{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_78147/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_78147","id":"gutenberg_78147","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/78147","summary":null,"tags":["Classical literature","Essays","Ethics","Philosophy"],"text":"Transcriber\u2019s notes:\n\nItalic text is marked _thus_.\nSpaced gesperrt text is marked ~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: _Venus weeping over the body of Adonis._\n\n_From the painting by Emanuel Benner._]\n\n\n\n\nPLUTARCH\u2019S ESSAYS AND MISCELLANIES\n\n  Comprising all his Works Collected\n  under the Title of \u201cMorals\u201d \u00b7 Translated\n  from the Greek by Several Hands\n  Corrected and Revised by WILLIAM\n  W. GOODWIN, Ph.D., Professor of\n  Greek Literature in Harvard University\n  In Five Volumes \u00b7 Volume Two\n\n[Illustration: HONOS ET VIRTVS]\n\n\n  BOSTON \u00b7 LITTLE, BROWN\n  AND COMPANY \u00b7 MCMXI\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\n  Printers\n  S. J. Parkhill & Co., Boston, U. S. A.\n\n\n\n\n  CONTENTS OF VOLUME SECOND.\n\n  WITH THE TRANSLATORS\u2019 NAMES.\n\n\n  THE BANQUET OF THE SEVEN WISE MEN.\n\n  By Roger Davis, A.M.\n\n  Periander prepares the banquet, 4. A question proposed to Bias of\n  Priene, 4. Thales ascertained the height of one of the pyramids, and\n  how, 5. Need of preparation for an entertainment, 6. Conversation by\n  the way, 6, 7. Arrival of the company, 7. Anacharsis the Scythian;\n  Eumetis, 8. The seat assigned to a person a frivolous consideration,\n  9. A prodigy: a child born of a mare, 10. The explanation, 11. Esop\n  relates the fable of the Lydian mule, 11. The frugality of Periander,\n  12. Anacharsis is questioned respecting the Scythians, 12. A letter\n  is read from Amasis, king of Egypt, proposing a question, 13. Bias\n  suggests an answer to the question, 14. The seven wise men, in turn,\n  reply to the question how a people should be governed, 15. The\n  discussion continued, 16, 17. Answers to other questions, 17, 18.\n  Riddles and their solutions, 19, 20. How should a state be governed?\n  20. How to govern a house, 21, 22. Talk about drinking wine, 23.\n  The end is worth more than the means, 24. The end of drinking is to\n  nourish and increase friendship, 24. What measure of outward good\n  should be regarded as sufficient, 26. A spare diet, as recommended\n  by Hesiod, 27. Extremes to be avoided, 28. Enjoy freely what we\n  have, but with moderation, 29. A necessity for eating and drinking,\n  31. But fatal distempers often ensue, 32. The story of Arion and\n  the dolphins, 33-36. The story of Hesiod and the dolphins, 36, 37.\n  Another story about dolphins, 38. The creatures obey the impulse of\n  God, 39. \u039c\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f04\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd, \u201cDo not overdo,\u201d 40,\n  41.\n\n\n  HOW A YOUNG MAN OUGHT TO HEAR POEMS.\n\n  By Simon Ford, D.D.\n\n  Young people are fond of fiction, 42. The danger hence arising,\n  42, 43. We would not interdict to them the reading of poetry, 44.\n  But give them wholesome advice touching the matter, 45. Poets deal\n  much in fiction: it belongs to the very essence of poetry, 46. This\n  contributes greatly to the entertainment of the reader, 46. Evident\n  absurdities must be rejected, 47. Do not receive as literal truth\n  what the poets say of the gods or of the departed, 48. Poetry is\n  an imitative art: the exactness of the imitation, even of a foul\n  action, gives pleasure, 50. If odious and abominable conduct is\n  to be represented in poetry, the expression must correspond, 51.\n  But the poets, especially Homer, signify their disapproval of such\n  conduct, 52, 53. They often introduce evil examples to promote\n  moral improvement, 55. The contradictions among poets lessen the\n  credit of what they say, and thus diminish the possible danger, 55.\n  The poets often furnish antidotes to the poison they deal out, 57,\n  58. We may also quote the philosophers against the poets, 59. In\n  using the names of the gods, the poets often mean only the powers\n  of nature, or fortune, or some second cause, 61, 62. They often use\n  words tropically, and then are not to be taken in the literal sense,\n  64, 65. Poetry requires variety, hence it never represents the same\n  persons, not even the gods, as uniformly virtuous or prosperous, 66,\n  67. Therefore the young man must not approve or admire every thing\n  which is said of the heroes of poetry, 68. Instance, Achilles and\n  Agamemnon, 69. Several passages in Homer criticised, 69-72. Criticism\n  on Sophocles, 72. More criticisms and explanations of the Iliad,\n  74-84, 89, 90. Young men may be taught good morals, and how they\n  differ from bad, by the poets, _ib._ Boys may learn something\n  useful even from passages wicked and absurd, 83. We may show young\n  persons how passages in the poets, of good tendency, are confirmed by\n  the language of philosophers, 91. Plato and the poets sometimes speak\n  alike, 92. Thus may poetry and philosophy be reconciled, 93, 94.\n\n\n  OF ENVY AND HATRED\n\n  By Mr. P. Lancaster, of Baliol College in Oxford\n\n  Envy and Hatred are alike opposed to Benevolence, 95. Yet they are\n  distinct passions, 95. Their points of difference, 95, _et seq._\n  Hatred regards the hated person as evil; envy regards only the\n  felicity of others, 95. Hatred may be directed against brutes; envy\n  is directed only against man, 96. Brutes may hate but never envy\n  brutes, 96. Envy is always unjust; hatred is often just, 96. Hatred\n  increases as the object grows worse; envy rises higher as the object\n  increases in virtue, 97. Envy often ceases when the object has risen\n  to supreme power; hatred never ceases, 98.\n\n\n  HOW TO KNOW A FLATTERER FROM A FRIEND\n\n  By Mr. Tullie, of Queen\u2019s College\n\n  Self-love and self-admiration expose a man to the attempts of\n  flatterers, 100. Mean, poor, and worthless people are not flattered,\n  but those of a generous and noble nature, 101. In the choice of\n  friends, let us be wary, yet not over scrupulous, 102. A parasite\n  who is cringing and obsequious is not difficult of detection, 103.\n  The great danger is from those who personate the true friend, yet\n  are selfish and insincere, 104. True friendship arises from a\n  conformity of tempers and dispositions, 105. The flatterer attempts\n  such a conformity, 106. It is not natural and uniform, but a mere\n  disguise, 107. The flatterer is mutable and inconstant, 109. He only\n  reflects the humors of other men, 109. The true friend imitates\n  and commends only what is worthy, 110. The flatterer copies the\n  faults and blemishes of friends, 110, 111. He pretends to have the\n  same diseases, 111. And to suffer the same ill-treatment, 112.\n  Counterfeiting the good qualities of a friend, he yields him the\n  pre-eminence, 112. The flatterer often overdoes, in the effort to\n  make himself agreeable, 114. The true friend is sometimes under the\n  necessity of giving pain, 115. The flatterer deals out undeserved\n  encomium, against which our own conscience protests, 116. Sometimes\n  he utters praise as if he heard it from a third person, 119.\n  Sometimes he flatters men in their vices by deriding the contrary\n  virtues, 119, 120. There is a silent flattery, as when a man yields\n  his place to another, 121. The parasite praises the man of money,\n  122. His censures, if he deliver any, fall upon venial faults, not\n  on real crimes, 124. He flatters, even while pretending to blame,\n  125. Men, are flattered when reproved for faults directly the\n  reverse of their real ones, 126. The friend aims at the improvement\n  of our character; the flatterer works on our weak spots, 128, 129.\n  The friend is open-hearted and natural; the flatterer ceremonious\n  and obsequious, 130. The real friend will assist in no dishonest\n  endeavor: the flatterer has no scruples about the proposal, 131,\n  132, 134, 135. The kindness of a friend is without parade; that of\n  a flatterer is attended with bustle and show, 133. The flatterer\n  reminds us of his past services; the true friend never, 134. An\n  accurate self-knowledge defends against flattery, 137, 138. We\n  have no need of flattery, 138. Causeless censure may be equally\n  mischievous with causeless praise, 138. How to avoid causeless\n  reprehension of others, 139, et seq. Eliminate from the affair\n  all self-interest, 140. Free our speech from reproachful words,\n  141. Deliver ourselves with seriousness and dignity, 142. Make our\n  reproofs seasonable, 143. The prosperous need reproof rather than the\n  afflicted, 144. When is severe reproof allowable? 145. Reprove not\n  in presence of another, 148; especially not before inferiors, 149. A\n  reprover should not himself need reproof, 150. In reproving, confess\n  our own fault, 150. Mix with the reproof a little praise, 151. If\n  reproved, do not retort on your monitor, 152. Reprove only on weighty\n  occasions, 152. Avoid a fault-finding, captious habit, 153. Reproof\n  is not offensive, when kindly administered, 154. Reprove with caution\n  and moderation, 155. Care should be used to leave with the reproof a\n  salutary impression, 156.\n\n\n  THAT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO LIVE PLEASURABLY ACCORDING TO THE DOCTRINE\n  OF EPICURUS.\n\n  By William Baxter, Gent.\n\n  Four interlocutors discourse respecting this doctrine, 157-203. What\n  had been said by a favorer of Epicurus, 157, 158. What the Epicurean\n  doctrine is, 159. It recognizes no pleasure but that which is derived\n  from the senses, 160. Objections to this doctrine, 160, _et\n  seq._ Pains, as well as pleasures, enter through the senses, and\n  these are keenly felt, 161. Bodily pleasure is feeble and soon over,\n  161. The remembrance of past pleasure only stimulates desire for\n  more, 163; and this produces a restless habit, 164. No man can safely\n  count on a continuance of what he now enjoys, 165. Hence there must\n  be constant disquiet, 166. A wicked course contributes nothing to\n  assurance of continual enjoyment, 166. Our very bodily constitution\n  places us in constant peril, 167. To escape evil, the Epicureans\n  say, is the supreme good; but this is simply impossible, 167. If it\n  were possible, it would not raise us above the brutes, 168, 169.\n  Freedom from bodily pain is a trivial affair, 169. The Epicurean\n  philosophy rejects the idea of God and of future retribution; this\n  costs effort; the brutes who never had this idea have advantage over\n  the followers of Epicurus, 170. Intellectual enjoyments greatly\n  superior to sensual pleasures, 171. There is great enjoyment in\n  knowledge, 171. An acquaintance with works of genius affords great\n  pleasure, 172. The mathematics afford unspeakable delight, 173.\n  Instances of this in the cases of Eudoxus, Pythagoras, Archimedes,\n  and others, 174. Such pleasures are far superior and more intense\n  than sensual enjoyments, 174. The Epicurean philosophy eschews these\n  higher and purer delights, 175; and in old age it has nothing left,\n  176. Epicurus disallows music, 177, 178. He would deprive the mind\n  of its own proper good, and drag it down to the level of the body,\n  179. The highest good consists in action, 180; especially beneficent\n  action, 180, 181. The pleasures recognized by Epicureans are base\n  and ignoble, 182. They make the stomach the centre, 183. A noble\n  nature despises such pleasures, 184, 185. Great and generous actions\n  are never forgotten, 186; but the memory of sensual gratification\n  is transient, 186. A good reputation affords high satisfaction,\n  187. This cannot be enjoyed by idle and debauched persons, 188. The\n  Epicureans leave us no hope from God, 189. The fear and worship of\n  God, even when joined with superstition, keep down wickedness and\n  afford much pleasure, 190. This pleasure is shared alike by rich and\n  poor, 191; but Epicureans deny it to themselves, 191. The Deity can\n  neither do nor suffer wrong, 192. Therefore a friend of God must\n  be happy, 193. Of such a satisfaction the followers of Epicurus\n  would deprive us, 194. According to them, death is the extinction\n  of our being,\u2014a gloomy prospect, 195. All men shrink at the idea\n  of annihilation, 197. A dark hereafter is better than none, 198.\n  Epicureanism extinguishes hope and virtue, 199. The hope of another\n  and better life gives additional comfort to the present, 200. Of all\n  this hope and enjoyment the Epicurean doctrine deprives us, and thus\n  debases and contracts our nature, 202, 203.\n\n\n  ROMAN QUESTIONS.\n\n  By Isaac Chauncy, of the College of Physicians, London.\n\n  1. Why do the Romans require a new-married woman to touch fire and\n  water? 204. 2. Why do they light, at nuptials, five torches? 204. 3,\n  4. Questions about Diana\u2019s temples, 205. 5. Why do persons falsely\n  reported as dead, on their return home from foreign parts, not enter\n  by the door? 206. 6. Why do women kiss their relations? 207. 7.\n  Why are husbands and wives forbidden to receive presents from each\n  other? 208. 8. Why may they not receive a gift from a son-in-law or\n  father-in-law? 209. 9. Why do husbands returning from remote parts\n  send to acquaint their wives of their approach? 209. 10. Why do\n  men in divine service cover their heads, &c.? 209. 11. Why do they\n  sacrifice to Saturn with head uncovered? 210. 12. Why do they esteem\n  Saturn the father of truth? 211. 13. Why do they sacrifice to Honor\n  bareheaded? 211. 14. Why do sons appear at their parents\u2019 funerals\n  with covered heads, &c.? 211. 15. Why do Romans not sacrifice to the\n  god Terminus? 212. 16. Why must not maid-servants enter the temple of\n  Matuta? 212. 17. Why do not women supplicate this goddess in behalf\n  of their children? 213. 18. Why do the rich pay tithes to Hercules?\n  213. 19. Why does the Roman year begin in January? 213. 20. Why is\n  not myrtle brought into the temple of Bona Dea? 214. 21. Why is\n  worship paid to the woodpecker? 215. 22. Why is Janus described as\n  double-faced? 215. 23. Why are funeral things sold in the temple of\n  Venus Libitina? 216. 24. Explain the Kalends, Nones, and Ides, 216.\n  25. Why are the days after the Kalends, Nones, and Ides, considered\n  unlucky? 217. 26. Why is white sometimes worn as a sign of mourning?\n  219. 27. Why are walls reputed sacred but not the gates? 219. 28.\n  Why are children forbidden to swear by Hercules within doors? 220.\n  29. Why must not the new-married woman step over the threshold but\n  be carried? 221. 30. Why is she to say, \u201cWhere thou art Caius, I am\n  Caia\u201d? 221. 31. Why is the name Thalassius sung at nuptials? 221.\n  32. Why are effigies of men, in some cases, called Argives? 222.\n  33. Why did not men in ancient times sup abroad without their sons?\n  222. 34. Why were funeral rites performed in December instead of\n  February? 223. 35. Why is worship paid to the harlot Laurentia? 223.\n  36. Why is one gate at Rome known as the Window? 224. 37. Why are\n  spoils taken in war allowed to decay? 225. 38. Why was divination\n  prohibited after the month of August? 225. 39. Why is it unlawful\n  for a man not yet mustered into the army to slay an enemy? 226. 40.\n  Why was it unlawful to anoint a priest of Jupiter in the open air?\n  226. 41. Why on the ancient coin was Janus stamped, with a ship on\n  the reverse? 228. 42. Why is the temple of Saturn used as the public\n  treasury? 228. 43. Why must ambassadors go to Saturn\u2019s temple, and\n  be there registered? 229. 44. Why must not priests of Jupiter swear?\n  229. 45. Why at the feast of Venus is wine so freely used? 230. 46.\n  Why would the ancients have the temple of Horta to stand always open?\n  230. 47. Why did Romulus build the temple of Vulcan without the city?\n  231. 48. Why were garlands used in the Consualia? 231. 49. Why did\n  candidates for office appear without tunics? 232. 50. Why did the\n  priest of Jupiter, on the death of his wife, resign his office? 232.\n  51. Why is a dog set before the Lares, and why are the Lares covered\n  with dogs\u2019 skins? 233. 52. Why is a dog sacrificed to Geneta, &c.?\n  233. 53. Why, at the Capitoline games, are Sardians offered for\n  sale by a crier? 234. 54. Why is the flesh-market called Macellum?\n  234. 55. Why do the minstrels wear women\u2019s apparel on the Ides of\n  January? 234. 56. Why is it supposed that matrons built the temple\n  of Carmenta? 235. 57. Why is milk plentifully used in the women\u2019s\n  sacrifice to Rumina? 236. 58. Why are some senators called Patres,\n  and others Patres Conscripti? 236. 59. Why was one altar common to\n  Hercules and the Muses? 236. 60. Why, of the two altars of Hercules,\n  do the women not partake of the greater? 237. 61. Why is the name\n  of the tutelary god of Rome not allowed to be mentioned? 237. 62.\n  Why of the Feciales was the Pater Patratus accounted the chief? 238.\n  63. Why is the Rex Sacrorum forbidden to bear civil office? 238. 64.\n  Why after eating must something always be left on the table? 239.\n  65. The first congress with a wife, why must it be in the dark? 239.\n  66. Why was a horse-race round called Flaminia? 239. 67. Whence the\n  name _lictors_? 239. 68. Why do the Luperci sacrifice a dog?\n  240. 69. Why upon the Septimontium are chariots not drawn by a pair\n  of horses? 240. 70. Why are convicted thieves called Furciferi? 241.\n  71. Why is hay bound to the horns of unruly oxen? 241. 72. Why must\n  the lanterns of soothsayers be open at the top? 242. 73. Why were\n  priests, afflicted with sores, forbidden to use divination? 242. 74.\n  Why did Servius Tullius build a temple of Small Fortune? 243. 75.\n  Why did the Romans not extinguish a candle? 243. 76. Why were little\n  moons worn on the shoes? 244. 77. Why was the year Jupiter\u2019s, but\n  the month Juno\u2019s? 244. 78. Why in soothsaying is _sinister_\n  fortunate? 245. 79. Why might the bones of one who had triumphed be\n  brought into the city? 246. 80. Why were the consuls requested not to\n  come to the supper of the triumpher? 246. 81. Why did not the tribune\n  wear purple? 246. 82. Why, before the chief officers, were the axes\n  carried bound up in rods? 247. 83. Why did the Romans forbid a human\n  sacrifice to barbarians, and offer one themselves? 248. 84. Why does\n  the Roman day begin at midnight? 249. 85. Why of old were women not\n  suffered to grind or to cook? 250. 86. Why are there no marriages in\n  May? 250. 87. Why is the hair of a bride parted with a spear? 251.\n  88. Why is the money for public plays called _lucar_? 251. 89.\n  Why is the Quirinalia called the Feast of Fools? 251. 90. Why, at\n  a sacrifice to Hercules, was no other god mentioned, &c.? 252. 91.\n  Why might not patricians dwell about the Capitol? 252. 92. Why is\n  a garland of oak-leaves put on him who saves a citizen in battle?\n  252. 93. Why are vultures used in soothsaying? 253. 94. Why is the\n  temple of Aesculapius placed without the city? 254. 95. Why must\n  chaste people abstain from pulse? 254. 96. Why are Vestal Virgins,\n  when unchaste, buried alive? 254. 97. Why, at a horse-race, is the\n  winning horse sacrificed to Mars, &c.? 255. 98. Why do the censors\n  begin their official work by feeding the sacred geese? 255. 99. Why\n  are augurs never deprived of office? 256. 100. Why, at the Ides of\n  August, do the servants feast and the free-women wait on them? 257.\n  101. Why are boys decorated with the necklace called _bulla_?\n  257. 102. Why do boys receive names at nine days old, and girls at\n  eight? 258. 103. Why are those whose fathers are not known called\n  _Spurius_? 258. 104. Why was Bacchus called Liber Pater? 259.\n  105. Why are widows married on holidays, but not virgins? 259. 106.\n  Why do the Romans worship Fortuna Primigenia? 260. 107. Whence the\n  term _histriones_? 260. 108. Why are marriages between persons\n  near akin not practised? 260. 109. Why must not the chief priest of\n  Jupiter touch meal or leaven? 261. 110. Why is he forbidden to touch\n  raw flesh? 261. 111. Why is he forbidden to touch or name dog or\n  goat? 262. 112. Why is he forbidden to touch ivy, or to pass under\n  vine branches? 263. 113. Why is he forbidden to bear civil office?\n  264.\n\n\n  GREEK QUESTIONS.\n\n  By the Same Hand.\n\n  1. Who are they at Epidaurus called \u039a\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 and  \u1f0c\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9? 265. 2.\n  What woman did the Cumans call Onobatis? 265. 3. Who is the\n  \u1f59\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03ba\u03b1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 among the Solenses? 266. 4. Who\n  are the \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 among the Cnidians, and who is the \u1f08\u03c6\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1? 266.\n  5. Who were the \u03a7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03af among the Arcadians and Lacedaemonians?\n  266. 6. Who is \u039a\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 among the Opuntians? 266. 7. What sort of\n  clouds are the Ploiades? 266. 8. Who is called Platychaetas among the\n  Boeotians? 267. 9. Who at Delphi is called \u1f49\u03c3\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1? 267. 10. What is\n  Phyxemelum? 268. 11. Who are the \u1f08\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c6\u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9? 268. 12. What was\n  Charila among the Delphians? 268. 13. What is the beggars\u2019 meat among\n  the Aenianes? 270. 14. Who were the Coliads among the Ithacans? what\n  was a \u03c6\u03ac\u03b3\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2? 271. 15. What is the wooden dog among the Locrians?\n  271. 16. What thing do the Megarians call \u1f00\u03c6\u03ac\u03b2\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1? 272. 17. Who was\n  called \u03b4\u03bf\u03c1\u03cd\u03be\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2? 272. 18. What is \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03ba\u03af\u03b1? 273. 19. What is the\n  Anthedon of which Pythia speaks? 273. 20. What is meant at Priene by\n  darkness at the Oak? 274. 21. Who in Crete were called \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9?\n  274. 22. What was the Sepulchre of the Boys at Chalcedon? 275. 23.\n  Who at Argos are \u039c\u03b9\u03be\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03b3\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 and \u1f18\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9? 276. 24. What at Argos\n  is \u1f14\u03b3\u03ba\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1? 276. 25. Who are \u1f08\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03c1, \u1f08\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, and \u03a0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2?\n  276. 26. What is the meaning of a verse sung by certain virgins of\n  Aenos? 276. 27. Why at Rhodes does the crier never enter the chapel\n  of Ocridion? 277. 28. Why at Tenedos does no piper enter the temple,\n  nor must Achilles be named there? 277. 29. Who was the \u03c0\u03c9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 at\n  Epidamnus? 278. 30. What is the shore of Araenus, in Thrace? 278.\n  31. Why at the feast of Ceres do the women of Eretria roast meat by\n  the sun? 279. 32. Who at Miletus were the \u1f08\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9? 279. 33. Why\n  do the Chalcidians call a certain place \u1f08\u03ba\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u039b\u03ad\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7? 279. 34. Who\n  was he that sacrificed an ox to his benefactor? 280. 35. Why did the\n  Bottiaean maids sing, \u201cLet us go to Athens\u201d? 280. 36. Why do the\n  Eleian women in their hymns say, \u201cO Bacchus, come with an ox foot\u201d?\n  281. 37. Why is a place at Tanagra called Achilleum? 281. 38. Who\n  among the Boeotians were the \u03a8\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, and the \u1f48\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9? 282. 39. Why\n  do the Arcadians stone those who go willingly into the Lycaeum, &c.?\n  282. 40. Who is Eunostus, the hero of Tanagra, and why may not women\n  enter his grove? 283. 41. How came there to be a river in Boeotia\n  called Scamander? 284. 42. Whence the saying, \u201cLet this prevail\u201d?\n  285. 43. Why is the city of the Ithacans called Alalcomenae? 285.\n  44. Who are the Monophagi in Aegina? 286. 45. Why does a statue of\n  Jupiter in Caria carry an axe and not a thunderbolt? 286. 46. Why\n  do the Trallians call the pulse \u1f44\u03c1\u03bf\u03b2\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2? 287. 47. Why do\n  the Eleans say, \u201cworse than Sambicus\u201d? 287. 48. Why is the temple\n  of Ulysses at Lacedaemon near the monument of Leucippides? 287. 49.\n  Why do the women of Chalcedon, on meeting other women\u2019s husbands,\n  cover one cheek? 288. 50. Why do the Argives bring their sheep to the\n  grove of Agenor, &c.? 289. 51. Why did the Argive boys in sport call\n  themselves Ballacrades? 289. 52. Why do the men of Elis lead their\n  mares out of their borders, &c.? 289. 53. Why was it a custom amongst\n  the Gnossians that they who borrowed money upon usury should snatch\n  it up and run away? 289. 54. Why in Samos do they call upon Venus of\n  Dexicreon? 289. 55. Why in Samos, when they sacrifice to Mercury, do\n  they allow stealing? 290. 56. Why in Samos is there a place called\n  \u03a0\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1? 290. 57. Why in Samos was the Andron called Pedetes? 290.\n  58. Why is the priest of Hercules in Cos clothed in women\u2019s apparel?\n  291. 59. Whence the race of Hamaxocylists in Megara? 292.\n\n\n  OF THE LOVE OF WEALTH.\n\n  By Mr. Patrick, of the Charterhouse.\n\n  True happiness is not to be bought and sold; wealth will not procure\n  it, 294. The love of money does not cease on the acquisition of\n  money, 295. A man who has much is intent on getting more, 296. He\n  does not need more, but to be relieved of some part of what he has,\n  296. To possess money, and not to use it, is a distemper of the\n  mind, 297. The love of wealth is never satisfied, 298. It makes of a\n  man a miserable slave, 299. Such men are always in want, 297, _et\n  seq._ They excite aversion in the beholders, 299. They lay up\n  wealth for their children, 300; who impatiently expect their decease,\n  301. What is the use of riches? 302. Riches need not be coveted,\n  since our real wants are easily supplied, 303. If there were nobody\n  to see a display of riches besides their possessor, their chief value\n  would cease, 304. When nobody looks on, riches signify nothing, 305.\n\n\n  HOW A MAN MAY INOFFENSIVELY PRAISE HIMSELF WITHOUT BEING LIABLE TO\n  ENVY.\n\n  By Mr. Lancaster, Fellow of Baliol College in Oxford.\n\n  An arrogant boaster is universally condemned, 306. Yet there are\n  times when a man may fitly praise himself, 307. A man may vindicate\n  his worthy acts when maligned by others, 309. Instances of this\n  in Pericles, Pelopidas, Epaminondas, 309. A man grappling with\n  ill-fortune may vindicate himself, 310. A man may do it, if treated\n  ungratefully, 311. Or if unjustly accused of evil acts, 312. A man\n  may indirectly praise himself by praising others who are of similar\n  character, 313. Envy may be forestalled by giving the credit of our\n  good actions to Fortune or to God, 314; and by admissions of partial\n  wrong in our character or conduct, 316, 317. We may praise ourselves\n  when it seems to be for the advantage of others, 318; and when by so\n  doing we may silence an insolent and blustering man, 319. When evil\n  conduct is praised, and we may attract the attention of the company\n  to a worthier example, 320. In general we should avoid talking about\n  ourselves, 321. This habit engenders boasting and vain-glory, 322. It\n  leads to the disparagement of others, 323. We should hear our praises\n  uttered with modesty and caution, 324; otherwise we incur disgrace,\n  325.\n\n\n  CONCERNING THE PROCREATION OF THE SOUL, AS DISCOURSED IN TIMAEUS.\n\n  By John Philips, Gent.\n\n  Opinion of Plato concerning the soul, 326. Quotation from the Timaeus\n  of Plato, 326. Opinions of Xenocrates and Crantor, 327. Plato held\n  the eternity of matter, 328, 353. Nature of the soul, according\n  to Plato, 329, 330. The material of which the world was formed,\n  originally a shapeless mass existing from eternity, 331. It was\n  arranged in perfect and beautiful forms by God, 331, 336. The soul\n  of the world, 332, 351. Origin of evil, 333, 334. Reconciliation of\n  Plato with himself, 335-337. His real meaning, 337. The four original\n  elements of all created, corporeal things, 337. The soul is both\n  created and uncreated, 338. The subject illustrated by geometry and\n  the doctrine of ratios, 339-345. And by the musical scale, 345-349.\n  Relation of spirit to matter, 350. The opinion of those philosophers\n  refuted who make the soul a compound of both, 351. The soul of the\n  world, what? 352. The divisible and the indivisible: the Other and\n  the Same, 326, 350, 354, _et seq._ The four elements, how\n  related, 355. Generation, what? 356. Two discordant principles rule\n  the world,\u2014Fate or Necessity, and Intelligence or Wisdom, 357, 358.\n  The soul is not altogether the workmanship of the Deity, 359. Another\n  illustration from geometry, 360. Illustration from the planetary\n  system, 361, 362. And from musical science, 361, 367.\n\n\n  THAT A PHILOSOPHER OUGHT CHIEFLY TO CONVERSE WITH GREAT MEN.\n\n  By Knightly Chetwood.\n\n  Instruction in philosophy not to be denied to men of quality, 368.\n  The true idea of philosophy, 369. If useful to any, it may be\n  especially useful to men who lead and govern, 370. Absurdity of the\n  contrary supposition, 371. Great value of true philosophy, 372.\n  Reputation valuable to a philosopher as a means of usefulness, 373. A\n  philosopher will delight in giving his instructions where they will\n  have the widest influence, 374, 375. Even an ordinary mechanic would\n  be pleased if he knew his machine would be put to a noble use, 376.\n\n\n  A DISCOURSE CONCERNING SOCRATES\u2019S DAEMON.\n\n  By Mr. Creech.\n\n  Introduction, 378. Supposed conversation among some friends\n  respecting affairs at Thebes, at the period of the return of the\n  exiles, 379-382. About Pelopidas, Epaminondas, Charon, Archias,\n  Leontidas, Lysanoridas, 381, 382. Plan for liberating Thebes from\n  the Spartan rule, 382. Strange portents and omens, 383-385. Recourse\n  to Egypt for the interpretation of a strange, antiquated writing,\n  383-385. The writing interpreted, 386. Folly of superstition, 387.\n  Socrates pursued a more rational method, 387. What shall we think\n  of his Daemon? 388. Was it some trifling thing, as an omen or a\n  sneeze? 389, 391. It could be nothing but sound judgment, 390. A\n  stranger from Italy introduced, 392. His account of affairs at\n  Metapontum, 393. Lysis had escaped from massacre at Metapontum, and\n  been hospitably received at Thebes, 394. Theanor, the stranger,\n  offers money in requital for the kindness bestowed on Lysis, 394.\n  The offer refused, and why, 395. Discourse of Epaminondas thereon,\n  396-398. Epaminondas has a good Daemon, 399. The conversation turns\n  on the liberation of Thebes from the Spartan garrison, 400. Fear that\n  the plot is discovered, 401. Dreams and omens, 401, 402. The Daemon\n  of Socrates again, 403, 404. A strong impression made on the mind\n  of some extraordinary man is from a Daemon, like that of Socrates,\n  406. A romantic dream related, 407-411. A descent into the infernal\n  regions, 409. Daemons are seen there; their connection with human\n  beings on earth, 410, 411. The Pythagorean philosophy respecting\n  dreams, daemons, and sacred impulses, 412, 413. Epaminondas refuses\n  to kill any citizen without process of law, 414. Slaughter of the\n  Spartan commanders and liberation of Thebes, 414-423.\n\n\n  OF CURIOSITY, OR AN OVER-BUSY INQUISITIVENESS INTO THINGS IMPERTINENT.\n\n  By Maurice Wheeler, Late of Christ Church, Oxon.\n\n  Uncomfortable houses may be so altered as to be made comfortable,\n  424. In like manner, we may so change our personal habits as to\n  become agreeable to ourselves and others, 425. One habit needing\n  to be changed may be that of a vain curiosity, 425. Let us make a\n  thorough self-inspection, 426. Those who eagerly pry into the affairs\n  of others are apt to be ignorant of themselves, 427, 428. It is rude\n  and indecent to intrude into the private concerns of others, 429. It\n  is also attended with danger, 430. Curiosity may be wisely and safely\n  indulged by inquiries into the phenomena of nature and the history\n  of great events, 431. But such things do not satisfy a perverse\n  and prurient curiosity, 432. Such curiosity proceeds from spite or\n  envy, 432. People so inclined search into matters which men wish to\n  keep secret, 433. Such people cannot endure the quiet of a country\n  life, 434. They eagerly inquire for news, 434. We carefully guard\n  ourselves against inquisitive persons, 435. The practice procures\n  its own punishment, 437. To cure ourselves of the habit of idle\n  curiosity, forbear to notice little things, 438. Do not peep in at\n  doors and windows, 439. Do not mix with low people, 441. Do not look\n  at beautiful women, 442. Restrain the impulse of curiosity, even in\n  lawful things, 443. Spies and informers, even when employed by the\n  government, are always hated, 444.\n\n\n  HOW A MAN MAY BE SENSIBLE OF HIS PROGRESS IN VIRTUE.\n\n  By Mr. Tod, of University College in Oxford.\n\n  There can be no progress in virtue while habits of wrong-doing\n  continue unchanged, 446. A change from vice to virtue is not\n  instantaneous, it must be progressive, 447. The opinion of the\n  Stoics confuted that all men are equally vicious, 448. As there are\n  degrees of moral improvement, they are easily discernible, 449.\n  Constant endeavors to be good may inspire confidence of success, 450.\n  It is a good sign if our efforts after moral improvement become more\n  intense and constant, 451. And if difficulties gradually disappear,\n  452. Examples given, 453. It is a good sign if the ridicule or\n  opposition of friends do not induce us to leave our studies, 454.\n  What may evince proficiency in virtue, 455. Many fail of advantage\n  from the study of philosophy, 456. In hearing lectures or reading,\n  attend to things spoken rather than the words, 457. Do not read\n  merely to admire the style, 457. Be more ready to hear than to\n  speak, 459. Maintain an unruffled temper, 459. Cultivate presence of\n  mind, 460. Be guided by truth rather than ostentation, 461. Exercise\n  self-restraint, 461; and moderation, 462. Cultivate a serious spirit,\n  463. Be willing to receive admonition, 464, 465. When in the wrong,\n  willingly acknowledge it, 466. Effects of careful and persistent\n  training, 468. Pleasant dreams indicate proficiency in virtue, 469.\n  Not only love and admire but imitate virtuous examples, 470. Let\n  some virtuous example ever be in our thoughts, 472. Cultivate the\n  acquaintance of the wise and good, 473. Carefully avoid every fault,\n  474.\n\n\n  OF FORTUNE\n\n  By William Baxter, Gent.\n\n  Does Fortune rule the affairs of men? 475. What influence could\n  it have in the affairs of Aristides, Scipio, Alexander, and men\n  like them? 475. Are there not such things as wisdom, justice,\n  moderation, and fortitude? 476. And are not these qualities of\n  supreme importance? 477. Were it not for our reason, we should be far\n  inferior to the brutes, 478. What place has Fortune in the affairs of\n  carpenters, artists, and painters? 479. If reason and good counsel\n  are of service in the mechanic arts, why not in affairs of state? 480.\n\n\n  OF VIRTUE AND VICE\n\n  By the Same Hand.\n\n  As our clothing does not impart heat to our bodies, so ample\n  possessions cannot make us happy, 482. Virtue can make any condition\n  in life pleasant and delightful, 483. A man\u2019s vices inflict on him\n  misery which he cannot avoid, 483. They allow him no rest, day or\n  night, 484. Worldly abundance only aggravates the disorders of the\n  mind, 484. Virtue makes a man happy anywhere, 485.\n\n\n  CONJUGAL PRECEPTS\n\n  By John Philips, Gent.\n\n  Introduction, 486. Avoid the first occasions of discord, 487.\n  There should be a conformity of tastes and manners, 488. The wife\n  must prefer the society of her husband to that of all others, 488.\n  The husband must avoid a morose, imperious behavior, 489. Let all\n  things be managed with the consent of both parties, 489. The wife,\n  if limited in expenses, must cheerfully submit, 490. She must not\n  chide her husband before others, 490. She should study to reflect\n  his character, 490. She should share his recreations and his cares,\n  491. If the husband takes another woman on an excursion of pleasure,\n  let not the wife show anger, 491. The caresses of conjugal life\n  should be proffered by the husband only, 492. A wife must have no\n  private friendships, 492. _Meum et tuum_ must have no place\n  in married life, 493. The petty altercations of man and wife, if\n  of daily occurrence, render the connection insupportable, 494. The\n  parties immediately concerned can best tell where the shoe pinches,\n  494. A wife wins her husband\u2019s affection most readily by sweetness\n  of disposition, 494. The wife should make a proper use of her\n  mirror, 495. A woman is adorned more by discretion, humility, and\n  modesty, than by gold or diamonds, 495. Anger and reproach should be\n  banished from the household, 496. A wife must not be a slut, 496. She\n  should avoid affectation and being over nice, 497. She should avoid\n  extravagance in dress, 497. She should guard her lips in the hearing\n  of strangers, 498. She must not attempt to control her husband,\n  498. The husband\u2019s government must be that of love, 498. The wife\n  should so gain her husband\u2019s love as not to lessen his affection\n  for his mother, 499. When the husband is in a passion, it is best\n  for the wife to hold her peace, 500. Women are rarely jealous of\n  their husbands when other women let them alone, 501. Let the husband\n  abstain from unlawful embraces, 503. Let him respect and honor his\n  wife, 504. Concluding counsels 505-507.\n\n\n  INDEX\n\n\n\n\n  PLUTARCH\u2019S MORALS.\n\n\n\n\n  PLUTARCH\u2019S MORALS.\n\n  VOL. II.\n\n\n\n\nTHE BANQUET OF THE SEVEN WISE MEN.\n\nTHE SEVEN,\u2014SOLON, BIAS, THALES, ANACHARSIS, CLEOBULUS, PITTACUS,\nCHILO.[1]\n\nNILOXENUS, EUMETIS, ALEXIDEMUS, PERIANDER, ARDALUS, ESOP, CLEODEMUS,\nMNESIPHILUS, CHERSIAS, GORGIAS, DIOCLES.\n\n\nDIOCLES TO NICARCHUS.\n\n1. No wonder, my friend Nicarchus, to find old truths so disguised,\nand the words and actions of men so grossly misrepresented and lamely\ndelivered, seeing people are so disposed to give ear and credit to\nfictions of yesterday\u2019s standing. For there were not merely seven\npresent at that feast, as you were informed; there were more than\ndouble the number. I was there myself in person and familiarly\nacquainted with Periander (my art had gained me his acquaintance); and\nThales boarded at my house, at the request and upon the recommendation\nof Periander. Whoever then gave you that account of our feast did it\nvery badly; it is plain he did it upon hearsay, and that he was not\nthere among us. Now, since we are together and at leisure, and possibly\nwe may not live to find an opportunity so convenient another time, I\nwill (seeing you desire it) give you a faithful account of the whole\nproceedings at that meeting.\n\n\n2. Periander had prepared a dinner for us, not in the town, but in a\ndining-hall at Lechaeum which stands close to the temple of Venus, to\nwhom there was a sacrifice that day. For having neglected the duty\never since his mother died for love, he was resolved now to atone\nfor the omission, being warned so to do by the dreams of Melissa. In\norder thereunto, there was provided a rich chariot for every one of\nthe guests. It was summer-time, and every part of the way quite to\nthe seaside was hardly passable, by reason of throngs of people and\nwhole clouds of dust. As soon as Thales espied the chariot waiting\nat the door, he smilingly discharged it, and we walked through the\nfields to avoid the press and noise. There was in our company a third\nperson, Niloxenus a Naucratian, an eminent man, who was very intimately\nacquainted with Solon and Thales in Egypt; he had a message to deliver\nto Bias, and a letter sealed, the contents whereof he knew not; only\nhe guessed it contained a second question to be resolved by Bias,\nand in case Bias undertook not to answer it, he had in commission to\nimpart it to the wisest men in Greece. What a fortune is this (quoth\nNiloxenus) to find you all together! This paper (showing it us) I am\nbringing to the banquet. Thales replied, after his wonted smiling way,\nIf it contains any hard question, away with it to Priene. Bias will\nresolve it with the same readiness he did your former problem. What\nproblem was that? quoth he. Why, saith Thales, a certain person sent\nhim a beast for sacrifice with this command, that he should return him\nthat part of his flesh which was best and worst; our philosopher very\ngravely and wisely pulled out the tongue of the beast, and sent it to\nthe donor;\u2014which single act procured him the name and reputation of\na very wise man. It was not this act alone that advanced him in the\nestimation of the world, quoth Niloxenus; but he joyfully embraces what\nyou so carefully shun, the acquaintance and friendship of kings and\ngreat men; and whereas he honors you for divers great accomplishments,\nhe particularly admires you for this invention, that with little labor\nand no help of any mathematical instrument you took so truly the height\nof one of the pyramids; for fixing your staff erect at the point of\nthe shadow which the pyramid cast, two triangles being thus made by\nthe tangent rays of the sun, you demonstrated that what proportion one\nshadow had to the other, such the pyramid bore to the stick.\n\nBut, as I said, you are accused of being a hater of kings, and certain\nback friends of yours have presented Amasis with a paper of yours\nstuffed with sentences reproachful to majesty; as for instance, being\nat a certain time asked by Molpagoras the Ionian, what the most absurd\nthing was you had observed in your notice, you replied, An old king.\nAnother time, in a dispute that happened in your company about the\nnature of beasts, you affirmed that of wild beasts, a king, of tame, a\nflatterer was the worst. Such apophthegms must needs be unacceptable to\nkings, who pretend there is vast difference between them and tyrants.