish nor fowl nor land animals can subsist. For all beasts that\nfeed upon flesh, of which there are some (as Aristotle reports) that\nnever drink, nevertheless support life and being merely by moisture. So\nthat of necessity that must be most profitable without which no sort of\nlife can subsist or endure.\n\n4. Let us therefore make a step from animals that eat to things that\nwe ourselves make use of, such are plants and fruits; of which some are\naltogether void of heat, others enjoy it but imperfectly and obscurely.\nBut moisture causes all things to germinate, increase, and bring\nforth. Why should I stand to reckon up wine and oil, milk and honey,\nand whatever else we reap and bring forth and see before our eyes,\nwhen wheat itself, which is looked upon as a dry nourishment, grows by\nalteration, putrefaction, and corruption of the moist matter?\n\n5. Then again, that is most useful which is no way detrimental. Now\nfire easily becomes most pernicious, but the nature of water is never\nprejudicial. In the next place, that is most useful which affords\nthe benefit which it brings with least expense, and without any\npreparation. But the benefit of fire requires cost and materials, and\ntherefore the rich make more use of it than the poor, and princes\nthan private persons; but water has that kindness for mankind, that\nit freely offers itself to all alike, a benefit perfect in itself,\nindigent of nothing, and wanting neither tools nor implements.\n\n6. Moreover, that which by augmentation loses its benefit is of least\nuse. Such is fire, which like a devouring beast ravages all before it,\nuseful rather by art and skilful moderation, than of its own nature.\nBut from water there is nothing to be feared. Furthermore, that is\nmost useful which may be joined with another. But fire will not admit\nof water, neither is it any way profitable by conjunction with it. But\nwater becomes profitable by joining with fire; and therefore hot waters\nare wholesome, and sensibly cure several diseases. Neither shall you\never find moist fire; but water both cold and hot is profitable for the\nbody of man.\n\n7. Then again, there being four elements, water produces a fifth out\nof itself, which is the sea, no less beneficial than the rest, as well\nfor commerce as for many other things. So that it may be said, this\nelement united and perfected our manner of living, which before was\nwild and unsociable, correcting it by mutual assistance, and creating\ncommunity of friendship by reciprocal exchanges of one good turn for\nanother. And as Heraclitus said, If there were no sun, it would be\nperpetual night; so may we say, If there were no sea, man would be the\nmost savage and shameless of all creature. But the sea brought the vine\nfrom India into Greece, and out of Greece transmitted the use of corn\nto foreign parts; from Phoenicia translated the knowledge of letters,\nthe memorials that prevent oblivion; furnished the world with wine and\nfruit, and prevented the greatest part of mankind from being illiterate\nand void of education. How is it possible then but that water should be\nthe most useful, when it thus furnishes us with an entirely new element?\n\n8. Or can any man speak as follows in defence of the contrary? We say\nthen that God, as a master workman, had before him the four elements,\nto complete the fabric of the universe; and these again were different\none from another. But earth and water were placed at the foundation,\nlike matter, to be formed and fashioned, participating of form and\norder and of power to procreate and bring forth, so far as they are\nassisted by air and fire,\u2014the great artificers that mould them into\nvarious shapes,\u2014and lying dead till roused by them to act and generate.\nOf these two latter, fire is the ruling agent. This is manifest by\ninduction. For earth without warmth and heat is altogether barren and\nunfruitful; but fire, by virtue of its rousing and inflaming quality,\nrenders it diffusive, and swells it into generation. Nor can any man\nfind out any other cause why rocks and the dry tops of mountains are\nnot productive, but because they participate either nothing at all or\nvery little of fire.\n\n9. Then generally for water, it is so far from being sufficient of\nitself for the generation and preservation of other things, that it is\nitself destroyed for want of fire. But fire is that which upholds every\nthing in its proper being, and preserves it in its proper substance,\nas well water itself as all other things; so that when fire leaves\nit, water will stink, and it may be said that the want of fire is the\ndeath and destruction of water. And thus we find in regard to pools\nand all manner of standing waters, and such as are settled in pits\nand holes without issue, what an offensive and dead stench they send\nforth, and all for want of motion; for this kindles and preserves\nheat in all things, and more especially in running waters and swift\nstreams, which being thus agitated and enlivened by heat, we commonly\nsay such waters \u201clive.\u201d Why then should not that be accounted the most\nuseful of the two, that affords to the other the cause of its being,\nas fire does to water? Moreover, that is the most useful, of which if\nan animal be wholly deprived, it must perish; for it is evident, that\nanything without which an animal cannot live affords the reason and\ncause why it exists. There is moisture also in things after they are\ndead, nor are they altogether dried up; for otherwise moist bodies\nwould never putrefy; since putrefaction is the alteration of dry into\nmoist, or rather the corruption of moisture in flesh. Neither is death\nany other than an absolute defect and want of heat, and therefore dead\ncarcasses are the coldest of all; so that if you do but touch them with\na razor, they will blunt the edge of it through excess of coldness.\nAlso in living creatures, those parts that least partake of heat are\nmost insensible, as the bones and hair, and those parts which are most\ndistant from the heart. Nay, to some of the most important things the\nabsence of fire and the presence of water are destructive. For plants\nand fruits are not produced by moisture, but by the warmth of the\nmoisture; and cold waters are most certainly either less productive,\nor altogether barren. For if water were fruitful in itself, it would\nalways, and that spontaneously too, bear fruit. But the contrary is\napparent, and it is rather baneful to generation.\n\n10. Let us begin anew. As to the use of fire, considered as fire, we\nhave no need of water. Rather the contrary is to be made out; for water\nextinguishes fire. And as for water, there is no use to be made of it\nin most things without fire. For water heated becomes more useful,\nwhereas otherwise it is prejudicial. So that, of the two, that is to\nbe accounted best which is profitable of itself without the assistance\nof another. Besides, water is beneficial only to the feeling, when\nyou either wash with it or touch it; but fire is profitable to all\nthe senses, being not only felt, but also seen at a distance; so that\nyou may add this to the rest of the virtues of it, that its uses are\nmanifold.\n\n11. Then to say that man did once subsist without fire is a mistake, it\nbeing impossible that man should be without it. But we must acknowledge\nthere are differences in this kind, as well as in other things. Thus\nheat has rendered the sea more beneficial, as having a greater portion\nof heat in it than other waters, from which it otherwise differs not at\nall. And as for those that have no need of outward fire, they do not\navoid it because they do not want it, but because they abound in heat\nwithin themselves. So that the use of fire seems to be more excellent\nin this, that water is never in such a condition as not to want\nexternal aids, but fire, endued with manifold virtues, contents itself\nwith its own sufficiency. Therefore, as he is the best commander who\nso manages the affairs of his city as not to have any need of foreign\nassistance, so that element excels that supplies us in such a manner as\nto want the least of other helps from without. And this is to be said\nof other creatures that have no need of external heat.\n\nNow, to argue on the other side, a man may say thus, that whatever we\nsingly and alone make use of is more profitable, since we are by our\nreason best fitted to choose what is best. For what is more useful and\nbeneficial to us than reason?... And yet brute animals want fire. What\nthen? Is it the less profitable, because found out by foresight of a\nhigher power?\n\n12. And since our discourse has brought us to it, what is more\nbeneficial to life than art? Yet fire invented and preserves all\nmanner of arts. And therefore Vulcan is feigned to be the prince of\nall artificers. Man has allowed him but a little time to live; and\nas Aristo said, sleep, like a toll-gatherer, deprives him of the\none-half of that too. I would rather say that the darkness does this;\nfor a man may watch all night. But he would have no benefit of his\nwatchfulness unless fire afforded him all the benefit of the light of\nday, and removed the difference between night and day. Since then there\nis nothing more beneficial to man than life, and this is prolonged\nby fire, why should not fire be accounted the most beneficial of all\nthings?\n\n13. Lastly, that is to be thought most profitable, of which the\ntemperament of the senses participates most. Now do you find that there\nis any of the senses, which of itself makes use of moisture without\nan intermixture of air and fire? But every sense partakes of fire, as\nbeing that which quickens the vital faculty; more especially the sight,\nwhich is the most acute of all the senses in the body, being a certain\nfiery efflux, that gave us our first light into the belief of a Deity,\nand by virtue of which we are able, as Plato says, to conform our souls\nto the motions of the celestial bodies.\n\n\n\n\nAGAINST COLOTES, THE DISCIPLE AND FAVORITE OF EPICURUS.\n\n\n1. Colotes, whom Epicurus was wont diminutively and by way of\nfamiliarity or fondness, to call Colotaras and Colotarion, composed,\nO Saturninus, and published a little book which he entitled, \u201cThat\naccording to the opinions of the other philosophers one cannot so much\nas live.\u201d This he dedicated to King Ptolemy. Now I suppose that it will\nnot be unpleasant for you to read, when set down in writing, what came\ninto my mind to speak against this Colotes, since I know you to be a\nlover of all elegant and honest treatises, and particularly of such as\nregard the science of antiquity, and to esteem the bearing in memory\nand having (as much as possible may be) in hand the discourses of the\nancient sages to be the most royal of all studies and exercises.\n\n2. Not long since therefore, as this book was reading, Aristodemus of\nAegium, a familiar friend of ours (whom you well know to be one of the\nAcademy, and not a mere thyrsus-bearer, but one of the most frantic\ncelebrators of Plato\u2019s orgies),[125] did, I know not how, keep himself\ncontrary to his custom very still all the while, and patiently gave\near to it even to the end. But the reading was scarce well over, when\nhe said: Well then, whom shall we cause to rise up and fight against\nthis man, in defence of the philosophers? For I am not of Nestor\u2019s\nopinion, who, when the most valiant of those nine warriors that\npresented themselves to enter into combat was to be chosen, committed\nthe election to the fortune of a lot.\n\nYet, answered I, you see he so disposed himself in reference to the\nlot, that the choice might pass according to the arbitrament of the\nwisest man;\n\n    And th\u2019 lot drawn from the helmet, as they wished,\n    On Ajax fell.\n\nBut yet since you command me to make the election,\n\n    How can I think a better choice to make\n    Than the divine Ulysses?[126]\n\nConsider therefore, and be well advised, in what manner you will\nchastise this man.\n\nBut you know, replied Aristodemus, that Plato, when highly offended\nwith his boy that waited on him, would not himself beat him, but\nrequested Speusippus to do it for him, saying that he himself was\nangry. As much therefore may I say to you; Take this fellow to you, and\ntreat him as you please; for I am in a fit of choler.\n\nWhen therefore all the rest of the company desired me to undertake\nthis office; I must then, said I, speak, since it is your pleasure.\nBut I am afraid that I also shall seem more vehemently transported\nthan is fitting against this book, in the defending and maintaining\nSocrates against the rudeness, scurrility, and insolence of this man;\nwho, because Socrates affirmed himself to know nothing certainly,\ninstead of bread (as one would say) presents him hay, as if he were a\nbeast, and asks him why he puts meat into his mouth and not into his\near. And yet perhaps some would make but a laughing matter of this,\nconsidering the mildness and gentleness of Socrates; \u201cbut for the whole\nhost of the Greeks,\u201d that is, of the other philosophers, amongst which\nare Democritus, Plato, Stilpo, Empedocles, Parmenides, and Melissus,\nwho have been basely traduced and reviled by him, it were not only a\nshame to be silent, but even a sacrilege in the least point to forbear\nor recede from freedom of speech in their behalf, who have advanced\nphilosophy to that honor and reputation it has gotten.\n\nAnd our parents indeed have, with the assistance of the Gods, given\nus our life; but to live well comes to us from reason, which we have\nlearned from the philosophers, which favors law and justice, and\nrestrains our concupiscence. Now to live well is to live sociably,\nfriendly, temperately, and justly; of all which conditions they leave\nus not one, who cry out that man\u2019s sovereign good lies in his belly,\nand that they would not purchase all the virtues together at the\nexpense of a cracked farthing, if pleasure were totally and on every\nside removed from them. And in their discourses concerning the soul and\nthe Gods, they hold that the soul perishes when it is separated from\nthe body, and that the Gods concern not themselves in our affairs. Thus\nthe Epicureans reproach the other philosophers, that by their wisdom\nthey bereave man of his life; whilst the others on the contrary accuse\nthem of teaching men to live degenerately and like beasts.\n\n3. Now these things are scattered here and there in the writings\nof Epicurus, and dispersed through all his philosophy. But this\nColotes, by having extracted from them certain pieces and fragments\nof discourses, destitute of any arguments whatever to render them\ncredible and intelligible, has composed his book, being like a shop or\ncabinet of monsters and prodigies; as you better know than any one\nelse, because you have always in your hands the works of the ancients.\nBut he seems to me, like the Lydian, to open not only one gate against\nhimself, but to involve Epicurus also in many and those the greatest\ndoubts and difficulties. For he begins with Democritus, who receives\nof him an excellent and worthy reward for his instruction; it being\ncertain that Epicurus for a long time called himself a Democritean,\nwhich as well others affirm, as Leonteus, a principal disciple of\nEpicurus, who in a letter which he writ to Lycophron says, that\nEpicurus honored Democritus, because he first attained, though a\nlittle at a distance, the right and sound understanding of the truth,\nand that in general all the treatise concerning natural things was\ncalled Democritean, because Democritus was the first who happened\nupon the principles and met with the primitive foundations of Nature.\nAnd Metrodorus says openly of philosophy, If Democritus had not gone\nbefore and taught the way, Epicurus had never attained to wisdom. Now\nif it be true, as Colotes holds, that to live according to the opinions\nof Democritus is not to live, Epicurus was then a fool in following\nDemocritus, who led him to a doctrine which taught him not to live.\n\n4. Now the first thing he lays to his charge is, that, by supposing\nevery thing to be no more of one nature than another, he wholly\nconfounds human life. But Democritus was so far from having been of\nthis opinion, that he opposed Protagoras the philosopher who asserted\nit, and writ many excellent arguments concluding against him, which\nthis fine fellow Colotes never saw nor read, nor yet so much as dreamed\nof; but deceived himself by misunderstanding a passage which is in his\nworks, where he determines that \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u03ad\u03bd is no more than \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd, naming\nin that place the body by \u03b4\u03ad\u03bd, and the void by \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd, and meaning that\nthe void has its own proper nature and subsistence, as well as the\nbody.\n\nBut he who is of opinion that nothing is more of one nature than\nanother makes use of a sentence of Epicurus, in which he says that all\nthe apprehensions and imaginations given us by the senses are true.\nFor if of two saying, the one, that the wine is sour, and the other,\nthat it is sweet, neither of them shall be deceived by his sense, how\nshall the wine be more sour than sweet? And we may often see that some\nmen using one and the same bath find it to be hot, and others find it\nto be cold; because those order cold water to be put into it, as these\ndo hot. It is said that, a certain lady going to visit Berenice, wife\nto King Deiotarus, as soon as ever they approached each other, they\nboth immediately turned their backs, the one, as it seemed, not being\nable to bear the smell of perfume, nor the other of butter. If then\nthe sense of one is no truer than the sense of another, it is also\nprobable, that water is no more cold than hot, nor sweet ointment or\nbutter better or worse scented one than the other. For if any one shall\nsay that it seems the one to one, and the other to another, he will,\nbefore he is aware, affirm that they are both the one and the other.\n\n5. And as for these symmetries and proportions of the pores, or little\npassages in the organs of the senses, about which they talk so much,\nand those different mixtures of seeds, which, they say, being dispersed\nthrough all savors, odors, and colors, move the senses of different\npersons to perceive different qualities, do they not manifestly drive\nthem to this, that things are no more of one quality than another? For\nto pacify those who think the sense is deceived and lies because they\nsee contrary events and passions in such as use the same objects, and\nto solve this objection, they teach,\u2014that all things being mixed and\nconfounded together, and yet one nevertheless being more suitable and\nfitting to one, and another to another, it is not possible that there\nshould in all cases be a contact and comprehension of one and the same\nquality, nor does the object equally affect all with all its parts,\nevery one meeting only those to which it has its sense commensurate\nand proportioned; so that they are to blame so obstinately to insist\nthat a thing is either good or bad, white or not white, thinking to\nestablish their own senses by destroying those of others; whereas\nthey ought neither to combat the senses,\u2014because they all touch some\nquality, each one drawing from this confused mixture, as from a living\nand large fountain, what is suitable and convenient,\u2014nor to pronounce\nof the whole, by touching only the parts, nor to think that all ought\nto be affected after one and the same manner by the same thing, seeing\nthat one is affected by one quality and faculty of it, and another by\nanother. Let us then seek who those men are which bring in this opinion\nthat things are not more of one quality than another, if they are not\nthose who hold that every sensible thing is a mixture, composed of all\nsorts of qualities, like a mixture of new wine fermenting, and who\nconfess that all their rules are lost and their faculty of judging\nquite gone, if they admit any sensible object that is pure and simple,\nand do not make each one thing to be many?\n\n6. See now to this purpose, what discourse and debate Epicurus makes\nPolyaenus to have with him in his Banquet concerning the heat of wine.\nFor when he asked, \u201cDo you, Epicurus, say, that wine does not heat?\u201d\nsome one answered, \u201cIt is not universally to be affirmed that wine\nheats.\u201d And a little after: \u201cFor wine seems not to be universally a\nheater; but such a quantity may be said to heat such a person.\u201d And\nagain subjoining the cause, to wit, the compressions and disseminations\nof the atoms, and having alleged their commixtures and conjunctions\nwith others when the wine comes to be mingled in the body, he adds this\nconclusion: \u201cIt is not universally to be said that wine is endued with\na faculty of heating; but that such a quantity may heat such a nature\nand one so disposed, while such a quantity to such a nature is cooling.\nFor in such a mass there are such natures and complexions of which cold\nmight be composed, and which, joined with others in proper measure,\nwould yield a refrigerative virtue. Wherefore some are deceived, who\nsay that wine is universally a heater; and others, who say that it is\nuniversally a cooler.\u201d He then who says that most men are deceived\nand err, in holding that which is hot to be heating and that which is\ncold to be cooling, is himself in an error, unless he should believe\nthat his assertion leads to the doctrine that one thing is not more of\none nature than another. He farther adds afterwards, that oftentimes\nwine entering into a body brings with it thither neither a calefying\nnor refrigerating virtue, but, the mass of the body being agitated and\ndisturbed, and a transposition made of the parts, the heat-effecting\natoms being assembled together do by their multitude cause a heat and\ninflammation in the body, and sometimes on the contrary disassembling\nthemselves cause a refrigeration.\n\n7. But it is moreover wholly evident, that we may apply this argument\nto all those things which are called and esteemed bitter, sweet,\npurging, dormitive, and luminous, not any one of them having an entire\nand perfect quality to produce such effects, nor to do rather than\nto suffer when they are in the bodies, but being there susceptible\nof various temperatures and differences. For Epicurus himself, in\nhis Second Book against Theophrastus, affirming that colors are not\nconnatural to bodies, but are engendered there according to certain\nsituations and positions with respect to the sight of man, says: \u201cFor\nthis reason a body is no more colored than destitute of color.\u201d And\na little above he writes thus, word for word: \u201cBut apart from this,\nI know not how a man may say that those bodies which are in the dark\nhave color; although very often, an air equally dark being spread\nabout them, some distinguish diversities of colors, others perceive\nthem not through the weakness of their sight. And moreover, going into\na dark house or room, we at our first entrance see no color, but after\nwe have stayed there awhile, we do. Wherefore we are to say that every\nbody is not more colored than not colored. Now, if color is relative\nand has its being in regard to something else, so also then is white,\nand so likewise blue; and if colors are so, so also are sweet and\nbitter. So that it may truly be affirmed of every quality, that it\ncannot more properly be said to be than not to be. For to those who\nare in a certain manner disposed, they will be; but to those who are\nnot so disposed, they will not be.\u201d Colotes therefore has bedashed and\nbespattered himself and his master with that dirt, in which he says\nthose lie who maintain that things are not more of one quality than\nanother.\n\n8. But is it in this alone, that this excellent man shows himself\n\n    To others a physician, whilst himself\n    Is full of ulcers?[127]\n\nNo indeed; but yet much farther in his second reprehension, without\nany way minding it, he drives Epicurus and Democritus out of this\nlife. For he affirms that the saying of Democritus\u2014that the atoms are\nto the senses color by a certain law or ordinance, that they are by\nthe same law sweetness, and by the same law concretion[128]\u2014is at war\nwith our senses, and that he who uses this reason and persists in this\nopinion cannot himself imagine whether he is living or dead. I know not\nhow to contradict this discourse; but this I can boldly affirm, that\nthis is as inseparable from the sentences and doctrines of Epicurus\nas they say figure and weight are from atoms. For what is it that\nDemocritus says? \u201cThere are substances, in number infinite, called\natoms (because they cannot be divided), without difference, without\nquality, and impassible, which move, being dispersed here and there,\nin the infinite voidness; and that when they approach one another,\nor meet and are conjoined, of such masses thus heaped together, one\nappears water, another fire, another a plant, another a man; and that\nall things are thus really atoms (as he called them), and that there\nis nothing else; for there can be no generation from what is not; and\nof those things which are nothing can be generated, because these\natoms are so firm, that they can neither change, alter, nor suffer;\nwherefore there cannot be made color of those things which are without\ncolor, nor nature or soul of those things which are without quality and\nimpassible.\u201d Democritus then is to be blamed, not for confessing those\nthings that happen upon his principles, but for supposing principles\nupon which such things happen. For he should not have supposed\nimmutable principles; or having supposed them, he ought to have seen\nthat the generation of all quality is taken away; but having seen the\nabsurdity, to deny it is most impudent. But Epicurus says, that he\nsupposes the same principles with Democritus, but that he says not that\ncolor, sweet, white, and other qualities, are by law and ordinance. If\ntherefore _not to say_ is merely _not to confess_, he does merely what\nhe is wont to do. For it is as when, taking away divine Providence,\nhe nevertheless says that he leaves piety and devotion towards the\nGods; and when, choosing friendship for the sake of pleasure, that he\nsuffers most grievous pains for his friends; and supposing the universe\nto be infinite, that he nevertheless takes not away high and low....\nIndeed having taken the cup, one may drink what he pleases, and return\nthe rest. But in reasoning one ought chiefly to remember this wise\napophthegm, that where the principles are not necessary, the ends and\nconsequences are necessary. It was not then necessary for him to\nsuppose or (to say better) to steal from Democritus, that atoms are\nthe principles of the universe; but having supposed this doctrine, and\nhaving pleased and glorified himself in the first probable and specious\nappearances of it, he must afterwards also swallow that which is\ntroublesome in it, or must show how bodies which have not any quality\ncan bring all sorts of qualities to others only by their meetings and\njoining together. As\u2014to take that which comes next to hand\u2014whence does\nthat which we call heat proceed, and how is it engendered, in the\natoms, if they neither had heat when they came, nor are become hot\nafter their being joined together? For the one presupposes that they\nhad some quality, and the other that they were fit to receive it. And\nyou affirm, that neither the one nor the other must be said to belong\nto atoms, because they are incorruptible.\n\n9. How then? Do not Plato, Aristotle, and Xenocrates produce gold\nfrom that which is not gold, and stone from that which is not stone,\nand many other things from the four simple first bodies? Yes indeed;\nbut with those bodies immediately concur also the principles for the\ngeneration of every thing, bringing with them great contributions, that\nis, the first qualities which are in them; then, when they come to\nassemble and join in one the dry with the moist, the cold with the hot,\nand the solid with the soft,\u2014that is active bodies with such as are fit\nto suffer and receive every alteration and change,\u2014then is generation\nwrought by passing from one temperature to another. Whereas the atom,\nbeing alone, is deprived and destitute of all quality and generative\nfaculty, and when it comes to meet with the others, it can make only a\nnoise and sound because of its hardness and firmness, but nothing else.\nFor they always strike and are stricken, not being able by this means\nto compose or make an animal, a soul, or a nature, nay, not so much as\na mass or heap of themselves; for that as they beat upon one another,\nso they fly back again asunder.\n\n10. But Colotes, as if he were speaking to some ignorant and unlettered\nking, again attacks Empedocles for breathing forth the same thought:\n\n    I\u2019ve one thing more to say. 'Mongst mortals there\n    No Nature is; nor that grim thing men fear\n    So much, called death. There only happens first\n    A mixture, and mixt things asunder burst\n    Again, when them disunion does befall.\n    And this is that which men do Nature call.\n\nFor my part, I do not see how this is repugnant and contrary to life or\nliving, especially amongst those who hold that there is no generation\nof that which is not, nor corruption of that which is, but that the\nassembling and union of the things which are is called generation, and\ntheir dissolution and disunion named corruption and death. For that\nhe took Nature for generation, and that this is his meaning, he has\nhimself declared, when he opposed Nature to death. And if they neither\nlive nor can live who place generation in union and death in disunion,\nwhat else do these Epicureans? Yet Empedocles, gluing, (as it were) and\nconjoining the elements together by heats, softnesses, and humidities,\ngives them in some sort a mixtion and unitive composition; but these\nmen who hunt and drive together the atoms, which they affirm to be\nimmutable and impassible, compose nothing proceeding from them, but\nindeed make many and continual percussions of them.\n\nFor the interlacement, hindering the dissolution, more and more\naugments the collision and concussion; so that there is neither mixtion\nnor adhesion and conglutination, but only a confusion and combat, which\naccording to them is called generation. And if the atoms do now recoil\nfor a moment by reason of the shock they have given, and then return\nagain after the blow is past, they are above double the time absent\nfrom one another, without either touching or approaching, so as nothing\ncan be made of them, not even so much as a body without a soul. But as\nfor sense, soul, understanding, and prudence, there is not any man who\ncan in the least conceive or imagine how it is possible they should\nbe made in a voidness, and of atoms which neither when separate and\napart have any quality, nor any passion or alteration when they are\nassembled and joined together, especially seeing this their meeting\ntogether is not an incorporation or congress, making a mixture or\ncoalition, but rather percussions and repercussions. So that, according\nto the doctrine of these people, life is taken away, and the being\nof an animal denied, since they suppose principles void, impassible,\ngodless, and soulless, and such as cannot admit or receive any mixture\nor incorporation whatever.\n\n11. How then is it, that they admit and allow Nature, soul, and living\ncreature? Even in the same manner as they do an oath, prayer, and\nsacrifice, and the adoration of the Gods. Thus they adore by word\nand mouth, only naming and feigning that which by their principles\nthey totally take away and abolish. If now they call that which is\nborn Nature, and that which is engendered generation,\u2014as those who\nordinarily call the wood itself wood-work and the voices that accord\nand sound together symphony,\u2014whence came it into his mind to object\nthese words against Empedocles? \u201cWhy,\u201d says he, \u201cdo we tire ourselves\nin taking such care of ourselves, in desiring and longing after certain\nthings, and shunning and avoiding others? For we neither are ourselves,\nnor do we live by making use of others.\u201d But be of good cheer, my\ndear little Colotes, may one perhaps say to him: there is none who\nhinders you from taking care of yourself by teaching that the nature\nof Colotes is nothing else but Colotes himself, or who forbids you to\nmake use of things (now things with you are pleasures) by showing\nthat there is no nature of tarts and marchpanes, of sweet odors, or of\nvenereal delights, but that there are tarts, marchpanes, perfumes, and\nwomen. For neither does the grammarian who says that \u201cthe strength of\nHercules\u201d is Hercules himself deny the being of Hercules; nor do those\nwho say that symphonies and roofings are but bare derivations affirm\nthat there are neither sounds nor timbers; since also there are some\nwho, taking away the soul and prudence, do not yet seem to take away\neither living or being prudent.\n\nAnd when Epicurus says that the nature of things consists in bodies\nand their place, do we so comprehend him as if he meant that Nature\nwere something else than the things which are, or as if he insinuated\nthat it is simply the things which are, and nothing else?\u2014as, to wit,\nhe is wont to call voidness itself the nature of voidness, and the\nuniverse, by Jupiter, the nature of the universe. And if any one should\nthus question him; What sayst thou, Epicurus, that this is voidness,\nand that the nature of voidness? No, by Jupiter, would he answer; but\nthis community of names is in use by law and custom. I grant it is. Now\nwhat has Empedocles done else, but taught that Nature is nothing else\nsave that which is born, and death no other thing but that which dies?\nBut as the poets very often, forming as it were an image, say thus in\nfigurative language,\n\n    Strife, tumult, noise, placed by some angry God,\n    Mischief, and malice there had their abode;[129]\n\nso do most men attribute generation and corruption to things that\nare contracted together and dissolved. But so far has he been from\nstirring and taking away that which is, or contradicting that which\nevidently appears, that he casts not so much as one single word out of\nthe accustomed use; but taking away all figurative fraud that might\nhurt or endamage things, he again restored the ordinary and useful\nsignification to words in these verses:\n\n    When from mixed elements we sometimes see\n    A man produced, sometimes a beast, a tree,\n    Or bird, this birth and geniture we name;\n    But death, when this so well compacted frame\n    And juncture is dissolved. This use I do approve.\n\nAnd yet I myself say that Colotes, though he alleged these verses, did\nnot understand that Empedocles took not away men, beasts, trees, or\nbirds, which he affirmed to be composed of the elements mixed together;\nand that, by teaching how much they are deceived who call this\ncomposition Nature and life, and this dissolution unhappy destruction\nand miserable death, he did not abrogate the using of the customary\nexpressions in this respect.\n\n12. And it seems to me, indeed, that Empedocles did not aim in this\nplace at the disturbing the common form of expression, but that he\nreally, as it has been said, had a controversy about generation from\nthings that have no being, which some call Nature. Which he manifestly\nshows by these verses:\n\n    Fools, and of little thought, we well may deem\n    Those, who so silly are as to esteem\n    That what ne\u2019er was may now engendered be,\n    And that what is may perish utterly.\n\nFor these are the words of one who cries loud enough to those which\nhave ears, that he takes not away generation, but procreation from\nnothing; nor corruption, but total destruction, that is, reduction to\nnothing. For to him who would not so savagely and foolishly but more\ngently calumniate, the following verses might give a colorable occasion\nof charging Empedocles with the contrary, when he says:\n\n    No prudent man can e\u2019er into his mind\n    Admit that, whilst men living here on earth\n    (Which only life they call) both fortunes find,\n    They being have, but that before the birth\n    They nothing were, nor shall be when once dead.\n\nFor these are not the expressions of a man who denies those that are\nborn to be, but rather of him who holds those to be that are not yet\nborn or that are already dead. And Colotes also does not altogether\naccuse him of this, but says that according to his opinion we shall\nnever be sick, never wounded. But how is it possible, that he who\naffirms men to have being both before their life and after their death,\nand during their life to find both fortunes (or to be accompanied both\nby good and evil), should not leave them the power to suffer? Who then\nare they, O Colotes, that are endued with this privilege never to be\nwounded, never to be sick? Even you yourselves, who are composed of\natoms and voidness, neither of which, you say, has any sense. Now there\nis no great hurt in this; but the worst is, you have nothing left that\ncan cause you pleasure, seeing an atom is not capable to receive those\nthings which are to effect it, and voidness cannot be affected by them.\n\n13. But because Colotes would, immediately after Democritus, seem\nto inter and bury Parmenides, and I have passed over and a little\npostponed his defence, to bring in between them that of Empedocles, as\nseeming to be more coherent and consequent to the first reprehensions,\nlet us now return to Parmenides. Him then does Colotes accuse of having\nbroached and set abroad certain shameful and villanous sophistries;\nand yet by these his sophisms he has neither rendered friendship\nless honorable, nor voluptuousness or the desire of pleasures more\naudacious and unbridled. He has not taken from honesty its attractive\nproperty or its being venerable or recommendable of itself, nor has\nhe disturbed the opinions we ought to have of the Gods. And I do not\nsee how, by saying that the All (or the universe) is one, he hinders\nor obstructs our living. For when Epicurus himself says that the All\nis infinite, that it is neither engendered nor perishable, that it can\nneither increase nor be diminished, he speaks of the universe as of\none only thing. And having in the beginning of his treatise concerning\nthis matter said, that the nature of those things which have being\nconsists of bodies and of voidness, he makes a division (as it were) of\none thing into two parts, one of which has in reality no subsistence,\nbeing, as you yourselves term it, impalpable, void, and incorporeal;\nso that by this means, even with you also, all comes to be one; unless\nyou desire, in speaking of voidness, to use words void of sense, and to\ncombat the ancients, as if you were fighting against a shadow.\n\nBut these atomical bodies, you will say, are, according to the opinion\nof Epicurus, infinite in number, and every thing which appears to us\nis composed of them. See now, therefore, what principles of generation\nyou suppose, infinity and voidness; one of which, to wit, voidness, is\ninactive, impassible, and incorporeal; the other, to wit, infinity,\nis disorderly, unreasonable, and incomprehensible, dissolving and\nconfounding itself, because it cannot for its multitude be contained,\ncircumscribed, or limited. But Parmenides has neither taken away fire,\nnor water, nor rocks and precipices, nor yet cities (as Colotes says)\nwhich are built and inhabited as well in Europe as in Asia; since\nhe has both made an order of the world, and mixing the elements, to\nwit, light and dark, does of them and by them compose and finish all\nthings that are to be seen in the world. For he has written very\nlargely of the earth, heaven, sun, moon, and stars, and has spoken\nof the generation of man; and being, as he was, an ancient author in\nphysiology, and one who in writing sought to deliver his own and not to\ndestroy another\u2019s doctrine, he has passed over none of the principal\nthings in Nature. Moreover, Plato, and before him Socrates himself,\nunderstood that in Nature there is one part subject to opinion, and\nanother subject to intelligence. As for that which is subject to\nopinion, it is always unconstant, wandering, and carried away with\nseveral passions and changes, liable to diminution and increase, and to\nbe variously disposed to various men, and not always appearing after\none manner even to the same person. But as to the intelligible part, it\nis quite of another kind,\n\n    Constant, entire, and still engenerable,\n\nas himself says, always like to itself, and perdurable in its being.\n\nHere Colotes, sycophant-like, catching at his expressions and drawing\nthe discourse from things to words, flatly affirms that Parmenides in\none word takes away the existence of all things by supposing _ens_ (or\nthat which is) to be one. But, on the contrary, he takes away neither\nthe one nor the other part of Nature; but rendering to each of them\nwhat belongs to it and is convenient for it, he places the intelligible\nin the idea of one and of \u201cthat which is,\u201d calling it _ens_ because it\nis eternal and incorruptible, and one because it is always like itself\nand admits no diversity. And as for that part which is sensible, he\nplaces it in the rank of uncertain, disorderly, and always moving. Of\nwhich two parts, we may see the distinct judgment:\n\n    One certain truth and sincere knowledge is,\n\nas regarding that which is intelligible, and always alike and of the\nsame sort;\n\n    The other does on men\u2019s opinions rest,\n    Which breed no true belief within our breast,\n\nbecause it is conversant in things which receive all sorts of changes,\npassions, and inequalities. Now how he could have left sense and\nopinion, if he had not also left any thing sensible and opinable, it\nis impossible for any man to say. But because to that which truly _is_\nit appertains to continue in its being, and because sensible things\nsometimes are, sometimes are not, continually passing from one being\nto another and perpetually changing their state, he thought they\nrequired some other name than that of _entia_, or things which always\nare. This speech therefore concerning _ens_ (or that which is), that\nit should be but one, is not to take away the plurality of sensible\nthings, but to show how they differ from that which is intelligible.\nWhich difference Plato in his discourse of Ideas more fully declaring,\nhas thereby afforded Colotes an opportunity of cavilling.\n\n14. Therefore it seems not unreasonable to me to take next into our\nconsideration, as it were all in a train, what he has also said against\nhim. But first let us contemplate a little the diligence\u2014together with\nthe manifold and profound knowledge\u2014of this our philosopher, who says,\nthat Aristotle, Xenocrates, Theophrastus, and all the Peripatetics\nhave followed these doctrines of Plato. For in what corner of the\nuninhabitable world have you, O Colotes, written your book, that,\ncomposing all these accusations against such personages, you never have\nlighted upon their works, nor have taken into your hands the books of\nAristotle concerning Heaven and the Soul, nor those of Theophrastus\nagainst the Naturalists, nor the Zoroaster of Heraclides, nor his books\nof Hell, nor that of Natural Doubts and Difficulties, nor the book of\nDicaearchus concerning the Soul; in all which books they are in the\nhighest degree contradictory and repugnant to Plato about the principal\nand greatest points of natural philosophy? Nay, Strato himself, the\nvery head and prince of the other Peripatetics, agrees not in many\nthings with Aristotle, and holds opinions altogether contrary to\nPlato, concerning motion, the understanding, the soul, and generation.\nIn fine, he says that the world is not an animal, and that what is\naccording to Nature follows what is according to Fortune; for that\nChance gave the beginning, and so every one of the natural effects was\nafterwards finished.\n\nNow as to the ideas,\u2014for which he quarrels with Plato,\u2014Aristotle, by\nmoving this matter at every turn, and alleging all manner of doubts\nconcerning them, in his Ethics, in his Physics, and in his Exoterical\nDialogues seems to some rather obstinately than philosophically to\nhave disputed against these doctrines, as having proposed to himself\nthe debasing and undervaluing of Plato\u2019s philosophy; so far he was\nfrom following it. What an impudent rashness then is this, that having\nneither seen nor understood what these persons have written and what\nwere their opinions, he should go and devise such things as they\nnever imagined; and persuading himself that he reprehends and refutes\nothers, he should produce a proof, written with his own hand, arguing\nand convincing himself of ignorance, licentiousness, and shameful\nimpudence, in saying that those who contradict Plato agree with him,\nand that those who oppose him follow him?\n\n15. Plato, says he, writes that horses are in vain by us esteemed\nhorses, and men men. And in which of Plato\u2019s commentaries has he found\nthis hidden? For as to us, we read in all his books, that horses are\nhorses, that men are men, and that fire is by him esteemed fire,\nbecause he holds that every one of these things is sensible and subject\nto opinion. But this fine fellow Colotes, as if he were not a hair\u2019s\nbreadth removed from perfect wisdom, apprehends it to be one and the\nsame thing to say, \u201cMan is not\u201d and \u201cMan is a _non ens_.\u201d\n\nNow to Plato there seems to be a wonderful great difference between\nnot being at all and being a _non ens_; because the first imports an\nannihilation and abolishment of all substance, and the other shows the\ndiversity there is between that which is participated and that which\nparticipates. Which diversity those who came after distinguished only\ninto the difference of genus and species, and certain common and\nproper qualities or accidents, as they are called, but ascended no\nhigher, falling into more logical doubts and difficulties. Now there\nis the same proportion between that which is participated and that\nwhich participates, as there is between the cause and the matter, the\noriginal and the image, the faculty and the effect. Wherein that which\nis by itself and always the same principally differs from that which\nis by another and never abides in one and the same manner; because\nthe one never was nor ever shall be non-existent, and is therefore\ntotally and essentially an _ens_; but to the other that very being,\nwhich it has not of itself but happens to take by participation from\nanother, does not remain firm and constant, but it goes out of it by\nits imbecility,\u2014the matter always gliding and sliding about the form,\nand receiving several affections and changes in the image of the\nsubstance, so that it is continually moving and shaking. As therefore\nhe who says that the image of Plato is not Plato takes not away the\nsense and substance of the image, but shows the difference of that\nwhich exists of itself from that which exists only in regard to some\nother; so neither do they take away the nature, use, or sense of men,\nwho affirm that every one of us, by participating in a certain common\nsubstance, that is, by the idea, is become the image of that which\nafforded the likeness for our generation. For neither does he who says\nthat a red-hot iron is not fire, or that the moon is not the sun, but,\nas Parmenides has it,\n\n    A torch which round the earth by night\n    Does bear about a borrowed light,\n\ntake away therefore the use of iron, or the nature of the moon. But if\nhe should deny it to be a body, or affirm that it is not illuminated,\nhe would then contradict the senses, as one who admitted neither body,\nanimal, generation, nor sense. But he who by his opinion imagines\nthat these things subsist only by participation, and considers how\nfar remote and distant they are from that which always is and which\ncommunicates to them their being, does not reject the sensible, but\naffirms that the intelligible is; nor does he take away and abolish the\neffects which are wrought and appear in us; but he shows to those who\nfollow him that there are other things, firmer and more stable than\nthese in respect of their essence, because they are neither engendered,\nnor perish, nor suffer any thing; and he teaches them, more purely\ntouching the difference, to express it by names, calling these \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 or\n_entia_ (_things that have being_), and those \u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 or _fientia_\n(_things engendered_). And the same also usually befalls the moderns;\nfor they deprive many\u2014and those great things\u2014of the appellation of\n_ens_ or _being_; such as are voidness, time, place, and simply the\nentire genus of things spoken, in which are comprised all things true.\nFor these things, they say, are not _entia_ but _some things_; and they\nperpetually make use of them in their lives and in their philosophy, as\nof things having subsistence and existence.\n\n16. But I would willingly ask this our fault-finder, whether themselves\ndo not in their affairs perceive this difference, by which some things\nare permanent and immutable in their substances,\u2014as they say of their\natoms, that they are at all times and continually after one and the\nsame manner, because of their impassibility and hardness,\u2014but that all\ncompounded things are fluxible, changeable, generated, and perishing;\nforasmuch as infinite images are always departing and going from them,\nand infinite others, as it is probable, repair to them from the ambient\nair, filling up what was diminished from the mass, which is much\ndiversified and transvasated, as it were, by this change, since those\natoms which are in the very bottom of the said mass can never cease\nstirring and reciprocally beating upon one another; as they themselves\naffirm. There is then in things such a diversity of substance.\nBut Epicurus is in this wiser and more learned than Plato, that he\ncalls them all equally _entia_,\u2014to wit, the impalpable voidness, the\nsolid and resisting body, the principles, and the things composed of\nthem,\u2014and thinks that the eternal participates of the common substance\nwith that which is generated, the immortal with the corruptible, and\nthe natures that are impassible, perdurable, unchangeable, and that\ncan never fall from their being, with those which have their essence\nin suffering and changing, and can never continue in one and the same\nstate. But though Plato had with all the justness imaginable deserved\nto be condemned for having offended in this, yet should he have been\nsentenced by these gentlemen, who speak Greek more elegantly and\ndiscourse more correctly than he, only as having confounded the terms,\nand not as having taken away the things and driven life from us,\nbecause he named them _fientia_ (or things engendered), and not _entia_\n(things that have being), as these men do.\n\n17. But because we have passed over Socrates, who should have come\nnext after Parmenides, we must now turn back our discourse to him.\nHim therefore has Colotes begun at the very first to remove, as the\ncommon proverb has it, from the sacred line; and having mentioned\nhow Chaerephon brought from Delphi an oracle, well known to us all,\nconcerning Socrates, he says thus: \u201cNow as to this narration of\nChaerephon\u2019s, because it is odious and absolutely sophistical, we\nwill overpass it.\u201d Plato then, that we may say nothing of others, is\nalso odious, who has committed it to writing; and the Lacedaemonians\nare yet more odious, who reserve the oracle of Lycurgus amongst their\nmost ancient and most authentic inscriptions. The oracle also of\nThemistocles, by which he persuaded the Athenians to quit their town,\nand in a naval fight defeated the barbarous Xerxes, was a sophistical\nfiction. Odious also were all the ancient legislators and founders of\nGreece, who established the most part of their temples, sacrifices,\nand solemn festivals by the answer of the Pythian Oracle. But if\nthe oracle brought from Delphi concerning Socrates, a man ravished\nwith a divine zeal to virtue, by which he is styled and declared\nwise, is odious, fictitious, and sophistical, by what name shall we\ncall your cries, noises, and shouts, your applauses, adorations and\ncanonizations, with which you extol and celebrate him who incites\nand exhorts you to frequent and continual pleasures? For thus has\nhe written in his epistle to Anaxarchus: \u201cI for my part incite and\ncall you to continual pleasures, and not to vain and empty virtues,\nwhich have nothing but turbulent hopes of uncertain fruits.\u201d And yet\nMetrodorus, writing to Timarchus, says: \u201cLet us do some extraordinarily\nexcellent thing, not suffering ourselves to be plunged in reciprocal\naffections, but retiring from this low and terrestrial life, and\nelevating ourselves to the truly holy and divinely revealed ceremonies\nand mysteries of Epicurus.\u201d And even Colotes himself, hearing one day\nEpicurus discoursing of natural things, fell suddenly at his feet and\nembraced his knees, as Epicurus himself, glorying in it, thus writes:\n\u201cFor as if you had adored what we were then saying, you were suddenly\ntaken with a desire, proceeding not from any natural cause, to come to\nus, prostrate yourself on the ground, embrace our knees, and use all\nthose gestures to us which are ordinarily practised by those who adore\nand pray to the Gods. So that you made us also,\u201d says he, \u201creciprocally\nsanctify and adore you.