\nThis was Pittacus\u2019s reply to Myrsilus, and it was spoken in jest, quoth\nThales; nor was it an old king I said I should marvel at, but an old\npilot. In this mistake, however, I am much of the youth\u2019s mind who,\nthrowing a stone at a bitch, hit his stepmother, adding, Not so bad. I\ntherefore esteemed Solon a very wise and good man, when I understood he\nrefused empire; and if Pittacus had not taken upon himself a monarchy,\nhe had never exclaimed, O ye Gods! how hard a matter it is to be good!\nAnd Periander, however he seems to be sick of his father\u2019s disease,\nis yet to be commended that he gives ear to wholesome discourses\nand converses only with wise and good men, rejecting the advice of\nThrasybulus my countryman, who would have persuaded him to chop off\nthe heads of his nobility. For a prince that chooses rather to govern\nslaves than freemen is like a foolish farmer, who throws his wheat and\nbarley in the streets, to fill his barns with swarms of locusts and\nwhole cages of birds. For government has one good thing to make amends\nfor the many evils attending it, namely, honor and glory, provided the\nruler rules good men because he is better than they, and great men\nseeming to be greater than they. But he that having ascended the throne\nminds only his own interest and ease, remitting all care and concern\nfor the welfare of the subject, is fitter to tend sheep or to drive\nhorses or to feed cattle than to govern men of reason.\n\nBut this stranger (continues he) has engaged us in a deal of\nimpertinent chat, for we have neglected to speak or offer any discourse\nsuitable to the occasion and end of our meeting; for doubtless it\nbecomes the guest, as well as the host, to make preparation beforehand.\nIt is reported that the Sybarites used to invite their neighbors\u2019\nwives a whole twelve-month before to their entertainments, that they\nmight have convenient time to trim and adorn themselves; for my part,\nI am of opinion, that he who would feast as he should ought to allow\nhimself more time for preparation than they, it being a more difficult\nmatter to compose the mind into an agreeable temper than to fit one\u2019s\nclothes for the outward ornament of the body. For a prudent man comes\nnot hither only to fill his belly, as if he were to fill a bottle,\nbut to be sometimes grave and serious, sometimes pleasant, sometimes\nto listen to others, and sometimes to speak himself what may benefit\nor divert the company, if the meeting is intended for any good use or\npurpose. For if the victuals be not good, men may let them alone, or if\nthe wine be bad, men may use water; but for a weak-headed, impertinent,\nunmannerly, shallow fellow-commoner there is no cure; he mars all the\nmirth and music, and spoils the best entertainment in the world.\nAnd it will be no easy business to rid one\u2019s self of a sullen temper\nwhen once entertained; since we find divers men, affronted in their\ndebauches, have yet remembered the provocation to their dying day,\nthe spite remaining like a surfeit arising from wrong done or anger\nconceived in drinking wine. Wherefore Chilo did very well and wisely;\nfor when he was invited yesterday, he would not promise to come till\nhe had a particular given him of all their names who were to meet him.\nFor, quoth he, if my business calls me to sea or I am pressed to serve\nmy prince in his wars, there is a necessity upon me to rest contented\nwith whatever company I fall into, though never so unsuitable to my\nquality or disagreeable to my nature and humor; but voluntarily and\nneedlessly to associate myself with any riffraff rabble would ill\nbecome any man pretending to but common discretion.\n\nThe Egyptian skeleton which they brought into their feasts and exposed\nto the view of their guests, with this advice, that they should not in\ntheir merriment forget they would shortly be themselves such as that\nwas,\u2014though it was a sight not so acceptable (as may be supposed),\u2014had\nyet this conveniency and use, to incite the spectators not to luxury\nand drunkenness but to mutual love and friendship, persuading them not\nto protract a life in itself short and uncertain by a tedious course of\nwickedness.\n\n3. In discourses of this kind we spent our time by the way, and were\nnow come to the house. Here Thales would not be washed, for he had but\na while before anointed himself; wherefore he took a round to view the\nhorse-race and the wrestling-place, and the grove upon the water-side,\nwhich was neatly trimmed and beautified by Periander; this he did, not\nso much to satisfy his own curiosity (for he seldom or never admired\nany thing he saw), but that he might not disoblige Periander or seem\nto overlook or despise the glory and magnificence of our host. Of the\nrest every one, after he had anointed and washed himself, the servants\nintroduced into a particular room, purposely fitted and prepared for\nthe men; they were guided thither through a porch, in which Anacharsis\nsat, and there was a certain young lady with him arranging his hair.\nThis lady stepping forward to welcome Thales, he saluted her most\ncourteously, and smiling said: Madam, make the stranger fair and\npleasant, so that, being (as he is) the mildest man in the world, he\nmay not be fearful and hideous for us to look on. When I was curious\nto enquire who this lady was whom Thales thus complimented, he said,\nDo you not yet know the wise and famous Eumetis?\u2014for so her father\ncalls her, though others call her after her father\u2019s name Cleobulina.\nDoubtless, saith Niloxenus, they call her by this name to commend her\njudgment and wit, and her reach into the more abstruse and recondite\npart of learning; for I have myself in Egypt seen and read some\nproblems first started and discussed by her. Not so, saith Thales,\nfor she plays with these as men do with cockal-bones, and encounters\nboldly all she meets, without study or premeditation; she is a person\nof an admirable understanding, of a politic capacious mind, of a very\nobliging conversation, and one that by her rhetoric and the sweetness\nof her temper prevails upon her father to govern his subjects with\nthe greatest mildness in the world. How popular she is appears, saith\nNiloxenus, plainly to any that observes her pleasant innocent garb. But\npray, continues he, wherefore is it that she shows such tenderness and\naffection to Anacharsis? Because, replied Thales, he is a temperate and\nlearned man, who fully and freely makes known to her those mysterious\nways of dieting and physicing the sick which are now in use among the\nScythians; and I doubt not she now coaxes and courts the old gentleman\nat the rate you see, taking this opportunity to discourse with him and\nlearn something of him.\n\nAs we were come near the dining-room, Alexidemus the Milesian, a\nbastard son of Thrasybulus the Tyrant, met us. He seemed to be\ndisturbed, and in an angry tone muttered to himself some words which\nwe could not distinctly hear; but espying Thales, and recovering\nhimself out of his disorder, he complained how Periander had put an\ninsufferable affront upon him. He would not permit me, saith he, to\ngo to sea, though I earnestly importuned him, but he would press me\nto dine with him. And when I came as invited, he assigned me a seat\nunbecoming my person and character, Aeolians and islanders and others\nof inferior rank being placed above me; whence it is easy to infer how\nmeanly he thinks of my father, and it is undeniable how this affront\nput upon me rebounds disgracefully in my parent\u2019s face. Say you so?\nquoth Thales, are you afraid lest the place lessen or diminish your\nhonor and worth, as the Egyptians commonly hold the stars are magnified\nor lessened according to their higher or lower place and position?\nAnd are you more foolish than that Spartan who, when the prefect of\nthe music had appointed him to sit in the lowest seat in the choir,\nreplied, This is prudently done, for this is the ready way to bring\nthis seat into repute and esteem? It is a frivolous consideration,\nwhere or below whom we sit; and it is a wiser part to adapt ourselves\nto the judgment and humor of our right and left hand man and the\nrest of the company, that we may approve ourselves worthy of their\nfriendship, when they find we take no pet at our host, but are rather\npleased to be placed near such good company. And whosoever is disturbed\nupon the account of his place seems to be more angry with his neighbor\nthan with his host, but certainly is very troublesome and nauseous to\nboth.\n\nThese are fine words, and no more, quoth Alexidemus, for I observe you,\nthe wisest of men, as ambitious as other men; and having said thus,\nhe passed by us doggedly and trooped off. Thales, seeing us admiring\nthe innocence of the man, declared he was a fellow naturally of a\nblockish, stupid disposition; for when he was a boy, he took a parcel\nof rich perfume that was presented to Thrasybulus and poured it into a\nlarge bowl, and mixing it with a quantity of wine, he drank it off and\nwas ever hated for it. As Thales was talking after this fashion, in\ncomes a servant and tells us it was Periander\u2019s pleasure we would come\nin and inform him what we thought of a certain creature brought into\nhis presence that instant, whether it were so born by chance or were\na prodigy and omen;\u2014himself seeming mightily affected and concerned,\nfor he judged his sacrifice polluted by it. At the same time he walked\nbefore us into a certain house adjoining to his garden-wall, where we\nfound a young beardless shepherd, tolerably handsome, who having opened\na leathern bag produced and showed us a child born (as he averred) of\na mare. His upper part, as far as his neck and his hands, was of human\nshape, and the rest of his body resembled a perfect horse; his cry was\nlike that of a child newly born. As soon as Niloxenus saw it, he cried\nout, The Gods deliver us; and away he fled as one sadly affrighted.\nBut Thales eyed the shepherd a considerable while, and then smiling\n(for it was his way to jeer me perpetually about my art) says he, I\ndoubt not, Diocles, but you have been all this time seeking for some\nexpiatory offering, and intending to call to your aid those Gods whose\nprovince and work it is to avert evils from men, as if some great and\ngrievous thing had happened. Why not? quoth I, for undoubtedly this\nprodigy portends sedition and war, and I fear the dire portents thereof\nmay extend to myself, my wife, and my children, and prove all our ruin;\nsince, before I have atoned for my former fault, the Goddess gives us\nthis second evidence and proof of her displeasure. Thales replied never\na word, but laughing went out of the house. Periander, meeting him\nat the door, enquired what we thought of that creature; he dismissed\nme, and taking Periander by the hand, said, Whatsoever Diodes shall\npersuade you to do, do it at your best leisure; but I advise you either\nnot to have such young men to keep your mares, or to give them leave\nto marry. When Periander heard him out, he seemed infinitely pleased,\nfor he laughed outright, and hugging Thales in his arms he kissed him;\nthen saith he, O Diocles, I am apt to think the worst is over, and what\nthis prodigy portended is now at an end; for do you not apprehend what\na loss we have sustained in the want of Alexidemus\u2019s good company at\nsupper?\n\n4. When we entered into the house, Thales raising his voice enquired\nwhere it was his worship refused to be placed; which being shown him,\nhe sat himself in that very place, and prayed us to sit down by him,\nand said, I would gladly give any money to have an opportunity to\nsit and eat with Ardalus. This Ardalus was a Troezenian by birth, by\nprofession a minstrel, and a priest of the Ardalian Muses, whose temple\nold Ardalus had founded and dedicated. Here Esop, who was sent from\nCroesus to visit Periander, and withal to consult the oracle at Delphi,\nsitting by and beneath Solon upon a low stool, told the company this\nfable: A Lydian mule, viewing his own picture in a river, and admiring\nthe bigness and beauty of his body, raises his crest; he waxes proud,\nresolving to imitate the horse in his gait and running; but presently,\nrecollecting his extraction, how that his father was but an ass at\nbest, he stops his career and checks his own haughtiness and bravery.\nChilo replied, after his short laconic way, You are slow and yet try to\nrun, in imitation of your mule.\n\nAmidst these discourses in comes Melissa and sits her down by\nPeriander; Eumetis followed and came in as we were at supper; then\nThales calls to me (I sat me down above Bias), Why do you not make\nBias acquainted with the problems sent him from the King by Niloxenus\nthis second time, that he may soberly and warily weigh them? Bias\nanswered, I have been already scared with that news. I have known that\nBacchus is otherwise a powerful God, and for his wisdom is termed\n\u03bb\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, that is, _the interpreter_; therefore I shall undertake\nit when my belly is full of wine. Thus they jested and reparteed and\nplayed one upon another all the while they sat at table. Observing\nthe unwonted frugality of Periander at this time, I considered with\nmyself that the entertainment of wise and good men is a piece of good\nhusbandry, and that so far from enhancing a man\u2019s expenses in truth it\nserves to save charge, the charge (to wit) of costly foreign unguents\nand junkets, and the waste of the richest wines, which Periander\u2019s\nstate and greatness required him every day in his ordinary treats to\nexpend. Such costly provisions were useless here, and Periander\u2019s\nwisdom appeared in his frugality. Moreover, his lady had laid aside her\nricher habit, and appeared in an ordinary, but a very becoming dress.\n\n5. Supper now ended, and Melissa having distributed the garlands, we\noffered sacrifice; and when the minstrel had played us a tune or two,\nshe withdrew. Then Ardalus enquired of Anacharsis, if there were women\nfiddlers at Scythia. He suddenly and smartly replied, There are no\nvines there. Ardalus asked a second question, whether the Scythians had\nany Gods among them. Yes, quoth Anacharsis, and they understand what\nmen say to them; nor are the Scythians of the Grecian opinion (however\nthese last may be the better orators), that the Gods are better\npleased with the sounds of flutes and pipes than with the voice of\nmen. My friend, saith Esop, what would you say if you saw our present\npipe-makers throw away the bones of fawns and hind-calves, to use those\nof asses, affirming they yield the sweeter and more melodious sound?\nWhereupon Cleobulina made one of her riddles about the Phrygian flute,\n... in regard to the sound, and wondered that an ass, a gross animal\nand no lover of music, should yet afford bones so fit for harmony.\nTherefore it is doubtless, quoth Niloxenus, that the people of Busiris\naccuse us Naucratians of folly for using pipes made of asses\u2019 bones, it\nbeing an insufferable fault in any of them to listen to the flute or\ncornet, the sound thereof being (as they esteem it) so like the braying\nof an ass; and you know an ass is hateful to the Egyptians on account\nof Typhon.\n\n6. There happening here a short silence, Periander, observing Niloxenus\nwilling but not daring to speak, said: I cannot but commend the\ncivility of those magistrates who give audience first to strangers\nand afterwards to their own citizens; wherefore I judge it convenient\nthat we inhabitants and neighbors should proceed no farther at\npresent in our discourse, and that now attention be given to those\nroyal propositions sent us from Egypt, which the worthy Niloxenus\nis commissioned to deliver to Bias, who desires that he and we may\nscan and examine them together. And Bias said: For where or in what\ncompany would a man more joyfully adventure to give his opinion than\nhere in this? And since it is his Majesty\u2019s pleasure that I should\ngive my judgment first, in obedience to his commands I will do so, and\nafterwards they shall come to every one of you in order.\n\nThen Niloxenus delivered the paper to Bias, who broke up the seal and\ncommanded it to be read in all their hearing. The contents were these:\u2014\n\n  Amasis the king of Egypt, to Bias, the wisest of the Grecians,\n  greeting. There is a contest between my brother of Ethiopia and\n  myself about wisdom; and being baffled in divers other particulars,\n  he now demands of me a thing absurd and impracticable; for he\n  requires me to drink up the ocean dry. If I be able to read this\n  his riddle, divers cities and towns now in his possession are to be\n  annexed to my kingdom; but if I cannot resolve this hard sentence,\n  and give him the right meaning thereof, he requires of me my right\n  to all the towns bordering upon Elephantina. Consider with speed the\n  premises, and let me receive your thoughts by Niloxenus. Pray lose no\n  time. If in any thing I can be serviceable to your city or friends,\n  you may command me. Farewell.\n\nBias, having perused and for a little time meditated upon the letter,\nand whispering Cleobulus in the ear (he sat by him), exclaimed: What a\nnarration is here, O Niloxenus! Will Amasis, who governs so many men\nand is seized of so many flourishing territories, drink up the ocean\nfor the gain of a few paltry, beggarly villages? Niloxenus replied\nwith a smile: Consider, good sir, what is to be done, if he will obey.\nWhy then, said Bias, let Amasis require the Ethiopian king to stop the\nstreams which from all parts flow and empty themselves in the ocean,\nuntil he have drunk out the whole remainder; for I conceive he means\nthe present waters, not those which shall flow into it hereafter.\nNiloxenus was so overjoyed at this answer, that he could not contain\nhimself. He hugged and kissed the author, and the whole company liked\nhis opinion admirably well; and Chilo laughing desired Niloxenus to get\naboard immediately before the sea was consumed, and tell his master he\nshould mind more how to render his government sweet and potable to his\npeople, than how to swallow such a quantity of salt water. For Bias, he\ntold him, understands these things very well, and knows how to oblige\nyour lord with very useful instructions, which if he vouchsafe to\nattend, he shall no more need a golden basin to wash his feet, to gain\nrespect from his subjects; all will love and honor him for his virtue,\nthough he were ten thousand times more hateful to them than he is.\nIt were well and worthily done, quoth Periander, if all of us did pay\nhim our first-fruits in this kind by the poll (as Homer said). Such a\ncourse would bring him an accession of profit greater than the whole\nprofit of the voyage, besides being of no little use to ourselves.\n\n7. To this point it is fit that Solon should first speak, quoth Chilo,\nnot only because he is the eldest in the company and therefore sits\nuppermost at table, but because he governs and gives laws to the\namplest and most complete and flourishing republic in the world, that\nof Athens. Here Niloxenus whispered me in the ear: O Diocles, saith he,\nhow many reports fly about and are believed, and how some men delight\nin lies which they either feign of their own heads or most greedily\nswallow from the mouths of others. In Egypt I heard it reported how\nChilo had renounced all friendship and correspondence with Solon,\nbecause he maintained the mutability of laws. A ridiculous fiction,\nquoth I, for then he and we must have renounced Lycurgus, who changed\nthe laws and indeed the whole government of Sparta.\n\nSolon, pausing awhile, gave his opinion in these words: I conceive that\nmonarch, whether king or tyrant, were infinitely to be commended, who\nwould exchange his monarchy for a commonwealth. Bias subjoined, And who\nwould be first and foremost in conforming to the laws of his country.\nThales added, I reckon that prince happy, who, being old, dies in his\nbed a natural death. Fourthly, Anacharsis, If he alone be a wise man.\nFifthly, Cleobulus said, If he trust none of his courtiers. Sixthly,\nPittacus spake thus, If he could cause his subjects to have fear not\nof him but for him. Lastly, Chilo concluded thus, A magistrate ought\nto have thoughts, purposes, and resolutions not mean and earthly, but\ndivine and immortal.\n\nWhen all had given in their judgments upon this point, we requested\nPeriander he would condescend to give the company the satisfaction to\nlet them know his thoughts upon the same head. Disorder and discontent\nappearing in his countenance, he said, These opinions are enough to\nscare any wise man from affecting empire. These things, saith Esop\nafter his fault-finding way, ought rather to have been discussed\nprivately among ourselves, lest we be accounted antimonarchical while\nwe desire to be esteemed friends and loyal counsellors. Solon, gently\nclapping him upon the shoulder and smiling, answered: Do you not\nperceive that any one would make a king more moderate and a tyrant\nmore favorable, who should persuade him that it is better not to reign\nthan to reign? Then we must believe you before the oracle delivered\nunto you, quoth Esop, which pronounced that city happy that heard but\none crier. Yes, quoth Solon, and Athens, though now a commonwealth,\nhath but one crier and one magistrate, and that is the law, though\nthe government be democratical; but you, my friend, have been so\naccustomed to the croaking of ravens and the prating of jays, that you\ndo not hear your own voice. For you maintain it to be the happiness\nof a city to be under the command of one man, and yet account it the\npraise of a feast if liberty is allowed every man to speak his mind\nfreely upon what subject he pleases. But you have not prohibited your\nservants\u2019 drunkenness, as you have forbidden them to love or to use dry\nointments. Solon laughed at this; but Cleodorus the physician said: To\nuse dry ointment is like talking when a man is drenched with wine; both\nare very pleasant. Therefore, saith Chilo, it concerns men the more\ncarefully to avoid it. Esop proceeds, Thales seemed to imply that he\nshould soon grow old.\n\n8. Periander said laughing: We suffer deservedly, for, before we have\nperfected our animadversions and remarks upon the letter, we are fallen\nupon disputes so strangely foreign to the matter under consideration;\nand therefore I pray, Niloxenus, read out the remainder of your lord\u2019s\nletter, and slip not this opportunity to receive what satisfaction\nall that are present shall be able to give you. The command of the\nking of Ethiopia, says Niloxenus, is no more and no less than (to\nuse Archilochus\u2019s phrase) a broken scytale; that is, the meaning is\ninscrutable and cannot be found out. But your friend Amasis was more\ngentle and civil in his queries; for he commanded him only to resolve\nhim what was most ancient, most beautiful, greatest, wisest, most\ncommon, and withal, what was most profitable, most pernicious, most\nstrong, and most easy. Did he resolve and answer every one of these\nquestions? He did, quoth Niloxenus, and do you judge of his answers\nand the soundness thereof: and it is my prince\u2019s purpose not to\nmisrepresent his responses and condemn unjustly what he saith well, so,\nwhere he finds him under a mistake, not to suffer that to pass without\ncorrection. His answers to the foresaid questions I will read to\nyou.\u2014What is most ancient? Time. What is greatest? The World. What is\nwisest? Truth. What is most beautiful? The light. What is most common?\nDeath. What is most profitable? God. What is most pernicious? An evil\ngenius. What is strongest? Fortune. What is most easy? That which is\npleasant.\n\n9. When Niloxenus had read out these answers, there was a short silence\namong them; by and by Thales desires Niloxenus to inform him if Amasis\napproved of these answers. Niloxenus said, he liked some and disliked\nothers. There is not one of them right and sound, quoth Thales, but\nall are full of wretched folly and ignorance. As for instance, how can\nthat be most ancient whereof part is past, part is now present, and\npart is yet to come; every man knows it is younger than ourselves and\nour actions. As to his answer that truth is the most wise thing, it is\nas incongruous as if he had affirmed the light to be an eye; if he\njudged the light to be the most beautiful, how could he overlook the\nsun; as to his solutions concerning the Gods and evil geniuses, they\nare full of presumption and peril. What he saith of Fortune is void\nof sense, for her inconstancy and fickleness proceeds from want of\nstrength and power. Nor is death the most common thing; the living are\nstill at liberty, it hath not arrested them. But lest we be censured as\nhaving a faculty to find fault only, we will lay down our opinions of\nthese things, and compare them with those of the Ethiopian; and I offer\nmyself first, if Niloxenus pleases, to deliver my opinion on every one\nsingly, and I will relate both questions and answers in that method\nand order in which they were sent to Ethiopia and read to us. What is\nmost ancient? Thales answered, God, for he had no beginning. What is\ngreatest? Place; the world contains all other things, this surrounds\nand contains the world. What is most beautiful? The world; for whatever\nis framed artificially and methodically is a part of it. What is most\nwise? Time; for it has found out some things already, it will find out\nthe rest in due time. What is most common? Hope; for they that want\nother things are masters of this. What is most profitable? Virtue; for\nby a right managery of other things she makes them all beneficial and\nadvantageous. What is most pernicious? Vice; for it depraves the best\nthings we enjoy. What is the most strong? Necessity; for this alone is\ninsuperable. What is most easy? That which is most agreeable to nature;\nfor pleasures themselves are sometimes tedious and nauseating.\n\n10. All the consult approved of Thales\u2019s solutions. Then Cleodemus\nsaid: My friend Niloxenus, it becomes kings to propound and resolve\nsuch questions; but the insolence of that barbarian who would have\nAmasis drink the sea would have been better fitted by such a smart\nreprimand as Pittacus gave Alyattes, who sent an imperious letter to\nthe Lesbians. He made him no answer, except to bid him spend his time\nin eating his hot bread and onions.\n\nPeriander here assumed the discourse, and said: It was the manner of\nthe ancient Grecians heretofore, O Cleodemus, to propound doubts to one\nanother; and it hath been told us, that the most famous and eminent\npoets once met at the grave of Amphidamas in Chalcis. This Amphidamas\nwas a leading citizen, one that had perpetual wars with the Eretrians,\nand at last lost his life in one of the battles fought for the\npossession of the Lelantine plain. Now, because the writings of those\npoets were composed in verse, and so made the argument more knotty and\nthe decision more difficult, and the great names of the antagonists,\nHomer and Hesiod, whose excellence was so well known, made the umpires\ntimorous and shy to determine; they therefore betook themselves to\nthese sorts of questions, and Homer, says Lesches, propounded this\nriddle:\u2014\n\n    Tell me, O Muse, what never was\n    And never yet shall be.\n\nHesiod answered readily and extempore in this wise:\u2014\n\n    When steeds with sounding hoof, to win\n      The prize, shall run amain;\n    And at the tomb of mighty Jove\n      Their chariots break in twain.\n\nFor this reply he was infinitely commended and won the tripod. Pray\ntell me, quoth Cleodemus, what difference there is between these\nriddles and those of Eumetis, which she frames and invents to recreate\nherself with as much pleasure as other virgins make nets and girdles?\nThey may be fit to offer and puzzle women withal; but for men to beat\ntheir brains to find out their mystery would be mighty ridiculous.\nEumetis looked like one that had a great mind to reply; but her modesty\nwould not permit her, for her face was filled with blushes. But Esop in\nher vindication asked: Is it not much more ridiculous that all present\ncannot resolve the riddle she propounded to us before supper? This was\nas follows:\u2014\n\n    A man I saw, who by his fire\n      Did set a piece of brass\n    Fast to a man, so that it seemed\n      To him it welded was.\n\nCan you tell me, said he, how to construe this, and what the sense of\nit may be? No, said Cleodemus, nor do I care to know what it means. And\nyet, quoth Esop, no man understands this thing better and practises\nit more judiciously and successfully than yourself. If you deny it, I\nhave my witnesses ready; for there are your cupping-glasses. Cleodemus\nlaughed outright; for of all the physicians in his time, none used\ncupping-glasses like him, he being a person that by his frequent and\nfortunate application thereof brought them first into request in the\nworld.\n\n11. Mnesiphilus the Athenian, a friend and favorite of Solon\u2019s, said:\nO Periander, our discourse, as our wine, ought to be distributed not\naccording to our power or priority, but freely and equally, as in\na popular state; for what hath been already discoursed concerning\nkingdoms and empires signifies little to us who live in a democracy.\nWherefore I judge it convenient that every one of you beginning with\nSolon, should freely and impartially declare his sense of a popular\nstate. The motion pleased all the company; then saith Solon: My friend\nMnesiphilus, you heard, together with the rest of this good company,\nmy opinion concerning republics; but since you are willing to hear\nit again, I hold that city or state happy and most likely to remain\ndemocratic, in which those that are not personally injured are yet as\nforward to question and correct wrong-doers as that person who is more\nimmediately wronged. Bias added, Where all fear the law as they fear a\ntyrant. Thirdly, Thales said, Where the citizens are neither too rich\nnor too poor. Fourthly, Anacharsis said, Where, though in all other\nrespects they are equal, yet virtuous men are advanced and vicious\npersons degraded. Fifthly, Cleobulus said, Where the rulers fear\nreproof and shame more than the law. Sixthly, Pittacus said, Where bad\nmen are prohibited from ruling, and good men from not ruling. Chilo,\npausing a little while, determined that the best and most durable\nstate was where the subject minded the law most and the orators least.\nPeriander concluded with his opinion, that all of them would best\napprove that democracy which came next and was likest to an aristocracy.\n\n12. When they had ended this discourse, I begged they would condescend\nto direct me how to govern a house; for they were few who had cities\nand kingdoms to govern, compared with those who had houses and families\nto manage. Esop laughed and said: I hope you except Anacharsis out\nof your number; for having no house, he glories because he can be\ncontented with a chariot only, as they say the sun is whirled about\nfrom one end of the heavens to the other in his chariot. Therefore,\nsaith Anacharsis, he alone, or he principally, is most free among the\nGods, and ever at his own liberty and dispose. He governs all, and is\ngoverned and subject to none, but he rides and reigns; and you know not\nhow magnificent and capacious his chariot is; if you did, you would\nnot thus floutingly compare it with our Scythian chariots. For you\nseem in my apprehension to call these coverings made of wood and mud\nhouses, as if you should call the shell and not the living creature a\nsnail. Therefore you laughed when Solon told you how, when he viewed\nCroesus\u2019s palace and found it richly and gloriously furnished, he yet\ncould not yield he lived happily until he had tried the inward and\ninvisible state of his mind; for a man\u2019s felicity consists not in the\noutward and visible favors and blessings of Fortune, but in the inward\nand unseen perfections and riches of the mind. And you seem to have\nforgot your own fable of the fox, who, contending with the leopard as\nto which was beset with more colors and spots, and having referred the\nmatter in controversy to the arbitration of an umpire, desired him to\nconsider not so much the outside as the inside; for, saith he, I have\nmore various and different fetches and tricks in my mind than he has\nmarks or spots in his body. You regard only the handiwork of carpenters\nand masons and stone-cutters, and call this a house; not what one hath\nwithin, his children, his wife, his friends and attendants, with whom\nif a man lived in an emmet\u2019s bed or a bird\u2019s nest, enjoying in common\nthe ordinary comforts of life, this man may be affirmed to live a happy\nand a fortunate life.\n\nThis is the answer I purpose to return Esop, quoth Anacharsis, and\nI tender it to Diocles as my share in this discourse; only let the\nrest give in their opinions, if they please. Solon thought that house\nmost happy where the estate was got without injustice, kept without\ndistrust, and spent without repentance. Bias said, That house is happy\nwhere the master does freely and voluntarily at home what the law\ncompels him to do abroad. Thales held that house most happy where the\nmaster had most leisure and respite from business. Cleobulus said, That\nin which the master is more beloved than feared. Pittacus said, That\nis most happy where superfluities are not required and necessaries are\nnot wanting. Chilo added, That house is most happy where the master\nrules as a monarch in his kingdom. And he proceeded, When a certain\nLacedaemonian desired Lycurgus to establish a democracy in the city, Go\nyou, friend, replied he, and try the experiment first in your own house.\n\n13. When they had all given in their opinions upon this point, Eumetis\nand Melissa withdrew. Then Periander called for a large bowl full of\nwine, and drank to Chilo; and Chilo likewise drank to Bias. Ardalus\nthen standing up called to Esop, and said: Will you not hand the cup\nto your friends at this end of the table, when you behold those\npersons there swilling up all that good liquor, and imparting none to\nus here, as if the cup were that of Bathycles. But this cup, quoth\nEsop, is no public cup, it hath stood so long by Solon\u2019s trenchard.\nThen Pittacus called to Mnesiphilus: Why, saith he, does not Solon\ndrink, but act in contradiction to his own verses?\u2014\n\n    I love that ruby God, whose blessings flow\n    In tides, to recreate my thirsty maw;\n    Venus I court, the Muses I adore,\n    Who give us wine and pleasures evermore.\n\nAnacharsis subjoined: He fears your severe law, my friend Pittacus,\nwherein you decreed the drunkard a double punishment. You seem, said\nPittacus, a little to fear the penalty, who have adventured heretofore,\nand now again before my face, to break that law and to demand a crown\nfor the reward of your debauch. Why not, quoth Anacharsis, when there\nis a reward promised to the hardest drinker? Why should I not demand\nmy reward, having drunk down all my fellows?\u2014or inform me of any other\nend men drive at in drinking much wine, but to be drunk. Pittacus\nlaughed at this reply, and Esop told them this fable: The wolf, seeing\na parcel of shepherds in their booth feeding upon a lamb, approaching\nnear them,\u2014What a bustle and noise and uproar would you have made,\nsaith he, if I had but done what you do! Chilo said: Esop hath very\njustly revenged himself upon us, who awhile ago stopped his mouth; now\nhe observes how we prevented Mnesiphilus\u2019s discourse, when the question\nwas put why Solon did not drink up his wine.\n\nMnesiphilus then spake to this effect: I know this to be the opinion\nof Solon, that in every art and faculty, divine and human, the work\nwhich is done is more desired than the instrument wherewith it is done,\nand the end than the means conducing to that end; as, for instance,\na weaver thinks a cloak or coat more properly his work than the\nordering of his shuttles or the divers motions of his beams. A smith\nminds the soldering of his irons and the sharpening of the axe more\nthan those little things preparatory to these main matters, as the\nkindling of the coals and getting ready the stone-dust. Yet farther,\na carpenter would justly blame us, if we should affirm it is not his\nwork to build houses or ships but to bore holes or to make mortar; and\nthe Muses would be implacably incensed with him that should say their\nbusiness is only to make harps, pipes, and such musical instruments,\nnot the institution and correction of manners and the government of\nthose men\u2019s passions who are lovers of singing and masters of music.\nAnd agreeably copulation is not the work of Venus, nor is drunkenness\nthat of Bacchus; but love and friendship, affection and familiarity,\nwhich are begot and improved by the means of these. Solon terms these\nworks divine, and he professes he loves and now prosecutes them in\nhis declining years as vigorously as ever in his youthful days. That\nmutual love between man and wife is the work of Venus, the greatness\nof the pleasure affecting their bodies mixes and melts their very\nsouls; divers others, having little or no acquaintance before, have yet\ncontracted a firm and lasting friendship over a glass of wine, which\nlike fire softened and melted their tempers, and disposed them for a\nhappy union. But in such a company, and of such men as Periander hath\ninvited, there is no need of can and chalice, but the Muses themselves\nthrowing a subject of discourse among you, as it were a sober cup,\nwherein is contained much of delight and drollery and seriousness\ntoo, do hereby provoke, nourish, and increase friendship among you,\nsuffering the can to rest quietly upon the bowl, contrary to the rule\nwhich Hesiod[2] gives for those who have more skill for carousing than\nfor discoursing,\n\n    Though all the rest with stated rules we bound,\n    Unmix\u2019d, unmeasured, are thy goblets crown\u2019d:[3]\n\nfor it was the old Greek way, as Homer here tells us, to drink one to\nanother in course and order. So Ajax gave a share of his meat to his\nnext neighbor.\n\nWhen Mnesiphilus had discoursed after this manner, in comes Chersias\nthe poet, whom Periander had lately pardoned and received into favor\nupon Chilo\u2019s mediation. Saith Chersias: Does not Jupiter distribute\nto the Gods their proportion and dividend sparingly and severally, as\nAgamemnon did to his commanders when his guests drank to one another?\nIf, O Chersias, quoth Cleodemus, as you narrate, certain doves bring\nhim his ambrosia every meal, flying with a world of hardship through\nthe rocks called _Planctae_ (or _wandering_), can you blame\nhim for his sparingness and frugality and dealing out to his guests by\nmeasure?\n\n14. I am satisfied, quoth Chersias, and since we are fallen upon our\nold discourse of housekeeping, which of the company can remember what\nremains to be said thereof? There remains, if I mistake not, to show\nwhat that measure is which may content any man. Cleobulus answered: The\nlaw has prescribed a measure for wise men; but as touching fools, I\nwill tell you a story I once heard my mother relate to my brother. On a\ncertain time the moon begged of her mother a coat that would fit her.\nHow can that be done, quoth the mother, for sometimes you are full,\nsometimes the one-half of you seems lost and perished, sometimes only\na pair of horns appear. So, my Chersias, to the desires of a foolish\nimmoderate man no certain measure can be fitted; for, according to\nthe ebbings and flowings of his lust and appetite, and the frequent\nor seldom casualties that befall him, accordingly his necessities\nebb or flow, not unlike Esop\u2019s dog, who, being pinched and ready to\nstarve with cold in winter, was of mind to build himself a house; but\nwhen summer came on, he lay all along upon the ground, and stretching\nhimself in the sun thought himself monstrous big, and thought it a\nneedless thing and besides no small piece of work to build him a house\nproportionable to that bulk and bigness. And do you not observe, O\nChersias, continues he, many poor men,\u2014how one while they pinch their\nbellies, upon what short commons they live, how sparing and niggardly\nand miserable they are; and another while you may observe the same\nmen as distrustful and covetous withal, as if the plenty of city and\ncountry, the riches of king and kingdom were not sufficient to preserve\nthem from want and beggary.\n\nWhen Chersias had concluded this discourse, Cleodemus began thus: We\nsee you that are wise men possessing these outward goods after an\nunequal manner. Good sweet sir, answered Cleobulus, the law weaver-like\nhath distributed to every man a fitting, decent, adequate portion,\nand in your profession your reason does what the law does here,\u2014when\nyou feed, or diet, or physic your patient, you give not an equal\nquantity to all, but what you judge to be convenient for each in his\ncircumstances. Ardalus enquires: I pray what law compels our friend and\nSolon\u2019s host, Epimenides, to abstain from all other victuals, and to\ncontent himself with a little composition of his own, which the Greeks\ncall \u1f04\u03bb\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 (_hunger-relieving_)? This he takes into his mouth and\nchews, and eats neither dinner nor supper. This instance obliged the\nwhole company to be a little while silent, until Thales in a jesting\nway replied, that Epimenides did very wisely, for hereby he saved the\ntrouble and charge of grinding and boiling his food, as Pittacus did.\nI myself sojourning at Lesbos overheard my landlady, as she was very\nbusy at her hand-mill, singing as she used to do at her work, \u201cGrind\nmill; grind mill; for even Pittacus, the prince of great Mitylene,\ngrinds.\u201d[4] Quoth Solon: Ardalus, I wonder you have not read the law\nof Epimenides\u2019s frugality in Hesiod\u2019s writings, who prescribes him and\nothers this spare diet; for he was the person that gratified Epimenides\nwith the seeds of this nutriment, when he directed him to enquire how\ngreat benefit a man might receive by mallows and asphodel.[5] Do you\nbelieve, said Periander, that Hesiod meant this literally; or rather\nthat, being himself a great admirer of parsimony, he hereby intended\nto exhort men to use a mean and spare diet, as most healthful and\npleasant? For the chewing of mallows is very wholesome, and the stalk\nof asphodel is very luscious; but this \u201cexpeller of hunger and thirst\u201d\nI take to be rather physic than natural food, consisting of honey and\nI know not what barbarian cheese, and of many and costly seeds fetched\nfrom foreign parts. If to make up this composition so many ingredients\nwere requisite, and so difficult to come by and so expensive, Hesiod\nmight as well have kept his breath to cool his pottage, and never\nblessed the world with the discovery. And yet I admire how your host,\nwhen he went to perform the great purification for the Delians not long\nsince, could overlook the monuments and patterns of the first aliment\nwhich the people brought into the temple,\u2014and, among other cheap\nfruits such as grow of themselves, the mallows and the asphodel; the\nusefulness and innocency whereof Hesiod seemed in his work to magnify.\nNot only that, quoth Anacharsis, but he affirms both plants to be great\nrestoratives. You are in the right, quoth Cleodemus; for it is evident\nHesiod was no ordinary physician, who could discourse so learnedly\nand judiciously of diet, of the nature of wines, and of the virtue of\nwaters and baths, and of women, the proper times for procreation, and\nthe site and position of infants in the womb; insomuch, that (as I take\nit) Esop deserves much more the name of Hesiod\u2019s scholar and disciple\nthan Epimenides, whose great and excellent wisdom the fable of the\nnightingale and hawk demonstrates. But I would gladly hear Solon\u2019s\nopinion in this matter; for having sojourned long at Athens and being\nfamiliarly acquainted with Epimenides, it is more than probable he\nmight learn of him the grounds upon which he accustomed himself to so\nspare a diet.\n\n15. To what purpose, said Solon, should I trouble him or myself to\nmake enquiry in a matter so plain? For if it be a blessing next to the\ngreatest to need little victuals, then it is the greatest felicity to\nneed none at all. If I may have leave to deliver my opinion, quoth\nCleodemus, I must profess myself of a different judgment, especially\nnow we sit at table; for as soon as the meat is taken away, we have\nremoved what belongs to those Gods that are the patrons of friendship\nand hospitality. As upon the removal of the earth, quoth Thales,\nthere must needs follow an universal confusion of all things, so\nin forbidding men meat, there must needs follow the dispersion and\ndissolution of the family, the sacred fire, the cups, the feasts and\nentertainments, which are the principal and most innocent diversions\nof mankind; and so all the comforts of society are at end. For to men\nof business some recreation is necessary, and the preparation and use\nof victuals conduces much thereunto. Again, to be without victuals\nwould tend to the destruction of husbandry, for want whereof the\nearth would soon be overgrown with weeds, and through the sloth of\nmen overflowed with waters. And together with this, all arts would\nfail which are supported and encouraged hereby; nay, more, take away\nhospitality and the use of victuals, and the worship and honor of the\nGods will sink and perish; the sun will have but small and the moon\nyet smaller reverence, if they afford men only light and heat. And who\nwill build an altar or offer sacrifice to Jupiter Pluvius, or to Ceres\nthe patroness of husbandmen, or to Neptune the preserver of plants and\ntrees? Or how can Bacchus be any longer termed the donor of all good\nthings, if men make no further use of the good things he gives? What\nshall men sacrifice? What first-fruits shall they offer? In short, the\nsubversion and confusion of the greatest blessings attend this opinion.\nPromiscuously and indefatigably to pursue all sorts of pleasures\nI own to be brutish, and to avoid all with a suitable aversion\nequally blockish; let the mind then freely enjoy such pleasures as\nare agreeable to its nature and temper. But for the body, there is\ncertainly no pleasure more harmless and commendable and fitting than\nthat which springs from a plentiful table,\u2014which is granted by all men;\nfor, placing this in the middle, men converse with one another and\nshare in the provision. As to the pleasures of the bed, men use these\nin the dark, reputing the use thereof no less shameful and beastly than\nthe total disuse of the pleasures of the table.\n\nCleodemus having finished this long harangue, I began to this effect.\nYou omit one thing, my friend, how they that decry food decry sleep\ntoo, and they that declaim against sleep declaim against dreams in\nthe same breath, and so destroy the primitive and ancient way of\ndivination. Add to this, that our whole life will be of one form and\nfashion, and our soul enclosed in a body to no purpose; many and those\nthe principal parts thereof are naturally so formed and fashioned as\nto be organs of nutriment; so the tongue, the teeth, the stomach, and\nthe liver, whereof none are idle, none framed for other use, so that\nwhosoever hath no need of nutriment has no need of his body; that is,\nin other words, no man hath any need of himself, for every man hath a\nbody of his own. This I have thought fit to offer in vindication of our\nbellies; if Solon or any other has any thing to object to what I have\nsaid, I am willing to hear him.\n\n16. Yea, doubtless, replies Solon, or we may be reputed more\ninjudicious than the Egyptians. For when any person dies among them,\nthey open him and show him so dissected to the sun; his guts they throw\ninto the river, to the remaining parts they allow a decent burial, for\nthey think the body now pure and clean; and to speak truly, they are\nthe foulest parts of the body, and like that lower hell crammed with\ndead carcasses and at the same time flowing with offensive rivers, such\nas flame with fire and are disturbed with tempests. No live creature\nfeeds upon another living creature, but we first take away their lives,\nand in that action we do them great wrong; forasmuch as whatsoever\nis transmuted and turned into another loseth the nature which it had\nbefore, and is corrupted that it may become nourishment to the others.\nNow the very plants have life in them,\u2014that is clear and manifest, for\nwe perceive they grow and spread. But to abstain from eating flesh (as\nthey say Orpheus of old did) is more a pretence than a real avoiding\nof an injury proceeding from the just use of meat. One way there is,\nand but one way, whereby a man may avoid offence, namely by being\ncontented with his own, not coveting what belongs to his neighbor. But\nif a man\u2019s circumstances be such and so hard that he cannot subsist\nwithout wronging another man, the fault is God\u2019s, not his. The case\nbeing such with some persons, I would fain learn if it be not advisable\nto destroy, at the same time with injustice, these instruments of\ninjustice, the belly, stomach, and liver, which have no sense of\njustice or appetite to honesty, and therefore may be fitly compared to\nyour cook\u2019s implements, his knives and his caldrons, or to a baker\u2019s\nchimney and bins and kneading-tubs. Verily one may observe the souls of\nsome men confined to their bodies, as to a house of correction, barely\nto do the drudgery and to serve the necessities thereof. It was our own\ncase but even now. While we minded our meat and our bellies, we had\nneither eyes to see nor ears to hear; but now the table is taken away,\nwe are free to discourse among ourselves and to enjoy one another;\nand now our bellies are full, we have nothing else to do or care for.\nAnd if this condition and state wherein we at present are would last\nour whole life, we having no wants to fear nor riches to covet (for a\ndesire of superfluities attends a desire of necessaries), would not our\nlives be much more comfortable and life itself much more desirable?\n\nYea, but Cleodemus stiffly maintains the necessity of eating and\ndrinking, else we shall want tables and cups, and shall not be able\nto sacrifice to Ceres and Proserpina. By a parity of reason there\nis a necessity there should be contentions and wars, that men may\nhave bulwarks and citadels and fortifications by land, fleets and\nnavies abroad at sea, and that having slain hundreds, we may offer\nsacrifices (called Hecatomphonia) after the Messenian manner. By this\nreason we shall find men grudging their own health, for (they will\nsay) there will be no need of down or feather beds unless they are\nsick; and so those healing Gods, and particularly Esculapius, will be\nvast sufferers, for they will infallibly lose so many fat and rich\nsacrifices yearly. Nay, the art of chirurgery will perish, and all\nthose ingenious instruments that have been invented for the cure of\nman will lie by useless and insignificant. And what great difference\nis there between this and that? For meat is a medicine against hunger,\nand such as keep a regular diet are said to cure themselves,\u2014I mean\nsuch as use meat not for wantonness but of necessity. For it is plain,\nthe prejudices we receive by feeding far surmount the pleasures. And\nthe pleasure of eating fills a very little place in our bodies and very\nlittle time. But why should I trouble you or myself with a catalogue of\nthe many vexations which attend that man who is necessitated to provide\nfor a family, and the many difficulties which distract him in his\nundertaking? For my part, I verily believe Homer had an eye to this\nvery thing, when, to prove the immortality of the Gods, he made use of\nthis very argument, that they were such because they used no victuals;\n\n    For not the bread of man their life sustains,\n    Nor wine\u2019s inflaming juice supplies their veins;[6]\n\nintimating meat to be the cause of death as well as the means of\nsustaining and supporting life. From hence proceed divers fatal\ndistempers caused much more by fulness than by fasting; and to digest\nwhat we have eaten proves frequently a harder matter than to provide\nand procure what we eat. And when we solicitously enquire beforehand\nwhat we should do or how we should employ ourselves if we had not such\ncare and business to take up our time, this is as if Danaus\u2019s daughters\nshould trouble their heads to know what they should do if they had no\nsieves to fill with water. We drudge and toil for necessaries, for want\nof better and nobler business. As slaves then who have gained their\nfreedom do now and then those drudgeries and discharge those servile\nemployments and offices for their own benefit which they undertook\nheretofore for their masters\u2019 advantage, so the mind of man, which at\npresent is enslaved to the body and the service thereof, when once it\nbecomes free from this slavery, will take care of itself, and spend its\ntime in contemplation of truth without distraction or disturbance. Such\nwere our discourses upon this head, O Nicarchus.\n\n17. And before Solon had fully finished, in came Gorvias, Periander\u2019s\nbrother, who was just returned from Taenarum, whither he had been sent\nby the advice of the oracle to sacrifice to Neptune and to conduct\na deputation. Upon his entrance we welcomed him home; and Periander\nhaving among the rest saluted him, Gorgias sat by him upon a bed, and\nprivately whispered something to his brother which we could not hear.\nPeriander by his various gestures and motions discovered different\naffections; sometimes he seemed sad and melancholic, by and by\ndisturbed and angry; frequently he looked as doubtful and distrustful\nmen use to do; awhile after he lifts up his eyes as is usual with men\nin a maze. At last recovering himself, saith he, I have a mind to\nimpart to you the contents of this embassy; but I scarce dare do it,\nremembering Thales\u2019s aphorism, how things impossible or incredible\nare to be concealed and only things credible and probable are to be\nrelated. Bias answered, I crave leave to explain Thales\u2019s saying, We\nmay distrust enemies, even though they speak things credible, and trust\nfriends, even though they relate things incredible; and I suppose by\nenemies he meant vicious men and foolish, and by friends, wise and good\nmen. Then, brother Gorgias, quoth Periander, I pray relate the whole\nstory particularly.\n\n18. Gorgias in obedience to his brother\u2019s command began his story thus:\u2014\n\nWhen we had fasted now for three days and offered sacrifice upon each\nof those days, we were all resolved to sit up the third night and\nspend it in pastime and dancing. The moon shone very bright upon the\nwater, and the sea was exceeding calm and still; this we saw, for we\nsported ourselves upon the shore. Being thus taken up, all of a sudden\nwe espied a wonderful spectacle off at sea, making with incredible\nexpedition to the adjoining promontory. The violence of the motion made\nthe sea foam again, and the noise was so loud, that the whole company\nforsook their sport and ran together toward the place, admiring what\nthe matter should be. Before we could make a full discovery of the\nwhole, the motion was so rapid, we perceived divers dolphins, some\nswimming in a ring or circle, others hastening amain to that part of\nthe shore which was most smooth, and others following after and (as it\nwere) bringing up the rear. In the middle there was a certain heap\nwhich we could perceive above the water; but we could not distinctly\napprehend what it was, till drawing near the shore we saw all the\ndolphins flocking together, and having made near the land they safely\nsurrendered their charge, and left out of danger a man breathing and\nshaking himself. They returned to the promontory, and there seemed\nto rejoice more than before for this their fortunate undertaking.\nDivers in the company were affrighted and ran away; myself and a few\nmore took courage, and went on to see and satisfy ourselves what this\nunusual matter might be; there we found and instantly knew our old\nacquaintance Arion the musician, who told us his name. He wore that\nvery garment he used when he strove for mastery. We brought him into\nour tent and found he had received no damage in his passage, save only\na little lassitude by the violence of the motion. He told us the whole\nstory of his adventure,\u2014a story incredible to all but such as saw\nit with their eyes. He told us how, when he had determined to leave\nItaly, being hastened away by Periander\u2019s letters, he went aboard a\nCorinthian merchantman then in port and ready to sail; being off at\nsea with the winds favorable, he observed the seamen bent to ruin him,\nand the master of the vessel told him as much, and that they purposed\nto execute their design upon him that very night. In this distress,\nthe poor man (as if inspired by his good Genius) girds about him his\nheretofore victorious, now his funeral cloak, with a brave resolution\nto compose and sing his own epitaph, as the swans when they apprehend\nthe approaches of death are reported to do. Being thus habited, he\ntold the seamen he was minded to commit the protection of himself and\nhis fellow-passengers to the providence of the Gods in a Pythian song;\nthen standing upon the poop near the side of the vessel, and having\ninvoked the help and assistance of all the sea Gods, he strikes up\nbriskly and sings to his harp. Before he had half finished his carol,\nthe sun set, and he could discern Peloponnesus before him. The seamen\nthought it tedious to tarry for the night, wherefore they resolved to\nmurder him immediately, to which purpose they unsheathed their swords.\nSeeing this, and beholding the master standing with his face covered,\nhe leaped into the sea as far as he could; but before his body sunk he\nfound himself supported by dolphins. At first he was surprised with\ncare and trouble; but by and by, finding himself marching forward\nwith much ease and security, and observing a whole shoal of dolphins\nflocking about him and joyfully contending which should appear most\nforward and serviceable in his preservation, and discerning the vessel\nat a considerable distance behind, he apprehended the nimbleness of\nhis porters; then, and not till then, his fears forsook him, and he\nprofessed he was neither so fearful of death nor desirous of life as\nhe was full of ambitious desire to reach the haven of safety, that\nhe might show to all men that he stood in the grace and favor of the\nGods, and that he might himself believe more firmly than ever before\nin their being and goodness. In his passage, as he lifted up his eyes\ntoward heaven, and beheld the stars glittering and twinkling and the\nmoon full and glorious, and the sea calm all about her as she seemed\nto rise out of it, and yielding him (as it were) a beaten track; he\ndeclared, he thought God\u2019s justice had more eyes than one, and that\nwith these many eyes the Gods beheld what was acted here below both by\nsea and land. With such contemplations he performed his voyage less\nanxiously, which much abated the tediousness thereof and was a comfort\nand refreshment to him in his solitude and danger. At last, arriving\nnear the promontory which was both steep and high, and fearing danger\nin a straight course and direct line, they unanimously veered about,\nand making to shore with a little compass for security, they delivered\nArion to us in safety, so that he plainly perceived and with thanks\nacknowledged a Providence.\n\nWhen Arion had finished this narrative of his escape, I asked him\n(quoth Gorgias) whither the ship was bound; he told me for Corinth,\nbut it would not be there very suddenly, for when he leaped out of the\nship and was carried (as he conceived) about five hundred furlongs, he\nperceived a calm, which must needs much retard their arrival who were\naboard. Gorgias added that, having learned the names of the pilot and\nmaster and the colors of the ship, he immediately despatched out ships\nand soldiers to examine all the ports, all this while keeping Arion\nconcealed, lest the criminals should upon notice of his deliverance\nescape the pursuit of justice. This action happened very luckily, as if\nit were directed by the power of the Gods; for as soon as he arrived at\nCorinth, news was brought him that the same ship was in port, and that\nhis party had seized it and secured all the men, merchants and others.\nWhereupon Periander commended Gorgias\u2019s discretion and zeal, desiring\nhim to proceed and lose no time, but immediately to clap them in close\nprison, and to suffer none to come at them to give the least notice of\nArion\u2019s miraculous escape.\n\n19. Gentlemen, quoth Esop, I remember you derided my dialogue of the\ndaws and crows; and now you can admire and believe as improbable a\nstory of dolphins. You are mightily out, said I, for this is no new\nstory which we believe, but it is recorded in the annals of Ino and\nAthamas above a thousand years ago. These passages are supernatural,\nquoth Solon, and much above our reason; what befell Hesiod is of a\nlower kind, and more proper for our discourse, and if you have not\nheard of it before, it is worth your hearing.\n\nHesiod was once entertained at the same house in Locris with a certain\nMilesian. In this his sojourning time it happened the gentleman\u2019s\ndaughter was got with child by the Milesian; which being discovered,\nthe whole family concluded Hesiod, if not guilty, must be privy to the\nfact. His innocence was but a weak fence against their jealousy and\naspersions; and therefore, rashly censuring him guilty, the brothers\nof the woman waylaid him in his return home, and slew him and his\ncompanion Troilus near the temple of Nemean Jove in Locris. Their\ncarcasses they threw into the sea; that of Troilus was carried into the\nriver Daphnus, and rested upon a certain rock compassed with waters,\njust above the surface of the sea, which rock bears his name to this\nday. The body of Hesiod was no sooner fallen upon the surface of the\nwater, but a company of dolphins received it, and conveyed it to Rhium\nand Molycria. It happened the Locrians were assembled at Rhium that\nday to feast and make merry, according to the custom which continues\nstill among them. As soon as they perceived a carcass floating or\nrather swimming towards them, they hastened, not without admiration, to\nsee what it was; and knowing the body to be Hesiod\u2019s, they instantly\nresolved to find out the murderers. It proved an easy discovery. After\nconviction they threw them headlong alive into the sea, and ordered\ntheir houses to be demolished to the very foundations. The body they\nburied in the grove of the temple of Jove, that no foreigner might find\nit out; the reason of this act was that the Orchomenians had searched\nfar and near for it at the instigation of the oracle, who promised them\nthe greatest felicity if they could get the bones of Hesiod and bury\nthem in their city. Now if dolphins are so favorable to dead men, it is\nvery probable they have a strong affection for the living, especially\nfor such as delight in music, whether vocal or instrumental. And this\nwe know undoubtedly, that these creatures delight infinitely in music;\nthey love it, and if any man sings or plays as he sails along in fair\nweather, they will quietly swim by the side of the ship, and listen\ntill the music is ended. When children bathe in the water and sport\nthemselves, you shall have a parcel of them flock together and sport\nand swim by them; and they may do it the more securely, since it is a\nbreach of the law of Nature to hurt them. You never heard of any man\nthat fishes for them purposely or hurts them wilfully, unless falling\ninto the nets they spoil the sport, and so, like naughty children, are\ncorrected for their misdemeanors. I very well remember the Lesbians\ntold me how a maid of their town was preserved from drowning by them.\n\n20. It was a very true story, quoth Pittacus, and there are divers\nstill alive who will attest it, if need be. The builders or founders\nof Lesbos were commanded by the oracle to sail till they came to a\nhaven called Mesogaeum, there they should sacrifice a bull to Neptune,\nand for the honor of Amphitrite and the sea-nymphs they should offer a\nvirgin. The principal persons in this colony were seven in number; the\neighth was one Echelaus by name, and appointed head of the rest by the\noracle himself; and he was a bachelor. A daughter of one of these seven\nwas to be sacrificed, but who it should be was to be decided by lot,\nand the lot fell upon Smintheus\u2019s sister. Her they dressed most richly,\nand so apparelled they conveyed her in abundance of state to the\nwater-side, and having composed a prayer for her, they were now ready\nto throw her overboard. There was in the company a certain ingenuous\nyoung gentleman whose name was Enalus; he was desperately in love with\nthis young lady, and his love prompted him to endeavor all he could for\nher preservation, or at least to perish in the attempt. In the very\nmoment she was to be cast away, he clasps her in his arms and throws\nhimself and her together into the sea. Shortly after there was a flying\nreport they were both conveyed safe to land. A while after Enalus was\nseen at Lesbos, who gave out they were preserved by dolphins. I could\ntell you stories more incredible than these, such as would amuse some\nand please others; but it is impossible to command men\u2019s faith. The sea\nwas so tempestuous and rough, the people were afraid to come too near\nthe waters, when Enalus arrived. A number of polypuses followed him\neven to Neptune\u2019s temple, the biggest and strongest of which carried a\ngreat stone. This Enalus dedicated, and this stone is therefore called\nEnalus to this day. To be short and to speak all in a few words,\u2014he\nthat knows how to distinguish between the impossible and the unusual,\nto make a difference between the unlikely and the absurd, to be neither\ntoo credulous nor too distrustful,\u2014he hath learned your lesson, Do not\noverdo.[7]\n\n21. Anacharsis after all this discourse spake to this purpose: Since\nThales has asserted the being of a soul in all the principal and most\nnoble parts of the universe, it is no wonder that the most commendable\nacts are governed by an over-ruling Power; for, as the body is the\norgan of the soul, so the soul is an instrument in the hand of God.\nNow as the body has many motions of its own proceeding from itself,\nbut the best and most from the soul, so the soul acts some things by\nits own power, but in most things it is subordinate to the will and\npower of God, whose glorious instrument it is. To me it seems highly\nunreasonable\u2014and I should be but too apt to censure the wisdom of the\nGods, if I were convinced\u2014that they use fire, and water, and wind, and\nclouds, and rain for the preservation and welfare of some and for the\ndetriment and destruction of others, while at the same time they make\nno use of living creatures that are doubtless more serviceable to their\nends than bows are to the Scythians or harps or pipes to the Greeks.\n\nChersias the poet broke off this discourse, and told the company of\ndivers that were miraculously preserved to his certain knowledge, and\nmore particularly of Cypselus, Periander\u2019s father, who being newly\nborn, his adversary sent a party of bloody fellows to murder him. They\nfound the child in his nurse\u2019s arms, and seeing him smile innocently\nupon them, they had not the heart to hurt him, and so departed; but\npresently recalling themselves and considering the peremptoriness of\ntheir orders, they returned and searched for him, but could not find\nhim, for his mother had hid him very carefully in a chest.[8] When\nhe came to years of discretion, and understood the greatness of his\nformer danger and deliverance, he consecrated a chapel at Delphi to\nApollo, by whose care he conceived himself preserved from crying in\nthat critical time, and by his cries from betraying his own life.\nPittacus, addressing his discourse to Periander, said: It is well done\nof Chersias to make mention of that chapel, for this brings to my\nmind a question I several times purposed to ask you but still forgot,\nnamely,\u2014To what intent all those frogs were carved upon the palm-tree\nbefore the door, and how they affect either the Deity or the dedicator?\nPeriander remitted him to Chersias for answer, as a person better\nversed in these matters, for he was present when Cypselus consecrated\nthe chapel. But Chersias smiling would not satisfy them, until they\nresolved him the meaning of these aphorisms; \u201cDo not overdo,\u201d \u201cKnow\nthyself,\u201d but particularly and principally this,\u2014which had scared\ndivers from wedlock and others from suretyship and others from speaking\nat all,\u2014\u201cPromise, and you are ruined.\u201d What need we to explain to you\nthese, when you yourself have so mightily magnified Esop\u2019s comment\nupon each of them. Esop replied: When Chersias is disposed to jest\nwith me upon these subjects, and to jest in earnest, he is pleased to\nfather such sayings and sentences upon Homer, who, bringing in Hector\nfuriously flying upon others, yet at another time represents him as\nflying from Ajax son of Telamon,[9]\u2014an argument that Hector knew\nhimself. And Homer made Ulysses approve the saying \u201cDo not overdo,\u201d\nwhen he besought his friend Diomedes not to commend him too much nor\nyet to censure him too much. And for suretyship he exposes it as a\nmatter unsafe, nay highly dangerous, saying that to be bound for\nidle and wicked men is full of hazard.[10] To confirm this, Chersias\nreported how Jupiter had thrown Ate headlong out of heaven, because she\nwas by when he made the promise about the birth of Hercules whereby he\nwas circumvented.\n\nHere Solon interrupted: I am of this mind, that we now give ear to the\nmost wise Homer,\u2014\n\n    But now the night extends her awful shade:\n    The Goddess parts you: be the night obeyed.[11]\n\nIf it please the company then, let us sacrifice to the Muses, to\nNeptune, and to Amphitrite, and so bid each adieu for this night.\n\nThis was the conclusion of that meeting, my dear Nicarchus.\n\n\n\n\nHOW A YOUNG MAN OUGHT TO HEAR POEMS.\n\n\n1. It may be allowed to be a question fit for the determination of\nthose concerning whom Cato said, Their palates are more sensitive than\ntheir hearts, whether that saying of Philoxenus the poet be true or no.\nThe most savory flesh is that which is no flesh, and fish that is no\nfish. Yet this to me, Marcus Sedatus, is out of question, that those\nprecepts of philosophy which seem not to be delivered with a designed\ngravity, such as becomes philosophers, take most with persons that are\nvery young, and meet with a more ready acceptance and compliance from\nthem. Whence it is that they do not only read through Esop\u2019s fables\nand the fictions of poets and the Abaris of Heraclides and Ariston\u2019s\nLyco; but they also read such doctrines as relate to the souls of men,\nif something fabulous be mixed with them, with an excess of pleasure\nthat borders on enthusiasm. Wherefore we are not only to govern their\nappetites in the delights of eating and drinking, but also (and much\nmore) to inure them to a like temperance in reading and hearing, that,\nwhile they make use of pleasure as a sauce, they may pursue that which\nis wholesome and profitable in those things which they read. For\nneither can a city be secure if but one gate be left open to receive\nthe enemy, though all the rest be shut; nor a young man safe, though he\nbe sufficiently fortified against the assaults of all other pleasures,\nwhilst he is without any guard against those of the ear. Yea, the\nnearer the commerce is betwixt the delights of that sense and those\nof the mind and reason, by so much the more, when he lies open on that\nside, is he apt to be debauched and corrupted thereby. Seeing therefore\nwe cannot (and perhaps would not if we could) debar young men of the\nsize of my Soclarus and thy Cleander altogether from the reading of\npoets, yet let us keep the stricter guard upon them, as those who need\na guide to direct them in their reading more than in their walks. Upon\nwhich consideration, I find myself disposed to send thee at present\nin writing that discourse concerning Poetry which I had lately an\noccasion to deliver by word of mouth; that, when thou hast read it over\nthyself, thou mayst also make such use of it, if thou judgest it may be\nserviceable to that purpose, as those which are engaged to drink hard\ndo of amethysts (or preservatives against drunkenness),\u2014that is, that\nthou mayst communicate it to Cleander, to prepossess him therewith;\nseeing he is naturally endowed with a brisk, piercing, and daring wit,\nand therefore more prone to be inveigled by that sort of study.\n\nThey say of the fish called polypus that\n\n    His head in one respect is very good,\n    But in another very naughty food;\n\nbecause, though it be very luscious to eat, yet it is thought to\ndisturb the fancy with frightful and confused dreams. And the like\nobservation may be made concerning poetry, that it affords sweet and\nwithal wholesome nourishment to the minds of young men, but yet it\ncontains likewise no less matter of disturbance and emotion to them\nthat want a right conduct in the study thereof. For of it also, as well\nas of Egypt, may it be said that (to those who will use it)\n\n    Its over-fertile and luxuriant field\n    Medicines and poisons intermixt doth yield;\n\nfor therein\n\n    Love with soft passions and rich language drest\n    Oft steals the heart out of th\u2019 ingenuous breast.[12]\n\nAnd indeed such only are endangered thereby, for the charms of that\nart ordinarily affect not those that are downright sots and naturally\nincapable of learning. Wherefore, when Simonides was asked why of all\nmen he could not deceive the Thessalians, his answer was, Because they\nare not so well bred as to be capable of being cajoled by me. And\nGorgias used to call tragical poems cheats, wherein he that did cheat\nwas juster than he that did not cheat, and he that was cheated was\nwiser than he that was not cheated.\n\nIt deserves therefore our consideration, whether we shall put young\nmen into Epicurus\u2019s boat,\u2014wherein, having their ears stopped with wax,\nas those of the men of Ithaca were, they shall be obliged to sail by\nand not so much as touch at poetry,\u2014or rather keep a guard on them,\nso as to oblige their judgments by principles of right reason to use\nit aright, and preserve them from being seduced to their hurt by that\nwhich affords them so much delight. For neither did Lycurgus, the\nvaliant son of Dryas (as Homer[13] calls him) act like a man of sound\nreason in the course which he took to reform his people that were much\ninclined to drunkenness, by travelling up and down to destroy all the\nvines in the country; whereas he should have ordered that every vine\nshould have a well of water near it, that (as Plato saith) the drunken\ndeity might be reduced to temperance by a sober one. For water mixed\nwith wine takes away the hurtful spirits, while it leaves the useful\nones in it. Neither should we cut down or destroy the Muses\u2019 vine,\npoetry; but where we perceive it luxuriates and grows wild through\nan ungoverned appetite of applause, there ought we to prune away or\nkeep under the fabulous and theatrical branches thereof; and where we\nfind any of the Graces linked to any of the Muses,\u2014that is, where the\nlusciousness and tempting charms of language are not altogether barren\nand unprofitable,\u2014there let us bring in philosophy to incorporate with\nit.\n\nFor as, where the mandrake grows near the vine and so communicates\nsomething of its force thereto, the wine that is made of its grapes\nmakes the sleep of those that drink it more refreshing; so doth the\ntempering poetry with the principles of philosophy and allaying their\nroughness with its fictions render the study of them more easy and\nthe relish of them more grateful to young learners. Wherefore those\nthat would give their minds to philosophical studies are not obliged\nto avoid poetry altogether, but rather to prepare themselves for\nphilosophy by poems, accustoming themselves to search for and embrace\nthat which may profit in that which pleaseth them, and rejecting\nand discarding that wherein they find nothing of this nature. For\nthis discrimination is the first step to learning; and when this is\nattained, then, according to what Sophocles saith,\u2014\n\n    To have begun well what we do intend\n    Gives hope and prospect of as good an end.\n\n2. Let us therefore in the first place possess those whom we initiate\nin the study of poetry with this notion (as one which they ought always\nto have at hand), that\n\n    \u2019Tis frequently the poet\u2019s guise\n    To intermingle truth with lies;\u2014\n\nwhich they do sometimes with and sometimes against their wills. They\ndo it with their wills, because they find strict truth too rigid to\ncomply with that sweetness and gracefulness of expression, which most\nare taken with, so readily as fiction doth. For real truth, though it\ndisgust never so much, must be told as it is, without alteration; but\nthat which is feigned in a discourse can easily yield and shift its\ngarb from the distasteful to that which is more pleasing. And indeed,\nneither the measures nor the tropes nor the grandeur of words nor the\naptness of metaphors nor the harmony of the composition gives such\na degree of elegance and gracefulness to a poem as a well-ordered\nand artificial fiction doth. But as in pictures the colors are more\ndelightful to the eye than the lines, because those give them a nearer\nresemblance to the persons they were made for, and render them the\nmore apt to deceive the beholder; so in poems we are more apt to be\nsmitten and fall in love with a probable fiction than with the greatest\naccuracy that can be observed in measures and phrases, where there is\nnothing fabulous or fictitious joined with it. Wherefore Socrates,\nbeing induced by some dreams to attempt something in poetry, and\nfinding himself unapt, by reason that he had all his lifetime been\nthe champion of severe truth, to hammer out of his own invention a\nlikely fiction, made choice of Esop\u2019s fables to turn into verse; as\njudging nothing to be true poetry that had in it nothing of falsehood.\nFor though we have known some sacrifices performed without pipes and\ndances, yet we own no poetry which is utterly destitute of fable and\nfiction. Whence the verses of Empedocles and Parmenides, the Theriaca\nof Nicander, and the sentences of Theognis, are rather to be accounted\nspeeches than poems, which, that they might not walk contemptibly on\nfoot, have borrowed from poetry the chariot of verse, to convey them\nthe more creditably through the world. Whensoever therefore any thing\nis spoken in poems by any noted and eminently famous man, concerning\nGods or Daemons or virtue, that is absurd or harsh, he that takes such\nsayings for truths is thereby misled in his apprehension and corrupted\nwith an erroneous opinion. But he that constantly keeps in his mind and\nmaintains as his principle that the witchcraft of poetry consists in\nfiction, he that can at all turns accost it in this language,\u2014\n\n    Riddle of art! like which no sphinx beguiles;\n    Whose face on one side frowns while th\u2019 other smiles!\n    Why cheat\u2019st thou, with pretence to make us wise,\n    And bid\u2019st sage precepts in a fool\u2019s disguise?\u2014\n\nsuch a one, I say, will take no harm by it, nor admit from it any\nabsurd thing into his belief. But when he meets in poetry with\nexpressions of Neptune\u2019s rending the earth to pieces and discovering\nthe infernal regions,[14] he will be able to check his fears of the\nreality of any such accident; and he will rebuke himself for his anger\nagainst Apollo for the chief commander of the Greeks,\u2014\n\n    Whom at a banquet, whiles he sings his praise\n    And speaks him fair, yet treacherously he slays.[15]\n\nYea, he will repress his tears for Achilles and Agamemnon, while\nthey are represented as mourning after their death, and stretching\nforth their limber and feeble hands to express their desire to live\nagain. And if at any time the charms of poetry transport him into any\ndisquieting passions, he will quickly say to himself, as Homer very\nelegantly (considering the propension of women to listen after fables)\nsays in his Necyia, or relation of the state of the dead,\u2014\n\n    But from the dark dominions speed thy way,\n    And climb the steep ascent to upper day;\n    To thy chaste bride the wondrous story tell,\n    The woes, the horrors, and the laws of hell.[16]\n\nSuch things as I have touched upon are those which the poets willingly\nfeign. But more there are which they do not feign, but believing them\nthemselves as their own proper judgments, they put fictitious colors\nupon them to ingratiate them to us. As when Homer says of Jupiter,\u2014\n\n    Jove lifts the golden balances, that show\n    The fates of mortal men, and things below.\n    Here each contending hero\u2019s lot he tries,\n    And weighs with equal hand their destinies.\n    Low sinks the scale surcharged with Hector\u2019s fate;\n    Heavy with death it sinks, and hell receives the weight.[17]\n\nTo this fable Aeschylus hath accommodated a whole tragedy which he\ncalls Psychostasia, wherein he introduceth Thetis and Aurora standing\nby Jupiter\u2019s balances, and deprecating each of them the death of her\nson engaged in a duel. Now there is no man but sees that this fable\nis a creature of the poet\u2019s fancy, designed to delight or scare the\nreader. But this other passage,\u2014\n\n    Great Jove is made the treasurer of wars;[18]\n\nand this other also,\u2014\n\n    When a God means a noble house to raze,\n    He frames one rather than he\u2019ll want a cause:[19]\n\nthese passages, I say, express the judgment and belief of poets\nwho thereby discover and suggest to us the ignorant or mistaken\napprehensions they had of the Deities. Moreover, almost every one\nknows nowadays, that the portentous fancies and contrivances of\nstories concerning the state of the dead are accommodated to popular\napprehensions,\u2014that the spectres and phantasms of burning rivers and\nhorrid regions and terrible tortures expressed by frightful names are\nall mixed with fable and fiction, as poison with food; and that neither\nHomer nor Pindar nor Sophocles ever believed themselves when they wrote\nat this rate:\u2014\n\n    There endless floods of shady darkness stream\n    From the vast caves, where mother Night doth teem;\n\nand,\n\n    There ghosts o\u2019er the vast ocean\u2019s waves did glide,\n    By the Leucadian promontory\u2019s side;[20]\n\nand,\n\n    There from th\u2019 unfathomed gulf th\u2019 infernal lake\n    Through narrow straits recurring tides doth make.\n\nAnd yet, as many of them as deplore death as a lamentable thing, or the\nwant of burial after death as a calamitous condition, are wont to break\nout into expressions of this nature:\u2014\n\n    O pass not by, my friend; nor leave me here\n    Without a grave, and on that grave a tear;[21]\n\nand,\n\n    Then to the ghosts the mournful soul did fly,\n    Sore grieved in midst of youth and strength to die;[22]\n\nand again,\n\n    \u2019Tis sweet to see the light. O spare me then,\n    Till I arrive at th\u2019 usual age of men:\n    Nor force my unfledged soul from hence, to know\n    The doleful state of dismal shades below.[23]\n\nThese, I say, are the speeches of men persuaded of these things, as\nbeing possessed by erroneous opinions; and therefore they touch us the\nmore nearly and torment us inwardly, because we ourselves are full of\nthe same impotent passion from which they were uttered. To fortify\nus therefore against expressions of this nature, let this principle\ncontinually ring in our ears, that poetry is not at all solicitous to\nkeep to the strict measure of truth. And indeed, as to what that truth\nin these matters is, even those men themselves who make it their only\nstudy to learn and search it out confess that they can hardly discover\nany certain footsteps to guide them in that enquiry. Let us therefore\nhave these verses of Empedocles, in this case, at hand:\u2014\n\n    No sight of man\u2019s so clear, no ear so quick,\n    No mind so piercing, that\u2019s not here to seek;\n\nas also those of Xenophanes:\u2014\n\n    The truth about the Gods and world, no man\n    E\u2019er was or shall be that determine can;\n\nand lastly, that passage concerning Socrates, in Plato, where he by the\nsolemnity of an oath disclaims all knowledge of those things. For those\nwho perceive that the searching into such matters makes the heads of\nphilosophers themselves giddy cannot but be the less inclined to regard\nwhat poets say concerning them.