\u201d Those, by Jupiter, well deserve to be\npardoned, who say, they would willingly give any money for a picture\nin which should be presented to the life this fine story of one lying\nprostrate at the knees and embracing the legs of another, who mutually\nagain adores him and makes his devout prayers to him. Nevertheless this\ndevout service, how well soever it was ordered and composed by Colotes,\nreceived not the condign fruit he expected; for he was not declared\nwise; but it was only said to him: Go thy ways, and walk immortal; and\nunderstand that we also are in like manner immortal.\n\n18. These men, knowing well in their consciences that they have used\nsuch foolish speeches, have had such motions, and such passions, dare\nnevertheless call others odious. And Colotes, having shown us these\nfine first-fruits and wise positions touching the natural senses,\u2014that\nwe eat meat, and not hay or forage; and that when rivers are deep and\ngreat, we pass them in boats, but when shallow and easily fordable, on\nfoot,\u2014cries out, \u201cYou use vain and arrogant speeches, O Socrates; you\nsay one thing to those who come to discourse with you, and practise\nanother.\u201d Now I would fain know what these vain and arrogant speeches\nof Socrates were, since he ordinarily said that he knew nothing, that\nhe was always learning, and that he went enquiring and searching after\nthe truth. But if, O Colotes, you had happened on such expressions\nof Socrates as are those which Epicurus writ to Idomeneus, \u201cSend me\nthen the first-fruits for the entertainment of our sacred body, for\nourself and for our children: for so it comes upon me to speak;\u201d what\nmore arrogant and insolent words could you have used? And yet that\nSocrates spake otherwise than he lived, you have wonderful proofs in\nhis gests at Delium, at Potidaea, in his behavior during the time of\nthe Thirty Tyrants, towards Archelaus, towards the people of Athens, in\nhis poverty, and in his death. For are not these things beseeming and\nanswerable to the doctrine of Socrates? They would indeed, good sir,\nhave been indubitable testimonies to show that he acted otherwise than\nhe taught, if, having proposed pleasure for the end of life, he had led\nsuch a life as this.\n\n19. Thus much for the calumnies he has uttered against Socrates.\nColotes besides perceives not that he is himself found guilty of the\nsame offences in regard to proofs which he objects against Socrates.\nFor this is one of the sentences and propositions of Epicurus, that\nnone but the wise man ought irrevocably and unchangeably to be\npersuaded of any thing. Since then Colotes, even after those adorations\nhe performed to Epicurus, became not one of the sages, let him first\nmake these questions and interrogatories his own: How is it that being\nhungry he eats meat and not hay, and that he puts a robe about his\nbody and not about a pillar, since he is not indubitably persuaded\neither that a robe is a robe or that meat is meat? But if he not only\ndoes these things, but also passes not over rivers, when they are\ngreat and high, on foot, and flies from wolves and serpents, not being\nirrevocably persuaded that any of these things is such as it appears,\nbut yet doing every thing according to what appears to him; so likewise\nthe opinion of Socrates concerning the senses was no obstacle to him,\nbut that he might in like manner make use of things as they appeared\nto him. For it is not likely that bread appeared bread and hay hay to\nColotes, because he had read those holy rules of Epicurus which came\ndown from heaven, while Socrates through his vanity took a fancy that\nhay was bread and bread hay. For these wise men use better opinions\nand reasons than we; but to have sense, and to receive an impression\nfrom things as they appear, is common as well to the ignorant as to the\nwise, as proceeding from causes where there needs not the discourse of\nreason. And the proposition which affirms that the natural senses are\nnot perfect, nor certain enough to cause an entire belief, hinders not\nthat every thing may appear to us; but leaving us to make use of our\nsenses in our actions according to that which appears, it permits us\nnot so to give credit to them as if they were exactly true and without\nerror. For it is sufficient that in what is necessary and commodious\nfor use there is nothing better. But as for the science and knowledge\nwhich the soul of a philosopher desires to have concerning every thing,\nthe senses have it not.\n\n20. But as to this, Colotes will farther give us occasion to speak of\nit hereafter, for he brings this objection against several others.\nFurthermore, whereas he profusely derides and despises Socrates\nfor asking what man is, and in a youthful bravery (as he terms\nit) affirming that he was ignorant of it, it is manifest that he\nhimself, who scoffs at it, never so much as thought of this matter;\nbut Heraclitus on the contrary, as having done some great and worthy\nthing, said, I have been seeking myself. And of the sentences that\nwere written in Apollo\u2019s temple at Delphi, the most excellent and most\ndivine seems to have been this, Know thyself. And this it was which\ngave Socrates an occasion and beginning of doubting and enquiring\ninto it, as Aristotle says in his Platonics. And yet this appears to\nColotes ridiculous and fit to be scoffed at. And I wonder that he\nderides not also his master himself, who does as much whenever he\nwrites concerning the substance of the soul and the origin of man. For\nif that which is compounded of both, as they themselves hold,\u2014of the\nbody, to wit, and the soul,\u2014is man, he who searches into the nature of\nthe soul consequently also searches into the nature of man, beginning\nfrom his chiefest principle. Now that the soul is very difficult to be\ncomprehended by reason, and altogether incomprehensible by the exterior\nsenses, let us not learn from Socrates, who is a vainglorious and\nsophistical disputer, but let us take it from these wise men, who,\nhaving forged and framed the substance of the soul of somewhat hot,\nspiritual, and aerial, as far as to her faculties about the flesh, by\nwhich she gives heat, softness and strength to the body, proceed not\nto that which is the principal, but give over faint and tired by the\nway. For that by which she judges, remembers, loves, hates,\u2014in a word,\nthat which is prudent and rational, is,\u2014say they, made afterwards of\nI know not what nameless quality. Now we well know, that this nameless\nthing is a confession of their shameful ignorance, whilst they pretend\nthey can not name what they are not able to understand or comprehend.\nBut let this, as they say, be pardoned them. For it seems not to be a\nlight and easy matter, which every one can at the first attempt find\nout and attain to, but has retired itself to the bottom of some very\nremote place, and there lies obscurely concealed. So that there is not,\namongst so many words and terms as are in use, any one that can explain\nor show it. Socrates therefore was not a fool or blockhead for seeking\nand searching what himself was; but they are rather to be thought\nshallow coxcombs, who enquire after any other thing before this, the\nknowledge of which is so necessary and so hard to find. For how could\nhe hope to gain the knowledge of other things, who has not been able to\ncomprehend the principal part even of himself?\n\n21. But granting a little to Colotes, that there is nothing so vain,\nuseless, and odious as the seeking into one\u2019s self, let us ask\nhim, what confusion of human life is in this, and how it is that a\nman cannot continue to live, when he comes once thus to reason and\ndiscourse in himself: \u201cGo to now, what am I? Am I a composition, made\nup of soul and body; or rather a soul, serving itself and making\nuse of the body, as an horseman using his horse is not a subject\ncomposed of horse and man? Or is every one of us the principal part\nof the soul, by which we understand, reason, and act; and are all the\nother parts, both of soul and body, only organs and utensils of this\npower? Or, to conclude, is there no proper substance of the soul at\nall apart, but is only the temperature and complexion of the body so\ndisposed, that it has force and power to understand and live?\u201d But\nSocrates does not by these questions overthrow human life, since all\nnatural philosophers treat of the same matter. But those perhaps are\nthe monstrous questions and enquiries that turn every thing upside\ndown, which are in Phaedrus,[130] where he says, that every one ought\nto examine and consider himself, whether he is a savage beast, more\ncautelous, outrageous, and furious than ever was the monster Typhon; or\non the contrary, an animal more mild and gentle, partaking by Nature of\na certain divine portion, and such as is free from pride. Now by these\ndiscourses and reasonings he overturns not the life of man, but drives\nfrom it presumption and arrogance, and those haughty and extravagant\nopinions and conceits he has of himself. For this is that monster\nTyphon, which your teacher and master has made to be so great in you by\nhis warring against the Gods and divine men.\n\n22. Having done with Socrates and Plato, he next attacks Stilpo. Now as\nfor those his true doctrines and good discourses, by which he managed\nand governed himself, his country, his friends, and such kings and\nprinces as loved him and esteemed him, he has not written a word; nor\nyet what prudence and magnanimity was in his heart, accompanied with\nmeekness, moderation, and modesty. But having made mention of one of\nthose little sentences he was wont in mirth and raillery to object\nagainst the sophisters, he does, without alleging any reason against it\nor solving the subtlety of the objection, stir up a terrible tragedy\nagainst Stilpo, saying that the life of man is subverted by him,\ninasmuch as he affirms that one thing cannot be predicated of another.\n\u201cFor how,\u201d says he, \u201cshall we live, if we cannot style a man good, nor\na man a captain, but must separately name a man a man, good good, and\na captain a captain; nor can say ten thousand horsemen, or a fortified\ntown, but only call horsemen horsemen, and ten thousand ten thousand,\nand so of the rest?\u201d Now what man ever was there that lived the worse\nfor this? Or who is there that, hearing this discourse, does not\nimmediately perceive and understand it to be the speech of a man who\nrallies gallantly, and proposes to others this logical question for the\nexercise of their wits? It is not, O Colotes, a great and dangerous\nscandal not to call man good, or not to say ten thousand horsemen;\nbut not to call God God, and not to believe him to be God,\u2014as you and\nthe rest do, who will not confess that there is a Jupiter presiding\nover generation, or a Ceres giving laws, or a Neptune fostering the\nplants,\u2014it is this separation of names that is pernicious, and fills\nour life with audaciousness and an atheistical contempt of the Gods.\nWhen you pluck from the Gods the names and appellations that are tied\nto them, you abolish also the sacrifices, mysteries, processions,\nand feasts. For to whom shall we offer the sacrifices preceding the\ntilling of the ground? To whom those for the obtaining of preservation?\nHow shall we celebrate the Phosphoria, or torch-festivals, the\nBacchanals, and the ceremonies that go before marriage, if we admit\nneither Bacchantes, Gods of light, Gods who protect the sown field,\nnor preservers of the state? For this it is that touches the principal\nand greatest points, being an error in things,\u2014not in words, in the\nstructure of propositions, or use of terms.\n\nNow if these are the things that disturb and subvert human life, who\nare there that more offend and fail in language than you? For you take\nutterly away the whole class of namable things, which constitute the\nessence of language; and leave only words and their accidental objects,\nwhile you take away in the mean time the things particularly signified\nby them, by which are wrought disciplines, doctrines, preconceptions,\nintelligences, inclination, and assent, which you hold to be nothing at\nall.\n\n23. But as for Stilpo, thus his argument stands. \u201cIf of a man we\npredicate good, and of an horse running, the predicate or thing\npredicated is not the same with the subject or that of which it is\npredicated, but the essential definition of man is one, and of good\nanother. And again, to be a horse differs from to be running. For being\nasked the definition of the one and of the other, we do not give the\nsame for them both; and therefore those err who predicate the one of\nthe other. For if good is the same with man, and to run the same with\na horse, how is good affirmed also of food and medicine, and again (by\nJupiter) to run of a lion and a dog? But if the predicate is different,\nthen we do not rightly say that a man is good, and a horse runs.\u201d Now\nif Stilpo is in this exorbitant and grossly mistaken, not admitting any\ncopulation of such things as are in the subject, or affirmed of the\nsubject, with the subject itself; but holding that every one of them,\nif it is not absolutely one and the same thing with that to which it\nhappens or of which it is spoken, ought not to be spoken or affirmed of\nit,\u2014no, not even as an accident; it is nevertheless manifest, that he\nwas only offended with some words, and opposed the usual and accustomed\nmanner of speaking, and not that he overthrew man\u2019s life, and turned\nhis affairs upside down.\n\n24, Colotes then, having got rid of the old philosophers, turns to\nthose of his own time, but without naming any of them; though he would\nhave done better either to have reproved by name these moderns, as he\ndid the ancients, or else to have named neither of them. But he who\nhas so often employed his pen against Socrates, Plato, and Parmenides,\nevidently demonstrates that it is through cowardice he dares not attack\nthe living, and not for any modesty or reverence, of which he showed\nnot the least sign to those who were far more excellent than these.\nBut his meaning is, as I suspect, to assault the Cyrenaics first, and\nafterwards the Academics, who are followers of Arcesilaus. For it was\nthese who doubted of all things; but those, placing the passions and\nimaginations in themselves, were of opinion that the belief proceeding\nfrom them is not sufficient for the assuring and affirming of things;\nbut, as if it were in the siege of a town, abandoning what is without,\nthey have shut themselves up in the passions, using only _it seems_,\nand not asserting _it is_, of things without. And therefore they\ncannot, as Colotes says of them, live or have the use of things. And\nthen speaking comically of them, he adds: \u201cThese deny that there is\na man, a horse, a wall; but say that they themselves (as it were)\nbecome walls, horses, men,\u201d or \u201care impressed with the images of walls,\nhorses, or men.\u201d In which he first maliciously abuses the terms, as\ncalumniators are usually wont to do. For though these things follow\nfrom the sayings of the Cyrenaics, yet he ought to have declared the\nfact as they themselves teach it. For they affirm that things then\nbecome sweet, bitter, lightsome, or dark, when each thing has in itself\nthe natural unhindered efficacy of one of these impressions. But if\nhoney is said to be sweet, an olive-branch bitter, hail cold, wine hot,\nand the nocturnal air dark, there are many beasts, things, and men that\ntestify the contrary. For some have an aversion for honey, others feed\non the branches of the olive-tree; some are scorched by hail, others\ncooled with wine; and there are some whose sight is dim in the sun but\nwho see well by night. Wherefore opinion, containing itself within\nthese impressions, remains safe and free from error; but when it goes\nforth and attempts to be curious in judging and pronouncing concerning\nexterior things, it often deceives itself, and opposes others, who\nfrom the same objects receive contrary impressions and different\nimaginations.\n\n25. And Colotes seems properly to resemble those young children who are\nbut beginning to learn their letters. For, being accustomed to learn\nthem where they see them in their own horn-books and primers, when\nthey see them written anywhere else, they doubt and are troubled; so\nthose very discourses, which he praises and approves in the writings\nof Epicurus, he neither understands nor knows again, when they are\nspoken by others. For those who say that the sense is truly informed\nand moulded when there is presented one image round and another broken,\nbut nevertheless permit us not to pronounce that the tower is round\nand the oar broken, confirm their own passions and imaginations, but\nthey will not acknowledge and confess that the things without are so\naffected. But as the Cyrenaics must say that they are imprinted with\nthe figure of a horse or of a wall, but do not speak of the horse or\nthe wall; so also it is necessary to say that the sight is imprinted\nwith a figure round or with three unequal sides, and not that the tower\nis in that manner triangular or round. For the image by which the sight\nis affected is broken; but the oar whence that image proceeds is not\nbroken. Since then there is a difference between the impression and\nthe external subject, the belief must either remain in the impression,\nor else\u2014if it maintains the being in addition to the appearing\u2014be\nreproved and convinced of untruth. And whereas they cry out and are\noffended in behalf of the sense, because the Cyrenaics say not that\nthe thing without is hot, but that the impression made on the sense is\nsuch; is it not the same with what is said touching the taste, when\nthey say that the thing without is not sweet, but that some impression\nand motion about the sense is such? And for him who says that he has\nreceived the apprehension of an human form, but perceives not whether\nit is a man, whence has he taken occasion so to say? Is it not from\nthose who affirm that they receive an apprehension of a bowed figure\nand form, but that the sight pronounces not that the thing which was\nseen is bowed or round, but that a certain effigies of it is such?\nYes, by Jupiter, will some one say; but I, going near the tower or\ntouching the oar, will pronounce and affirm that the one is straight\nand the other has many angles and faces; but he, when he comes near\nit, will confess that it seems and appears so to him, and no more. Yes\ncertainly, good sir, and more than this, when he sees and observes the\nconsequence, that every imagination is equally worthy of belief for\nitself, and none for another; but that they are all in like condition.\nBut this your opinion is quite lost, that all the imaginations are true\nand none false or to be disbelieved, if you think that these ought to\npronounce positively of that which is without, but those you credit\nno farther than that they are so affected. For if they are in equal\ncondition as to their being believed, when they are near or when they\nare far off, it is just that either upon all of them, or else not upon\nthese, should follow the judgment pronouncing that a thing is: But if\nthere is a difference in the being affected between those that are\nnear and those that are far off, it is then false that one sense and\nimagination is not more express and evident than another. Therefore\nthose which they call testimonies and counter-testimonies are nothing\nto the sense, but are concerned only with opinion. So, if they would\nhave us following these to pronounce concerning exterior things, making\nbeing a judgment of opinion, and what appears an affection of sense,\nthey transfer the judicature from that which is totally true to that\nwhich often fails.\n\n26. But how full of trouble and contradiction in respect of one\nanother these things are, what need is there to say at present? But\nthe reputation of Arcesilaus, who was the best beloved and most\nesteemed of all the philosophers in his time, seems to have been no\nsmall eyesore to Epicurus; who says of him that, delivering nothing\npeculiar to himself or of his own invention, he imprinted in illiterate\nmen an opinion and esteem of his being very knowing and learned. Now\nArcesilaus was so far from desiring any glory by being a bringer-in of\nnew opinions, and from arrogating to himself those of the ancients,\nthat the sophisters of that time blamed him for attributing to\nSocrates, Plato, Parmenides, and Heraclitus the doctrines concerning\nthe retention of assent, and the incomprehensibility of things; having\nno need so to do, but only that he might strengthen them and render\nthem recommendable by ascribing them to such illustrious personages.\nFor this therefore thanks to Colotes, and to every one who declares\nthat the Academic doctrine was from higher times derived to Arcesilaus.\nNow as for the retention of assent and the doubting of all things,\nnot even those who have much labored in the matter, and strained\nthemselves to compose great books and large treatises concerning it,\nwere ever able to stir it; but bringing at last out of the Stoa itself\nthe cessation from all actions, as the Gorgon to frighten away the\nobjections that came against them, they were at last quite tired and\ngave over. For they could not, what attempts and stirs soever they\nmade, obtain so much from the instinct by which the appetite is moved\nto act, as to suffer itself to be called an assent, or to acknowledge\nsense for the origin and principle of its propension, but it appeared\nof its own accord to present itself to act, as having no need to be\njoined with any thing else. For against such adversaries the combat and\ndispute is lawful and just. And\n\n    Such words as you have spoke, the like you may\n    Expect to hear.[131]\n\nFor to speak to Colotes of instinct and consent is, I suppose, all one\nas to play on the harp before an ass. But to those who can give ear\nand conceive, it is said that there are in the soul three sorts of\nmotions,\u2014the imaginative, the appetitive, and the consenting. As to\nthe imaginative or the apprehension, it cannot be taken away, though\none would. For one cannot, when things approach, avoid being informed\nand (as it were) moulded by them, and receiving an impression from\nthem. The appetite, being stirred up by the imaginative, effectually\nmoves man to that which is proper and agreeable to his nature, just as\nwhen there is made a propension and inclination in the principal and\nreasonable part. Now those who withhold their assent and doubt of all\nthings take not away this, but make use of the appetition or instinct\nnaturally conducting every man to that which seems convenient for him.\nWhat then is the only thing that they shun? That in which is bred\nfalsehood and deceit,\u2014that is, opining, and precipitation in giving\nconsent,\u2014which is a yielding through weakness to that which appears,\nand has not any true utility. For action stands in need of two things,\nto wit, the apprehension or imagination of what is agreeable to Nature,\nand the instinct or appetition driving to that which is so imagined; of\nwhich, neither the one nor the other is repugnant to the retention of\nassent. For reason withdraws us from opinion, and not from appetition\nor imagination. When therefore that which is delectable seems to us to\nbe proper for us, there is no need of opinion to move and carry us to\nit, but appetition immediately exerts itself, which is nothing else but\nthe motion and inclination of the soul.\n\n27. It is their own saying, that a man must only have sense and be\nflesh and blood, and pleasure will appear to be good. Wherefore\nalso it will seem good to him who withholds his assent. For he also\nparticipates of sense, and is made of flesh and blood, and as soon as\nhe has conceived an imagination of good, desires it and does all things\nthat it may not escape from him; but as much as possibly he can, he\nwill keep himself with that which is agreeable to his nature, being\ndrawn by natural and not by geometrical constraints. For these goodly,\ngentle, and tickling motions of the flesh are, without any teacher,\nattractive enough of themselves\u2014even as these men forget not to say\u2014to\ndraw even him who will not in the least acknowledge and confess that he\nis softened and rendered pliable by them. \u201cBut how comes it to pass,\u201d\nperhaps you will say, \u201cthat he who is thus doubtful and withholds his\nassent hastens not away to the mountain, instead of going to the bath?\nOr that, rising up to go forth into the market-place, he runs not\nhis head against the wall, but takes his way directly to the door?\u201d\nDo you ask this, who hold all the senses to be infallible, and the\napprehensions of the imagination certain and true? It is because the\nbath appears to him not a mountain, but a bath; and the door seems\nnot a wall, but a door; and the same is to be said of every other\nthing. For the doctrine of retention does not pervert the sense, nor\nby absurd passions and motions work in it an alteration disturbing the\nimaginative faculty; but it only takes away opinions, and for the rest,\nmakes use of other things according to their nature.\n\nBut it is impossible, you will say, not to consent to things that are\nevident; for to deny such things as are believed is more absurd than\nneither to deny nor affirm. Who then are they that call in question\nthings believed, and contend against things that are evident? They\nwho overthrow and take away divination, who say that there is not any\ngovernment of Divine Providence, who deny the sun and the moon\u2014to whom\nall men offer sacrifices and whom they honor and adore\u2014to be animated.\nAnd do not you take away that which is apparent to all the world,\nthat the young are contained in the nature of their parents? Do you\nnot, contrary to the sense of all men, affirm that there is no medium\nbetween pleasure and pain, saying that not to be in pain is to be in\nthe fruition of pleasure, that not to do is to suffer, and that not to\nrejoice is to be grieved?\n\n28. But to let pass all the rest, what is more evident and more\ngenerally believed by all men, than that those who are seized with\nmelancholy distempers, and whose brain is troubled and whose wits are\ndistracted, do, when the fit is on them and their understanding altered\nand transported, imagine that they see and hear things which they\nneither see nor hear? Whence they frequently cry out:\n\n    Women in black arrayed bear in their hands,\n    To burn mine eyes, torches and fiery brands.\n\nAnd again:\n\n    See, in her arms she holds my mother dear.[132]\n\nThese, and many other illusions more strange and tragical than\nthese,\u2014resembling those mormos and bugbears which they themselves\nlaugh at and deride, as they are described by Empedocles to be, \u201cwith\nwinding feet and undivided hands, bodied like ox and faced like\nman,\u201d\u2014with certain other prodigious and unnatural phantoms, these men\nhave gathered together out of dreams and the alienations of distracted\nminds, and affirm that none of them is a deception of the sight, a\nfalsity, or inconsistence; but that all these imaginations are true,\nbeing bodies and figures that come from the ambient air. What thing\nthen is there so impossible in Nature as to be doubted of, if it is\npossible to believe such reveries as these? For these men, supposing\nthat such things as never any mask-maker, potter, carver of wonderful\nimages, or skilful and all-daring painter durst join together, to\ndeceive or make sport for the beholders, are seriously and in good\nearnest existent,\u2014nay, which is more, affirming that, if they are not\nreally so, all firmness of belief, all certainty of judgment and truth,\nis for ever gone,\u2014do by these their suppositions and affirmations\ncast all things into obscurity, and bring fears into our judgments,\nand suspicions into our actions,\u2014if the things which we apprehend, do,\nare familiarly acquainted with, and have at hand are grounded on the\nsame imagination and belief with these furious, absurd, and extravagant\nfancies. For the equality which they suppose to be in all apprehensions\nrather derogates from the credit of such as are usual and rational,\nthan adds any belief to those that are unusual and repugnant to reason.\nWherefore we know many philosophers who would rather and more willingly\ngrant that no imagination is true than that all are so, and that would\nrather simply disbelieve all the men they never had conversed with,\nall the things they had not experimented, and all the speeches they\nhad not heard with their own ears, than persuade themselves that any\none of these imaginations, conceived by these frantic, fanatical, and\ndreaming persons, is true. Since then there are some imaginations\nwhich may, and others which may not be rejected, it is lawful for us\nto retain our assent concerning them, though there were no other cause\nbut this discordance, which is sufficient to work in us a suspicion of\nthings, as having nothing certain and assured, but being altogether\nfull of obscurity and perturbation. For in the dissensions about the\ninfinity of worlds and the nature of atoms and individuums and their\ninclinations, although they trouble and disturb very many, there is\nyet this comfort, that none of all these things that are in question\nis near us, but rather every one of them is far remote from sense. But\nas to this diffidence, perplexity, and ignorance concerning sensible\nthings and imaginations (whether these be true or false), found even\nin our eyes, our ears, and our hands, what opinion does it not shock?\nWhat consent does it not turn upside down? For if men neither drunk,\nintoxicated, nor otherwise disturbed in their senses, but sober, sound\nin mind, and professedly writing of the truth and of the canons and\nrules by which to judge it, do in the most evident passions and motions\nof the senses set down either that which has no existence for true,\nor that which is existent for false, it is not to be wondered that a\nman should be silent about all things, but rather that he should give\nhis assent to any thing; nor is it incredible that he should have no\njudgment about things which appear, but rather that he should have\ncontrary judgments. For it is less to be wondered, that a man should\nneither affirm the one nor the other but keep himself in a mean between\ntwo opposite things, than that he should set down things repugnant and\ncontrary to one another. For he that neither affirms nor denies, but\nkeeps himself quiet, is less repugnant to him who affirms an opinion\nthan he who denies it, and to him who denies an opinion than he who\naffirms it. Now if it is possible to withhold one\u2019s assent concerning\nthese things, it is not impossible also concerning others, at least\naccording to your opinion, who say that one sense does not exceed\nanother, nor one imagination another.\n\n29. The doctrine then of retaining the assent is not, as Colotes\nthinks, a fable or an invention of rash and light-headed young men who\nplease themselves in babbling and prating; but a certain habit and\ndisposition of men who desire to keep themselves from falling into\nerror, not leaving the judgment at a venture to such suspected and\ninconstant senses, nor suffering themselves to be deceived by those\nwho hold that in uncertain matters things which do not appear are\ncredible and ought to be believed, when they see so great obscurity\nand uncertainty in things which appear. But the infinity you assert\nis a fable, and so indeed are the images you dream of; and he breeds\nin young men rashness and self-conceitedness, who writ of Pythocles,\nnot yet eighteen years of age, that there was not in all Greece a\nbetter or more excellent nature, that he admirably well expressed his\nconceptions, and that he was in other respects like a woman,\u2014praying\nthat all these extraordinary endowments of the young man might not work\nhim hatred and envy. But these are sophisters and arrogant, who write\nso impudently and proudly against great and excellent personages. I\nconfess indeed, that Plato, Aristotle, Theophrastus, and Democritus\ncontradicted those who went before them; but never durst any man\nbesides Colotes set forth with such an insolent title as this against\nall at once.\n\n30. Whence it comes to pass that, like to such as have offended some\nDivinity, confessing his fault, he says thus towards the end of his\nbook: \u201cThose who have established laws and ordinances and instituted\nmonarchies and other governments in towns and cities, have placed human\nlife in great repose and security and delivered it from many troubles;\nand if any one should go about to take this away, we should lead the\nlife of savage beasts, and should be every one ready to eat up one\nanother as we meet.\u201d For these are the very words of Colotes, though\nneither justly nor truly spoken. For if any one, taking away the laws,\nshould leave us nevertheless the doctrines of Parmenides, Socrates,\nPlato, and Heraclitus, we should be far from mutually devouring one\nanother and leading the life of beasts. For we should fear dishonest\nthings, and should for honesty alone venerate justice, the Gods, our\nsuperiors, and magistrates, believing that we have spirits and Daemons\nwho are the guardians and superintendents of human life, esteeming all\nthe gold that is upon and within the earth not to be equivalent to\nvirtue; and doing that willingly by reason, as Xenocrates says, which\nwe now do by force and through fear of the law. When then will our life\nbecome savage, unsocial, and bestial? When, the laws being taken away,\nthere shall be left doctrines inciting men to pleasure; when the world\nshall be thought not to be ruled and governed by Divine Providence;\nwhen those men shall be esteemed wise who spit at honesty if it is not\njoined with pleasure; and when such discourses and sentences as these\nshall be scoffed at and derided:\n\n    For Justice has an eye which all things sees;\n\nand again:\n\n    God near us stands, and views whate\u2019er we do;\n\nand once more: \u201cGod, as antiquity has delivered to us, holding the\nbeginning, middle, and end of the universe, makes a direct line,\nwalking according to Nature. After him follows Justice, a punisher of\nthose who have been deficient in their duties by transgressing the\ndivine law.\u201d\n\nFor they who contemn these things as if they were fables, and think\nthat the sovereign good of man consists about the belly, and in those\nother avenues by which pleasure is admitted, are such as stand in\nneed of the law, and fear, and stripes, and some king, prince, or\nmagistrate, having in his hand the sword of justice; to the end that\nthey may not devour their neighbors through their gluttony, rendered\nconfident by their atheistical impiety. For this is the life of\nbrutes, because brute beasts know nothing better nor more honest than\npleasure, understand not the justice of the Gods, nor revere the beauty\nof virtue; but if Nature has bestowed on them any point of courage,\nsubtlety, or activity, they make use of it for the satisfaction of\ntheir fleshly pleasure and the accomplishment of their lusts. And\nthe wise Metrodorus believes that this should be so, for he says:\n\u201cAll the fine, subtle, and ingenious inventions of the soul have\nbeen found out for the pleasure and delight of the flesh, or for the\nhopes of attaining to it and enjoying it, and every act which tends\nnot to this end is vain and unprofitable.\u201d The laws being by such\ndiscourses and philosophical reasons as these taken away, there wants\nnothing to a beast-like life but lions\u2019 paws, wolves\u2019 teeth, oxen\u2019s\npaunches, and camels\u2019 necks; and these passions and doctrines do the\nbeasts themselves, for want of speech and letters, express by their\nbellowings, neighings, and brayings, all their voice being for their\nbelly and the pleasure of their flesh, which they embrace and rejoice\nin either present or future; unless it be perhaps some animal which\nnaturally takes delight in chattering and garrulity.\n\n31. No sufficient praise therefore or equivalent to their deserts can\nbe given those who, for the restraining of such bestial passions, have\nset down laws, established policy and government of state, instituted\nmagistrates and ordained good and wholesome laws. But who are they that\nutterly confound and abolish this? Are they not those who withdraw\nthemselves and their followers from all part in the government? Are\nthey not those who say that the garland of tranquillity and a reposed\nlife are far more valuable than all the kingdoms and principalities\nin the world? Are they not those who declare that reigning and being\na king is a mistaking the path and straying from the right way of\nfelicity? And they write in express terms: \u201cWe are to treat how a man\nmay best keep and preserve the end of Nature, and how he may from the\nvery beginning avoid entering of his own free will and voluntarily\nupon offices of magistracy, and government over the people.\u201d And yet\nagain, these other words are theirs: \u201cThere is no need at all that\na man should tire out his mind and body to preserve the Greeks, and\nto obtain from them a crown of wisdom; but to eat and drink well,\nO Timocrates, without prejudicing, but rather pleasing the flesh.\u201d\nAnd yet in the constitution of laws and policy, which Colotes so\nmuch praises, the first and most important article is the belief and\npersuasion of the Gods. Wherefore also Lycurgus heretofore sanctified\nthe Lacedaemonians, Numa the Romans, the ancient Ion the Athenians,\nand Deucalion universally all the Greeks, through prayers, oaths,\noracles, and omens, rendering them devout and affectionate to the Gods\nby means of hopes and fears at once. And if you will take the pains to\ntravel through the world, you may find towns and cities without walls,\nwithout letters, without kings, without houses, without wealth, without\nmoney, without theatres and places of exercise; but there was never\nseen nor shall be seen by man any city without temples and Gods, or\nwithout making use of prayers, oaths, divinations, and sacrifices for\nthe obtaining of blessings and benefits, and the averting of curses and\ncalamities. Nay, I am of opinion, that a city might sooner be built\nwithout any ground to fix it on, than a commonweal be constituted\naltogether void of any religion and opinion of the Gods,\u2014or being\nconstituted, be preserved. But this, which is the foundation and\nground of all laws, do these men, not going circularly about, nor\nsecretly and by enigmatical speeches, but attacking it with the first\nof their most principal opinions, directly subvert and overthrow; and\nthen afterwards, as if they were haunted by the Furies, they come and\nconfess that they have grievously offended in thus taking away the\nlaws, and confounding the ordinances of justice and policy, that they\nmay not be capable of pardon. For to err in opinion, though it be not\nthe part of wise men, is at least human; but to impute to others the\nerrors and offences they commit themselves, how can any one declare\nwhat it is, if he forbears to give it the name it deserves?\n\n32. For if, in writing against Antidorus or Bion the sophister, he had\nmade mention of laws, policy, order, and justice, might not either of\nthem have said to him, as Electra did to her mad brother Orestes:\n\n    Lie still at ease, poor wretch; keep in thy bed,[133]\n\nand there cherish thy bit of flesh, leaving those to expostulate and\nfind fault with me who have themselves lived a civil and domestic life?\nNow such are all those whom Colotes has reviled and railed at in his\nbook. Amongst whom, Democritus in his writings advises and exhorts to\nthe learning of political science, as being the greatest of all, and\nto the accustoming one\u2019s self to bear fatigues, by which men attain\nto great wealth and honor. And as for Parmenides, he beautified and\nadorned his native country with most excellent laws which he there\nestablished, so that even to this day the officers every year, when\nthey enter first on the exercise of their charges, are obliged to\nswear that they will observe the laws and ordinances of Parmenides.\nEmpedocles brought to justice some of the principal of his city, and\ncaused them to be condemned for their insolent behavior and embezzling\nof the public treasure, and also delivered his country from sterility\nand the plague\u2014to which calamities it was before subject\u2014by immuring\nand stopping up the holes of certain mountains, whence there issued\nan hot south wind, which overspread all the plain country and blasted\nit. And Socrates, after he was condemned, when his friends offered\nhim, if he pleased, an opportunity of making his escape, absolutely\nrefused to make use of it, that he might maintain the authority of\nthe laws, choosing rather to die unjustly than to save himself by\ndisobeying the laws of his country. Melissus, being captain general of\nhis country, vanquished the Athenians in a battle at sea. Plato left\nin his writings excellent discourses concerning the laws, government,\nand policy of a commonweal; and yet he imprinted much better in the\nhearts and minds of his disciples and familiars, which caused Sicily\nto be delivered by Dion, and Thrace to be set at liberty by Pytho and\nHeraclides, who slew Cotys. Chabrias also and Phocion, those two great\ngenerals of the Athenians, came out of the Academy. As for Epicurus,\nhe indeed sent certain persons into Asia to chide Timocrates, and\nhad him removed out of the king\u2019s palace, because he had offended his\nbrother Metrodorus; and this is written in their own books. But Plato\nsent of his disciples and friends, Aristonymus to the Arcadians, to set\nin order their commonweal, Phormio to the Eleans, and Menedemus to the\nPyrrhaeans. Eudoxus gave laws to the Cnidians, and Aristotle to the\nStagirites, who were both of them the intimates of Plato. And Alexander\nthe Great demanded of Xenocrates rules and precepts for reigning well.\nAnd he who was sent to the same Alexander by the Grecians dwelling in\nAsia, and who most of all inflamed and stimulated him to embrace and\nundertake the war against the barbarian king of Persia, was Delius the\nEphesian, one of Plato\u2019s familiars. Zeno, the disciple of Parmenides,\nhaving attempted to kill the tyrant Demylus, and failing in his design,\nmaintained the doctrine of Parmenides, like pure and fine gold tried\nin the fire, that there is nothing which a magnanimous man ought to\ndread but dishonor, and that there are none but children and women, or\neffeminate and women-hearted men, who fear pain. For, having with his\nown teeth bitten off his tongue, he spit it in the tyrant\u2019s face.\n\n33. But out of the school of Epicurus, and from among those who follow\nhis doctrine, I will not ask what tyrant-killer has proceeded, nor yet\nwhat man valiant and victorious in feats of arms, what lawgiver, what\nprince, what counsellor, or what governor of the people; neither will\nI demand, who of them has been tormented or has died for supporting\nright and justice. But which of all these sages has for the benefit and\nservice of his country undertaken so much as one voyage at sea, gone of\nan embassy, or expended a sum of money? What record is there extant of\none civil action in matter of government, performed by any of you? And\nyet, because Metrodorus went down one day from the city as far as the\nhaven of Piraeus, taking a journey of forty stadia to assist Mithres\na Syrian, one of the king of Persia\u2019s court who had been arrested and\ntaken prisoner, he writ of it to every one and in all his letters,\nEpicurus also highly magnifying and extolling this wonderful voyage.\nWhat value then, think you, would they have put upon it, if they had\ndone such an act as Aristotle did, who procured the restoration and\nrebuilding of Stagira, the town of his nativity, after it had been\ndestroyed by King Philip? Or as Theophrastus, who twice delivered his\ncity, when possessed and held by tyrants? Would not the river Nile\nsooner have given over to bear the paper-reed, than they have been\nweary of writing their brave exploits?\n\nAnd it is not the greatest indignity, that, of so many sects of\nphilosophers as have been extant, they alone should enjoy the benefits\nthat are in cities, without having ever contributed to them any thing\nof their own; but far worse is it that, while there are not even any\ntragical or comical poets who do not always endeavor to do or say some\ngood thing or other in defence of the laws and policy, these men, if\nperadventure they write, write of policy, that we may not concern\nourselves in the government of the commonweal,\u2014of rhetoric, that we may\nnot perform an act of eloquence,\u2014and of royalty, that we may shun the\nliving and conversing with kings. Nor do they ever name any of those\ngreat personages who have intermeddled in civil affairs, but only to\nscoff at them and abolish their glory. Thus they say that Epaminondas\nhad something of good, but that very little, or \u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd, for that is the\nvery word they use. They moreover call him iron-hearted, and ask what\nailed him that he went marching his army through all Peloponnesus, and\nwhy he did not rather keep himself quiet at home with a night-cap on\nhis head, employed only in cherishing and making much of his belly.\nBut methinks I ought not in this place to omit what Metrodorus writ\nin his book of Philosophy, when, utterly abjuring all meddling in the\nmanagement of the state, he said thus: \u201cSome, through an abundance of\nvanity and arrogance, have so deep an insight into the business of\nit, that in treating about the precepts of good life and virtue, they\nsuffer themselves to be carried away with the very same desires as were\nLycurgus and Solon.\u201d What is this? Was it then vanity and abundance of\nvanity, to set free the city of Athens, to render Sparta well-policied\nand governed by wholesome laws, that young men might do nothing\nlicentiously, nor get children upon common courtesans and whores, and\nthat riches, delights, intemperance, and dissolution might no longer\nbear sway and have command in cities, but law and justice? For these\nwere the desires of Solon. To this Metrodorus, by way of scorn and\ncontumely, adds this conclusion: \u201cIt is then very well beseeming a\nfree-born gentleman to laugh heartily, as at other men, so especially\nat these Solons and Lycurguses.\u201d But such a one, O Metrodorus, is\nnot a gentleman, but a servile and dissolute person, and deserves to\nbe scourged, not with that whip which is for free-born persons, but\nwith that scourge strung with ankle-bones; with which those gelded\nsacrificers called Galli were wont to be chastised, when they failed of\nperforming their duty in the ceremonies and sacrifices of the Goddess\nCybele, the great Mother of the Gods.\n\n34. But that they made war not against the lawgivers but against the\nlaws themselves, one may hear and understand from Epicurus. For in his\nquestions, he asks himself, whether a wise man, being assured that it\nwill not be known, will do any thing that the laws forbid. To which he\nanswers: \u201cThat is not so easy to determine simply,\u201d\u2014that is, \u201cI will do\nit indeed, but I am not willing to confess it.\u201d And again, I suppose,\nwriting to Idomeneus, he exhorts him not to make his life a slave to\nthe laws or to the opinions of men, unless it be to avoid the trouble\nthey prepare, by the scourge and chastisement, so near at hand. If then\nthose who abolish the laws, governments, and policies of men subvert\nand destroy human life, and if Metrodorus and Epicurus do this, by\ndehorting and withdrawing their friends from concerning themselves in\npublic affairs, by hating those who intermeddle in them, by reviling\nthe first most wise lawgivers, and by advising contempt of the laws\nprovided there is no fear and danger of the whip and punishment, I do\nnot see that Colotes has brought so many false accusations against the\nother philosophers as he has alleged and advanced true ones against the\nwritings and doctrines of Epicurus.\n\n\n\n\nPLUTARCH\u2019S CONSOLATORY LETTER TO HIS WIFE.\n\n\nPLUTARCH TO HIS WIFE: ALL HEALTH\n\n1. As for the messenger you despatched to tell me of the death of my\nlittle daughter, it seems he missed his way as he was going to Athens.\nBut when I came to Tanagra, I heard of it by my niece. I suppose by\nthis time the funeral is over. I wish that whatever has been done\nmay create you no dissatisfaction, as well now as hereafter. But if\nyou have designedly let any thing alone, depending upon my judgment,\nthinking better to determine the point if I were with you, I pray let\nit be without ceremony and timorous superstition, which I know are far\nfrom you.\n\n2. Only, dear wife, let you and me bear our affliction with patience.\nI know very well and do comprehend what loss we have had; but if I\nshould find you grieve beyond measure, this would trouble me more\nthan the thing itself. For I had my birth neither from a stock nor a\nstone;[134] and you know it full well, I having been assistant to you\nin the education of so many children, which we brought up at home under\nour own care. This daughter was born after four sons, when you were\nlonging to bear a daughter; which made me call her by your own name.\nTherefore I know she was particularly dear to you. And grief must\nhave a peculiar pungency in a mind tenderly affectionate to children,\nwhen you call to mind how naturally witty and innocent she was, void\nof anger, and not querulous. She was naturally mild, and compassionate\nto a miracle. And her gratitude and kindness not only gave us delight,\nbut also manifested her generous nature; for she would pray her nurse\nto give suck, not only to other children, but to her very playthings,\nas it were courteously inviting them to her table, and making the best\ncheer for them she could.\n\n3. Now, my dear wife, I see no reason why these and the like things,\nwhich delighted us so much when she was alive, should upon remembrance\nof them afflict us when she is dead. But I also fear lest, while we\ncease from sorrowing, we should forget her; as Clymene said,\n\n    I hate the handy horned bow,\n    And banish youthful pastimes now;\n\nbecause she would not be put in mind of her son by the exercises he had\nbeen used to. For Nature always shuns such things as are troublesome.\nBut since our little daughter afforded all our senses the sweetest and\nmost charming pleasure; so ought we to cherish her memory, which will\nconduce many ways\u2014or rather many fold\u2014more to our joy than our grief.\nAnd it is but just, that the same arguments which we have oft-times\nused to others should prevail upon ourselves at this so seasonable a\ntime, and that we should not supinely sit down and overwhelm the joys\nwhich we have tasted with a multiplicity of new griefs.\n\n4. Moreover, they who were present at the funeral report this with\nadmiration, that you neither put on mourning, nor disfigured yourself\nor any of your maids; neither were there any costly preparations\nnor magnificent pomp; but all things were managed with silence and\nmoderation in the presence of our relatives alone. And it seemed not\nstrange to me that you, who never used richly to dress yourself for the\ntheatre or other public solemnities, esteeming such magnificence vain\nand useless even in matters of delight, have now practised frugality\non this sad occasion. For a virtuous woman ought not only to preserve\nher purity in riotous feasts, but also to think thus with herself, that\nthe tempest of the mind in violent grief must be calmed by patience,\nwhich does not intrench on the natural love of parents towards their\nchildren, as many think, but only struggles against the disorderly and\nirregular passions of the mind. For we allow this love of children\nto discover itself in lamenting, wishing for, and longing after them\nwhen they are dead. But the excessive inclination to grief, which\ncarries people on to unseemly exclamations and furious behavior, is no\nless culpable than luxurious intemperance. Yet reason seems to plead\nin its excuse; because, instead of pleasure, grief and sorrow are\ningredients of the crime. What can be more irrational, I pray, than\nto check excessive laughter and joy, and yet to give a free course\nto rivers of tears and sighs, which flow from the same fountain? Or,\nas some do, quarrel with their wives for using artificial helps to\nbeauty, and in the mean time suffer them to shave their heads, wear the\nmournful black, sit disconsolate, and lie in pain? And, which is worst\nof all, if their wives at any time chastise their servants or maids\nimmoderately, they will interpose and hinder them, but at the same time\nsuffering them to torment and punish themselves most cruelly, in a case\nwhich peculiarly requires their greatest tenderness and humanity?