\n\n3. And we shall fix our young man yet the more if, when we enter him\nin the poets, we first describe poetry to him, and tell him that it\nis an imitating art and doth in many respects correspond to painting;\nnot only acquainting him with that common saying, that poetry is vocal\npainting and painting silent poetry, but teaching him, moreover,\nthat when we see a lizard or an ape or the face of a Thersites in a\npicture, we are surprised with pleasure and wonder at it, not because\nof any beauty in the things, but for the likeness of the draught. For\nit is repugnant to the nature of that which is itself foul to be at\nthe same time fair; and therefore it is the imitation\u2014be the thing\nimitated beautiful or ugly\u2014that, in case it do express it to the life,\nis commended; and on the contrary, if the imitation make a foul thing\nto appear fair, it is dispraised because it observes not decency and\nlikeness. Now some painters there are that paint uncomely actions; as\nTimotheus drew Medea killing her children; Theon, Orestes murdering\nhis mother; and Parrhasius, Ulysses counterfeiting madness; yea,\nChaerephanes expressed in picture the unchaste converse of women with\nmen. Now in such cases a young man is to be familiarly acquainted with\nthis notion, that, when men praise such pictures, they praise not the\nactions represented but only the painter\u2019s art, which doth so lively\nexpress what was designed in them. Wherefore, in like manner, seeing\npoetry many times describes by imitation foul actions and unseemly\npassions and manners, the young student must not in such descriptions\n(although performed never so artificially and commendably) believe\nall that is said as true or embrace it as good, but give its due\ncommendation so far only as it suits the subject treated of. For as,\nwhen we hear the grunting of hogs and the shrieking of pulleys and the\nrustling of wind and the roaring of seas, we are, it may be, disturbed\nand displeased, and yet when we hear any one imitating these or the\nlike noises handsomely (as Parmenio did that of an hog, and Theodorus\nthat of a pulley), we are well pleased; and as we avoid (as an\nunpleasing spectacle) the sight of sick persons and of a lazar full of\nulcers, and yet are delighted to be spectators of the Philoctetes of\nAristophon and the Jocasta of Silanion, wherein such wasting and dying\npersons are well acted; so must the young scholar, when he reads in a\npoem of Thersites the buffoon or Sisyphus the whoremaster or Batrachus\nthe bawd speaking or doing any thing, so praise the artificial managery\nof the poet, adapting the expressions to the persons, as withal to look\non the discourses and actions so expressed as odious and abominable.\nFor the goodness of things themselves differs much from the goodness\nof the imitation of them; the goodness of the latter consisting only\nin propriety and aptness to represent the former. Whence to foul\nactions foul expressions are most suitable and proper. As the shoes\nof Demonides the cripple (which, when he had lost them, he wished\nmight suit the feet of him that stole them) were but unhandsome shoes,\nbut yet fit for the man they were made for; so we may say of such\nexpressions as these:\u2014\n\n    \u2019Tis worth the while an unjust act to own,\n    When it sets him that does it on a throne;[24]\n\n    Get the repute of Just for a disguise,\n    And in it do all things whence gain may rise,\n\n    A talent dowry! Could I close my eyes\n    In sleep, or live, if thee I should despise?\n    And should I not in hell tormented be,\n    Could I be guilty of profaning thee?[25]\n\nThese, it is true, are wicked as well as false speeches, but yet are\ndecent enough in the mouth of an Eteocles, an Ixion, and an old griping\nusurer. If therefore we mind our children that the poets write not\nsuch things as praising and approving them, but do really account\nthem base and vicious and therefore accommodate such speeches to\nbase and vicious persons, they will never be damnified by them from\nthe esteem they have of the poets in whom they meet with them. But,\non the contrary, the suspicions insinuated into them of the persons\nwill render the words and actions ascribed to them suspected for evil,\nbecause proceeding from such evil men. And of this nature is Homer\u2019s\nrepresentation of Paris, when he describes him running out of the\nbattle into Helen\u2019s bed. For in that he attributes no such indecent act\nto any other, but only to that incontinent and adulterous person, he\nevidently declares that he intends that relation to import a disgrace\nand reproach to such intemperance.\n\n4. In such passages therefore we are carefully to observe whether or\nnot the poet himself do anywhere give any intimation that he dislikes\nthe things he makes such persons say; which, in the prologue to his\nThais Menander does, in these words:\u2014\n\n    Therefore, my Muse, describe me now a whore,\n    Fair, bold, and furnished with a nimble tongue;\n    One that ne\u2019er scruples to do lovers wrong;\n    That always craves, and denied shuts her door;\n    That truly loves no man, yet, for her ends,\n    Affection true to every man pretends.\n\nBut Homer of all the poets does it best. For he doth beforehand, as it\nwere, bespeak dislike of the evil things and approbation of the good\nthings he utters. Of the latter take these instances:\u2014\n\n    He readily did the occasion take,\n    And sweet and comfortable words he spake;[26]\n\n    By him he stood, and with soft speeches quelled\n    The wrath which in his heated bosom swelled.[27]\n\nAnd for the former, he so performs it as in a manner solemnly to forbid\nus to use or heed such speeches as those he mentions, as being foolish\nand wicked. For example, being to tell us how uncivilly Agamemnon\ntreated the priest, he premises these words of his own,\u2014\n\n    Not so Atrides: he with kingly pride\n    Repulsed the sacred sire, and thus replied;[28]\n\nintimating the insolency and unbecomingness of his answer. And when he\nattributes this passionate speech to Achilles,\u2014\n\n    O monster, mix\u2019d of insolence and fear,\n    Thou dog in forehead, and in heart a deer![29]\n\nhe accompanies it with this censure,\u2014\n\n    Nor yet the rage his boiling breast forsook,\n    Which thus redoubling on Atrides broke;[30]\n\nfor it was unlikely that speaking in such anger he should observe any\nrules of decency.\n\nAnd he passeth like censures on actions. As on Achilles\u2019s foul usage of\nHector\u2019s carcass,\u2014\n\n    Gloomy he said, and (horrible to view)\n    Before the bier the bleeding Hector threw.[31]\n\nAnd in like manner he doth very decently shut up relations of things\nsaid or done, by adding some sentence wherein he declares his judgment\nof them. As when he personates some of the Gods saying, on the occasion\nof the adultery of Mars and Venus discovered by Vulcan\u2019s artifice,\u2014\n\n    See the swift God o\u2019ertaken by the lame!\n    Thus ill acts prosper not, but end in shame.[32]\n\nAnd thus concerning Hecter\u2019s insolent boasting he says,\u2014\n\n    With such big words his mind proud Hector eased,\n    But venerable Juno he displeased.[33]\n\nAnd when he speaks of Pandarus\u2019s shooting, he adds,\u2014\n\n    He heard, and madly at the motion pleased,\n    His polish\u2019d bow with hasty rashness seized.[34]\n\nNow these verbal intimations of the minds and judgments of poets are\nnot difficult to be understood by any one that will heedfully observe\nthem. But besides these, they give us other hints from actions. As\nEuripides is reported, when some blamed him for bringing such an\nimpious and flagitious villain as Ixion upon the stage, to have given\nthis answer: But yet I brought him not off till I had fastened him to\na torturing wheel. This same way of teaching by mute actions is to be\nfound in Homer also, affording us useful contemplations upon those very\nfables which are usually most disliked in him. These some men offer\nforce to, that they may reduce them to allegories (which the ancients\ncalled \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9), and tell us that Venus committing adultery with Mars,\ndiscovered by the Sun, is to be understood thus: that when the star\ncalled Venus is in conjunction with that which hath the name of Mars,\nbastardly births are produced, and by the Sun\u2019s rising and discovering\nthem they are not concealed. So will they have Juno\u2019s dressing herself\nso accurately to tempt Jupiter, and her making use of the girdle of\nVenus to inflame his love, to be nothing else but the purification of\nthat part of the air which draweth nearest to the nature of fire. As\nif we were not told the meaning of those fables far better by the poet\nhimself. For he teacheth us in that of Venus, if we heed it, that light\nmusic and wanton songs and discourses which suggest to men obscene\nfancies debauch their manners, and incline them to an unmanly way of\nliving in luxury and wantonness, of continually haunting the company of\nwomen, and of being\n\n    Given to fashions, that their garb may please,\n    Hot baths, and couches where they loll at ease.\n\nAnd therefore also he brings in Ulysses directing the musician thus,\u2014\n\n    Leave this, and sing the horse, out of whose womb\n    The gallant knights that conquered Troy did come;[35]\n\nevidently teaching us that poets and musicians ought to receive the\narguments of their songs from sober and understanding men. And in the\nother fable of Juno he excellently shows that the conversation of women\nwith men, and the favors they receive from them procured by sorcery,\nwitchcraft, or other unlawful arts, are not only short, unstable, and\nsoon cloying, but also in the issue easily turned to loathing and\ndispleasure, when once the pleasure is over. For so Jupiter there\nthreatens Juno, when he tells her,\u2014\n\n    Hear this, remember, and our fury dread,\n    Nor pull the unwilling vengeance on thy head;\n    Lest arts and blandishments successless prove\n    Thy soft deceits and well dissembled love.[36]\n\nFor the fiction and representation of evil acts, when it withal\nacquaints us with the shame and damage befalling the doers, hurts not\nbut rather profits him that reads them. For which end philosophers\nmake use of examples for our instruction and correction out of\nhistorical collections; and poets do the very same thing, but with this\ndifference, that they invent fabulous examples themselves. There was\none Melanthius, who (whether in jest or earnest he said it, it matters\nnot much) affirmed that the city of Athens owed its preservation to\nthe dissensions and factions that were among the orators, giving\nwithal this reason for his assertion, that thereby they were kept from\ninclining all of them to one side, so that by means of the differences\namong those statesmen there were always some that drew the saw the\nright way for the defeating of destructive counsels. And thus it is\ntoo in the contradictions among poets, which, by lessening the credit\nof what they say, render them the less powerful to do mischief; and\ntherefore, when comparing one saying with another we discover their\ncontrariety, we ought to adhere to the better side. As in these\ninstances:\u2014\n\n          The Gods, my son, deceive poor men oft-times.\n    _Ans._ \u2019Tis easy, sir, on God to lay our crimes.\n\n           \u2019Tis comfort to thee to be rich, is\u2019t not!\n    _Ans._ No, sir, \u2019tis bad to be a wealthy sot.\n\n           Die rather than such toilsome pains to take.\n    _Ans._ To call God\u2019s service toil\u2019s a foul mistake.\n\nSuch contrarieties as these are easily solved, if (as I said) we teach\nyouth to judge aright and to give the better saying preference. But if\nwe chance to meet with any absurd passages without any others at their\nheels to confute them, we are then to overthrow them with such others\nas elsewhere are to be found in the author. Nor must we be offended\nwith the poet or grieved at him, but only at the speeches themselves,\nwhich he utters either according to the vulgar manner of speaking or,\nit may be, but in drollery. So, when thou readest in Homer of Gods\nthrown out of heaven headlong one by another, or Gods wounded by men\nand quarrelling and brawling with each other, thou mayest readily, if\nthou wilt, say to him,\u2014\n\n    Sure thy invention here was sorely out,\n    Or thou hadst said far better things, no doubt;[37]\n\nyea, and thou dost so elsewhere, and according as thou thinkest, to\nwit, in these passages of thine:\u2014\n\n    The Gods, removed from all that men doth grieve,\n    A quiet and contented life do live.\n\n    Herein the immortal Gods for ever blest\n    Feel endless joys and undisturbed rest.\n\n    The Gods, who have themselves no cause to grieve,\n    For wretched man a web of sorrow weave.[38]\n\nFor these argue sound and true opinions of the Gods; but those other\nwere only feigned to raise passions in men. Again, when Euripides\nspeaks at this rate,\u2014\n\n    The Gods are better than we men by far,\n    And yet by them we oft deceived are,\u2014\n\nwe may do well to quote him elsewhere against himself, where he says\nbetter,\u2014\n\n    If Gods do wrong, surely no Gods there are.\n\nSo also, when Pindar saith bitterly and keenly,\n\n    No law forbids us any thing to do,\n    Whereby a mischief may befall a foe,\n\ntell him: But, Pindar, thou thyself sayest elsewhere,\n\n    The pleasure which injurious acts attends\n    Always in bitter consequences ends.\n\nAnd when Sophocles speaks thus,\n\n    Sweet is the gain, wherein to lie and cheat\n    Adds the repute of wit to what we get,\n\ntell him: But we have heard thee say far otherwise,\n\n    When the account\u2019s cast up, the gain\u2019s but poor\n    Which by a lying tongue augments the store.\n\nAnd as to what he saith of riches, to wit\n\n    Wealth, where it minds to go, meets with no stay;\n    For where it finds not, it can make a way;\n    Many fair offers doth the poor let go,\n    And lose his prize because his purse is low;\n    The fair tongue makes, where wealth can purchase it,\n    The foul face beautiful, the fool a wit:\u2014\n\nhere the reader may set in opposition divers other sayings of the same\nauthor. For example,\n\n    From honor poverty doth not debar,\n    Where poor men virtuous and deserving are.\n\n    Whate\u2019er fools think, a man is ne\u2019er the worse\n    If he be wise, though with an empty purse\n\n    The comfort which he gets who wealth enjoys,\n    The vexing care by which \u2019tis kept destroys.\n\nAnd Menander also somewhere magnifies a voluptuous life, and inflames\nthe minds of vain persons with these amorous strains,\n\n    The glorious sun no living thing doth see,\n    But what\u2019s a slave to love as well as we.\n\nBut yet elsewhere, on the other side, he fastens on us and pulls us\nback to the love of virtue, and checks the rage of lust, when he says\nthus,\n\n    The life that is dishonorably spent,\n    Be it ne\u2019er so pleasant, yields no true content.\n\nFor these lines are contrary to the former, as they are also better and\nmore profitable; so that by comparing them considerately one cannot but\neither be inclined to the better side, or at least flag in the belief\nof the worse.\n\nBut now, supposing that any of the poets themselves afford no such\ncorrecting passages to solve what they have said amiss, it will then be\nadvisable to confront them with the contrary sayings of other famous\nmen, and therewith to sway the scales of our judgment to the better\nside. As, when Alexis tempts to debauchery in these verses,\n\n    The wise man knows what of all things is best,\n    Whilst choosing pleasure he slights all the rest.\n    He thinks life\u2019s joys complete in these three sorts,\n    To drink and eat, and follow wanton sports;\n    And what besides seems to pretend to pleasure,\n    If it betide him, counts it over measure,\n\nwe must remember that Socrates said the contrary, to wit: Bad men live\nthat they may eat and drink, whereas good men eat and drink that they\nmay live. And against the man that wrote in this manner,\n\n    He that designs to encounter with a knave,\n    An equal stock of knavery must have,\n\nseeing he herein advises us to follow other vicious examples, that of\nDiogenes may well be returned, who being asked by what means a man\nmight revenge himself upon his enemy, answered, By becoming himself a\ngood and honest man. And the same Diogenes may be quoted also against\nSophocles, who, writing thus of the sacred mysteries, caused great\ngrief and despair to multitudes of men:\n\n    Most happy they whose eyes are blest to see\n    The mysteries which here contained be,\n    Before they die! For only they have joy\n    In th\u2019 other world; the rest all ills annoy.\n\nThis passage being read to Diogenes, What then! says he, shall the\ncondition of Pataecion, the notorious robber, after death be better\nthan that of Epaminondas, merely for his being initiated in these\nmysteries? In like manner, when one Timotheus on the theatre, in the\npraise of the Goddess Diana, called her furious, raging, possessed,\nmad, Cinesias presently cried out to him aloud, May thy daughter,\nTimotheus, be such a Goddess! And witty also was that of Bion to\nTheognis, who said,\u2014\n\n    One can not say nor do, if poor he be;\n    His tongue is bound to th\u2019 peace, as well as he.[39]\n\nHow comes it to pass then, said he, Theognis, that thou thyself being\nso poor pratest and gratest our ears in this manner?\n\n5. Nor are we to omit in our reading those hints which, from some\nother words or phrases bordering on those that offend us, may help to\nrectify our apprehensions. But as physicians use cantharides, believing\nthat, though their bodies be deadly poison, yet their feet and wings\nare medicinal and can even kill the poison of the flies themselves, so\nmust we deal with poems. If any noun or verb near at hand may assist to\nthe correction of any such saying, and preserve us from putting a bad\nconstruction upon it, we should take hold of it and employ it to assist\na more favorable interpretation. As some do in reference to those\nverses of Homer,\u2014\n\n    Sorrows and tears most commonly are seen\n    To be the Gods\u2019 rewards to wretched men:\u2014\n\n    The Gods, who have no cause themselves to grieve,\n    For wretched man a web of sorrow weave.[40]\n\nFor, they say, he says not of men simply, or of all men, that the Gods\nweave for them the fatal web of a sorrowful life; but he affirms it\nonly of foolish and imprudent men, whom, because their vices make them\nsuch, he therefore calls wretched and miserable.\n\n6. Another way whereby those passages which are suspicious in poets\nmay be transferred to a better sense may be taken from the common\nuse of words, which a young man ought indeed to be more exercised in\nthan in the use of strange and obscure terms. For it will be a point\nof philology which it will not be unpleasant to him to understand,\nthat when he meets with \u1fe5\u03b9\u03b3\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03bd\u03ae in a poet, that word signifies an\n_evil death_; for the Macedonians use the word \u03b4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 to signify\n_death_. So the Aeolians call victory gotten by patient endurance\nof hardships \u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b7; and the Dryopians call daemons \u03c0\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nBut of all things it is most necessary, and no less profitable if\nwe design to receive profit and not hurt from the poets, that we\nunderstand how they make use of the names of Gods, as also of the terms\nof Evil and Good; and what they mean by Fortune and Fate; and whether\nthese words be always taken by them in one and the same sense or rather\nin various senses, as also many other words are. For so the word \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2\nsometimes signifies a _material house_, as, Into the high-roofed\nhouse; and sometimes _estate_, as, My house is devoured. So\nthe word \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 sometimes signifies _life_, and sometimes\n_wealth_. And \u1f00\u03bb\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd is sometimes taken for being _uneasy_\nand _disquieted in mind_, as in\n\n  \u1f69\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03b8\u2019\u00b7 \u1f21 \u03b4\u2019 ~\u1f00\u03bb\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3~\u2019 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03b2\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf,\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c2,[41]\n\nand elsewhere for boasting and rejoicing, as in\n\n    \u1f2a ~\u1f00\u03bb\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2~, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f3e\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd.[42]\n\nIn like manner \u03b8\u03bf\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd signifies either _to move_, as in Euripides\nwhen he saith,\n\n    \u039a\u1fc6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 ~\u03b8\u03bf\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd~ \u1f10\u03ba \u1f08\u03c4\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f01\u03bb\u03cc\u03c2,\u2014\n\nor _to sit_, as in Sophocles when he writes thus,\n\n    \u03a4\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03b8\u2019 \u1f15\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 ~\u03b8\u03bf\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5~,\n    \u1f39\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bb\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9.[43]\n\nIt is elegant also when they adapt to the present matter, as\ngrammarians teach, the use of words which are commonly of another\nsignification. As here:\u2014\n\n    \u039d\u1fc6\u2019 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u1fc3 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bd\u1f76 \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1 \u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFor here \u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd signifies _to praise_ (instead of \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd), and\n_to praise_ is used for _to refuse_. So in conversation it\nis common with us to say, \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9, _it is well_ (i.e., _No,\nI thank you_), and to bid any thing _fare well_ (\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd);\nby which forms of speech we refuse a thing which we do not want, or\nreceive it not, but still with a civil compliment. So also some say\nthat Proserpina is called \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae in the notion of \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae, _to be\ndeprecated_, because death is by all men shunned.\n\nAnd the like distinction of words we ought to observe also in things\nmore weighty and serious. To begin with the Gods, we should teach our\nyouth that poets, when they use the names of Gods, sometimes mean\nproperly the Divine Beings so called, but otherwhiles understand\nby those names certain powers of which the Gods are the donors and\nauthors, they having first led us into the use of them by their own\npractice. As when Archilochus prays,\n\n    King Vulcan, hear thy suppliant, and grant\n    That which thou\u2019rt wont to give and I to want,\n\nit is plain that he means the God himself whom he invokes. But when\nelsewhere he bewails the drowning of his sister\u2019s husband, who had not\nobtained lawful burial, and says,\n\n    Had Vulcan his fair limbs to ashes turned,\n    I for his loss had with less passion mourned,\n\nhe gives the name of Vulcan to the fire and not to the Deity. Again,\nEuripides, when he says,\n\n    No; by great Jove I swear, enthroned on high,\n    And bloody Mars,[44]\n\nmeans the Gods themselves who bare those names. But when Sophocles\nsaith,\n\n    Blind Mars doth mortal men\u2019s affairs confound,\n    As the swine\u2019s snout doth quite deface the ground,\n\nwe are to understand the word Mars to denote not the God so called, but\nwar. And by the same word we are to understand also weapons made of\nhardened brass, in those verses of Homer,\n\n    These are the gallant men whose noble blood\n    Keen Mars did shed near swift Scamander\u2019s flood.[45]\n\nWherefore, in conformity to the instances given, we must conceive and\nbear in mind that by the names of Jupiter also sometimes they mean the\nGod himself, sometimes Fortune, and oftentimes also Fate. For when they\nsay,\u2014\n\n    Great Jupiter, who from the lofty hill\n    Of Ida govern\u2019st all the world at will;[46]\n\n    That wrath which hurled to Pluto\u2019s gloomy realm\n    The souls of mighty chiefs:\u2014\n    Such was the sovereign doom, and such the will of Jove;[47]\n\n    For who (but who himself too fondly loves)\n    Dares lay his wisdom in the scale with Jove\u2019s?\u2014\n\nthey understand Jupiter himself. But when they ascribe the event of all\nthings done to Jupiter as the cause, saying of him,\u2014\n\n    Many brave souls to hell Achilles sent,\n    And Jove\u2019s design accomplished in th\u2019 event,\u2014\n\nthey mean by Jove no more but Fate. For the poet doth not conceive that\nGod contrives mischief against mankind, but he soundly declares the\nmere necessity of the things themselves, to wit, that prosperity and\nvictory are destined by Fate to cities and armies and commanders who\ngovern themselves with sobriety, but if they give way to passions and\ncommit errors, thereby dividing and crumbling themselves into factions,\nas those of whom the poet speaks did, they do unhandsome actions,\nand thereby create great disturbances, such as are attended with sad\nconsequences.\n\n    For to all unadvised acts, in fine,\n    The Fates unhappy issues do assign.[48]\n\nBut when Hesiod brings in Prometheus thus counselling his brother\nEpimetheus,\n\n    Brother, if Jove to thee a present make,\n    Take heed that from his hands thou nothing take,[49]\n\nhe useth the name of Jove to express Fortune; for he calls the good\nthings which come by her (such as riches, and marriages, and empires,\nand indeed all external things the enjoyment whereof is unprofitable\nto them who know not how to use them well) the gifts of Jove. And\ntherefore he adviseth Epimetheus (an ill man, and a fool withal) to\nstand in fear of and to guard himself from prosperity, as that which\nwould be hurtful and destructive to him.\n\nAgain, where he saith,\n\n    Reproach thou not a man for being poor;\n    His poverty\u2019s God\u2019s gift, as is thy store,[50]\n\nhe calls that which befalls men by Fortune God\u2019s gift, and intimates\nthat it is an unworthy thing to reproach any man for that poverty which\nhe falls into by Fortune, whereas poverty is then only a matter of\ndisgrace and reproach when it is attendant on sloth and idleness, or\nwantonness and prodigality. For, before the name of Fortune was used,\nthey knew there was a powerful cause, which moved irregularly and\nunlimitedly and with such a force that no human reason could avoid it;\nand this cause they called by the names of Gods. So we are wont to call\ndivers things and qualities and discourses, and even men themselves,\ndivine. And thus may we rectify many such sayings concerning Jupiter as\nwould otherwise seem very absurd. As these, for instance:\u2014\n\n    Before Jove\u2019s door two fatal hogsheads, filled\n    With human fortunes, good and bad luck yield:\u2014\n\n    Of violated oaths Jove took no care,\n    But spitefully both parties crushed by war:\u2014\n\n    To Greeks and Trojans both this was the rise\n    Of mischief, suitable to Jove\u2019s device.[51]\n\nThese passages we are to interpret as spoken concerning Fortune or\nFate, of the causality of both which no account can be given by us,\nnor do their effects fall under our power. But where any thing is said\nof Jupiter that is suitable, rational, and probable, there we are to\nconceive that the names of that God is used properly. As in these\ninstances:\u2014\n\n    Through others\u2019 ranks he conquering did range,\n    But shunned with Ajax any blows t\u2019 exchange;\n    But Jove\u2019s displeasure on him he had brought,\n    Had he with one so much his better fought.[52]\n\n    For though great matters are Jove\u2019s special care,\n    Small things t\u2019 inferior daemons trusted are\n\nAnd other words there are which the poets remove and translate\nfrom their proper sense by accommodation to various things, which\ndeserve also our serious notice. Such a one, for instance, is \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ae,\n_virtue_. For because virtue does not only render men prudent,\njust, and good, both in their words and deeds, but also oftentimes\npurchaseth to them honor and power, therefore they call likewise these\nby that name. So we are wont to call both the olive-tree and the fruit\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03b1, and the oak-tree and its acorn \u03c6\u03b7\u03b3\u03cc\u03c2, communicating the name of\nthe one to the other. Therefore, when our young man reads in the poets\nsuch passages as these,\u2014\n\n    This law th\u2019 immortal Gods to us have set,\n    That none arrive at virtue but by sweat;[53]\n\n    The adverse troops then did the Grecians stout\n    By their mere virtue profligate and rout;[54]\n\n    If now the Fates determined have our death,\n    To virtue we\u2019ll consign our parting breath;\u2014\n\nlet him presently conceive that these things are spoken of that most\nexcellent and divine habit in us which we understand to be no other\nthan right reason, or the highest attainment of the reasonable nature,\nand most agreeable to the constitution thereof. And again, when he\nreads this.\n\n    Of virtue Jupiter to one gives more,\n    And lessens, when he lifts, another\u2019s store;\n\nand this,\n\n    Virtue and honor upon wealth attend;[55]\n\nlet him not sit down in an astonishing admiration of rich men, as if\nthey were enabled by their wealth to purchase virtue, nor let him\nimagine that it is in the power of Fortune to increase or lessen his\nown wisdom; but let him conceive that the poet by virtue meant either\nglory or power or prosperity or something of like import. For poets\nuse the same ambiguity also in the word \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, _evil_, which\nsometimes in them properly signifies a wicked and malicious disposition\nof mind, as in that of Hesiod,\n\n    Evil is soon acquired; for everywhere\n    There\u2019s plenty on\u2019t and t\u2019all men\u2019s dwellings near;[56]\n\nand sometimes some evil accident or misfortune, as when Homer says,\n\n    Sore evils, when they haunt us in our prime,\n    Hasten old age on us before our time.[57]\n\nSo also in the word \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1, he would be sorely deceived who should\nimagine that, wheresoever he meets with it in poets, it means (as it\ndoes in philosophy) a perfect habitual enjoyment of all good things or\nthe leading a life every way agreeable to Nature, and that they do not\nwithal by the abuse of such words call rich men happy or blessed, and\npower or glory felicity. For, though Homer rightly useth terms of that\nnature in this passage,\u2014\n\n    Though of such great estates I am possest,\n    Yet with true inward joy I am not blest;[58]\n\nand Menander in this,\u2014\n\n    So great\u2019s th\u2019 estate I am endowed withal.\n    All say I\u2019m rich, but none me happy call;\u2014\n\nyet Euripides discourseth more confusedly and perplexedly when he\nwrites after this manner,\u2014\n\n    May I ne\u2019er live that grievous blessed life;\u2014\n\n    But tell me, man, why valuest thou go high\n    Th\u2019 unjust beatitude of tyranny?[59]\n\nexcept, as I said, we allow him the use of these words in a\nmetaphorical and abusive sense. But enough hath been spoken of these\nmatters.\n\n7. Nevertheless, this principle is not once only but often to be\ninculcated and pressed on young men, that poetry, when it undertakes\na fictitious argument by way of imitation, though it make use of such\nornament and illustration as suit the actions and manners treated\nof, yet disclaims not all likelihood of truth, seeing the force of\nimitation, in order to the persuading of men, lies in probability.\nWherefore such imitation as does not altogether shake hands with truth\ncarries along with it certain signs of virtue and vice mixed together\nin the actions which it doth represent. And of this nature is Homer\u2019s\npoetry, which totally bids adieu to Stoicism, the principles whereof\nwill not admit any vice to come near where virtue is, nor virtue to\nhave any thing to do where any vice lodgeth, but affirms that he that\nis not a wise man can do nothing well, and he that is so can do nothing\namiss. Thus they determine in the schools. But in human actions and the\naffairs of common life the judgment of Euripides is verified, that\n\n    Virtue and vice ne\u2019er separately exist,\n    But in the same acts with each other twist.[60]\n\nNext, it is to be observed that poetry, waiving the truth of things,\ndoes most labor to beautify its fictions with variety and multiplicity\nof contrivance. For variety bestows upon fable all that is pathetical,\nunusual, and surprising, and thereby makes it more taking and graceful;\nwhereas what is void of variety is unsuitable to the nature of fable,\nand so raiseth no passions at all. Upon which design of variety it\nis, that the poets never represent the same persons always victorious\nor prosperous or acting with the same constant tenor of virtue;\u2014yea,\neven the Gods themselves, when they engage in human actions, are not\nrepresented as free from passions and errors;\u2014lest, for the want of\nsome difficulties and cross passages, their poems should be destitute\nof that briskness which is requisite to move and astonish the minds of\nmen.\n\n8. These things therefore so standing, we should, when we enter a young\nman into the study of the poets, endeavor to free his mind from that\ndegree of esteem of the good and great personages in them described\nas may incline him to think them to be mirrors of wisdom and justice,\nthe chief of princes, and the exemplary measures of all virtue and\ngoodness. For he will receive much prejudice, if he shall approve and\nadmire all that comes from such persons as great, if he dislike nothing\nin them himself, nor will endure to hear others blame them, though for\nsuch words and actions as the following passages import:\u2014\n\n    Oh! would to all the immortal powers above,\n    Apollo, Pallas, and almighty Jove!\n    That not one Trojan might be left alive,\n    And not a Greek of all the race survive.\n    Might only we the vast destruction shun,\n    And only we destroy the accursed town!\n\n    Her breast all gore, with lamentable cries,\n    The bleeding innocent Cassandra dies,\n    Murdered by Clytemnestra\u2019s faithless hand:\n\n    Lie with thy father\u2019s whore, my mother said,\n    That she th\u2019 old man may loathe; and I obeyed.\n\n    Of all the Gods, O father Jove, there\u2019s none\n    Thus given to mischief but thyself alone.[61]\n\nOur young man is to be taught not to commend such things as these,\nno, nor to show the nimbleness of his wit or subtlety in maintaining\nan argument by finding out plausible colors and pretences to varnish\nover a bad matter. But we should teach him rather to judge that\npoetry is an imitation of the manners and lives of such men as are\nnot perfectly pure and unblamable, but such as are tinctured with\npassions, misled by false opinions, and muffled with ignorance; though\noftentimes they may, by the help of a good natural temper, change them\nfor better qualities. For the young man\u2019s mind, being thus prepared\nand disposed, will receive no damage by such passages when he meets\nwith them in poems, but will on the one side be elevated with rapture\nat those things which are well said or done, and on the other, will\nnot entertain but dislike those which are of a contrary character. But\nhe that admires and is transported with every thing, as having his\njudgment enslaved by the esteem he hath for the names of heroes, will\nbe unawares wheedled into many evil things, and be guilty of the same\nfolly with those who imitate the crookedness of Plato or the lisping\nof Aristotle. Neither must he carry himself timorously herein, nor,\nlike a superstitious person in a temple, tremblingly adore all he meets\nwith; but use himself to such confidence as may enable him openly to\npronounce, This was ill or incongruously said, and, That was bravely\nand gallantly spoken. For example, Achilles in Homer, being offended at\nthe spinning out that war by delays, wherein he was desirous by feats\nof arms to purchase to himself glory, calls the soldiers together when\nthere was an epidemical disease among them. But having himself some\nsmattering skill in physic, and perceiving after the ninth day, which\nuseth to be decretory in such cases, that the disease was no usual one\nnor proceeding from ordinary causes, when he stands up to speak, he\nwaives applying himself to the soldiers, and addresseth himself as a\ncouncillor to the general, thus:\u2014\n\n    Why leave we not the fatal Trojan shore,\n    And measure back the seas we cross\u2019d before?[62]\n\nAnd he spake well, and with due moderation and decorum. But when the\nsoothsayer Chalcas had told him that he feared the wrath of the most\npotent among the Grecians, after an oath that while he lived no man\nshould lay violent hands on him, he adds, but not with like wisdom and\nmoderation,\n\n    Not e\u2019en the chief by whom our hosts are led,\n    The king of kings, shall touch that sacred head;\n\nin which speech he declares his low opinion or rather his contempt of\nhis chief commander. And then, being farther provoked, he drew his\nweapon with a design to kill him, which attempt was neither good nor\nexpedient. And therefore by and by he repented his rashness,\u2014\n\n    He said, observant of the blue-eyed maid;\n    Then in the sheath returned the shining blade;\n\nwherein again he did rightly and worthily, in that, though he could not\naltogether quell his passion, yet he restrained and reduced it under\nthe command of reason, before it brake forth into such an irreparable\nact of mischief. Again, even Agamemnon himself talks in that assembly\nridiculously, but carries himself more gravely and more like a prince\nin the matter of Chryseis. For whereas Achilles, when his Briseis was\ntaken away from him,\n\n    In sullenness withdraws from all his friends,\n    And in his tent his time lamenting spends;\n\nAgamemnon himself hands into the ship, delivers to her friends, and so\nsends from him, the woman concerning whom a little before he declared\nthat he loved her better than his wife; and in that action did nothing\nunbecoming or savoring of fond affection. Also Phoenix, when his father\nbitterly cursed him for having to do with one that was his own harlot,\nsays,\n\n    Him in my rage I purposed to have killed,\n    But that my hand some God in kindness held;\n    And minded me that Greeks would taunting say,\n    Lo, here\u2019s the man that did his father slay.\n\nIt is true that Aristarchus was afraid to permit these verses to stand\nin the poet, and therefore censured them to be expunged. But they were\ninserted by Homer very aptly to the occasion of Phoenix\u2019s instructing\nAchilles what a pernicious thing anger is, and what foul acts men do by\nits instigation, while they are capable neither of making use of their\nown reason nor of hearing the counsel of others. To which end he also\nintroduceth Meleager at first highly offended with his citizens, and\nafterwards pacified; justly therein reprehending disordered passions,\nand praising it as a good and profitable thing not to yield to them,\nbut to resist and overcome them, and to repent when one hath been\novercome by them.\n\nNow in these instances the difference is manifest. But where a like\nclear judgment cannot be passed, there we are to settle the young\nman\u2019s mind thus, by way of distinction. If Nausicaa, having cast her\neyes upon Ulysses, a stranger, and feeling the same passion for him as\nCalypso had before, did (as one that was ripe for a husband) out of\nwantonness talk with her maidens at this foolish rate,\u2014\n\n    O Heaven! in my connubial hour decree\n    This man my spouse, or such a spouse as he![63]\n\nshe is blameworthy for her impudence and incontinence. But if,\nperceiving the man\u2019s breeding by his discourse, and admiring the\nprudence of his addresses, she rather wisheth to have such a one for a\nhusband than a merchant or a dancing gallant of her fellow-citizens,\nshe is to be commended. And when Ulysses is represented as rejoicing\nat Penelope\u2019s jocular conversation with her wooers, and at their\npresenting her with rich garments and other ornaments,\n\n    Because she cunningly the fools cajoled.\n    And bartered light words for their heavy gold;[64]\n\nif that joy were occasioned by greediness and covetousness, he\ndiscovers himself to be a more sordid prostituter of his own wife than\nPoliager is wont to be represented on the stage to have been, of whom\nit is said,\u2014\n\n    Happy man he, whose wife, like Capricorn,\n    Stores him with riches from a golden horn!\n\nBut if through foresight he thought thereby to get them the more within\nhis power, as being lulled asleep in security for the future by the\nhopes she gave them at present, this rejoicing, joined with confidence\nin his wife, was rational. Again, when he is brought in numbering the\ngoods which the Phaeacians had set on shore together with himself and\ndeparted; if indeed, being himself left in such a solitude, so ignorant\nwhere he was, and having no security there for his own person, he is\nyet solicitous for his goods, lest\n\n    The sly Phaeacians, when they stole to sea,\n    Had stolen some part of what they brought away;[65]\n\nthe covetousness of the man deserved in truth to be pitied, or\nrather abhorred. But if, as some say in his defence, being doubtful\nwhether or no the place where he was landed were Ithaca, he made use\nof the just tale of his goods to infer thence the honesty of the\nPhaeacians,\u2014because it was not likely they would expose him in a\nstrange place and leave him there with his goods by him untouched, so\nas to get nothing by their dishonesty,\u2014then he makes use of a very fit\ntest for this purpose, and deserves commendation for his wisdom in\nthat action. Some also there are who find fault with that passage of\nthe putting him on shore when he was asleep, if it really so happened,\nand they tell us that the people of Tuscany have still a traditional\nstory among them concerning Ulysses, that he was naturally sleepy, and\ntherefore a man whom many men could not freely converse with. But if\nhis sleep was but feigned, and he made use of this pretence only of\na natural infirmity, by counterfeiting a nap, to hide the strait he\nwas in at that time in his thoughts, betwixt the shame of sending away\nthe Phaeacians without giving them a friendly collation and hospitable\ngifts, and the fear he had of being discovered to his enemies by the\ntreating such a company of men together, they then approve it.\n\nNow, by showing young men these things, we shall preserve them from\nbeing carried away to any corruption in their manners, and dispose\nthem to the election and imitation of those that are good, as being\nbefore instructed readily to disapprove those and commend these. But\nthis ought with the most care to be done in the reading of tragedies\nwherein probable and subtle speeches are made use of in the most foul\nand wicked actions. For that is not always true which Sophocles saith,\nthat\n\n    From naughty acts good words can ne\u2019er proceed.\n\nFor even he himself is wont to apply pleasant reasonings and plausible\narguments to those manners and actions which are wicked or unbecoming.\nAnd in another of his fellow-tragedians, we may see even Phaedra\nherself represented as justifying her unlawful affection for Hippolytus\nby accusing Theseus of ill-carriage towards her. And in his Troades,\nhe allows Helen the same liberty of speech against Hecuba, whom she\njudgeth to be more worthy of punishment than herself for her adultery,\nbecause she was the mother of Paris that tempted her thereto. A young\nman therefore must not be accustomed to think any thing of that nature\nhandsomely or wittily spoken, nor to be pleased with such colorable\ninventions; but rather more to abhor such words as tend to the defence\nof wanton acts than the very acts themselves.\n\n9. And lastly, it will be useful likewise to enquire into the cause why\neach thing is said. For so Cato, when he was a boy, though he was wont\nto be very observant of all his master\u2019s commands, yet withal used to\nask the cause or reason why he so commanded. But poets are not to be\nobeyed as pedagogues and lawgivers are, except they have reason to back\nwhat they say. And that they will not want, when they speak well; and\nif they speak ill, what they say will appear vain and frivolous. But\nnowadays most young men very briskly demand the reason of such trivial\nspeeches as these, and enquire in what sense they are spoken:\n\n    It bodes ill luck, when vessels you set up,\n    To place the ladle on the mixing-cup.\n\n    Who from his chariot to another\u2019s leaps,\n    Seldom his seat without a combat keeps.[66]\n\nBut to those of greater moment they give credence without examination,\nas to those that follow:\n\n    The boldest men are daunted oftentimes,\n    When they\u2019re reproached with their parents\u2019 crimes:[67]\n\n    When any man is crushed by adverse fate,\n    His spirit should be low as his estate.\n\nAnd yet such speeches relate to manners, and disquiet men\u2019s lives\nby begetting in them evil opinions and unworthy sentiments, except\nthey have learned to return answer to each of them thus: \u201cWherefore\nis it necessary that a man who is crushed by adverse fate should\nhave a dejected spirit? Yea, why rather should he not struggle\nagainst Fortune, and raise himself above the pressures of his low\ncircumstances? Why, if I myself be a good and wise son of an evil and\nfoolish father, does it not rather become me to bear myself confidently\nupon the account of my own virtue, than to be dejected and dispirited\nbecause of my father\u2019s defects?\u201d For he that can encounter such\nspeeches and oppose them after this manner, not yielding himself up to\nbe overset with the blast of every saying, but approving that speech of\nHeraclitus, that\n\n    Whate\u2019er is said, though void of sense and wit,\n    The size of a fool\u2019s intellect doth fit,\n\nwill reject many such things as falsely and idly spoken.\n\n10. These things therefore may be of use to preserve us from the\nhurt we might get by the study of poems. Now, as on a vine the\nfruit oftentimes lies shadowed and hidden under its large leaves\nand luxuriant branches, so in the poet\u2019s phrases and fictions that\nencompass them there are also many profitable and useful things\nconcealed from the view of young men. This, however, ought not to be\nsuffered; nor should we be led away from things themselves thus, but\nrather adhere to such of them as tend to the promoting of virtue and\nthe well forming of our manners. It will not be altogether useless\ntherefore, to treat briefly in the next place of passages of that\nnature. Wherein I intend to touch only at some particulars, leaving\nall longer discourses, and the trimming up and furnishing them with\na multitude of instances, to those who write more for show and\nostentation.\n\nFirst, therefore, let our young man be taught to understand good and\nbad manners and persons, and from thence apply his mind to the words\nand deeds which the poet decently assigns to either of them. For\nexample, Achilles, though in some wrath, speaks to Agamemnon thus\ndecently:\n\n    Nor, when we take a Trojan town, can I\n    With thee in spoils and splendid prizes vie;[68]\n\nwhereas Thersites to the same person speaks reproachfully in this\nmanner:\u2014\n\n    \u2019Tis thine whate\u2019er the warrior\u2019s breast inflames,\n    The golden spoil, and thine the lovely dames.\n    With all the wealth our wars and blood bestow,\n    Thy tents are crowded and thy chests o\u2019erflow.\n\nAgain, Achilles thus:\u2014\n\n    Whene\u2019er, by Jove\u2019s decree, our conquering powers\n    Shall humble to the dust Troy\u2019s lofty towers;\n\nbut Thersites thus:\u2014\n\n    Whom I or some Greek else as captive bring.\n\nAgain, Diomedes, when Agamemnon taking a view of the army spoke\nreproachfully to him,\n\n    To his hard words forbore to make reply,\n    For the respect he bare to majesty;\n\nwhereas Sthenelus, a man of small note, replies on him thus:\u2014\n\n    Sir, when you know the truth, what need to lie?\n    For with our fathers we for valor vie.\n\nNow the observation of such difference will teach the young man\nthe decency of a modest and moderate temper, and the unbecoming\nnauseousness of the contrary vices of boasting and cracking of a man\u2019s\nown worth. And it is worth while also to take notice of the demeanor of\nAgamemnon in the same passage. For he passeth by Sthenelus unspoken to;\nbut perceiving Ulysses to be offended, he neglects not him, but applies\nhimself to answer him:\u2014\n\n    Struck with his generous wrath, the king replies.[69]\n\nFor to have apologized to every one had been too servile and\nmisbecoming the dignity of his person; whereas equally to have\nneglected every one had been an act of insolence and imprudence. And\nvery handsome it is that Diomedes, though in the heat of the battle he\nanswers the king only with silence, yet after the battle was over useth\nmore liberty towards him, speaking thus:\u2014\n\n    You called me coward, sir, before the Greeks.\n\nIt is expedient also to take notice of the different carriage of a wise\nman and of a soothsayer popularly courting the multitude. For Chalcas\nvery unseasonably makes no scruple to traduce the king before the\npeople, as having been the cause of the pestilence that was befallen\nthem. But Nestor, intending to bring in a discourse concerning the\nreconciling Achilles to him, that he might not seem to charge Agamemnon\nbefore the multitude with the miscarriage his passion had occasioned,\nonly adviseth him thus:\u2014\n\n    But thou, O king, to council call the old....\n    Wise weighty counsels aid a state distress\u2019d,\n    And such a monarch as can choose the best;\n\nwhich done, accordingly after supper he sends his ambassadors. Now this\nspeech of Nestor tended to the rectifying of what he had before done\namiss; but that of Chalcas, only to accuse and disparage him.\n\nThere is likewise consideration to be had of the different manners\nof nations, such as these. The Trojans enter into battle with loud\noutcries and great fierceness; but in the army of the Greeks,\n\n    Sedate and silent move the numerous bands;\n    No sound, no whisper, but the chief\u2019s commands;\n    Those only heard, with awe the rest obey.\n\nFor when soldiers are about to engage an enemy, the awe they stand in\nof their officers is an argument both of courage and obedience. For\nwhich purpose Plato teacheth us that we ought to inure ourselves to\nfear blame and disgrace more than labor and danger. And Cato was wont\nto say that he liked men that were apt to blush better than those that\nlooked pale.\n\nMoreover, there is a particular character to be noted of the men who\nundertake for any action. For Dolon thus promiseth:\u2014\n\n    I\u2019ll pass through all their host in a disguise\n    To their flag-ship, where she at anchor lies.\n\nBut Diomedes promiseth nothing, but only tells them he shall fear\nthe less if they send a companion with him; whereby is intimated,\nthat discreet foresight is Grecian and civil, but rash confidence is\nbarbarous and evil; and the former is therefore to be imitated, and the\nlatter to be avoided.\n\nIt is a matter too of no unprofitable consideration, how the minds\nof the Trojans and of Hector too were affected when he and Ajax were\nabout to engage in a single combat. For Aeschylus, when, upon one of\nthe fighters at fisticuffs in the Isthmian games receiving a blow on\nthe face, there was made a great outcry among the people, said: \u201cWhat\na thing is practice! See how the lookers-on only cry out, but the man\nthat received the stroke is silent.\u201d But when the poet tells us, that\nthe Greeks rejoiced when they saw Ajax in his glistering armor, but\n\n    The Trojans\u2019 knees for very fear did quake,\n    And even Hector\u2019s heart began to ache;[70]\n\nwho is there that wonders not at this difference,\u2014when the heart of\nhim that was to run the risk of the combat only beats inwardly, as if\nhe were to undertake a mere wrestling or running match, but the very\nbodies of the spectators tremble and shake, out of the kindness and\nfear which they had for their king?\n\nIn the same poet also we may observe the difference betwixt the humor\nof a coward and a valiant man. For Thersites\n\n    Against Achilles a great malice had,\n    And wise Ulysses he did hate as bad;\n\nbut Ajax is always represented as friendly to Achilles; and\nparticularly he speaks thus to Hector concerning him:\u2014\n\n    Hector! approach my arm, and singly know\n    What strength thou hast, and what the Grecian foe.\n    Achilles shuns the fight; yet some there are\n    Not void of soul, and not unskill\u2019d in war:\n\nwherein he insinuates the high commendation of that valiant man. And in\nwhat follows, he speaks like handsome things of his fellow-soldiers in\ngeneral, thus:\u2014\n\n    Whole troops of heroes Greece has yet to boast,\n    And sends thee one, a sample of her host;\n\nwherein he doth not boast himself to be the only or the best champion,\nbut one of those, among many others, who were fit to undertake that\ncombat.\n\nWhat hath been said is sufficient upon the point of dissimilitudes;\nexcept we think fit to add this, that many of the Trojans came into the\nenemy\u2019s power alive, but none of the Grecians; and that many of the\nTrojans supplicated to their enemies,\u2014as (for instance) Adrastus, the\nsons of Antimachus, Lycaon,\u2014and even Hector himself entreats Achilles\nfor a sepulture; but not one of these doth so, as judging it barbarous\nto supplicate to a foe in the field, and more Greek-like either to\nconquer or die.\n\n11. But as, in the same plant, the bee feeds on the flower, the goat\non the bud, the hog on the root, and other living creatures on the\nseed and the fruit; so in reading of poems, one man singleth out the\nhistorical part, another dwells upon the elegancy and fit disposal of\nwords, as Aristophanes says of Euripides,\u2014\n\n    His gallant language runs so smooth and round,\n    That I am ravisht with th\u2019 harmonious sound;[71]\n\nbut others, to whom this part of my discourse is directed, mind only\nsuch things as are useful to the bettering of manners. And such we are\nto put in mind that it is an absurd thing, that those who delight in\nfables should not let any thing slip them of the vain and extravagant\nstories they find in poets, and that those who affect language should\npass by nothing that is elegantly and floridly expressed; and that\nonly the lovers of honor and virtue, who apply themselves to the study\nof poems not for delight but for instruction\u2019s sake, should slightly\nand negligently observe what is spoken in them relating to valor,\ntemperance, or justice. Of this nature is the following:\u2014\n\n    And stand we deedless, O eternal shame!\n    Till Hector\u2019s arm involve the ships in flame?\n    Haste, let us join, and combat side by side.[72]\n\nFor to see a man of the greatest wisdom in danger of being totally cut\noff with all those that take part with him, and yet affected less with\nfear of death than of shame and dishonor, must needs excite in a young\nman a passionate affection for virtue. And this,\n\n    Joyed was the Goddess, for she much did prize\n    A man that was alike both just and wise,\n\nteacheth us to infer that the Deity delights not in a rich or a proper\nor a strong man, but in one that is furnished with wisdom and justice.\nAgain, when the same Goddess (Minerva) saith that the reason why she\ndid not desert or neglect Ulysses was that he was\n\n    Gentle, of ready wit, of prudent mind,\n\nshe therein tells us that, of all things pertaining to us, nothing\nis dear to the Gods and divine but our virtue, seeing like naturally\ndelights in like.\n\nAnd seeing, moreover, that it both seemeth and really is a great thing\nto be able to moderate a man\u2019s anger, but a greater by far to guard\na man\u2019s self beforehand by prudence, that he fall not into it nor be\nsurprised by it, therefore also such passages as tend that way are not\nslightly to be represented to the readers; for example, that Achilles\nhimself\u2014who was a man of no great forbearance, nor inclined to such\nmeekness\u2014yet warns Priam to be calm and not to provoke him, thus,\n\n    Move me no more (Achilles thus replies,\n    While kindling anger sparkled in his eyes),\n    Nor seek by tears my steady soul to bend:\n    To yield thy Hector I myself intend:\n    Cease; lest, neglectful of high Jove\u2019s command,\n    I show thee, king, thou tread\u2019st on hostile land;\n\nand that he himself first washeth and decently covereth the body of\nHector and then puts it into a chariot, to prevent his father\u2019s seeing\nit so unworthily mangled as it was,\u2014\n\n                    Lest the unhappy sire,\n    Provoked to passion, once more rouse to ire\n    The stern Pelides; and nor sacred age,\n    Nor Jove\u2019s command, should check the rising rage.\n\nFor it is a piece of admirable prudence for a man so prone to anger,\nas being by nature hasty and furious, to understand himself so well as\nto set a guard upon his own inclinations, and by avoiding provocations\nto keep his passion at due distance by the use of reason, lest he\nshould be unawares surprised by it. And after the same manner must the\nman that is apt to be drunken forearm himself against that vice; and\nhe that is given to wantonness, against lust, as Agesilaus refused to\nreceive a kiss from a beautiful person addressing to him, and Cyrus\nwould not so much as endure to see Panthea. Whereas, on the contrary,\nthose that are not virtuously bred are wont to gather fuel to inflame\ntheir passions, and voluntarily to abandon themselves to those\ntemptations to which of themselves they are endangered. But Ulysses\ndoes not only restrain his own anger, but (perceiving by the discourse\nof his son Telemachus, that through indignation conceived against such\nevil men he was greatly provoked) he blunts his passion too beforehand,\nand composeth him to calmness and patience, thus:\u2014\n\n    There, if base scorn insult my reverend age,\n    Bear it, my son! repress thy rising rage.\n    If outraged, cease that outrage to repel;\n    Bear it, my son! howe\u2019er thy heart rebel.\n\nFor as men are not wont to put bridles on their horses when they are\nrunning in full speed, but bring them bridled beforehand to the race;\nso do they use to preoccupy and predispose the minds of those persons\nwith rational considerations to enable them to encounter passion, whom\nthey perceive to be too mettlesome and unmanageable upon the sight of\nprovoking objects.\n\nFurthermore, the young man is not altogether to neglect names\nthemselves when he meets with them; though he is not obliged to give\nmuch heed to such idle descants as those of Cleanthes, who, while he\nprofesseth himself an interpreter, plays the trifler, as in these\npassages of Homer: \u0396\u03b5\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f3c\u03b4\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd, and \u0396\u03b5\u1fe6 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b1 \u0394\u03c9\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b5.[73]\nFor he will needs read the last two of these words joined into one, and\nmake them \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b4\u03c9\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b5; for that the air evaporated from the earth by\nexhalation (\u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2) is so called. Yea, and Chrysippus too, though he\ndoes not so trifle, yet is very jejune, while he hunts after improbable\netymologies. As when he will need force the words \u03b5\u1f50\u03c1\u03cd\u03bf\u03c0\u03b1 \u039a\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03bd to\nimport Jupiter\u2019s excellent faculty in speaking and powerfulness to\npersuade thereby.\n\nBut such things as these are fitter to be left to the examination of\ngrammarians; and we are rather to insist upon such passages as are both\nprofitable and persuasive. Such, for instance, as these:\u2014\n\n    My early youth was bred to martial pains,\n    My soul impels me to the embattled plains!\n\n    How skill\u2019d he was in each obliging art;\n    The mildest manners, and the gentlest heart.[74]\n\nFor while the author tells us that fortitude may be taught, and that an\nobliging and graceful way of conversing with others is to be gotten by\nart and the use of reason, he exhorts us not to neglect the improvement\nof ourselves, but by observing our teachers\u2019 instructions to learn a\nbecoming carriage, as knowing that clownishness and cowardice argue\nill-breeding and ignorance. And very suitable to what hath been said is\nthat which is said of Jupiter and Neptune:\u2014\n\n    Gods of one source, of one ethereal race,\n    Alike divine, and heaven their native place;\n    But Jove the greater; first born of the skies,\n    And more than men or Gods supremely wise.[75]\n\nFor the poet therein pronounceth wisdom to be the most divine and royal\nquality of all; as placing therein the greatest excellency of Jupiter\nhimself, and judging all virtues else to be necessarily consequent\nthereunto. We are also to accustom a young man attentively to hear such\nthings as these:\u2014\n\n    Urge him with truth to frame his fair replies\n    And sure he will, for wisdom never lies:\n\n    The praise of wisdom, in thy youth obtain\u2019d,\n    An act so rash, Antilochus, has stain\u2019d:\n\n    Say, is it just, my friend, that Hector\u2019s ear\n    From such a warrior such a speech should hear?\n    I deemed thee once the wisest of thy kind,\n    But ill this insult suits a prudent mind.[76]\n\nThese speeches teach us that it is beneath wise men to lie or to deal\notherwise than fairly, even in games, or to blame other men without\njust cause. And when the poet attributes Pindarus\u2019s violation of the\ntruce to his folly, he withal declares his judgment that a wise man\nwill not be guilty of an unjust action. The like may we also infer\nconcerning continence, taking our ground for it from these passages:\u2014\n\n    For him Antaea burn\u2019d with lawless flame,\n    And strove to tempt him from the paths of fame.\n    In vain she tempted the relentless youth,\n    Endued with wisdom, sacred fear, and truth:\n\n    At first, with worthy shame and decent pride,\n    The royal dame his lawless suit denied!\n    For virtue\u2019s image yet possessed her mind:[77]\n\nin which speeches the poet assigns wisdom to be the cause of\ncontinence. And when in exhortations made to encourage soldiers to\nfight, he speaks in this manner:\u2014\n\n    What mean you, Lycians? Stand! O stand, for shame!\n\n    Yet each reflect who prizes fame or breath,\n    On endless infamy, on instant death;\n    For, lo! the fated time, the appointed shore;\n    Hark! the gates burst, the brazen barriers roar![78]\n\nhe seems to intimate that continent men are valiant men; because they\nfear the shame of base actions, and can trample on pleasures and stand\ntheir ground in the greatest hazards. Whence Timotheus, in the play\ncalled Persae, takes occasion handsomely to exhort the Grecians thus:\u2014\n\n    Brave soldiers of just shame in awe should stand;\n    For the blushing face oft helps the fighting hand.\n\nAnd Aeschylus also makes it a point of wisdom not to be blown up with\npride when a man is honored, nor to be moved or elevated with the\nacclamations of a multitude, writing thus of Amphiaraus:\u2014\n\n    His shield no emblem bears; his generous soul\n    Wishes to be, not to appear, the best;\n    While the deep furrows of his noble mind\n    Harvests of wise and prudent counsel bear.[79]\n\nFor it is the part of a wise man to value himself upon the\nconsciousness of his own true worth and excellency.\n\nWhereas, therefore, all inward perfections are reducible to wisdom, it\nappears that all sorts of virtue and learning are included in it.\n\n12. Again, boys may be instructed, by reading the poets as they ought,\nto draw something that is useful and profitable even from those\npassages that are most suspected as wicked and absurd; as the bee is\ntaught by Nature to gather the sweetest and most pleasant honey from\nthe harshest flowers and sharpest thorns. It does indeed at the first\nblush cast a shrewd suspicion on Agamemnon of taking a bribe, when\nHomer tells us that he discharged that rich man from the wars who\npresented him with his fleet mare Aethe:\u2014\n\n    Whom rich Echepolus, more rich than brave,\n    To \u2019scape the wars, to Agamemnon gave\n    (Aethe her name), at home to end his days;\n    Base wealth preferring to eternal praise.[80]\n\nYet, as saith Aristotle, it was well done of him to prefer a good\nbeast before such a man. For, the truth is, a dog or ass is of more\nvalue than a timorous and cowardly man that wallows in wealth and\nluxury. Again, Thetis seems to do indecently, when she exhorts her son\nto follow his pleasures and minds him of companying with women. But\neven here, on the other side, the continency of Achilles is worthy\nto be considered; who, though he dearly loved Briseis\u2014newly returned\nto him too,\u2014yet, when he knew his life to be near its end, does not\nhasten to the fruition of pleasures, nor, when he mourns for his friend\nPatroclus, does he (as most men are wont) shut himself up from all\nbusiness and neglect his duty, but only bars himself from recreations\nfor his sorrow\u2019s sake, while yet he gives himself up to action and\nmilitary employments. And Archilochus is not praiseworthy either, who,\nin the midst of his mourning for his sister\u2019s husband drowned in the\nsea, contrives to dispel his grief by drinking and merriment. And yet\nhe gives this plausible reason to justify that practice of his,\n\n    To drink and dance, rather than mourn, I choose;\n    Nor wrong I him, whom mourning can\u2019t reduce.\n\nFor, if he judged himself to do nothing amiss when he followed sports\nand banquets, sure, we shall not do worse, if in whatever circumstances\nwe follow the study of philosophy, or manage public affairs, or go to\nthe market or to the Academy, or follow our husbandry. Wherefore those\ncorrections also are not to be rejected which Cleanthes and Antisthenes\nhave made use of. For Antisthenes, seeing the Athenians all in a tumult\nin the theatre, and justly, upon the pronunciation of this verse,\u2014\n\n    Except what men think base, there\u2019s nothing ill,[81]\n\npresently subjoined this corrective,\n\n    What\u2019s base is base,\u2014believe men what they will.\n\nAnd Cleanthes, hearing this passage concerning wealth:\n\n    Great is th\u2019 advantage that great wealth attends,\n    For oft with it we purchase health and friends;[82]\n\npresently altered it thus:\n\n    Great disadvantage oft attends on wealth;\n    We purchase whores with\u2019t and destroy our health.\n\nAnd Zeno corrected that of Sophocles,\n\n    The man that in a tyrant\u2019s palace dwells\n    His liberty for\u2019s entertainment sells,\n\nafter this manner:\n\n    No: if he came in free, he cannot lose\n    His liberty, though in a tyrant\u2019s house;\n\nmeaning by a free man one that is undaunted and magnanimous, and one of\na spirit too great to stoop beneath itself. And why may not we also,\nby some such acclamations as those, call off young men to the better\nside, by using some things spoken by poets after the same manner? For\nexample, it is said,\n\n    \u2019Tis all that in this life one can require,\n    To hit the mark he aims at in desire.\n\nTo which we may reply thus:\n\n    \u2019Tis false; except one level his desire\n    At what\u2019s expedient, and no more require.\n\nFor it is an unhappy thing and not to be wished, for a man to obtain\nand be master of what he desires if it be inexpedient. Again this\nsaying,\n\n    Thou, Agamemnon, must thyself prepare\n    Of joy and grief by turns to take thy share:\n    Thy father, Atreus, sure, ne\u2019er thee begat,\n    To be an unchanged favorite of Fate:[83]\n\nwe may thus invert:\n\n    Thy father, Atreus, never thee begat,\n    To be an unchanged favorite of Fate:\n    Therefore, if moderate thy fortunes are,\n    Thou shouldst rejoice always, and grief forbear.\n\nAgain it is said,\n\n    Alas! this ill comes from the powers divine,\n    That oft we see what\u2019s good, yet it decline.[84]\n\nYea, rather, say we, it is a brutish and irrational and wretched fault\nof ours, that when we understand better things, we are carried away\nto the pursuit of those which are worse, through our intemperance and\neffeminacy. Again, one says,\n\n    \u2019Tis not the teacher\u2019s speech but practice moves.[85]\n\nYea, rather, say we, both the speech and practice,\u2014or the practice\nby the means of speech,\u2014as the horse is managed with the bridle, and\nthe ship with the helm. For virtue hath no instrument so suitable and\nagreeable to human nature to work on men withal, as that of rational\ndiscourse. Again, we meet with this character of some person:\n\n    A. Is he more prone to male or female loves?\n    B. He\u2019s flexible both ways, where beauty moves.\n\nBut it had been better said thus:\n\n    He\u2019s flexible to both, where virtue moves.\n\nFor it is no commendation of a man\u2019s dexterity to be tossed up and down\nas pleasure and beauty move him, but an argument rather of a weak and\nunstable disposition. Once more, this speech,\n\n    Religion damps the courage of our minds,\n    And ev\u2019n wise men to cowardice inclines,\n\nis by no means to be allowed; but rather the contrary,\n\n    Religion truly fortifies men\u2019s minds,\n    And a wise man to valiant acts inclines,\n\nand gives not occasion of fear to any but weak and foolish persons and\nsuch as are ungrateful to the Deity, who are apt to look on that divine\npower and principle which is the cause of all good with suspicion and\njealousy, as being hurtful unto them. And so much for that which I call\ncorrection of poets\u2019 sayings.\n\n13. There is yet another way of improving poems, taught us well by\nChrysippus; which is, by accommodation of any saying, to transfer that\nwhich is useful and serviceable in it to divers things of the same\nkind. For whereas Hesiod saith,\n\n    If but a cow be lost, the common fame\n    Upon the next ill neighbor lays the blame;[86]\n\nthe same may be applied to a man\u2019s dog or ass or any other beast of his\nwhich is liable to the like mischance. Again, Euripides saith,\n\n    How can that man be called a slave, who slights\n    Ev\u2019n death itself, which servile spirits frights?\n\nthe like whereof may be said of hard labor or painful sickness. For as\nphysicians, finding by experience the force of any medicine in the cure\nof some one disease, make use of it by accommodation, proportionably to\nevery other disease of affinity thereto, so are we to deal with such\nspeeches as are of a common import and apt to communicate their value\nto other things; we must not confine them to that one thing only to\nwhich they were at first adapted, but transfer them to all other of\nlike nature, and accustom young men by many parallel instances to see\nthe communicableness of them, and exercise the promptness of their wits\nin such applications. So that when Menander says,\n\n    Happy is he who wealth and wisdom hath,\n\nthey may be able to judge that the same is fitly applicable to glory\nand authority and eloquence also. And the reproof which Ulysses gives\nAchilles, when he found him sitting in Scyrus in the apartment of the\nyoung ladies,\n\n    Thou, who from noblest Greeks deriv\u2019st thy race,\n    Dost thou with spinning wool thy birth disgrace?\n\nmay be as well given to the prodigal, to him that undertakes any\ndishonest way of living, yea, to the slothful and unlearned person,\nthus:\n\n    Thou, who from noblest Greeks deriv\u2019st thy race,\n    Dost thou with fuddling thy great birth disgrace?\n\nor dost thou spend thy time in dicing, or quail-striking,[87] or deal\nin adulterate wares or griping usury, not minding any thing that is\ngreat and worthy thy noble extraction? So when they read,\n\n    For Wealth, the God most serve, I little care,\n    Since the worst men his favors often wear,[88]\n\nthey may be able to infer, therefore, as little regard is to be had to\nglory and bodily beauty and princely robes and priestly garlands, all\nwhich also we see to be the enjoyments of very bad men. Again, when\nthey read this passage,\n\n    A coward father propagates his vice,\n    And gets a son heir to his cowardice,\n\nthey may in truth apply the same to intemperance, to superstition,\nto envy, and all other diseases of men\u2019s minds. Again, whereas it is\nhandsomely said of Homer,\n\n    Unhappy Paris, fairest to behold!\n\nand\n\n    Hector, of noble form,[89]\n\nfor herein he shows that a man who hath no greater excellency than\nthat of beauty to commend him deserves to have it mentioned with\ncontempt and ignominy,\u2014such expressions we should make use of in like\ncases to repress the insolence of such as bear themselves high upon\nthe account of such things as are of no real value, and to teach young\nmen to look upon such compellations as \u201cO thou richest of men,\u201d and \u201cO\nthou that excellest in feasting, in multitudes of attendants, in herds\nof cattle, yea, and in eloquent speaking itself,\u201d to be (as they are\nindeed) expressions that import reproach and infamy. For, in truth, a\nman that designs to excel ought to endeavor it in those things that are\nin themselves most excellent, and to become chief in the chiefest, and\ngreat in the greatest things. Whereas glory that ariseth from things\nin themselves small and inconsiderable is inglorious and contemptible.\nTo mind us whereof we shall never be at a loss for instances, if, in\nreading Homer especially, we observe how he applieth the expressions\nthat import praise or disgrace; wherein we have clear proof that he\nmakes small account of the good things either of the body or Fortune.\nAnd first of all, in meetings and salutations, men do not call others\nfair or rich or strong, but use such terms of commendation as these:\n\n    Son of Laertes, from great Jove deriving\n    Thy pedigree, and skilled in wise contriving;\n\n    Hector, thou son of Priam, whose advice\n    With wisest Jove\u2019s men count of equal price;\n\n    Achilles, son of Peleus, whom all story\n    Shall mention as the Grecians\u2019 greatest glory;\n\n    Divine Patroclus, for thy worth thou art,\n    Of all the friends I have, lodged next my heart.[90]\n\nAnd moreover, when they speak disgracefully of any person, they touch\nnot at bodily defects, but direct all their reproaches to vicious\nactions; as for instance.\n\n    A dogged-looking, drunken beast thou art,\n    And in thy bosom hast a deer\u2019s faint heart;\n\n    Ajax, at brawling valiant still,\n    Whose tongue is used to speaking ill;\n\n    A tongue so loose hung, and so vain withal,\n    Idomeneus, becomes thee not at all;\n\n    Ajax, thy tongue doth oft offend;\n    For of thy boasting there\u2019s no end.[91]\n\nLastly, when Ulysses reproacheth Thersites, he objecteth not to him his\nlameness nor his baldness nor his hunched back, but the vicious quality\nof indiscreet babbling. On the other side, when Juno means to express a\ndalliance or motherly fondness to her son Vulcan, she courts him with\nan epithet taken from his halting, thus,\n\n    Rouse thee, my limping son![92]\n\nIn this instance, Homer does (as it were) deride those who are ashamed\nof their lameness or blindness, as not thinking any thing a disgrace\nthat is not in itself disgraceful, nor any person liable to a reproach\nfor that which is not imputable to himself but to Fortune. These two\ngreat advantages may be made by those who frequently study poets;\u2014the\nlearning moderation, to keep them from unseasonable and foolish\nreproaching others with their misfortunes, when they themselves enjoy a\nconstant current of prosperity; and magnanimity, that under variety of\naccidents they be not dejected nor disturbed, but meekly bear the being\nscoffed at, reproached, and drolled upon. Especially, let them have\nthat saying of Philemon ready at hand in such cases:\n\n    That spirit\u2019s well in tune, whose sweet repose\n    No railer\u2019s tongue can ever discompose.\n\nAnd yet, if one that so rails do himself deserve reprehension, thou\nmayst take occasion to retort upon him his own vices and inordinate\npassions; as when Adrastus in the tragedy is assaulted thus by Alcmaeon.\n\n    Thy sister\u2019s one that did her husband kill,\n\nhe returns him this answer,\n\n    But thou thyself thy mother\u2019s blood did spill.\n\nFor as they who scourge a man\u2019s garments do not touch the body, so\nthose that turn other men\u2019s evil fortunes or mean births to matter\nof reproach do only with vanity and folly enough lash their external\ncircumstances, but touch not their internal part, the soul, nor those\nthings which truly need correction and reproof.\n\n14. Moreover, as we have above taught you to abate and lessen the\ncredit of evil and hurtful poems by setting in opposition to them\nthe famous speeches and sentences of such worthy men as have managed\npublic affairs, so will it be useful to us, where we find any things\nin them of civil and profitable import, to improve and strengthen\nthem by testimonies and proofs taken from philosophers, withal giving\nthese the credit of being the first inventors of them. For this is\nboth just and profitable to be done, seeing by this means such sayings\nreceive an additional strength and esteem, when it appears that what\nis spoken on the stage or sung to the harp or occurs in a scholar\u2019s\nlesson is agreeable to the doctrines of Pythagoras and Plato, and that\nthe sentences of Chilo and Bias tend to the same issue with those\nthat are found in the authors which children read. Therefore must we\nindustriously show them that these poetical sentences,\n\n    Not these, O daughter, are thy proper cares,\n    Thee milder arts befit, and softer wars;\n    Sweet smiles are thine, and kind endearing charms;\n    To Mars and Pallas leave the deeds of arms;\n\n    Jove\u2019s angry with thee, when thy unmanaged rage\n    With those that overmatch thee doth engage;[93]\n\ndiffer not in substance but bear plainly the same sense with that\nphilosophical sentence, Know thyself. And these,\n\n    Fools, who by wrong seek to augment their store,\n    And know not how much half than all is more;\n\n    Of counsel giv\u2019n to mischievous intents,\n    The man that gives it most of all repents;[94]\n\nare of near kin to what we find in the determination of Plato, in his\nbooks entitled Gorgias and Concerning the Commonwealth, to wit, that it\nis worse to do than to suffer injury, and that a man more endamageth\nhimself, when he hurts another, than he would be damnified if he were\nthe sufferer. And that of Aeschylus,\n\n    Cheer up, friend; sorrows, when they highest climb,\n    What they exceed in measure want in time,\n\nwe must inform them, is but the same famous sentence which is so much\nadmired in Epicurus, that great griefs are but short, and those that\nare of long continuance are but small. The former clause whereof is\nthat which Aeschylus here saith expressly, and the latter but the\nconsequent of that. For if a great and intense sorrow do not last, then\nthat which doth last is not great nor hard to be borne. And those words\nof Thespis,\n\n    Seest not how Jove,\u2014because he cannot lie\n    Nor vaunt nor laugh at impious drollery,\n    And pleasure\u2019s charms are things to him unknown,\u2014\n    Among the Gods wears the imperial crown?\n\nwherein differ they from what Plato says, that the divine nature is\nseated far from both joy and grief? And that saying of Bacchylides,\n\n    Virtue alone doth lasting honor gain,\n    But men of wretched souls oft wealth attain;\n\nand those of Euripides much of the same import.\n\n    Hence temperance in my esteem excels,\n    Because it constantly with good men dwells;\n\n    How much soe\u2019er to honor thou aspire,\n    And strive by riches virtue to acquire,\n    Still shall thy lot to good men wretched seem;\n\ndo they not evidently confirm to us what the philosophers say of riches\nand other external good things, that without virtue they are fruitless\nand unprofitable enjoyments?\n\nNow thus to accommodate and reconcile poetry to the doctrines of\nphilosophy strips it of its fabulous and personated parts, and makes\nthose things which it delivers usefully to acquire also the reputation\nof gravity; and over and above, it inclines the soul of a young man to\nreceive the impressions of philosophical precepts. For he will hereby\nbe enabled to come to them not altogether destitute of some sort of\nrelish of them, not as to things that he has heard nothing of before,\nnor with an head confusedly full of the false notions which he hath\nsucked in from the daily tattle of his mother and nurse,\u2014yea, sometimes\ntoo of his father and pedant,\u2014who have been wont to speak of rich men\nas the happy men and mention them always with honor, and to express\nthemselves concerning death and pain with horror, and to look on virtue\nwithout riches and glory as a thing of nought and not to be desired.\nWhence it comes to pass, that when such youths first do hear things of\na quite contrary nature from philosophers, they are surprised with a\nkind of amazement, trouble, and stupid astonishment, which makes them\nafraid to entertain or endure them, except they be dealt with as those\nwho come out of very great darkness into the light of the bright sun,\nthat is, be first accustomed for a while to behold those doctrines\nin fabulous authors, as in a kind of false light, which hath but a\nmoderate brightness and is easy to be looked on and borne without\ndisturbance to the weak sight. For having before heard or read from\npoets such things as these are,\u2014\n\n    Mourn at one\u2019s birth, as th\u2019 inlet t\u2019 all that grieves;\n    But joy at death, as that which man relieves;\n\n    Of worldly things a mortal needs but twain;\n    The spring supplies his drink, the earth his grain:\n\n    O tyranny, to barbarous nations dear!\n\n    This in all human happiness is chief,\n    To know as little as we can of grief;[95]\n\nthey are the less disturbed and offended when they hear from\nphilosophers that no man ought to be much concerned about death; that\nthe riches of nature are defined and limited; that the happiness of\nman\u2019s life doth not consist in the abundance of wealth or vastness\nof employments or height of authority and power, but in freedom from\nsorrow, in moderation of passions, and in such a temper of mind as\nmeasures all things by the use of Nature.\n\nWherefore, upon all these accounts, as well as for all the reasons\nbefore mentioned, youth stands in need of good government to manage\nit in the reading of poetry, that being free from all prejudicate\nopinions, and rather instructed beforehand in conformity thereunto, it\nmay with more calmness, friendliness, and familiarity pass from thence\nto the study of philosophy.\n\n\n\n\nOF ENVY AND HATRED.\n\n\n1. Envy and hatred are passions so like each other that they are\noften taken for the same. And generally, vice has (as it were) many\nhooks, whereby it gives unto those passions that hang thereto many\nopportunities to be twisted and entangled with one another; for as\ndiffering diseases of the body agree in many like causes and effects,\nso do the disturbances of the mind. He who is in prosperity is equally\nan occasion of grief to the envious and to the malicious man; therefore\nwe look upon benevolence, which is a willing our neighbor\u2019s good, as\nan opposite to both envy and hatred, and fancy these two to be the\nsame because they have a contrary purpose to that of love. But their\nresemblances make them not so much one as their unlikeness makes\nthem distinct. Therefore we endeavor to describe each of them apart,\nbeginning at the original of either passion.\n\n2. Hatred proceeds from an opinion that the person we hate is evil,\nif not generally so, at least in particular to us. For they who think\nthemselves injured are apt to hate the author of their wrong; yea, even\nthose who are reputed injurious or malicious to others than ourselves\nwe usually nauseate and abhor. But envy has only one sort of object,\nthe felicity of others. Whence it becomes infinite, and, like an evil\nor diseased eye, is offended with every thing that is bright. On the\nother hand, hatred is always determined by the subject it adheres to.\n\n3. Secondly, hatred may be conceived even against brutes; for there are\nsome men who have an antipathy to cats or beetles or toads or serpents.\nGermanicus could endure neither the crowing nor the sight of a cock;\nand the Persian Magi were killers of mice, as creatures which they\nboth hated themselves and accounted odious to God. In like manner also\nall the Arabians and Ethiopians abhor them. But envy is purely a human\npassion, and directed only against man.\n\n4. Envy is not likely to be found among brutes, whose fancies are not\nmoved by the apprehensions of each other\u2019s good or evil; neither can\nthey be spirited with the notions of glorious or dishonorable, by which\nenvy is chiefly stirred up. Yet they have mutual hatred; they kill each\nother, and wage most incredible wars. The eagles and the dragons fight,\nthe crows and the owls, yea, the little titmouse and linnet; insomuch\nthat it is said, the very blood of these creatures, when slain, will by\nno means be mixed; but though you would temper them together, they will\nimmediately separate again. The lion also vehemently hates the cock,\nand the elephant the hog; but this probably proceeds from fear; for\nwhat they fear, the same are they inclined to hate.\n\nWe see then herein a great difference betwixt envy and hate, that the\none is natural to brutes, but they are not at all capable of the other.