\n\n5. But between us, dear wife, there never was any occasion for such\ncontests, nor, I think, will there ever be. For there is no philosopher\nof our acquaintance who is not in love with your frugality, both in\napparel and diet; nor a citizen, to whom the simplicity and plainness\nof your dress is not conspicuous, both at religious sacrifices and\npublic shows in the theatre. Formerly also you discovered on the like\noccasion a great constancy of mind, when you lost your eldest son; and\nagain, when the lovely Chaeron left us. For I remember, when the news\nwas brought me of my son\u2019s death, as I was returning home with some\nfriends and guests who accompanied me to my house, when they beheld\nall things in order, and observed a profound silence everywhere,\u2014as\nthey afterwards declared to others,\u2014they thought no such calamity had\nhappened, but that the report was false. So discreetly had you settled\nthe affairs of the house at that time, when no small confusion and\ndisorder might have been expected. And yet you gave this son suck\nyourself, and endured the lancing of your breast, to prevent the ill\neffects of a contusion. These are things worthy of a generous woman,\nand one that loves her children.\n\n6. Whereas, we see most other women receive their children in their\nhands as playthings with a feminine mirth and jollity; and afterwards,\nif they chance to die, they will drench themselves in the most vain and\nexcessive sorrow. Not that this is any effect of their love, for that\ngentle passion acts regularly and discreetly; but it rather proceeds\nfrom a desire of vain-glory, mixed with a little natural affection,\nwhich renders their mourning barbarous, brutish, and extravagant. Which\nthing Aesop knew very well, when he told the story of Jupiter\u2019s giving\nhonors to the Gods; for, it seems, Grief also made her demands, and\nit was granted that she should be honored, but only by those who were\nwilling of their own accord to do it. And indeed, this is the beginning\nof sorrow. Everybody first gives her free access; and after she is\nonce rooted and settled and become familiar, she will not be forced\nthence with their best endeavors. Therefore she must be resisted at her\nfirst approach; nor must we surrender the fort to her by any exterior\nsigns, whether of apparel, or shaving the hair, or any other such like\nsymptoms of mournful weakness; which happening daily, and wounding\nus by degrees with a kind of foolish bashfulness, at length do so\nenervate the mind, and reduce her to such straits, that quite dejected\nand besieged with grief, the poor timorous wretch dare not be merry,\nor see the light, or eat and drink in company. This inconvenience is\naccompanied by a neglect of the body, carelessness of anointing and\nbathing, with whatsoever else relates to the elegancy of human life.\nWhereas, on the contrary, the soul, when it is disordered, ought to\nreceive aid from the vigor of a healthful body. For the sharpest\nedge of the soul\u2019s grief is rebated and slacked, when the body is in\ntranquillity and ease, like the sea in a calm. But where, from an ill\ncourse of diet, the body becomes dry and hot, so that it cannot supply\nthe soul with commodious and serene spirits, but only breathes forth\nmelancholy vapors and exhalations, which perpetually annoy her with\ngrief and sadness; there it is difficult for a man (though never so\nwilling and desirous) to recover the tranquillity of his mind, after it\nhas been disturbed with so many evil affections.\n\n7. But that which is most to be dreaded in this case does not at\nall affrighten me, to wit, the visits of foolish women, and their\naccompanying you in your tears and lamentations; by which they sharpen\nyour grief, not suffering it either of itself or by the help of others\nto fade and vanish away. For I am not ignorant how great a combat you\nlately entered, when you assisted the sister of Theon, and opposed\nthe women who came running in with horrid cries and lamentations,\nbringing fuel as it were to her passion. Assuredly, when men see their\nneighbor\u2019s house on fire, every one contributes his utmost to quench\nit; but when they see the mind inflamed with furious passion, they\nbring fuel to nourish and increase the flame. When a man\u2019s eye is in\npain, he is not suffered to touch it, though the inflammation provoke\nhim to it, nor will they that are near him meddle with it. But he who\nis galled with grief sits and exposes his distemper to every one, like\nwaters that all may poach in; and so that which at first seemed a light\nitching or trivial smart, by much fretting and provoking, becomes a\ngreat and almost incurable disease. But I know very well that you will\narm yourself against these inconveniences.\n\n8. Moreover, I would have you endeavor to call often to mind that\ntime when our daughter was not as yet born to us, and when we had\nno cause to complain of Fortune. Then, joining that time with this,\nargue thus with yourself, that we are now in the same condition as\nthen. Otherwise, dear wife, we shall seem discontented at the birth\nof our little daughter, if we own that our circumstances were better\nbefore her birth. But the two years of her life are by no means to be\nforgotten by us, but to be numbered amongst our blessings, in that they\nafforded us an agreeable pleasure. Nor must we esteem a small good for\na great evil; nor ungratefully complain against Fortune for what she\nhas actually given us, because she has not added what we wished for.\nCertainly, to speak reverently of the Gods, and to bear our lot with\nan even mind without accusing Fortune, always brings with it a fair\nreward. But he who in such a case calls prosperous things to mind, and\nturning his thoughts from dark and melancholy objects, fixes them on\nbright and cheerful ones, will either quite extinguish his grief, or by\nallaying it with contrary sentiments, will render it weak and feeble.\nFor, as perfumes bring delight to the nose, and arm it against ill\nscents, so the remembrance of happiness gives necessary assistance\nin adversity to those who avoid not the recollection of their past\nprosperity nor complain at all against Fortune. For certainly it would\nlittle become us to accuse our life, if like a book it hath but one\nlittle blot in it, though all the rest be fair and clean.\n\n9. For you have oftentimes heard, that true happiness consists in\nthe right discourses and counsels of the mind, tending to its own\nconstant establishment, and that the changes of Fortune are of no great\nimportance to the felicity of our life. But even if we must also be\ngoverned by exterior things, and with the common sort of people have a\nregard to casualties, and suffer any kind of men to be judges of our\nhappiness, however, do not you take notice of the tears and moans of\nsuch as visit you at present, condoling your misfortunes; for their\ntears and sighs are but of course. But rather, do you consider how\nhappy every one of them esteems you for the children you have, the\nhouse you keep, and the life you lead. For it would be an ill thing,\nwhile others covet your fortune, though sullied with this affliction,\nthat you should exclaim against what you enjoy, and not be sensible,\nfrom the taste of affliction, how grateful you ought to be for the\nhappiness which remains untouched. Or, like some who, collecting all\nthe defective verses of Homer, pass over at the same time so many\nexcellent parts of his poems, so shall we peevishly complain of and\nreckon up the inconveniences of our life, neglecting at the same time\npromiscuously the benefits thereof? Or, shall we imitate covetous and\nsordid misers, who, having heaped together much riches, never enjoy\nwhat they have in possession, but bewail it if it chance to be lost?\n\nBut if you lament the poor girl because she died unmarried and without\noffspring, you have wherewithal to comfort yourself, in that you are\ndefective in none of these things, having had your share. And these\nare not to be esteemed at once great evils where they are wanted, and\nsmall benefits where they are enjoyed. But so long as she is gone to\na place where she feels no pain, what need is there of our grief? For\nwhat harm can befall us from her, when she is free from all hurt? And\nsurely the loss of even great things abates the grief, when it is come\nto this, that we have no need or use of them. But thy Timoxena was\ndeprived but of small matter; for she had no knowledge but of such,\nneither took she delight but in such small things. But for that which\nshe never was sensible of, and which did not so much as once enter into\nher thoughts, how can you say it is taken from her?\n\n10. As for what you hear others say, who persuade the vulgar that\nthe soul, when once freed from the body, suffers no inconvenience or\nevil nor is sensible at all, I know that you are better grounded in\nthe doctrines delivered down to us from our ancestors, as also in the\nsacred mysteries of Bacchus, than to believe such stories; for the\nreligious symbols are well known to us who are of the fraternity.\nTherefore be assured, that the soul, being incapable of death, is\naffected in the same manner as birds that are kept in a cage. For if\nshe has been a long time educated and cherished in the body, and by\nlong custom has been made familiar with most things of this life, she\nwill (though separable) return again, and at length enter the body; nor\nceaseth it by new births now and then to be entangled in the chances\nand events of this life. For do not think that old age is therefore\nevil spoken of and blamed, because it is accompanied with wrinkles,\ngray hairs, and weakness of body. But this is the most troublesome\nthing in old age, that it maketh the soul weak in its remembrance of\ndivine things, and too earnest for things relating to the body; thus\nit bendeth and boweth, retaining that form which it took of the body.\nBut that which is taken away in youth, being more soft and tractable,\nsoon returns to its native vigor and beauty. Just as fire that is\nquenched, if it be forthwith kindled again, sparkles and burns out\nimmediately.... So most speedily\n\n    \u2019Twere good to pass the gates of death,[135]\n\nbefore too great a love of bodily and earthly things be engendered in\nthe soul, and it become soft and tender by being used to the body, and\n(as it were) by charms and potions incorporated with it.\n\n11. But the truth of this will appear in the laws and traditions\nreceived from our ancestors. For when children die, no libations nor\nsacrifices are made for them, nor any other of those ceremonies which\nare wont to be performed for the dead. For infants have no part of\nearth or earthly affections. Nor do we hover or tarry about their\nsepulchres or monuments, or sit by when their dead bodies are exposed.\nThe laws of our country forbid this, and teach us that it is an impious\nthing to lament for those whose souls pass immediately into a better\nand more divine state. Wherefore, since it is safer to give credit to\nour traditions than to call them in question, let us comply with the\ncustom in outward and public behavior, and let our interior be more\nunpolluted, pure, and holy....\n\n\n\n\nOF THE THREE SORTS OF GOVERNMENT, MONARCHY, DEMOCRACY, AND OLIGARCHY.\n\n\n1. AS I was considering with myself to bring forth and propose to the\njudgment of this worthy company the discourse I held yesterday in your\npresence, methought I heard political virtue\u2014not in the illusion of a\ndream, but in a true and real vision\u2014say thus to me.\n\n    A golden ground is laid for sacred songs.\n\nWe have already laid the foundation of the discourse by persuading\nand exhorting persons to concern themselves in managing the affairs\nof the commonweal, and now we proceed to build upon it the doctrine\nwhich is due after such an exhortation. For after a man has received\nan admonition and exhortation to deal in the affairs of the state,\nthere ought consequently to be given him the precepts of government,\nfollowing and observing which, he may, as much as it is possible for a\nman to do, profit the public, and in the mean time honestly prosecute\nhis own affairs with such safety and honor as shall be meet for him.\n\nThere is first then one point to be discoursed, which, as it is\nprecedent to what we have hereafter to say, so depends on what we have\nsaid before. Now this is, what sort of policy and government is best?\nFor as there are many sorts of lives in particular men, so also are\nthere in people and states; and the life of a people or state is its\npolicy and government. It is therefore necessary to declare which is\nthe best, that a statesman may choose it from among the rest, or, if\nthat is not possible for him to do, he may at least take that which has\nthe nearest resemblance to the best.\n\n2. Now there is one signification of this word policy (\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1) which\nimports as much as _burgess-ship_, that is, a participation in the\nrights and privileges belonging to a town, city, or borough; as when we\nsay that the Megarians, by an edict of their city, presented Alexander\nthe Great with their _policy_, that is, their _burgess-ship_, and that,\nAlexander laughing at the offer they made him of it, they answered him,\nthat they had never decreed that honor to any but Hercules and now to\nhimself. This he wondering to hear accepted their present, thinking it\nhonorable inasmuch as it was rare. The life also of a political person,\nwho is concerned in the government of the commonweal, is called policy,\nas when we praise the policy of Pericles or Bias, that is, the manner\nof their government, and on the contrary, blame that of Hyperbolus and\nCleon. Some moreover there are, who call a great and memorable action\nperformed in the administration of a commonweal a policy, such as is\nthe distribution of money, the suppressing of a war, the introduction\nof some notable decree worthy to be kept in perpetual memory. In which\nsignification it is a common manner of speaking to say, This man to-day\nhas done a policy, if he has peradventure effected some remarkable\nmatter in the government of the state.\n\n3. Besides all these significations there is yet another, that is, the\norder and state by which a commonweal is governed, and by which affairs\nare managed and administered. According to which we say that there are\nthree sorts of policy or public government,\u2014to wit, Monarchy, which\nis regality or kingship, Oligarchy, which is the government by peers\nand nobles, and Democracy, which is a popular or (as we term it) a free\nstate. Now all these are mentioned by Herodotus in his Third Book,[136]\nwhere he compares them one with another. And these seem to be the most\ngeneral of all; for all other sorts are, as it were, the depravation\nand corruption of these, either by defect or excess; as it is in the\nfirst consonances of music, when the strings are either too straight or\ntoo slack.\n\nNow these three sorts of government have been distributed amongst the\nnations that have had the mightiest and the greatest empire. Thus the\nPersians enjoyed regality or kingship, because their king had full\nabsolute power in all things, without being liable to render an account\nto any one. The Spartans had a council consisting of a small number,\nand those the best and most considerable persons in the city, who\ndespatched all affairs. The Athenians maintained popular government\nfree and exempt from any other mixture. In which administration when\nthere are any faults, their transgressions and exorbitances are styled\ntyrannies, oppressions of the stronger, unbridled licentiousness of the\nmultitude. That is, when the prince who has the royalty permits himself\nto outrage whomever he pleases, and will not suffer any remonstrance\nto be made him concerning it, he becomes a tyrant; when a few lords or\nsenators in whose hands the government is arrive at that arrogance as\nto contemn all others, they turn oppressors; and when a popular state\nbreaks forth into disobedience and levelling, it runs into anarchy\nand unmeasurable liberty: and in a word, all of them together will be\nrashness and folly.\n\n4. Even then as a skilful musician will make use of all sorts of\ninstruments, and play on every one of them, accommodating himself in\nsuch manner as its quality can bear and as shall be fit to make it\nyield the sweetest sound, but yet, if he will follow Plato\u2019s counsel,\nwill lay aside fiddles, many-stringed virginals, psalteries, and harps,\npreferring before all other the lute and bandore; in like manner,\nan able statesman will dexterously manage the Laconic and Lycurgian\nseignory or oligarchy, fitting and accommodating his companions who\nare of equal authority with him, and by little and little drawing and\nreducing them to be managed by himself. He will also carry himself\ndiscreetly in a popular state, as if he had to deal with an instrument\nof many and differently sounding strings, one while letting down and\nremitting some things, and again extending others, as he shall see his\nopportunity and find it most convenient for the government, to which he\nwill vigorously apply himself, well knowing when and how he ought to\nresist and contradict; but yet, if he might be permitted to make his\nchoice from amongst all sorts of government, as from so many musical\ninstruments, he would not, if Plato\u2019s advice might be taken, choose any\nother but monarchy or regal authority, as being that which is indeed\nalone able to support that most perfect and most lofty note of virtue,\nwithout suffering him either by force or by grace and favor, to frame\nhimself for advantage and gain. For all other sorts of governments do\nin a manner as much rule a statesman as he does them, no less carrying\nhim than they are carried by him; forasmuch as he has no certain\npower over those from whom he has his authority, but is very often\nconstrained to cry out in these words of the poet Aeschylus, which King\nDemetrius, surnamed the Town-taker, often alleged against Fortune,\nafter he had lost his kingdom\n\n    Thou mad\u2019st me first, and now undoest me quite.\n\n\n\n\n  WHETHER THE ATHENIANS WERE MORE RENOWNED FOR THEIR WARLIKE\n  ACHIEVEMENTS OR FOR THEIR LEARNING.\n\n\n1.... THESE things he rightly spoke to the commanders that accompanied\nhim, to whom he opened the way for future performances, while he\nexpelled the barbarians and restored Greece to her ancient liberty. And\nthe same thing may be said to those that magnify themselves for their\nwritings. For if there were none to act, there would be none to write.\nTake away the political government of Pericles, and the naval trophies\nof Phormio at Rhium, and the brave achievements of Nicias at Cythera,\nMegara, and Corinth, Demosthenes\u2019s Pylos, and the four hundred captives\ntaken by Cleon, Tolmides sailing round the Peloponnesus, and Myronidas\nvanquishing the Boeotians at Oenophyta: and you murder Thucydides.\nTake away the daring braveries of Alcibiades in the Hellespont, and of\nThrasyllus near Lesbos; the dissolution of the oligarchy by Theramenes;\nThrasybulus, Archippus, and the seventy that from Phylae ventured to\nattack the Lacedaemonian tyranny; and Conon again enforcing Athens\nto take the sea: and then there is an end of Cratippus. For as for\nXenophon, he was his own historian, relating the exploits of the army\nunder his command, but saying that Themistogenes the Syracusan had\nwritten the history of them; dedicating the honor of his writing to\nanother, that writing of himself as of another, he might gain the\nmore credit. But all the other historians, as the Clinodemi, Diyli,\nPhilochorus, Philarchus, were but the actors of other men\u2019s deeds,\nas of so many plays, while they compiled the acts of kings and great\ngenerals, and thrusting themselves into the memory of their fame,\npartake of a kind of lustre and light from them. For there is a certain\nshadow of glory which reflects from those that act to those that write,\nwhile the actions of another appear in the discourse as in a mirror.\n\n2. But this city was the mother and charitable nurse of many other arts\nand sciences; some of which she first invented and illustrated, to\nothers she gave both efficacy, honor, and increase. More especially to\nher is painting beholden for its first invention, and the perfection to\nwhich it has attained. For Apollodorus the painter, who first invented\nthe mixing of colors and the softening of shadows, was an Athenian.\nOver whose works there is this inscription:\n\n    \u2019Tis no hard thing to reprehend me;\n    But let the men that blame me mend me.\n\nThen for Euphranor, Nicias, Asclepiodorus, and Plistaenetus the brother\nof Phidias, some of them painted the victories, others the battles of\ngreat generals, and some of them heroes themselves. Thus Euphranor,\ncomparing his own Theseus with another drawn by Parrhasius, said, that\nParrhasius\u2019s Theseus ate roses, but his fed upon beef. For Parrhasius\u2019s\npiece was daintily painted, and perhaps it might be something like the\noriginal. But he that beheld Euphranor\u2019s Theseus might well exclaim,\n\n    Race of Erechtheus bold and stout,\n    Whom Pallas bred.[137]\n\nEuphranor also painted with great spirit the battle of Mantinea,\nfought by the cavalry between the Athenians and Epaminondas. The\nstory was thus. The Theban Epaminondas, puffed up with his victory at\nLeuctra, and designing to insult and trample over fallen Sparta and\nthe glory of that city, with an army of seventy thousand men invaded\nand laid waste the Lacedaemonian territory, stirred up the subject\npeople to revolt, and not far from Mantinea provoked the Spartans to\nbattle; but they neither being willing nor indeed daring to encounter\nhim, being in expectation of a reinforcement from Athens, Epaminondas\ndislodged in the night-time, and with all the secrecy imaginable fell\ninto the Lacedaemonian territory; and missed but little of taking\nSparta itself, being destitute of men to defend it. But the allies of\nthe Lacedaemonians made haste to its relief; whereupon Epaminondas\nmade a show as if he would again return to spoiling and laying waste\nthe country; and by this means deceiving and amusing his enemies, he\nretreats out of Laconia by night, and with swift marches coming upon\nthe Mantineans unexpectedly, at what time they were deliberating to\nsend relief to Sparta, presently commanded the Thebans to prepare to\nstorm the town. Immediately the Thebans, who had a great conceit of\ntheir warlike courage, took their several posts, and began to surround\nthe city. This put the Mantineans into a dismal consternation, and\nfilled the whole city with dreadful outcries and hurly-burly, as being\nneither able to withstand such a torrent of armed men ready to rush in\nupon them, nor having any hopes of succor.\n\nBut at the same time, and by good fortune, the Athenians came down from\nthe hills into the plains of Mantinea, not knowing any thing of the\ncritical moment that required more speedy haste, but marching leisurely\nalong. However, so soon as they were informed of the danger of their\nallies, by one that scouted out from the rest, though but few in\nrespect of the number of their enemies, single of themselves, and tired\nwith their march, yet they presently drew up into order of battle; and\nthe cavalry charging up to the very gates of Mantinea, there happened a\nterrible battle between the horse on both sides; wherein the Athenians\ngot the better, and so saved Mantinea out of Epaminondas\u2019s hands. This\nconflict was painted by Euphranor, and you see in the picture with what\nstrength, what fury and vigor they fought. And yet I do not believe\nthat any one will compare the skill of the painter with that of the\ngeneral; or would endure that any one should prefer the picture before\nthe trophy, or the imitation before the truth itself.\n\n3. Though indeed Simonides calls painting silent poetry, and poetry\nspeaking painting. For those actions which painters set forth as they\nwere doing, those history relates when they were done. And what the\none sets forth in colors and figures, the other relates in words and\nsentences; only they differ in the materials and manner of imitation.\nHowever, both aim at the same end, and he is accounted the best\nhistorian, who can make the most lively descriptions both of persons\nand passions. Therefore Thucydides always drives at this perspicuity,\nto make the hearer (as it were) a spectator, and to inculcate the same\npassions and perturbations of mind into his readers as they were in\nwho beheld the causes of those effects. For Demosthenes embattling the\nAthenians near the rocky shore of Pylos; Brasidas hastening the pilot\nto run the ship aground, then going to the rowers\u2019 seats, then wounded\nand fainting, sinking down in that part of the vessel where the oars\ncould not trouble him; the land fight of the Spartans from the sea, and\nthe sea engagement of the Athenians from the land; then again in the\nSicilian war, both a land fight and sea engagement, so fought that\nneither had the better,[138]... So that if we may not compare painters\nwith generals, neither must we equal historians to them.\n\nThersippus of Eroeadae brought the first news of the victory at\nMarathon, as Heraclides of Pontus relates. But most report that Eucles,\nrunning armed with his wounds reeking from the fight, and falling\nthrough the door into the first house he met, expired with only these\nwords in his mouth, \u201cGod save ye, we are well.\u201d Now this man brought\nthe news himself of the success of a fight wherein he was present in\nperson. But suppose that any of the goat-keepers or herd-men had beheld\nthe combat from some high hill at a distance, and seeing the success of\nthat great achievement, greater than by words can be expressed, should\nhave come to the city without any wound or blood about him, and should\nhave claimed the honors done to Cynaegirus, Callimachus, and Polyzelus,\nfor giving an account of their wounds, their bravery and deaths,\nwouldst thou not have thought him impudent above impudence itself;\nseeing that the Lacedaemonians gave the messenger that brought the\nnews of the victory at Mantinea[139] no other reward than a quantity\nof victuals from the public mess? But historians are (as it were)\nwell-voiced relators of the actions of great men, who add grace and\nbeauty and dint of wit to their relations, and to whom they that first\nlight upon them and read them are indebted for their pleasing tidings.\nAnd being read, they are applauded for transmitting to posterity the\nactions of those that do bravely. For words do not make actions, though\nwe give them the hearing.\n\n4. But there is a certain grace and glory of the poetic art, when it\nresembles the grandeur of the actions themselves; according to that of\nHomer,\n\n    And many falsities he did unfold,\n    That looked like truth, so smoothly were they told.[140]\n\nIt is reported also, that when one of his familiar friends said to\nMenander, The feasts of Bacchus are at hand, and thou hast made ne\u2019er a\ncomedy; he made him this answer: By all the Gods, I have made a comedy,\nfor I have laid my plot; and there remains only to make the verses and\nmeasures to it. So that the poets themselves believe the actions to be\nmore necessary than the words, and the first things to be considered.\nCorinna likewise, when Pindar was but a young man and made too daring\na use of his eloquence, gave him this admonition, that he was no poet,\nfor that he never composed any fables, which was the chiefest office of\npoetry; in regard that strange words, figures, metaphors, songs, and\nmeasures were invented to give a sweetness to things. Which admonition\nPindar laying up in his mind, wrote a certain ode which thus begins:\n\n            Shall I Ismenus sing,\n    Or Melia, that from spindles all of gold\n            Her twisted yarn unwinds,\n        Or Cadmus, that most ancient king,\n    Or else the sacred race of Sparti bold,\n    Or Hercules, that far in strength transcends.\n\nWhich when he showed to Corinna, she with a smile replied: When you\nsow, you must scatter the seed with your hand, not empty the whole\nsack at once. And indeed we find that Pindar intermixes in his poetic\nnumbers a collection of all sorts of fables. Now that poetry employs\nitself in mythology is agreed by Plato likewise. For a fable is the\nrelation of a false story resembling truth, and therefore very remote\nfrom real actions; for relation is the image of action, as fable is the\nimage of relation. And therefore they that feign actions fall as far\nbehind historians as they that speak differ from those that act.\n\n5. Athens therefore never bred up any true artist in epic or lyric\nverse. For Cinesias was a troublesome writer of dithyrambics, a person\nof mean parentage and of no repute; and being jeered and derided by the\ncomedians, proved very unfortunate in the pursuit of fame.\n\nNow for the dramatic poets, the Athenians looked upon comedy to be so\nignoble and troublesome, that they published a law that no Areopagite\nshould make any comedies. But tragedy flourished and was cried up, and\nwith wonder and admiration heard and beheld by all people in those\ndays, deceiving them with fables and the display of various passions;\nwhereby, as Gorgias says, he that deceived was more just than he that\ndeceived not, and he that was deceived was wiser than he who was not\ndeceived. He that deceived was more just, because it was no more than\nwhat he pretended to do; and he that was deceived was wiser, for that\nhe must be a man of no sense that is not taken with the sweetness\nof words. And yet what benefit did those fine tragedies procure the\nAthenians? But the shrewdness and cunning of Themistocles walled\nthe city, the industry of Pericles adorned their citadel, and Cimon\nadvanced them to command their neighbors. But as for the wisdom of\nEuripides, the eloquence of Sophocles, the lofty style of Aeschylus,\nwhat calamity did they avert from the city; or what renown or fame did\nthey bring to the Athenians? Is it fitting then that dramatic poems\nshould be compared with trophies, the stage with the generals\u2019 office,\nor lists of dramas with noble achievements?\n\n6. Would ye that we should introduce the men themselves carrying before\nthem the marks and signals of their own actions, permitting them to\nenter in order, like the actors upon the stage? But then poets must go\nbefore them, with flutes and lyres, saying and singing:\n\n    Far from our choirs who in this lore\u2019s unskilled,\n    Or does not cherish pure and holy thoughts,\n    Nor views nor joins the Muses\u2019 generous rites,\n    Nor is perfected in the Bacchic tongue,\n    With which Cratinus bull-devourer sang.[141]\n\nAnd then there must be scenes, and vizards, and altars, and versatile\nmachines. There must be also the tragedy actors, the Nicostrati,\nCallippidae, Menisci, Theodori, Poli, the dressers, and sedan-men of\ntragedy,\u2014like those of some sumptuously apparelled lady, or rather like\nthe painters, gilders, and colorers of statues,\u2014together with a costly\npreparation of vessels, vizards, purple coats, and machines, attended\nby an unruly rabble of dancers and guards; and let all the preparation\nbe exceeding costly and magnificent. A Lacedaemonian once, beholding\nall this, not improperly said: How strangely are the Athenians\nmistaken, consuming so much cost and labor upon ridiculous trifles;\nthat is to say, wasting the expenses of navies and of victualling whole\narmies upon the stage. For if you compute the cost of those dramatic\npreparations, you will find that the Athenians spent more upon their\nBacchae, Oedipuses, and Antigone, and the woes of Medea and Electra,\nthan in their wars against the barbarians for liberty and extending\ntheir empire. For their general oft-times led forth the soldiers to\nbattle, commanding them to make provisions only of such food as needed\nnot the tedious preparation of fire. And indeed their admirals and\ncaptains of their ships went aboard without any other provision than\nmeal, onions, and cheese. Whereas the masters of the choruses, feeding\ntheir dancers with eels, lettuce, the kernels of garlic, and marrow,\nfeasted them for a long time, exercising their voices and pleasing\ntheir palates by turns. And as for these captains, if they were\novercome, it was their misfortune to be contemned and hissed at; and if\nthey were victors, there was neither tripod, nor consecrated ornament\nof victory, as Demetrius says, but a life prolonged among cables, and\nan empty house for a tomb. For this is the tribute of poetry, and there\nis nothing more splendid to be expected from it.\n\n7. Now then let us consider the great generals as they approach, to\nwhom, as they pass by, all those must rise up and pay their salutations\nwho have never been famous for any great action, military or civil, and\nwere never furnished with daring boldness nor purity of wisdom for such\nenterprises, nor initiated by the hand of Miltiades that overthrew the\nMedes, or of Themistocles that vanquished the Persians. This is the\nmartial gang, at once combating with phalanxes by land, and engaging\nwith navies by sea, and laden with the spoils of both. Give ear, Alala,\ndaughter of War, to this same prologue of swords and spears.\n\n    Hasten to death, when for your country vowed,\n\nas Epaminondas said,\u2014for your country, your sepulchres, and your\naltars, throwing yourselves into most noble and illustrious combats.\nTheir victories methinks I see approaching toward me, not dragging\nafter them a goat or ox for a reward, nor crowned with ivy and smelling\nof the dregs of wine. But whole cities, islands, continents, and\ncolonies well peopled are their rewards, being surrounded with trophies\nand spoils of all sorts. Whose statues and symbols of honor are\nParthenons, a hundred feet in length, South-walls, houses for ships,\nthe Propylaea, the Chersonesus, and Amphipolis. Marathon displays the\nvictory of Miltiades, and Salamis the glory of Themistocles, triumphing\nover the ruins of a thousand vessels. The victory of Cimon brings\naway a hundred Phoenician galleys from the Eurymedon. And the victory\nof Cleon and Demosthenes brings away the shield of Brasidas, and the\ncaptive soldiers in chains from Sphacteria. The victory of Conon and\nThrasybulus walls the city, and brings the people back at liberty from\nPhylae. The victory of Alcibiades near Sicily restores the languishing\ncondition of the city; and Greece beheld Ionia raised again by the\nvictories of Neleus and Androclus in Lydia and Caria.\n\nIf you ask what benefit every one of the rest procured to the city; one\nwill answer Lesbos, another Samos, another Cyprus, another the Pontus\nEuxinus, another five hundred galleys with three banks of oars, and\nanother ten thousand talents, the rewards of fame and trophies won.\nFor these victories the city observes public anniversary festivals,\nfor these victories she sacrifices to the Gods; not for the victories\nof Aeschylus and Sophocles, not because Carcinus was victorious[142]\nwith his Aerope, or Astydamas with his Hector. But upon the sixth\nof September, even to this day, the Athenians celebrate a festival\nin memory of the fight at Marathon. Upon the sixteenth of the same\nmonth libations are poured in remembrance of the naval victory won\nby Chabrias near Naxos. Upon the twelfth they offer thanksgiving\nsacrifices for the recovery of their liberty. For upon that day they\nreturned back from Phylae. The third of the same month they won the\nbattle of Plataea. The sixteenth of April was consecrated to Diana,\nwhen the moon appeared in the full to the Greeks victorious at Salamis.\nThe twelfth of June was made sacred by the battle of Mantinea, wherein\nthe Athenians, when their confederates were routed and fled, alone\nby themselves obtained the victory and triumph over their victorious\nenemies. Such actions as these procured honor and veneration and\ngrandeur to the city; for these acts it was that Pindar called Athens\nthe support of Greece; not because she had set the fortune of the\nGreeks upright by the tragedies of Phrynichus and Thespis, but because\n(as he says) \u201cnear Artemisium the Athenian youth laid the first\nglorious foundation of freedom;\u201d and afterwards fixing it upon the\nadamantine pillars of Salamis, Mycale, and Plataea, they multiplied\ntheir felicity to others.\n\n8. But as for the writings of the poets, they are mere bubbles. But\nrhetoricians and orators indeed have something in them that renders\nthem in some measure fit to be compared with great captains. For\nwhich reason, Aeschines in derision reports of Demosthenes, that he\nsaid he was bringing a suit in behalf of the orator\u2019s stand against\nthe generals\u2019 office.[143] But for all that, do you think it proper\nto prefer the Plataic oration of Hyperides to the Plataic victory\nof Aristides? Or the oration of Lysias against the Thirty Tyrants,\nto the acts of Thrasybulus and Archias that put them to death? Or\nthat of Aeschines against Timarchus for unchastity, to the relieving\nof Byzantium by Phocion, by which he prevented the sons of the\nconfederates from being the scorn and derision of the Macedonians?\nOr shall we set before the public crowns which Demosthenes received\nfor setting Greece at liberty, his oration on the Crown, wherein the\nrhetorician has behaved himself most splendidly and learnedly, swearing\nby their progenitors that ventured their lives at Marathon for the\nliberty of Greece,[144] rather than by those that instructed youth in\nthe schools? And therefore the city buried these heroes at the expense\nof the public, honoring the sacred relics of their bodies, not men\nlike Isocrates, Antiphon, and Isaeus, and the orator has translated\nthem into the number of the Gods; and by these it was that he chose\nto swear, though he did not follow their example. Isocrates also was\nwont to say, that they who ventured their lives at Marathon fought\nas if they had been inspired with other souls than their own; and\nextolling their daring boldness and contempt of life, to one that asked\nhim (being at that time very aged) how he did,\u2014As well, said he, as\none who, being now above fourscore and ten years old, esteems death\nto be the worst of evils. For neither did he spend his years to old\nage in whetting his sword, in grinding and sharpening his spear, in\nscouring and polishing his helmet, in commanding navies and armies,\nbut in knitting and joining together antithetical and equally balanced\nclauses, and words of similar endings, all but smoothing and adapting\nhis periods and sentences with files, planes, or chisels. How would\nthat man have been affrighted at the clattering of weapons or the\nrouting of a phalanx, who was so afraid of suffering one vowel to clash\nwith another, or to pronounce a sentence where but one syllable was\nwanting!\n\nMiltiades, the very next day after the battle of Marathon, returned\na victor to the city with his army. And Pericles, having subdued the\nSamians in nine months, derided Agamemnon that was ten years taking\nof Troy. But Isocrates was nearly three Olympiads (or twelve years)\nin writing his Panegyric; in all which time he had neither been a\ngeneral nor an ambassador, neither built a city, nor been an admiral,\nnotwithstanding the many wars that harassed Greece within that\ntime. But while Timotheus freed Euboea from slavery, while Chabrias\nvanquished the enemy near Naxos, while Iphicrates defeated and cut to\npieces a whole battalion of the Lacedaemonians near Lechaeum, while the\nAthenians, having shaken off the Spartan yoke, set the rest of Greece\nat liberty, with as ample privileges as they had themselves; he sits\nporing at home in his study, seeking out proper phrases and choice\nwords for his oration, as long a time as Pericles spent in erecting\nthe Propylaea and the Parthenon. Though the comic poet Cratinus seems\nto deride even Pericles himself as one that was none of the quickest,\nwhere he says of the middle wall:\n\n    In words the mighty Pericles\n      Has rais\u2019d us up a wall;\n    But \u2019tis a wall in only words,\n      For we see none at all.\n\nConsider now the poor spirit of this great orator, who spent the ninth\npart of his life in compiling one single oration. But to say no more of\nhim, is it rational to compare the harangues of Demosthenes the orator\nwith the martial exploits of Demosthenes the great leader? For example,\nthe oration against Conon for an assault, with the trophies which the\nother erected before Pylos? Or the declamation against Amathusius\nconcerning slaves, with the noble service which the other performed\nin bringing home the Spartan captives? Neither can it be said, that\nDemosthenes for his oration in regard to foreigners ... deserved as\nmuch honor as Alcibiades, who joined the Mantineans and Eleans as\nconfederates with the Athenians against the Lacedaemonians. And yet we\nmust acknowledge that the public orations of Demosthenes deserve this\npraise, that in his Philippics he bravely encourages the Athenians to\ntake arms, and he extols the enterprise of Leptines....\n\n\n\n\nAGAINST RUNNING IN DEBT, OR TAKING UP MONEY UPON USURY.\n\n\n1. PLATO in his Laws[145] permits not any one to go and draw water from\nhis neighbor\u2019s well, who has not first digged and sunk a pit in his\nown ground till he is come to a vein of clay, and has by his sounding\nexperimented that the place will not yield a spring. For the clay or\npotter\u2019s earth, being of its own nature fatty, solid, and strong,\nretains the moisture it receives, and will not let it soak or pierce\nthrough. But it must be lawful for them to take water from another\u2019s\nground, when there is no way or means for them to find any in their\nown; for the law ought to provide for men\u2019s necessity, but not favor\ntheir laziness. Should there not be the like ordinance also concerning\nmoney; that none should be allowed to borrow upon usury, nor to go\nand dive into other men\u2019s purses,\u2014as it were into their wells and\nfountains,\u2014before they have first searched at home and sounded every\nmeans for the obtaining it; having collected (as it were) and gathered\ntogether all the gutters and springs, to try if they can draw from\nthem what may suffice to supply their most necessary occasions? But on\nthe contrary, many there are who, to defray their idle expenses and\nto satisfy their extravagant and superfluous delights, make not use\nof their own, but have recourse to others, running themselves deeply\ninto debt without any necessity. Now this may easily be judged, if\none does but consider that usurers do not ordinarily lend to those\nwhich are in distress, but only to such as desire to obtain somewhat\nthat is superfluous and of which they stand not in need. So that the\ncredit given by the lender is a testimony sufficiently proving that the\nborrower has of his own; whereas on the contrary, since he has of his\nown, he ought to keep himself from borrowing.\n\n2. Why shouldst thou go and make thy court to a banker or a merchant?\nBorrow from thine own table. Thou hast tankards, dishes, and basins of\nsilver. Make use of them for thy necessity, and when they are gone to\nsupply thy wants, the pleasant town of Aulis or isle of Tenedos will\nagain refurnish thy board with fair vessels of earth, far more cleanly\nand neat than those of silver. For they are not scented with the strong\nand unpleasant smell of usury, which, like rust, daily more and more\nsullies and tarnishes the lustre of thy sumptuous magnificence. They\nwill not be every day putting thee in mind of the Kalends and new\nmoons, which, being of themselves the most holy and sacred days of the\nmonths, are by reason of usuries rendered the most odious and accursed.\nFor as to those who choose rather to carry their goods to the brokers\nand there lay them in pawn for money taken upon usury than to sell them\noutright, I do not believe that Jupiter Ctesius himself can preserve\nthem from beggary. They are ashamed forsooth to receive the full price\nand value of their goods; but they are not ashamed to pay use for the\nmoney they have borrowed on them. And yet the great and wise Pericles\ncaused that costly ornament of fine gold, weighing about forty talents,\nwith which Minerva\u2019s statue was adorned, to be made in such a manner\nthat he could take it off and on at his pleasure; to the end (said\nhe) that when we shall stand in need of money to support the charges\nof war, we may take it and make use of it, putting afterwards in its\nplace another of no less value. Thus we ought in our affairs, as in\na besieged town, never to admit or receive the hostile garrison of a\nusurer, nor to endure before our eyes the delivering up of our goods\ninto perpetual servitude; but rather to cut off from our table what is\nneither necessary nor profitable, and in like manner from our beds, our\ncouches, and our ordinary expenses, and so to keep ourselves free and\nat liberty, in hopes to restore again what we shall have retrenched, if\nFortune shall hereafter smile upon us.\n\n3. The Roman ladies heretofore willingly parted with their jewels and\nornaments of gold, for the making a cup to be sent as an offering\nto the temple of Apollo Pythius in the city of Delphi. And the\nCarthaginian matrons did with their own hands cut the hair from their\nheads, to make cords for the managing of their warlike engines and\ninstruments, in defence of their besieged city. But we, as if we were\nashamed of being able to stand on our own legs without being supported\nby the assistance of others, go and enslave ourselves by engagements\nand obligations; whereas it were much better that, restraining our\nambition and confining it to what is profitable for us, we should of\nour useless and superfluous plate, which we should either melt or sell,\nbuild a temple of Liberty for ourselves, our wives, and our children.\nThe Goddess Diana in the city of Ephesus gives to such debtors as can\nfly into her temple freedom and protection against their creditors; but\nthe sanctuary of parsimony and moderation in expenses, into which no\nusurer can enter to pluck thence and carry away any debtor prisoner, is\nalways open for the prudent, and affords them a long and large space of\njoyful and honorable repose. For as the prophetess which gave oracles\nin the temple of the Pythian Apollo, about the time of the Persian\nwars, answered the Athenians, that God had for their safety given them\na wall of wood, upon which, forsaking their lands, their city, their\nhouses, and all their goods, they had recourse to their ships for the\npreservation of their liberty; so God gives us a table of wood, vessels\nof earth, and garments of coarse cloth, if we desire to live and\ncontinue in freedom.\n\n    Aim not at gilded coaches, steeds of price,\n    And harness, richly wrought with quaint device;\n\nfor how swiftly soever they may run, yet will usuries overtake them and\noutrun them.\n\nTake rather the first ass thou shalt meet or the first pack-horse that\nshall come in thy way, and fly from that cruel and tyrannical enemy\nthe usurer, who asks thee not earth and water, as heretofore did the\nbarbarous king of Persia, but\u2014which is worse\u2014touches thy liberty, and\nwounds thy honor by proscriptions. If thou payest him not, he troubles\nthee; if thou hast wherewithal to satisfy him, he will not receive it,\nunless it be his pleasure. If thou sellest, he will have thy goods\nfor nothing, or at a very under rate; and if thou wilt not sell, he\nwill force thee to it; if thou suest him, he speaks to thee of an\naccommodation; if thou swearest to give him content, he will domineer\nover thee; if thou goest to his house to discourse with him, he shuts\nhis door against thee; if thou stayest at home, he is always knocking\nat thy door and will never stir from thee.\n\n4. Of what use to the Athenians was the decree of Solon, by which he\nordained that the body should not be obliged for any public debt? For\nthey who owe are in bondage to all bankers, and not to them alone (for\nthen there would be no great hurt), but to their very slaves, who are\nproud, insolent, barbarous, and outrageous, and in a word exactly\nsuch as Plato describes the devils and fiery executioners to be, who\nin hell torment the souls of the wicked. For thus do these wretched\nusurers make the court where justice is administered a hell to the poor\ndebtors, preying on some and gnawing them, vulture-like, to the very\nbones, and\n\n    Piercing into their entrails with sharp beaks;[146]\n\nand standing over others, who are, like so many Tantaluses, prohibited\nby them from tasting the corn and fruits of their own ground and\ndrinking the wine of their own vintage. And as King Darius sent to\nthe city of Athens his lieutenants Datis and Artaphernes with chains\nand cords, to bind the prisoners they should take; so these usurers,\nbringing into Greece boxes full of schedules, bills, and obligatory\ncontracts, as so many irons and fetters for the shackling of poor\ncriminals, go through the cities, sowing in them, as they pass, not\ngood and profitable seed,\u2014as did heretofore Triptolemus, when he went\nthrough all places teaching the people to sow corn,\u2014but roots and\ngrains of debts, that produce infinite labors and intolerable usuries,\nof which the end can never be found, and which, eating their way and\nspreading their sprouts round about, do in fine make cities bend under\nthe burden, till they come to be suffocated. They say that hares at\nthe same time suckle one young leveret, are ready to kindle and bring\nforth another, and conceive a third; but the usuries of these barbarous\nand wicked usurers bring forth before they conceive. For at the very\ndelivery of their money, they immediately ask it back, taking it up\nat the same moment they lay it down; and they let out that again to\ninterest which they take for the use of what they have before lent.\n\n5. It is a saying among the Messenians,\n\n    Pylos before Pylos, and Pylos still you\u2019ll find;\n\nbut it may much better be said against the usurers,\n\n    Use before use, and use still more you\u2019ll find.\n\nSo that they laugh at those natural philosophers who hold that\nnothing can be made of nothing and of that which has no existence;\nbut with them usury is made and engendered of that which neither is\nnor ever was. They think the taking to farm the customs and other\npublic tributes, which the laws nevertheless permit, to be a shame and\nreproach; and yet themselves on the contrary, in opposition to all\nthe laws in the world, make men pay tribute for what they lend upon\ninterest; or rather, if truth may be spoken, do in the very letting out\ntheir money to use, basely deceive their debtor. For the poor debtor,\nwho receives less than he acknowledges in his obligation, is falsely\nand dishonestly cheated. And the Persians indeed repute lying to be a\nsin only in a second degree, but to be in debt they repute to be in the\nfirst; forasmuch as lying frequently attends those that owe. Now there\nare not in the whole world any people who are oftener guilty of lying\nthan usurers, nor that practise more unfaithfulness in their day-books,\nin which they set down that they have delivered such a sum of money\nto such a person, to whom they have not given nigh so much. And the\nmoving cause of their lying is pure avarice, not want or poverty, but\nan insatiable desire of always having more, the end of which is neither\npleasurable nor profitable to themselves, but ruinous and destructive\nto those whom they injure. For they neither cultivate the lands of\nwhich they deprive their debtors, nor inhabit the houses out of which\nthey eject them, nor eat at the tables which they take away from\nthem, nor wear the clothes of which they strip them. But first one is\ndestroyed, and then a second soon follows, being drawn on and allured\nby the former. For the mischief spreads like wildfire, still consuming,\nand yet still increasing by the destruction and ruin of those that\nfall into it, whom it devours one after another. And the usurer who\nmaintains this fire, blowing and kindling it to the undoing of so many\npeople, reaps no other advantage from it but only that he now and then\ntakes his book of accounts, and reads in it how many poor debtors he\nhas caused to sell what they had, how many he has dispossessed of their\nlands and livings, whence his money came which he is always turning,\nwinding, and increasing.\n\n6. Think not that I speak this for any ill-will or enmity that I have\nborne against usurers;\n\n    For never did they drive away\n    My horses or my kine.[147]\n\nBut my only aim is to show those who are so ready to take up money upon\nuse, how much shame and slavery there is in it, and how it proceeds\nonly from extreme folly, sloth, and effeminacy of heart. For if thou\nhast of thy own, borrow not, since thou hast no need of it; and if thou\nhast nothing, borrow not, because thou wilt not have any means to pay.\nBut let us consider the one and the other apart. The elder Cato said\nto a certain old man, who behaved himself ill: My friend, seeing old\nage has of itself so many evils, why dost thou go about to add to them\nthe reproach and shame of wickedness? In like manner may we say to a\nman oppressed with poverty: Since poverty has of itself so many and so\ngreat miseries, do not heap upon them the anguishes of borrowing and\nbeing in debt. Take not from poverty the only good thing in which it is\nsuperior to riches, to wit, freedom from pensive care. Otherwise thou\nwilt subject thyself to the derision of the common proverb, which says,\n\n    A goat I cannot bear away,\n    Therefore an ox upon me lay.\n\nThou canst not bear poverty, and yet thou art going to load on thyself\na usurer, which is a burden even to a rich man insupportable.\n\nBut you will say perhaps, how then would you have me to live? Is this\na question fit for thee to ask, who hast hands, feet, and a voice, who\nin brief art a man, whose property it is to love and be beloved, to do\nand receive a courtesy? Canst thou not teach, bring up young children,\nbe a porter or doorkeeper, travel by sea, serve in a ship? There is in\nall these nothing more shameful or odious, than to be dunned with the\nimportunate clamors of such as are always saying, Pay me, give me my\nmoney.\n\n7. Rutilius that rich Roman, coming one day to Musonius the\nphilosopher, whispered him thus in his ear: Musonius, Jupiter the\nSavior, whom you philosophers profess to imitate and follow, takes not\nup money at interest. Musonius smiling presently answered him: Nor yet\ndoes he lend for use. For this Rutilius, who was himself an usurer,\nupbraided the other with borrowing upon use. Now what a foolish stoical\narrogance was this. For what need was there of bringing here Jupiter\nthe Savior, when he might have given him the same admonition by things\nthat were familiar and before his eyes? Swallows run not themselves\ninto debt, ants borrow not upon interest; and yet Nature has given\nthem neither reason, hands, nor art. But she has endued men with such\nabundance of understanding, that they maintain not only themselves,\nbut also horses, dogs, partridges, hares, and jays. Why then dost thou\ncondemn thyself, as if thou wert less able to persuade than a jay, more\ndumb than a partridge, and more ungenerous than a dog, in that thou\ncouldst not oblige any man to be assistant to thee, either by serving\nhim, charming him, guarding him, or fighting in his defence? Dost thou\nnot see how many occasions the land, and how many the sea affords thee\nfor thy maintenance? Hear also what Crates says:\n\n    Here I saw Miccylus the wool to card,\n    Whilst his wife spun, that they by labor hard\n    In these hard times might 'scape the hungry jaws\n    Of famine.\n\nKing Antigonus, when he had not for a long time seen Cleanthes the\nphilosopher, said to him, Dost thou yet, O Cleanthes, continue to\ngrind? Yes, sir, replied Cleanthes, I still grind, and that I do\nto gain my living and not to depart from philosophy. How great and\ngenerous was the courage of this man, who, coming from the mill and\nthe kneading-trough, did with the same hand which had been employed in\nturning the stone and moulding the dough, write of the nature of the\nGods, moon, stars, and sun! And yet we think these to be servile works.\n\nTherefore, forsooth, that we may be free, we take up money at interest,\nand to this purpose flatter base and servile persons, wait on them,\ntreat them, make them presents, and pay them pensions; and this we do,\nnot being compelled by poverty (for no usurer will lend a poor man\nmoney) but to gratify our prodigality. For if we would be content with\nsuch things as are necessary for human life, usurers would be no less\nrare in the world than Centaurs and Gorgons. But luxury and excess, as\nit produced goldsmiths, silversmiths, perfumers, and dyers of curious\ncolors, so has it also brought forth usurers. For we run not into debt\nfor bread and wine, but for the purchasing of stately seats, numerous\nslaves, fine mules, costly banqueting halls, rich tables, and for all\nthose foolish and superfluous expenses to which we frequently put\nourselves for the exhibiting of plays to the people, or some such vain\nambition, from which we frequently reap no other fruit but ingratitude.\nNow he that is once entangled in usury remains a debtor all his life,\nnot unlike in this to the horse, who, having once taken the bridle\ninto his mouth and the saddle on his back, receives one rider after\nanother. Nor is there any means for these debtors to make their escape\ninto those fair pastures and meadows which once they enjoyed, but they\nwander about, like those Daemons mentioned by Empedocles to have been\ndriven out of heaven by the offended Gods.\n\n    By the sky\u2019s force they\u2019re thrust into the main,\n    Which to the earth soon spews them back again.\n    Thence to bright Titan\u2019s orb they\u2019re forced to fly,\n    And Titan soon remits them to the sky.\n\nIn like manner do such men fall from the hand of one usurer or banker\nto another, sometimes of a Corinthian, sometimes of a Patrian,\nsometimes of an Athenian, till, having been deceived and cheated by\nall, they finally find themselves dissipated and torn in pieces by\nusury. For as he who is fallen into the dirt must either rise up and\nget out of it, or else lie still in the place into which he first fell,\nfor that by tumbling, turning, and rolling about, he does but still\nmore and more bemire himself; so also those who do but change their\ncreditor, and cause their names to be transcribed from one usurer\u2019s\nbook to another\u2019s, do by loading and embroiling themselves with new\nusuries become more and more oppressed. Now in this they properly\nresemble persons distempered with cholera, who cannot receive any\nmedicine sufficient to work a perfect cure, but continually vomit\nup all that is given them, and so make way for the choleric humor\nto gather more and more. For in the same manner these men are not\nwilling to be cleansed at once, but do with grievous anguish and sorrow\npay their use at every season of the year, and no sooner have they\ndischarged one, but another drops and stills immediately after, which\ncauses them both aching hearts and heads; whereas they should have\ntaken care to get wholly clear, that they might remain free and at\nliberty.\n\n8. For I now turn my speech to those who are more wealthy, and withal\nmore nice and effeminate, and whose discourse is commonly in this\nmanner: How shall I remain then without servants, without fire, and\nwithout a house or place to which I may repair? Now this is the same\nthing as if one who is sick of a dropsy and puffed up as a barrel\nshould say to a physician: How? Would you have me become slender, lean,\nand empty? And why not, provided you thereby get your health? Thus it\nis better you should be without servants, than that you should yourself\nbecome a slave; and that you should remain without possessions, than\nthat you should be made the possession of another. Give ear a little\nto the discourse of the two vultures, as it is reported in the fable.\nOne of them was taken with so strong a fit of vomiting, that he said:\nI believe I shall cast up my very bowels. Now to this his companion\nanswered: What hurt will there be in it? For thou wilt not indeed throw\nup thine own entrails, but those of the dead man which we devoured the\nother day. So he who is indebted sells not his own inheritance nor his\nown house, but that of the usurer who lent him the money, to whom by\nthe law he has given the right and possession of them. Nay, by Jupiter\n(will he say to me); but my father left me this estate. I believe it\nwell, but he left thee also liberty and a good repute, of which thou\noughtest to make more account and be more careful. He who begat thee\nmade thy foot and thy hand, and nevertheless, if they happen to be\nmortified, thou wilt give money to the chirurgeon to cut them off.\nCalypso presented Ulysses with a robe breathing forth the sweet-scented\nodor of an immortal body, which she put on him, as a token and memorial\nof the love she had borne him. But when his ship was cast away and\nhimself ready to sink to the bottom, not being able to keep above the\nwater by reason of his wet robe, which weighed him downwards, he put it\noff and threw it away, and having girt his naked breast with a broad\nswaddling band,\n\n    Swam, gazing on the distant shore.[148]\n\nAnd afterwards, when the danger was over and he seen to be landed, he\nwanted neither food nor raiment. And is it not a true tempest, when the\nusurer after some time comes to assault the miserable debtors with this\nword Pay?\n\n    This having said, the clouds grow thick, the sea\n    Is troubled, and its raging waves beat high,\n    Whilst east, south, west winds through the welkin fly.[149]\n\nThese winds are use, and use upon use, which roll one after another;\nand he that is overwhelmed by them and kept down by their weight cannot\nserve himself nor make his escape by swimming, but at last sinks down\nto the bottom, where he perishes, carrying with him his friends who\nwere pledges and sureties for him.\n\nCrates, the Theban philosopher, acted far otherwise; for owing\nnothing, and consequently not being pressed for payment by any\ncreditor, but only tired with the cares and troubles of housekeeping\nand the solicitude requisite to the management of his estate, he left\na patrimony of eight talents\u2019 value, and taking only his cloak and\nwallet, retired to philosophy and poverty. Anaxagoras also forsook his\nplentiful and well-stocked pastures. But what need is there of alleging\nthese examples, seeing that the lyric poet Philoxenus, being one of\nthose who were sent to people a new city and new land in Sicily, where\nthere fell to his share a good house and great wealth with which he\nmight have lived well at his ease, yet seeing that delights, pleasure,\nand idleness, without any exercise of good letters, reigned in those\nquarters, said: These goods, by all the Gods, shall not destroy me, but\nI will rather lose them. And immediately leaving to others the portion\nthat was allotted to himself, he again took shipping, and returned to\nAthens. Whereas those who are in debt bear and suffer themselves to be\nsued, taxed, made slaves of, and cheated with false money, feeding like\nKing Phineus certain winged harpies. For these usurers fly to them,\nand ravish out of their hands their very food. Neither yet have they\npatience to stay and expect the season; for they buy their debtors\u2019\ncorn before it is ready for harvest, bargain for the oil before the\nolives are ripe, and in like manner for their wines. I will have it,\nsays the usurer, at such a price; and immediately he gets the writing\nsigned; and yet the grapes are still hanging on the vine, expecting the\nrising of Arcturus.\n\n\n\n\nPLUTARCH\u2019S PLATONIC QUESTIONS.\n\n\n_QUESTION I._\n\n  WHAT IS THE REASON THAT GOD BADE SOCRATES TO ACT THE MIDWIFE\u2019S\n  PART TO OTHERS, BUT CHARGED HIMSELF NOT TO GENERATE; AS HE SAYS IN\n  THEAETETUS?[150]\n\n1. For he would never have used the name of God in such a merry,\njesting manner, though Plato in that book makes Socrates several times\nto talk with great boasting and arrogance, as he does now. \u201cThere are\nmany, dear friend, so affected towards me, that they are ready even\nto bite me, when I offer to cure them of the least madness. For they\nwill not be persuaded that I do it out of good-will, because they are\nignorant that no God bears ill-will to man, and that therefore I wish\nill to no man; but I cannot allow myself either to stand in a lie or to\nstifle the truth.\u201d[151] Whether therefore did he style his own nature,\nwhich was of a very strong and pregnant wit, by the name of God,\u2014as\nMenander says, \u201cFor our mind is God,\u201d and as Heraclitus, \u201cMan\u2019s genius\nis a Deity\u201d? Or did some divine cause or some Daemon or other impart\nthis way of philosophizing to Socrates, whereby always interrogating\nothers, he cleared them of pride, error, and ignorance, and of being\ntroublesome both to themselves and to others? For about that time there\nhappened to be in Greece several sophisters; to these some young men\npaid great sums of money, for which they purchased a strong opinion of\nlearning and wisdom, and of being stout disputants; but this sort of\ndisputation spent much time in trifling squabblings, which were of no\ncredit or profit. Now Socrates, using an argumentative discourse by way\nof a purgative remedy, procured belief and authority to what he said,\nbecause in refuting others he himself affirmed nothing; and he the\nsooner gained upon people, because he seemed rather to be inquisitive\nafter the truth as well as they, than to maintain his own opinion.\n\n2. Now, however useful a thing judgment is, it is mightily impeached\nby the begetting of a man\u2019s own fancies. For the lover is blinded\nwith the thing loved; and nothing of a man\u2019s own is so beloved as is\nthe opinion and discourse which he has begotten. And the distribution\nof children, said to be the justest, in respect of discourses is the\nunjustest; for there a man must take his own, but here a man must\nchoose the best, though it be another man\u2019s. Therefore he that has\nchildren of his own, is a worse judge of other men\u2019s; it being true, as\nthe sophister said well, \u201cThe Eleans would be the most proper judges of\nthe Olympic games, were no Eleans gamesters.\u201d So he that would judge of\ndisputations cannot be just, if he either seeks the bays for himself,\nor is himself antagonist to either of the antagonists. For as the\nGrecian captains, when they were to decide by their suffrages who had\nbehaved himself the best, every man of them voted for himself; so there\nis not a philosopher of them all but would do the like, besides those\nthat acknowledge, like Socrates, that they can say nothing that is\ntheir own; and these only are the pure uncorrupt judges of the truth.\nFor as the air in the ears, unless it be still and void of noise in\nitself, without any sound or buzzing, does not exactly take sounds;\nso the philosophical judgment in disputations, if it be disturbed and\nobstreperous within, is hardly comprehensive of what is said without.\nFor our familiar and inbred opinion will not admit that which is at\nvariance with itself, as the number of sects and parties proves, of\nwhich philosophy\u2014if she deals with them in the best manner\u2014must hold\none to be right, and all the others to be at war with the truth in\ntheir opinions.\n\n3. Furthermore, if men can comprehend and know nothing, God did justly\ninterdict Socrates the procreation of false and unstable discourses,\nwhich are like wind-eggs, and bid him convince others who were of any\nother opinion. And reasoning, which rids us of the greatest of evils,\nerror and vanity of mind, is none of the least benefit to us; \u201cFor God\nhas not granted this to the Esculapians.\u201d[152] Nor did Socrates give\nphysic to the body; indeed he purged the mind of secret corruption.\nBut if there be any knowledge of the truth, and if the truth be one,\nhe has as much that learns it of him that invented it, as the inventor\nhimself. Now he the most easily attains the truth, that is persuaded\nhe has it not; and he chooses best, just as he that has no children\nof his own adopts the best. Mark this well, that poetry, mathematics,\noratory, and sophistry, which are the things the Deity forbade Socrates\nto generate, are of no value; and that of the sole wisdom about what\nis divine and intelligible (which Socrates called amiable and eligible\nfor itself), there is neither generation nor invention by man, but\nreminiscence. Wherefore Socrates taught nothing, but suggesting\nprinciples of doubt, as birth-pains, to young men, he excited and at\nthe same time confirmed the innate notions. This he called his Art of\nMidwifery, which did not (as others professed) extrinsically confer\nintelligence upon his auditors; but demonstrated it to be innate, yet\nimperfect and confused, and in want of a nurse to feed and strengthen\nit.\n\n\n_QUESTION II._\n\n  WHY DOES HE CALL THE SUPREME GOD FATHER AND MAKER OF ALL THINGS?[153]\n\n1. Is it because he is (as Homer calls him) of created Gods and men\nthe Father, and of brutes and things that have no soul the maker? If\nChrysippus may be credited, he is not properly styled the father of\nthe afterbirth who supplied the seed, although it springs from the\nseed. Or has he figuratively called the maker of the world the father\nof it? In his Convivium he calls Phaedrus the father of the amatorious\ndiscourse which he had introduced; and so in his Phaedrus[154] he\ncalls him \u201cfather of noble children,\u201d when he had been the occasion of\nmany excellent discourses about philosophical matters. Or is there any\ndifference between a father and a maker? Or between procreation and\nmaking? For as what is procreated is also made, but not the contrary;\nso he that procreated did also make, for the procreation of an animal\nis the making of it. Now the work of a maker\u2014as of a builder, a weaver,\na musical-instrument maker, or a statuary\u2014is altogether distinct and\nseparate from its author; but the principle and power of the procreator\nis implanted in the progeny, and contains his nature, the progeny being\na piece pulled off the procreator. Since therefore the world is neither\nlike a piece of potter\u2019s work nor joiner\u2019s work, but there is a great\nshare of life and divinity in it, which God from himself communicated\nto and mixed with matter, God may properly be called Father of the\nworld\u2014since it has life in it\u2014and also the maker of it.\n\n2. And since these things come very near to Plato\u2019s opinion, consider,\nI pray, whether there may not be some probability in them. Whereas the\nworld consists of two parts, body and soul, God indeed made not the\nbody; but matter being provided, he formed and fitted it, binding up\nand confining what was infinite within proper limits and figures. But\nthe soul, partaking of mind, reason, and harmony, was not only the work\nof God, but, part of him; not only made by him, but begot by him.\n\n\n_QUESTION III._\n\nIn the Republic,[155] he supposes the universe, as one line, to be cut\ninto two unequal sections; again he cuts each of these sections in two\nafter the same proportion, and supposes the two sections first made to\nconstitute the two genera of things sensible and things intelligible\nin the universe. The first represents the genus of intelligibles,\ncomprehending in the first subdivision the primitive forms or ideas,\nin the second the mathematics. Of sensibles, the first subdivision\ncomprehends solid bodies, the second comprehends the images and\nrepresentations of them. Moreover, to every one of these four he has\nassigned its proper judicatory faculty;\u2014to the first, reason; to the\nmathematics, the understanding; to sensibles, belief; to images and\nlikenesses, conjecture.\n\n  BUT WHAT DOES HE MEAN BY DIVIDING THE UNIVERSE INTO UNEQUAL PARTS?\n  AND WHICH OF THE SECTIONS, THE INTELLIGIBLE OR THE SENSIBLE, IS THE\n  GREATER? FOR IN THIS HE HAS NOT EXPLAINED HIMSELF.\n\n1. At first sight it will appear that the sensible is the greater\nportion. For the essence of intelligibles being indivisible, and in\nthe same respect ever the same, is contracted into a little, and pure;\nbut an essence divisible and pervading bodies constitutes the sensible\npart. Now what is immaterial is limited; but body in respect of matter\nis infinite and unlimited, and it becomes sensible only when it is\ndefined by partaking of the intelligible. Besides, as every sensible\nhas many images, shadows, and representations, and from one and the\nsame original several copies may be taken both by nature and art;\nso the latter must needs exceed the former in number, according to\nPlato, who makes things intelligible to be patterns or ideas of things\nsensible, like the originals of images and reflections. Further, Plato\nderives the knowledge of ideas from body by abstraction and cutting\naway, leading us by various steps in mathematical discipline from\narithmetic to geometry, thence to astronomy, and setting harmony above\nthem all. For things become geometrical by the accession of magnitude\nto quantity; solid, by the accession of profundity to magnitude;\nastronomical, by the accession of motion to solidity; harmonical, by\nthe accession of sound to motion. Abstract then sound from moving\nbodies, motion from solids, profundity from superficies, magnitude from\nquantity, we are then come to pure intelligible ideas, which have no\ndistinction among themselves in respect of the one single intelligible\nessence. For unity makes no number, unless joined by the infinite\nbinary; then it makes a number. And thence we proceed to points, thence\nto lines, from them to superficies, and profundities, and bodies, and\nto the qualities of the bodies so and so qualified. Now the reason is\nthe only judicatory faculty of intelligibles; and the understanding\nis the reason in the mathematics, where intelligibles appear as by\nreflection in mirrors. But as to the knowledge of bodies, because of\ntheir multitude, Nature has given us five powers or distinctions of\nsenses; nor are all bodies discerned by them, many escaping sense by\nreason of their smallness. And though every one of us consists of a\nbody and soul, yet the hegemonic and intellectual faculty is small,\nbeing hid in the huge mass of flesh. And the case is the same in the\nuniverse, as to sensible and intelligible. For intelligibles are the\nprinciples of bodily things, but every thing is greater than the\nprinciple whence it came.\n\n2. Yet, on the contrary, some will say that, by comparing sensibles\nwith intelligibles, we match things mortal with divine, in some\nmeasure; for God is in intelligibles. Besides, the thing contained is\never less than the containing, and the nature of the universe contains\nthe sensible in the intelligible. For God, having placed the soul in\nthe middle, hath extended it through all, and hath covered it all round\nwith bodies. The soul is invisible, and cannot be perceived by any of\nthe senses, as Plato says in his Book of Laws; therefore every man\nmust die, but the world shall never die. For mortality and dissolution\nsurround every one of our vital faculties. The case is quite otherwise\nin the world; for the corporeal part, contained in the middle by the\nmore noble and unalterable principle, is ever preserved. And a body is\nsaid to be without parts and indivisible for its minuteness; but what\nis incorporeal and intelligible is so, as being simple and sincere, and\nvoid of all firmness and difference. Besides, it were folly to think\nto judge of incorporeal things by corporeal. The present, or _now_, is\nsaid to be without parts and indivisible, since it is everywhere and no\npart of the world is void of it. But all affections and actions, and\nall corruptions and generations in the world, are contained by this\n_now_. But the mind is judge only of what is intelligible, as the sight\nis of light, by reason of its simplicity and similitude. But bodies,\nhaving several differences and diversities, are comprehended, some\nby one judicatory faculty, others by another, as by several organs.\nYet they do not well who despise the intelligible and intelligent\nfaculty in us; for being great, it comprehends all sensibles, and\nattains to things divine. The most important thing he himself teaches\nin his Banquet, where he shows us how we should use amatorious matters,\nturning our minds from sensible goods to things discernible only by the\nreason, that we ought not to be enslaved by the beauty of any body,\nstudy, or learning, but laying aside such pusillanimity, should turn to\nthe vast ocean of beauty.[156]\n\n\n_QUESTION IV._\n\n  WHAT IS THE REASON THAT, THOUGH PLATO ALWAYS SAYS THAT THE SOUL IS\n  ANCIENTER THAN THE BODY, AND THAT IT IS THE CAUSE AND PRINCIPLE OF\n  ITS RISE, YET HE LIKEWISE SAYS, THAT NEITHER COULD THE SOUL EXIST\n  WITHOUT THE BODY, NOR THE REASON WITHOUT THE SOUL, BUT THE SOUL IN\n  THE BODY, AND THE REASON IN THE SOUL? FOR SO THE BODY WILL SEEM TO BE\n  AND NOT TO BE, BECAUSE IT BOTH EXISTS WITH THE SOUL, AND IS BEGOT BY\n  THE SOUL.\n\nPerhaps what we have often said is true; viz., that the soul without\nreason and the body without form did mutually ever coexist, and neither\nof them had generation or beginning. But after the soul did partake of\nreason and harmony, and being through consent made wise, it wrought\na change in matter, and being stronger than the other\u2019s motions, it\ndrew and converted these motions to itself. So the body of the world\ndrew its original from the soul, and became conformable and like to\nit. For the soul did not make the Nature of the body out of itself, or\nout of nothing; but it wrought an orderly and pliable body out of one\ndisorderly and formless. Just as if a man should say that the virtue\nof the seed is with the body, and yet that the body of the fig-tree\nor olive-tree was made of the seed, he would not be much out; for the\nbody, its innate motion and mutation proceeding from the seed, grew\nup and became what it is. So, when formless and indefinite matter\nwas once formed by the inbeing soul, it received such a form and\ndisposition.\n\n\n_QUESTION V._\n\n  WHY, SINCE BODIES AND FIGURES ARE CONTAINED PARTLY BY RECTILINEARS\n  AND PARTLY BY CIRCLES, DOES HE MAKE ISOSCELES TRIANGLES AND TRIANGLES\n  OF UNEQUAL SIDES THE PRINCIPLES OF RECTILINEARS; OF WHICH THE\n  ISOSCELES TRIANGLE FORMS THE CUBE, THE ELEMENT OF THE EARTH; AND A\n  SCALENE TRIANGLE FORMS THE PYRAMID WHICH IS THE SEED OF FIRE, THE\n  OCTAHEDRON WHICH IS THE SEED OF AIR, AND THE ICOSAHEDRON WHICH IS THE\n  SEED OF WATER;\u2014WHILE HE DOES NOT MEDDLE WITH CIRCULARS, THOUGH HE\n  DOES MENTION THE GLOBE, WHERE HE SAYS THAT EACH OF THE AFORE-RECKONED\n  FIGURES DIVIDES A ROUND BODY THAT ENCLOSES IT INTO EQUAL PARTS.[157]\n\n1. Is their opinion true who think that he ascribed a dodecahedron\nto the globe, when he says that God made use of it in delineating\nthe universe? For upon account of the multitude of its bases and the\nobtuseness of its angles, avoiding all rectitude, it is flexible,\nand by circumtension, like globes made of twelve skins, it becomes\ncircular and comprehensive. For it has twenty solid angles, each of\nwhich is contained by three obtuse planes, and each of these contains\none and the fifth part of a right angle. Now it is made up of twelve\nequilateral and equangular quinquangles (or pentagons), each of which\nconsists of thirty of the first scalene triangles. Therefore it seems\nto resemble both the Zodiac and the year, it being divided into the\nsame number of parts as these.\n\n2. Or is a right line in Nature prior to circumference; or is\ncircumference but an accident of rectilinear? For a right line is said\nto bend; and a circle is described by a centre and distance, which is\nthe place of a right line by which a circumference is measured, this\nbeing everywhere equally distant from the middle. And a cone and a\ncylinder are made by rectilinears; a cone by keeping one side of a\ntriangle fixed and carrying another round with the base,\u2014a cylinder,\nby doing the like with a parallelogram. Further, that is nearest to\nprinciple which is less; but a right is the least of all lines, as\nit is simple; whereas in a circumference one part is convex without,\nanother concave within. Besides, numbers are before figures, as unity\nis before a point, which is unity in position. But indeed unity is\ntriangular; for every triangular number[158] taken eight times, by\nadding unity, becomes quadrate; and this happens to unity. Therefore\na triangle is before a circle, whence a right line is before a\ncircumference. Besides, no element is divided into things compounded\nof itself; indeed there is a dissolution of all other things into the\nelements. Now a triangle is divided into no circumference, but two\ndiameters cut a circle into four triangles; therefore a rectilinear\nfigure is before a circular, and has more of the nature of an element.\nAnd Plato himself shows that a rectilinear is in the first place, and\na circular is only consequential and accidental. For when he says the\nearth consists of cubes, each of which is contained with rectilinear\nsuperficies, he says the earth is spherical and round. Therefore there\nwas no need of making a peculiar element for round things, since\nrectilinears, fitted after a certain manner among themselves, do make\nup this figure.\n\n3. Besides, a right line, whether great or little, preserves the same\nrectitude; but as to the circumference of a circle, the less it is,\nthe crookeder it is; the larger, the straighter. Therefore if a convex\nsuperficies stands on a plane, it sometimes touches the subject plane\nin a point, sometimes in a line. So that a man may imagine that a\ncircumference is made up of little right lines.\n\n4. But observe whether this be not true, that no circle or sphere in\nthis world is exact; but since by the tension and circumtension of\nthe right lines, or by the minuteness of the parts, the difference\ndisappears, the figure seems circular and round. Therefore no\ncorruptible body moves circularly, but altogether in a right line. To\nbe truly spherical is not in a sensible body, but is the element of\nthe soul and mind, to which he has given circular motion, as being\nagreeable to their nature.\n\n\n_QUESTION VI._\n\n  HOW COMES IT TO PASS THAT IN PHAEDRUS IT IS SAID, THAT THE NATURE\n  OF A WING, BY WHICH ANY THING THAT IS HEAVY IS CARRIED UPWARDS,\n  PARTICIPATES MOST OF THE BODY OF GOD?[159]\n\nIs it because the discourse is of love, and love is of beauty inherent\nin a body? Now beauty, by similitude to things divine, moves and\nreminds the soul. Or it may be (without too much curiosity) he may\nbe understood in plain meaning, to wit, that the several faculties\nof the soul being employed about bodies, the power of reasoning and\nunderstanding partakes most about divine and heavenly things; which he\ndid not impertinently call a wing, it raising the soul from mean and\nmortal things to things above.\n\n\n_QUESTION VII._\n\n  IN WHAT SENSE DOES PLATO SAY, THAT THE ANTIPERISTASIS (OR REACTION)\n  OF MOTION\u2014BY REASON THERE IS NO VACUUM\u2014IS THE CAUSE OF THE EFFECTS IN\n  PHYSICIANS\u2019 CUPPING-GLASSES, IN SWALLOWING, IN THROWING OF WEIGHTS,\n  IN THE RUNNING OF WATER, IN THUNDER, IN THE ATTRACTION OF THE\n  LOADSTONE, AND IN THE HARMONY OF SOUNDS?[160]\n\n1. For it seems unreasonable to ascribe the reason of such different\neffects to the selfsame cause.\n\n2. How respiration is made by the reaction of the air he has\nsufficiently shown. But the rest, he says, seem to be done\nmiraculously, but really the bodies thrust each other aside and change\nplaces with one another; while he has left for us to determine how each\nis particularly done.\n\n3. As to cupping-glasses, the case is thus: the air next to the flesh\nbeing comprehended and inflamed by the heat, and being made more rare\nthan the pores of the brass, does not go into a vacuum (for there is no\nsuch thing), but into the air that is without the cupping-glass, and\nhas an impulse upon it. This air drives that before it; and each, as it\ngives way, strives to succeed into the place which was vacuated by the\ncession of the first. And so the air approaching the flesh comprehended\nby the cupping-glass, and exciting it, draws the humors into the\ncupping-glass.\n\n4. Swallowing takes place in the same way. For the cavities about the\nmouth and stomach are full of air; when therefore the meat is squeezed\ndown by the tongue and tonsils, the elided air follows what gives way,\nand also forces down the meat.\n\n5. Weights also thrown cleave the air and dissipate it, as they fall\nwith force; the air recoiling back, according to its natural tendency\nto rush in and fill the vacuity, follows the impulse, and accelerates\nthe motion.\n\n6. The fall also of thunderbolts is like to darting any thing. For by\nthe blow in the cloud, the fiery matter exploded breaks into the air;\nand it being broken gives way, and again being contracted above, by\nmain force it presses the thunderbolt downwards contrary to Nature.\n\n7. And neither amber nor the loadstone draws any thing to it which is\nnear, nor does any thing spontaneously approach them. But this stone\nemits strong exhalations, by which the adjoining air being impelled\nforceth that which is before it; and this being carried round in the\ncircle, and returning into the vacuated place, forcibly draws the iron\nin the same direction. In amber there is a flammeous and spirituous\nnature, and this by rubbing on the surface is emitted by recluse\npassages, and does the same that the loadstone does. It also draws the\nlightest and driest of adjacent bodies, by reason of their tenuity\nand weakness; for it is not so strong nor so endued with weight and\nstrength as to force much air and to act with violence and to have\npower over great bodies, as the magnet has. But what is the reason the\nair never draws a stone, nor wood, but iron only, to the loadstone?\nThis is a common question both by them who think the coition of these\nbodies is made by the attraction of the loadstone, and by such as think\nit done by the incitement of the iron. Iron is neither so rare as wood,\nnor altogether so solid as gold or a stone; but has certain pores and\nasperities, which in regard of the inequality are proportionable to\nthe air; and the air being received in certain seats, and having (as\nit were) certain stays to cling to, does not slip away; but when it is\ncarried up to the stone and strikes against it, it draws the iron by\nforce along with it to the stone. Such then may be the reason of this.\n\n8. But the manner of the waters running over the earth is not so\nevident. But it is observable that the waters of lakes and ponds stand\nimmovable, because the air about them stagnates immovable and admits of\nno vacuity. For the water on the surface of lakes and seas is troubled\nand fluctuates as the air is moved, it following the motion of the\nair, and moving as it is moved. For the force from below causes the\nhollowness of the wave, and from above the swelling thereof; until\nthe air ambient and containing the water is still. Therefore the flux\nof such waters as follow the motion of the retreating air, and are\nimpelled by that which presses behind, is continued without end. And\nthis is the reason that the stream increases with the waters, and is\nslow where the water is weak, the air not giving way, and therefore\nsuffering less reaction. So the water of fountains must needs flow\nupwards, the extrinsic air succeeding into the vacuity and throwing the\nwater out. In a close house, that keeps in the air and wind, the floor\nsprinkled with water causes an air or wind, because, as the sprinkled\nwater falls, the air gives way. For it is so provided by Nature that\nair and water force one another and give way to one another; because\nthere is no vacuity in which one can be settled without feeling the\nchange and alteration in the other.\n\n9. Concerning symphony, he shows how sounds harmonize. A quick sound\nis acute, a slow is grave. Therefore acute sounds move the senses the\nquicker; and these dying and grave sounds supervening, what arises\nfrom the contemperation of one with the other causes pleasure to the\near, which we call harmony. And by what has been said, it may easily\nbe understood that air is the instrument of these things. For sound is\nthe stroke upon the sense of the hearer, caused by the air; and the air\nstrikes as it is struck by the thing moving,\u2014if violent, acutely,\u2014if\nlanguid, softly. The violent stroke comes quick to the ear; then the\ncircumambient air receiving a slower, it affects and carries the sense\nalong with it.\n\n\n_QUESTION VIII._\n\n  WHAT MEANS TIMAEUS,[161] WHEN HE SAYS THAT SOULS ARE DISPERSED INTO\n  THE EARTH, THE MOON, AND INTO OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF TIME?\n\n1. Does the earth move like the sun, moon, and five planets, which\nfor their motions he calls organs or instruments of time? Or is the\nearth fixed to the axis of the universe; yet not so built as to remain\nimmovable, but to turn and wheel about, as Aristarchus and Seleucus\nhave shown since; Aristarchus only supposing it, Seleucus positively\nasserting it? Theophrastus writes how that Plato, when he grew old,\nrepented him that he had placed the earth in the middle of the\nuniverse, which was not its place.\n\n2. Or is this contradictory to Plato\u2019s opinion elsewhere, and in the\nGreek instead of \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 should it be written \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u1ff3, taking the dative\ncase instead of the genitive, so that the stars will not be said to\nbe instruments, but the bodies of animals? So Aristotle has defined\nthe soul to be \u201cthe actual being of a natural organic body, having\nthe power of life.\u201d[162] The sense then must be this, that souls are\ndispersed into meet organical bodies in time. But this is far besides\nhis opinion. For it is not once, but several times, that he calls the\nstars instruments of time; as when he says, the sun was made, as well\nas other planets, for the distinction and conservation of the numbers\nof time.\n\n3. It is therefore most proper to understand the earth to be here an\ninstrument of time; not that the earth is moved, as the stars are;\nbut that, they being carried about it, it standing still makes sunset\nand sunrising, by which the first measures of time, nights and days,\nare circumscribed. Wherefore he called it the infallible guard and\nartificer of night and day. For the gnomons of dials are instruments\nand measures of time, not in being moved with the shadows, but in\nstanding still; they being like the earth in intercepting the light of\nthe sun when it is down,\u2014as Empedocles says that the earth makes night\nby intercepting light. This therefore may be Plato\u2019s meaning.\n\n4. And so much the rather might we consider whether the sun is not\nabsurdly and without probability said to be made for the distinction\nof time, with the moon and the rest of the planets. For as in\nother respects the dignity of the sun is great; so by Plato in his\nRepublic[163] the sun is called the king and lord of the whole sensible\nnature, as the Chief Good is of the intelligible. For it is said to\nbe the offspring of Good, it giving both generation and appearance to\nthings visible; as it is from Good that things intelligible both are\nand are understood. But that this God, having such a nature and so\ngreat power, should be only an instrument of time, and a sure measure\nof the difference that happens among the eight orbs, as they are slow\nor swift in motion, seems neither decent nor highly rational. It must\ntherefore be said to such as are startled at these things, that it is\ntheir ignorance to think that time is the measure of motion in respect\nof sooner or later, as Aristotle calls it; or quantity in motion, as\nSpeusippus; or an interval of motion and nothing more, as some of the\nStoics define it, by an accident, not comprehending its essence and\npower, which Pindar has not ineptly expressed in these words: Time,\nwho surpasses all in the seats of the blest. Pythagoras also, when he\nwas asked what time was, answered, it was the soul of this world. For\ntime is no affection or accident of motion, but the cause, power, and\nprinciple of that symmetry and order that confines all created beings,\nby which the animated nature of the universe is moved. Or rather, this\norder and symmetry itself\u2014so far as it is motion\u2014is called time. For\nthis,\n\n    Walking by still and silent ways,\n    Mortal affairs with justice guides.[164]\n\nAccording to the ancients, the essence of the soul is a number moving\nitself. Therefore Plato says that time and heaven were coexistent,\nbut that motion was before heaven had being. But time was not. For\nthen there neither was order, nor measure, nor determination; but\nindefinite motion, as it were, the formless and rude matter of time.\n\n... But when matter was informed with figures, and motion with\ncircuitions, from that came the world, from this time. Both are\nrepresentations of God; the world, of his essence; time, of his\neternity in the form of motion, as the world is God in creation.\nTherefore they say heaven and motion, being bred together, will perish\ntogether, if ever they do perish. For nothing is generated without\ntime, nor is any thing intelligible without eternity; if this is to\nendure for ever, and that never to die when once bred. Time therefore,\nhaving a necessary connection and affinity with heaven, cannot be\ncalled simple motion, but (as it were) motion in order having terms and\nperiods; whereof since the sun is prefect and overseer, to determine,\nmoderate, produce, and observe changes and seasons, which (according\nto Heraclitus) produce all things, he is coadjutor to the governing\nand chief God, not in trivial things, but in the greatest and most\nmomentous affairs.\n\n\n_QUESTION IX._\n\nSince Plato in his Commonwealth, discoursing of the faculties of\nthe soul, has very well compared the symphony of reason and of the\nirascible and the concupiscent faculties to the harmony of the middle,\nlowest, and highest chord,[165] some men may properly ask this\nquestion:\u2014\n\n  DID PLATO PLACE THE RATIONAL OR THE IRASCIBLE FACULTY IN THE MIDDLE?\n  FOR HE IS NOT CLEAR IN THE POINT.\n\n1. Indeed, according to the natural order of the parts, the place of\nthe irascible faculty must be in the middle, and of the rational in\nthe highest, which the Greeks call hypate. For they of old called\nthe chief and supreme \u1f55\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2. So Xenocrates calls Jove, in respect of\nimmutable things, \u1f55\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 (or _highest_), in respect of sublunary things\n\u03bd\u03ad\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 (or _lowest_). And long before him, Homer calls the chief God\n\u1f55\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, _Highest of Rulers_. And Nature has of due given\nthe highest place to what is most excellent, having placed reason as\na steersman in the head, and the concupiscent faculty at a distance,\nlast of all and lowest. And the lowest place they call \u03bd\u03b5\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7, as the\nnames of the dead, \u03bd\u03ad\u03c1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 and \u1f14\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9, do show. And some say, that\nthe south wind, inasmuch as it blows from a low and obscure place, is\ncalled \u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2. Now since the concupiscent faculty stands in the same\nopposition to reason in which the lowest stands to the highest and the\nlast to the first, it is not possible for the reason to be uppermost\nand first, and yet for any other part to be the one called \u1f55\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 (or\n_highest_). For they that ascribe the power of the middle to it, as\nthe ruling power, are ignorant how they deprive it of a higher power,\nnamely, of the highest, which is competible neither to the irascible\nnor to the concupiscent faculty; since it is the nature of them both\nto be governed by and obsequious to reason, and the nature of neither\nof them to govern and lead it. And the most natural place of the\nirascible faculty seems to be in the middle of the other two. For it is\nthe nature of reason to govern, and of the irascible faculty both to\ngovern and be governed, since it is obsequious to reason, and commands\nthe concupiscent faculty when this is disobedient to reason. And as\nin letters the semi-vowels are middling between mutes and vowels,\nhaving something more than those and less than these; so in the soul\nof man, the irascible faculty is not purely passive, but hath often\nan imagination of good mixed with the irrational appetite of revenge.\nPlato himself, after he had compared the soul to a pair of horses and\na charioteer, likened (as every one knows) the rational faculty to\nthe charioteer, and the concupiscent to one of the horses, which was\nresty and unmanageable altogether, bristly about the ears, deaf and\ndisobedient both to whip and spur; and the irascible he makes for the\nmost part very obsequious to the bridle of reason, and assistant to\nit. As therefore in a chariot, the middling one in virtue and power\nis not the charioteer, but that one of the horses which is worse than\nhis guider and yet better than his fellow; so in the soul, Plato gives\nthe middle place not to the principal part, but to that faculty which\nhas less of reason than the principal part and more than the third.\nThis order also observes the analogy of the symphonies, i.e. the\nrelation of the irascible to the rational (which is placed as hypate)\nforming the diatessaron (or fourth), that of the irascible to the\nconcupiscent (or nete) forming the diapente (or fifth), and that of the\nrational to the concupiscent (as hypate to nete) forming an octave or\ndiapason. But should you place the rational in the middle, you would\nmake the irascible farther from the concupiscent; though some of the\nphilosophers have taken the irascible and the concupiscent faculty for\nthe selfsame, by reason of their likeness.\n\n2. But it may be ridiculous to describe the first, middle, and last by\ntheir place; since we see hypate highest in the harp, lowest in the\npipe; and wheresoever you place the mese in the harp, provided it is\ntunable, it sounds more acute than hypate, and more grave than nete.\nNor does the eye possess the same place in all animals; but wherever\nit is placed, it is natural for it to see. So a pedagogue, though he\ngoes not foremost but follows behind, is said to lead (\u1f04\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd), as the\ngeneral of the Trojan army,\n\n    Now in the front, now in the rear was seen,\n    And kept command;[166]\n\nbut wherever he was, he was first and chief in power. So the faculties\nof the soul are not to be ranged by mere force in order of place or\nname, but according to their power and analogy. For that in the body\nof man reason is in the highest place, is accidental. But it holds\nthe chief and highest power, as mese to hypate, in respect of the\nconcupiscent; as mese to nete, in respect of the irascible; insomuch\nas it depresses and heightens,\u2014and in fine makes a harmony,\u2014by abating\nwhat is too much and by not suffering them to flatten and grow dull.\nFor what is moderate and symmetrous is defined by mediocrity. Still\nmore is it the object of the rational faculty to reduce the passions\nto moderation, which is called sacred, as effecting a harmony of the\nextremes with reason, and through reason with each other. For in\nchariots the best of the beasts is not in the middle; nor is the skill\nof driving to be placed as an extreme, but it is a mediocrity between\nthe inequality of the swiftness and the slowness of the horses. So the\nforce of reason takes up the passions irrationally moved, and reducing\nthem to measure, constitutes a mediocrity betwixt too much and too\nlittle.\n\n\n_QUESTION X._\n\n  WHY SAID PLATO, THAT SPEECH WAS COMPOSED OF NOUNS AND VERBS?[167]\n\n1. For he seems to make no other parts of speech but them. But Homer in\na sportive humor has comprehended them all in one verse:\n\n    \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f30\u1f7c\u03bd \u03ba\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03af\u03b7\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f44\u03c6\u03c1\u2019 \u03b5\u1f56 \u03b5\u1f30\u03b4\u1fc7\u03c2.[168]\n\nFor in it there is pronoun, participle, noun, preposition, article,\nconjunction, adverb, and verb, the particle -\u03b4\u03b5 being put instead of\nthe preposition \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2; for \u03ba\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03af\u03b7\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5, _to the tent_, is said in the same\nsense as \u1f08\u03b8\u03ae\u03bd\u03b1\u03b6\u03b5, _to Athens_. What then shall we say for Plato?\n\nIs it that at first the ancients called that \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, or speech, which\nonce was called protasis and now is called axiom or proposition,\u2014which\nas soon as a man speaks, he speaks either true or false? This consists\nof a noun and verb, which logicians call the subject and predicate.\nFor when we hear this said, \u201cSocrates philosophizeth\u201d or \u201cSocrates\nis changed,\u201d requiring nothing more, we say the one is true, the\nother false. For very likely in the beginning men wanted speech and\narticulate voice, to enable them to express clearly at once the\npassions and the patients, the actions and the agents. Now, since\nactions and affections are sufficiently expressed by verbs, and they\nthat act and are affected by nouns, as he says, these seem to signify.\nAnd one may say, the rest signify not. For instance, the groans and\nshrieks of stage-players, and even their smiles and reticence, make\ntheir discourse more emphatic. But they have no necessary power to\nsignify any thing, as a noun and verb have, but only an ascititious\npower to vary speech; just as they vary letters who mark spirits and\nquantities upon letters, these being the accidents and differences of\nletters. This the ancients have made manifest, whom sixteen letters\nsufficed to speak and write any thing.\n\n2. Besides, we must not neglect to observe, that Plato says that speech\nis composed _of_ these, not _by_ these; nor must we blame Plato for\nleaving out conjunctions, prepositions, and the like, any more than\nwe should cavil at a man who should say such a medicine is composed\nof wax and galbanum, because fire and utensils are omitted, without\nwhich it cannot be made. For speech is not composed of these; yet by\ntheir means, and not without them, speech must be composed. As, if a\nman pronounce _beats_ or _is beaten_, and put Socrates and Pythagoras\nto the same, he offers us something to conceive and understand. But\nif a man pronounce _indeed_ or _for_ or _about_, and no more, none\ncan conceive any notion of a body or matter; and unless such words\nas these be uttered with verbs and nouns, they are but empty noise\nand chattering. For neither alone nor joined one with another do\nthey signify any thing. And join and confound together conjunctions,\narticles, and prepositions, supposing you would make something of them;\nyet you will be taken to babble, and not to speak sense. But when there\nis a verb in construction with a noun, the result is speech and sense.\nTherefore some do with good reason make only these two parts of speech;\nand perhaps Homer is willing to declare himself of this mind, when he\nsays so often,\n\n    \u1f1c\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u2019 \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c4\u2019 \u1f14\u03ba \u03c4\u2019 \u1f40\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFor by \u1f14\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 he usually means a verb, as in these verses:\n\n    \u1f6e \u03b3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f22 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f14\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03bb\u03b3\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f14\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u03c2,\n\nand,\n\n    \u03a7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c1\u03b5, \u03c0\u03ac\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1, \u1f66 \u03be\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03b5, \u1f14\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u03b5\u1f34\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03bb\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n    \u0394\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f04\u03c6\u03b1\u03c1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u03ac\u03be\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f04\u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9.[169]\n\nFor neither conjunction, article, nor preposition could be called\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd (_terrible_) or \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03bb\u03b3\u03ad\u03c2 (_soul-grieving_), but only a verb\nexpressing a base action or a foolish passion of the mind. Therefore,\nwhen we would praise or dispraise poets or writers, we are wont to say,\nsuch a man uses Attic nouns and good verbs, or else common nouns and\nverbs; but none can say that Thucydides or Euripides used Attic or good\nor common articles.\n\n3. What then? may some say, do the rest of the parts conduce nothing to\nspeech? I answer, They conduce, as salt does to victuals, or water to\nbarley cakes. And Euenus calls fire the best sauce. Though sometimes\nthere is neither occasion for fire to boil, nor for salt to season our\nfood, which we have always occasion for. Nor has speech always occasion\nfor articles. I think I may say this of the Latin tongue, which is\nnow the universal language; for it has taken away all prepositions,\nsaving a few, nor does it use any articles, but leaves its nouns (as it\nwere) without skirts and borders. Nor is it any wonder, since Homer,\nwho in fineness of epic surpasses all men, has put articles only to a\nfew nouns, like handles to cans, or crests to helmets. Therefore these\nverses are remarkable wherein the articles are expressed:\n\n    \u0391\u1f34\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b1\u0390\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9 \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u1f44\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\n    \u03a4\u1ff7 \u03a4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u1fc3\u00b7[170]\n\nand,\n\n    \u03a0\u03bf\u03af\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd \u1f44\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u1fc6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03c5\u03b3\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u00b7[171]\n\nand some few besides. But in a thousand others, the omission of the\narticles hinders neither perspicuity nor elegance of phrase.