\n\n5. Further, envy is always unjust; for none wrong by being happy, and\nupon this sole account they are envied. But hatred is often just; for\nthere are some men so much to be avoided and disliked, that we should\njudge those worthy to be hated themselves who do not shun and detest\nthem. And of this it is no weak evidence, that many will acknowledge\nthey hate, but none will confess they envy; and hatred of the evil is\nregistered amongst laudable things.\n\nTherefore, as some were commending Charillus, the nephew of\nLycurgus and king of Sparta, for his universally mild and gentle\ndisposition,\u2014How, answered his colleague, can Charillus be a virtuous\nperson, who is pleasing even to the vicious? So the poet too, when he\nhad variously and with an infinite curiosity described the deformities\nof Thersites\u2019s body, easily couched all the baseness of his manners in\na word,\u2014\n\n    Most hateful to Achilles and Ulysses too;\n\nfor to be an enemy to the good is the greatest extravagance of vice.\n\nMen will deny the envy; and when it is alleged, will feign a thousand\nexcuses, pretending they were angry, or that they feared or hated the\nperson, cloaking envy with the name of any passion they can think of,\nand concealing it as the most loathsome sickness of the soul.\n\n6. Moreover, these disturbances of the mind, like plants, must be\nnourished and augmented by the same roots from which they spring;\ntherefore hatred increases as the persons hated grow worse, while\nenvy swells bigger as the envied rise higher in the true braveries of\nvirtue. Upon this consideration Themistocles, whilst he was yet young,\nsaid that he had done nothing gallant, for he was not yet envied. And\nwe know that, as the cantharis is most busy with ripe fruits and roses\nin their beauty, so envy is most employed about the eminently good and\nthose who are glorious in their places and esteem.\n\nAgain, extreme badness makes hatred more vehement and bitter. The\nAthenians therefore had so utter an abhorrence of those who accused\nSocrates, that they would neither lend them fire, nor answer them any\nquestion, nor wash with them in the same water, but commanded the\nservants to pour it out as polluted; till these sycophants, no longer\nable to bear up under the pressure of this hatred, put an end to their\nown lives.\n\nYet envy often gives place to the splendor of a matchless prosperity.\nFor it is not likely that any envied Alexander or Cyrus, when they\narrived at the height of their conquests and became lords of all. But\nas the sun, where he passes highest and sends down his beams most\ndirectly, has none or very little shadow, so they who are exalted to\nthe meridian of fortune, shining aloof over the head of envy, have\nscarce any thing of their brightness eclipsed, while envy retires,\nbeing driven away by the brightness overspreading it.\n\nOn the contrary, hatred is not vanquished by the greatness and glory\nof its objects. For though Alexander had not one to envy him, yet he\nhad many haters, by whose treacheries at last he fell. So, on the other\nside, misfortunes cause envy to cease, but take not enmity away; for\nmen will be malicious even toward abject enemies, but none envy the\ndistressed. However, what was said by one of our Sophists, that the\nenvious are tenderly inclinable to pity, is true; and in this appears\na great unlikeness of these passions, that hatred leaves neither the\nhappy nor the miserable, but envy becomes languid when its object has\neither prosperity or adversity in excess.\n\n7. We shall better understand this from the poising them together.\n\nMen let go their enmity and hatred, when either they are persuaded they\nwere not injured at all, or if they now believe them to be good whom\nbefore they hated as evil, or, lastly, when they are appeased by the\ninsinuations of a benefit received. For as Thucydides saith, A later\nservice or good turn, if it be done at the right moment, will take away\nthe ill resenting of a former fault, though this was greater than the\nrecompense.[96]\n\nYet the first of these removes not envy, for men will persist in\nthis vice, though they know they are not wronged; and the two latter\n(the esteem or credit of a person, and the bestowing a favor) do\nexasperate it more. For they most envy the virtuous, as those who are\nin possession of the chiefest good; and when they receive a kindness\nfrom any in prosperity, it is with reluctance, as though they grudged\nthem not only the power but the will of conferring it; the one of which\ncomes from their happy fortune, the other from their virtue. Both are\ngood. Therefore envy is an entirely distinct affection from hatred,\nsince, as we see, the very things that appease the one only rouse and\nexasperate the other.\n\n8. Now let us consider a little the inclination and bent of either\npassion.\n\nThe design of hatred is to endamage; and hence they define it, an\ninsidious desire and purpose of doing hurt. But envy aims not at this.\nMany envy their familiars and kinsfolk, but have no thoughts of their\nruin nor of so much as bringing any troubles upon them; only their\nfelicity is a burden. Though they will perhaps diminish their glory and\nsplendor what they can, yet they endeavor not their utter subversion;\nbeing, as it were, content to pull down so much only of an high stately\nhouse as hindered the light and obscured them with too great a shade.\n\n\n\n\nHOW TO KNOW A FLATTERER FROM A FRIEND.\n\nTo Antiochus Philopappus.\n\n\n1. PLATO is of opinion that it is very pardonable in a man to\nacknowledge that he has any extraordinary passion for himself; and yet\nthe humor is attended with this ill consequent, besides several others,\nthat it renders us incapable of making a right judgment of ourselves.\nFor our affections usually blind our discerning faculties, unless we\nhave learned to raise them above the sordid level of things congenial\nand familiar to us, to those which are truly noble and excellent in\nthemselves. And hence it is that we are so frequently exposed to the\nattempts of a parasite, under the disguise and vizard of a friend. For\nself-love, that grand flatterer within, willingly entertains another\nfrom without, who will but soothe up and second the man in the good\nopinions he has conceived of himself. For he who deservedly lies\nunder the character of one that loves to be flattered is doubtless\nsufficiently fond of himself; and through abundance of complaisance to\nhis own person, not only wishes but thinks himself master of all those\nperfections which may recommend him to others. And though indeed it be\nlaudable enough to covet such accomplishments, yet is it altogether\nunsafe for any man to fancy them inherent in him.\n\nNow, if truth be a ray of the divinity, as Plato says it is, and the\nsource of all the good that derives upon either Gods or men, then\ncertainly the flatterer must be looked upon as a public enemy to all\nthe Gods, and especially to Apollo; for he always acts counter to that\ncelebrated oracle of his, Know thyself, endeavoring to make every man\nhis own cheat, by keeping him ignorant of the good and ill qualities\nthat are in him; whereupon the good never arrive at perfection, and the\nill grow incorrigible.\n\n2. Did flattery, indeed, as most other misfortunes do, generally\nor altogether wait on the debauched and ignoble part of mankind,\nthe mischief were of less consequence, and might admit of an easier\nprevention. But, as worms breed most in sweet and tender woods,\nso usually the most obliging, the most brave and generous tempers\nreadiliest receive and longest entertain the flattering insect that\nhangs and grows upon them. And since, to use Simonides\u2019s expression,\nit is not for persons of a narrow fortune, but for gentlemen of\nestates, to keep a good stable of horses; so never saw we flattery the\nattendant of the poor, the inglorious and inconsiderable plebeian, but\nof the grandees of the world, the distemper and bane of great families\nand affairs, the plague in kings\u2019 chambers, and the ruin of their\nkingdoms. Therefore it is a business of no small importance, and one\nwhich requires no ordinary circumspection, so to be able to know a\nflatterer in every shape he assumes, that the counterfeit resemblance\nsome time or other bring not true friendship itself into suspicion and\ndisrepute. For parasites,\u2014like lice, which desert a dying man, whose\npalled and vapid blood can feed them no longer,\u2014never intermix in dry\nand insipid business where there is nothing to be got; but prey upon a\nnoble quarry, the ministers of state and potentates of the earth, and\nafterwards lousily shirk off, if the greatness of their fortune chance\nto leave them. But it will not be wisdom in us to stay till such fatal\njunctures, and then try the experiment, which will not only be useless\nbut dangerous and hurtful; for it is a deplorable thing for a man to\nfind himself then destitute of friends, when he most wants them, and\nhas no opportunity either of exchanging his false and faithless friend\nfor a fast and honest one. And therefore we should rather try our\nfriend, as we do our money, whether or not he be passable and current,\nbefore we need him. For it is not enough to discover the cheat to our\ncost, but we must so understand the flatterer, that he put no cheat\nupon us; otherwise we should act like those who must needs take poison\nto know its strength, and foolishly hazard their lives to inform their\njudgment. And as we cannot approve of this carelessness, so neither\ncan we of that too scrupulous humor of those who, taking the measures\nof true friendship only from the bare honesty and usefulness of the\nman, immediately suspect a pleasant and easy conversation for a cheat.\nFor a friend is not a dull tasteless thing, nor does the decorum of\nfriendship consist in sourness and austerity of temper, but its very\nport and gravity is soft and amiable,\u2014\n\n    Where Love and all the Graces do reside.[97]\n\nFor it is not only a comfort to the afflicted,\n\n    To enjoy the courtesy of his kindest friend,[98]\n\nas Euripides speaks; but friendship extends itself to both fortunes, as\nwell brightens and adorns prosperity as allays the sorrows that attend\nadversity. And as Evenus used to say that fire makes the best sauce,\nso friendship, wherewith God has seasoned the circumstances of our\nmortality, gives a relish to every condition, renders them all easy,\nsweet, and agreeable enough. And indeed, did not the laws of friendship\nadmit of a little pleasantry and good humor, why should the parasite\ninsinuate himself under that disguise? And yet he, as counterfeit gold\nimitates the brightness and lustre of the true, always puts on the\neasiness and freedom of a friend, is always pleasant and obliging, and\nready to comply with the humor of his company. And therefore it is\nno way reasonable either, to look upon every just character that is\ngiven us as a piece of flattery; for certainly a due and seasonable\ncommendation is as much the duty of one friend to another as a\npertinent and serious reprehension; nay indeed, a sour querulous temper\nis perfectly repugnant to the laws of friendship and conversation;\nwhereas a man takes a chiding patiently from a friend who is as ready\nto praise his virtues as to animadvert upon his vices, willingly\npersuading himself that mere necessity obliged him to reprimand, whom\nkindness had first moved to commend.\n\n3. Why then, some may say, it is infinitely difficult at this rate\nto distinguish a flatterer from a friend, since there is no apparent\ndifference either betwixt the satisfaction they create or the praises\nthey bestow. Nay, it is observable, that a parasite is frequently\nmore obsequious and obliging than a friend himself. Well, the way\nthen to discover the disparity? Why, I will tell you; if you would\nlearn the character of a true subtle flatterer, who nicks his point\n_secundum artem_, you must not, with the vulgar, mistake those\nsordid smell-feasts and poor trencher-slaves for your men, who begin to\nprate as soon as they have washed their hands in order to dinner, as\none says of them, and ere they are well warmed with a good cut of the\nfirst dish and a glass of wine, betray the narrow soul that acts them\nby the nauseous and fulsome buffoonery they vent at table. For sure\nit needed no great sagacity to detect the flattery of Melanthius, the\nparasite of Alexander of Pherae, who, being asked how his master was\nmurdered, made answer, With a thrust which went in at his side, but\ninto my belly. Nor must we, again, confine our notions of flatterers to\nthose sharping fellows who ply about rich men\u2019s tables, whom neither\nfire nor sword nor porter can keep from supper; nor yet to such as were\nthose female parasites of Cyprus, who going into Syria were nick-named\nSteps, because they cringed so to the great ladies of that country that\nthey mounted their chariots on their backs.\n\n4. Well, but after all, who is this flatterer then, whom we ought so\nindustriously to avoid?\n\nI answer: He who neither professes nor seems to flatter; who never\nhaunts your kitchen, is never observed to watch the dial that he may\nnick your supper-time; who won\u2019t drink to excess, but will keep his\nbrains about him; who is prying and inquisitive, would mix in your\nbusiness, and wind himself into your secrets: in short, he who acts\nthe friend, not with the air of a comedian or a satirist, but with the\nport and gravity of a tragedian. For, as Plato says, It is the height\nof injustice to appear just and be really a knave. So are we to look\nupon those flatterers as most dangerous who walk not barefaced but in\ndisguise, who make no sport but mind their business; for these often\npersonate the true and sincere friend so exactly, that it is enough\nto make him fall under the like suspicion of a cheat, unless we be\nextremely curious in remarking the difference betwixt them. It is\nstoried of Gobryas (one of the Persian nobility, who joined with Darius\nagainst the Magi), that he pursued one of them into a dark room, and\nthere fell upon him; during the scuffle Darius came in and drew upon\nthe enemy, but durst not push at him, lest perhaps he might wound his\nconfederate Gobryas with the thrust; whereupon Gobryas bade him, rather\nthan fail, run both through together. But since we can by no means\nadmit of that vulgar saying, Let my friend perish, so my enemy perish\nwith him, but had rather still endeavor at the discovery of a parasite\nfrom a friend, notwithstanding the nearness of the resemblance, we\nought to use our utmost care, lest at any time we indifferently reject\nthe good with the bad, or unadvisedly retain the bad with the good, the\nfriend and flatterer together. For as those wild grains which usually\ngrow up with wheat, and are of the same figure and bigness with it,\nare not easily winnowed from it,\u2014for they either cannot pass through\nthe holes of the sieve, if narrow, or pass together with the wheat,\nif larger,\u2014so is it infinitely difficult to distinguish flattery from\nfriendship, because the one so exquisitely mixes with all the passions,\nhumors, interests, and inclinations of the other.\n\n5. Now because the enjoyment of a friend is attended with the\ngreatest satisfaction incident to humanity, therefore the flatterer\nalways endeavors to entrap us by rendering his conversation highly\npleasant and agreeable. Again, because all acts of kindness and mutual\nbeneficence are the constant attendants upon true friendship (on which\naccount we usually say, A friend is more necessary than fire or water),\ntherefore the flatterer is ready upon every occasion to obtrude his\nservice upon you, and will with an indefatigable bustle and zeal seek\nto oblige you if he can.\n\nIn the next place, the parasite observes that all true friendship takes\nits origin from a concurrence of like humors and inclinations, and that\nthe same passions, the same aversions and desires, are the first cement\nof a true and lasting friendship. He therefore composes his nature,\nlike unformed matter, striving to fit and adapt it by imitation to the\nperson on whom he designs, that it may be pliant and yielding to any\nimpression that he shall think fit to stamp upon it; and, in fine, he\nso neatly resembles the original, that one would swear,\u2014\n\n    Sure thou the very Achilles art, and not his son.\n\nBut the most exquisite fineness of a flatterer consists in his\nimitation of that freedom of discourse which friends particularly use\nin mutually reprehending each other. For finding that men usually\ntake it for what it really is, the natural language of friendship, as\npeculiar to it as certain notes or voices are to certain animals, and\nthat, on the contrary, a shy sheepish reservedness looks both rude and\nunfriendly, he lets not even this proper character of a friend escape\nhis imitation. But as skilful cooks use to correct luscious meats with\nsharp and poignant sauce, that they may not be so apt to overcharge\nthe stomach; so he seasons his flattery now and then with a little\nsmartness and severity, lest the fulsomeness of repeated dissimulation\nshould pall and cloy the company. And yet his reprehensions always\ncarry something in them that looks not true and genuine; he seems to\ndo it, but with a kind of a sneering and grinning countenance at the\nbest; and though his reproofs may possibly tickle the ear, yet they\nnever strike effectually upon the heart. On these accounts then it is\nas difficult to discern a flatterer from a friend, as to know those\nanimals again which always wear the livery of the last thing they touch\nupon. And therefore, since he puts so easily upon us under the disguise\nand appearance of a friend, it will be our business at present to\nunmask the hypocrite, and show him in other men\u2019s shapes and colors, as\nPlato speaks, since he has none properly his own.\n\n6. Well then, let us enquire regularly into this affair. We have\nalready asserted, that friendship generally takes its rise from a\nconformity of tempers and dispositions, whereby different persons come\nto have the same taste of the like humors, customs, studies, exercises,\nand employs, as these following verses import:\u2014\n\n    Old men with old, and boys with boys agree;\n    And women\u2019s clack with women\u2019s company.\n    Men that are crazy, full of sores and pain,\n    Love to diseased persons to complain.\n    And they who labor under adverse fate,\n    Tell their sad stories to th\u2019 unfortunate.\n\nThe flatterer then, observing how congenial it is to our natures\nto delight in the conversation of those who are, as it were, the\ncounterpart of ourselves, makes his first approaches to our affections\nat this avenue, where he gradually advances (like one making towards a\nwild beast in a pasture, with a design to tame and bring it to hand) by\naccommodating himself to the same studies, business, and color of life\nwith the person upon whom he designs, till at last the latter gives\nhim an opportunity to catch him, and becomes tractable by the man who\nstrokes him. All this while the flatterer falls foul upon those courses\nof life, persons, and things he perceives his cully to disapprove, and\nagain as extravagantly commends those he is pleased to honor with his\napprobation, still persuading him that his choice and dislike are the\nresults of a solid and discerning judgment and not of passion.\n\n7. Well, then, by what signs or tokens shall we be able to know this\ncounterfeit copy of ourselves from a true and genuine likeness?\n\nIn the first place, we must accurately remark upon the whole tenor of\nhis life and conversation, whether or not the resemblance he pretends\nto the original be of any continuance, natural and easy, and all of\na piece; whether he square his actions according to any one steady\nand uniform model, as becomes an ingenuous lover of conversation and\nfriendship, which is all of one thread, and still like itself; for this\nis a true friend indeed. But the flatterer, who has no principles in\nhim, and leads not a life properly his own, but forms and moulds it\naccording to the various humors and caprices of those he designs to\nbubble, is never one and the same man, but a mere dapple or trimmer,\nwho changes shapes with his company, like water that always turns and\nwinds itself into the figure of the channel through which it flows.\nApes, it seems, are usually caught by their antic mimicry of the\nmotions and gesticulations of men; and yet the men themselves are\ntrepanned by the same craft of imitation in a flatterer, who adapts\nhimself to their several humors, fencing and wrestling with one,\nsinging and dancing with another. If he is in chase of a spark that\ndelights in a pack of dogs, he follows him at the heels, hollowing\nalmost like Phaedra,\n\n    O what a pleasure \u2019tis, ye Gods, to wind\n    The shrill-mouthed horn and chase the dappled hind;[99]\n\nand yet the hunter himself is the game he designs for the toils. If\nhe be in pursuit of some bookish young gentleman, then he is always\na poring, he nourishes his reverend beard down to his heels, wears a\ntattered cloak, affects the careless indifference of a philosopher, and\ncan now discourse of nothing under Plato\u2019s triangles and rectangles. If\nhe chance to fall into the acquaintance of a drunken, idle debauchee\nwho has got an estate,\n\n    Then sly Ulysses throws away his rags,[100]\n\nputs off his long robe, mows down his fruitless crop of beard, drinks\nbriskly, laughs modishly on the walks, and drolls handsomely upon\nthe philosophical fops of the town. And thus, they say, it happened\nat Syracuse; for when Plato first arrived there and Dionysius was\nwonderfully hot upon the study of philosophy, all the areas in the\nking\u2019s palace were full of nothing but dust and sand, by reason of the\ngreat concourse of geometricians who came to draw their figures and\ndemonstrate there. But no sooner was Plato in disgrace at court, and\nDionysius finally fallen from philosophy to wine and women, trifles\nand intemperance, than learning fell into a general disrepute, and\nthe whole body of the people, as if bewitched by some Circe or other,\nbecame universally stupid, idle, and infatuated. Besides this, I\nappeal to the practices of men notorious for flattery and popularity\nto back my observation. Witness he who topped them all, Alcibiades,\nwho, when he dwelt at Athens, was as arch and witty as any Athenian\nof them all, kept his stable of horses, played the good fellow, and\nwas universally obliging; and yet the same man at Sparta shaved close\nto the skin, wore his cloak, and never bathed but in cold water. When\nhe sojourned in Thrace, he drank and fought like a Thracian; and\nagain, in Tissaphernes\u2019s company in Asia, he acted the part of a soft,\narrogant, and voluptuous Asiatic. And thus, by an easy compliance\nwith the humors and customs of the people amongst whom he conversed,\nhe made himself master of their affections and interests. So did not\nthe brave Epaminondas nor Agesilaus, who, though they had to do with\ngreat variety of men and manners, and cities of vastly different\npolitics, were still the same men, and everywhere, through the whole\ncircle of their conversation, maintained a port and character worthy of\nthemselves. And so was Plato the same man at Syracuse that he was in\nthe Academy, the same in Dionysius\u2019s court that he was in Dion\u2019s.\n\n8. But he who will take the pains to act the dissembler himself, by\ninterchangeably decrying and extolling the same things, discourses, and\nways of living, will easily perceive that the opinions of a flatterer\nare as mutable and inconstant as the colors of a polypus, that he is\nnever consonant to himself nor properly his own man; that all his\npassions, his love and hatred, his joy and sorrow, are borrowed and\ncounterfeit; and that, in a word, like a mirror, he only receives\nand represents the several faces or images of other men\u2019s affections\nand humors. Do but discommend one of your acquaintance a little in\nhis company, and he will tell you it is a wonder you never found him\nout all this while, for his part he never fancied him in his life.\nChange but your style and commend him, he presently swears you oblige\nhim in it, gives you a thousand thanks for the gentleman\u2019s sake, and\nbelieves your character of him to be just. Tell him you have thoughts\nof altering your course of life, as for instance, to retire from all\npublic employs to privacy and ease; he immediately wishes that he had\nretreated long ago from the hurry and drudgery of business and the\nodium that attends it. Seem but again inclinable to an active life; Why\nnow, says he, you speak like yourself; leisure and ease are sweet, it\nis true, but withal mean and inglorious. When you have thus trepanned\nhim, it would be proper to cashier him with some such reply as this:\u2014\n\n    How now, my friend! What, quite another man![101]\n\nI abhor a fellow who servilely complies with whatsoever I propose, and\nkeeps pace with me in all my motions,\u2014my shadow can do that better than\nyourself,\u2014but my friend must deal plainly and impartially, and assist\nme faithfully with his judgment. And thus you see one way of discerning\na flatterer from a friend.\n\n9. Another difference observable betwixt them in the resemblance they\nbear to each other is, that a true friend will not rashly commend\nnor imitate every thing, but only what really deserves it; for, as\nSophocles says,\n\n    He shares with him his loves, but not his hates,[102]\n\nand will scorn to bear any part with him in any base and dishonorable\nactions, unless, as people sometimes catch blear eyes, he may\nchance insensibly to contract some ill habit or other by the very\ncontagion of familiarity and conversation. Thus they say Plato\u2019s\nacquaintance learned his stoop, Aristotle\u2019s his lisp, and Alexander\u2019s\nthe inclination of his neck and the rapidity of his speech. For\nsome persons, ere they are aware, get a touch of the humors and\ninfirmities of those with whom they converse. But now as a true friend\nendeavors only to copy the fairest originals, so, on the contrary,\nthe flatterer, like the chameleon, which puts on all colors but the\ninnocent white, being unable to reach those strokes of virtue which\nare worth his imitation, takes care that no failure or imperfection\nescape him. As unskilful painters, when they cannot hit the features\nand air of a face, content themselves with the faint resemblance\nin a wrinkle, a wart, or a scar, so he takes up with his friend\u2019s\nintemperance, superstition, cholericness, severity to his servants,\ndistrust of his relations and domestics or the like. For, besides\nthat a natural propensity to evil inclines him always to follow the\nworst examples, he imagines his assuming other men\u2019s vices will best\nsecure him from the suspicion of being disaffected towards them; for\ntheir fidelity is often suspected who seem dissatisfied with faults\nand wish a reformation. Which very thing lost Dion in the good opinion\nof Dionysius, Samius in Philip\u2019s, Cleomenes in Ptolemy\u2019s, and at last\nproved the occasion of their ruin. And therefore the flatterer pretends\nnot only to the good humor of a companion, but to the faithfulness of\na friend too, and would be thought to have so great a respect for you\nthat he cannot be disgusted at the very worst of your actions, being\nindeed of the same make and constitution with yourself. Hence you shall\nhave him pretend a share in the most common casualties that befall\nanother, nay, in complaisance, feign even diseases themselves. In\ncompany of those who are thick of hearing, he is presently half deaf,\nand with the dim-sighted can see no more than they do. So the parasites\nabout Dionysius at an entertainment, to humor his blindness, stumbled\none upon another and jostled the dishes off his table.\n\nBut there are others who refine upon the former by a pretended\nfellow-suffering in the more private concernments of life, whereby they\nwriggle themselves deeper into the affections of those they flatter;\nas, if they find a man unhappily married, or distrustful of his\nchildren or domestics, they spare not their own family, but immediately\nentertain you with some lamentable story of the hard fortune they have\nmet with in their children, their wife, their servants, or relations.\nFor, by the parallel circumstances they pretend to, they seem more\npassionately concerned for the misfortunes of their friends, who, as if\nthey had already received some pawn and assurance of their fidelity,\nblab forth those secrets which they cannot afterwards handsomely\nretract, and dare not betray the least distrust of their new confidant\nfor the future. I myself knew a man who turned his wife out of doors\nbecause a gentleman of his acquaintance divorced his, though the latter\nlady smelt the intrigue afterwards by the messages the flatterer sent\nto his wife after the pretended divorce and the private visits he was\nobserved to make her. So little did he understand the flatterer who\ntook these following verses for the description of a crab rather than\nhis:\u2014\n\n    The shapeless thing\u2019s all over paunch and gut:\n    Who can the monster\u2019s mighty hunger glut?\n    It crawls on teeth, and with a watchful eye\n    Does into every secret corner pry.\n\nFor this is the true portraiture of those sharpers, who, as Eupolis\nspeaks, sponge upon their acquaintance for a dinner.\n\n10. But we will reserve these remarks for a more proper place. In\nthe mean time I must not omit the other artifice observable in his\nimitation, which is this: that if at any time he counterfeit the good\nqualities of his friend, he immediately yields him the pre-eminence;\nwhereas there is no competition, no emulation or envy amongst true\nfriends, but whether they are equally accomplished or not, they bear\nthe same even unconcerned temper of mind towards each other. But the\nflatterer, remembering that he is but to act another\u2019s part, pretends\nonly to such strokes as fall short of the original, and is willing to\nconfess himself outdone in any thing but his vices, wherein alone he\nclaims the precedency to himself; as, if the man he is to wheedle be\ndifficult and morose, he is quite overrun with choler; if something\nsuperstitious, he is a perfect enthusiast; if a little in love, for\nhis part he is most desperately smitten. I laughed heartily at such a\npassage, says one; But I had like to have died with laughter, says the\nother. But now in speaking of any laudable qualities, he inverts his\nstyle; as, I can run fast enough, says he, but you perfectly fly. I can\nsit an horse tolerably well, but alas! what\u2019s that to this Hippocentaur\nfor good horsemanship? I have a tolerable good genius for poetry, and\nam none of the worst versifiers of the age;\n\n    But thunder is the language of you Gods, not mine.\n\nAnd thus at the same time he obliges his friend both in approving of\nhis abilities by his owning of them, and in confessing him incomparable\nin his way by himself coming short of his example. These then are the\ndistinguishing characters of a friend and flatterer, as far as concerns\nthe counterfeit resemblance betwixt them.\n\n11. But because, as we have before observed, it is common to them both\nto please (for a good man is no less taken with the company of his\nfriends than an ill one is with a flatterer\u2019s), let us discriminate\nthem here too. And the way will be to have an eye to the end to\nwhich they direct the satisfaction they create, which may be thus\nillustrated. Your perfumed oils have a fine odoriferous scent, and so,\nit may be, have some medicines too; but with this difference, that\nthe former are prepared barely for the gratification of the sense,\nwhilst the other, besides their odor, purge, heal, and fatten. Again,\nthe colors used by painters are certainly very florid and the mixture\nagreeable; and yet so it is in some medicinal compositions too. Wherein\nthen lies the difference? Why, in the end or use for which they are\ndesigned, the one purely for pleasure the other for profit. In like\nmanner the civilities of one friend to another, besides the main point\nof their honesty and mutual advantage, are always attended with an\noverplus of delight and satisfaction. Nay, they can now and then\nindulge themselves the liberty of an innocent diversion, a collation,\nor a glass of wine, and, believe me, can be as cheerful and jocund as\nthe best; all which they use only as sauce, to give a relish to the\nmore serious and weighty concernments of life. To which purpose was\nthat of the poet,\n\n    With pleasing chat they did delight each other;\n\nas likewise this too,\n\n    Nothing could part our pleasure or our love.[103]\n\nBut the whole business and design of a flatterer is continually to\nentertain the company with some pastime or other, a little jest, a\nstory well told, or a comical action; and, in a word, he thinks he can\nnever overact the diverting part of conversation. Whereas the true\nfriend, proposing no other end to himself than the bare discharge of\nhis duty, is sometimes pleasant, and as often, it may be, disagreeable,\nneither solicitously coveting the one, nor industriously avoiding the\nother, if he judge it the more seasonable and expedient. For as a\nphysician, if need require, will throw in a little saffron or spikenard\nto qualify his patient\u2019s dose, and will now and then bathe him and feed\nhim up curiously, and yet again another time will prescribe him castor,\n\n    Or poley, which the strongest scent doth yield\n    Of all the physic plants which clothe the field,\n\nor perhaps will oblige him to drink an infusion of hellebore,\u2014proposing\nneither the deliciousness of the one nor the nauseousness of the other\nas his scope and design, but only conducting him by these different\nmethods to one and the same end, the recovery of his health,\u2014in like\nmanner the real friend sometimes leads his man gently on to virtue by\nkindness, by pleasing and extolling him, as he in Homer,\n\n    Dear Teucer, thou who art in high command\n    Thus draw the bow with thy unerring hand;\n\nand as another speaking of Ulysses,\n\n    How can I doubt, while great Ulysses stands\n    To lend his counsel and assist our hands?\n\nand again, when he sees correction requisite, he will check him\nseverely, as,\n\n    Whither, O Menelaus, wouldst thou run,\n    And tempt a fate which prudence bids thee shun?[104]\n\nand perhaps he is forced another time to second his words with actions,\nas Menedemus reclaimed his friend Asclepiades\u2019s son, a dissolute and\ndebauched young gentleman, by shutting his doors upon him and not\nvouchsafing to speak to him. And Arcesilaus forbade Battus his school\nfor having abused Cleanthes in a comedy of his, but after he had made\nsatisfaction and an acknowledgment of his fault, took him into favor\nagain. For we ought to grieve and afflict our friend with design merely\nof serving him, not of making a rupture betwixt us, and must apply our\nreprehensions only as pungent and acute medicines, with no other intent\nthan the recovery of the patient. And therefore a friend\u2014like a skilful\nmusician who, to tune his instrument, winds up one string and lets\ndown another\u2014grants some things and refuses others according as their\nhonesty or usefulness prompt him, whereby he often pleases, but is sure\nalways to profit; whereas the parasite, who is continually upon the\nsame humoring string, knows not how to let fall a cross word or commit\na disobliging action, but servilely complies with all your desires,\nand is always in the tune you ask for. And therefore, as Xenophon\nreports of Agesilaus that he took some delight in being praised by\nthose who would upon occasion dispraise him too, so ought we to judge\nthat only he rejoices and pleases us really as a friend, who will,\nwhen need requires, thwart and contradict us; we must suspect their\nconversation who aim at nothing but our gratification, without the\nleast intermixture of reprehension; and indeed we ought to have ready\nupon such occasions that repartee of a Lacedaemonian who, hearing King\nCharillus highly extolled for an excellent person, asked, How he could\nbe so good a man, who was never severe to an ill one?\n\n12. They tell us that gad-flies creep into the ears of bulls, and ticks\ninto those of dogs. But I am sure the parasite lays so close siege and\nsticks so fast to the ears of the ambitious with the repeated praises\nof their worth, that it is no easy matter to shake him off again. And\ntherefore it highly concerns them to have their apprehensions awake\nand upon the guard, critically to remark whether the high characters\nsuch men lavish out are intended for the person or the thing they would\nbe thought to commend. And we may indeed suppose them more peculiarly\ndesigned for the things themselves, if they bestow them on persons\nabsent rather than present; if they covet and aspire after the same\nqualities themselves which they magnify in others; if they admire the\nsame perfections in the rest of mankind as well as in us, and are never\nfound to falter and belie, either in word or action, the sentiments\nthey have owned. And, what is the surest criterion in this case, we\nare to examine whether or no we are not really troubled at or ashamed\nof the commission of those very things for which they applaud us, and\ncould not wish that we had said or acted the quite contrary; for our\nown consciences, which are above the reach of passion and will not be\nput upon by all the sly artifices of flattery, will witness against us\nand spurn at an undeserved commendation. But I know not how it comes\nto pass, that several persons had rather be pitied than comforted in\nadversity; and when they have committed a fault, look upon those as\nenemies and informers who endeavor to chide and lecture them into a\nsense of their guilt, but caress and embrace them as friends who soothe\nthem up in their vices. Indeed they who continue their applauses to so\ninconsiderable a thing as a single action, a wise saying, or a smart\njest, do only a little present mischief; but they who from single acts\nproceed to debauch even the habits of the mind with their immoderate\npraises are like those treacherous servants who, not content to rob\nthe common heap in the granary, filch even that which was chosen\nand reserved for seed. For, whilst they entitle vice to the name of\nvirtue, they corrupt that prolific principle of action, the genius\nand disposition of the soul, and poison the fountain whence the whole\nstream of life derives. Thucydides observes, that in the time of war\nand sedition the names of good and evil are wont to be confounded\naccording to men\u2019s judgment of circumstances; as, fool-hardiness is\ncalled a generous espousal of a friend\u2019s quarrel, a provident delay\nis nicknamed cowardice, modesty a mere pretext for unmanliness, a\nprudent slow inspection into things downright laziness.[105] In like\nmanner, if you observe it, a flatterer terms a profuse man liberal,\na timorous man wary, a mad fellow quick and prompt, a stingy miser\nfrugal, an amorous youngster kind and good-natured, a passionate proud\nfool stout, and a mean-spirited slave courteous and observing. As\nPlato somewhere remarks, that a lover who is always a flatterer of his\nbeloved object styles a flat nose lovely and graceful, an hawk nose\nprincely, the black manly, and the fair the offspring of the Gods; and\nobserves particularly that the appellation of honey-pale is nothing but\nthe daub of a gallant who is willing to set off his mistress\u2019s pale\ncomplexion.[106] Now indeed an ugly fellow bantered into an opinion\nthat he is handsome, or a little man magnified into tall and portly,\ncannot lie long under the mistake nor receive any great injury by the\ncheat; but when vice is extolled by the name of virtue, so that a man\nis induced to sin not only without regret but with joy and triumph,\nand is hardened beyond the modesty of a blush for his enormities, this\nsort of flattery, I say, has been fatal even to whole kingdoms. It\nwas this that ruined Sicily, by styling the tyranny of Dionysius and\nPhalaris nothing but justice and a hatred of villanous practices. It\nwas this that overthrew Egypt, by palliating the king\u2019s effeminacy,\nhis yellings, his enthusiastic rants, and his beating of drums, with\nthe more plausible names of true religion and the worship of the\nGods. It was this that had very nigh ruined the stanch Roman temper,\nby extenuating the voluptuousness, the luxury, the sumptuous shows,\nand public profuseness of Antony, into the softer terms of humanity,\ngood nature, and the generosity of a gentleman who knew how to use the\ngreatness of his fortune. What but the charms of flattery made Ptolemy\nturn piper and fiddler? What else put on Nero\u2019s buskins and brought\nhim on the stage? Have we not known several princes, if they sung a\ntolerable treble, termed Apollos; when they drank stoutly, styled\nBacchuses; and upon wrestling, fencing, or the like, immediately dubbed\nby the name of Hercules, and hurried on by those empty titles to the\ncommission of those acts which were infinitely beneath the dignity of\ntheir character?\n\n13. And therefore it will be then more especially our concern to look\nabout us when a flatterer is upon the strain of praising; which he is\nsensible enough of, and accordingly avoids all occasion of suspicion\nwhen he attacks us on that side. If indeed he meets with a tawdry fop,\nor a dull country clown in a leathern jacket, he plays upon him with\nall the liberty imaginable; as Struthias by way of flattery insulted\nand triumphed over the sottishness of Bias, when he told him that he\nhad out-drunk King Alexander himself, and that he was ready to die of\nlaughter at his encounter with the Cyprian. But if he chance to fall\nupon an apprehensive man, who can presently smoke a design, especially\nif he thinks he has an eye upon him and stands upon his guard, he does\nnot immediately assault him with an open panegyric, but first fetches a\ncompass, and softly winds about him, till he has in some measure tamed\nthe untractable creature and brought it to his hand. For he either\ntells him what high characters he has heard of him abroad (introducing,\nas the rhetoricians do, some third person), how upon the exchange the\nother day he happily overheard some strangers and persons of great\ngravity and worth, who spake extreme honorably of him and professed\nthemselves much his admirers; or else he forges some frivolous and\nfalse accusation of him, and then coming in all haste, as if he had\nheard it really reported, asks him seriously, if he can call to mind\nwhere he said or did such a thing. And immediately upon his denial of\nthe matter of fact, which he has reason enough to expect, he takes\noccasion to fall upon the subject of his commendation; I wondered\nindeed, says he, to hear that you should calumniate your friend, who\nnever used to speak ill of your enemies; that you should endeavor to\nrob another man of his estate, who so generously spend your own.