\n\n4. Now neither an animal nor an instrument nor arms nor any thing else\nis more fine, efficacious, or graceful, for the loss of a part. Yet\nspeech, by taking away conjunctions, often becomes more persuasive, as\nhere:\n\n    One rear\u2019d a dagger at a captive\u2019s breast;\n    One held a living foe, that freshly bled\n    With new-made wounds; another dragg\u2019d a dead.[172]\n\nAnd this of Demosthenes:\n\n\u201cA bully in an assault may do much which his victim cannot even\ndescribe to another person,\u2014by his mien, his look, his voice,\u2014when he\nstings by insult, when he attacks as an avowed enemy, when he smites\nwith his fist, when he gives a blow on the face. These rouse a man;\nthese make a man beside himself who is unused to such foul abuse.\u201d\n\nAnd again:\n\n\u201cNot so with Midias; but from the very day, he talks, he abuses, he\nshouts. Is there an election of magistrates?\n\nMidias the Anagyrrasian is nominated. He is the advocate of Plutarchus;\nhe knows state secrets; the city cannot contain him.\u201d[173]\n\nTherefore the figure asyndeton, whereby conjunctions are omitted, is\nhighly commended by writers of rhetoric. But such as keep overstrict to\nthe law, and (according to custom) omit not a conjunction, rhetoricians\nblame for using a dull, flat, tedious style, without any variety in it.\nAnd inasmuch as logicians mightily want conjunctions for the joining\ntogether their axioms, as much as charioteers want yokes, and Ulysses\nwanted withs to tie Cyclop\u2019s sheep; this shows they are not parts of\nspeech, but a conjunctive instrument thereof, as the word conjunction\nimports. Nor do conjunctions join all, but only such as are not spoken\nsimply; unless you will make a cord part of the burthen, glue a part of\na book, or distribution of money part of the government. For Demades\nsays, that money which is given to the people out of the exchequer for\npublic shows is the glue of a democracy. Now what conjunction does\nso of several propositions make one, by knitting and joining them\ntogether, as marble joins iron that is melted with it in the fire? Yet\nthe marble neither is nor is said to be part of the iron; although\nin this case the substances enter into the mixture and are melted\ntogether, so as to form a common substance from many and to be mutually\naffected. But there be some who think that conjunctions do not make any\nthing one, but that this kind of discourse is merely an enumeration, as\nwhen magistrates or days are reckoned in order.\n\n5. Moreover, as to the other parts of speech, a pronoun is manifestly a\nsort of noun; not only because it has cases like the noun, but because\nsome pronouns, when they are applied to objects heretofore defined, by\ntheir mere utterance give the most distinct and proper designation of\nthem.\n\nNor do I know whether he that says _Socrates_ or he that says _this\none_ does more by name declare the person.\n\n6. The thing we call a participle, being a mixture of a verb and noun,\nis nothing of itself, as are not the common names of male and female\nqualities (i.e. adjectives), but in construction it is put with others,\nin regard of tenses belonging to verbs, in regard of cases to nouns.\nLogicians call them \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03ba\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, (i.e. _reflected_),\u2014as \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd comes\nfrom \u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, and \u03c3\u03c9\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd from \u03c3\u03ce\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2,\u2014having the force both of\nnouns and appellatives.\n\n7. And prepositions are like to the crests of a helmet, or footstools\nand pedestals, which (one may rather say) do belong to words than are\nwords themselves. See whether they rather be not pieces and scraps\nof words, as they that are in haste write but dashes and pricks for\nletters. For it is plain that \u1f10\u03bc\u03b2\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 and \u1f10\u03ba\u03b2\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 are abbreviations of\nthe whole words \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b2\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 and \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b2\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 for \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, and \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd for \u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9 \u1f35\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd. As undoubtedly for haste and\nbrevity\u2019s sake, instead of \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd and \u03c4\u03bf\u03af\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f40\u03c1\u03cd\u03c4\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd men\nfirst said \u03bb\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd and \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03c5\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\n8. Therefore every one of these is of some use in speech; but nothing\nis a part or element of speech (as has been said) except a noun and a\nverb, which make the first juncture admitting of truth or falsehood,\nwhich some call a proposition or protasis, others an axiom, and which\nPlato called speech.\n\n\n\n\nPARALLELS, OR A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE GREEK AND ROMAN HISTORIES.[174]\n\n\nMOST people are apt to take the histories of former times for mere\nforgeries and fables, because of many passages in those relations that\nseem to be very extravagant. But yet, according to my observation, we\nhave had as strange occurrences of a later date in the Roman times as\nany we have received from antiquity; for proof whereof, I have here\nmatched several stories of the ancients with modern instances, and\ncited my authorities.\n\n\n1. Datis, an eminent Persian commander, drew out three hundred thousand\nmen to Marathon, a plain of Attica, where he encamped and declared war\nagainst the inhabitants. The Athenians made no reckoning at all of so\nbarbarous a rabble, but sent out nine thousand men against him, under\nthe command of Cynaegirus, Polyzelus, Callimachus, and Miltiades.\nUpon the joining of battle, Polyzelus was struck blind at the sight\nof a wonderful apparition; Callimachus\u2019s body was struck through with\na great many lances, continuing in an upright posture even when he\nwas dead; Cynaegirus had both his hands cut off upon laying hold of a\nPersian ship that was endeavoring to get away.\n\nKing Asdrubal, having possessed himself of Sicily, proclaimed war\nagainst the Romans. Metellus, who was appointed by the Senate to\ncommand in chief, overcame him. L. Glauco, a patrician, laid hold\nof the vessel that Asdrubal was in, and lost both his hands upon\nit.\u2014_Aristides Milesius gives this account in his First Book of the\nAffairs of Sicily, and Dionysius Siculus had it from him._\n\n\n2. Xerxes came with an army of five millions of men to Artemisium,\nand declared war against the country. The Athenians, in a very great\nsurprise, sent Agesilaus, the brother of Themistocles, to discover the\nmotions of the enemy, notwithstanding a dream of his father Neocles,\nthat his son had lost both his hands. This Agesilaus put himself into\na Persian habit, and entered the barbarians\u2019 camp; where, taking\nMardonius (an officer of the king\u2019s guards) for Xerxes himself, he\nkilled him. Whereupon he was immediately seized, bound, and carried to\nXerxes, who was just then about to sacrifice an ox to the Sun. The fire\nwas kindled upon the altar, and Agesilaus put his right hand into it,\nwithout so much as shrinking at the pain. He was ordered upon this to\nbe untied; and told the king that the Athenians were all of the same\nresolution, and that, if he pleased, he should see him burn his left\nhand too. This gave Xerxes an apprehension of him, so that he caused\nhim to be still kept in custody.\u2014_This I find in Agatharchides the\nSamian, in the Second Book of his Persian History._\n\nPorsena, a king of Tuscany, encamped himself beyond the Tiber, and made\nwar upon the Romans, cutting off the supplies, till they were brought\nto great want of provisions. The Senate were at their wits\u2019 end what\nto do, till Mucius, a nobleman, got leave of the consuls to take four\nhundred of his own quality to advise with upon the matter. Mucius, upon\nthis, put himself into the habit of a private man, and crossed the\nriver; where finding one of the king\u2019s officers giving orders for the\ndistribution of necessaries to the soldiers, and taking him for the\nking himself, he slew him. He was taken immediately and carried to the\nking, where he put his right hand into a fire that was in the room, and\nwith a smile in the middle of his torments,\u2014Barbarian, says he, I can\nset myself at liberty without asking you leave; and be it known to you,\nthat I have left four hundred men in the camp as daring as myself, that\nhave sworn your death. This struck Porsena with such a terror, that he\nmade peace with the Romans upon it.\u2014_Aristides Milesius is my author\nfor this, in the Third Book of his History._\n\n\n3. There happened a dispute betwixt the Argives and Lacedaemonians\nabout a claim to the possession of Thyreatis. The Amphictyons gave\ntheir opinion for a trial of it by battle, so many and so many of\na side, and the possession to go to the victor. The Lacedaemonians\nmade choice of Othryades for their captain, and the Argives of\nThersander. The battle was fought, and the only two survivors that\nappeared were Agenor and Chromius, both Argives, who carried their\ncity the news of the victory. In this interim, Othryades, who was\nnot as yet quite dead, made a shift to raise himself by the help of\nbroken lances, gathered the shields of the dead together, and erected\na trophy with this inscription upon it in his own blood. \u201cTo Jupiter\nthe Guardian of Trophies.\u201d The controversy still depended, till the\nAmphictyons, upon an ocular examination of the matter, gave it for the\nLacedaemonians.\u2014_This is according to Chrysermus, in his Third Book of\nthe Peloponnesian History._\n\nIn a war that the Romans had with the Samnites, they made Posthumius\nAlbinus their general. He was surprised in the difficult pass called\nthe Caudine Forks, where he was hemmed in and lost three legions, he\nhimself likewise falling upon the place grievously wounded. In the\ndead of the night, finding himself near his end, he gathered together\nthe targets of his dead enemies, and raised a trophy with them, which\nhe inscribed with his hand dipped in blood, \u201cErected by the Romans to\nJupiter, Guardian of the Trophies, for a victory over the Samnites.\u201d\nBut Fabius Gurges, that was despatched away with troops under his\ncommand, so soon as he came to the place and saw the trophy, took up\nan auspicious omen upon it, fought the enemy, and overcame them, took\ntheir king prisoner, and sent him to Rome.\u2014_This is in the Third Book\nof Aristides Milesius\u2019s Italian History._\n\n\n4. Upon the Persians falling into Greece with a body of five millions\nof men, the Spartans sent out Leonidas with a party of three hundred\nsoldiers to secure the Pass of Thermopylae. As they were at dinner, the\nbarbarians fell in upon them; upon which, Leonidas bade them eat as if\nthey were to sup in another world. Leonidas charged at the head of his\nmen into the body of the barbarians; and after many wounds received,\ngot up to Xerxes himself, and took his crown from his head. He lost his\nlife in the attempt, and Xerxes causing him to be cut up when he was\ndead, found his heart all hairy.\u2014_Aristides, in the First Book of his\nPersian History._\n\nIn the Punic war the Romans sent out three hundred men under the\ncommand of Fabius Maximus, where they were all lost; and he himself,\nafter he had received a mortal wound, assaulting Hannibal, took his\ndiadem from his head, and died in the action. _According to Aristides\nMilesius._\n\n\n5. There was a terrible earthquake, with a wonderful eruption of water,\nat Celaenae, a city of Phrygia, that swallowed up a great many houses,\npeople and all. Midas upon this consults the oracle, which gave him\nfor answer, that if he would cast into that gulf the most precious\nthing that he had in the world, the earth should close again. Whereupon\nhe threw in a mass of gold and silver; but never the better. This\nput it in the head of Anchurus, the son of Midas, to consider, that\nthe most precious thing in Nature is the life and soul of a man; so\nthat he went presently and embraced his father and his wife Timothea,\nmounted his horse, and leaped into the abyss. The earth closed upon\nit, and Midas raised a golden altar in the place, laid his hand upon\nit, and dedicated it TO JUPITER IDAEUS. This altar becomes stone at\nthat time of the year when it was usual to have these eruptions; and\nafter that season was over, it is turned to gold again.\u2014_My author is\nCallisthenes, in his Second Book of Transformations._\n\nThe River Tiber, in its course over the Forum, opened a huge cavity in\nthe ground, so that a great many houses were buried in it. This was\nlooked upon as a judgment upon the place, from Jupiter Tarsius; who,\nas the oracle told them, was not to be appeased without throwing into\nit what they held most valuable. So they threw a quantity of gold and\nsilver into it. But Curtius, one of the bravest young men they had,\ngave a better guess at the mind of the oracle; and reflecting upon\nit, that the life of a man was much more excellent than treasure,\ntook his horse and plunged himself into the gulf, and so redeemed his\ncountry.\u2014_Aristides, in the Fortieth Book of his Italian History._\n\n\n\n6. As several great captains were making merry with Polynices, an\neagle passing by made a stoop, and carried up into the air the lance\nof Amphiaraus, who was one of the company; and then falling down, it\nstuck in the ground, and was turned into a laurel. The next day, when\nthe armies were in action, the earth opened and swallowed up Amphiaraus\nwith his chariot, in that very place where at present the city Harma\nstands, so called from that chariot.\u2014_This is in Trisimachus\u2019s Third\nBook of the Foundations of Cities._\n\nWhen the Romans made war upon Pyrrhus, the king of the Epirots, the\noracle promised Aemilius Paulus the victory in case he should erect\nan altar in that place where he should see an eminent man with his\nchariot swallowed up into the ground. Some three days after, Valerius\nConatus, a man skilled in divining, was commanded in a dream to take\nthe pontifical habit upon him. He did so, and led his men into the\nbattle, where, after a prodigious slaughter of the enemy, the earth\nopened and swallowed him up. Aemilius built an altar here, obtained a\ngreat victory, and sent a hundred and sixty castle-bearing elephants\nto Rome. This altar delivers oracles about that season of the year in\nwhich Pyrrhus was overcome.\u2014_Critolaus has this in his Third Book of\nthe History of the Epirots._\n\n\n7. Pyraechmes, king of the Euboeans, made war upon the Boeotians.\nHercules, when he was yet a youth, overcame this king, had him drawn\nto pieces with horses, and threw away the carcass unburied. The place\nwhere this was done is called Pyraechmes\u2019s horses. It lies upon the\nRiver Heraclius, and there is heard a neighing whensoever any horse\ndrinks of that river.\u2014_This is in the Third Book of Rivers._\n\nTullus Hostilius, a king of the Romans, waged war against the Albans,\nwhose king\u2019s name was Metius Fufetius; and he many times kept off from\nfighting. He had the ill luck to be once worsted, upon which the Albans\ngave themselves up to drinking and making good cheer, till Tullus\nfell in upon them when they were in their cups, and tore their king\nto pieces betwixt two horses.\u2014_Alexarchus, in the Fourth Book of his\nItalian History._\n\n\n8. Philip had a design to sack Olynthus and Methone, and in trying\nto pass the River Sandanus, was shot in the eye with an arrow by one\nAster, an Olynthian, with these words: It is Aster that sends Philip\nthis mortal shaft. Philip upon this swam back again to his own people,\nand with the loss of an eye saved his life.\u2014_Callisthenes, in his Third\nBook of the Macedonics._\n\nPorsena made war upon the Romans, and pitched his camp on the further\nside of the Tiber, where he intercepted all relief, till they were\npinched with famine. Horatius Cocles, being chosen general, took\npossession of the wooden bridge, where he opposed himself to the enemy\nthat were pressing to come over; but finding himself overpowered with\nnumbers, he commanded his people to cut down the bridge behind him, by\nwhich means he hindered them from coming over. But in the mean time\nreceiving a wound in his eye, he threw himself into the river, and swam\nover to his own party.\u2014_So Theotimus in the Second Book of his Italian\nHistory._\n\n\n9. Eratosthenes in Erigone tells a story of Icarius, that entertained\nBacchus under his roof; and it runs thus. Saturn, having taken up his\nlodging with an husbandman who had a very beautiful daughter named\nEntoria, took her to his bed, and had several sons by her, Janus,\nHymnus, Faustus, and Felix. He taught his host Icarius the use of\nwine and the way of dressing his vines, with a charge that he should\nlikewise instruct his neighbors in the mystery. His acquaintance,\nhereupon finding that this strange drink had cast them into a deeper\nsleep than ordinary, took a fancy that they were poisoned, and stoned\nIcarius in revenge; whereupon his grandchildren hanged themselves for\ngrief.\n\nUpon a time, when the plague was very hot in Rome, the Pythian oracle\nbeing consulted gave this answer, that upon the appeasing the wrath\nof Saturn, and the Manes of those that were unjustly killed, the\npestilence would cease. Lutatius Catulus, a man of the first quality,\ncaused a temple upon this occasion to be erected near the Tarpeian\nMount, which he dedicated to Saturn, placing an altar in it with four\nfaces; possibly with a respect to Saturn\u2019s four children, or to the\nfour seasons of the year. He also instituted the month of January. But\nSaturn translated them all to heaven among the stars, some of which are\ncalled Protrygeteres, as forerunners of the vintage; only Janus rises\nfirst, and has his place at the feet of the Virgin.\u2014_Critolaus, in his\nFourth Book of Celestial Appearances._\n\n\n10. In the time of the devastation of Greece by the Persians,\nPausanias, the Lacedaemonian commander, took a bribe of 500 talents\nof Xerxes, to betray Sparta. The treason being discovered, his father\nAgesilaus pressed him so hard, that he was fain to take sanctuary\nin the temple of Minerva, called Chalcioecos, where he caused the\ndoors to be bricked up, and his son to be immured till he died of\nhunger; and his mother after this would not suffer the body to be\nburied.\u2014_Chrysermus, in his Second Book of Histories._\n\nThe Romans, being in war with the Latins, made choice of P. Decius\nfor their general. Now there was a certain patrician, a young man and\npoor (Cassius Brutus by name), who proposed for a certain reward to\nopen the gates to the enemy; but being detected, he fled to the temple\nof Minerva Auxiliaria. But his father Cassius, an ensign-bearer, shut\nhim up there till he died of famine, and his dead body was not allowed\nburial.\u2014_Clitonymus, in his Italian History._\n\n\n11. Darius, the Persian, had a battle with Alexander near the River\nGranicus, where he lost seven satraps, and five hundred and two\nchariots armed with scythes. And yet he would have tried the fortune of\nanother battle the day following; but his son Ariobarzanes, in favor of\nAlexander, undertook to betray his father into his hands. The father\nwas so transported with passion at the indignity of the thing, that he\ncut off his son\u2019s head for it.\u2014_Aretades Cnidius, in the Third of his\nMacedonian History._\n\nBrutus, that was created consul by the unanimous vote of the citizens,\nforced away Tarquinius Superbus into banishment for his abominable\ntyranny. He fled to the Tuscans, and by their assistance made war upon\nthe Romans. The sons were treating to betray the father; the business\nwas discovered, and they lost their heads for it.\u2014_Aristides Milesius,\nin his Italian History._\n\n\n12. Epaminondas, a Theban general, managed a war against the Spartans.\nHe went from the army to Thebes, to be present there at a public\nelection of magistrates; but first enjoined his son Stesimbrotus\nthat he should not fight the enemy in his absence upon any terms.\nThe Spartans being informed that Epaminondas was not with the army,\nreproached the young man with want of courage, and so far provoked him,\nthat without any regard to his father\u2019s command he gave the Spartans\nbattle, and overcame them. His father was so incensed against him for\nthis action, that though he crowned him for the victory, he cut off\nhis head for his disobedience.\u2014_Ctesiphon, in his Third Book of the\nBoeotian History._\n\nIn a war that the Romans had against the Samnites, they gave the\ncommand to Manlius, surnamed Imperiosus. He had occasion to go to\nRome, to be present there at the choice of consuls, and gave his son\nin charge not to engage the enemy in the mean time. The Samnites,\nunderstanding this, irritated the young man with opprobrious words,\nas if he declined fighting out of cowardice, and in the end provoked\nhim to a battle; upon which action he carried the day; but his father\ncaused his head to be struck off for breaking his order.\u2014_This is in\nAristides Milesius._\n\n\n13. Hercules made love to Iole, but she gave him the repulse, and so he\nwent and assaulted Oechalia. Iole threw herself headlong down from the\nwall, but the whiffling of the wind under her garments broke the fall,\nand she had no hurt.\u2014_This story is in Nicias Maleotes._\n\nValerius Torquatus was the Romans\u2019 general in the war they had with\nthe Tuscans; who, upon the sight of Clusia, the daughter of the Tuscan\nking, fell in love with her, and when he found he could do no good\non\u2019t, laid siege to the city. Clusia, upon this, threw herself headlong\nfrom a tower; but Venus was so careful of her, that by the playing\nof the wind in the folds of her garments, she was wafted safe to the\nground. Torquatus, however, offered her violence, and for so doing he\nwas banished by a public decree into the isle of Corsica.\u2014_Theophilus,\nin the Third Book of his Italian History._\n\n\n14. While the Carthaginians were treating an alliance with the\nSicilians against the Romans, the Roman general Metellus was observed\nto omit sacrificing only to Vesta, who revenged herself upon him by\nsending a cross wind to the navy. But Caius Julius, a soothsayer,\nbeing consulted in the matter, gave answer, that this obstacle would\nbe removed upon the general\u2019s sacrificing his daughter; so that he was\nforced to produce his daughter Metella for a sacrifice. But Vesta had\ncompassion for her, and so sent her away to Lamusium, substituting a\nheifer in her stead, and made a priestess of her to the dragon that\nis worshipped in that place.\u2014_So Pythocles, in the Third Book of his\nItalian History._\n\nSomething like this happened to Iphigenia in Aulis, a city of\nBoeotia.\u2014_See Meryllus, in the First Book of his Boeotic History._\n\n\n15. Brennus, a king of the Gauls, after the wasting of Asia, came to\nEphesus, and there fell in love with a country girl, who promised him\nthat for such a certain reward in bracelets and other curiosities of\nvalue he should have the use of her body, and that she would further\nundertake to deliver up Ephesus into his hands. Brennus ordered his\nsoldiers to throw all the gold they had into the lap of this avaricious\nwretch, which they did, till she perished under the weight of\nit.\u2014_Clitophon in the First Book of his Gallican History._\n\nTarpeia, a virgin that was well born, and had the keeping of the\nCapitol in the war betwixt the Sabines and the Romans, passed a\npromise unto Tatius, that she would open him a passage into the\nTarpeian Mount, provided that he would give her all the jewels that the\nSabines wore, for a reward. The Sabines hearing this crushed her to\ndeath.\u2014_Aristides\u2019s Milesius, in his Italic History._\n\n\n16. After a long war betwixt two cities, Tegea and Phenea, they came to\nan agreement to refer the decision of the controversy, by combat, to\nthree twin-brothers on each side, the sons of Reximachus for Tegea,\nand the sons of Damostratus for Phenea. Upon the encounter, two of the\nsons of Reximachus were slain; but Critolaus, the third, had a fetch\nbeyond his two brothers; for, under a pretence of running away, he\ndivided his enemies that pursued him, and so taking them one by one,\nhe killed them all. The Tegeans upon his return went all overjoyed to\ngratulate the victor. Only his sister Demodice was not so well pleased;\nfor she was betrothed, it seems, to Demodicus, one of the brothers,\nthat was now slain. Which Critolaus took so ill that he killed his\nsister, and being afterwards indicted for murder at the instigation of\nhis mother, he was acquitted.\u2014_Demaratus, in his Second Book of the\nArcadian History._\n\nIn the heat of the war betwixt the Romans and Albans, they came to\nthis agreement, that the cause should be determined by a trial at\narms betwixt three and three twins on each side, the Curiatii for\nthe Albans, and the Horatii for the Romans. Upon the encounter, the\nCuriatii killed two of the others; the third survivor, under the color\nof flying, destroyed his enemies one by one, as they followed him.\nAll his friends came to joy him of his victory, save only his sister\nHoratia; for one of the Curiatii, that her brother killed, was her\nsweetheart. Horatius for this killed his sister.\u2014_Aristides Milesius,\nin his Italian Commentaries._\n\n\n17. The temple of Minerva in Ilium happened to be on fire. Ilus ran\npresently to save the Palladium (an image dropped from heaven); but\nupon the taking of it up, he was struck blind, it being a thing\nunlawful for any man to look upon. But upon appeasing the Deity, he\nwas afterwards restored to his sight.\u2014_Dercyllus, in his First Book of\nFoundations._\n\nMetellus, an eminent man, as he was walking out of the city, was\ninterrupted by ravens, that laid hold of him and kept a flapping of\nhim with their wings. This omen surprised him, and back he went into\nthe city again, where he found the temple of Vesta all in a flame.\nHe went and took away the Palladium, and fell blind upon\u2019t. But some\ntime after, the Goddess being pacified gave him the use of his eyes\nagain.\u2014_Aristides Milesius, in his Italian History._\n\n\n18. Upon a time when the Thracians were engaged in a war against the\nAthenians, the oracle promised them victory if they would but save the\nlife of Codrus. Codrus upon this puts himself in a coarse disguise, and\naway he goes into the enemies\u2019 camp with a scythe in his hand, where\nhe killed one, and another killed him, so that the Athenians got the\nbetter on\u2019t.\u2014_Socrates, in his Second Book of his Thracian History._\n\nPublius Decius, a Roman, at a time when they were in war with the\nAlbans, had a dream that his death would bring a great advantage to\nthe Romans; upon which consideration he charged into the middle of his\nenemies, where he killed many, and was slain himself: his son Decius\ndid the like in the Gallic war, for the conservation of the Roman\nState.\u2014_Aristides Milesius is my author._\n\n\n19. There was one Cyanippus a Syracusan, that sacrificed to all the\nGods but Bacchus; who took the contempt so heinously that he made him\ndrunk, in which fit he got his daughter Cyane into a corner and lay\nwith her. She in the mean time slipped his ring off his finger, and\ngave it to her nurse to keep, as a circumstance that some time or other\nmight come to be brought in evidence. There brake out a pestilence, and\nthe Pythian oracle advised the sacrificing of an incestuous person to\nthe Gods that are the averters of such calamities, as the only remedy.\nCyane, that understood the meaning of the oracle better than other\npeople, took her father by the hair of the head and dragged him forth,\nfirst stabbing him and then herself.\u2014_Dositheus, in the Third Book of\nhis Sicilian History._\n\nIn the time of celebrating the Bacchanalia at Rome, Aruntius, that had\nnever drunk any wine since he was born, did not show such reverence\nfor the power of the God as he ought to have done, so that Bacchus\nintoxicated him; and in that freak, Aruntius ravished his daughter\nMedullina. She came to know the ravisher by his ring, and an exploit\ncame into her head, above what from her age could have been expected.\nShe made her father drunk and set a garland upon his head, carrying him\nto the altar of Thunder, where with tears she killed him for robbing\nher so treacherously of her virginity.\u2014_Aristides, in the Third Book of\nhis Italian History._\n\n\n20. Erechtheus was told in a war he had with Eumolpus, that he should\nhave the better of his enemy if he would but sacrifice his daughter.\nHe advised upon the matter with his wife Praxithea, and delivered up\nhis daughter after the manner of a common sacrifice.\u2014_Euripides, in his\nErechtheus._\n\nMarius, finding himself hard put to it in the Cimbrian war, had it\nrevealed to him in a dream, that he should overcome his enemies if\nhe would but sacrifice his daughter Calpurnia. He did it, preferring\nthe common safety before any private bond of Nature, and he got the\nvictory. There are two altars in Germany, where about that time of the\nyear may be heard the sound of trumpets.\u2014_Dorotheus, in the Fourth Book\nof his Italian History._\n\n\n21. There was one Cyanippus, a Thessalian, who was a great lover of\nthe chase and was often abroad a hunting. This same Cyanippus was\nnewly married, and his staying out so long and so often in the woods\ngave his wife a jealousy of an intrigue there with some other woman;\ninsomuch that she followed him one time, and got into a thicket to\nwatch him. The rustling of the boughs in the place where she lay\nbrought the dogs thither in expectation of some game, where they tore\nthis tender-hearted woman to pieces, as if she had been a brute beast.\nCyanippus was so surprised with so dismal and unthought-of a spectacle,\nthat he killed himself.\u2014_Parthenias the Poet._\n\nSybaris is a city of Italy, where there was one Aemilius, a very\nhandsome young man, and a lover of hunting. His wife (whom he had\nlately married) took up a suspicion that, under color of the chase,\nhe carried on an assignation with some other woman. She traced him to\nthe wood, and upon the noise of the boughs in her passage, the dogs\nran presently to her and tore her to pieces; and her husband stabbed\nhimself immediately upon this miserable accident.\u2014_Clitonymus, in the\nSecond Book of his Sybaritics._\n\n\n22. One Smyrna (to whom Venus owed a shame, it seems) fell passionately\nin love with her father Cinyras, and made the nurse her confidant. She\ngoes craftily to work with her master, and tells him of a maid there\nin the neighborhood that loved him above all things in the world, but\nshe could not in modesty appear publicly to him. So the father lay\nignorantly with his own daughter. But some time after, having a great\nmind to see his mistress, he called for a light, and when he saw who it\nwas, he pursued the incestuous wretch with his drawn sword; but by the\nprovidence of Venus, she was rescued from that danger, and turned into\na myrrh-tree.\u2014_Theodorus, in his Transformations._\n\nOne Valeria Tusculanaria (for whom Venus had no kindness) fell\ndownright in love with her father Valerius. She told the nurse the\nsecret, who ordered it so that she brought the father and the daughter\ntogether, telling him, that a maid there hard by was fallen desperately\nin love with him, but that she durst not lie with him for fear of being\nknown. The father was got into his cups, and as he was in bed with his\ndaughter, called for a candle. The nurse waked Valeria, and away she\ngoes wandering up and down the country with her great belly. She had\nat last a fall from a precipice, but escaped without so much as any\nmiscarriage; for she was delivered at her time, and the child\u2019s name\nwas Sylvanus (or goat-footed Pan). Valerius, in the anxiety of his\nmind, threw himself from the same precipice.\u2014_Aristides Milesius, in\nthe Third Book of his Italian History._\n\n\n23. Diomedes, after the destruction of Troy, was cast by stress of\nweather upon the coast of Libya, where Lycus the son of Mars was king,\nwhose custom it was to sacrifice all strangers to his father; but\nhis daughter Callirrhoe falling in love with Diomede, betrayed her\nfather and set Diomede at liberty; who presently went his way without\nany regard to his benefactress, and Callirrhoe hanged herself upon\nit.\u2014_Juba, Book the Third of his Libyan History._\n\nCalpurnius Crassus, a famous man bearing arms with Regulus, was sent to\nthe Massyllians to attack the castle of Garaetius, being a very strong\nplace. He was taken in the enterprise, and designed for a sacrifice to\nSaturn; but Bisaltia, the king\u2019s daughter, out of a passionate kindness\nto Calpurnius, betrayed her father. Calpurnius left her, and after\nhis departure Bisaltia cut her own throat.\u2014_Hesianax\u2019s Third Book of\nAfrican History._\n\n\n24. When Priam found that Troy was given for lost, he sent his young\nson Polydore into Thrace with a vast sum of gold, and put all into the\nhands of Polymestor his kinsman. So soon as Troy was taken, Polymestor\nkilled the child, and took the gold to himself. Hecuba, being driven\nupon that quarter, overreached Polymestor by craft, under pretence of\ngiving him a great treasure, at which time she, with the assistance of\nher fellow-prisoners, tore out his eyes with her nails.\u2014_Euripides the\nTragedian._\n\nWhen Hannibal was ravaging the country of Campania, Lucius Thymbris\ndeposited his son Rustius, with a vast sum of money, in the hands of\nValerius Gestius his kinsman; who upon intelligence that the enemy\ncarried all before him, out of pure avarice and without any regard to\nhumanity or justice, killed the child. It so fell out that Thymbris,\nas he was walking about the fields, found the dead body of his son;\nwhereupon he called his kinsman under pretence of a treasure that\nhe would show him. He took his opportunity, put out his eyes, and\ncrucified him.\u2014_Aristides\u2019s Third Book of his Italic History._\n\n\n25. Aeacus had two sons by Psamathe, Phocus and Telamon, the former\nbetter beloved than the other. Telamon one day took out his brother a\nhunting; and a boar presenting himself, he threw his lance in pretence\nat the boar, but in truth at his brother, whom he hated, and so killed\nhim; for which his father banished him.\u2014_Dorotheus\u2019s First Book of\nTransformations._\n\nCaius Maximus had two sons, Rhesus the one, by Ameria, ... and the\nother Similius. The brothers were a hunting together, and Rhesus having\nkilled the other, put it off\u2014when he came home\u2014that it was by chance,\nand far from any design of doing it. But his father, when he came in\ntime to know the truth of it, banished the son.\u2014_Aristocles, in the\nThird Book of his Italian History._\n\n\n26. Mars is said to have begotten Meleager upon Althaea.\u2014_Euripides, in\nhis Meleager._\n\nSeptimius Marcellus took to wife one Sylvia, and a great lover of\nhunting he was. Mars put himself in the habit of a shepherd, whored the\nnew wife and got her with child; which being done, he told her who he\nwas, and gave her a spear, telling her that the fate of the child she\nwent withal was wrapped up in the fate of that spear....\n\nSeptimius slew Tuscinus; but Mamercus, in his sacrificing to the Gods\nfor a fruitful season, omitted only Ceres, who in revenge sent a wild\nboar into his grounds. Whereupon getting a knot of huntsmen together,\nhe killed him, and delivered the head and skin to his sweetheart; but\nScymbrates and Muthias, the maid\u2019s uncles, took them away from her.\nMamercus in a rage killed them upon it, and the mother burned the\nspear.\u2014_Menyllus, in the Third Book of his Italian History._\n\n\n27. When Telamon, the son of Aeacus and Endeis, came to Euboea, he\ndebauched Periboea the daughter of Alcathous, and fled away by night.\nThe father understanding this, and suspecting the villany to be done by\nsome of the citizens, he delivered his daughter to one of the guards\nto be thrown into the sea. But the soldier, in compassion to the\nwoman, rather sold her, and she was carried away by sea to the island\nof Salamis, where Telamon bought her, and had by her Ajax.\u2014_Aretades\nCnidius, in his Second Book of Islands._\n\nLucius Troscius had by Patris a daughter called Florentia, who, being\ncorrupted by Calpurnius a Roman, was delivered by her father to a\nsoldier, with a charge to throw her in the sea and drown her. The man\nhad compassion of her, and rather sold her. And when good fortune\nbrought the ship to Italy, Calpurnius bought her, and had Contruscus by\nher....\n\n\n28. Aeolus, a great king of Etruria, had by Amphithea six daughters,\nand as many sons. Macareus, the youngest of them, had the carnal\nknowledge of one of his sisters, who was delivered of a boy. Her father\nsent her a sword to kill the child with; but that was so impious, that\nshe chose rather to kill herself. And Macareus laid violent hands upon\nhimself too.\u2014_Sostratus, in his Second Book of Tuscan History._\n\nPapirius Tolucer married Julia Pulchra, by whom he had six sons and six\ndaughters. Papirius Romanus, the eldest of the six, got Canulia his\nsister with child. When the father came to the knowledge of it, he sent\nhis daughter a sword, with which she killed herself; and Romanus did\nthe same.\u2014_Chrysippus, in his First Book of Italian History._\n\n\n29. Aristonymus, an Ephesian and the son of Demostratus, was a\nwoman-hater; but he had to do with an ass, which brought him forth in\nthe ordinary course of time a most beautiful daughter, which he called\nOnoscelis.\u2014_Aristotle\u2019s Second Book of Paradoxes._\n\nFulvius Stellus had an aversion to women too; but entertained himself\nto his satisfaction with a mare, by which he had a very handsome\ndaughter, that he called Hippona; and this is the goddess that has the\ncare of the breed of horses.\u2014_According to Agesilaus, in the Third Book\nof his Italian History._\n\n\n30. The Sardians, being engaged in war with the Smyrnaeans, besieged\nSmyrna, and sent them word by their ambassadors, that they would never\nraise the siege till the Smyrnaeans should deliver up their wives to\ntheir embraces. The men of Smyrna would have been hard put to it upon\nthis pinching necessity, if it had not been for the advice of a pretty\nwench that was a maid-servant to Phylarchus. Her counsel to her master\nwas this; that instead of sending free women, they should rather dress\nup the servants and send them. The Smyrnaeans followed their advice;\nand when the Sardians had wearied themselves with their mistresses, the\nSmyrnaeans easily overcame them. From whence there is a festival day\nobserved under the name of Eleutheria, which is celebrated among the\nSmyrnaeans with great solemnity; the servants being dressed up with all\nthe ornaments of the free women.\u2014_Dositheus, in the Third Book of his\nLydian History._\n\nAtepomarus, a king of the Gauls, being in war with the Romans, made\na public declaration, that he would never agree to a peace till the\nRomans should prostitute their wives to them. The Romans advised with\nthe maid-servants, and sent them in the place of the free women; the\nbarbarians plied the work so hard, that they were soon tired and\nfell asleep. Retana (who was the authoress of the counsel) climbed a\nfig-tree, and so got on the wall; and finding how it was, gave notice\nof it to the consuls. The Romans upon this made a sally and routed the\nenemy; in memory whereof was instituted the Servants\u2019 Holiday, and\nthis was the rise of it.\u2014_Aristides Milesius, in the First Book of his\nItalian History._\n\n\n31. In the war betwixt the Athenians and Eumolpus, provisions falling\nshort, the commissary Pyrandrus, upon a point of prudence and good\nhusbandry, made some small abatement in the soldiers\u2019 proportions.\nThe citizens suspected treachery in the case, and stoned him to\ndeath.\u2014_Callisthenes, Third Book of his History of Thrace._\n\nThe Romans being in war with the Gauls, and provisions for the belly\nbeing very scarce, Cinna contracted the soldiers\u2019 allowance to a less\nproportion than they had formerly. The citizens interpreted this\nabatement to an ambitious design he had upon the government, and so\nstoned him for it.\u2014_Aristides, Book Third of his Italian History._\n\n\n32. In the time of the Peloponnesian war, Pisistratus an Orchomenian\nhad a spite at the nobility, and to make himself popular, favored the\ncommon people. The Senate conspired against him, and treacherously\nkilled him, cutting him into small gobbets which they carried away with\nthem in their bosoms, and paring off the surface of the ground that\nno signs of the murder might appear. The common people, however, upon\na jealousy of the matter, went tumultuously to the senate house; but\nthe king\u2019s younger son Telesimachus that was dipped in the conspiracy,\ndiverted them with a sham story, telling them that he himself had\nseen his father in a form more than human, walking as lively as\nwas possible up the Pisaean mountain. And so he imposed upon the\npeople.\u2014_Theophilus\u2019s Second Book of Peloponnesian Histories._\n\nThe Senate of Rome, being hard put to it for the maintaining of a war\nwith so many of their neighbors, thought it good husbandry to shorten\nthe people\u2019s allowance of corn, which Romulus the king took very ill;\nand not only did he restore it to the people, but several great men\nwere punished for it. Upon this he was murdered in the Senate by a\nconspiracy of the nobles, who cut him all to pieces, and carried them\nseverally away in the lappets of their garments. The Romans came to\nthe senate house in a hurry, and brought fire with them to set all in\na flame; but Julius Proculus, one that was in the plot, told them that\nhe saw Romulus upon a mountain, of a size larger than any man, and that\nhe was translated into the number of the Gods. The Romans believed him,\nand quietly withdrew.\u2014_Aristobulus, in the Third Book of his History of\nItaly._\n\n\n33. Pelops the son of Tantalus and Euryanassa, had two children, Atreus\nand Thyestes, by his wife Hippodamia; and by the Nymph Danais he had\nChrysippus, whom he loved better than his lawful children. But Laius\nthe Theban in the heat of his lust forcibly abused his body; and being\ntaken by Atreus and Thyestes, obtained his pardon from Pelops, in\nregard that love had provoked him to it. Hippodamia\u2019s advice to Atreus\nand Thyestes was, that they should kill Chrysippus, as one that would\ninterpose between them and the crown. Upon their refusal to do so base\na thing, she herself put her own hands to the work, and in the dead of\nthe night took Laius\u2019s sword when he was asleep, wounded Chrysippus\nwith it, and left the weapon in his body. This circumstance of Laius\u2019s\nsword brought him into suspicion of the murder, till he was cleared\nby Chrysippus himself, who, being as yet but half dead, gave his\ntestimony to the truth. Pelops buried his son, and then banished his\nwife.\u2014_Dositheus, in his Pelopidae._\n\nEbius Toliex had two sons by his wife Nuceria, and a third called\nFirmus by an enfranchised woman, who was very handsome and better\nbeloved by the father than those that were legitimate. Nuceria that\nhated this by-blow, advised her sons to despatch Firmus; but upon their\nrefusal, she did it herself; and in the dead of the night got the sword\nof him that guarded the body of Firmus, gave him a mortal wound, and\nleft the weapon sticking in his body. The boy cleared his keeper by a\nparticular account of the matter of fact; the father buried his son,\nand sent away his wife into banishment.\u2014_Dositheus, Book Third of his\nItalian History._\n\n\n34. Theseus, the true son of Neptune, had Hippolytus by the Amazon\nHippolyta, and afterward married Phaedra the daughter of Minos, who\nfell deep in love with Hippolytus, and made use of the nurse\u2019s\nmediation to help forward the incest. But Hippolytus upon this left\nAthens and went away to Troezen, where he diverted himself with\nhunting. Now this lascivious woman, finding her design disappointed,\nforged several scandalous letters to the prejudice of the chaste young\nman, and ended her days with a halter. Theseus gave credit to the\nslander, and Neptune having promised him a grant of any three things\nhe would ask, he made it his request that he would destroy Hippolytus.\nSo Neptune sent a bull to the coast where Hippolytus was driving his\nchariot, which put his horses into such a fright, that they ran away\nwith them, and overturning the chariot killed the master.\n\nComminius Super, a Laurentine, had a son by the nymph Egeria, whom\nhe called Comminius; after which he married one Gidica, who fell\npassionately in love with her son-in-law. And receiving a repulse, she\nframed slanderous letters against him, which she left behind her, and\nso hanged herself. Comminius, reflecting upon the crime and believing\nthe calumny, applied himself to Neptune, who with a terrible bull\nfrighted the horses so, while the youth was in the chariot, that they\noverturned all, and killed him with the fall.\u2014_Dositheus, Book Third of\nItalian Histories._\n\n\n35. In the time of a great plague in Lacedaemon, they were told by\nthe oracle, that the pestilence would cease upon the sacrificing of\na noble virgin every year. It fell one time by lot to Helena, who\nwas brought out and dressed up ready for the sacrifice. An eagle\nat that time flying by took away the sword, and carrying it into a\nherd of cattle laid it down upon a heifer; whereupon they spared the\nvirgin.\u2014_Aristodemus, in his Third Collection of Fables._\n\nThere was a dreadful plague in Falerii, which the oracle said would be\nremoved upon the sacrificing of a virgin to Juno every year. While this\nsuperstition was in course, it fell to Valeria Luperca\u2019s lot to be the\nsacrifice. An eagle flew away with the drawn sword, but laid a stick\nupon the fuel prepared for the fire, with a little mallet fixed to it.\nThe sword he threw upon a heifer feeding near the temple. The virgin\nperceiving this sacrificed the heifer; and taking up the mallet, went\nabout from house to house, and with a gentle knock called to those that\nwere sick, bidding them be of good health. And this was the rise of the\nceremony which continues to this day.\u2014_Aristides, in his Nineteenth\nBook of Italian Histories._\n\n\n36. Philonome, the daughter of Nyctimus and Arcadia, went many times\nto the chase with Diana. Mars lay with her in the shape of a shepherd,\nand fetched up her belly. She was delivered in time of twins, which for\nfear of her father she threw into the river Erymanthus. By a strange\nfatality of providence they were driven safe into a hollow oak, which\nhappening to be the kennel of a wolf, this wolf threw her whelps into\nthe river, and suckled the children. Tyliphus a shepherd, that had\nseen this with his own, eyes, took these children and brought them up\nas his own, calling one of them Lycastus, and the other Parrasius,\nwhich reigned successively in Arcadia.\u2014_This is reported by Zopyrus\nByzantius, in the Third Book of his Histories._\n\nAmulius dealing very tyrannically with his brother Numitor, killed his\nson Aenitus as they were a hunting, and made his daughter Sylvia ...\na priestess of Juno. Mars got her with child, and when she had laid\nher belly of twins, she confessed the truth to the tyrant; which put\nhim in such an apprehension, that he exposed them both on the side\nof the river Tiber, where they were carried by the stream to a place\nwhere a she-wolf had her whelps. The wolf cast away her own, and gave\nsuck to these children. Faustus a shepherd, observing this, took the\nchildren to himself, and called them by the names of Romus and Romulus,\nwhich came afterwards to be the founders of Rome.\u2014_Aristides\u2019s Italian\nHistories._\n\n\n37. After the destruction of Troy, Agamemnon and Cassandra were killed;\nbut Orestes, that was brought up with Strophius, revenged the death of\nhis father.\u2014_Pyrander\u2019s Fourth Book of Peloponnesian Histories._\n\nFabius Fabricianus, a kinsman of Fabius Maximus, having taken Tuxium,\nthe chief city of the Samnites, sent to Rome the image of Venus\nVictrix, which among them was held in great veneration. His wife\nFabia was debauched by Petronius Valentinus, a handsome young man,\nand afterwards she treacherously murdered her husband; but for her\nson Fabricianus who was yet in his infancy, she shifted him away to\nbe privately brought up, and so provided for his security. When he\nwas grown up, he destroyed both his mother and the adulterer, and was\nformally acquitted for it by a decree of the Senate.\u2014_Dositheus\u2019s Third\nBook of Italian History._\n\n\n38. Busiris, the son of Neptune and Anippe the daughter of Nilus, was\nused to invite strangers in to him under a pretence of hospitality, and\nthen to murder them; but divine vengeance met with him at last, for\nHercules found out the villany, and killed him with his club.\u2014_Agatho\nthe Samian._\n\nHercules, as he was driving Geryon\u2019s oxen through Italy, took up his\nlodging with King Faunus there, the son of Mercury, whose custom it was\nto sacrifice strangers to his father. He set upon Hercules, and had his\nbrains beaten out for his pains.\u2014_Dercyllus\u2019s Third Book of Italian\nHistory._\n\n\n39. Phalaris of Agrigentum, a cruel tyrant, was wont to put\nstrangers and travellers to the most exquisite torment, Perillus, a\nbrass-founder, made a cow of brass, and presented it to the king for\na new invention, that he might burn strangers alive in it. Phalaris\nfor this once was just, in making the first proof of it upon Perillus\nhimself; and the invention was so artificial, that upon putting it\nin execution, the engine itself seemed to bellow.\u2014_Second Book of\nQuestions or Causes._\n\nIn Egesta, a city of Sicily, there was a certain tyrant called\nAemilius Censorinus, who was so inhuman that he proposed rewards to\nthe inventors of new tortures. There was one Aruntius Paterculus that\nhad framed a brazen horse, and made a present of it to the tyrant\nto practise with it upon whom he pleased. It was the first piece of\njustice that ever the tyrant did, to make trial of the torment upon\nthe author of it, that he might first feel himself the torments he had\nprovided for others. He was afterwards thrown down from the Tarpeian\nRock. It may be thought that unmerciful rulers are from this tyrant\ncalled Aemilii.\u2014_Aristides\u2019s Fourth Book of Italian History._\n\n\n40. Evenus, the son of Mars and Sterope, had a daughter Marpessa by\nhis wife Alcippe, the daughter of Oenomaus; and this girl he had\na mind to keep a virgin. But Idas, the son of Aphareus, ran away\nwith her from a choir. Evenus pursued him, and finding he could not\novertake him, he threw himself into the river Lycormas, and became\nimmortal.\u2014_Dositheus\u2019s First Book of Italian History._\n\nAnius, a king of the Tuscans, had a delicate, handsome daughter,\nwhose name was Salia, and he took great care to keep her a virgin.\nBut Cathetus, a man of quality, seeing her sporting herself, fell\npassionately in love with her, and carried her away to Rome. The father\nmade after her, and when he saw there was no catching of her, he threw\nhimself into a river that from him took the name of Anio. Cathetus\nbegot Latinus and Salius upon the body of Salia, the root of a noble\nrace.\u2014_Aristides Milesius, and Alexander Polyhistor\u2019s Third Book of\nItalian History._\n\n\n41. Hegesistratus an Ephesian committed a murder in his family, and\nfled to Delphi; on consulting the oracle what place to settle in, the\nanswer was, that when he should come to a place where he should see\nthe country people dancing with garlands of olive-leaves, he should\nsettle there. He travelled into a certain country of Asia, where he\nfound as the oracle told him, and there built a city which he called\nElaeus.\u2014_Pythocles the Samian, in the Third Book of his Georgics._\n\nTelegonus, the son of Ulysses by Circe, was sent to find out his\nfather, and commanded by an oracle to erect a city where he should\nsee the country people dancing with garlands. He came into a certain\nplace of Italy, where he found the countrymen dancing with wreaths of\nilex about their heads; so that there he built a city, and called it\nPrinistum, for an ilex in Greek is \u03c0\u03c1\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2. The Romans corruptly call\nthis city Praeneste.\u2014_Aristocles, in the Third Book of his Italian\nHistory._\n\n\n\n\nOF THE NAMES OF RIVERS AND MOUNTAINS, AND OF SUCH THINGS AS ARE TO BE\nFOUND THEREIN.[175]\n\n\nI. HYDASPES.\n\nThis is a river of India, which falls with an extraordinary swift\nstream into the Saronitic Syrtis: Chrysippe, by the impulse of Venus,\nwhom she had offended, fell in love with her father Hydaspes, and\nnot being able to curb her preternatural desires, by the help of\nher nurse, in the dead of the night got to his bed and received his\ncaresses; after which, the king proving unfortunate in his affairs,\nhe buried alive the old bawd that had betrayed him, and crucified his\ndaughter. Nevertheless such was the excess of his grief for the loss\nof Chrysippe, that he threw himself into the river Indus, which was\nafterwards called by his name Hydaspes.