\n\n14. Others again, like painters who enhance the lustre and beauty\nof a curious piece by the shades which surround it, slyly extol and\nencourage men in their vices by deriding and railing at their contrary\nvirtues. Thus, in the company of the debauched, the covetous, and the\nextortioner, they run down temperance and modesty as mere rusticity;\nand justice and contentment with our present condition argue nothing in\ntheir phrase but a dastardly spirit and an impotence to action. If they\nfall into the acquaintance of lubbers who love laziness and ease, they\nstick not to explode the necessary administration of public affairs\nas a troublesome intermeddling in other men\u2019s business, and a desire\nto bear office as an useless empty thirst after a name. To wheedle in\nwith an orator, they scout a philosopher; and who so gracious as they\nwith the jilts of the town, by laughing at wives who are faithful to\ntheir husbands\u2019 beds as impotent and country-bred? And, what is the\nmost egregious stratagem of all the rest, the flatterer shall traduce\nhimself rather than want a fair opportunity to commend another; as\nwrestlers put their body in a low posture, that they may the better\nworst their adversaries. I am a very coward at sea, says he, impatient\nof any fatigue, and cannot digest the least ill language; but my good\nfriend here fears no colors, can endure all hardness, is an admirable\ngood man, bears all things with great patience and evenness of temper.\nIf he meets with one who abounds in his own sense and affects to\nappear rigid and singular in his judgment, and, as an argument of the\nrectitude and steadiness thereof, is always telling you of that of\nHomer,\n\n    Let not your praise or dispraise lavish be,\n    Good Diomedes, when you speak of me,[107]\n\nhe applies a new engine to move this great weight. To such a one he\nimparts some of his private concerns, as being willing to advise with\nthe ablest counsel: he has indeed a more intimate acquaintance with\nothers, but he was forced to trouble him at present: for to whom should\nwe poor witless men have recourse (says he) when we stand in need of\nadvice? Or whom else should we trust? And as soon as he has delivered\nhis opinion, whether it be to the purpose or not, he takes his leave of\nhim with a seeming satisfaction, as if he had received an answer from\nan oracle. Again, if he perceives a man pretends to be master of a\nstyle, he presently presents him with something of his own composing,\nrequesting him to peruse and correct it. Thus Mithridates could no\nsooner set up for a physician, than some of his acquaintance desired to\nbe cut and cauterized by him,\u2014a piece of flattery that extended beyond\nthe fallacy of bare words,\u2014they imagining that he must needs take it as\nan argument of their great opinion of his skill, that they durst trust\nthemselves in his hands.\n\n    For things divine take many shapes.[108]\n\nNow to discover the cheat which these insinuations of our own worth\nmight put upon us (a thing that requires no ordinary circumspection),\nthe best way will be to give him a very absurd advice, and to\nanimadvert as impertinently as may be upon his works when he submits\nthem to your censure. For if he makes no reply, but grants and approves\nof all you assert, and applauds every period with the eulogy of Very\nright! Incomparably well!\u2014then you have trepanned him, and it is plain\nthat, though\n\n    He counsel asked, he played another game,\n    To swell you with the opinion of a name.\n\n15. But to proceed. As some have defined painting to be mute poetry, so\nthere is a sort of silent flattery which has its peculiar commendation.\nFor as hunters are then surest of their game when they pass under the\ndisguise of travellers, shepherds or husbandmen, and seem not at all\nintent upon their sport; so the eulogies of a parasite never take more\neffectually than when he seems least of all to commend you. For he who\nrises up to a rich man when he comes in company, or who, having begun\na motion in the Senate, suddenly breaks off and gives some leading man\nthe liberty of speaking his sense first in the point, such a man\u2019s\nsilence more effectually shows the deference he pays the other\u2019s\njudgment than if he had avowedly proclaimed it. And hereupon you shall\nhave them always placed in the boxes at the play-house, and perched\nupon the highest seats at other public entertainments; not that they\nthink them suitable to their quality, but merely for the opportunity of\ngratifying great men by giving them place. Hence it is likewise, that\nthey open first in all solemn and public assemblies, only that they\nmay give place to another as an abler speaker, and they retract their\nopinion immediately, if any person of authority, riches, or quality\ncontradict them. So that you may perceive all their concessions,\ncringes, and respects to be but mere courtship and complaisance, by\nthis easy observation, that they are usually paid to riches, honor, or\nthe like, rather than to age, art, virtue, or other personal endowments.\n\nThus dealt not Apelles with Megabyzus (one of the Persian nobility),\nwho pretending once to talk I know not what about lines, shades, and\nother things peculiar to his art, the painter could not but take him\nup, telling him that his apprentices yonder, who were grinding colors,\ngazed strangely upon him, admiring his gold and purple ornaments, while\nhe held his tongue, but now could not choose but titter to hear him\noffer at a discourse upon an argument so much out of his sphere. And\nwhen Croesus asked Solon his opinion of felicity, he told him flatly,\nthat he looked upon Tellus, an honest though obscure Athenian, and\nBiton and Cleobis, as happier than he. But the flatterer will have\nkings, governors, and men of estates, not only the most signally happy,\nbut the most eminently knowing, the most virtuous, and the most prudent\nof mankind.\n\n16. And now some cannot endure to hear the Stoics, who centre all\ntrue riches, generosity, nobility, and royalty itself in the person\nof a wise man; but with the flatterer it is the man of money that is\nboth orator and poet, and, if he pleases, painter and fiddler too,\na good wrestler, an excellent footman, or any thing, for they never\nstand with him for the victory in those engagements; as Crisson,\nwho had the honor to run with Alexander, let him designedly win the\nrace, which the king being told of afterwards was highly disgusted\nat him. And therefore I like the observation of Carneades, who used\nto say that young princes and noblemen never arrived to a tolerable\nperfection in any thing they learned, except riding; for their\npreceptors spoil them at school by extolling all their performances,\nand their wrestling-masters by always taking the foil; whereas the\nhorse, who knows no distinction betwixt a private man and a magistrate,\nbetwixt the rich and the poor, will certainly throw his rider if he\nknows not how to sit him, let him be of what quality he pleases. And\ntherefore it was but impertinently said of Bion upon this subject, that\nhe who could praise his ground into a good crop were to blame if he\nbestowed any other tillage upon it. \u2019Tis granted: nor is it improper\nto commend a man, if you do him any real kindness thereby. But here is\nthe disparity: that a field cannot be made worse by any commendations\nbestowed upon it, whereas a man immoderately praised is puffed up,\nburst, and ruined by it.\n\n17. Thus much then for the point of praising; proceed we in the next\nplace to treat of freedom in their reprehensions. And indeed, it were\nbut reasonable that,\u2014as Patroclus put on Achilles\u2019s armor and led his\nwar-horse out into the field, yet durst not for all that venture to\nwield his spear,\u2014so, though the flatterer wear all the other badges\nand ensigns of a friend, he should not dare to counterfeit the plain\nfrankness of his discourse, as being \u201ca great, massy, and substantial\nweapon,\u201d peculiar to him.[109]\n\nBut because, to avoid that scandal and offence which their drunken\nbouts, their little jests, and ludicrous babling humor might otherwise\ncreate, they sometimes put on the face of gravity, and flatter under\nthe vizard of a frown, dropping in now and then a word of correction\nand reproof, let us examine this cheat too amongst the rest.\n\nAnd indeed I can compare that trifling insignificant liberty of speech\nto which he pretends to nothing better than that sham Hercules which\nMenander introduces in one of his comedies, with a light hollow club\nupon his shoulder; for, as women\u2019s pillows, which seem sufficiently\nstuffed to bear up their heads, yield and sink under their weight,\nso this counterfeit freedom in a flatterer\u2019s conversation swells\nbig and promises fair, that when it shrinks and contracts itself\nit may draw those in with it who lay any stress upon its outward\nappearance. Whereas the genuine and friendly reprehension fixes upon\nreal criminals, causing them grief and trouble indeed, but only what\nis wholesome and salutary; like honey that corrodes but yet cleanses\nthe ulcerous parts of the body, and is otherwise both pleasant and\nprofitable. But of this in its proper place. We shall discourse at\npresent of the flatterer who affects a morose, angry, and inexorable\nbehavior towards all but those upon whom he designs, is peevish and\ndifficult towards his servants, animadverts severely upon the failures\nof his relations and domestics, neither admires nor respects a stranger\nbut superciliously contemns him, pardons no man, but by stories and\ncomplaints exasperates one against another, thinking by these means to\nacquire the character of an irreconcilable enemy to all manner of vice,\nthat he may be thought one who would not spare his favorites themselves\nupon occasion, and would neither act nor speak any thing out of a mean\nand dastardly complaisance.\n\nAnd if at any time he undertakes his friend, he feigns himself a mere\nstranger to his real and considerable crimes; but if he catch him in\nsome petty trifling peccadillo, there he takes his occasion to rant\nhim terribly and thunder him severely off; as, if he see any of his\ngoods out of order, if his house be not very convenient, if his beard\nbe not shaven or his clothes unfashionable, if his dog or his horse\nbe not well looked after. But if he slight his parents, neglect his\nchildren, treat his wife scornfully, his friends and acquaintance\ndisrespectfully, and squander away his estate, here he dares not open\nhis mouth, and it is the safest way to hold his tongue. Just as if the\nmaster of a wrestling-school should indulge his young champion scholar\nin drinking and wenching, and yet rattle him about his oil-cruise and\nbody-brush; or as if a schoolmaster should severely reprove a boy\nfor some little fault in his pen or writing-book, but take no notice\nof the barbarisms and solecisms in his language. For the parasite is\nlike him who hearing a ridiculous impertinent orator finds no fault\nwith his discourse but delivery, blaming him only for having hurt his\nthroat with drinking cold water; or like one who, being to peruse and\ncorrect some pitiful scribble, falls foul only upon the coarseness of\nthe paper and the blots and negligence of the transcriber. Thus the\nparasites about Ptolemy, when he pretended to learning, would wrangle\nwith him till midnight about the propriety of an expression, a verse,\nor a story; but not a word all this while of his cruelty, insults,\nsuperstition, and oppressions of the people. Just as if a chirurgeon\nshould pare a man\u2019s nails or cut his hair, to cure him of a fistula,\nwen, or other carnous excrescence.\n\n18. But there are others behind, who outdo all the subtlety of\nthe former, such as can claw and please, even whilst they seem to\nreprehend. Thus when Alexander had bestowed some considerable reward\nupon a jester, Agis the Argive, through mere envy and vexation, cried\nout upon it as a most absurd action; which the king overhearing, he\nturned him about in great indignation at the insolence, saying, What\u2019s\nthat you prate, sirrah? Why truly, replied the man, I must confess,\nI am not a little troubled to observe, that all you great men who\nare descended from Jupiter take a strange delight in flatterers and\nbuffoons; for as Hercules had his Cercopians and Bacchus his Silenuses\nabout him, so I see your majesty is pleased to have a regard for such\npleasant fellows too. And one time when Tiberius Caesar was present\nat the senate, there stood up a certain fawning counsellor, asserting\nthat all free-born subjects ought to have the liberty of speaking their\nsense freely, and should not dissemble or conceal any thing that they\nmight conceive beneficial to the public; who, having thus awakened the\nattention of his audience, silence being made, and Tiberius impatient\nto hear the sequel of the man\u2019s discourse, pursued it in this manner:\nI must tell you of a fault, Caesar, said he, for which we universally\nblame you, though no man yet has taken the confidence to speak it\nopenly. You neglect yourself, endanger your sacred person by your too\nmuch labor and care, night and day, for the public. And he having\nharangued several things to the same effect, it is reported that\nCassius Severus the orator subjoined: This man\u2019s freedom of speech will\nruin him.\n\n19. Such artifices as these, I confess, are not very pernicious, but\nthere remains one of a most dangerous consequence to weak men; and that\nis when a flatterer fastens those vices upon them which are directly\ncontrary to those they are really guilty of. As Himerius, an Athenian\nparasite, upbraided one of the most miserable and stingy misers of the\nwhole town with carelessness and prodigality, telling him he was afraid\nhe should live to see the day when both he and his children should go\na begging. Or, on the contrary, when they object niggardliness and\nparsimony to one that is lavish and profuse, as Titus Petronius did\nto Nero. Or when they advise arbitrary and tyrannical princes to lay\naside their too much moderation and their unprofitable and unseasonable\nclemency. And like to these are they who shall pretend to be afraid of\na half-witted idiot, as of some notable shrewd fellow; and shall tax\nan ill-natured censorious man, if at any time he speak honorably of\na person of worth, of being too lavish in his commendations. You are\nalways, say they, praising men that deserve it not; for who is he, or\nwhat remarkable thing did he ever say or do? But they have yet a more\nsignal opportunity of exercising their talent, when they meet with any\ndifference betwixt lovers or friends; for if they see brothers quarrel,\nor children despise their parents, or husbands jealous of their\nwives, they neither admonish them nor blame them for it, but inflame\nthe difference. You don\u2019t understand yourself, say they; you are the\noccasion of all this clutter by your own soft and submissive behavior.\nIf there chance to have happened some little love-skirmish betwixt a\nmiss and her gallant, then the flatterer interposes boldly and adds\nfresh fuel to the expiring flame, taking the gentleman to task, and\ntelling him how many things he has done which looked a little hard,\nwere not kind, and deserved a chiding.\n\n    Ungrateful man! can you forget her charms,\n    And former soft embraces in her arms?[110]\n\nThus Antony\u2019s friends persuaded him, when he was smitten with his\nbeloved Cleopatra, that she doted on him, still calling him haughty and\nhard-hearted man. She, said they, has stripped herself of the glories\nof a crown and former grandeur, and now languishes with the love of\nyou, attending the motion of your camp in the poor sordid figure of a\nconcubine.\n\n    But you have steeled your heart, and can unmoved\n    Behold her grief, whom once you so much loved.[111]\n\nNow he was strangely pleased to hear of his little unkindness to his\nmistress, and was more taken with such a chiding than with the highest\ncharacter they could have given him; but was not sensible that,\nunder the color of a friendly admonition, they really corrupted and\ndebauched him. For such a rebuke as this is just like the bites of a\nlecherous woman, for it only tickles and provokes, and pleases even\nwhilst it pains you. And as pure wine taken singly is an excellent\nantidote against hemlock, but if mixed with it renders the poison\nincurable, because the heat of the wine quickens its circulation to the\nheart; so some rascally fellows, knowing very well that the liberty of\nreproving a friend is a quality very hardly compatible with flattery,\nand, as I may say, the best remedy against it, mix them both together,\nand flatter you under the very color and pretext of reprimanding you.\n\nUpon the whole thereof, Bias seems not to have answered him very\npertinently, who asked him which he thought was the most hurtful\nanimal, when he replied, Of wild creatures a tyrant, and of tame\nones a flatterer. For he might have answered more accurately, that\nsome flatterers indeed are tame creatures, those shirks who ply\nabout your bath and your table; but they whose calumnies, malignity,\nand inquisitive meddling humor, like so many gins and snares, reach\nthe ladies\u2019 very closets and bed-chambers, are wild, savage, and\nuntractable.\n\n20. Now one way of arming ourselves against these assaults will be\nalways to remember that,\u2014since our souls are made up of two different\nparts, the one sincere, honest, and reasonable, the other brutish,\nfalse, and governed by passion,\u2014the friend always adapts his advice\nand admonitions to the improvement of the better part (like a good\nphysician, who preserves and advances an healthful constitution where\nhe finds it), whilst the flatterer claws and tickles the irrational\npart of the man only, debauching it from the rules of right reason by\nthe repeated suggestion of soft and sensual delights. For as there are\nsome sorts of meat which assimilate neither with the blood nor with\nthe spirits, and invigorate neither the nerves nor the marrow, but\nonly provoke lust, swell the paunch, and breed putrid flabby flesh;\nso he who shall give himself the labor to observe will find that the\ndiscourses of a flatterer contribute nothing to the improvement of\nour prudence and understanding, but either only entertain us with\nthe pleasure of some love-intrigue, or make us indiscreetly angry or\nenvious, or blow us up into an empty troublesome opinion of ourselves,\nor increase our sorrows by pretending to share in them; or else they\nexasperate any inbred naughtiness that is in us, or our illiberality\nor distrustfulness, making them harsh, timorous, and jealous, with\nidle malicious stories, hints, and conjectures of his own. For he\nalways fastens upon and pampers some distemper of the mind, growing,\nlike a botch or bile, upon its inflamed or putrid part only. Are you\nangry? Revenge yourself, says he. Covet you any thing? Have it. Are you\nafraid? Fly. Suspect you this or that? Believe it.\n\nBut if we find it something difficult to discover him in these attempts\nupon our passions, because they often violently overpower all the\nforces of our reason to the contrary, we may then trace him in other\ninstances of his knavery; for he always acts consonant to himself. As,\nif you are afraid of a surfeit and thereupon are in suspense about your\nbath and diet, a friend indeed will advise you to act cautiously and\ntake care of your health; but the flatterer persuades you to the bath,\nbids you feed freely and not starve yourself with mortification. If he\nobserves you want briskness and spirit for action, as being unwilling\nto undergo the fatigue of a journey or a voyage, he will tell you\npresently, there is no haste; the business may be well enough deferred,\nor else transacted by proxy. If at any time you have promised to lend\nor give a friend a sum of money, and upon second thoughts gladly\nwould, and yet are ashamed to retract your word, the flatterer puts\nhis advice in the worse scale, and inclines the balance to the saving\nside, and strips you of your squeamish modesty, telling you that you\nought not to be so prodigal, who live at great expense and have others\nto relieve besides him. And therefore, unless we be mere strangers to\nourselves,\u2014to our own covetousness, shamelessness, or timidity,\u2014the\nflatterer cannot easily escape our discovery; for he is the great\npatron of these disorderly passions, endeavoring always to wind us up\nto excesses of this kind. But enough of this.\n\n21. Let us in the next place discourse of the useful and kind offices\nwhich the flatterer seems cheerfully ready upon every occasion to\nperform, thereby rendering the disparity betwixt him and the true\nfriend extremely perplexed and intricate.\n\nFor the temper of a friend, like the language of truth, is (as\nEuripides says) sincere, natural, without paint or varnish; but that\nof a flatterer, as it is corrupt and diseased in itself, so stands\nin need of many curious and exquisite remedies to correct it.[112]\nAnd therefore you shall have friends upon an accidental rencounter,\nwithout either giving or receiving a formal salute, content themselves\nto speak their mutual kindness and familiarity in a nod and a smile;\nbut the flatterer pursues you, runs to meet you, and extends his hand\nlong before he comes at you; and if you chance but to see and salute\nhim first, he swears you must excuse his rudeness, and will produce\nyou witness that he did not see you, if you please. Thus again, a\nfriend dwells not upon every trifling punctilio, is not ceremonious\nand punctual in the transacting of business, is not inquisitive, and\ndoes not intrude into every piece of service; but the parasite is all\nobedience, all perpetual indefatigable industry, admits no rival in his\nservices, but will wait your commands, which if you lay not upon him,\nhe seems mightily afflicted, the unhappiest man in the world!\n\n22. Now these observations are argument enough to convince a man of any\ntolerable sense, that the friendship such men pretend to is not really\nvirtuous and chaste, but rather a sort of impudent whorish love that\nobtrudes its embraces upon you.\n\nBut, to be more particular, let us first examine the disparity betwixt\ntheir promises. For our forefathers well observed, that the offers of a\nfriend run in such terms as these:\n\n    If I can serve you, sir, if your request\n    Be feasible by me, I\u2019ll do my best;\n\nbut the flatterer\u2019s thus:\n\n    Command me freely what you will, I\u2019ll do it.[113]\n\nFor the comedians introduce such brave promises as these:\n\n    Come, sir, let me but fight that fellow there;\n    I\u2019ll beat him soft as sponge or jellies are.\n\nBesides, no real friend will assist in the execution of a design,\nunless, being first advised with, he approve of it as either honest or\nuseful. Whereas the flatterer, though permitted to consult and give his\nopinion about an undertaking, not only out of a paltry desire to comply\nwith and gratify his friend at any rate, but lest he should be looked\nupon as disaffected to the business, servilely closes with and advances\nhis proposal, how unreasonable soever. For there are few rich men or\nprinces of this mind:\n\n    Give me a friend, though a poor beggar he,\n    Or meaner than the meanest beggar be,\n    If he his thoughts but freely will impart,\n    And boldly speak the language of his heart;[114]\n\nfor they, like actors in a tragedy, must have a chorus of their friends\nto join with them in the concert, or else the claps of the pit to\nencourage them. Whereupon Merope in the tragedy speaks thus:\n\n    Make choice of those for friends, who never knew\n    The arts of wheedling and betraying you;\n    But those poor rascals never entertain,\n    Who please you only with design to gain.[115]\n\nBut alas! they invert the counsel, and abominate those who deal\nfreely with them and advise them obstinately for the best, whilst\npitiful cringing cheats and impostors are admitted not only into their\nhouses, but into their affections and the nearest concernments of\ntheir life. You shall have some of them indeed more plain and simple\nthan the rest, who confess themselves unworthy to consult about such\nweighty affairs, but are ready to serve you in the executive part\nof a design. But the more subtle hypocrite comes in at the consult,\nknits his brows, declares his consent by the gravity of a look or a\nnod, but speaks never a word, unless perchance, when the great man\ndelivers his opinion, he cries, Lord! sir, you prevented me; I was just\ngoing to say so. For, as the mathematicians tell us that surfaces and\nlines, which are incorporeal and creatures of the understanding only,\nare neither bended nor moved nor extended of themselves, but are so\naffected together with the bodies whose extremities they are; so you\nshall observe the flatterer attends only the motion of another\u2019s sense,\nopinion, or passion, without any principle of action in himself. So\nthat the disparity betwixt them thus far is easily discernible.\n\nAnd yet more easily in the manner they perform their good offices. For\nthe kindnesses of a friend, like an animate creature, have their most\nproper virtues deep within, without any parade or pageantry on the\noutside. Nay, many times, as a faithful physician cures his patient\nwhen he least knows of it, so a true friend, either present or absent,\nas occasion serves, is solicitous about your concerns, when perhaps\nyou know nothing of it. Such was the excellent Arcesilaus, as in his\nother actions, so particularly in his kindness to Apelles, native of\nChios, whom finding extremely indigent in his sickness, he repeated\nhis visit to him with twenty drachms in his pocket; and sitting by his\nbedside, You have got nothing here, said he, but Empedocles\u2019s elements,\nfire, water, earth, and the surrounding air; neither, methinks, do you\nlie easily. And with that, stirring up his pillow, he put the money\nprivately under his head; which when the good old woman his nurse found\nand in great wonder acquainted Apelles with, Aye, says he, smiling a\nlittle, this is a piece of Arcesilaus\u2019s thievery. And the saying that\nchildren resemble their parents is found true also in philosophy.\nFor when Cephisocrates was impeached of high treason, and Lacydes,\nan intimate acquaintance of Arcesilaus, with several others of his\nfriends, stood by him at his trial, the counsel for the state desired\nthat the prisoner\u2019s ring, wherein lay the principal evidence against\nhim, might be produced in court; which Cephisocrates hearing dropped\nit softly off his finger, and Lacydes observing it set his foot upon\nit and buried it in the ground. Whereupon being acquitted, and going\nafterwards to pay his respects and thanks to his judges, one of them\n(who, it seems, had taken notice of the passages) told him that his\nthanks were owing to Lacydes, and so related the whole story, when yet\nLacydes had never mentioned it.\n\nThus I am verily persuaded the Gods confer several benefits upon us\nwhich we are not sensible of, upon no other motive in the world than\nthe mere pleasure and satisfaction they take in acts of kindness and\nbeneficence.\n\nBut on the contrary, the seemingly good offices of a flatterer\nhave nothing of that sincerity and integrity, that simplicity and\ningenuousness, which recommend a kindness, but are always attended\nwith bustle and noise, hurry, sweat and contracting the brow, to\nenhance your opinion of the great pains he has taken for you; like a\npicture drawn in gaudy colors, with folded torn garments, and full of\nangles and wrinkles, to make us believe it an elaborate piece and done\nto the life.\n\nBesides, the flatterer is so extremely troublesome in recounting the\nweary steps he has taken, the cares he has had upon him, the persons he\nhas been forced to disoblige, with a thousand other inconveniencies he\nhas labored under upon your account, that you will be apt to say, The\nbusiness was never worth all this din and clutter about it.\n\nFor a kindness once upbraided loses its grace, turns a burden, and\nbecomes intolerable. But the flatterer not only reproaches us with his\nservices already past, but at the very instant of their performance;\nwhereas, if a friend be obliged to speak of any civility done another,\nhe modestly mentions it indeed, but attributes nothing to himself.\nThus, when the Lacedaemonians supplied the people of Smyrna in great\nscarcity of provisions, and they gratefully resented and extolled the\nkindness; Why, replied the Spartans, it was no such great matter, we\nonly robbed ourselves and our cattle of a dinner. For a favor thus\nbestowed is not only free and ingenuous, but more acceptable to the\nreceiver, because he imagines his benefactor conferred it on him\nwithout any great prejudice to himself.\n\n23. But the temper of a flatterer is discernible from that of a\nfriend not only in the easiness of his promises and the troublesome\nimpertinence that attends his good offices, but more signally in this,\nthat the one is ready to promote any base and unworthy action, the\nother those only which are fair and honest. The one labors to please,\nthe other to profit you. For a friend must not, as Gorgias would have\nhim, beg another\u2019s assistance in a just undertaking, and then think to\ncompensate the civility by contributing to several that are unjust.\n\n    In wisdom, not in folly, should they join.\n\nAnd if, after all, he cannot prevail upon him, he may disengage himself\nwith the reply of Phocion to Antipater; Sir, I cannot be both your\nfriend and your flatterer,\u2014that is, Your friend and not your friend\nat the same time. For we ought to be assistant to him in his honest\nendeavors indeed, but not in his knaveries; in his counsels, not in\nhis tricks; in appearing as evidence for him, but not in a cheat;\nand must bear a share in his misfortunes, but not in his acts of\ninjustice. For if a man ought not to be as much as conscious of any\nunworthiness in his friend, how much less will it become him to partake\nin it? Therefore, as the Lacedaemonians, defeated and treating of\narticles of peace with Antipater, prayed him to command them any thing,\nhowsoever grievous and burthensome to the subject, provided it were not\nbase and dishonorable; so a friend, if you want his assistance in a\nchargeable, dangerous, and laborious enterprise, embarks in the design\ncheerfully and without reserve; but if such as will not stand with\nhis reputation and honor, he fairly desires to be excused. Whereas,\non the contrary, if you offer to put a flatterer upon a difficult or\nhazardous employment, he shuffles you off and begs your pardon. For but\nsound him, as you rap a vessel to try whether it be whole or cracked,\nfull or empty; and he shams you off with the noise of some paltry,\nfrivolous excuses. But engage him in any mean, sordid, and inglorious\nservice, abuse him, kick him, trample on him, he bears all patiently\nand knows no affront. For as the ape, who cannot keep the house like\na dog or bear a burden like an horse or plough like an ox, serves to\nbe abused, to play the buffoon, and to make sport; so the parasite,\nwho can neither plead your cause nor be your counsel nor espouse your\nquarrel, as being averse from all painful and good offices, denies you\nin nothing that may contribute to your pleasure, turns pander to your\nlust, pimps for a whore, provides you an handsome entertainment, looks\nthat your bill be reasonable, and sneaks to your miss; but he shall\ntreat your relations with disrespect and impudently turn your wife out\nof doors, if you commission him. So that you may easily discover him in\nthis particular. For put him upon the most base and dirty actions; he\nwill not spare his own pains, provided he can but gratify you.\n\n24. There remains yet another way to discover him by his inclinations\ntowards your intimates and familiars. For there is nothing more\nagreeable to a true and cordial acquaintance than to love and to be\nbeloved with many; and therefore he always sedulously endeavors to\ngain his friend the affections and esteem of other men. For being\nof opinion that all things ought to be in common amongst friends,\nhe thinks nothing ought to be more so than they themselves. But the\nfaithless, the adulterate friend of base alloy, who is conscious to\nhimself of the disservice he does true friendship by that false coin\nof it which he puts upon us, is naturally full of emulation and envy,\neven towards those of his own profession, endeavoring to outdo them in\ntheir common talent of babbling and buffoonery, whilst he reveres and\ncringes to his betters, whom he dares no more vie with than a footman\nwith a Lydian chariot, or lead (to use Simonides\u2019s expression) with\nrefined gold. Therefore this light and empty counterfeit, finding he\nwants weight when put into the balance against a solid and substantial\nfriend, endeavors to remove him as far as he can, like him who, having\npainted a cock extremely ill, commanded his servant to take the\noriginal out of sight; and if he cannot compass his design, then he\nproceeds to compliment and ceremony, pretending outwardly to admire\nhim as a person far beyond himself, whilst by secret calumnies he\nblackens and undermines him. And if these chance to have galled and\nfretted him only and have not thoroughly done their work, then he\nbetakes himself to the advice of Medius, that arch parasite and enemy\nto the Macedonian nobility, and chief of all that numerous train which\nAlexander entertained in his court. This man taught his disciples to\nslander boldly and push home their calumnies; for, though the wound\nmight probably be cured and skinned over again, yet the teeth of\nslander would be sure to leave a scar behind them. By these scars, or\n(to speak more properly) gangrenes and cancers of false accusations,\nfell the brave Callisthenes, Parmenio, and Philotas; whilst Alexander\nhimself became an easy prey to an Agnon, Bagoas, Agesias, and\nDemetrius, who tricked him up like a barbarian statue, and paid the\nmortal the adoration due to a God. So great a charm is flattery, and,\nas it seems, the greatest with those we think the greatest men; for\nthe exalted thoughts they entertain of themselves, and the desire of a\nuniversal concurrence in the same opinion from others, both add courage\nto the flatterer and credit to his impostures. Hills and mountains\nindeed are not easily taken by stratagem or ambuscade; but a weak mind,\nswollen big and lofty by fortune, birth, or the like, lies naked to the\nassaults of every mean and petty aggressor.\n\n25. And therefore we repeat here what we advised at our entrance into\nthis discourse, that we cashier every vain opinion of ourselves and\nall self-love. For their inbred flattery only disposes and prepares\nus to a more favorable reception of that from without. For, if we did\nbut square out actions according to the famous oracular precept of\nknowing ourselves, rate things according to their true intrinsic value,\nand withal, reflecting upon our own nature and education, consider\nwhat gross imperfections and failures mix with our words, actions,\nand affections, we should not lie so open to the attempts of every\nflatterer who designs upon us. For even Alexander himself, being\nreminded of his mortality by two things especially, the necessity of\nsleep and the use of women, began to stagger in the opinion they had\nmade him conceive of his godhead. And did we in like manner but take an\nimpartial survey of those troubles, lapses, and infirmities incident to\nour nature, we should find we stood in no need of a friend to praise\nand extol our virtues, but of one rather that would chide and reprimand\nus for our vices. For first, there are but few who will venture to deal\nthus roundly and impartially with their friends, and fewer yet who\nknow the art of it, men generally mistaking railing and ill language\nfor a decent and friendly reproof. And then a chiding, like any other\nphysic, if ill-timed, racks and torments you to no purpose, and works\nin a manner the same effect with pain that flattery does with pleasure.\nFor an unseasonable reprehension may be equally mischievous with an\nunseasonable commendation, and force your friend to throw himself upon\nthe flatterer; like water which, leaving the too precipitous and rugged\nhills, rolls down upon the humble valleys below. And therefore we ought\nto qualify and allay the sharpness of our reproofs with a due temper of\ncandor and moderation,\u2014as we would soften light which is too powerful\nfor a distempered eye,\u2014lest our friends, being plagued and ranted upon\nevery trivial occasion, should at last fly to the flatterer\u2019s shade for\ntheir ease and quiet. For all vice, Philopappus, is to be corrected\nby an intermediate virtue, and not by its contrary extreme, as some\ndo who, to shake off that sheepish bashfulness which hangs upon their\nnatures, learn to be impudent; to lay aside their country breeding,\nendeavor to be comical; to avoid the imputation of softness and\ncowardice, turn bullies; out of an abhorrence of superstition, commence\natheists; and rather than be reputed fools, play the knave; forcing\ntheir inclinations, like a crooked stick, to the opposite extreme for\nwant of skill to set them straight.\n\nBut it is highly rude to endeavor to avoid the suspicion of flattery\nby only being insignificantly troublesome, and it argues an ungenteel,\nunconversable temper in a man to show his just abhorrency of mean\nand servile ends in his friendship only by a sour and disagreeable\nbehavior; like the freedman in the comedy, who would needs persuade\nhimself that his railing accusation fell within the limits of that\nfreedom in discourse which every one had right to with his equals.\nSince therefore it is absurd to incur the suspicion of a flatterer by\nan over-obliging and obsequious humor, and as absurd, on the other\nhand, in endeavoring to decline it by an immoderate latitude in our\napprehensions, to lose the enjoyments and salutary admonitions of a\nfriendly conversation, and since the measures of what is just and\nproper in this, as in other things, are to be taken from decency and\nmoderation; the nature of the argument seems to require me to conclude\nit with a discourse upon this subject.\n\n26. Now seeing this liberty of animadverting on other men\u2019s failures is\nliable to so many exceptions, let us in the first place carefully purge\nit from all mixture of self-love and interest, lest any private motive,\ninjury, grudge, or dissatisfaction of our own should seem to incite us\nto the undertaking. For such a chiding as this would not pass for an\neffect of kindness but of passion, and looks more like complaint than\nan admonition; for the latter has always something in it that sounds\nkind and yet awful, whereas the other betrays only a selfish and narrow\ndisposition. And therefore we usually honor and revere our monitor, but\ncontemn and recriminate upon a querulous accuser. As Agamemnon could by\nno means digest the moderate censures of Achilles, yet bore well enough\nwith the severer reprimand of Ulysses,\n\n    O were thy sway the curse of meaner powers,\n    And thou the shame of any host but ours![116]\n\nbeing satisfied of his wisdom and good intentions; for he rated him\npurely upon the account of the public, the other upon his own. And\nAchilles himself, though of a rough and untractable disposition and\nready enough to find faults where there were none,[117] yet heard\nPatroclus patiently when he ranted him thus:\n\n    Unpitying man! no Peleus caused thy birth,\n    Nor did the tender Thetis bring thee forth;\n    But rocks, hard as thy heart, and th\u2019 angry sea,\n    Clubbed to produce a monstrous man like thee.[118]\n\nFor as Hyperides the orator desired the Athenians to consider not only\nwhether his reflections were sharp, but also whether his sharpness\nwas disinterested and incorrupt; so the reproofs of a friend, if they\nproceed from a sincere and disinterested affection, create veneration,\nawe, and confusion in the criminal to whom they are addressed. And if\nhe once perceive that his friend, waiving all offences against himself,\nchides him purely for those committed against others, he can never\nhold out against the force of so powerful a rebuke; for the sweet and\nobliging temper of his monitor gives a keener edge to his admonitions.\nAnd therefore it has been wisely said, that especially in heats and\ndifferences with our friends we ought to have a peculiar regard to\ntheir honor and interest. Nor is it a less argument of friendship,\nfor a man who is laid aside and out of favor himself to turn advocate\nin behalf of another equally despised and neglected; as Plato being\nin disgrace with Dionysius begged audience of him, which he readily\ngranting in expectation of being entertained with an account of his\ngrievances, Plato addressed himself to him after this manner: Sir,\nsaid he, if you were informed there were a certain ruffian come over\ninto your island of Sicily with design to attempt upon your majesty\u2019s\nperson, but for want of an opportunity could not execute the villany,\nwould you suffer him to go off unpunished? No, by no means, Plato,\nreplied the king; for we ought to detest and revenge not only the overt\nacts but the malicious intentions of our enemies. Well then, on the\nother hand, said Plato, if there should come a person to court out of\npure kindness and ambition to serve your majesty, and you would not\ngive him an opportunity of expressing it, were it reasonable to dismiss\nhim with scorn and disrespect? Whom do you mean, said Dionysius? Why,\nAeschines, replied Plato, as honest and excellent a person as any in\nthe school of Socrates, and of a very edifying conversation; who,\nhaving exposed himself to the difficulties of a tedious voyage that\nhe might enjoy the happiness of a philosophical converse with your\nmajesty, has met with nothing but contempt in return to the kindness\nhe intended. This friendly and generous temper of mind so strangely\naffected Dionysius, that he hugged and embraced Plato, and treated\nAeschines with a great deal of honor and magnificence.