\n\nMoreover in this river there grows a stone, which is called Lychnis,\nwhich resembles the color of oil, and is very bright in appearance.\nAnd when they are searching after it, which they do when the moon\nincreases, the pipers play all the while. Nor is it to be worn by any\nbut the richer sort. Also near that part of the river which is called\nPylae, there grows an herb which is very like a heliotrope, with the\njuice of which the people anoint their skins to prevent sunburning, and\nto secure them against the scorching of the excessive heat.\n\nThe natives whenever they take their virgins tardy, nail them to a\nwooden cross, and fling them into this river, singing at the same\ntime in their own language a hymn to Venus. Every year also they bury\na condemned old woman near the top of the hill called Therogonos;\nat which time an infinite multitude of creeping creatures come down\nfrom the top of the hill, and devour the insects that hover about the\nburied carcass. This Chrysermus relates in his History of India, though\nArchelaus gives a more exact account of these things in his Treatise of\nRivers.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Elephas, so called upon this\noccasion. When Alexander the Macedonian advanced with his army into\nIndia, and the natives were resolved to withstand him with all their\nforce, the elephant upon which Porus, king of that region, was wont\nto ride, being of a sudden stung with a gad-bee, ran up to the top of\nthe mountain of the sun, and there uttered these words distinctly in\nhuman speech: \u201cO king, my lord, descended from the race of Gegasius,\nforbear to attempt any thing against Alexander, for he is descended\nfrom Jupiter.\u201d And having so said, he presently died. Which when Porus\nunderstood, afraid of Alexander, he fell at his feet and sued for\npeace. Which when he had obtained, he called the mountain Elephas;\u2014as\nDercyllus testifies in his Third Book of Mountains.\n\n\nII. ISMENUS.\n\nIsmenus is a river of Boeotia, that washes the walls of Thebes. It was\nformerly called the foot of Cadmus, upon this occasion. When Cadmus\nhad slain the dragon which kept the fountain of Mars, he was afraid\nto taste of the water, believing it was poisoned; which forced him to\nwander about in search of another fountain to allay his thirst. At\nlength, by the help of Minerva, he came to the Corycian den, where his\nright leg stuck deep in the mire. And from that hole it was that, after\nhe had pulled his leg out again, sprung a fair river, which the hero,\nafter the solemnity of his sacrifices performed, called by the name of\nCadmus\u2019s foot.\n\nSome time after, Ismenus, the son of Amphion and Niobe, being wounded\nby Apollo and in great pain, threw himself into the said river, which\nwas then from his name called Ismenus;\u2014as Sostratus relates in his\nSecond Book of Rivers.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Cithaeron, formerly called\nAsterion for this reason. Boeotus the son of Neptune was desirous,\nof two noble ladies, to marry her that should be most beneficial to\nhim; and while he tarried for both in the night-time upon the top of\na certain nameless mountain, of a sudden a star fell from heaven upon\nthe shoulders of Eurythemiste, and immediately vanished. Upon which\nBoeotus, understanding the meaning of the prodigy, married the virgin,\nand called the mountain Asterion from the accident that befell him.\nAfterwards it was called Cithaeron upon this occasion. Tisiphone,\none of the Furies, falling in love with a most beautiful youth whose\nname was Cithaeron, and not being able to curb the impatience of her\ndesires, declared her affection to him in a letter, to which he would\nnot return any answer. Whereupon the Fury, missing her design, pulled\none of the serpents from her locks, and flung it upon the young lad as\nhe was keeping his sheep on the top of the mountain Asterion; where\nthe serpent twining about his neck choked him to death. And thereupon\nby the will of the Gods the mountain was called Cithaeron;\u2014as Leo of\nByzantium writes in his History of Boeotia.\n\nBut Hermesianax of Cyprus tells the story quite otherwise. For he says,\nthat Helicon and Cithaeron were two brothers, quite different in their\ndispositions. For Helicon was affable and mild, and cherished his\naged parents. But Cithaeron, being covetous and greedily gaping after\nthe estate, first killed his father, and then treacherously threw his\nbrother down from a steep precipice, but in striving together, fell\nhimself along with him. Whence, by the providence of the Gods, the\nnames of both the mountains were changed. Cithaeron, by reason of his\nimpiety, became the haunt of the Furies. Helicon, for the young man\u2019s\nlove to his parents, became the habitation of the Muses.\n\n\nIII. HEBRUS.\n\nHebrus is a river of Thrace, deriving its former name of Rhombus from\nthe many gulfs and whirlpools in the water.\n\nCassander, king of that region, having married Crotonice, had by her a\nson whom he named Hebrus. But then being divorced from his first wife,\nhe married Damasippe, the daughter of Atrax, and brought her home over\nhis son\u2019s head; with whom the mother-in-law falling in love, invited\nhim by letters to her embraces. But he, avoiding his mother-in-law as\na Fury, gave himself over to the sport of hunting. On the other side\nthe impious woman, missing her purpose, belied the chaste youth, and\naccused him of attempting to ravish her. Upon this Cassander, raging\nwith jealousy, flew to the wood in a wild fury, and with his sword\ndrawn pursued his son, as one that treacherously sought to defile\nhis father\u2019s bed. Upon which the son, finding he could no way escape\nhis father\u2019s wrath, threw himself into the river Rhombus, which was\nafterwards called Hebrus from the name of the young man;\u2014as Timotheus\ntestifies in his Eleventh Book of Rivers.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Pangaeus, so called upon this\noccasion. Pangaeus, the son of Mars and Critobule, by a mistake lay\nwith his own daughter; which perplexed him to that degree that he fled\nto the Carmanian mountain, where, overwhelmed with a sorrow that he\ncould not master, he drew his sword and slew himself. Whence, by the\nprovidence of the Gods, the place was called Pangaeus.\n\nIn the river before mentioned, grows an herb not much unlike to\noriganum; the tops of which the Thracians cropping off burn upon a\nfire, and after they are filled with the fruits of Ceres, they hold\ntheir heads over the smoke, and snuff it up into their nostrils,\nletting it go down their throats; till at last they fall into a\nprofound sleep.\n\nAlso upon the mountain Pangaeus grows an herb, which is called the\nharp upon this occasion. The women that tore Orpheus in pieces cast\nhis limbs into the river Hebrus; and his head being changed, the whole\nbody was turned into the shape of a dragon. But as for his harp, such\nwas the will of Apollo, it remained in the same form. And from the\nstreaming blood grew up the herb which was called the harp; which,\nduring the solemnity of the sacrifices to Bacchus, sends forth a sound\nlike that of an harp when played upon. At which time the natives, being\ncovered with the skins of young hinds and waving their thyrsuses in\ntheir hands, sing a hymn, of which these are part of the words,\n\n    When wisdom all in vain must be,\n    Then be not wise at all;\u2014\n\nas Clitonymus reports, in his Third Book of Thracian Relations.\n\n\nIV. GANGES.\n\nGanges is a river in India, so called for this reason. A certain\nCalaurian nymph had by Indus a son called Ganges, conspicuous for his\nbeauty. Who growing up to manhood, being once desperately overcome with\nwine, in the heat of his intoxication lay with his mother. The next\nday he was informed by the nurse of what he had done; and such was\nthe excess of his sorrow, that he threw himself into a river called\nChliarus, afterwards called Ganges from his own name.\n\nIn this river grows an herb resembling bugloss, which the natives\nbruise, and keep the juice very charily. With this juice in the dead of\nthe night they go and besprinkle the tigers\u2019 dens; the virtue of which\nis such, that the tigers, not being able to stir forth by reason of\nthe strong scent of the juice, are starved to death;\u2014as Callisthenes\nreports in his Third Book of Hunting.\n\nUpon the banks of this river lies the mountain called the Anatole for\nthis reason. The Sun, beholding the nymph Anaxibia innocently spending\nher time in dancing, fell passionately in love with her, and not able\nto curb his loose amours, pursued her with a purpose to ravish her.\nShe therefore, finding no other way to escape him, fled to the temple\nof Orthian Diana, which was seated upon the mountain called Coryphe,\nand there immediately vanished away. Upon which the Sun, that followed\nher close at the heels, not knowing what was become of his beloved,\noverwhelmed with grief, rose in that very place. And from this accident\nit was that the natives called the top of that mountain Anatole, or the\nrising of the Sun;\u2014as Caemaron reports in his Tenth Book of the Affairs\nof India.\n\n\nV. PHASIS.\n\nPhasis is a river of Scythia, running by a city of the same name. It\nwas formerly called Arcturus, deriving its name from the situation of\nthe cold regions through which it runs. But the name of it was altered\nupon this occasion.\n\nPhasis, the child of the Sun and Ocyrrhoe daughter of Oceanus, slew\nhis mother, whom he took in the very act of adultery. For which being\ntormented by the Furies appearing to him, he threw himself into the\nriver Arcturus, which was afterwards called by his own name Phasis.\n\nIn this river grows a reed, which is called leucophyllus, or the reed\nwith the white leaf. This reed is found at the dawning of the morning\nlight, at what time the sacrifices are offered to Hecate, at the time\nwhen the divinely inspired paean is chanted, at the beginning of the\nspring; when they who are troubled with jealous heads gather this reed,\nand strew it in their wives\u2019 chambers to keep them chaste. And the\nnature of the reed is such, that if any wild extravagant person happens\nto come rashly in drink into the room where it lies, he presently\nbecomes deprived of his rational thoughts, and immediately confesses\nwhatever he has wickedly done and intended to do. At what time they\nthat are present to hear him lay hold of him, sew him up in a sack, and\nthrow him into a hole called the Mouth of the Wicked, which is round\nlike the mouth of a well. This after thirty days empties the body into\nthe Lake Maeotis, that is full of worms; where of a sudden the body is\nseized and torn to pieces by several vultures unseen before, nor is it\nknown from whence they come;\u2014as Ctesippus relates in his Second Book of\nScythian Relations.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Caucasus, which was before called\nBoreas\u2019s Bed, upon this occasion. Boreas in the heat of his amorous\npassion ravished away by force Chione, the daughter of Arcturus, and\ncarried her to a certain hill which was called Niphantes, and upon her\nbegot a son whom he called Hyrpax, who succeeded Heniochus in his\nkingdom. For which reason the mountain was first called Boreas\u2019s Bed;\nbut afterwards Caucasus upon this occasion. After the fight of the\nGiants, Saturn, to avoid the menaces of Jupiter, fled to the top of\nBoreas\u2019s Bed, and there being turned into a crocodile [lay concealed.\nBut Prometheus] slew Caucasus, one of the shepherds inhabiting that\nplace; and cutting him up and observing the disposition of his\nentrails, he foresaw that his enemies were not far off. Presently\nJupiter appearing, and binding his father with a woollen list, threw\nhim down to hell. Then changing the name of the mountain in honor of\nthe shepherd Caucasus, he chained Prometheus to it, and caused him to\nbe tormented by an eagle that fed upon his entrails, because he was the\nfirst that found out the inspection of bowels, which Jupiter deemed a\ngreat cruelty;\u2014as Cleanthes relates in his Third Book of the Wars of\nthe Gods.\n\nUpon this mountain grows an herb which is called Prometheus, which\nMedea gathering and bruising made use of to protect Jason against her\nfather\u2019s obstinacy.\n\n\nVI. ARAR.\n\nArar is a river in Gallia Celtica, deriving the name from its being\nmixed with the river Rhone. For it falls into the Rhone within the\ncountry of the Allobroges. It was formerly called Brigulus, but\nafterwards changed its name upon this occasion. Arar, as he was a\nhunting, entering into the wood, and there finding his brother Celtiber\ntorn in pieces by the wild beasts, mortally wounded himself for\ngrief, and fell into the river Brigulus; which from that accident was\nafterwards called by his own name Arar.\n\nIn this river there breeds a certain large fish, which by the natives\nis called Clupaea. This fish during the increase of the moon is white;\nbut all the while the moon is in the wane, it is altogether black;\nand when it grows over bulky, it is (as it were) stabbed by its own\nfins. In the head of it is found a stone like a corn of salt, which,\nbeing applied to the left parts of the body when the moon is in the\nwane, cures quartan agues;\u2014as Callisthenes the Sybarite tells us in the\nThirteenth Book of Gallic Relations, from whom Timagenes the Syrian\nborrowed his argument.\n\nNear to this river stands a mountain called Lugdunum, which changed its\nname upon this occasion. When Momorus and Atepomarus were dethroned\nby Seseroneus, in pursuance of the oracle\u2019s command they designed to\nbuild a city upon the top of the hill. But when they had laid the\nfoundations, great numbers of crows with their wings expanded covered\nall the neighboring trees. Upon which Momorus, being a person well\nskilled in augury, called the city Lugdunum. For _lugdon_ in their\nlanguage signifies a crow, and _dunum_[176] any spacious hill.\u2014This\nClitophon reports, in his Thirteenth Book of the Building of Cities.\n\n\nVII. PACTOLUS.\n\nPactolus is a river of Lydia, that washes the walls of Sardis,\nformerly called, Chrysorrhoas. For Chrysorrhoas, the son of Apollo\nand Agathippe, being a mechanic artist, and one that only lived from\nhand to mouth upon his trade, one time in the middle of the night made\nbold to break open the treasury of Croesus; and conveying thence a\ngood quantity of gold, he made a distribution of it to his family. But\nbeing pursued by the king\u2019s officers, when he saw he must be taken, he\nthrew himself into the river which was afterwards from his name called\nChrysorrhoas, and afterwards changed into that of Pactolus upon this\noccasion.\n\nPactolus, the son of ... and Leucothea, during the performance of\nthe mysteries sacred to Venus, ravished Demodice his own sister, not\nknowing who she was; for which being overwhelmed with grief, he threw\nhimself into the river Chrysorrhoas, which from that time forward was\ncalled Pactolus, from his own name. In this river is found a most pure\ngold sand, which the force of the stream carries into the bosom of the\nHappy Gulf.\n\nAlso in this river is to be found a stone which is called the preserver\nof the fields, resembling the color of silver, very hard to be found,\nin regard of its being mixed with the gold sand. The virtue of which is\nsuch, that the more wealthy Lydians buy it and lay it at the doors of\ntheir treasuries, by which means they preserve their treasure, whatever\nit be, safe from the seizure of pilfering hands. For upon the approach\nof thieves or robbers, the stone sends forth a sound like that of a\ntrumpet. Upon which the thieves surprised, and believing themselves\napprehended by officers, throw themselves headlong and break their\nnecks; insomuch that the place where the thieves thus frighted come by\ntheir violent deaths is called Pactolus\u2019s prison.\n\nIn this river also there grows an herb that bears a purple flower, and\nis called chrysopolis; by which the inhabitants of the neighboring\ncities try their purest gold. For just before they put their gold\ninto the melting-pot, they touch it with this herb; at what time,\nif it be pure and unmixed, the leaves of the herb will be tinctured\nwith the gold and preserve the substance of the matter; but if it\nbe adulterated, they will not admit the discoloring moisture;\u2014as\nChrysermus relates in his Third Book of Rivers.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Tmolus, full of all manner of wild\nbeasts, formerly called Carmanorion, from Carmanor the son of Bacchus\nand Alexirrhoea, who was killed by a wild boar as he was hunting; but\nafterward Tmolus upon this occasion.\n\nTmolus, the son of Mars and Theogone, king of Lydia, while he was a\nhunting upon Carmanorion, chanced to see the fair virgin Arrhippe that\nattended upon Diana, and fell passionately in love with her. And such\nwas the heat of his love, that not being able to gain her by fair\nmeans, he resolved to vitiate her by force. She, seeing she could by\nno means escape his fury otherwise, fled to the temple of Diana, where\nthe tyrant, contemning all religion, ravished her,\u2014an infamy which the\nnymph not being able to survive immediately hanged herself. But Diana\nwould not pass by so great a crime; and therefore, to be revenged upon\nthe king for his irreligious insolence, she set a mad bull upon him, by\nwhich the king being tossed up in the air, and falling down upon stakes\nand stones, ended his days in torment. But Theoclymenus his son, so\nsoon as he had buried his father, altered the name of the mountain, and\ncalled it Tmolus after his father\u2019s name.\n\nUpon this mountain grows a stone not unlike a pumice-stone, which is\nvery rare to be found. This stone changes its color four times a day;\nand is to be seen only by virgins that are not arrived at the years of\nunderstanding. But if marriageable virgins happen to see it, they can\nnever receive any injury from those that attempt their chastity;\u2014as\nClitophon reports.\n\n\nVIII. LYCORMAS.\n\nLycormas is a river of Aetolia, formerly called Evenus for this reason.\nIdas the son of Aphareus, after he had ravished away by violence\nMarpessa, with whom he was passionately in love, carried her away to\nPleuron, a city of Aetolia. This rape of his daughter Evenus could by\nno means endure, and therefore pursued after the treacherous ravisher,\ntill he came to the river Lycormas But then despairing to overtake the\nfugitive, he threw himself for madness into the river, which from his\nown name was called Evenus.\n\nIn this river grows an herb which is called sarissa, because it\nresembles a spear, of excellent use for those that are troubled with\ndim sight;\u2014as Archelaus relates in his First Book of Rivers.\n\nNear to this river lies Myenus, from Myenus the son of Telestor and\nAlphesiboea; who, being beloved by his mother-in-law and unwilling to\ndefile his father\u2019s bed, retired himself to the mountain Alphius. But\nTelestor, being made jealous of his wife, pursued his son into the\nwilderness; and followed him so close, that Myenus, not being able to\nescape, flung himself headlong from the top of the mountain, which for\nthat reason was afterwards called Myenus.\n\nUpon this mountain grows a flower called the white violet, which, if\nyou do but name the word step-dame, presently dies away;\u2014as Dercyllus\nreports in his Third Book of Mountains.\n\n\nIX. MAEANDER.\n\nMaeander is a river of Asia, formerly called the Returner. For of all\nrivers in the world it is the only stream which, taking its rise from\nits own fountain, seems to run back to its own head.\n\nIt is called Maeander from Maeander, the son of Cercaphus and Anaxibia,\nwho, waging war with the Pessinuntines, made a vow to the Mother of the\nGods, that if he obtained the victory, he would sacrifice the first\nthat came to congratulate him for his good success. Now it happened\nthat the first that met him were his son Archelaus, his mother, and\nhis sister. All which, though so nearly related to him, he offered in\nsacrifice to the satisfaction of his vow. But then no less grieved for\nwhat he had done, he cast himself into the river, which from this\naccident was afterwards called by his own name Maeander;\u2014as Timolaus\ntells us in his First Book of Phrygian Relations. Agathocles the Samian\nalso makes mention of this story, in his Commonwealth of Pessinus.\n\nBut Demostratus of Apamea relates the story thus: Maeander being a\nsecond time elected general against the Pessinuntines, and obtaining\nthe victory quite contrary to his expectation, gave to his soldiers the\nofferings due to the Mother of the Gods. At which the Goddess being\noffended, she deprived him of his reason to that degree, that in the\nheight of his madness he slew both his wife and his son. But coming\nsomewhat to himself and repenting of what he had done, he threw himself\ninto the river, which by his name was called Maeander.\n\nIn this river there is a certain stone, which by Antiphrasis is called\nsophron, or the sober-stone; which if you drop into the bosom of\nany man, it presently makes him mad to that degree as to murder his\nnearest relations, but having once atoned the Mother of the Gods, he\nis presently restored to his wits;\u2014as Damaratus testifies in his Third\nBook of Rivers. And Archelaus makes mention of the same in his First\nBook of Stones.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Sipylus, so called from Sipylus\nthe son of Agenor and Dioxippe. For he having killed his mother by\nmistake, and being haunted by the Furies, retired to the Ceraunian\nmountain, and there hanged himself for grief. After which, by the\nprovidence of the Gods, the mountain was called Sipylus.\n\nIn this mountain grows a stone that resembles a cylinder, which when\nchildren that are obedient to their parents find, they lay it up in\nthe temple of the Mother of the Gods. Nor do they ever transgress out\nof impiety; but reverence their parents, and are obedient to their\nsuperior relations;\u2014as Agatharchides the Samian relates in his Fourth\nBook of Stones, and Demaratus in his Fourth Book of Phrygia.\n\n\nX. MARSYAS.\n\nMarsyas is a river of Phrygia, flowing by the city Celaenae, and\nformerly called the fountain of Midas for this reason. Midas, king of\nPhrygia, travelling in the remoter parts of the country, and wanting\nwater, stamped upon the ground; and there presently appeared a golden\nfountain. But the water proving gold, and both he and his soldiers\nbeing ready to perish for thirst, he invoked the compassion of Bacchus,\nwho listening to his prayers supplied him with water. The Phrygians\nhaving by this means quenched their thirst, Midas named the river that\nissued from the spring the Fountain of Midas. Afterwards it was called\nMarsyas, upon this occasion.\n\nMarsyas being overcome and flayed by Apollo, certain Satyrs are said to\nhave sprung from the stream of his blood; as also a river bearing the\nname of Marsyas;\u2014as Alexander Cornelius recites in his Third Book of\nPhrygian Relations.\n\nBut Euemeridas the Cnidian tells the story after this manner. It\nhappened that the wine-bag which was made of Marsyas\u2019s skin, being\ncorroded by time and carried away negligently by the wind, fell at last\nfrom the land into Midas\u2019s well; and driving along with the stream, was\ntaken up by a fisherman. At what time Pisistratus the Lacedaemonian,\nbeing commanded by the oracle to build near the place where the relics\nof the Satyr were found, reflected upon the accident, and in obedience\nto the oracle having built a fair city, called it Noricum, which in the\nPhrygian language signifies a wine-bag.\n\nIn this river grows an herb called the pipe, which being moved in the\nwind yields a melodious sound;\u2014as Dercyllus reports in his First Book\nof Satyrics.\n\nNear to this river also lies the mountain Berecyntus, deriving its\nname from Berecyntus, the first priest to the Mother of the Gods. Upon\nthis mountain is found a stone which is called machaera, very much\nresembling iron; which if any one happens to light upon while the\nsolemnities of the Mother of the Gods are performing, he presently runs\nmad;\u2014as Agatharchides reports in his Phrygian Relations.\n\n\nXI. STRYMON.\n\nStrymon is a river of Thrace, that flows along by the city Edonis. It\nwas formerly called Palaestinus, from Palaestinus the son of Neptune.\nFor he being at war with his neighbors, and seized with a violent\nsickness, sent his son Haliacmon to be general of his army; who, rashly\ngiving battle to his enemies, was slain in the fight. The tidings of\nwhich misfortune being brought to Palaestinus, he privately withdrew\nhimself from his guards, and in the desperation of his grief flung\nhimself into the River Conozus, which from that accident was afterwards\ncalled Palaestinus. But as for Strymon, he was the son of Mars and\nHelice; and hearing that his son Rhesus was slain, he flung himself\ninto the river Palaestinus, which was after that called Strymon, by his\nown name.\n\nIn this river grows a stone which is called pausilypus, or the\ngrief-easing stone. This stone if any one find who is oppressed with\ngrief, he shall presently be eased of his sorrow;\u2014as Jason of Byzantium\nrelates in his Thracian Histories.\n\nNear to this river lie the mountains Rhodope and Haemus. These being\nbrother and sister, and both falling in love with each other, the one\nwas so presumptuous as to call his sister his Juno, the other to call\nher brother her Jupiter; which so offended the Deities, that they\nchanged them into mountains bearing their own names.\n\nIn these two mountains grow certain stones, which are called\nphiladelphi, or the loving brethren. These stones are of a crow-color,\nand resembling human shape, and if they chance to be named when they\nare separated one from another, they presently and separately, as they\nlie, dissolve and waste away; as Thrasyllus the Mendesian testifies in\nhis Third Book of Stones, but more accurately in his Thracian Histories.\n\n\nXII. SAGARIS.\n\nSagaris is a river of Phrygia, formerly called Xerobates because in\nthe summer time it was generally dry. But it was called Sagaris for\nthis reason: Sagaris, the son of Myndon and Alexirrhoe, contemning and\nslighting the mysteries of the Mother of the Gods, frequently affronted\nand derided her priests the Galli. At which the Goddess heinously\noffended, struck him with madness to that degree, that in one of his\nraging fits he flung himself into the river Xerobates, which from that\ntime forward was called Sagaris.\n\nIn this river grows a stone, which is called autoglyphus, that is,\nnaturally engraved; for it is found with the Mother of the Gods by\nnature engraved upon it. This stone, which is rarely to be found, if\nany of the Galli or gelded priests happen to light upon, he makes no\nwonder at it, but undauntedly brooks the sight of a preternatural\naction;\u2014as Aretazes reports in his Phrygian Relations.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Ballenaeus, which in the Phrygian\nlanguage signifies _royal_; so called from Ballenaeus, the son of\nGanymede and Medesigiste, who perceiving his father almost wasted with\na consumption, instituted the Ballenaean festival, observed among the\nnatives to this day.\n\nIn this river is to be found a stone called aster, which from the\nlatter end of autumn shines at midnight like fire. It is called in the\nlanguage of the natives _ballen_, which being interpreted signifies\na king;\u2014as Hermesianax the Cyprian affirms in his Second Book of his\nPhrygian Relations.\n\n\nXIII. SCAMANDER.\n\nScamander is a river of Troas, which was formerly called Xanthus, but\nchanged its name upon this occasion. Scamander, the son of Corybas and\nDemodice, having suddenly beheld the ceremonies while the mysteries of\nRhea were solemnizing, immediately ran mad, and being hurried away by\nhis own fury to the River Xanthus, flung himself into the stream, which\nfrom thence was called Scamander.\n\nIn this river grows an herb like a vetch, that bears a cod with berries\nrattling in it when they are ripe; whence it derived the name of\n_sistrum_, or the _rattle_; whoever has this herb in possession fears\nno apparition nor the sight of any God;\u2014as Demostratus writes in his\nSecond Book of Rivers.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Ida, formerly Gargarus; on the top\nof which stand the altars of Jupiter and of the Mother of the Gods.\nBut it was called Ida upon this occasion. Aegesthius, who descended\nfrom Jupiter, falling passionately in love with the nymph Ida, obtained\nher good-will, and begat the Idaean Dactyli, or priests of the Mother\nof the Gods. After which, Ida running mad in the temple of Rhea,\nAegesthius, in remembrance of the love which he bare her, called the\nmountain by her name.\n\nIn this mountain grows a stone called cryphius, as being never to be\nfound but when the mysteries of the Gods are solemnizing;\u2014as Heraclitus\nthe Sicyonian writes in his Second Book of Stones.\n\n\nXIV. TANAIS.\n\nTanais is a river of Scythia, formerly called the Amazonian river,\nbecause the Amazons bathed themselves therein; but it altered its name\nupon this occasion. Tanais, the son of Berossus and Lysippe, one of\nthe Amazons, became a vehement hater of the female sex, and looking\nupon marriage as ignominious and dishonorable, applied himself wholly\nto martial affairs. This so offended Venus, that she caused him to\nfall passionately in love with his own mother. True it is, at first he\nwithstood the force of his passion; but finding he could not vanquish\nthe fatal necessity of yielding to divine impulse, and yet desirous to\npreserve his respect and piety towards his mother, he flung himself\ninto the Amazonian river, which was afterwards called Tanais, from the\nname of the young man.\n\nIn this river grows a plant which is called halinda, resembling a\ncolewort; which the inhabitants bruising, and anointing their bodies\nwith the juice of it, find themselves in a condition better able to\nendure the extremity of the cold; and for that reason, in their own\nlanguage they call it Berossus\u2019s oil.\n\nIn this river grows a stone not unlike to crystal, resembling the shape\nof a man with a crown upon his head. Whoever finds the stone when the\nking dies, and has it ready against the time that the people meet upon\nthe banks of the river to choose a new sovereign, is presently elected\nking, and receives the sceptre of the deceased prince;\u2014as Ctesiphon\nrelates in his Third Book of Plants; and Aristobulus gives us the same\naccount in his First Book of Stones.\n\nNear to this river also lies a mountain, in the language of the\nnatives called Brixaba, which signifies the _forehead of a ram_. And\nit was so called upon this occasion. Phryxus having lost his sister\nHelle near the Euxine Sea, and, as Nature in justice required, being\nextremely troubled for his loss, retired to the top of a certain hill\nto disburden himself of his sorrow. At which time certain barbarians\nespying him, and mounting up the hill with their arms in their hands,\na gold-fleeced ram leaping out of a thicket, and seeing the multitude\ncoming, with articulate language and the voice of a man, awakened\nPhryxus, who was fast asleep, and taking him upon his back, carried him\nto Colchis. From this accident it was that the mountainous promontory\nwas called the ram\u2019s forehead.\n\nIn this mountain grows an herb, by the barbarians called phryxa (which\nbeing interpreted signifies _hating the wicked_), not unlike our common\nrue. If the son of a former mother have it in his possession, he can\nnever be injured by his step-dame. It chiefly grows near the place\nwhich is called Boreas\u2019s Den, and being gathered, is colder than snow.\nBut if any step-dame be forming a design against her son-in-law, it\nsets itself on fire and sends forth a bright flame. By which means they\nwho are thus warned avoid the danger they are in;\u2014as Agatho the Samian\ntestifies in his Second Book of Scythian Relations.\n\n\nXV. THERMODON.\n\nThermodon is a river of Scythia, deriving its name from this accident.\nIt was formerly called Crystallus, as being often frozen in the summer,\nthe situation of the place producing this effect. But that name was\naltered upon this occasion....\n\n\nXVI. NILE.\n\nThe Nile is a river in Egypt, that runs by the city of Alexandria.\nIt was formerly called Melas, from Melas the son of Neptune; but\nafterwards it was called Aegyptus upon this occasion. Aegyptus, the son\nof Vulcan and Leucippe, was formerly king of the country, between whom\nand his own subjects happened a civil war; on which account the river\nNile not increasing, the Egyptians were oppressed with famine. Upon\nwhich the oracle made answer, that the land should be again blessed\nwith plenty, if the king would sacrifice his daughter to atone the\nanger of the Gods. Upon which the king, though greatly afflicted in his\nmind, gave way to the public good, and suffered his daughter to be led\nto the altar. But so soon as she was sacrificed, the king, not able to\nsupport the burden of his grief, threw himself into the river Melas,\nwhich after that was called Aegyptus. But then it was called Nilus upon\nthis occasion.\n\nGarmathone, queen of Egypt, having lost her son Chrysochoas while he\nwas yet very young, with all her servants and friends most bitterly\nbemoaned her loss. At what time Isis appearing to her, she surceased\nher sorrow for a while, and putting on the countenance of a feigned\ngratitude, kindly entertained the goddess. She, willing to make a\nsuitable return to the queen for the piety which she expressed in her\nreception, persuaded Osiris to bring back her son from the subterranean\nregions. When Osiris undertook to do this, at the importunity of his\nwife, Cerberus\u2014whom some call the Terrible\u2014barked so loud, that Nilus,\nGarmathone\u2019s husband, struck with a sudden frenzy, threw himself into\nthe river Aegyptus, which from thence was afterwards called Nilus.\n\nIn this river grows a stone, not unlike to a bean, which so soon as any\ndog happens to see, he ceases to bark. It also expels the evil spirit\nout of those that are possessed, if held to the nostrils of the party\nafflicted.\n\nThere are other stones which are found in this river, called kollotes,\nwhich the swallows picking up against the time that Nilus overflows,\nbuild up the wall which is called the Chelidonian wall, which restrains\nthe inundation of the water and will not suffer the country to be\ninjured by the fury of the flood;\u2014as Thrasyllus tells us in his\nRelation of Egypt.\n\nUpon this river lies the mountain Argyllus, so called for this reason.\n\nJupiter in the heat of his amorous desires ravished away the Nymph Arge\nfrom Lyctus, a city of Crete, and then carried her to a mountain of\nEgypt called Argillus, and there begat a son, whom he named Dionysus\n(or Bacchus); who, growing up to years of manhood, in honor of his\nmother called the hill Argillus; and then mustering together an army\nof Pans and Satyrs, first conquered the Indians, and then subduing\nSpain, left Pan behind him there, the chief commander and governor of\nthose places. Pan by his own name called that country Pania, which was\nafterward by his posterity called Spania;\u2014as Sosthenes relates in the\nThirteenth Book of Iberian Relations.\n\n\nXVII. EUROTAS.\n\nHimerus, the son of the Nymph Taygete and Lacedaemon, through the anger\nof offended Venus, at a revelling that lasted all night, deflowered\nhis sister Cleodice, not knowing what he did. But the next day being\ninformed of the truth of the matter, he laid it so to heart, that\nthrough excess of grief he flung himself into the river Marathon, which\nfrom thence was called Himeros; but after that Eurotas, upon this\noccasion.\n\nThe Lacedaemonians being at war with the Athenians, and staying for\nthe full moon, Eurotas their captain-general, despising all religion,\nwould needs fight his enemies, though at the same time he was warned by\nthunder and lightning. However, having lost his army, the ignominy of\nhis loss so incessantly perplexed him, that he flung himself into the\nriver Himerus, which from that accident was afterwards called Eurotas.\n\nIn this river grows a stone which is shaped like a helmet, called\nthrasydeilos, or _rash and timorous_. For if it hears a trumpet sound,\nit leaps toward the bank of the river; but if you do but name the\nAthenians, it presently sinks to the bottom of the water. Of these\nstones there are not a few which are consecrated and laid up in the\ntemple of Minerva of the Brazen House;\u2014as Nicanor the Samian relates in\nhis Second Book of Rivers.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Taygetus, deriving its name\nfrom the nymph Taygete, who, after Jupiter had deflowered her, being\novercome by grief, ended her days by hanging at the summit of the\nmountain Amyclaeus, which from thence was called Taygetus.\n\nUpon this mountain grows a plant called Charisia, which the women at\nthe beginning of the spring tied about their necks, to make themselves\nmore passionately beloved by men;\u2014as Cleanthes reports in his First\nBook of Mountains. But Sosthenes the Cnidian is more accurate in the\nrelation of these things, from whom Hermogenes borrowed the subject of\nhis writing.\n\n\nXVIII. INACHUS.\n\nInachus is a river in the territories of Argos, formerly called\nCarmanor. Afterwards Haliacmon, for this reason.\n\nHaliacmon, a Tirynthian by birth, while he kept sheep upon the mountain\nCoccygium, happened against his will to see Jupiter and Rhea sporting\ntogether; for which being struck mad, and hurried by the violence of\nthe frenzy, he flung himself into the river Carmanor, which after\nthat was called Haliacmon. Afterwards it was called Inachus upon this\noccasion.\n\nInachus, the son of Oceanus, after that Jupiter had deflowered his\ndaughter Io, pursued the Deity close at the heels, abusing and cursing\nhim all the way as he went. Which so offended Jupiter, that he sent\nTisiphone, one of the Furies, who haunted and plagued him to that\ndegree, that he flung himself into the river Haliacmon, afterwards\ncalled by his own name Inachus.\n\nIn this river grows an herb called cynura, not unlike our common rue,\nwhich the women that desire to miscarry without any danger lay upon\ntheir navels, being first steeped in wine.\n\nThere is also found in this river a certain stone, not unlike a beryl,\nwhich in the hands of those who intend to bear false witness will grow\nblack. Of these stones there are many laid up in the temple of Juno\nProsymnaea;\u2014as Timotheus relates in his Argolica, and Agatho the Samian\nin his Second Book of Rivers.\n\nAgathocles the Milesian, in his History of Rivers, also adds, that\nInachus for his impiety was thunderstruck by Jupiter, and so the river\ndried up.\n\nNear to this river lie the mountains Mycenae, Apesantus, Coccygium,\nand Athenaeum; so called for these reasons. Apesantus was first called\nSelenaeus. For Juno, resolving to be revenged upon Hercules, called the\nmoon (Selene) to her assistance, who by the help of her magical charms\nfilled a large chest full of foam and froth, out of which sprang an\nimmense lion; which Iris binding with her own girdle carried to the\nmountain Opheltium, where the lion killed and tore in pieces Apesantus,\none of the shepherds belonging to that place. And from that accident,\nby the will of the Gods, the hill was called Apesantus;\u2014as Demodocus\nwrites in his First Book of the History of Hercules.\n\nIn this river grows an herb called selene, with the froth of which,\nbeing gathered in the spring, the shepherds anoint their feet, and keep\nthem from being bit or stung by any creeping vermin.\n\nMycenae was formerly called Argion, from the many-eyed Argos; but\nafterwards the name was changed upon this occasion.\n\nWhen Perseus had slain Medusa, Stheno and Euryale sisters to her\nthat was killed, pursued him as a murderer. But coming to this hill\nand despairing to overtake him, out of that extreme love which they\nhad for their sister they made such a bellowing (\u03bc\u03c5\u03ba\u03b7\u03b8\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2), that the\nnatives from thence called the top of the mountain Mycenae;\u2014as Ctesias\nthe Ephesian relates in his First Book of the Acts of Perseus. But\nChrysermus the Corinthian relates the story thus in the First Book\nof his Peloponnesiacs. For he says that, when Perseus was carried\naloft in the air and lit upon this mountain, he lost the chape of his\nscabbard. At what time this same Gorgophonos (or Gorgon-slayer), king\nof the Epidaurians, being expelled his kingdom, received this answer\nupon his consulting the oracle, that he should visit all the cities of\nthe Argolic territory, and that where he found the chape of a scabbard\n(called in Greek \u03bc\u03c5\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2), he should build a city. Thereupon coming to\nthe mountain Argium, and finding there an ivory scabbard, he built a\ncity, and from the accident called it Mycenae.\n\nIn this mountain there is found a stone, which is called corybas, of\na crow-color, which he that finds and wears about him shall never be\nafraid of any monstrous apparitions. As for the mountain Apesantus,\nthis may be added, that Apesantus, the son of Acrisius, as he was a\nhunting in that place, chanced to tread upon a venomous serpent, which\noccasioned his death. Whom when his father had buried, in memory of his\nson he named the hill Apesantus, which before was called Selinuntius.\n\nThe mountain Coccygium derived its name from this accident. Jupiter\nfalling desperately in love with his sister Juno, and having\nvanquished her by his importunity, begat a male child. From whence the\nmountain, before called Lyrceum, was named Coccygium;\u2014as Agathonymus\nrelates in his Persis.\n\nIn this mountain grows a tree, which is called paliurus; upon the\nboughs of which whatever fowl happens to perch, it is presently\nentangled as it were with bird-lime, and cannot stir; only the cuckoo\nit lets go free, without any harm;\u2014as Ctesiphon testifies in his First\nBook of Trees.\n\nAs for the mountain Athenaeum, it derives its name from Minerva. For\nafter the destruction of Troy, Diomede returning to Argos, ascended the\nmountain Ceraunius, and there erecting a temple to Minerva, called the\nmountain Athenaeum from her name Athena.\n\nUpon the top of this mountain grows a root like to that of rue, which\nif any woman unwarily taste of, she presently runs mad. This root\nis called Adrastea;\u2014as Plesimachus writes in his Second Book of the\nReturns of the Heroes.\n\n\nXIX. ALPHEUS.\n\nAlpheus is a river of Arcadia, running by the walls of Pisa, a city of\nOlympia. It was formerly called Stymphelus, from Stymphelus the son\nof Mars and Dormothea; who, having lost his brother Alcmaeon, threw\nhimself for grief into the river Nyctimus, for that reason called\nStymphelus. Afterwards it was called Alpheus upon this occasion.\n\nAlpheus, one of those that derive their descent from the Sun,\ncontending with his brother Cercaphus about the kingdom, slew him. For\nwhich being chased away and pursued by the Furies, he flung himself\ninto the river Nyctimus, which after that was called Alpheus.\n\nIn this river grows a plant which is called cenchritis, resembling a\nhoney-comb, the decoction of which, being given by the physicians to\nthose that are mad, cures them of their frenzy;\u2014as Ctesias relates in\nhis First Book of Rivers.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Cronium, so called upon this\noccasion. After the Giants\u2019 war, Saturn, to avoid the threats of\nJupiter, fled to the mountain Cturus, and called it Cronium from his\nown name. Where after he had absconded for some time, he took his\nopportunity, and retired to Caucasus in Scythia.\n\nIn this mountain is found a stone, which is called the cylinder, upon\nthis occasion. For as oft as Jupiter either thunders or lightens,\nso often this stone through fear rolls down from the top of the\nmountain;\u2014as Dercyllus writes in his First Book of Stones.\n\n\nXX. EUPHRATES.\n\nEuphrates is a river of Parthia, washing the walls of Babylon, formerly\ncalled Medus from Medus the son of Artaxerxes. He, in the heat of his\nlust, having ravished away and deflowered Roxane, and finding he was\nsought after by the king, in order to be brought to punishment, threw\nhimself into the river Xaranda, which from thenceforward was called by\nhis name Medus. Afterwards it was called Euphrates upon this occasion.\n\nEuphrates the son of Arandacus, finding his son Axurta abed with his\nmother, and thinking him to be some one of the citizens, provoked by\nhis jealousy, drew his sword and nailed him to the bed. But perceiving\nhimself the author of what could not be recalled, he flung himself for\ngrief into the river Medus, which from that time forward was called by\nhis name Euphrates.\n\nIn this river grows a stone called aetites, which midwives applying to\nthe navels of women that are in hard labor, it causes them to bring\nforth with little pain.\n\nIn the same river also there grows an herb which is called axalla,\nwhich signifies heat. This herb they that are troubled with\nquartan-agues apply to their breasts, and are presently delivered from\nthe fit;\u2014as Chrysermus writes in his Thirteenth Book of Rivers.\n\nNear this river lies the mountain Drimylus, where grows a stone not\nunlike a sardonyx; worn by kings and princes upon their diadems, and\ngreatly available against dimness of sight;\u2014as Nicias Mallotes writes\nin his Book of Stones.\n\n\nXXI. CAICUS.\n\nCaicus is a river of Mysia, formerly called Astraeus, from Astraeus\nthe son of Neptune. For he, in the height of Minerva\u2019s nocturnal\nsolemnities having deflowered his sister by a mistake, took a ring\nat the same time from her finger; by which when he understood the\nnext day the error which he had committed, for grief he threw himself\nheadlong into the river Adurus, which from thence was called Astraeus.\nAfterwards it came to be called Caicus upon this occasion.\n\nCaicus, the son of Hermes and Ocyrrhoe the Nymph, having slain Timander\none of the noblemen of the country, and fearing the revenge of his\nrelations, flung himself into the river Astraeus, which from that\naccident was called Caicus.\n\nIn this river grows a sort of poppy, which instead of fruit bears\nstones. Of these there are some which are black and shaped like harps,\nwhich the Mysians throw upon their ploughed lands; and if the stones\nlie still in the place where they are thrown, it is a sign of a barren\nyear; but if they fly away like so many locusts, they prognosticate a\nplentiful harvest.\n\nIn the same river also grows an herb which is called elipharmacus,\nwhich the physicians apply to such as are troubled with immoderate\nfluxes of blood, as having a peculiar virtue to stop the orifices of\nthe veins;\u2014according to the relation of Timagoras in his First Book of\nRivers.\n\nAdjoining to the banks of this river lies the mountain Teuthras, so\ncalled from Teuthras king of the Mysians; who in pursuance of his\nsport, as he was a hunting, ascending the hill Thrasyllus and seeing\na monstrous wild boar, followed him close with the rest of his train.\nOn the other side, the boar, to prevent the hunters, like a suppliant\nfled to the temple of Orthosian Diana, into which when the hunters\nwere about to force their entrance, the boar in articulate words cried\nout, Spare, O king, the nursling of the Goddess. However, Teuthras,\nexalted with his good success, killed the poor boar. At which Diana\nwas so highly offended, that she restored the boar to life, but struck\nthe offender with scurf and madness. Which affliction the king not\nenduring betook himself to the tops of the mountains. But his mother\nLeucippe, understanding what had befallen her son, ran to the forest,\ntaking along with her the soothsayer Polyidus, the son of Coeranus; by\nwhom being informed of all the several circumstances of the matter, by\nmany sacrifices she at last atoned the anger of the Goddess, and having\nquite recovered and cured her son, erected an altar to Orthosian Diana,\nand caused a golden boar to be made with a man\u2019s face. Which to this\nday, if pursued by the hunters, enters the temple, and speaks with the\nvoice of a man the word \u201cspare.\u201d Thus Teuthras, being restored to his\nformer health, called the mountain by his own name Teuthras.\n\nIn this mountain grows a stone called antipathes (or the resister),\nwhich is of excellent virtue to cure scabs and leprosies, being\npowdered and mixed with wine;\u2014as Ctesias the Cnidian tells us in his\nSecond Book of Mountains.\n\n\nXXII. ACHELOUS.\n\nAchelous is a river of Aetolia; formerly called Thestius. This Thestius\nwas the son of Mars and Pisidice, who upon some domestic discontent\ntravelled as far as Sicyon, where after he had resided for some time,\nhe returned to his native home. But finding there his son Calydon\nand his mother both upon the bed together, believing him to be an\nadulterer, he slew his own child by a mistake. But when he beheld the\nunfortunate and unexpected fact he had committed, he threw himself into\nthe river Axenos, which from thence was afterwards called Thestius. And\nafter that, it was called Achelous upon this occasion.\n\nAchelous, the son of Oceanus and the Nymph Nais, having deflowered his\ndaughter Cletoria by mistake, flung himself for grief into the river\nThestius, which then by his own name was called Achelous.\n\nIn this river grows an herb, which they call zaclon, very much\nresembling wool; this if you bruise and cast into wine, it becomes\nwater, and preserves the smell but not the virtues of the wine.\n\nIn the same river also is found a certain stone of a mixed black and\nlead color, called linurgus from the effect; for if you throw it upon a\nlinen cloth, by a certain affectionate union it assumes the form of the\nlinen, and turns white;\u2014as Antisthenes relates in the Third Book of his\nMeleagris, though Diocles the Rhodian more accurately tells us the same\nthing in his Aetolics.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Calydon, so called from Calydon,\nthe son of Mars and Astynome; for that he, by an accident having seen\nDiana bathing herself, was transformed into a rock; and the mountain\nwhich before was named Gyrus was afterwards by the providence of the\nGods called Calydon.\n\nUpon this mountain grows an herb called myops. This if any one steep\nin water and wash his face with it, he shall lose his sight, but upon\nhis atoning Diana, he shall recover it again;\u2014as Dercyllus writes in\nhis Third Book of Aetolics.\n\n\nXXIII. ARAXES.\n\nAraxes is a river in Armenia, so called from Araxus the son of Pylus.\nFor he, contending with his grandfather Arbelus for the empire, shot\nhim with an arrow. For which being haunted by the Furies, he threw\nhimself into the river Bactros, for that reason called Araxes;\u2014as\nCtesiphon testifies in his First Book of the Persian Affairs. Araxes,\nking of the Armenians, being at war with his neighbors the Persians,\nbefore they came to a battle, was told by the oracle that he should win\nthe victory if he sacrificed to the Gods two of the most noble virgins\nin his kingdom. Now he, out of his paternal affection to his children,\nspared his own daughters, and caused two lovely virgins, the daughters\nof one of his nobility, to be laid upon the altar. Which Mnesalces,\nthe father of the victims, laying to heart, for a time concealed his\nindignation; but afterwards, observing his opportunity, he killed\nboth the king\u2019s daughters, and then leaving his native soil fled into\nScythia. Which when Araxes understood, for grief he threw himself into\nthe river Halmus, which then was altered and called Araxes.\n\nIn this river grows a plant which is called araxa, which in the\nlanguage of the natives signifies a virgin-hater. For that if it happen\nto be found by any virgin, it falls a bleeding and dies away.\n\nIn the same river there is also found a stone of a black color,\ncalled sicyonus. This stone, when the oracle advises the sacrificing\nof a human victim, is laid upon the altar of the mischief-diverting\nGods. And then, no sooner does the priest touch it with his knife,\nbut it sends forth a stream of blood; at what time the superstitious\nsacrificers retire, and with howlings and loud ohoning carry the stone\nto the temple;\u2014as Dorotheus the Chaldaean relates in his Second Book of\nStones.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Diorphus, so called from Diorphus\nthe son of the Earth, of whom this story is reported. Mithras desirous\nto have a son, yet hating woman-kind, lay with a stone, till he had\nheated it to that degree that the stone grew big, and at the prefixed\ntime was delivered of a son, called Diorphus; who, growing up and\ncontending with Mars for courage and stoutness, was by him slain, and\nby the providence of the Gods was transformed into the mountain which\nwas called Diorphus by his name.\n\nIn this mountain grows a tree, not unlike a pomegranate-tree, which\nyields plenty of apples, in taste like grapes. Now if any one gather\nthe ripest of this fruit, and do but name Mars while he holds it in his\nhand, it will presently grow green again;\u2014as Ctesiphon witnesses in his\nThirteenth Book of Trees.\n\n\nXXIV. TIGRIS.\n\nTigris is a river of Armenia flowing into Araxes and the lake of\nArsacis, formerly called Sollax, which signifies running and carried\ndownward. It was called Tigris upon this occasion.\n\nBacchus, through the design of Juno running mad, wandered over sea\nand land, desirous to be quit of his distemper. At length coming\ninto Armenia, and not being able to pass the river before-mentioned,\nhe called upon Jupiter; who, listening to his prayers, sent him a\ntiger that carried him safely over the water. In remembrance of which\naccident, he called the river Tigris;\u2014as Theophilus relates in his\nFirst Book of Stones. But Hermesianax the Cyprian tells the story\nthus:\u2014\n\nBacchus falling in love with the Nymph Alphesiboea, and being able to\nvanquish her neither with presents nor entreaties, turned himself into\nthe shape of the river Tigris, and overcoming his beloved by fear, took\nher away and carrying her over the river, begat a son whom he called\nMedus; who growing up in years, in remembrance of the accident he\ncalled the river by the name of Tigris;\u2014as Aristonymus relates in his\nThird Book....\n\nIn this river a stone is to be found, called myndan, very white;\nwhich whoever possesses shall never be hurt by wild beasts;\u2014as Leo of\nByzantium relates in his Third Book of Rivers.\n\nNear to this river lies the mountain Gauran; so called from Gauran the\nson of the satrap Roxanes; who, being extremely religious and devout\ntowards the Gods, received this reward of his piety, that of all the\nPersians he only lived three hundred years; and dying at last without\nbeing ever afflicted with any disease, was buried upon the top of the\nmountain Gauran, where he had a sumptuous monument erected to his\nmemory. Afterwards, by the providence of the Gods, the name of the\nmountain was changed to that of Mausorus.\n\nIn this mountain grows an herb, which is like to wild barley. This herb\nthe natives heat over the fire, and anointing themselves with the oil\nof it, are never sick, till the necessity of dying overtakes them;\u2014as\nSostratus writes in his First Collection of Fabulous History.\n\n\nXXV. INDUS.\n\nIndus is a river in India, flowing with a rapid violence into the\ncountry of the fish-devourers. It was first called Mausolus, from\nMausolus the son of the Sun, but changed its name for this reason.\n\nAt the time when the mysteries of Bacchus were solemnized and the\npeople were earnest at their devotion, Indus, one of the chief of\nthe young nobility, by force deflowered Damasalcidas, the daughter\nof Oxyalcus the king of the country, as she was carrying the sacred\nbasket; for which being sought for by the tyrant, in order to bring\nhim to condign punishment, for fear he threw himself into the river\nMausolus, which from that accident was afterwards called Indus.\n\nIn this river grows a certain stone called ... which if a virgin carry\nabout her, she need never be afraid of being deflowered.\n\nIn the same river also grows an herb, not unlike to bugloss. Which is\nan excellent remedy against the king\u2019s-evil, being administered to the\npatient in warm water;\u2014as Clitophon the Rhodian reports in his First\nBook of Indian Relations.\n\nNear to this mountain lies the mountain Lilaeus, so called from Lilaeus\na shepherd; who, being very superstitious and a worshipper of the Moon\nalone, always performed her mysteries in the dead time of the night.\nWhich the rest of the Gods taking for a great dishonor, sent two\nmonstrous lions that tore him in pieces. Upon which the Moon turned her\nadorer into a mountain of the same name.\n\nIn this mountain a stone is found which is called clitoris, of a\nvery black color, which the natives wear for ornament\u2019s sake in their\nears;\u2014as Aristotle witnesses in his Fourth Book of Rivers.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[1] Odyss. XII. 395.\n\n[2] \u201cI see not how this that is included within these marks [ ] agreeth\nwith this place, or matter in hand: I suppose therefore it is inserted\nheere without judgement, and taken out of some other booke.\u201d\u2014HOLLAND.\n\n[3] See Mullach, Fragm. Philos. p. 325 (No. 73).\n\n[4] Odyss. X. 284.\n\n[5] Eurip. Cresphontes, Frag. 457.\n\n[6] Concerning Ideas, according to the MSS. (G.)\n\n[7] Theopompus was Archon in B.C. 411. (G.)\n\n[8] The corrupt clause indicated by ... probably means, that the\nDemarchs were to make inventories (\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9) of the traitors\u2019 estates.\n(G.)\n\n[9] B.C. 459.\n\n[10] B.C. 444.\n\n[11] B.C. 413.\n\n[12] B.C. 486\n\n[13] B.C. 338.\n\n[14] B.C. 369-342.\n\n[15] The Greek text is corrupt; but it is evident that the author\nconfounds the Phocian war, which ended in 346 B.C., with the Amphissian\nwar of 339 B.C. The next sentence shows the same mistake. (G.)\n\n[16] See Demosthenes on the Crown, p. 271, 27.\n\n[17] This is one of the statements which seem to fix the number of\nAthenian citizens in the age of the Orators at about 20,000. See\nBoeckh\u2019s Public Economy of the Athenians, I. Book 1, chap. 7. (G.)\n\n[18] Aristoph. Birds, 1296.\n\n[19] B.C. 364.\n\n[20] This name was properly pronounced with the accent on the last\nsyllable, \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2. (G.)\n\n[21] B.C. 385-384 to 349-348.\n\n[22] B.C. 348-347.\n\n[23] B.C. 368-362.\n\n[24] B.C. 280\n\n[25] This is supposed to have been added by some other hand, because a\ncontrary sentence is given of him before.\n\n[26] See Demosthenes on the Crown, p. 221, 27.\n\n[27] B.C. 307.\n\n[28] B.C. 269.\n\n[29] B.C. 307.\n\n[30] Persons who carried baskets, or panniers, on their heads, of\nsacred things.\n\n[31] Thuc. II. 44.\n\n[32] Soph. Oed. Colon. 668.\n\n[33] Eurip. Aeolus, Frag. 28.\n\n[34] Sophocles, Frag. 779.\n\n[35] Eurip. Orestes, 258.\n\n[36] Il. VIII. 453.\n\n[37] Il. XIX. 165.\n\n[38] Il. II. 53.\n\n[39] Il. II. 372.\n\n[40] Eurip Antiope, Frag. 220.\n\n[41] Sophocles, Frag. 779.\n\n[42] Il. XVI. 9.\n\n[43] Il. XXII. 71.\n\n[44] Il. IX. 55.\n\n[45] Il. IX. 443.\n\n[46] Il. IX. 55.\n\n[47] Il. IX. 443.\n\n[48] Il. IX. 441.\n\n[49] See Od. VII. 165.\n\n[50] Eurip. Frag. 977 and 442.\n\n[51] Od. II. 69.\n\n[52] Thuc. II. 65.\n\n[53] The son of Melesias, not the historian. (G.)\n\n[54] So he called the little island Aegina.\n\n[55] Eurip. Autolycus, Frag. 284, vs. 22.\n\n[56] A brook near Athens, the waters of which fell with an\nextraordinary noise. Aristoph. Eq. 137.\n\n[57] Pind. Olymp. VI. 4.\n\n[58] From whence they set forth to run.\n\n[59] See Odyss. X. 495.\n\n[60] Aristoph. Pac. 756.\n\n[61] See Aristoph. Eq. 1099.\n\n[62] Eurip. Bellerophon, Frag. 311.\n\n[63] Il. X. 242.\n\n[64] Il. X. 558.\n\n[65] Il. XVII. 171.\n\n[66] Il. VII. 358.\n\n[67] Il. V. 800.\n\n[68] See Il. XVII. 156.\n\n[69] See Il. IV. 223.\n\n[70] Il. IV. 415.\n\n[71] Xen. Anab. III. 1, 4.\n\n[72] Probably a mistake for _Nabis_. See Plutarch\u2019s Life of\nPhilopoemen, \u00a7 12. (G.)\n\n[73] Odyss. V. 350.\n\n[74] See Il. XIX. 404.\n\n[75] Il. IV. 130.\n\n[76] Hesiod, Works and Days, 235.\n\n[77] Eurip. Hippol. 218.\n\n[78] Hesiod, Works and Days, 275.\n\n[79] In the lost tragedy, Prometheus Unbound, Frag. 188 (Nauck). (G.)\n\n[80] See Odyss. XII. 116.\n\n[81] Il. V. 85.\n\n[82] Hesiod, Works and Days, 525.\n\n[83] Il. XVI. 34.\n\n[84] Odyss. XIV. 30.\n\n[85] Fragment 38.\n\n[86] History of Animals, IV. 9, 19.\n\n[87] Il XXIV. 80.\n\n[88] \u03ba\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n[89] That is, by joining hands and sweeping across an island. See the\ndescription in Herod. VI. 31, and \u03c3\u03b1\u03b3\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9 in Liddell and Scott. (G.)\n\n[90] See Il. V. 487.\n\n[91] Theognis, vs. 215.\n\n[92] Il. XVI. 407.\n\n[93] Il. IX. 56. See above, chap. 13.\n\n[94] It seems incredible that Plutarch could have put this into the\nmouth of Gryllus, even by carelessness. (G.)\n\n[95] See the account of various ancient doctrines of vision and the\nreflection of light in the treatise on the Opinions of Philosophers,\nBook IV. Chapters 13 and 14. The idea that vision was caused by\nsomething proceeding from the eye to the object is especially to be\nnoticed. (G.)\n\n[96] The text in this passage is defective, and the sense chiefly\nconjectural. (G.)\n\n[97] Aesch. Prom. 349.\n\n[98] Here again the text is defective, and the sense conjectural. (G.)\n\n[99] Il. IX. 212.\n\n[100] Otus and Ephialtes.\n\n[101] See Il. XIV. 246. The second of these verses is not found in the\npresent text of the Iliad, but was probably defended by Crates against\nAristarchus. (G.)\n\n[102] Hesiod, Works and Days, 41.\n\n[103] Il. XX. 65.\n\n[104] Il. VIII. 16.\n\n[105] Odyss. VII. 244.\n\n[106] Odyss. IV. 563.\n\n[107] Odyss. XI. 221.\n\n[108] Odyss. XI. 601.\n\n[109] \u201cThis little Treatise is so pitiously torne, maimed, and\ndismembred thorowout, that a man may sooner divine and guess thereat\n(as I have done) than translate it. I beseech the readers therefore, to\nhold me excused, in case I neither please my selfe, nor content them,\nin that which I have written.\u201d\u2014HOLLAND.\n\n[110] See Plato, Phaedrus, p. 248 C; Timaeus, p. 41 E; Republic, X. p.\n617 D.\n\n[111] Plato, Tim. p. 39 D.\n\n[112] This is the whole passage from Plato\u2019s Phaedrus, p. 248 C, of\nwhich part is quoted in \u00a7 1. (G.)\n\n[113] Plato, Phaedo, p. 58 A.\n\n[114] Plato, Timaeus, p. 29 D.\n\n[115] Plato, Timaeus, p. 41 D.\n\n[116] Plato, Timaeus, p. 42 D.\n\n[117] Plato, Laws, IX. p. 875 C.\n\n[118] Plato, Theages, p. 129 E.\n\n[119] Odyss. IX. 44.\n\n[120] Il. XVI. 649.\n\n[121] Pind. Isthm. IV. 112.\n\n[122] Odyss. V. 469.\n\n[123] Pindar, Olymp. I. 1.\n\n[124] Hesiod, Theog. 116.\n\n[125] See Plato, Phaed. p. 69 C, and Stallbaum\u2019s note. Here the\nproverb occurs,\u2014\u039d\u03b1\u03c1\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03bf\u03c6\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f76, \u0392\u03ac\u03ba\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9, _the\nthyrsus-bearers are many, but the true priests of Bacchus are few_. (G.)\n\n[126] Il. VII. 182; X. 243.\n\n[127] Euripides Frag. 1071.\n\n[128] The text is corrupt here. (G.)\n\n[129] Il. XVIII. 585.\n\n[130] Plato, Phaedrus, p. 230 A.\n\n[131] Il. XX. 250.\n\n[132] Eurip. Iph. Taur. 289.\n\n[133] Eurip. Orest. 258.\n\n[134] See Il. XXII. 126.\n\n[135] See Il. V. 646; XXIII. 71.\n\n[136] Herod. III. 82.\n\n[137] Il. II. 547.\n\n[138] The text of several lines which follow here is hopelessly\ncorrupt, but it is evident that Plutarch refers to the description in\nThucyd. VII. 71. (G.)\n\n[139] Thucyd. V. 73.\n\n[140] Odyss. XIX. 208.\n\n[141] Aristophanes, Frogs, 354.\n\n[142] I follow Baehr\u2019s emendation (or rather substitution) \u1f10\u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03b1 for\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u1fc6\u03bd, which is demanded by the obvious sense of the whole passage. (G.)\n\n[143] See Aeschines against Ctesiphon, \u00a7 146.\n\n[144] Demosthenes on the Crown, p. 297, 11.\n\n[145] Plato, Laws, VIII. p. 844 B.\n\n[146] Odyss. XI. 578.\n\n[147] Il. I. 154.\n\n[148] Odyss. V. 439.\n\n[149] Odyss. V. 291, 295.\n\n[150] See Plato, Theaet. p. 149 B.\n\n[151] Theaet. p. 151 C.\n\n[152] Theognis, vs. 432.\n\n[153] Plato, Timaeus, p. 28 C.\n\n[154] Phaedrus, p. 261 A.\n\n[155] Republic, VI. pp. 509 D-511 E.\n\n[156] See Plato\u2019s Symposium, p. 210 D.\n\n[157] See Timaeus, pp. 53-56.\n\n[158] Triangular numbers are those of which equilateral triangles can\nbe formed in this way:\u2014\n\n[Illustration]\n\nSuch are 3, 6, 10, 15, 21, 28, 36, 45, &c.; that is, numbers formed by\nadding the digits in regular order. (G.)\n\n[159] See Phaedrus, p. 246 D.\n\n[160] See Timaeus, pp. 79-81.\n\n[161] See Timaeus, p. 42 D.\n\n[162] See Aristotle on the Soul, II. 1, with Trendelenburg\u2019s note. (G.)\n\n[163] Plato, Republic, VI. pp. 508, 509.\n\n[164] Euripides, Troad. 887.\n\n[165] See Republic, IV. p. 448 D.\n\n[166] Il. XI. 64.\n\n[167] Plato\u2019s Sophist, p. 262 A.\n\n[168] Il. I. 185.\n\n[169] Odyss. XXIII. 183; VIII. 408.\n\n[170] Il. XIV. 459.\n\n[171] Il. XX. 147.\n\n[172] Il. XVIII. 536.\n\n[173] Demosthenes against Midias, p. 537, 25, and p. 578, 29.\n\n[174] It seems impossible to believe this treatise to be the work\nof Plutarch, and equally impossible to believe it to be the work of\nany full-grown man of sound mind. In this case, and in that of the\nnext treatise, no satisfaction is gained by merely supposing the work\nspurious. One of these Parallel Histories is usually a well-known\nstory, and the other is an absurd imitation of it. An instance may be\nseen in section 12, where the common story of Manlius Torquatus and his\nson is matched by an absurd one of Epaminondas and his son; on which\nWyttenbach remarks: \u201cRomanum constat: Graecum non modo ementitum, sed\nstulte ementitum.\u201d We might almost suspect that many of them are some\nschool-boy\u2019s compositions, half historical, and half imitations of\nwell-known stories fortified by imaginary authorities. Is it possible\nthat this school-boy can have been Plutarch himself? (G.)\n\n[175] A very slight inspection of this strange treatise will convince\nthe reader that it is justly placed among the Pseudoplutarchea. It\nis reprinted here merely because it was included in the original\ntranslation. (G.)\n\n[176] Whence probably our English word _down_.\n\n\n\n\nINDEX.\n\n\nA.\n\n\u201cA bird in the hand is worth two in the bush,\u201d a proverb among the\n      Greeks, iv. 229.\n\n\u201cAbstain from beans,\u201d meaning of the aphorism, i. 29.\n\nAchelous, a river in Aetolia, v. 504.\n\nAcrotatus, apothegm of, i. 400.\n\nActaeon, a beautiful youth of Corinth, murdered, iv. 313-315.\n\nAda, queen of Caria, sends delicacies to Alexander, i. 199.\n\nAdimantus, admiral of the Corinthian fleet at the battle of Salamis,\n      iv. 362;\n  his courage vindicated, 364.\n\nAdrastus, anecdote of, i. 288.\n\nAdvice to a new-married couple, ii. 486-507.\n\nAeacus, his two sons, v. 466.\n\nAemilius Censorinus, v. 475.\n\nAemilius of Sybaris, v. 464.\n\nAemilius Paulus, sayings of, i. 232; iv. 202.\n\nAeolus, king of Etruria, v. 467.\n\nAeschines, quoted, Prom., i. 40;\n  anecdote of, 55;\n  Eumen., 59;\n  Frag., 163;\n  Prom., 299;\n  Ctesiphon, 334;\n  his early life, and concern in public affairs, v. 34;\n  incurs the hostility of Demosthenes, _ib._;\n  accused by Demosthenes and acquitted, 34, 35;\n  impeaches Ctesiphon, is fined and exiled, 35;\n  his school at Rhodes, _ib._;\n  his death, _ib._;\n  his orations, _ib._;\n  his public employments, 36.\n\nAeschylus, quoted, Septem, i. 210, 286, 315, 329, 493;\n  quoted, ii. 47;\n  anecdote of, 77, 160;\n  Frag., 48, 83, 127, 165, 374, 431, 458, 463, 474, 477;\n  quoted, iii. Frag., 24, 222;\n  quoted, iv. 20, 54, 385;\n  Frag., 276, 279;\n  quoted, v. Frag., 170;\n  Prom., 241, 320, 398.\n\nAesop, murdered by the citizens of Delphi, iv. 160;\n  their punishment, 161.\n _See Esop._\n\nAgamedes and Trophonius built the temple at Delphi, i. 313.\n\nAgasicles, apothegms of, i. 385.\n\nAgatharchides the Samian, his Persian History, v. 451.\n\nAgatho the Samian, v. 474.\n\nAgathocles, anecdote of, i. 46; ii. 317.\n\nAged Men, Shall they meddle in State Affairs?, v. 64-96.\n\nAgesianax quoted, v. 235, 236.\n\nAgesilaus, reply of, i. 73, 219, 220;\n  his sayings and great actions, 385-397;\n  his upright character, ii. 109, 115, 319, 455;\n  his punishment, iii. 46, 79;\n  anecdote of, v. 67;\n  his faults, 118; 457;\n  his Italian History, 468.\n\nAgesipolis, two of the name, apothegms of, i. 397, 398.\n\nAgis, king of Sparta, his sayings, i. 218, 221;\n  anecdote of, v. 95.\n\nAgis, son of Archidamus, apothegm of, i. 398.\n\nAgis the Argive, ii. 125.\n\nAgis the Last, apothegm of, i. 400.\n\nAgis the Younger, apothegms of, i. 400.\n\nAjax\u2019s soul, her place in Hell, iii. 442.\n\nAlba, king of, torn in pieces by horses, v. 455.\n\nAlbinus, a Roman general, v. 453.\n\nAlcaeus quoted, ii. 298; iii, 264.\n\nAlcamenes, apothegm of, i. 400.\n\nAlcibiades, i. 143;\n  his sayings, 211;\n  his lustful conduct, 489;\n  the prince of flatterers, ii. 108, 471;\n  failure of, 460;\n  spoke with hesitation, v. 110, 112.\n\nAlcippus, a Lacedaemonian, banished for his virtue; his wife slays\n      herself and her daughters, iv. 320-322.\n\nAlcmaeon, saying of, i. 288;\n  philosophical opinions;\n    of the planets, iii. 140;\n    of hearing, 170;\n    of smelling, 170;\n    of taste, 170;\n    of the barrenness of mules, 182;\n    of embryos, 184;\n    of the formation of the body, 184;\n    of the cause of sleep, 188;\n of health, sickness, and old age, 192.\n\nAlcmaeonidae, unfairly represented by Herodotus, iv. 338, 347.\n\nAlcman, quoted; Frag., i. 494; iii. 16; v. 279.\n\nAleuas the Thessalian, iii. 67.\n\nAlexander of Macedon, and Porus, i. 45;\n  lament of, 140;\n  and Criso the runner, 152;\n  his sayings, 198-202;\n  the Fortune or Virtue of, 475-516;\n  anecdotes of, ii. 125, 138, 473;\n  his moderation, 475; iii. 29;\n  was he a great drinker, 219;\n  his purpose to attack the Romans, iv. 219; v. 140.\n\nAlexander, tyrant of Pherae, his cruel temper softened by a play, i.\n      492.\n\nAlexandridas, apothegm of, i. 401.\n\nAlexarchus, his Italian History, v. 456.\n\nAlexidemas, at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41.\n\nAlexinus the sophist, i. 76.\n\nAlexis quoted, ii. 58.\n\nAlpha, why placed first in the Alphabet, iii. 438.\n\nAlpheus, a river in Arcadia, v. 501.\n\nAmasis, king of Egypt, required to drink the ocean dry, ii. 13;\n  questions of, 16.\n\nAmmonius, teacher of Plutarch, anecdote of, ii. 147.\n\nAmphiaraus, quoted, i. 317;\n  his lance turned into a laurel, v. 455.\n\nAmphidamas, poets meet at his grave in Chalcis, ii. 19.\n\nAmphion, first invented playing on the harp and lyric poesy, i. 105.\n\nAnarcharsis, and Eumetis, ii. 8;\n  his utterances at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, 12, 15, 20,\n      21, 27, 39.\n\nAnatole, a mountain, v. 482.\n\nAnaxagoras, saying of, i. 159;\n  said the sun was red-hot metal, 179;\n  anecdote of, 332; ii. 357; iii. 35, 37;\n  philosophical opinions;\n  Homoeomeries, 108;\n  of the origin of bodies, 119;\n  how bodies are mixed, 126;\n  of fortune, 131;\n  of the world\u2019s inclination, 136;\n  of the stars, 138, 140;\n  of the sun, 142, 143;\n  of the moon, 145, 147;\n  of the milky way, 149;\n  of shooting stars, 150;\n  of thunder, lightning and hurricanes, 151;\n  of the rainbow, 153;\n  of earthquakes, 157;\n  of the sea, 158;\n  of the overflow of the Nile, 160;\n  of the voice, 172;\n  of generation, 178;\n  of the generation of animals, 186;\n  of reason in animals, 187;\n  of sleep, 190; v. 145, 255.\n\nAnaxander, apothegm of, i. 401.\n\nAnaxilas, apothegm of, i. 402.\n\nAnaximander, philosophical opinions;\n  of principles, iii. 107;\n  the stars were heavenly deities, 121;\n  of the stars, 140;\n  of the essence and magnitude of the sun, 141, 142;\n  of eclipses of the sun, 144;\n  of the moon, 145;\n  of fire from clouds, 150;\n  of winds, 154;\n  of the earth, 155;\n  of the sea, 158;\n  of the generation of animals, 186.\n\nAnaximenes, philosophical opinions;\n  air is the principle of all beings, iii. 107;\n  of heaven, 137;\n  of the stars, 139, 140;\n  cause of summer and winter, 141;\n  of the shape of the sun and summer and winter solstice, 143;\n  of the moon, 146;\n  of clouds, 151;\n  of the rainbow, 153;\n  of the earth, 155;\n  of earthquakes, 157; v. 313.\n\nAncients, suppers of the, iii. 255-259.\n\nAndocides, one of the ten Attic orators, v. 21-23;\n  of a noble family, 21;\n  accused of impious acts, 22;\n  his adventures in Cyprus, 22, 23;\n  his exile, 23;\n  his orations, _ib._\n\nAndroclidas, apothegm of, i. 402.\n\nAnecdotes of\n  Aeschylus, ii. 458.\n  Agathocles, i. 46.\n  Agesilaus, i. 73, 219, 220; v. 67, 118.\n  Agis, king of Sparta, v. 95.\n  Alcibiades, ii. 108, 109.\n  Alexander the Great, i. 45; ii. 473.\n  Ammonius, ii. 147.\n  Anaxagoras, i. 332.\n  Antigonus, i. 44, 47, 67, 202, 205, 334; iv. 231.\n  Antimachus, i. 307.\n  Antiochus Hierax, iii. 60.\n  Antipater, i. 64, 197, 205, 215.\n  Antony and Cleopatra, ii. 127.\n  Apelles the painter, i. 16, 153; ii. 122, 133.\n  Appius Claudius, v. 89.\n  Arcesilaus and Apelles, ii. 133.\n  Archelaus of Macedon, i. 67, 193.\n  Archidamus, i. 74.\n  Archimedes, ii. 174; v. 71.\n  Archytas of Tarentum, i. 18, 24.\n  Aristippus, i. 11, 55, 147, 459; ii. 55.\n  Athenian barber, iv. 238.\n  Attalus and Eumenes, iii. 61.\n  Augustus Caesar and Fulvius, iv. 235, 236.\n  Bocchoris, i. 63.\n  Brasidas, ii. 458.\n  Caesar, i. 293; iv. 204, 205; v. 67.\n  Cato, i. 295; ii. 490.\n  Cato and Catulus, i. 73.\n  Cleon, v. 100, 116.\n  Corinna, v. 404.\n  Crassus, i. 288, 290.\n  Croesus and Solon, ii. 122.\n  Demades and Phocion, ii. 298.\n  Demaratus and Philip, ii. 146.\n  Demetrius Phalereus, ii. 145; iii. 21.\n  Demosthenes, i. 15, 65, 334; ii. 460; v. 43-53.\n  Diogenes, i. 51, 67, 141, 142, 166, 283, 285, 311, 487; ii. 455,\n      458; iii, 21, 29.\n  Diogenes and Philip, ii. 147.\n  Diogenes and the mouse, ii. 453.\n  Dion, i. 64, 333.\n  Dionysius of Syracuse, i. 83, 152, 493; ii. 108, 140; iv. 238.\n  Epaminondas, v. 72, 95, 101, 120, 121, 125, 401.\n  Euclid, i. 55.\n  Eudoxus, ii. 174.\n  Eumenes, iii. 61; iv. 232.\n  Fulvius and Augustus, iv. 235, 236.\n  Hiero, i. 291.\n  Hyperides, v. 55, 56.\n  Isocrates, v. 31.\n  Leaena, iv. 229, 230.\n  Lucretia, i. 355.\n  Lycurgus, the lawgiver, i. 7.\n  Lycurgus, the orator, v. 39.\n  Lysander, i. 72; ii. 495.\n  Lysias, iv. 226.\n  Magas, i. 45.\n  Menander, v. 403.\n  Nasica, i. 285.\n  Nero, v. 123.\n  Nicias, the Athenian general, i. 177.\n  Nicias, the painter, ii. 173; v. 71.\n  Nicostratus and Archidamus, i. 74.\n  Olympias, ii. 494, 495.\n  Pericles, i. 15, 18, 66, 211, 332; ii. 309, 315; v. 67, 106.\n  Philip of Macedon, i. 305; ii. 146, 147, 494.\n  Phocion, ii. 298; v. 118.\n  Pindar, v. 404.\n  Pisistratus, iii. 41.\n  Plato, i. 71.\n  Plato and Socrates, ii. 148.\n  Polemon, i. 55.\n  Pompey, v. 70.\n  Postumia, i. 290.\n  Priest of Hercules, iii. 90.\n  Prometheus, i. 289.\n  Ptolemy Lagus, i. 45.\n  Pythagoras, ii. 174.\n  Roman Senator and his wife, iv. 233-235.\n  Scaurus, i. 295.\n  Scilurus, a Scythian king, iv. 244.\n  Seleucus Callinicus, iv. 237.\n  Seneca, i. 53.\n  Simonides, v. 68.\n  Socrates, i. 11, 13, 23, 26, 38, 53, 141, 150.\n  Socrates and Plato, ii. 148.\n  Solon, v. 89.\n  Solon and Croesus, ii. 122.\n  Sophocles, v. 68.\n  Stasicrates, i. 495.\n  Stilpo the philosopher, ii. 468.\n  Stratonicus, iii. 21.\n  Sylla, v. 72.\n  Terpander, i. 91, 92.\n  Themistocles, i. 73, 290, 296; iii. 21; v. 120.\n  Theramenes, i. 306.\n  Timotheus the musician, i. 92.\n  Valeria, i. 356.\n  Xanthippe, wife of Socrates, i. 53, 292.\n  Xenocrates, i. 71.\n  Xenophon, i. 333.\n  Xerxes and Ariamenes, iii. 59, 60.\n  Zeno, i. 72, 142, 283; ii. 455; iii. 25; iv. 225.\n\nAnger, concerning the cure of, i. 33-59.\n\nAnimal Food, shall it be eaten? Of Eating of Flesh, v. 3-16.\n\nAnimals, generation of, iii. 186;\n  how many species of, 187;\n  appetites and pleasures of, 191;\n  ails and cures of, 510;\n  their intelligence, v. 157-217.\n\nAnius, king of the Tuscans, v. 475.\n\nAntalcidas, his sayings, i. 222, 402;\n  his reply to a railing Athenian, v. 125.\n\nAnthes, the first author of hymns, i. 105.\n\nAnthias, the sacred fish, v. 208.\n\nAnthipphus, Lydian harmony first used by, i. 114.\n\nAntichthon, the, iii. 155.\n\nAntigonus, anecdote of, i. 25;\n  saying of, 44, 47, 67, 202, 205, 334, 484; iv. 231.\n\nAntigonus the Second, his sayings, i. 205; ii. 319.\n\nAntimachus, anecdote of, i. 308.\n\nAntiochus and Charicles, iii. 49.\n\nAntiochus and Seleucus, iii. 60.\n\nAntiochus, apothegm of, i. 403.\n\nAntiochus Hierax, anecdotes of, i. 206; iii. 60.\n\nAntiochus Sidetes, anecdotes of, i. 207.\n\nAntiochus the Spartan, his saying, i. 221.\n\nAntiochus the Third, anecdotes of, i. 206.\n\nAntipater, anecdotes of, i. 64, 197, 205, 215; ii. 135, 298; iii.\n      517; v. 49.\n\nAntiperistasis of motion, v. 435.\n\nAntiphanes, witty saying of his, ii. 456.\n\nAntiphon, one of the ten Attic orators,\nii. 142; v. 17-21;\n  his birth, education, &c., 17;\n  wrote speeches for others, _ib._;\n  a man of great talent and learning, 18;\n  concerned in the revolution which subverted the popular government,\n      _ib._;\n  on the overthrow of the oligarchical party he was involved in\n      their ruin, _ib._;\n  number of his orations, 19;\n  decree of the senate against him, 20;\n  his condemnation and punishment, 21;\n  opinion concerning the moon, iii. 146;\n  of the sea, 158.\n\nAntisthenes quoted, i. 77, 289, 496; v. 125.\n\nAntony and Cleopatra, ii. 127.\n\nApelles, the painter, anecdotes of, i. 16, 153;\n  his picture of Alexander, 494;\n  and Megabyzus, ii. 122;\n  and Arcesilaus, 133.\n\nAphareus, adopted son of Isocrates, wrote orations and tragedies, v.\n      32.\n\nApis, the sacred bull of the Egyptians, iv. 68;\n  slain by Ochus, king of Persia, 74, 92.\n\nApollo and the dragon Python, iv. 20.\n\nApollo, inventor of the flute and harp, i. 113.\n\nApollo, temple of, iv. 478-498;\n  the inscription \u03b5\u03b9 over its gate, 479.\n\nApollodorus, first invented the mixing of colors and the softening of\n      shadows, v. 400.\n\nApollonides, of shadow, v. 265;\n  of spots in the moon, 269.\n\nApollonis of Cyzicum, iii. 41.\n\nApollonius, consolation to, i. 299-339.\n\nApollonius, the Peripatetic, iii. 57.\n\nApothegms of Kings and Great Commanders, i. 185-250.\n  Agathocles, sayings of, i. 193.\n  Agesilaus, 219.\n  Agis, 218-221.\n  Alcibiades, 211.\n  Alexander the Great, 198-202.\n  Antalcidas, 222.\n  Antigonus, 202.\n  Antigonus the Second, 205.\n  Antiochus Sidetes, 207.\n  Antiochus the Spartan, 221.\n  Antiochus the Third, 206.\n  Antipater, 205.\n  Archelaus, 193.\n  Archidamus, 218.\n  Aristides, 210.\n  Artaxerxes Longimanus, 187.\n  Artaxerxes Mnemon, 188.\n  Ateas, 189.\n  Augustus Caesar, 248-250.\n  Brasidas, 218.\n  Caecilius Metellus, 239.\n  Caius Fabricius, 227.\n  Caius Marius, 239.\n  Caius Popilius, 240.\n  Cato the Elder, 233-235.\n  Chabrias, 213.\n  Charillus, 217.\n  Cicero, 244.\n  Cneus Domitius, 231.\n  Cneus Pompeius, 241-244.\n  Cotys, 189.\n  Cyrus the Elder, 186.\n  Cyrus the Younger, 188.\n  Darius, 186.\n  Demetrius, 204.\n  Demetrius Phalereus, 217.\n  Dion, 193.\n  Dionysius the Elder, 191.\n  Dionysius the Younger, 192.\n  Epaminondas, 222-226.\n  Eudaemonidas, 221.\n  Eumenes of Pergamus, 206.\n  Fabius Maximus, 227-228.\n  Gelo, 190.\n  Hegesippus, 213.\n  Hiero, 190.\n  Idathyrsus, 189.\n  Iphicrates, 212.\n  Lucullus, 241.\n  Lycurgus, 217.\n  Lysander, 219.\n  Lysimachus, 205.\n  Manius Curius, 226.\n  Memnon, 189.\n  Nicostratus, 221.\n  Orontes, 188.\n  Parysatis, 188.\n  Paulus Aemilius, 232.\n  Pelopidas, 225.\n  Pericles, 211.\n  Philip of Macedon, 194-198.\n  Phocion, 213, 216.\n  Pisistratus, 216.\n  Poltys, 189.\n  Ptolemy Lagus, 202.\n  Pyrrhus the Epirot, 207.\n  Pytheas, 213.\n  Scilurus, 190.\n  Scipio Junior, 235-239.\n  Scipio the Elder, 229.\n  Semiramis, 187.\n  Teres, 189.\n  Themistocles, 208.\n  Theopompus, 217.\n  Timotheus, 212.\n  Titus Quinctius, 230.\n  Xerxes, 187.\n\nAppius Claudius, anecdote of, v. 89.\n\nApple tree, of the, iii. 333.\n\nArar, a river in Gaul, v. 484.\n\nAratus, quoted, iii. 116;\n  of the stars, 141;\n  quoted, 334, 497; iv. 98; v. 112;\n quoted, 177.\n\nAraxes, a river in Armenia, v. 506.\n\nArcadian prophet in Herodotus, iii. 38.\n\nArcadio the Archaean, saying of, i. 44.\n\nArcesilaus, i. 53, 148;\n  quoted, 258, 315;\n  and Battus, ii. 115;\n  his kindness to Apelles, 133; v. 371.\n\nArchelaus, king of Macedon, anecdote of, i. 67, 193.\n\nArchelaus, his opinions concerning principles, iii. 109.\n\nArchias, ii. 379 _et seq._; iv. 314, 315.\n\nArchidamidas, apothegms of, i. 404.\n\nArchidamus, i. 4, 74, 218, 404; ii. 379 _et seq._\n\nArchilochus the poet, banished from Sparta, i. 96;\n  quoted, 97;\n  his improvements in music, 122, 123, 177;\n  phrase of, ii. 17, 61, 84; iii. 26; v. 108, 216, 320.\n\nArchimedes, of the sun\u2019s diameter, v. 71;\n  anecdote of, ii. 173, 174.\n\nArchytas of Tarentum, anecdotes of, i. 18, 24.\n\nArdalus, a minstrel at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 11, 12.\n\nAregeus, apothegm of, i. 403.\n\nAretades Cnidus, his Macedonian History, v. 458;\n  his Second Book of Islands, 467.\n\nAretaphila, her fortitude and virtue, i. 367.\n\nArgive women, their repulse of the Spartan army, i. 346.\n\nArgives, wrestling matches of, i. 121;\n  imposed a fine for playing with more than seven strings, 130;\n  combat of the, with the Lacedaemonians, v. 452.\n\nAriamenes yields the throne of Persia to his younger brother Xerxes,\n      iii. 59.\n\nArion and the dolphins, ii. 33-36.\n\nAristarchus, iii. 36;\n  concerning the eclipse of the sun, 144; v. 246.\n\nAristides, his Persian History, v. 453.\n\nAristides, his sayings, i. 210.\n\nAristides Milesius, his Italian History, v. 451, 452, 453, 458, 459,\n      460, 462, 463, 465, 466, 469, 473, 474, 475, 476;\n  Italian Commentaries, 461;\n  quoted, 462.\n\nAristippus, anecdotes of, i. 11, 55, 79, 147; ii. 295, 459.\n\nAristo of Chios, ii. 369.\n\nAristobolus, his Third Book of Italian History, v. 470.\n\nAristocles, Third Book of his Italian History, v. 466, 476.\n\nAristoclia, a beautiful maiden, iv. 312, 313.\n\nAristodemus, his Third Collection of Fables, v. 472.\n\nAristodemus, king of Messenia, i. 177.\n\nAristodemus the Epicurean, ii. 158, 159, 180.\n\nAristomenes, preceptor of Ptolemy, ii. 149.\n\nAriston, apothegm of, i. 403; iii. 18;\n  his opinion of moral virtue, 462; v. 111.\n\nAristonicus the musician, i. 494.\n\nAristonymus, a woman hater, v. 468.\n\nAristophanes, his comedy of \u201cThe Clouds,\u201d i. 23;\n  quoted, 79, 125, 500;\n  quoted, ii. 78, 149, 429;\n  his coarseness and buffoonery, iii. 11;\n  compared with Menander, 11-14;\n  quoted, iv. 196, 273;\n  quoted, v. 42, 405.\n\nAristotinus, tyranny of, i. 357-363; v. 172.\n\nAristotle, quoted, i. 37; 50;\n  on harmony, 119; 155, 272, 326;\n  the teacher of Alexander, 478, ii. 302, 319;\n  letter of, 455;\n  his philosophical opinions; of nature, 105;\n  of principles and elements, 106;\n  of God, 121;\n  of matter, 123;\n  of ideas, 123;\n  of causes, 124;\n  of a vacuum, 127;\n  of motion, 128;\n  of fortune, 131;\n  of the world, 133, 134, 135;\n  of vacuum, 137;\n  of the world, 137;\n  of heaven, 137;\n  of the stars, 140;\n  of the sun, 142;\n  of the summer and winter solstices, 143;\n  of the moon, 146;\n  of the milky way, 148, 149;\n  of comets, 149;\n  of thunder and lightning, 151;\n  of earthquakes, 157;\n  of tides, 159;\n  of the motion of the soul, 164;\n  of the senses, 166;\n  of the voice, 172;\n  of generative seed, 177;\n  of the sperm, 177;\n  of emission of women, 177;\n  of conception, 178;\n  of generation, 179;\n  of the first form in the womb, 184;\n  of seven months\u2019 children, 185;\n  of the species of animals, 187;\n  of sleep, 189;\n  of plants, 190;\n  quoted, 225, 226;\n  opinions concerning the soul, 465;\n  opinion concerning a plurality of worlds, iv. 33;\n  concerning prophetic inspiration, 54; v. 189, 253, 262, 313, 316,\n      355;\n  quoted, 439;\n  the Second Book of Paradoxes, 468.\n\nAristoxenus, of music, i. 114, 115, 125, 134.\n\nArsinoe, Queen, i. 319.\n\nArtaxerxes Longimanus, his sayings, i. 187.\n\nArtaxerxes Mnemon, his sayings, i. 188.\n\nAruntius and Medullina, v. 463.\n\nAsclepiades, opinions: of the soul, iii. 161;\n  of respiration, 174;\n  of two or three children at one birth, 180;\n  animals in the womb, 188;\n  of health, sickness, and old age, 193.\n\nAster the archer, v. 456.\n\nAstycratidas, apothegm of, i. 405.\n\nAteas, saying of, i. 189; ii. 177.\n\nAtepomarus, king of the Gauls, v. 469.\n\nAtheism and superstition compared, i. 168 _et seq._\n\nAthenian citizens, their number, v. 42;\n  their temper and disposition, 100.\n\nAthenians, whether they were more renowned for their warlike\n      achievements, or for their learning, v. 399-411.\n\nAthenodorus, memorable action of, iii. 50.\n\nAthens, was a democracy, v. 397;\n  the nurse of history, of painting, and poetry, 400, 401;\n  not renowned for epic or lyric verse, 404.\n\nAtoms, doctrine of, v. 345-348.\n\nAtreus and Thyestes, v. 470, 471.\n\nAttalus and Eumenes, their kindness and fidelity to each other, iii.\n      61, 62.\n\nAttica, invasion of, by Datis, v. 450, 451.\n\nAugustus Caesar, his sayings, i. 248-250;\n  the favored son of Fortune, iv. 205; v. 67.\n\nAugustus Caesar and Fulvius, anecdote of, iv. 235, 236.\n\nAutobulus, v. 156 _et seq._\n\nAutumn, dreams in, iii. 432.\n\n\nB.\n\nBaccho, iv. 256, 264, 269.\n\nBacchus, ii. 12, 29.\n\nBallenaeus, mount, v. 492.\n\nBanishment, or flying one\u2019s country, iii. 15-35.\n\nBanquet of the Seven Wise Men; Solon, Bias, Thales, Anacharsis,\n      Cleobulus, Pittacus, Chilo, ii. 3-41.\n\nBarley, sow, in dust, iii. 505.\n\nBarrenness in women, iii. 181.\n\nBarrenness of mules, iii. 182.\n\nBashfulness, i. 60-77.\n\nBasilocles, iii. 69, 70.\n\nBaths, hot and cold, iii. 512.\n\nBattus, ii. 115.\n\nBear, cunning of the, v. 185.\n\nBears, flesh of, iii. 509.\n\nBeasts, flesh of sacrificial, iii. 361.\n\nBees, cannot abide smoke, iii. 515;\n  stinging of, 516.\n\nBellerophon, fable of, i. 351.\n\nBerecyntus, mount, v. 490.\n\nBerosus concerning the eclipse of the moon, iii. 146.\n\nBewitching, power of, iii. 327.\n\nBias, quoted, i. 17, 406;\n  at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 4, 14, 128.\n\nBion, saying of, i. 76;\n  his opinion concerning the punishment of children for the sins of\n      their fathers, iv. 171;\n  saying of, v. 170.\n\nBird or the egg, which was first, iii. 242-246.\n\nBirds, prophetic nature of, v. 193.\n\nBirth, two or three at one, iii. 180.\n\nBirthdays of famous men, iii. 400.\n\nBiton and Cleobis, their filial piety, i. 313.\n\nBoar and the toil, iii. 512.\n\nBocchoris, anecdote of, i. 63.\n\nBodies, of, iii. 124;\n  division of, 126;\n  how mixed with one another, 126.\n\nBody, passions of the, iii. 175;\n  what part is first formed, 184;\n  diseases of the, iv. 504-508.\n\nBoedromion, month of, iii. 444.\n\nBoethus, his opinion concerning comets, iii. 150.\n\nBook of Rivers, v. 455.\n\nBrasidas, apothegm of, i. 218; ii. 458.\n\nBrennus, king of the Gauls, v. 460.\n\nBritain, longevity in, iii. 193.\n\nBrixaba, mount, v. 494.\n\nBrotherly love, iii. 36-68.\n\nBrute animals, ails and cures of, iii. 510;\n  their intelligence; which are the more crafty, water or land\n      animals? v. 157-217.\n\nBrute beasts make use of reason, v. 218-233.\n\nBucephalus, the horse, v. 183.\n\nBulimy, or the greedy disease, iii. 355.\n\nBusiris, king of Egypt, strangers murdered by, v. 474.\n\n\nC.\n\nCaecilius Metellus, apothegm of, i. 239.\n\nCaesar, Augustus, his sayings, i. 248-250;\n  anecdote of, iv. 205;\n  and Fulvius, 235, 236; v. 67, 132.\n\nCaesar, C. Julius, his sayings, i. 246-248;\n  his magnanimity, 293;\n  his reliance on fortune, iv. 205.\n\nCaesar, Tiberius, sayings of, i. 277; ii. 126; iii. 23.\n\nCaicus, a river, v. 503.\n\nCaius Fabricius, apothegm of, i. 227.\n\nCaius Gracchus, i. 40; v. 99.\n\nCaius Marius, apothegm of, i. 239.\n\nCaius Maximus, and his two sons, v. 466.\n\nCaius Popilius, apothegm of, i. 240.\n\nCallicratidas, apothegms of, i. 412;\n  saying of, ii. 187.\n\nCallimachus, saying of, i. 323; iii. 23, 118, 321.\n\nCallisthenes, saying of, i. 37;\n  his Book of Transformations, v. 454;\n  Third Book of the Macedonics, 456;\n  Third Book of History of Thrace, v. 469.\n\nCalpurnius Crassus, liberated from captivity, v. 465.\n\nCalpurnius and Florentia, v. 467.\n\nCalydon, mount, v. 505.\n\nCamillus, anecdote of, iv. 204.\n\nCamma, the Galatian, her revenge, i. 372.\n\nCanus the piper, v. 71.\n\nCaphene and Nymphaeus, i. 348.\n\nCaphisias, ii. 379 _et seq._\n\nCarneades, i. 160;\n  a striking observation of his, ii. 123.\n\nCassius, a Roman traitor, v. 457.\n\nCastor and Pollux, iii. 48.\n\nCato and Catulus, anecdotes of, i. 73.\n\nCato, saying of, i. 61;\n  and Catulus, 73; 261;\n  his integrity, 295;\n  his sayings, ii. 42, 72, 76, 318; v. 10, 66, 67;\n  anecdotes of, 83, 112, 120, 123, 144, 155.\n\nCato the Elder, apothegms of, i. 233-235;\n  anecdote of, ii. 490.\n\nCatoptrics, doctrine of the, v. 257.\n\nCattle, salt given to, iii. 497.\n\nCatulus, v. 457.\n\nCaucasus, mount, v. 483.\n\nCaudine Forks, defeat of the Romans at the, v. 452, 453.\n\nCauses, of, iii. 123.\n\nCauses of sleep and death, iii. 188.\n\nCeltic women, virtue of the, i. 347.\n\nCephisocrates, ii. 133.\n\nCephisophan, a rhetorician, i. 98.\n\nCeres, mistress of earthly things, v. 285, 286.\n\nChabrias, his sayings, i. 213.\n\nChaeremon quoted, Frag., ii. 475.\n\nChameleon, the, v. 202.\n\nChaplet of flowers at table, iii. 260-265.\n\nCharicles and Antiochus, iii. 49.\n\nCharillus, his sayings, i. 217, 432; ii. 97, 116.\n\nCharon, the Theban, ii. 381.\n\nChasms in the earth closed by men leaping into them, v. 454.\n\nChersias at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41.\n\nChian women, virtue of the, i. 344.\n\nChildren, training of, i. 3-32;\n  similitude to their parents, iii. 180;\n  similitude to strangers, 181.\n\nChilo, i. 280;\n  at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41.\n\nChilon, saying of, i. 471.\n\nChiomara of Galatia, i. 374.\n\nChorus of the Aeantis, iii. 226-228.\n\nChorus of the Leontis, iii. 226.\n\nChromatic scale, in music, i. 117.\n\nChrysermus, his Peloponnesian History, v. 452;\n  Second Book of Histories, 457.\n\nChrysippus, ii. 87;\n  his opinion concerning fate, iii. 130;\n  of moral virtue, 462;\n  his doctrines refuted, 488; iv. 372 _et seq._, 428-477; v. 205;\n  his opinion concerning the cause of cold combated, 324;\n  First Book of Italian History, 468.\n\nCicero, apothegm of, i. 244; ii. 310; v. 96.\n\nCilician geese, v. 175.\n\nCinesias, the lyric poet, i. 180.\n\nCinna stoned to death, v. 469.\n\nCios, maids of, i. 354.\n\nCirce, her supposed conversation with Ulysses, v. 218-219.\n\nCithaeron, mount, v. 479.\n\nCleanthes, his opinion concerning the stars, iii. 139, 140; v. 176,\n      420.\n\nCleobis and Biton, i. 313.\n\nCleobulus at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41.\n\nCleodemus, at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41;\n  first brought the cupping-glass into request, 20.\n\nCleodorus, the physician, ii. 16.\n\nCleombrotus, i. 413; iv. 3, 4, 26.\n\nCleomenes, v. 161.\n\nCleomenes, apothegms of, i. 346, 413, 416.\n\nCleon, anecdotes of, v. 100, 116.\n\nClisthenes, vindicated from the aspersions of Herodotus, iv. 343.\n\nClitonymus, his Italian History, v. 458;\n  Second Book of his Sybaritics, v. 464.\n\nClitophon, his First Book of Gallican History, v. 460.\n\nCloelia and Valeria, i. 356.\n\nClonas, a musical composer, i. 107, 109.\n\nClouds, eruption of fire out of the, iii. 150;\n  rain, hail, and snow, 151.\n\nCneus Domitius, apothegm of, i. 231.\n\nCneus Pompeius, apothegms of, i. 241-244.\n\nCocles, the Roman, v. 145.\n\nCodrus, king of Athens, v. 462.\n\nCoeranus and the dolphins, v. 215.\n\nCold, First Principle of, v. 309-330.\n\nColor, does it exist in the dark, v. 344, 345.\n\nColors, of, iii. 125.\n\nColotes, the Epicurean, ii. 187;\n  book written by, v. 338;\n  misrepresents Democritus, 341;\n  his doctrines, 349;\n  misrepresents Plato, 355, 356;\n  falls at the feet of Epicurus, 360;\n  disparagement of Socrates, 361;\n  against Stilpo, 367;\n  assaults the Philosophers, 367;\n  condemns the opinion of Epicurus, 368;\n  Cyrenaic philosophers ridiculed, 369;\n  treats Arcesilaus unfairly, 371;\n  absurdity of Epicureanism, 373;\n  opinions of Epicurus, 374;\n  danger of his doctrines, 377, 378, 338-385.\n\nComets and shooting fires, iii. 149.\n\nComminius Super, a Laurentine, v. 472.\n\nCommon conceptions against the Stoics, iv. 372-427.\n\nComparison between the actions of the Greeks and Romans, v. 450-476.\n\nComparison betwixt Aristophanes and Menander, iii. 11-14.\n\nConception, how it is made, iii. 178.\n\nConcerning Music, i. 102-135.\n\nConcerning such whom God is slow to punish, iv. 140-188.\n\nConcerning the fortune of the Romans, iv. 198-219.\n\nConcerning the virtues of women, i. 340-384.\n\nConciseness of speech, recommended, iv. 243;\n  examples given, 243, 244.\n\nConjugal Precepts; Advice to a New-married Couple, ii. 486-507.\n\nConsolation to Apollonius, i. 299-339.\n\nConsolatory Letter from Plutarch to his Wife, Timoxena, on Occasion\n      of the Death of their Daughter, two years old, v. 386-394.\n\nContingent and possible defined, v. 299.\n\nContradictions of the Stoics, iv. 428-477.\n\nCora and Proserpine, v. 285.\n\nCorinna, anecdote of, v. 404.\n\nCorinthian Hall at Delphi, iii. 80-82.\n\nCornelius Scipio, consul, v. 96, 112, 114, 136.\n\nCotys, his sayings, i. 189.\n\nCrabs charmed by fifes, v. 163.\n\nCranes, flight of, v. 175, 203.\n\nCrantor, quoted, i. 300, 304, 324, 326;\n  his opinion of the soul, ii. 327, 328, 345, 349, 360.\n\nCrassus, anecdotes of, i. 288, 290; v. 125.\n\nCrassus Calpurnius, v. 465.\n\nCrassus\u2019s mullet, v. 196.\n\nCrates, i. 141;\n  saying of, 495; ii. 145, 321;\n  opinion of the stars, iii. 140; v. 419, 423.\n\nCratinus the comic poet, v. 410.\n\nCrato, iii. 198.\n\nCreon\u2019s daughter, i. 472.\n\nCretinus, the Magnesian, v. 121.\n\nCriticism on passages in Homer, ii. 69-72, 74-84, 89, 90, 91.\n\nCriticism on Sophocles, ii. 72.\n\nCritolaus, his History of the Epirots, v. 455;\n  Fourth Book of Celestial Appearances, 457.\n\nCrocodile, story of a, v. 196, 206, 210.\n\nCroesus, ii. 122; iii. 85; iv. 339.\n\nCronium, mount, v. 501.\n\nCtesiphon, his Third Book of the Boeotian History, v. 458.\n\nCtesiphon the Pancratiast, i. 42.\n\nCuratii and Horatii, v. 461.\n\nCure of anger, i. 33-59.\n\nCuriosity, of, ii. 424-445;\n  mischiefs of vain, iv. 236.\n\nCuttle-fish, sign of a storm, iii. 505;\n  wariness of the, v. 200.\n\nCyanippus, a Syracusan, v. 462.\n\nCyanippus, a Thessalian, v. 463.\n\nCyclades islands, iii. 24.\n\nCycloborus, a brook near Athens, v. 110.\n\nCynaegirus, an Athenian commander, story of, v. 450.\n\nCyprus, female parasites of, called Steps, ii. 103.\n\nCyrus the Elder, his sayings, i. 186; ii. 319;\n  enlarges the Persian empire, iv. 85.\n\nCyrus the Younger, his sayings, i. 188.\n\n\nD.\n\nDaemon of Socrates, Discourse concerning the, ii. 378-423.\n\nDaemons, their nature, attributes, and actions, iv. 14 _et seq._;\n  some of them are malignant and cruel, 19;\n  they are mortal, 15, 23, 24;\n  vainglorious, 28;\n  have the care of oracles, 21, 27;\n  sometimes have quarrels and combats with one another, 27;\n  our souls are by nature endued with similar powers, 50 _et\n      seq._;\n  in the Moon, v. 289;\n  will of the, 304;\n  providence of the, 307, 308.\n\nDamindas, apothegm of, i. 407.\n\nDamis, apothegm of, i. 406.\n\nDamonidas, apothegm of, i. 406.\n\nDarius, his sayings, i. 186, 502; v. 458.\n\nDarkness, whether visible, iii. 169.\n\nDatis, a Persian commander, his invasion of Attica, v. 450.\n\nDaughters who had carnal knowledge of their fathers, v. 464.\n\nDeath appertains to soul or body, iii. 189.\n\nDeath a reward for distinguished piety; illustrated by the cases of\n      Biton and Cleobis, of Agamedes and Trophonius, of Pindar and\n      Euthynous, i. 313, 314.\n\nDeath of fire is the generation of air, v. 316.\n\nDeath the brother of sleep, i. 311.\n\nDebates at entertainments, iii. 394.\n\nDebt, Evils of. Against running in Debt, or Taking up Money upon\n      Usury, v. 412-424.\n\nDebt of nature, i. 309.\n\nDecius of Rome, v. 462.\n\nDecrees proposed to the Athenians, v. 58.\n\nDeity, knowledge of a, whence derived, iii. 115.\n\nDelay of Providence in Punishing the Wicked. De sera Numinis\n      Vindicta, iv. 140-188.\n\nDelight in hearing the passions of men represented, iii. 314.\n\nDelphi, a walk in, iii. 69;\n  the statues there, 70;\n  atmosphere of, 72;\n  ancient oracles of, 73;\n  Corinthian Hall at, 80-82;\n  statue of Phryne, 83.\n\nDelphic Oracle, inscription on the, Know thyself, and Nothing too\n      much, i. 328.\n\nDemades and Phocion, anecdotes of, ii. 298; v. 108, 141.\n\nDemaratus and Philip, anecdote of, ii. 146.\n\nDemaratus, apothegm of, i. 407, 482;\n  his Second Book of Arcadian History, v. 461.\n\nDemetrius Phalereus, his saying, i. 217;\n  anecdotes of, ii. 145; iii. 21; v. 145.\n\nDemetrius, his sayings, i. 204.\n\nDemetrius of Tarsus, comes to Delphi, iv. 3.\n\nDemochares, a nephew of Demosthenes, procures a statue to be set up\n      for his uncle, v. 58-60;\n  a decree for a statue for himself, 60, 61.\n\nDemocracy and Oligarchy, v. 395-398.\n\nDemocrates, saying of, v. 109.\n\nDemocritus, saying of, i. 22, 263, 275; ii. 440; iii. 7;\n  his philosophical opinions, 121, 123, 126, 127, 128, 129, 132, 133,\n      135, 139, 140, 142, 145, 149, 155, 156, 157, 160, 162, 163,\n      164, 166, 168, 169, 171, 176, 177, 179, 183, 187, 227;\n  his opinions misrepresented, v. 341;\n  his doctrine concerning atoms, 345, 346, 381.\n\nDemodocus, i. 105.\n\nDemonides, the cripple, ii. 51.\n\nDemosthenes, the orator, anecdotes of, i. 15, 65;\n  quoted, 67, 286, 325;\n  anecdote of, 334, 481;\n  quoted, ii. 145, 300, 312, 313;\n  anecdote of, 460;\n  quoted, iv. 212;\n  quoted, v. 34, 35;\n  sketch of his life, 43-53;\n  his birth, education, and early years, 43;\n  calls his guardians to account, _ib._;\n  is chosen choregus, 44;\n  his methods to obtain excellence in speaking, _ib._;\n  opposes the designs of Philip, 45;\n  describes \u201caction\u201d as of supreme importance in oratory, _ib._;\n  his early failures as an orator, _ib._;\n  defends the Olynthians, 46;\n  is admired by Philip, though an enemy, _ib._;\n  his magnanimity, 47;\n  his conduct at Chaeronea, _ib._;\n  his patriotism, _ib._;\n  the oration for the Crown, _ib._;\n  accused of receiving a bribe, 48;\n  his exile, _ib._;\n  recalled, _ib._;\n  returns to the administration of public affairs, 49;\n  leaves Athens to avoid being delivered up to Antipater, _ib._;\n  his death, 50;\n  his family, _ib._;\n  honors paid to his memory, 51;\n  anecdotes of him, 49, 50-53;\n  his great temperance, 53;\n  his public services recounted in a decree, 58-60;\n  quoted, 69, 109, 110, 124, 138, 146, 409, 411, 447, 448.\n\nDercyllidas, apothegm of, i. 407.\n\nDercyllus, his First Book of Foundations, v. 461;\n  Third Book of Italian History, 474.\n\nDestiny, or fate, iii. 130.\n\nDeucalion [like Noah] sent forth a dove from the ark, and with like\n      purpose, v. 179.\n\nDiagoras the Melian, iii. 118.\n\nDiana Orthia, rites of, i. 98.\n\nDicaearchus, opinion concerning the soul, iii. 161;\n  of divination, 176; v. 93.\n\nDignity of places at table, iii. 210, 212.\n\nDinarchus, an Athenian orator, v. 57, 58;\n  becomes rich, 57;\n  his exile in Chalcis, 58;\n  restored, _ib._;\n  his orations, _ib._\n\nDiocles, at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41;\n  his philosophical opinions, iii. 179, 182, 185, 192.\n\nDiogenes Laertius quoted, i. 77.\n\nDiogenes, quoted, i. 4, 12;\n  anecdotes of, 51, 67, 141, 142, 166, 283, 285, 311, 487;\n  quoted, ii. 58, 155, 193; 455, 458, 465, 466;\n  story of the mouse, 453; iii. 21, 27, 29, 31;\n  his philosophical opinions, 132, 136, 138, 143, 148, 163, 183, 187,\n      189, 494; iv. 311; v. 8, 65.\n\nDiogenes and Philip, ii. 147.\n\nDiogenianus, iii. 71, 73, _et seq._\n\nDiomedes, ii. 41;\n  liberated from captivity, v. 465.\n\nDion, example of, i. 64, 193, 333.\n\nDionysius, tyrant of Sicily, does not relish the Lacedaemonian broth,\n      i. 83;\n  his unreasonable anger, 152;\n  his sayings, 449, 484, 491;\n his ungenerous behavior, 493;\n  parasites of, ii. 166; 314;\n  anecdote of, iv. 238.\n\nDionysius and Plato, ii. 108, 140.\n\nDionysius the Elder, his sayings, i. 191; v. 84.\n\nDionysius the Younger, his sayings, i. 192, 501.\n\nDiophantus, saying of, i. 4.\n\nDiorphus, mount, v. 507.\n\nDiscourse to an Unlearned Prince, iv. 323-330.\n\nDiseases of the body, iv. 504-508.\n\nDivination, of, iii. 176; iv. 59.\n\nDog, habit of biting of stones, iii. 516;\n  affection for his master, v. 180, 182, 184;\n  docility of the, 191.\n\nDolphin, sagacity of the, v. 200;\n  nature of the, 204;\n  story of a, 213;\n  its love of music, 214;\n  stories of affection of, 215, 216.\n\nDolphin and Arion, ii. 33-36;\n  and the lad of Jasus, v. 215.\n\nDomitian is mentioned [which fixes the era of Plutarch], ii. 443.\n\nDomitius, anecdote of, i. 288, 295; v. 125.\n\nDorian Mood of music, i. 109, 115.\n\nDorians pray for bad making of their hay, iii. 504.\n\nDorotheus, his First Book of Transformations, v. 466;\n  his Fourth Book of Italian History, v. 463.\n\nDositheus, his Third Book of Sicilian History, v. 463, 471, 472, 474;\n  Third Book of Lydian History, 469;\n  his Pelopidae, 471;\n  First Book of Italian History, 475.\n\nDream, a romantic, ii. 407-411.\n\nDreams and Omens, ii. 401, 402.\n\nDreams in Autumn, iii. 432.\n\nDreams, whence do they arise, iii. 176.\n\nDrink either five or three, iii. 282-284.\n\nDrink passeth through the lungs, iii. 363.\n\n\nE.\n\nEarth, its nature and magnitude, iii. 154;\n  figure of the, 155;\n  site and position of the, 155;\n  inclination of the, 155;\n  motion of the, 156;\n  zones of the, 156;\n  exhalations from the, iv. 53;\n  its form and its place, v. 247;\n  an instrument of time, 439.\n\nEarthquakes, of, iii. 157.\n\nEcho, what gives the, iii. 172.\n\nEclipse of the moon, iii. 146.\n\nEclipses of the sun, iii. 144.\n\nEcphantus, his opinion concerning the motion of the earth, iii. 156.\n\nEgg or the bird, which was first, iii. 242-246.\n\nEgypt, its Religion and Philosophy; of Isis and Osiris, or of the\n      Ancient Religion and Philosophy of Egypt, iv. 65-139.\n\nEgyptian skeleton at feasts, ii. 7.\n\nEgyptians in Ethiopia, iii. 20.\n\n\u0395\u03b9 at Apollo\u2019s temple at Delphi, iv. 479-498.\n\nEleans, the, v. 426.\n\nElements, mixture of the, iii. 126.\n\nElephant, understanding of the, v. 178;\n  stories of, 178;\n  of King Porus, 183;\n  most beloved by the Gods, 187;\n  amour of the, 188;\n  chirurgery of the, 192.\n\nElephas, mount, v. 478.\n\nElysian fields in the moon, v. 289.\n\nElysius the Terinean, vision of, i. 314.\n\nEmbryo, how nourished, iii. 183;\n  is an animal, _ib._\n\nEmpedocles, i. 59;\n  saying of, 158, 469;\n  quoted, ii. 49, 195; 357;\n  quoted, iii. 34, 81;\n  his philosophical opinions, 112, 114, 125-129, 131, 132, 136-138,\n      143, 145, 147, 154, 158, 163, 165, 168-170, 173, 178-184,\n      188-191;\n  quoted, 209, 262, 293, 333, 497, 509, 518;\n  quoted, iv. 21, 52, 85, 87, 108, 273;\n  quoted, v. 169, 239, 246, 249, 252, 255, 318, 348, 350, 351;\n  misunderstood by Colotes, 351;\n  quoted, 381, 420, 421, 439.\n\nEmprepes, apothegm of, i. 408.\n\nEnemies, how a man may profit by his, i. 280-298.\n\nEntertainment, late to an, iii. 417.\n\nEnvy and Hatred, ii. 95-99.\n\nEpaminondas, his sayings, i. 222-226, 277;\n  his great actions, 225;\n  his consistency of character, ii. 109; 182, 185, 309, 313, 319,\n      381, 396, 399, 414; iii. 6; v. 72, 75, 95, 101, 121, 125;\n  his invasion of Laconia, 401, 407, 458.\n\nEpaminondas, son of, beheaded, v. 458.\n\nEphorus, his opinion concerning the overflowing of the Nile, iii. 161.\n\nEpicharmus, quoted, i. 315, 496; ii. 141; iv. 242.\n\nEpicureans, misrepresentations of the, v. 352-354.\n\nEpicurus, quoted, i. 138, 139, 159;\n  famous sentence of, ii. 92;\n  his doctrine; refutation of it; pleasure is not attainable, 157-203;\n  reverence of his brothers, iii. 57;\n  his philosophical opinions, 111, 122, 124, 127, 128, 131, 134, 135,\n      139, 142, 143, 151, 163, 164, 165, 169, 177, 183;\n  opinions of, v. 350, 374;\n  danger of his doctrines, 377, 378;\n disciples of, 383, 385.\n\nEpigenes, opinion concerning comets, iii. 150.\n\nEpimenides, long sleep of, v. 66; 279.\n\nErasistratus, his opinion of the soul, iii. 163;\n  of superfetation, 180;\n  his definition of a fever, 192.\n\nEratosthenes, his philosophical opinions: of time, iii. 128;\n  of the sun, 147; v. 456.\n\nErectheus, sacrifice of his daughter, v. 463.\n\nEryxo of Cyrene, i. 378.\n\nEsop, fable of, ii. 11, 12, 16, 19-22, 23;\n  dog of, 25;\n  at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, 3-41; iii. 63, 202.\n\nEteocles the Theban, i. 257.\n\nEuboea, king of, drawn in pieces by horses, v. 455.\n\nEuboidas, apothegm of, i. 408.\n\nEuclid, anecdote of, i. 55; ii. 173.\n\nEuclides, his brotherly love, iii. 61.\n\nEuctus and Eulaeus, ii. 146.\n\nEudaemonidas, his sayings, i. 221.\n\nEudamidas, apothegm of, i. 408.\n\nEudemus, of matter, ii. 334.\n\nEudorus, system of numbers, ii. 343, 345.\n\nEudoxus, anecdotes of, ii. 174;\n  his opinion of the cause of winter and summer, iii. 141;\n  of the overflow of the Nile, 161.\n\nEuemerus, his opinion of God, iii. 118.\n\nEumenes of Pergamus, his sayings, i. 206;\n  anecdotes of, iii. 61, iv. 232.\n\nEumetis at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41;\n  her riddle, 20.\n\nEuphorion quoted, iii. 321.\n\nEuphranor, the painter, v. 400.\n\nEuphrates, the river, v. 502.\n\nEupolis, saying of, ii. 112.\n\nEuripides, quoted, i. 3, 158, 291, 300, 301, 302, 308, 320, 329, 330,\n      335, 458;\n  Hippol., 4, 14, 471;\n  Protesilaus, 23;\n  Dictys, 26, 58;\n  Bellerophon, 63, 141;\n  Frag., 287, 472;\n  Pirithous, 70;\n  Orestes, 37, 137, 140, 165, 170, 286;\n  Medea, 64, 71, 255;\n  Iph. Aul., 152, 302;\n  Bacchae, 163;\n  Troad, 170;\n  Phoeniss, 257, 303, 327;\n  Danae, 307;\n  Adrastus, 288;\n  Stheneboea, 301;\n  Ino, 303, 304;\n  Alcestis, 310;\n  Suppliants, 316;\n  Cresphontes, 316;\n  Erectheus, 500;\n  Hypsipyle, 317, 465; ii. 54, 56, 62, 87, 92, 121, 148, 150, 251,\n      300, 306, 357, 363, 391, 472;\n  Cresphontes, 93;\n  Hippol., 73, 108, 173, 198, 373, 374;\n  Frag., 86, 181, 318, 437, 501;\n  Orestes, 143, 443;\n  Medea, 66;\n  Iph. Aul., 49, 85;\n  Phoeniss, 51, 61, 66, 130, 151;\n  Ion, 102, 144;\n  Ino, 131;\n  Erectheus, 132;\n  Electra, 85;\n  Aeolus, 66, 85, 88, 175;\n  Herc. Furens, 151;\n  Hecuba, 197;\n  Iph. Taur., 447; iii. 27, 99, 116, 194;\n  Frag., 3, 19, 33, 41, 42, 94, 230, 458, 475, 512;\n  Hippol., 483;\n  Orestes, 168, 437;\n  Phoeniss, 16, 32, 43, 49, 257;\n  Stheneboea, 217;\n  Iph. Taur., 21;\n  Androm., 232;\n  Hipsipyle, 291, iv. 17, 128, 142, 270, 308, 450, 478, 497;\n  Frag., 47, 220, 233, 251, 272, 273, 292, 301, 325, 392, 461, 475;\n  Bacchae, 223, 272, 422, 506;\n  Hippol., 294, 298;\n  Cyclops, 56;\n  Aeolus, 105;\n  Troad, 132;\n  Orestes, 141, 507;\n  Ino, 158, 231;\n  Alcestis, 197;\n  Danae, 274, 283;\n  Stheneboea, 288;\n  Androm., 401;\n  Herc. Furens, 459, 467; v. 126, 128, 157, 172;\n  Frag., 15, 79, 105, 108, 118, 345;\n  Aeolus, 71;\n  Hippol., 158;\n  Iph. Taur., 374;\n  Orestes, 77, 380;\n  Troad, 440;\n  Erectheus, 463;\n  Meleager, 466.\n\nEurotas, a river in Laconia, v. 497.\n\nEurycratidas, apothegm of, i. 410.\n\nEurydice of Hierapolis, her epigram, i. 32.\n\nEuthrymenes, his opinion of the overflow of the Nile, iii. 160.\n\nEuthynous and Pindar, i. 313.\n\nEutropion, anecdote of, i. 25.\n\nEvenus quoted, ii. 102, 192.\n\nEvenus, son of Mars, v. 475.\n\nExercises, different kinds of, iii. 248-250.\n\nExile, consolations of, iii. 15-35.\n\nEyes, images of the, iii. 169.\n\n\nF.\n\nFabius Maximus, his sayings, i. 227, 228;\n  in the Punic war, v. 453.\n\nFable of Minerva, i. 41.\n\nFable of the defeat of Neptune, iii. 444.\n\nFable of the Fox and Leopard, ii. 21.\n\nFable of the Lydian Mule, ii. 11.\n\nFabricianus, v. 474.\n\nFabricius, iv. 201.\n\nFace appearing in the moon, v. 234-292.\n\nFasting creates more thirst than hunger, iii. 339.\n\nFate, or destiny, iii. 130;\n  nature of, 130; v. 293-308.\n\nFaunus, king of Italy, strangers murdered by, v. 474.\n\nFever, cause of a, iii. 192.\n\nFig-trees, of, iii. 250, 335.\n\nFigures, of, iii. 125.\n\nFilial treachery in Persian and Roman history, v. 458.\n\nFire or water, which is more useful, v. 331-337.\n\nFirmus and Nuceria, v. 471.\n\nFish called the fisherman, v. 201.\n\nFish, eating of, iii. 422.\n\nFisherman\u2019s nets, rotting of, iii. 503.\n\nFishes, of; the labrax, mullet, scate, anthias, dolphin, cuttle-fish,\n      star-fish, torpedo, the fisherman, tunny, amiae, pionetras,\n      sponge, porphyrae, hegemon, whale, pinoterus, gilthead,\n      phycides, galeus, tortoise, v. 195, 209.\n\nFittest time for a man to know his wife, iii. 274-279.\n\nFives, we reckon by, iv. 43-47.\n\nFive tragical histories of Love, iv. 312-322.\n\nFlattery: How to know a Flatterer from a Friend, ii. 100-156.\n\nFlattery fatal to whole kingdoms, ii. 118.\n\nFlesh exposed to the moon, iii. 284-287.\n\nFlute girls, whether they are to be admitted to a feast, iii. 387.\n\nFolly of Seeking Many Friends, i. 464-474.\n\nFood, digesting of, iii. 289-295.\n\nFortune, of, ii. 475-481; iii. 131;\n  is a cause by accident, v. 302;\n  not the same as chance, 303;\n  relates to men only, 303.\n\nFortune of the Romans, iv. 198-219.\n\nFox, cunning of the, v. 179.\n\nFresh water washes clothes better than salt, iii. 224-226.\n\nFriends, folly of seeking many, i. 464-474.\n\nFrogs, croaking of, v. 210.\n\nFrost makes hunting difficult, iii. 510.\n\nFruit, salt not found in, iii. 498.\n\nFulvius and Augustus, anecdotes of, iv. 235, 236.\n\nFulvius Stellus, v. 468.\n\nFundanus, i. 34, 35.\n\n\nG.\n\nGalaxy, or milky way, iii. 148.\n\nGaleus, affection of, for their young, v. 209.\n\nGanges, the river, v. 481.\n\nGarlands at sacred games, iii. 411.\n\nGarrulity, or Talkativeness, iv. 220-253.\n\nGauran, mount, v. 508.\n\nGelo, his saying, i. 190.\n\nGeneration and corruption, iii. 128.\n\nGeneration of males and females, iii. 178;\n  of animals, 186;\n  of the Gods, 400.\n\nGenerative seed, iii. 177.\n\nGeniuses and heroes, opinions concerning, iii. 122.\n\nGermanicus, ii. 96.\n\nGnatho the Sicilian, iii. 3.\n\nGobryas, a Persian noble, ii. 104.\n\nGod always plays the Geometer, saying attributed to Plato, iii. 402.\n\nGod bade Socrates act the midwife\u2019s part, v. 425.\n\nGod, Father and Maker of all things, v. 428.\n\nGod, what is, iii. 118.\n\nGods, generation of the, iii. 400.\n\nGorgias, i. 340;\n  at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41; 44, 134; ii. 502;\n      v. 405.\n\nGovernment. Of the Three Sorts of Government, Monarchy, Democracy,\n      and Oligarchy, v. 395-398.\n\nGracchus, Caius, example of, i. 40.\n\nGreek music, principles of, i. 102, 103.\n\nGreek Questions, ii. 265-293.\n\nGroom, saying of the king\u2019s, i. 21.\n\nGryllus, v. 218 _et seq._\n\nGuests, should the entertainer seat the, iii. 203-210;\n  to a wedding supper, 300;\n  that are called shadows, iii. 381.\n\nGylippus, his dishonesty, i. 23.\n\n\nH.\n\nHabits of animals, v. 173-177.\n\nHalcyon, of the, v. 211.\n\nHalo, of the, iii. 160.\n\nHannibal and Fabius, i. 228.\n\nHares, cunning of the, v. 185.\n\nHarp, an invention of Apollo, i. 113.\n\nHart, tears of the, iii. 507.\n\nHealth, preservation of, i. 251-279.\n\nHealth, sickness, and old age, iii. 192.\n\nHearing, of, i. 441-463; iii. 170.\n\nHeaven, its nature and essence, iii. 137;\n  division of, 137.\n\nHebrus, a river of Thrace, v. 480.\n\nHedgehog, ingenuity of the, v. 186.\n\nHedgehog of the sea, v. 203.\n\nHegemon, of the fish, v. 206.\n\nHegesippus, sayings of, &c., i. 213.\n\nHegesistratus, an Ephesian, v. 476.\n\nHelicon the mathematician, i. 57.\n\nHephaestion, the friend of Alexander, i. 489, 505.\n\nHeracleo, v. 194.\n\nHeraclides, his compendium of music, i. 105; ii. 158;\n  his philosophical opinions, iii. 139, 149, 156, 159, 165.\n\nHeraclides the wrestler, iii. 220.\n\nHeraclitus, i. 44, 79, 276, 308, 448, 453; ii. 74, 165, 330, 358,\n      477; iii. 26, 74;\n  his philosophical opinions, 111, 125, 128, 130, 131, 143, 144, 145,\n      146, 162;\n  apothegm, v. 9;\n  quoted, 73, 169, 425.\n\nHercules and Iole, v. 459.\n\nHercules in Antisthenes, precept of, i. 77.\n\nHercules, ridiculous representation of, v. 70;\n  and King Faunus, 474.\n\nHercules the woman-hater, his temple in Phocis, iii. 90;\n  singular anecdote, _ib._\n\nHermes, iv. 74.\n\nHermias, v. 121.\n\nHermogenes, ii. 194.\n\nHerodotus, quoted, i. 80, 441;\n  saying of, ii. 202, 489;\n  Arcadian prophet, iii. 38;\n  quoted, iv. 248, 335 _et seq._;\n  malice of, iv. 331-371; v. 397.\n\nHerondas, apothegm of, i. 410.\n\nHerons, artifices of the, v. 176.\n\nHerophilus, opinion of, iii. 128, 163.\n\nHesianax, his Third Book of African History, v. 465.\n\nHesiod, quoted, Works and Days, i. 22, 65, 70, 138, 156, 178, 261,\n      296, 307, 325;\n  Works and Days, ii. 24;\n  spare diet recommended by, 27;\n  and the dolphin, 36, 37;\n  Works and Days, 63, 64, 65, 73, 87, 92, 302, 303, 449, 452, 480,\n      483;\n  Theogony, 102;\n  Works and Days, iii. 64, 210, 382, 416, 436, 438;\n  Theogony, 118, 324, 458; iv. 15;\n  Works and Days, 48, 49, 68, 87, 154, 173, 264, 385, 442, 457;\n  Theogony, 53;\n  Works and Days, v. 153, 168, 172, 279.\n\nHicetes, his opinion of the earth, iii. 154.\n\nHiero, his sayings, i. 190;\n  anecdote of, 291.\n\nHiero the Spartan, statue of, iii. 76.\n\nHiero the Tyrant, statue of, iii. 75.\n\nHieronymus, saying of, i. 38, 50, 462.\n\nHimerius, an Athenian parasite, ii. 126.\n\nHippasus, opinions of, iii. 111.\n\nHippocrates, saying of, i. 40;\n  quoted, 261, 292; ii. 165, 185;\n  his magnanimity, ii. 466.\n\nHippocratidas, apothegm of, i. 412.\n\nHippodamus, apothegm of, i. 411.\n\nHippolytus, son of Theseus, v. 471, 472.\n\nHippomachus, ii. 294.\n\nHipponax, i. 108.\n\nHistory of music, i. 104 _et seq._\n\nHistory of wind instruments, i. 108.\n\nHomer, passages in, criticised, ii. 69-72, 74-84, 89, 90.\n\nHomer quoted: Iliad, i. 34, 38, 39, 51, 52, 55, 62, 104, 132, 133,\n      134, 138, 141, 151, 153, 154, 156, 161, 165, 178, 180, 181,\n      200, 236, 251, 292, 303, 305, 306, 310, 324, 325, 329, 330,\n      331, 385, 466, 469, 475, 486, 490, 507, 508, 510, 511; ii. 25,\n      32, 41, 44, 47, 48, 49, 52, 53, 55, 56, 59, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68,\n      74, 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 88, 89, 90, 91, 108, 114, 115, 120,\n      123, 131, 140, 142, 145, 150, 151, 152, 154, 185, 197, 198, 200,\n      237, 295, 305, 310, 311, 314, 317, 319, 413, 501, 505; iii. 25,\n      26, 47, 53, 54, 107, 120, 152, 206, 207, 221, 231, 248, 255, 285,\n      301, 313, 317, 321, 323, 325, 336, 354, 364, 381, 394, 401, 413,\n      418, 437, 442, 447, 448, 449, 450, 480, 486, 492, 493, 515; iv.\n      16, 65, 108, 111, 152, 191, 194, 195, 216, 237, 238, 280, 285,\n      291, 327, 329, 383, 386, 401, 405, 434, 462, 483, 490, 499,\n      504; v. 78, 79, 85, 88, 90, 92, 96, 104, 119, 122, 123, 134,\n      135, 138, 146, 147, 171, 182, 200, 208, 214, 266, 276, 281,\n      315, 339, 350, 371, 386, 394, 400, 418, 443, 444, 447;\n  Odyss. i. 52, 134, 138, 154, 236, 252, 305, 310, 318, 325, 452,\n      469; ii. 41, 43, 47, 48, 52, 53, 54, 56, 59, 63, 65, 67, 70,\n      71, 82, 83, 108, 110, 114, 115, 127, 149, 158, 159, 162, 184,\n      195, 304, 316, 317, 320, 371, 427, 463, 467, 478; iii. 10, 42,\n      45, 72, 81, 101, 196, 201, 207, 226, 232, 233, 249, 259, 280,\n      333, 359, 365, 395, 419, 425, 437, 438, 451, 466, 477, 499; iv.\n      5, 30, 86, 97, 191, 200, 219, 224, 226, 230, 231, 289, 307,\n      325, 401, 405; v. 3, 11, 105, 106, 143, 171, 184, 281, 285,\n      290, 315, 323, 403, 416, 422, 423, 446.\n\nHoratii and Curatii, v. 460, 461.\n\nHoratius Cocles, v. 456.\n\nHorsehair for fishing lines, iii. 505.\n\nHorses, called \u03bb\u03c5\u03c7\u03bf\u03c3\u03c0\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2, iii. 253.\n\nHorus, son of Osiris, iv. 80, 114 _et seq._\n\nHounds that hunt hares, v. 184.\n\nHow a man may praise himself without being envied, ii. 306.\n\nHow a man may receive advantage and profit from his enemies, i.\n      280-298.\n\nHow animals are begotten, iii. 186.\n\nHow a young man ought to hear poems, ii. 42.\n\nHow plants grow, and whether they are animals, iii. 190.\n\nHow to know a flatterer, ii. 100-156.\n\nHunger, cause of, iii. 341;\n  allayed by drinking, 345.\n\nHurricanes, of, iii. 150.\n\nHyagnis, first that sung to the pipe, i. 107.\n\nHydaspes, a river in India, v. 477.\n\nHyperides, the Athenian orator, ii. 140; v. 53-57;\n  his part in public affairs, 53;\n  his friendship for Demosthenes, 54;\n  this friendship broken, _ib._;\n  demanded by Antipater, he escapes to Aegina, _ib._;\n  is apprehended, tortured, and put to death, 55;\n  an excellent orator, _ib._;\n  his amorous propensities, 55, 56;\n  his patriotism, 56;\n  sent as ambassador, 56, 57.\n\nHypsipyle, foster-child of, i, 465.\n\n\nI.\n\nIbis, habits of, imitated by the Egyptians, v. 192.\n\nIbycus, the poet, iv. 240.\n\nIchneumon, of the, v. 174.\n\nIda, mount, v. 493.\n\nIdathyrsus, his sayings, i. 189.\n\nIdeas, of, iii. 123.\n\nImages presented to our eyes in mirrors, iii. 169.\n\nImagination, imaginable and phantom, difference between, iii. 167.\n\nImmortality of the soul, argument for it, iv. 169, 170.\n\nImpotency in men, iii. 181.\n\nImprobabilities of the Stoics, iii. 194-196.\n\nInachus, a river in Argolis, v. 498.\n\nIncest, case of, v. 467.\n\nIndus, the river, v. 508.\n\nInfants, seven months\u2019, iii. 184.\n\nInquisitiveness, or vain curiosity; of curiosity, or an over-busy\n      inquisitiveness into things impertinent, ii. 424-445.\n\nIole, the beloved of Hercules, v. 459.\n\nIon the tragedian, i. 322, 328; v. 186, 254.\n\nIphicrates, his saying, i. 80, 212; v. 105.\n\nIphigenia at Aulis, v. 459, 460.\n\nIrascible faculty, v. 441.\n\nIsaeus, an Athenian orator, v. 33;\n  considered by some equal to Lysias, _ib._;\n  the teacher of Demosthenes, _ib._;\n  number of his orations, _ib._\n\nIsis and Osiris, iv. 66-139.\n\nIsmenodora, iv. 256, 264, 269, 311.\n\nIsmenus, a river of Boeotia, v. 478.\n\nIsocrates, an Athenian orator, iii. 198; v. 27-33;\n  his parentage, birth, and education, 27;\n  composed orations for others, 28;\n  his school at Chios, _ib._;\n  his great success as a teacher of rhetoric, _ib._;\n  lived to a great age, 29;\n  his death and burial, 30;\n  number of his orations, 31;\n  his timidity, 27, 31;\n  his description of the use of rhetoric, 31;\n  the two suits against him, 32, 409;\n  his Panegyric, 410.\n\nIsthmian games, iii. 318.\n\nIvy, nature of, iii. 265-268.\n\n\nJ.\n\nJason, saying of, v. 140.\n\nJewish religion, statements and conjectures respecting it, iii.\n      307-312.\n\nJews, their fatal inaction in war because it was their Sabbath day,\n      i. 178.\n\nJuba, his third Book of Lybian History, v. 465.\n\n\nL.\n\nLacedaemonians, their laws and customs, i. 82-101;\n  their currency, 99;\n  influx of gold and silver, 100;\n  refuse to assist Philip and Alexander in their designs against\n      Persia, 101;\n  lose all their ancient glory, 101;\n  combat with the Argives, v. 452.\n\nLachares, tyranny of, ii. 166.\n\nLaconic answers, iv. 243.\n\nLaconic Apothegms, of, i. 385-440.\n  Acrotatus, 400.\n  Agasicles, 385.\n  Agesilaus, 385-397.\n  Agesipolis, 397, 398.\n  Agis, son of Archidamus, 398.\n  Agis the Last, 400.\n  Agis the Younger, 400.\n  Alcamenes, the son of Teleclus, 400.\n  Alexandridas, 401.\n  Anaxander, 401.\n  Anaxilas, 402.\n  Androclidas, 402.\n  Antalcidas, 402.\n  Antiochus, 403.\n  Archidamidas, 403.\n  Archidamus, son of Agesilaus, 404.\n  Archidamus, son of Zeuxidamus, 404.\n  Aregeus, 403.\n  Ariston, 403.\n  Astycratidas, 405.\n  Bias, 406.\n  Callicratidas, 412.\n  Charillus, 432.\n  Cleombrotus, 413.\n  Cleomenes, son of Cleombrotus, 413, 416.\n  Damindas, 407.\n  Damis, 406.\n  Damonidas, 406.\n  Demaratus, 407.\n  Dercyllidas, 407.\n  Emprepes, 408.\n  Euboidas, 408.\n  Eudamidas, son of Archidamas, 408.\n  Eurycratidas, 410.\n  Herondas, 410.\n  Hippocratidas, 412.\n  Hippodamus, 411.\n  Leonidas, the son of Anaxandrias, 417.\n  Leo, the son of Eucratidas, 417.\n  Leotychides, 416.\n  Lycurgus the Lawgiver, 419-425.\n  Lysander, 425.\n  Namertes, 427.\n  Nicander, 427.\n  Paedaretus, 429.\n  Panthoidas, 427.\n  Pausanias, son of Cleombrotus, 428.\n  Pausanias, son of Plistoanax, 428.\n  Phoebidas, 431.\n  Plistoanax, 430.\n  Polycratidas, 431.\n  Polydorus, 430.\n  Soos, 431.\n  Telecrus, 431.\n  Thectamenes, 411.\n  Themisteas, 410.\n  Theopompus, 410.\n  Thorycion, 411.\n  Zeuxidamus, 410.\n\nLacydes, King of the Argives, i. 290.\n\nLais, murder of, iv. 302.\n\nLampis, a sea commander, v. 73.\n\nLampsace, anecdote of, i. 366.\n\nLamps and tables of the ancients, iii. 372.\n\nLand, food of the, iii. 302-306.\n\nLasus, his innovation upon ancient music, i. 123.\n\nLeaena, anecdote of, iv. 229, 230.\n\nLeast things in nature, iii. 125.\n\nLeo, apothegm of, i. 417.\n\nLeo Byzantinus, saying of, i. 288;\n  and his wife, v. 110.\n\nLeonidas, apothegm of, i. 417;\n  vindicated from the statements of Herodotus, iv. 354; v. 157;\n  at Thermopylae, 453.\n\nLeotychides, apothegm of, i. 422.\n\nLeprosy caused by dewy trees, iii. 500.\n\nLeptis, custom in, ii. 499.\n\nLeucippus, his opinions of the world, iii. 135;\n  of the earth, 155;\n  of the senses, 165.\n\nLight and darkness, of, v. 325.\n\nLightning, of, iii. 150.\n\nLight, of reflected, iii. 168, 169; v. 236 _et seq._\n\nLilaeus, mount, v. 508, 509.\n\nLinus, elegies of, i. 105.\n\nLions, of, v. 187.\n\nLiquids, of, iii. 359.\n\nLive concealed, whether\u2019t were rightly said, iii. 3-10.\n\nLives of the ten Attic orators, v. 17-63.\n\nLove: Five tragical histories of, iv. 312-322.\n\nLove, of, iv. 254-311;\n  makes a man a poet, iii. 217-219.\n\nLove of wealth, ii. 294-305.\n\nLucretia, the Roman matron, i. 355.\n\nLucullus, apothegm of, i. 241;\n  quoted, iii. 51; v. 84.\n\nLugdunum, mount, v. 485.\n\nLyaeus and choraeus, i. 54.\n\nLybian crows, v. 175.\n\nLycastus and Parasius, v. 473.\n\nLycian women, virtue of the, i. 351.\n\nLycormas, a river in Aetolia, v. 487.\n\nLycurgus, an Athenian orator, v. 36-42;\n  treasurer of the commonwealth, 36;\n  his great public services, 37;\n  his fidelity in office and great reputation, 37;\n  his justice and integrity, 37, 38;\n  useful laws procured by his influence, 38;\n  his diligence in the study and practice of oratory, 39;\n  his incorruptible honesty, 40;\n  his death, _ib._;\n  honors paid to his memory, _ib._;\n  his family, 40, 41;\n  his orations and success as an orator, 41;\n  his benevolence, 42;\n  a decree for honors to be paid to his memory, 61-63.\n\nLycurgus, the Spartan lawgiver, anecdote of, i. 7;\n  his institutions, 82 _et seq._;\n  their final overthrow, 101, 217, 419-425;\n  his sayings, ii. 22; v. 12, 92.\n\nLydian mood of music, i. 109, 114.\n\nLyric nomes, i. 106.\n\nLysander, i. 72;\n  his great victory over the Athenians, 99;\n  introduces gold and silver into Lacedaemon, 100;\n    the results, _ib._;\n  his sayings, 219, 425;\n  saying of, ii. 149;\n  anecdote of, 495; iii. 100; v. 92.\n\nLysias, the Athenian orator, his remarks on music, i. 104;\n  anecdote of, iv. 226; v. 24-26;\n  his birth, early residence in Athens, residence in Thurii, and\n      return to Athens, 24;\n  banished by the Thirty Tyrants, 25;\n  return after their overthrow, _ib._;\n  death, _ib._;\n  number of his orations, _ib._;\n  his other works, 26;\n  his eloquence, _ib._; v. 33.\n\nLysimache, the priestess, i. 73.\n\nLysimachus, his sayings, i. 205, 259.\n\nLysippus, his statue of Alexander, i. 494.\n\n\nM.\n\nMadness of animals, v. 167.\n\nMaeander, a river in Asia, v. 488.\n\nMagas, anecdote of, i. 45.\n\nMagpie, story of a, v. 189.\n\nMaimactes, king of the gods, i. 45.\n\nMan, perfection of a, iii. 189;\n  most unhappy of all creatures, iv. 504;\n  compounded of three parts, v. 286.\n\nManeros, the foster-son of Isis, iv. 79.\n\nManius Curius, apothegm of, i. 226.\n\nManlius, son of, beheaded, v. 458.\n\nMan\u2019s progress in virtue, ii. 446-474.\n\nMantinea, battle of, v. 401.\n\nMarius, sacrifice of his daughter, v. 463.\n\nMars, some bad actions of his, v. 466, 467.\n\nMarsyas, a river in Phrygia, v. 490.\n\nMarsyas, the musician, i. 41, 108.\n\nMassinissa, his vigorous old age, v. 83.\n\nMathematics, applied to Music, i. 118-121;\n  affords unspeakable delight, ii. 172, 174.\n\nMatter, of, iii. 122.\n\nMedius, the parasite, ii. 137.\n\nMegasthenes, saying of, v. 275.\n\nMegisto and Micca, and other women of Elis, i. 357-363.\n\nMeilichius, king of the gods, i. 45.\n\nMelanippides, quoted, iv. 278.\n\nMelanthius, quoted, i. 35, 449; ii. 103; iv. 147.\n\nMelian women, virtue of the, i. 348.\n\nMelisponda and Nephalia, i. 59.\n\nMelissus, his opinion of generation, iii, 128.\n\nMemnon, his saying, i. 189.\n\nMenalippides, i. 114, 123.\n\nMenander, quoted, i. 70, 139, 158, 161, 164, 335, 470;\n  quoted, ii. 52, 57, 65, 86, 87, 124, 192, 297;\n  his superiority to Aristophanes, iii. 11-14;\n  quoted, 38, 65, 196, 488; iv. 290;\n  anecdote of, v. 403;\n  saying of, 425.\n\nMendesian goat, v. 225.\n\nMenedemus, i. 77; ii. 115, 464;\n  his opinion of the nature of moral virtue, iii. 461.\n\nMenelaus, the mathematician, v. 257.\n\nMen, impotency in, iii. 181;\n  elements of, 188;\n  have better stomachs in autumn, 240;\n  temper of, 270-272;\n  when asleep are never thunderstruck, 295-300;\n  having carnal knowledge of brutes, 468.\n\nMenon, his definition of virtue, i. 464.\n\nMenyllus, his First Book of Boeotic History, v. 460;\n  Third Book of Italian History, 467.\n\nMessenians, saying among the, v. 416.\n\nMetellus, quoted, iii. 53; iv. 202; v. 459, 461.\n\nMeteors, of, which resemble rods, iii. 153.\n\nMetiochus, his misuse of power, v. 127.\n\nMetius Fufetius, king of Alba, torn in pieces, v. 455.\n\nMetrocles, i. 144.\n\nMetrodorus, ii. 158, 160, 161, 167, 169, 175, 180, 183, 496;\n  his philosophical opinions, iii. 115, 127, 132, 149, 150, 151, 153,\n      154, 155, 157, 158; v. 378, 383, 384.\n\nMicca and Megisto, and other women of Elis, i. 357-363.\n\nMidas, i. 326; v. 454.\n\nMiletus, maidens of, i. 354.\n\nMills of the gods grind slowly, but they grind fine, iv. 143.\n\nMiltiades, v. 407-411.\n\nMimnermus, quoted, iii. 475.\n\nMind, tranquillity of the, i. 136-167.\n\nMinerva, admonished by a satyr, i. 41; iii. 195;\n  temple of, v. 461.\n\nMirrors, causes and reasons of, iii. 169; v. 236 _et seq._\n\nMithridates, i. 204; ii. 121;\n  story of, iii. 219.\n\nMixture of the elements, iii. 126.\n\nMnemosyne, the mother of the Muses, i. 22.\n\nMnesarete, statue of, iii. 83.\n\nMnesiphilus, at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41.\n\nMnesitheus, the physician, iii. 511.\n\nMonarchy, Democracy, and Oligarchy, v. 395-398.\n\nMoney upon usury, v. 412-424.\n\nMonstrous births, of, iii. 179.\n\nMoon: essence of the, iii. 145;\n  magnitude of the, 145;\n  figure of the, 145;\n  whence her light, 145;\n  eclipses of the, 146;\n  phases of the, 147;\n  distance from the sun, 147;\n  of the face appearing within the orb of the moon, v. 234-292;\n  its distance from the earth, 246;\n  its nature, 253-260;\n  its size, 261;\n  why called Glaucopis, 267;\n  is it inhabited, 274, 275.\n\nMoot point in Homer\u2019s Iliad, iii. 446.\n\nMoral virtue, essay on, iii. 461-494.\n\nMoschio, dialogue on health, i. 251, 252.\n\nMotherland a Cretan expression, v. 85.\n\nMotion, of, iii. 128.\n\nMount Athos\u2019 shade, v. 270.\n\nMule and the salt, v. 184.\n\nMule, superannuated, v. 182.\n\nMules, barrenness of, iii. 182.\n\nMullet, of the, v. 213.\n\nMuses, number of the, iii. 450.\n\nMushrooms produced by thunder, iii. 295-300.\n\nMusic, treatise concerning, i. 102-135;\n  pleasures from bad, iii. 376;\n  for entertainments, 389.\n\nMusonius, his rule of health, i. 35.\n\nMust, sweet, iii. 511.\n\nMycenae, mount, v. 501.\n\n\nN.\n\nNamertes, apothegm of, i. 427.\n\nNames of rivers and mountains, and of such things as are to be found\n      therein, and the fables connected therewith, v. 477-509.\n\nNasica, his saying, i. 285.\n\nNatural affection towards one\u2019s offspring, iv. 189-197.\n\nNatural philosophy, iii. 105.\n\nNatural Questions, Plutarch\u2019s, iii. 495-518.\n\nNature, of, iii. 131;\n  what is, 105;\n  things that are least in, 125;\n  animated, v. 160.\n\nNecessity, of, iii. 129;\n  nature of, 129;\n  defined, v. 299.\n\nNephalia and Melisponda, i. 59.\n\nNeptune, ii. 38, 39, 41.\n\nNero, i. 53; iv. 228, 229;\n  anecdote of, v. 123.\n\nNew diseases and how caused, iii. 426.\n\nNew-married couple, advice to, ii. 486-507.\n\nNew wine, of, iii. 279.\n\nNicander, apothegm of, i. 427, 441.\n\nNicias Maleotes, quoted, v. 459.\n\nNicias, the Athenian general, superstition of, i. 177; v. 107.\n\nNicias, the painter, anecdote of, ii. 173; v. 71.\n\nNicostratus and Archidamus, i. 74;\n  apothegm of, 221.\n\nNiger, anecdote of, i. 267.\n\nNightingale, of the, v. 189.\n\nNile, the river, v. 495;\n  overflow of the, iii. 160;\n  water of the, 415.\n\nNiloxenus, at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41.\n\nNiobe, i. 328.\n\nNoises in the night and day, iii. 406.\n\nNuma, of the reign of, iv. 208-210.\n\n\nO.\n\nOenopides, his discovery of the obliquity of the Zodiac, iii. 138.\n\nOgygia, an island west from Britain and its neighbor islands,\n      described, v. 281-283.\n\nOil, top of the, iii. 370;\n  on the sea, 503;\n  is transparent, v. 318;\n  does not easily freeze, 319.\n\nOld age, health, and sickness, iii. 192.\n\nOld men, love pure wine, iii. 221;\n  read best at a distance, 222-224;\n  easily foxed, 268-270;\n  in state affairs, v. 64-96.\n\nOligarchy, Monarchy, and Democracy, v. 395-398.\n\nOlympias, anecdotes of, ii. 494, 495.\n\nOlympus, a Phrygian player, i. 107, 108, 110, 112, 115, 116, 123.\n\nOmens and dreams, ii. 401, 402.\n\nOnesicrates, banquet of, i. 103, 133.\n\nOnomademus, wisdom of, i. 295; v. 129.\n\nOpinions of philosophers, iii. 104-193.\n\nOptatus, v. 171.\n\nOracle in Cilicia, iv. 55.\n\nOracles of Delphi, iii. 73.\n\nOracles, why they cease to give answers, iv. 3-64.\n\nOrestes slays his mother, v. 474.\n\nOrigin of things, opinions concerning the, iii. 107-113.\n\nOrontes, his saying, i. 188.\n\nOrpheus never imitated any one, i. 107.\n\nOrphic Fragments, iv. 59, 404.\n\nOryx, fables of the, v. 193.\n\nOsiris, iv. 75-135;\n  story about his birth, 74;\n  great actions of, 75;\n  his death, 76;\n  his body torn in pieces by Typhon, 80;\n  is identical with Serapis and Bacchus, 89;\n  with the bull Apis, 90;\n  sacred vestments of, 135.\n\nOthryadas, iv. 338.\n\nOtus, the bird, v. 163.\n\nOxen, teaching of, v. 193.\n\n\nP.\n\nPaeans, makers of, i. 110.\n\nPaedaretus, apothegm of, i. 429.\n\nPainter, neat saying of a, ii. 378.\n\nPainting is silent poetry, v. 402.\n\nPalladium in Ilium and in Rome, v. 461.\n\nPalm tree, of the, iii. 514.\n\nPanaetius, sayings of, i. 57.\n\nPancrates, i. 117.\n\nPandora\u2019s box, i. 306.\n\nPangaeus, mount, v. 480.\n\nPanthoidas, apothegm of, i. 427.\n\nPapirius Tolucer, v. 468.\n\nParallels, or a comparison between the actions of Greeks and Romans,\n      v. 450-476.\n\nParmenides, v. 357;\n  his philosophical opinions: of generation and corruption, iii. 128;\n  of necessity, 129;\n  of the world, 135;\n  of the moon, 145;\n  of the galaxy, 149;\n  of the earth, 155;\n  of earthquakes, 157;\n  of the soul, 163;\n  defended from the misrepresentations of the Epicureans, v. 352-354;\n  quoted, 357, 359, 381.\n\nPartridge, cunning of the, v. 185.\n\nParysatis, her saying, i. 188.\n\nPassions of the body, iii. 175.\n\nPassions of the soul, or diseases of the body: which are worse, iv.\n      504, 508.\n\nPaulus Aemilius, apothegm of, i. 232.\n\nPausanias, the Spartan traitor, v. 457.\n\nPausanius, i. 305;\n  apothegm of, 428.\n\nPauson the painter, iii. 73.\n\nPederasty, or the love of boys, iv. 259;\n  defended, 259, 260;\n  instances of its power, 284-286;\n  severely condemned, 304;\n  the connection is uncertain and short-lived, 307;\n  it ceases on the sprouting of the beard, 307.\n\nPelopidas, his saying, i. 225.\n\nPelops and his two sons, v. 470, 471.\n\nPemptides, iv. 272, 275, 279.\n\nPergamus, woman of, i. 374.\n\nPeriander, at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41;\n  tyrant of Corinth sends three hundred boys to be castrated, iv. 341;\n  the crime prevented, 342.\n\nPericles, anecdotes of, i. 15, 18, 66, 211, 332; ii. 309, 315; v. 67,\n      102;\n  his absolute sway over the Athenians, 106;\n  his soliloquy when about to address the people, 130, 131, 410, 413.\n\nPericlitus, a Lesbian harper, i. 108.\n\nPersaeus, anecdote of, i. 70.\n\nPerseus, king of Macedonia, his sorrow on losing his kingdom, i. 160.\n\nPersian Magi, killers of mice, ii. 96.\n\nPersian women, virtue of the, i. 347.\n\nPersians had a monarchy, v. 397.\n\nPestilence, relief from, a virgin sacrificed for, v. 472.\n\nPetron, doctrine of, iv. 30.\n\nPhaedimus, v. 171, 194.\n\nPhaeton, i. 141.\n\nPhalaris, brazen cow of, v. 474.\n\nPharnaces, of the moon, v. 265.\n\nPhasis, a river of Thrace, v. 482.\n\nPhayllus, iv. 282.\n\nPhemius, the poet, i. 105.\n\nPherecrates, fragment of, i. 124.\n\nPhidias, statue of Venus, ii. 498; iv. 133.\n\nPhilammon, verses in honor of Latona, Diana, and Apollo, i. 105.\n\nPhilemon and Magas, i. 45.\n\nPhilinus, iii. 69, 70.\n\nPhilip of Macedonia, examples from, i. 44, 45;\n  sayings of, 194-198, 305;\n  anecdotes of, ii. 141, 146, 147, 494; iii. 22; v. 115.\n\nPhilippides the comedian, ii. 430.\n\nPhilippus, his demonstration of the figure of the moon, ii. 173.\n\nPhilolaus, his philosophical opinions: of the nutriment of the world,\n      iii. 134;\n  of the essence of the sun, 142;\n  of the position of the earth, 155;\n  of the motion of the earth, 156.\n\nPhilosophers ought chiefly to converse with great men, ii. 368-377.\n\nPhilosophers, their various opinions. Of those sentiments concerning\n      nature with which philosophers were delighted, iii. 104-193.\n\nPhilosophical discourses at merry meetings, iii. 198-203.\n\nPhilosophy, threefold division of, iii. 104.\n\nPhilotas and Antigona, i. 504.\n\nPhilotas, son of Parmenio, i. 504.\n\nPhilotimus, the physician, i. 452; ii. 153.\n\nPhiloxenus, i. 125;\n  sayings of, ii. 42; iii. 3; iv. 289; v. 423.\n\nPhocian women, virtue of the, i. 343, 355.\n\nPhocion, his saying on the death of Alexander, i. 49;\n  his sayings, 70;\n  wife of, 102, 216; ii. 135, 298, 311, 321, 328; v. 83, 109, 118;\n  his magnanimity, 122;\n  his reply to Demades, 125, 142, 149.\n\nPhocus, a story of love respecting him, iv. 319.\n\nPhocylides the poet, quoted, i. 9, 462.\n\nPhoebidas, apothegm of, i. 431.\n\nPhoenix, tutor to Achilles, i. 9; ii. 150.\n\nPhrygian mood of music, i. 109.\n\nPhryne, the statue of, iii. 83.\n\nPhrynis, the musician, ii. 470.\n\nPieria and other women of Myus, i. 363, 364.\n\nPierus, the first that wrote in praise of the Muses, i. 105.\n\nPindar and Euthynous, i. 314.\n\nPindar, his sayings, i. 77, 114;\n  quoted, 143, 173, 174, 286, 293, 303, 304, 310, 313, 328;\n  his description of the state of the blessed, 336;\n  quoted, ii. 57, 143, 177, 193, 306;\n  quoted, iii. 9, 23, 74, 93, 95, 96, 194, 207, 218, 377, 455, 458,\n      491, 516;\n  quoted, iv. 10, 15, 96, 138, 145, 150, 163, 260, 289, 405;\n  quoted, v. 64, 111, 117, 148, 194, 197, 202, 214, 316, 331, 404;\n  anecdote of, 404, 440.\n\nPine, sacred to Neptune and Bacchus, iii. 318.\n\nPine trees, of, iii. 250.\n\nPinoteras, the fish, v. 205.\n\nPisias, of love, iv. 270 _et seq._\n\nPisistratus, i. 216;\n  anecdote of, iii. 41, 200.\n\nPittacus, sayings of, i. 31, 151;\n  his reply to Myrsilus, ii. 5;\n  at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, 3-41; iii. 50; iv. 231; v.\n      145.\n\nPitwater, of, iii. 514.\n\nPlace at table called Consular, iii. 210-212.\n\nPlace, of, iii. 127.\n\nPlague in Falerie and in Lacedaemon, v. 472.\n\nPlain of truth, iv. 29.\n\nPlanetiades, iv. 9, 11.\n\nPlants, grow how, iii. 190;\n  nourishment and growth of, 191.\n\nPlato, quoted, i. 9, 19, 24, 26;\n  saying of, 27;\n  quoted, 41, 57, 71, 74, 79;\n  on harmony, 115, 118;\n  quoted, 141, 173, 256, 264, 279, 287;\n  laws, 292;\n  quoted, 297, 311, 314, 321, 337, 339, 456;\n  quoted, ii. 49, 92, 100, 104, 106;\n  at the court of Dionysius, 108, 109, 141, 146;\n  and Socrates, 148, 150, 168, 174, 326;\n  concerning the soul, 328 _et seq._, 334;\n  quoted, 344, 352, 353, 355, 356, 359, 364, 455, 456, 457, 492, 496,\n      504;\n  quoted, iii. 19, 81;\n  his philosophical opinions: of the universe, 112, 114, 115;\n  of the understanding, 116;\n  what is God, 119;\n  of God, 121;\n  of matter and ideas, 123;\n  of causes and of bodies, 124;\n  of colors, 125;\n  of bodies, 126;\n  of place and time, 127, 128;\n  of motion, 128;\n  of necessity, 129;\n  of fate, 130;\n  of fortune, 131;\n  of the world, 134, 135, 137;\n  of the stars, 137-141;\n  of the sun, 142, 143;\n  of the moon, 145, 146;\n  of the rainbow, 152;\n  of earthquakes, 158;\n  of the sea, 159;\n  of the soul, 161-165;\n  of sight, 168;\n  of hearing, 170;\n  of the voice, 171;\n  of the echo, 172;\n  of divination, 176;\n  of generative seed, 177;\n  of the embryo, 183;\n  of reason in animals, 187;\n  of sleep, 189;\n  that plants are animals, 190;\n  quoted, 200, 201, 213, 221, 223, 243, 365, 368-370, 401, 462, 464,\n      499; iv. 18, 28, 30, 41, 45;\n  his opinion about daemons, 86, 87, 109, 115-117, 119, 146, 254,\n      261, 292, 305;\n  quoted, v. 10, 82, 103, 116, 120, 172, 257, 276, 288, 293, 295,\n      297, 302, 305, 306, 338, 355, 364, 377, 381, 412, 425-433, 435,\n      440, 441, 444.\n\nPleasure not attainable according to Epicurus, ii. 157-203.\n\nPleasures from bad music, iii. 376.\n\nPlistoanax, apothegm of, i. 430.\n\nPlurality of worlds, iv. 29-39.\n\nPlutarch, his rules for the preservation of health, i. 251-279;\n  his Symposiacs, iii. 197-460;\n  his natural questions, 495-518;\n  on the immortality of the soul, iii. 164, iv. 169; v. 393;\n  consolatory letter to his wife, 386-394;\n  his Platonic questions, 425-449;\n  his spurious remains, 450-509.\n\nPoet, love makes a man a, iii. 217-219.\n\nPoetry, essay on. How a young man ought to hear poems, ii. 42-94.\n\nPolemon, his kind reply, i. 55.\n\nPolicy or government defined, v. 396.\n\nPolitical precepts, v. 97-156.\n\nPoltys, saying of, i. 189.\n\nPolus the tragedian, v. 69.\n\nPolybus, of seven-months\u2019 infants, iii. 185.\n\nPolycephalus, the nome, i. 108.\n\nPolycratidas, apothegm of, i. 431.\n\nPolycrita, a woman of Naxos, i. 364, 366.\n\nPolydorus, apothegm of, i. 430.\n\nPolyhistor, his Third Book of Italian History, v. 476.\n\nPolymnestus, his improvements in music, i. 107, 110, 112, 123.\n\nPolypus, why it changes color, iii. 506;\n  many-colored, v. 202.\n\nPolysperchon\u2019s treachery, i. 64, 71.\n\nPompey, his great actions and sayings, i. 241 _et seq._, 290;\n  statues of, 293, v. 70, 102, 112, 114;\n  owed his success to Sylla, 115.\n\nPorsena of Clusium, war with the Romans, v. 451, 456.\n\nPorus, an Indian king, i. 202.\n\nPosidonius, his opinion of fate, iii. 130;\n  of a vacuum, 137;\n  of eclipses, v. 262.\n\nPossible and contingent defined, v. 299.\n\nPostumia, chastity of, i. 290.\n\nPower, necessity, &c., defined, v. 300.\n\nPraise, inordinate, a sign of a flatterer, ii, 116, 117, 120;\n  young people are often spoiled by it, 123.\n\nPreservation of health, rules for, i. 251-279.\n\nPriam and Polydore, v. 465.\n\nPrice of peace, women given as the, v. 468.\n\nPriest of Hercules, iii. 90.\n\nPrinciple and element, difference between, iii. 106.\n\nPrinciple of cold, v. 309-330.\n\nPrinciples, what they are, iii. 106.\n\nPrize for poets at the games, iii. 316.\n\nProcles, tyrant of Epidaurus, puts Timarchus to death, iii. 89;\n  his own unhappy end, _ib._\n\nProcreation of the soul as discussed in the Timaeus of Plato, ii.\n      326-367.\n\nProgress in virtue, how it may be ascertained, ii. 446-474.\n\nPrometheus, anecdote of, i. 289.\n\nProserpine, the same as Isis, iv. 88;\n  and Cora, v. 285, 286.\n\nProsodia, songs called, i. 106.\n\nProtagoras quoted, i. 332.\n\nProtogenes, iv. 257, 258, 260-265.\n\nProvidence, of God, iv. 140-188; v. 305;\n  of the inferior gods, 306;\n  of the daemons, 307, 308.\n\nPtolemaeus Philadelphus, i. 25.\n\nPtolemaeus Soter, iv. 88.\n\nPtolemy Lagus, anecdote of, i. 45;\n  his saying, 202; ii. 177.\n\nPublius Decius, his dream, v. 462.\n\nPublius Nigidius, v. 96.\n\nPunishment of the wicked, why so long delayed, iv. 140-188.\n\nPupius Piso, the rhetorician, iv. 245.\n\nPurple shell fish, v. 205.\n\nPylades and Orestes, their friendship, i. 465.\n\nPyraechmes\u2019s horses, v. 455.\n\nPyrander, his Fourth Book of Peloponnesian Histories, v. 474.\n\nPyrandrus, the commissary, v. 469.\n\nPyrrhon, the Stoic philosopher, anecdote of, ii. 467.\n\nPyrrhus the Epirot, his saying, i. 207.\n\nPythagoras, his aphorisms, i. 28, 29;\n  of music, 130;\n  quoted, 175;\n  aphorism, 179, 294;\n  symbols of, 454, 471;\n  his unseasonable reproof, ii. 148;\n  his joy on discovering the relation to each other of the three\n      sides of a right-angled triangle, 174;\n  his philosophical opinions: of the principles of things, iii. 109;\n  of the unity of God, 121;\n  of geniuses and heroes, 122;\n  of matter, 123;\n  of causes, 124;\n  of bodies, 126;\n  of time, 127;\n  of motion, 128;\n  of generation and corruption, 129;\n  of the world, 132-137;\n  of the zodiac, 138;\n  of the summer and winter solstice, 143;\n  of the moon, 145;\n  of the zones, 156;\n  of the soul, 161-164;\n  of the voice, 172;\n  of divination, 176;\n  of generative seed, 177;\n  of reason in animals, 187;\n  precepts of, derived his philosophy from Egyptian priests, iv. 72.\n\nPythagorean philosophy of dreams, daemons, ii. 412, 413.\n\nPythagoreans, precept of, iii. 22;\n  why they do not eat fish, 422-426.\n\nPytheas, his saying, i. 213; iii. 159;\n  apothegm of, v. 107, 110.\n\nPythes, the Lydian, i. 382.\n\nPythian games, iii. 316.\n\nPythian priestess, iv. 8, 9, 62, 63;\n  why she now ceases to deliver her oracles in verse, iii. 69-103.\n\nPythocles, his Third Book of Italian History, v. 460;\n  Third Book of the Georgics, 476.\n\nPythoclides the flute player, i. 114.\n\nPython of Aenos, ii. 314.\n\n\nQ.\n\nQuarry of Carystus, iv. 54.\n\nQuestions or Causes, Second Book of, v. 475.\n\n\nR.\n\nRaillery, of, iii. 229-240.\n\nRainbow, of the, iii. 151.\n\nRain, snow, and hail, of, iii. 151.\n\nRational faculty, of the, v. 441.\n\nReason, beasts make use of, v. 218-233.\n\nReason, habit of our, iii. 166.\n\nRemarkable speeches of some obscure\nmen amongst the Spartans, i. 432-440.\n\nRemora or Echeneis, iii. 252.\n\nReproof, how to be administered, ii. 138-156.\n\nRespiration or breathing, iii, 173.\n\nRhesus and Similius, v. 466.\n\nRhodope and Haemus, mountains, v. 491.\n\nRiddles and their solutions, ii. 19, 20.\n\nRoman questions, ii. 204-264.\n\nRoman senator and his wife, iv. 233-235.\n\nRomans, fortune of the, iv. 198-219.\n\nRome, saved by the cackling of geese, iv. 217;\n  favored by fortune, 219.\n\nRomulus, his birth and education, iv. 206-208;\n  murdered in the senate, v. 470;\n  and Remus, suckled by a she-wolf, 473.\n\nRules for the preservation of health, i. 251-279.\n\nRutilius the usurer, v. 419.\n\n\nS.\n\nSabinus of Galatia, iv. 308.\n\nSacadas, a flute player, i. 109, 110, 112.\n\nSacred games, garlands of, iii. 411.\n\nSacrificed beasts, iii. 361.\n\nSagaris, a river in Phrygia, v. 492.\n\nSalmantica, women of, i. 352.\n\nSalt and cummin, why does Homer call it divine, iii. 336.\n\nSalt given to cattle, iii. 497;\n  not found in fruit, 498.\n\nSappho, i. 42, 114; ii. 506;\n  quoted, iii. 95, 263;\n  quoted, iv. 260.\n\nSappho\u2019s measures, grace in, iii. 74.\n\nSardanapalus, his luxury and lust, i. 497.\n\nSardians and Smyrnaeans, v. 468.\n\nSaturn and his four children, v. 456, 457.\n\nSatyrus the orator, i. 47.\n\nScamander, a river in Troas, v. 493.\n\nScaurus, his magnanimity, i. 295.\n\nScilurus, anecdote of, iv. 244.\n\nScipio the Elder, apothegm of, i. 229; ii. 475; iv. 201; v. 96, 112,\n      114, 136.\n\nScipio the Younger, his sayings and great actions, i. 235-239.\n\nScopas, saying of, ii. 303.\n\nScythinus, verses of, iii. 86.\n\nSea calves, of, v. 210.\n\nSea, of the, iii. 158;\n  ebbing and flowing of the, 159;\n  food of the, 302-306;\n  made hot by wind, 501.\n\nSea-sickness, iii. 502.\n\nSea water nourishes not trees, iii. 495;\n  upon wine, 502;\n  oil on the, 503.\n\nSeed, nature of generative, iii. 177;\n  that fall on the oxen\u2019s horns, 368;\n  watering of, 496;\n  watered by thunder showers, 498.\n\nSeleucus the mathematician, iii. 159.\n\nSeleucus Callinicus, anecdote of, iv. 237.\n\nSelf-praise. How a man may inoffensively praise himself without being\n      liable to envy, ii. 306-325.\n\nSemiramis, her saying, i. 187, 497; iv. 85.\n\nSeneca, anecdote of, i. 53.\n\nSenses, of the, iii. 164;\n  represent what is true, 165;\n  number of the, 165;\n  actions of the, 166.\n\nSentiments concerning Nature with which Philosophers were delighted,\n      iii. 104-193.\n\nSerapio, iii. 74, 79, 81, 82.\n\nSerapis is Pluto, iv. 88, 89.\n\nSerpent and the Aetolian woman, v. 188.\n\nSeven months\u2019 infants, of, iii. 184.\n\nSeven Wise Men, Banquet of the, ii. 3-41.\n\nServius Tullius, his birth, elevation, and prosperous reign, iv. 212,\n      213.\n\nShadows, guests called, iii. 381.\n\nSheep bitten by wolves, iii. 254.\n\nShe-wolves, of, iii. 517.\n\nShips in winter, sailing of, iii. 500.\n\nShoe pinches, where the, ii. 494.\n\nSibyl with her frantic grimaces, iii. 74.\n\nSight, of our, iii. 168.\n\nSilence commended, iv. 230, 243.\n\nSimonides, quoted, i. 149, 257, 295, 305, 309, 318;\n  quoted, ii. 44, 101, 136, 436, 457, 471;\n  quoted, iii. 22, 87, 259, 409, 451, 459, 473;\n  quoted, iv. 158;\n  saying of, v. 66, 68, 71, 121.\n\nSipylus, mount, v. 489.\n\nSiramnes, saying of, i. 185.\n\nSleep or death, causes of, iii. 188;\n  whether it appertains to the soul or body, 189.\n\nSmelling, of, iii. 170.\n\nSmyrna and Cinyras, v. 464.\n\nSnow, preservation of, iii. 350.\n\nSoclarus, iv. 292; v. 156, 158, 160, 166, 169, 170, 171, 216.\n\nSocrates, anecdotes of, i. 11, 13, 23, 26, 38, 53, 141, 150, 162;\n  rules of health, 255;\n  quoted, 307, 310, 312, 337; ii. 46, 148, 150, 338, 441;\n  his Daemon, 378-423, 441, 495; iii. 4, 19, 35, 112, 121, 123; iv.\n      249; v. 93, 359, 361, 362-364, 377, 381.\n\nSocrates, his Second Book of Thracian History, v. 462.\n\nSoil, deep, for wheat, iii. 504;\n  lean soil for barley, 504.\n\nSolon and Croesus, anecdote of, ii. 122.\n\nSolon, quoted, i. 155, 297;\n  at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41;\n  quoted, 297, 454, 487;\n  quoted,\niii. 50; iv. 72;\n  quoted, 260;\n  anecdote of, 304; v. 89, 113, 117, 118, 131.\n\nSophocles, quoted, i. 46, 57, 244, 288;\n  Thamyras, 39;\n  Frag., 58, 63;\n  Tyre, 206, 467;\n  Antig., 51, 462;\n  Oed. Tyr., 179, 470;\n  quoted, ii. 45, 57, 61, 72;\n  criticisms on, 72;\n  Frag., 173, 241, 244, 298, 431, 452, 456, 470, 495;\n  Oed. Tyr., 60, 172, 442, 476, 495;\n  Antig., 110;\n  Trachin., 311;\n  Electra, 440;\n  quoted, iii. 97, 210, 222;\n  Frag., 7;\n  Antig. 45;\n  Oed. Tyr., 235, 474;\n  Oed. Col., 232;\n  Electra, 437;\n  quoted, iv. 87, 246, 287, 304;\n  Oed. Tyr., 197, 202;\n  Trachin., 281;\n  Antig., 239, 283, 404;\n  Frag., 221, 226, 274, 284, 301;\n  quoted, v. 69, 76, 158, 216;\n  Oed. Col., 68;\n  Frag., 75, 84;\n  anecdote of, 68.\n\nSostratus, his Second Book of Tuscan History, v. 468.\n\nSotades, jest of, i. 25.\n\nSoterichus, the musician, i. 103, 112.\n\nSoul of Ajax, her place in hell, iii. 442.\n\nSoul or body, death appertains to, iii. 189.\n\nSoul, procreation of the, ii. 326-367;\n  its nature and essence, iii. 161, 163;\n  parts of the, 162;\n  in what part of the body it resides, 163;\n  motion of the, 163;\n  immortality of the, 164;\n  principal part of the, 173;\n  three sorts of motion in the, v. 371;\n  state of, after death, 393, 394;\n  ancienter than the body, 432.\n\nSouls dispersed into the earth, moon, &c., v. 438.\n\nSounds in the night and day, iii. 406.\n\nSows, tame and wild, iii. 508.\n\nSpace, of, iii. 127.\n\nSparta had an oligarchy, v. 397.\n\nSpeech composed of nouns and verbs, v. 444.\n\nSpeech of a statesman, what it should be, v. 107.\n\nSperm, whether it be a body, iii. 177.\n\nSpermatic emission of women, iii. 177.\n\nSphodrias, v. 118.\n\nSpiders, labor of the, v. 174.\n\nSponge, of the, v. 205.\n\nSpurious remains of Plutarch, v. 450-509.\n\nStar-fish, subtlety of the, v. 201.\n\nStark drunk, those that are, iii. 281.\n\nStars, essence of the, iii. 138;\n  what figure they are, 139;\n  order and place of, 139;\n  motion and circulation of, 140;\n  whence do they receive their light, 140;\n which are called the Dioscuri, the twins, or Castor and Pollux,\n      141;\n  how they prognosticate, 141;\n  number of the, whether odd or even, 446.\n\nStasicrates proposes to turn Mount Athos into a statue of Alexander,\n      i. 495.\n\nStesichorus, i. 109, 112; iv. 497.\n\nSteward of a feast, iii. 212-216.\n\nStilpo, the philosopher, i. 13, 76, 144, 161;\n  anecdote of, ii. 468;\n  defended, v. 365-367.\n\nStoics speak greater improbabilities than the poets, iii. 194-196;\n  their opinions concerning daemons, iv. 24;\n  common conceptions against the, 372-427;\n  contradictions of the, 428-477.\n\nStrabo, quoted, i. 27.\n\nStrato, i. 155; iii. 163; v. 161.\n\nStratonica of Galatia, i. 373.\n\nStratonicus, anecdote of, ii. 298; iii. 21.\n\nStrymon, a river in Thrace, v. 491.\n\nSummer and winter, cause of, iii. 141.\n\nSummer and winter solstice, iii. 143.\n\nSun, essence of the, iii. 141;\n  magnitude of the, 142;\n  figure or shape of the, 143;\n  turning and returning of the, 143;\n  eclipses of the, 144.\n\nSuperstition of the Gauls, Scythians, and Carthaginians, i. 182, 183.\n\nSuperstition, or indiscreet devotion, i. 168-184;\n  folly of, ii. 387.\n\nSupper, many guests at, iii. 323.\n\nSupper-room, why too narrow at first for guests, iii. 326.\n\nSuppers of the ancients, iii. 255-259.\n\nSwallows in the house, iii. 419;\n  intelligence of the, v. 174.\n\nSylla, i. 32-35;\n  anecdote of, v. 72, 115, 135.\n\nSymposiacs, or table discourses, iii. 197-460.\n\nSynorix and Camma, iv. 302.\n\n\nT.\n\nTable, dignity of places at, iii. 210-212.\n\nTables and lamps of the ancients, iii. 372.\n\nTalkativeness, or garrulity, iv. 220-253.\n\nTalk, deliberate or tumultuous, iii. 395.\n\nTanais, a river in Scythia, v. 494.\n\nTarpeia, a virgin, the story of, v. 460.\n\nTaste, of, iii. 170.\n\nTaxiles of India, i. 201.\n\nTaygetus, mount, v. 498.\n\nTears of the hart, iii. 507.\n\nTears of wild boars, iii. 507.\n\nTelamon and Periboea, v. 467.\n\nTelamon and Phocus, v. 466.\n\nTelecrus, apothegm of, i. 431.\n\nTelegonus, son of Ulysses, v. 476.\n\nTelephanes of Megara, i. 117.\n\nTelephus, i. 289.\n\nTelesias the Theban, an eminent flute-player, i. 125.\n\nTelesphorus, in an iron cage, iii. 31.\n\nTemple of Apollo, iv. 478-498.\n\nTeres, his saying, i. 189.\n\nTeribazus, anecdote of, i. 176.\n\nTerpander, the musician, fined by the Ephori, and why? i. 91, 92;\n  an inventor of ancient music, 102, 105, 109;\n  an excellent composer to the harp, 106, 112;\n  added the octave to the heptachord, 102, 122.\n\nTeuthras, mount, v. 504.\n\nThales, at the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, ii. 3-41;\n  first of philosophers; the Ionic sect took its denomination from\n      him, iii. 107;\n  his philosophical opinions; difference between a principle and an\n      element, 106;\n  that the intelligence of the world was God, 121;\n  of geniuses and heroes, 122;\n  of division of bodies, 126;\n  of necessity, 129;\n  of the division of heaven, 137;\n  of the eclipses of the sun, 144;\n  that the moon borrows her light from the sun, 146;\n  that the earth is globular, and the centre of the universe, 155;\n  of earthquakes, 157;\n  of the overflow of the Nile, 160;\n  of the soul, 161; iv. 337, 480.\n\nThaletas, a composer, i. 110, 112;\n  power of his music, 133.\n\nThamyras, the singer, i. 105.\n\nTheanor, ii. 395, 396.\n\nThebes, liberation of, ii. 414-423.\n\nThectamenes, apothegm of, i. 411.\n\nThemisteas, apothegm of, i. 410.\n\nThemistocles, quoted, i. 73;\n  his saying, 208;\n  suspected of treason, 290, 296, 480;\n  quoted, ii. 97, 311, 471;\n  his kind reception by the Persian king, iii. 21, 30; iv. 208, 361,\n      365; v. 101, 116, 120, 121, 127.\n\nTheo, iii. 70, 71, 74, 88.\n\nTheocritus, his remark and death, i. 25, 73; ii. 380; iii. 516.\n\nTheodorus, saying of, i. 142; ii. 321, 349; iii. 31;\n  his Book of Transformations, v. 464.\n\nTheognis, i. 473; ii. 59; iii. 506.\n\nTheon, ii. 157 _et seq._; v. 273-275.\n\nTheophilus, his Third Book of Italian History, v. 459;\n  Second Book of Peloponnesian Histories, 470.\n\nTheophrastus, sayings of, i. 276, 304, 442; ii. 303; iii. 45, 64,\n      218, 219, 334; v. 202, 427.\n\nTheopompus, his sayings, i. 217, 410; v. 137.\n\nTheotimus, his Italian History, v. 456.\n\nTheramenes, anecdote of, i. 306.\n\nThermodon, a river in Scythia, v. 495.\n\nThero, anecdote of, iv. 286.\n\nTheseus and his son Hippolytus, v. 471.\n\nThespesius, iv. 177, 182 _et seq._, 188.\n\nThirst, cause of, iii. 341.\n\nThorycion, apothegm of, i. 411.\n\nThrasonides quoted, ii. 297.\n\nThucydides, quoted, i. 70, 76, 472, 490;\n  quoted, ii. 98, 117, 149, 152, 458;\n  quoted, iii. 88;\n  quoted, iv. 141;\n  quoted, v. 65, 106, 403.\n\nThunder, of, iii. 150.\n\nThymbris, and his son Rustius, v. 466.\n\nTides, of, iii. 159.\n\nTigris, the river, v. 507.\n\nTimaeus, his opinion of tides, iii. 159.\n\nTimesias, the oracle and, i. 471;\n  anecdote of, v. 127.\n\nTime, essence and nature of, iii. 127, 128.\n\nTimoclea, at the taking of Thebes, i. 376.\n\nTimoleon, ii. 314.\n\nTimotheus, the musician, anecdote of, i. 92, 106, 112; ii. 83, 306;\n      v. 76.\n\nTitus Quinctius, apothegm of, i. 230.\n\nTmolus, mount, v. 486.\n\nTorpedo, or crampfish, v. 201.\n\nTorquatus and Clusia, v. 459.\n\nTortoise, their care for their young, v. 209.\n\nTraining of children, i. 3-32.\n\nTranquillity of the mind, the, i. 136-167.\n\nTransmutation of bodies, v. 14.\n\nTrees and seeds, watering of, iii. 496.\n\nTrees not nourished by sea-water, iii. 495.\n\nTriangles, of, v. 433.\n\nTrisimachus, his book of Foundations of Cities, v. 455.\n\nTrochilus and crocodile, v. 206.\n\nTroilus wept less than Priam, i. 323.\n\nTrojan women, virtue of the, i. 342.\n\nTrophonius and Agamedes, i. 313.\n\nTrue friendship, of, i. 464-474; ii. 100-134.\n\nTrue happiness, of, v. 392.\n\nTullus Hostilius, v. 455.\n\nTunnies, dim sight of the, v. 204.\n\nTyphon, in Egyptian mythology, iv. 80, 81, 86, 88, 91, 92, 99, 101,\n      105, 110, 114, 118, 122.\n\nTyrrhene women, virtue of the, i. 349.\n\n\nU.\n\nUlysses, i. 160;\n in the island of Circe, v. 218 _et seq._\n\nUnity of God. Of the word \u03b5\u1f30 engraven over the gate of the temple of\n      Apollo at Delphi, iv. 478-498.\n\n\n\n\nUniverse, whether it is one, iii. 114;\n  division of the, v. 429.\n\nUnlearned Prince, Discourse to an, iv. 323-330.\n\nUsurers, what sort of men they are, 417.\n\nUsury, evils of, v. 412-424.\n\n\nV.\n\nVacuum, of a, iii. 126;\n  there can be none in nature, iv. 33;\n  suppose there were, it would have no beginning, middle, or end, 34.\n\nValeria and Cloelia, i. 356.\n\nValeria Tusculanaria, v. 464.\n\nValerius Conatus swallowed up alive, v. 455.\n\nVenus\u2019s hands wounded by Diomedes, iii. 441.\n\nVerses seasonably and unseasonably applied, iii. 436.\n\nVice and virtue, ii. 482-485.\n\nVice, whether it is sufficient to render a man unhappy, iv. 499-503.\n\nVines irrigated with wine, iii. 513;\n  rank of leaves, iii. 513.\n\nVirtue and vice, ii. 482-485.\n\nVirtue may be taught, i. 78-81.\n\nVirtue or fortune, to which of these was due the greatness and glory\n      of Rome? iv. 198-219.\n\nVirtue, progress in, ii. 446-474.\n\nVirtues of women, i. 340-384.\n\nVision, doctrine of, iii. 168; v. 236 _et seq._\n\nVoice is incorporeal, iii. 172.\n\nVoice, of the, iii. 171.\n\nVowels and semi-vowels, iii. 438.\n\n\nW.\n\nWater made colder by stones and lead, iii. 348.\n\nWater or fire, which is more useful? v. 331-337.\n\nWater, white and black, iii. 518.\n\nWealth, the love of, ii. 294-305.\n\nWell water, change of the temperature in, iii. 347.\n\nWest wind the swiftest, iii, 515.\n\nWhale, of the, v. 207.\n\nWheat, sow, in clay, iii. 505.\n\nWhether an aged man ought to meddle in state affairs, v. 64-96.\n\nWhether the passions of the soul, or diseases of the body, are\n      worse, iv. 504-508.\n\nWhether \u2019twere rightly said, \u201cLive concealed,\u201d iii. 3-10.\n\n\n\n\nWhether vice is sufficient to render a man unhappy, iv. 499-503.\n\nWhirlwinds, of, iii. 150.\n\nWhy the oracles cease to give answers, iv. 3-64.\n\nWicked, delay of Providence in punishing the, iv. 140-188.\n\nWidows in India, iv. 502.\n\nWild beasts, steps of, iii. 509;\n  their tracks, 509.\n\nWild boars, tears of the, iii. 507.\n\nWinds, of, iii. 154.\n\nWine, whether it is potentially cold, iii. 272-274;\n  straining of, 351;\n  middle of, 370;\n  sea water upon, 502;\n  irrigation with, 513.\n\nWinter and summer, cause of, iii. 141, 154.\n\nWinter, ships in, iii. 500;\n  sea least hot in, 501.\n\nWise Men, the Seven, Banquet of, ii. 3-41;\n  their names, iv. 480.\n\nWoman, of Pergamus, i. 374.\n\nWoman of Thessaly torn in pieces by dogs, v. 463.\n\nWomen, the virtues of, i. 340-384;\n  barrenness in, iii. 181;\n  are hardly foxed, 268-270;\n  temper of, 270-272;\n  given as the price of peace, v. 468.\n\nWord \u03b5\u03b9 at Apollo\u2019s temple at Delphi. iv. 478-498.\n\nWorld, how it was brought into its present order, iii. 113.\n\nWorld, of the, iii. 132;\n  figure of the, 133;\n  whether it be an animal, 133;\n  whether it is eternal and incorruptible, 133;\n  its nutriment, 134;\n  from what element was it raised, 134;\n  in what form and order was it composed, 135;\n  cause of its inclination, 136;\n  thing which is beyond the, 136;\n  what parts on the right and left hand, 137.\n\nWorlds, plurality of, iv. 29-38.\n\nWrestling, of, iii. 246.\n\n\nX.\n\nXanthippe, wife of Socrates, anecdotes of, i. 53, 292.\n\nXenaenetus, v. 109.\n\nXenocrates, anecdote of; i. 71, 442;\n  his opinions concerning the soul, ii. 327, 439;\n  of triangles, iii. 24, 139, 494;\n  his opinion about daemons, iv. 17, 87;\n  saying of, v. 10, 494.\n\nXenocritus, a composer, i. 110, 380.\n\nXenodamus, a composer, i. 110.\n\nXenophanes, his reply, i. 65, 183;\n  his philosophical opinions, iii. 134, 138, 141, 144, 145, 150, 155;\n  quoted, ii. 49; iv. 291.\n\nXenophon, quoted, i. 137;\n  maxim of, 281, 333, 447; ii. 115, 144, 178, 307;\n  the scene of his old age, iii. 24; v. 67, 72, 121, 139.\n\nXerxes, his saying, i. 39, 187;\n  and Arimanes, iii. 59, 60;\n  invasion of Greece, v. 451, 452.\n\n\nY.\n\nYear, length of, in different planets, iii. 147.\n\n\nZ.\n\nZaleucus, laws of, ii. 315.\n\nZaratas, ii. 327.\n\nZeno, saying of, i. 56;\n  anecdotes of, 72, 142, 283; ii. 321, 365, 455;\n  quoted, 467, 481; iii. 25, 113, 125, 128;\n  his definition of virtue, 462;\n  anecdote of, iv. 225; v. 382.\n\nZenocrates, v. 288, 377, 441.\n\nZeuxidamus, apothegm of, i. 410.\n\nZeuxippus, dialogue on health, i. 251-279; ii. 157 _et seq._;\n      iv. 270, 278, 288.\n\nZeuxis, reply of, i. 468.\n\nZopyrus Byzantius, his Third Book of Histories, v. 473.\n\nZoroaster, ii. 357; iv. 106.","title":"Plutarch's essays and miscellanies, Vol. 5 (of 5) : $b Comprising all his works collected under the title of \"Morals\"","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":186088}