\n\n27. In the next place, let us free our discourse from all contumelious\nlanguage, all laughter, mockery, and scurrility, which spoil the relish\nof our reprehensions. For, as when a chirurgeon makes an incision in\nthe flesh he uses decent neatness and dexterity in the operation,\nwithout the affected and superfluous gesticulations of a quack or\nmountebank, so the lancing the sores of a friend may admit indeed of a\nlittle humor and urbanity, but that so qualified that it spoil not the\nseriousness and gravity requisite to the work. For boldness, insolence,\nand ill language destroy its force and efficacy. And therefore the\nfiddler reparteed handsomely enough upon Philip, when he undertook to\ndispute with him about the touch upon his instrument: God forbid that\nyour majesty should be so unhappy as to understand a fiddle better than\nI do. But Epicharmus was too blunt upon Hiero, who invited him to\nsupper a little after he had put some of his acquaintance to death,\nwhen he replied, Aye, but you could not invite me the other day to the\nsacrifice of my friends. And so was Antiphon too rude in his reflection\nupon Dionysius, when, on occasion of a discourse about the best sort\nof bronze, he told him that was the best in his opinion of which\nthe Athenians made statues of Harmodius and Aristogeiton. For these\nscurrilous abusive jests are most certainly disagreeable and pain to\nno purpose, being but the product of an intemperate wit, and betraying\nthe enmity and ill-nature of him who takes the liberty to use them;\nand whosoever allows himself in them does but wantonly sport about the\nbrink of that pit which one day will swallow him up. For Antiphon was\nafterward executed under Dionysius; and Timagenes was in disgrace with\nAugustus Caesar, not for any extravagant freedom in his discourse,\nbut only because he had taken up a foolish custom of never talking\nseriously but always scurrilously at every entertainment and walk where\nthe emperor desired his company,\u2014\n\n    Scorn all his joy, and laughter all his aim;[119]\n\nalleging the pleasantness of his humor as the cause of his favor at\ncourt.\n\nThus you shall meet with several smart and satirical reflections in a\ncomedy; but the mixture of jest and fool in the play, like ill sauce to\ngood meat, abates their poignancy and renders them insignificant; so\nthat, upon the whole, the poet acquires only the character of a saucy\nand foul-mouthed buffoon, and the auditors lose that advantage which\nthey might otherwise reap from remarks of that nature.\n\nWe may do well therefore to reserve our jollity and mirth for more\nsuitable occasions, but we must by all means be serious and candid in\nour admonitions; which, if they be upon important points, must be so\nanimated with our gestures, passion, and eagerness of voice, as to give\nthem weight and credit and so awaken a tender concern in the persons to\nwhom they are addressed.\n\nWe are again to time our reproofs as seasonably as we can; for a\nmistake in the opportunities, as it is of ill consequence in all\nother things, is so peculiarly in our reprehensions. And therefore, I\npresume, it is manifest, we ought not to fall foul upon men in their\ndrink. For first, he who broaches any sour disagreeable discourse\namidst the pleasantry and good humor of friends casts a cloud over the\nserenity of the company, and acts counter to the God Lysius,[120] who,\nas Pindar words it, unties the band of all our cares. Besides, such\nunseasonable remonstrances are not without danger; for wine is apt to\nwarm men into passion, and make them quarrel at the freedom you take.\nAnd in short, it is no argument of any brave and generous, but rather\nof an unmanly temper, not to dare to speak one\u2019s sense when men are\nsober, but to keep barking like a cowardly cur at table. And therefore\nwe need not enlarge any further upon this topic.\n\n28. But because several persons neither will nor dare take their\nfriends to task whilst they thrive and flourish in the world, looking\nupon prosperity as a state above the reach of a rebuke, but pour forth\ntheir invectives like a river that has overflown its banks, insulting\nand trampling upon them, when Fortune has already laid them at their\nfeet, out of a sort of satisfaction to see their former state and\ngrandeur reduced to the same level of fortune with themselves; it may\nnot be improper to discourse a little upon this argument, and make some\nreply to that question of Euripides,\u2014\n\n    What need is there of friends when Fortune smiles?[121]\n\nI answer, to lower those lofty and extravagant thoughts which are\nusually incident to that condition; for wisdom in conjunction with\nprosperity is a rare talent and the lot of but few. Therefore most\nmen stand in need of a borrowed prudence, to depress the tumors that\nattend an exuberant felicity; but when the turn of Fortune itself has\nabated the swelling, a man\u2019s very circumstances are sufficient of\nthemselves to read him a lecture of repentance, so that all other grave\nand austere corrections are then superfluous and impertinent; and it\nis on the contrary more proper in such traverses of Fortune to enjoy\nthe company of a compassionate friend,[122] who will administer some\ncomfort to the afflicted and buoy him up under the pressure of his\naffairs. So Xenophon relates that the presence of Clearchus, a person\nof a courteous and obliging aspect, gave new life and courage to his\nsoldiers in the heat of a battle or any other difficult rencounter.\nBut he who chides and upbraids a man in distress, like him who applies\na medicine for clearing the sight to a distempered and inflamed eye,\nneither works a cure nor allays the pain, but only adds anger to his\nsorrows and exasperates the patient. A man in health indeed will digest\na friendly lecture for his wenching, drinking, idleness, continual\nrecreations and bathing, or unseasonable eating; but for a sick man\nto be told that all this comes of his intemperance, voluptuousness,\nhigh feeding, or whoring, is utterly insupportable and worse than the\ndisease itself. O impertinent man! will such a one say, the physicians\nprescribe me castor and scammony, and I am just making my last will\nand testament, and do you lie railing and preaching to me lectures\nof philosophy? And thus men in adversity stand more in need of our\nhumanity and relief than of sharp and sententious reprimands. For\nneither will a nurse immediately scold at her child that is fallen,\nbut first help him up, wash him, and put him in order again, and\nthen chide and whip him. They tell us a story to this purpose of\nDemetrius Phalereus, that, when he dwelt an exile at Thebes in mean\nbeggarly circumstances, he was once extremely concerned to observe\nthe philosopher Crates making towards him, expecting to be treated by\nhim with all the roughness of a cynical behavior. But when Crates had\naddressed himself courteously to him, and discoursed him upon the point\nof exile, endeavoring to convince him that it had nothing miserable or\nuneasy in it, but on the contrary rather rescued him from the nice and\nhazardous management of public affairs,\u2014advising him withal to repose\nhis confidence in himself and his own conscience,\u2014Demetrius was so\ntaken and encouraged by his discourse, that he is reported to have said\nto his friends, Cursed be those employs which robbed me so long of the\nacquaintance of such an excellent person. For\n\n    Soft, friendly words revive th\u2019 afflicted soul;\n    But sharp rebukes are only for a fool.\n\nAnd this is the way of generous and ingenuous friends. But they who\nservilely admire you in prosperity,\u2014like old fractures and sprains,\nwhich (as Demosthenes[123] speaks) always ache and pain us when\nsome fresh disease has befallen the body,\u2014stick close to you in the\nrevolution of your fortune, and rejoice and enjoy the change. Whereas,\nif a man must needs have a remembrancer of a calamity which his own\nindiscretion hath pulled upon him, it is enough you put him in mind\nthat he owes it not to your advice, for you often dissuaded him from\nthe undertaking.[124]\n\n29. Well then, you say, when is a keen reprehension allowable, and when\nmay we chide a friend severely indeed? I answer, when some important\noccasion requires it, as the stopping him in the career of his\nvoluptuousness, anger, or insolence, the repressing his covetous humor\nor any other foolish habit. Thus dealt Solon with Croesus, puffed up\nand debauched with the uncertain greatness of his fortune, when he\nbade him look to the end. Thus Socrates humbled Alcibiades, forced him\ninto unfeigned tears, and turned his heart, when he argued the case\nwith him. Such, again, were the remonstrances and admonitions of Cyrus\nto Cyaxares, and of Plato to Dion, who, when the lustre and greatness\nof his achievements had fixed all men\u2019s eyes upon him, wished him to\nbeware of arrogance and self-conceit, as the readiest way to make all\nmen abandon him. And Speusippus wrote to him, not to pride himself in\nthe little applauses of women and children, but to take care to adorn\nSicily with religion, justice, and wholesome laws, that he might render\nthe Academy great and illustrious. So did not Euctus and Eulaeus,\ntwo of Perseus\u2019s favorites; who fawned upon and complied with him as\nobsequiously as any courtier of them all during the success of his\narms, but after his defeat at Pydna by the Romans inveighed bitterly\nagainst him, reminding him of his past faults, till the man out of\nmere anger and vexation stabbed them both on the spot. And so much\nconcerning the timing our reproofs in general.\n\n30. Now there are several other accidental occasions administered\nby our friends themselves, which a person heartily solicitous for\ntheir interest will lay hold of. Thus some have taken an opportunity\nof censuring them freely from a question they have asked, from the\nrelation of a story, or the praise or dispraise of the same actions in\nother men which they themselves have committed.\n\nThus, they tell us, Demaratus coming from Corinth into Macedonia when\nPhilip and his queen and son were at odds, and being after a gracious\nreception asked by the king what good understanding there was among the\nGrecians, replied, as being an old friend and acquaintance of his, Aye,\nby all means, sir, it highly becomes your majesty to enquire about the\nconcord betwixt the Athenians and Peloponnesians, when you suffer your\nown family to be the scene of so much discord and contention. And as\npert was that of Diogenes, who, entering Philip\u2019s camp as he was going\nto make war upon the Grecians, was seized upon and brought before the\nking, who not knowing him asked him if he was a spy. Why, yes truly,\nsaid he, I am a spy upon your folly and imprudence, who without any\nnecessity upon you are come hither to expose your kingdoms and your\nlife to the uncertain decision of the cast of a die. This may perhaps\nseem a little too biting and satirical.\n\n31. Another seasonable opportunity of reproving your friend for his\nvices is when some third person has already mortified him upon the same\naccount. For a courteous and obliging man will dexterously silence his\naccuser, and then take him privately to task himself, advising him\u2014if\nfor no other reason, yet to abate the insolence of his enemies\u2014to\nmanage himself more prudently for the future. For how could they open\ntheir mouths against you, what could they have to reproach you with,\nif you would but reform such and such vices which render you obnoxious\nto their censure? And by this means the offence that was given lies at\nhis door who roughly upbraided him; whilst the advantage he reaps is\nattributed to the person who candidly advised him. But there are some\nwho have got yet a genteeler way of chiding, and that is, by chastising\nothers for faults which they know their friends really stand guilty\nof. As my master Ammonius, perceiving once at his afternoon lecture\nthat some of his scholars had dined more plentifully than became the\nmoderation of students, immediately commanded one of his freedmen\nto take his own son and whip him. For what? says he. The youngster,\nforsooth, must needs have vinegar sauce to his meat; and with that\ncasting his eye upon us, he gave us to understand that we likewise were\nconcerned in the reprehension.\n\n32. Again, we must be cautious how we rebuke a friend in company,\nalways remembering the repartee made upon Plato on that account. For\nSocrates having fallen one day very severely upon an acquaintance of\nhis at table, Plato could not forbear to take him up, saying, Had it\nnot been more proper, sir, to have spoken these things in private? To\nwhich Socrates instantly replied, And had it not been more proper for\nyou to have told me so in private too? And they say, Pythagoras one\ntime ranted a friend of his so terribly before company, that the poor\nyoung man went and hanged himself; from which time the philosopher\nwould never chide any man in the presence of another. For the discovery\nand cure of a vice, like that of a scandalous disease, ought to be in\nsecret, and not like a public show transacted upon the theatre; for it\nis no way the part of a friend, but a mere cheat and trick, for one man\nto recommend himself to the standers-by and seek for reputation from\nthe failures of another, like mountebank chirurgeons, who perform their\noperations on a stage to gain the greater practice. But besides the\ndisgrace that attends a reproof of this nature (a thing that will never\nwork any cure), we are likewise to consider that vice is naturally\nobstinate and loves to dispute its ground. For what Euripides says is\ntrue not only of love,\n\n    The more \u2019tis checked, the more it presses on,\n\nbut of any other imperfection. If you lay a man open publicly for it\nand tell all, you are so far from reforming him that you force him\nto brave it out. And therefore, as Plato advises that old men who\nwould teach the younger fry reverence should learn to revere them\nfirst, so certainly modestly to reprimand is the way to meet with a\nmodest return. For he who warily attacks the criminal works upon his\ngood nature by his own, and so insensibly undermines his vices. And\ntherefore it would be much more proper to observe the rule in Homer\n\n    To whisper softly in the ear,\n    Lest standers-by should chance to hear.[125]\n\nBut above all, we ought not to discover the imperfections of an husband\nbefore his wife, nor of a father before his children, nor of a lover in\ncompany of his mistress, nor of masters in presence of their scholars,\nor the like; for it touches a man to the quick to be rebuked before\nthose whom he would have think honorably of him. And I verily believe\nthat it was not so much the heat of the wine as the sting of too public\na reprehension, that enraged Alexander against Clitus. And Aristomenes,\nPtolemy\u2019s preceptor, lost himself by awaking the king, who had dropped\nasleep one time at an audience of foreign embassadors; for the court\nparasites immediately took this occasion to express their pretendedly\ndeep resentments of the disgrace done his majesty, suggesting that,\nif indeed the cares of the government had brought a little seasonable\ndrowsiness upon him, he might have been told of it in private, but\nshould not have had rude hands laid upon his person before so great an\nassembly; which so affected the king, that he presently sent the poor\nman a draught of poison, and made him drink it up. And Aristophanes\nsays, Cleon blamed him for railing at Athens before strangers,[126]\nwhereby he incensed the Athenians against him. And therefore they\nwho aim at the interest and reformation of their friends rather than\nostentation and popularity, ought amongst other things to beware of\nexposing them too publicly.\n\nAgain, what Thucydides[127] makes the Corinthians say of themselves,\nthat they were persons every way qualified for the reprehension of\nother men, ought to be the character of every one who sets up for a\nmonitor. For, as Lysander replied upon a certain Megarian, who in a\ncouncil of allies and confederates had spoken boldly in behalf of\nGreece, This style of yours, sir, needs a state to back it; so he who\ntakes upon him the liberty of a censor must be a man of a regular\nconversation himself,\u2014one like Plato, whose life was a continued\nlecture to Speusippus, or Xenocrates, who, casting his eye one time\nupon the dissolute Polemon at a disputation, reformed him with the very\nawfulness of his looks. Whereas the remonstrance of a lewd whiffling\nfellow will certainly meet with no better entertainment than that of\nthe old proverbial repartee,\n\n    Physician, heal thyself.[128]\n\n33. But because several accidental emergencies in conversation will now\nand then invite a man, though bad enough himself, to correct others,\nthe most dexterous way of doing it will be to involve ourselves in the\nsame guilt with those we reprehend; as in this passage of Homer,\n\n    Fie, what\u2019s the matter, Diomede, that we\n    Have now forgot our former gallantry?\n\nand in this other,\n\n    We are not worth one single Hector all.[129]\n\nThus Socrates would handsomely twit the young men with their ignorance\nby professing his own, pretending for his part he had need with them\nto study morality and make more accurate enquiries into the truth of\nthings. For a confession of the same guilt, and a seeming endeavor to\nreform ourselves as well as our friends, gives credit to the reprimand\nand recommends it to their affections. But he who gravely magnifies\nhimself, whilst he imperiously detracts from others, as being a man\nforsooth of no imperfections, unless his age or a celebrated reputation\nindeed commands our attention, is only impertinent and troublesome\nto no purpose. And therefore it was not without reason that Phoenix,\nchecking Achilles for his intemperate anger, confessed his own\nunhappiness in that particular, how he had like once to have slain his\nown father through a transport of passion had not the scandalous name\nof parricide held his hands;[130] that the hero might not imagine he\ntook that liberty with him because he had never offended in the like\nkind himself. For such inoffensive reproofs leave a deeper impress\nbehind them, when they seem the result of sympathy rather than contempt.\n\nBut because a mind subject to the disorders of passion, like an\ninflamed eye that cannot bear a great and glaring light, is impatient\nof a rebuke, without some temperament to qualify and allay its\npoignancy, therefore the best remedy in this case will be to dash it\nwith a little praise, as in the following:\n\n    Think, and subdue! on dastards dead to fame\n    I waste no anger, for they feel no shame;\n    But you, the pride, the flower of all our host,\n    My heart weeps blood to see your glory lost!\n\n    Where, Pandarus, are all thy honors now,\n    Thy winged arrows and unerring bow,\n    Thy matchless skill, thy yet unrivall\u2019d fame\n    And boasted glory of the Lycian name![131]\n\nAnd such rebukes as these are also most effectual in reclaiming those\nthat are ready to fall into gross enormities:\n\n    O where are Oedipus and all his riddles now?\n\nand\n\n    Is this the speech of daring Hercules?[132]\n\nFor a mixture of both together not only abates and takes off from that\nroughness and command which a blunt reprehension seems to carry along\nwith it, but raises in a man a generous emulation of himself, whilst\nthe remembrance of his past virtues shames him out of his present vices\nand makes him propose his former actions for his future example. But\nif you compare him with other men, as with his fellow-citizens, his\ncontemporaries, or relations, then vice, which loves to dispute the\nvictory, renders him uneasy and impatient under the comparison, and\nwill be apt to make him grumble, and in an huff bid you be gone then\nto his betters and not trouble him any longer. And therefore we ought\nnot to fall upon other men\u2019s commendations before him whom we take the\nliberty to rebuke, unless indeed they be his parents; as Agamemnon in\nHomer,\u2014\n\n    Ah! how unlike his sire is Tydeus\u2019 son![133]\n\nand Ulysses in the tragedy called the Scyrians, speaking to Achilles,\u2014\n\n    Dost thou, who sprang from a brave Grecian race\n    By spinning thy great ancestors disgrace?\n\n34. It is in the next place very improper for a man immediately to\nretort or recriminate upon his monitor; for this is the way to occasion\nheats and animosities betwixt them, and will speak him rather impatient\nof any reproof at all than desirous to recompensate the kindness of one\nwith another. And therefore it is better to take his chiding patiently\nfor the present; and if he chance afterwards to commit a fault worth\nyour remarking upon, you have then an opportunity of repaying him in\nhis own coin. For being reminded, without the least intimation of\na former pique or dissatisfaction, that he himself did not use to\noverlook the slips of his friend, he will receive the remonstrance\nfavorably at your hands, as being the return of kindness rather than of\nanger and resentment.\n\n35. Moreover, as Thucydides[134] says that he is a wise man who\nwill not venture to incur odium except for matters of the highest\nconcernment, so, when we do undertake the ungrateful office of censor,\nit ought to be only upon weighty and important occasions. For he\nwho is peevish and angry at everybody and upon every trivial fault,\nacting rather with the imperious pedantry of a schoolmaster than the\ndiscretion of a friend, blunts the edge of his reprehensions in matters\nof an higher nature, by squandering, like an unskilful physician, that\nkeen and bitter but necessary and sovereign remedy of his reproofs\nupon many slight distempers that require not so exquisite a cure. And\ntherefore a wise man will industriously avoid the character of being a\nperson who is always chiding and delights in finding faults. Besides\nthat, whosoever is of that little humor that animadverts upon every\ntrifling peccadillo only affords his friend a fairer occasion of being\neven with him one time or another for his grosser immoralities. As\nPhilotimus the physician, visiting a patient of his who was troubled\nwith an inflammation in his liver, but showed him his forefinger,\ntold him: Sir, your distemper is not a whitlow. In like manner we may\ntake occasion now and then to reply upon a man who carps at trifles\nin another,\u2014his diversions, pleasantries, or a glass of wine,\u2014Let the\ngentleman rather, sir, turn off his whore and leave off his dicing;\nfor otherwise he is an admirable person. For he who is dispensed with\nin smaller matters more willingly gives his friend the liberty of\nreprimanding him for greater. But there is neither child nor brother\nnor servant himself able to endure a man of a busy inquisitive\nhumor, who brawls perpetually, and is sour and unpleasant upon every\ninconsiderable occasion.\n\n36. But since a weak and foolish friend, as Euripides says of old age,\nhas its strong as well as its feeble part, we ought to observe both,\nand cheerfully extol the one before we fall foul upon the other. For as\nwe first soften iron in the fire and then dip it in water, to harden\nit into a due consistence; so, after we have warmed and mollified\nour friend by a just commendation of his virtues, we may then safely\ntemper him with a moderate reprehension of his vices. We may then say,\nAre these actions comparable to the other? Do you not perceive the\nadvantages of a virtuous life? This is what we who are your friends\nrequire of you. These are properly your own actions, for which nature\ndesigned you; but for the other,\n\n    Let them for ever from you banished be,\n    To desert mountains or the raging sea.[135]\n\nFor as a prudent physician had rather recover his patient with sleep\nand good diet than with castor and scammony, so a candid friend, a\ngood father or schoolmaster, will choose to reform men\u2019s manners by\ncommendations rather than reproofs. For nothing in the world renders\nour corrections so inoffensive and withal so useful as to address\nourselves to the delinquent in a kind, affectionate manner. And\ntherefore we ought not to deal roughly with him upon his denial of the\nmatter of fact, nor hinder him from making his just vindication; but we\nshould rather handsomely help him out in his apology and mollify the\nmatter. As Hector to his brother Paris,\n\n    Unhappy man, by passion overruled;[136]\n\nsuggesting that he did not quit the field, in his encounter with\nMenelaus, out of cowardice, but mere anger and indignation. And Nestor\nspeaks thus to Agamemnon.\n\n    You only yielded to the great impulse.[137]\n\nFor to tell a man that he did such a thing through ignorance or\ninadvertency is, in my opinion, a much more genteel expression than\nbluntly to say, \u201cYou have dealt unjustly or acted basely by me.\u201d And to\nadvise a man not to quarrel with his brother is more civil than to say,\n\u201cDon\u2019t you envy and malign him.\u201d And \u201cKeep not company with that woman\nwho debauches you\u201d is softer language than \u201cDon\u2019t you debauch her.\u201d\n\nAnd thus you see with what caution and moderation we must reprehend\nour friends in reclaiming them from vices to which they are already\nsubjected; whilst the prevention of them doth require a clear contrary\nmethod. For when we are to divert them from the commission of a crime,\nor to check a violent and headstrong passion, or to push on and excite\na phlegmatic lazy humor to great things, we may then ascribe their\nfailings to as dishonorable causes as we please.\n\nThus Ulysses, when he would awaken the courage of Achilles, in one of\nthe tragedies of Sophocles, tells him, that it was not the business of\na supper that put him in such a fret, as he pretended, but because he\nwas now arrived within sight of the walls of Troy. And when Achilles,\nin a great chafe at the affront, swore he would sail back again with\nhis squadron and leave him to himself, Ulysses came upon him again with\nthis rejoinder\n\n    Come, sir, \u2019tis not for this you\u2019d sail away;\n    But Hector\u2019s near, it is not safe to stay\n\nAnd thus, by representing to the bold and valiant the danger of being\nreputed a coward, to the temperate and sober that of being thought\na debauchee, and to the liberal and magnificent the chance of being\ncalled stingy and sordid, we spur them on to brave actions and divert\nthem from base and ignominious ones.\n\nIndeed, when a thing is once done and past remedy, we ought to qualify\nand attemperate our reproofs, and commiserate rather than reprimand.\nBut if it be a business of pure prevention, of stopping a friend in\nthe career of his irregularities, our applications must be vehement,\ninexorable, and indefatigable; for this is the proper season for a\nman to show himself a true monitor and a friend indeed. But we see\nthat even enemies reprove each other for faults already committed. As\nDiogenes said pertinently enough to this purpose, that he who would\nact wisely ought to be surrounded either with good friends or flagrant\nenemies; for the one always teach us well, and the other as constantly\naccuse us if we do ill.\n\nBut certainly it is much more eligible to forbear the commission of a\nfault by hearkening to the good advice of our friends, than afterwards\nto repent of it by reason of the obloquy of our enemies. And therefore,\nif for no other reason, we ought to apply our reprehensions with a\ngreat deal of art and dexterity, because they are the most sovereign\nphysic that a friend can prescribe, and require not only a due mixture\nof ingredients in the preparation of them but a seasonable juncture for\nthe patient to take them in.\n\n37. But because, as it has been before observed, reproofs usually carry\nsomething of trouble and vexation along with them, we must imitate\nskilful physicians, who, when they have made an incision in the flesh,\nleave it not open to the smart and torment that attends it, but chafe\nand foment it to assuage the pain. So he who would admonish dexterously\nmust not immediately give a man over to the sting and anguish of his\nreprehensions, but endeavor to skin over the sore with a more mild\nand diverting converse; like stone-cutters, who, when they have made\na fracture in their statues, polish and brighten them afterwards. But\nif we leave them in pain with their wounds and resentments, and (as it\nwere) with the scars of our reproofs yet green upon them, they will\nhardly be brought to admit of any lenitive we shall offer for the\nfuture. And therefore they who will take upon them to admonish their\nfriends ought especially to observe this main point, not to leave\nthem immediately upon it, nor abruptly break off the conference with\ndisobliging and bitter expressions.\n\n\n\n\nTHAT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO LIVE PLEASURABLY ACCORDING TO THE DOCTRINE\nOF EPICURUS.\n\nPLUTARCH, ZEUXIPPUS, THEON, ARISTODEMUS.\n\n\n1. Epicurus\u2019s great confidant and familiar, Colotes, set forth a book\nwith this title to it, that according to the tenets of the other\nphilosophers it is impossible to live. Now what occurred to me then\nto say against him, in the defence of those philosophers, hath been\nalready put into writing by me. But since upon breaking up of our\nlecture several things have happened to be spoken afterwards in the\nwalks in further opposition to his party, I thought it not amiss to\nrecollect them also, if for no other reason, yet for this one, that\nthose who will needs be contradicting other men may see that they ought\nnot to run cursorily over the discourses and writings of those they\nwould disprove, nor by tearing out one word here and another there, or\nby falling foul upon particular passages without the books, to impose\nupon the ignorant and unlearned.\n\n2. Now as we were leaving the school to take a walk (as our manner is)\nin the place of exercise, Zeuxippus began to us: In my opinion, said\nhe, the debate was managed on our side with more softness and less\nfreedom than was fitting. I am sure, Heraclides sufficiently signified\nhis disgust at us at parting, for handling Epicurus and Metrodorus\nmore roughly than they deserved. Yet you may remember, replied Theon,\nhow you told them that Colotes himself, compared with the rhetoric of\nthose two gentlemen, would appear the complaisantest man alive; for\nwhen they have raked together the lewdest terms of ignominy the tongue\nof man ever used, as buffooneries, trollings, arrogancies, whorings,\nassassinations, whining counterfeits, vile seducers, and blockheads,\nthey faintly throw them in the faces of Aristotle, Socrates,\nPythagoras, Protagoras, Theophrastus, Heraclides, Hipparchus, and which\nnot, even of the best and most celebrated authorities. So that, should\nthey pass for very knowing men upon all other accounts, yet their very\ncalumnies and reviling language would bespeak them at the greatest\ndistance from philosophy imaginable. For emulation can never enter that\nGod-like consort, nor such fretfulness as wants resolution to conceal\nits own resentments. Aristodemus then subjoined: Heraclides, you know,\nis a great philologist; and that may be the reason why he made Epicurus\nthose amends for the poetic din (so that party style poetry) and for\nthe fooleries of Homer; or else, it may be, it was because Metrodorus\nhad libelled that poet in so many books. But let us let these gentlemen\npass at present, Zeuxippus, and rather return to what was charged\nupon the philosophers in the beginning of our discourse, that it is\nimpossible to live according to their tenets. And I see not why we two\nmay not despatch this affair betwixt us, with the good assistance of\nTheon; for I find this gentleman (meaning me) is already tired. Then\nTheon said to him,\n\n    Our fellows have that garland from us won;\n\ntherefore, if you please,\n\n    Let\u2019s fix another goal, and at that run.[138]\n\nWe will even prosecute them at the suit of the philosophers, in the\nfollowing form: We\u2019ll prove, if we can, that it is impossible to live\na pleasurable life according to their tenets. Bless me! said I to him,\nsmiling, you seem to me to level your foot at the very bellies of the\nmen, and to design to enter the list with them for their lives, whilst\nyou go about to rob them thus of their pleasure, and they cry out to\nyou,\n\n    \u201cForbear, we\u2019re no good boxers, sir;\n\nno, nor good pleaders, nor good senators, nor good magistrates either;\n\n    Our proper talent is to eat and drink,[139]\n\nand to excite such tender and delicate motions in our bodies as may\nchafe our imaginations to some jolly delight or gayety.\u201d And therefore\nyou seem to me not so much to take off (as I may say) the pleasurable\npart, as to deprive the men of their very lives, while you will not\nleave them to live pleasurably. Nay then, said Theon, if you think so\nwell of this subject-matter, why do you not set in hand to it? By all\nmeans, said I, I am for this, and shall not only hear but answer you\ntoo, if you shall require it. But I must leave it to you to take the\nlead.\n\nThen, after Theon had spoken something to excuse himself, Aristodemus\nsaid: When we had so short and fair a cut to our design, how have you\nblocked up the way before us, by preventing us from joining issue with\nthe faction at the very first upon the single point of honesty! For you\nmust grant, it can be no easy matter to drive men already possessed\nthat pleasure is their utmost good yet to believe a life of pleasure\nimpossible to be attained. But now the truth is, that just when they\nfailed of living honestly they failed also of living pleasurably; for\nto live pleasurably without living honestly is even by themselves\nallowed inconsistent.\n\n3. Theon then said: We may probably resume the consideration of that in\nthe process of our discourse; in the interim we will make use of their\nconcessions. Now they suppose their last good to lie about the belly\nand such other conveyances of the body as let in pleasure and not\npain; and are of opinion, that all the brave and ingenious inventions\nthat ever have been were contrived at first for the pleasure of the\nbelly, or the good hope of compassing such pleasure,\u2014as the sage\nMetrodorus informs us. By which, my good friend, it is very plain,\nthey found their pleasure in a poor, rotten, and unsure thing, and\none that is equally perforated for pains, by the very passages they\nreceive their pleasures by; or rather indeed, that admits pleasure but\nby a few, but pain by all its parts. For the whole of pleasure is in a\nmanner in the joints, nerves, feet, and hands; and these are oft the\nseats of very grievous and lamentable distempers, as gouts, corroding\nrheums, gangrenes, and putrid ulcers. And if you apply to yourself the\nexquisitest of perfumes or gusts, you will find but some one small part\nof your body is finely and delicately touched, while the rest are many\ntimes filled with anguish and complaints. Besides, there is no part\nof us proof against fire, sword, teeth, or scourges, or insensible\nof dolors and aches; yea, heats, colds, and fevers sink into all our\nparts alike. But pleasures, like gales of soft wind, move simpering,\none towards one extreme of the body and another towards another, and\nthen go off in a vapor. Nor are they of any long durance, but, as so\nmany glancing meteors, they are no sooner kindled in the body than they\nare quenched by it. As to pain, Aeschylus\u2019s Philoctetes affords us a\nsufficient testimony:\n\n    The cruel viper ne\u2019er will quit my foot;\n    Her dire envenomed teeth have there ta\u2019en root.\n\nFor pain will not troll off as pleasure doth, nor imitate it in its\npleasing and tickling touches. But as the clover twists its perplexed\nand winding roots into the earth, and through its coarseness abides\nthere a long time; so pain disperses and entangles its hooks and roots\nin the body, and continues there, not for a day or a night, but for\nseveral seasons of years, if not for some revolutions of Olympiads,\nnor scarce ever departs unless struck out by other pains, as by\nstronger nails. For who ever drank so long as those that are in a fever\nare adry? Or who was ever so long eating as those that are besieged\nsuffer hunger? Or where are there any that are so long solaced with\nthe conversation of friends as tyrants are racking and tormenting?\nNow all this is owing to the baseness of the body and its natural\nincapacity for a pleasurable life; for it bears pains better than it\ndoth pleasures, and with respect to those is firm and hardy, but with\nrespect to these is feeble and soon palled. To which add, that if we\nare minded to discourse on a life of pleasure, these men won\u2019t give\nus leave to go on, but will presently confess themselves that the\npleasures of the body are but short, or rather indeed but of a moment\u2019s\ncontinuance; if they do not design to banter us or else speak out of\nvanity, when Metrodorus tells us, We many times spit at the pleasures\nof the body, and Epicurus saith, A wise man, when he is sick, many\ntimes laughs at the very extremity of his distemper.\n\nWith what consistence then can those that account the pains of the body\nso light and easy think so highly of its pleasures? For should we allow\nthem not to come behind its pains either in duration or magnitude, they\nwould not yet have their being without them. For Epicurus hath made\nthe removal of all that pains the common definition of all pleasure;\nas if Nature had intended to advance the pleasurable part only to the\ndestruction of the painful, but would not have it improved any further\nin magnitude, and as if she only diverted herself with certain useless\ndiversifications after she hath once arrived to an abolition of pain.\nBut now the passage to this, conjoined with an appetence which is the\nmeasure of pleasure, is extremely short and soon over. And therefore\nthe sense of their narrow entertainment here hath obliged them to\ntransplant their last end from the body, as from a poor and lean soil,\nto the mind, in hopes of enjoying there, as it were, large pastures and\nfair meadows of delights and satisfactions.\n\n    For Ithaca is no fit place\n    For mettled steeds to run a race.[140]\n\nNeither can the joys of our poor bodies be smooth and equal; but on the\ncontrary they must be coarse and harsh, and immixed with much that is\ndispleasing and inflamed.\n\n4. Zeuxippus then said: And do you not think then they take the right\ncourse to begin at the body, where they observe pleasure to have its\nfirst rise, and thence to pass to the mind as the more stable and sure\npart, there to complete and crown the whole?\n\nThey do, by Jove, I said; and if, after removing thither, they have\nindeed found something more consummate than before, they take a course\ntoo as well agreeing with nature as becoming men adorned with both\ncontemplative and civil knowledge. But if after all this you still\nhear them cry out, and protest that the mind of man can receive no\nsatisfaction or tranquillity from any thing under Heaven but the\npleasures of the body either in possession or expectance, and that\nthese are its proper and only good, can you forbear thinking they make\nuse of the soul but as a funnel for the body, while they mellow their\npleasure by shifting it from one vessel to another, as they rack wine\nout of an old and leaky vessel into a new one and there let it grow\nold, and then imagine they have performed some extraordinary and very\nfine thing? True indeed, time may both keep and recover wine that hath\nthus been drawn off; but the mind, receiving but the remembrance only\nof past pleasure, like a kind of scent, retains that and no more. For\nas soon as it hath given one hiss in the body, it immediately expires,\nand that little of it that stays behind in the memory is but flat and\nlike a queasy fume; as if a man should lay up and treasure in his\nfancy what he either ate or drank yesterday, that he may have recourse\nto that when he wants fresh fare. See now how much more temperate the\nCyrenaics are, who, though they have drunk out of the same bottle with\nEpicurus, yet will not allow men so much as to practise their amours by\ncandle-light, but only under the covert of the dark, for fear seeing\nshould fasten too quick an impression of the images of such actions\nupon the fancy and thereby too frequently inflame the desire. But these\ngentlemen account it the highest accomplishment of a philosopher to\nhave a clear and retentive memory of all the various figures, passions,\nand touches of past pleasure. We will not now say, they present us with\nnothing worthy the name of philosophy, while they leave the refuse of\npleasure in their wise man\u2019s mind, as if it could be a lodging for\nbodies; but that it is impossible such things as these should make a\nman live pleasurably, I think is abundantly manifest from hence.\n\nFor it will not perhaps seem strange if I assert, that the memory of\npleasure past brings no pleasure with it if it seemed but little in\nthe very enjoyment, or to men of such abstinence as to account it for\ntheir benefit to retire from its first approaches; when even the most\namazed and sensual admirers of corporeal delights remain no longer in\ntheir gaudy and pleasant humor than their pleasure lasts them. What\nremains is but an empty shadow and dream of that pleasure that hath now\ntaken wing and is fled from them and that serves but for fuel to foment\ntheir untamed desires. Like as in those that dream they are adry or\nin love, their unaccomplished pleasures and enjoyments do but excite\nthe inclination to a greater keenness. Nor indeed can the remembrance\nof past enjoyments afford them any real contentment at all, but must\nserve only, with the help of a quick desire, to raise up very much of\noutrage and stinging pain out of the remains of a feeble and befooling\npleasure. Neither doth it befit men of continence and sobriety to\nexercise their thoughts about such poor things, or to do what one\ntwitted Carneades with, to reckon, as out of a diurnal, how oft they\nhave lain with Hedia or Leontion, or where they last drank Thasian\nwine, or at what twentieth-day feast they had a costly supper. For\nsuch transport and captivatedness of the mind to its own remembrances\nas this is would show a deplorable and bestial restlessness and raving\ntowards the present and hoped-for acts of pleasure. And therefore I\ncannot but look upon the sense of these inconveniences as the true\ncause of their retiring at last to a freedom from pain and a firm\nstate of body; as if living pleasurably could lie in bare imagining\nthis either past or future to some persons. True indeed it is, \u201cthat a\nsound state of body and a good assurance of its continuing must needs\nafford a most transcending and solid satisfaction to all men capable of\nreasoning.\u201d\n\n5. But yet look first what work they make, while they course this\nsame thing\u2014whether it be pleasure, exemption from pain, or good\nhealth\u2014up and down, first from the body to the mind, and then back\nagain from the mind to the body, being compelled to return it to\nits first origin, lest it should run out and so give them the slip.\nThus they pitch the pleasure of the body (as Epicurus says) upon the\ncomplacent joy in the mind, and yet conclude again with the good\nhopes that complacent joy hath in bodily pleasure. Indeed what wonder\nis it if, when the foundation shakes, the superstructure totter? Or\nthat there should be no sure hope nor unshaken joy in a matter that\nsuffers so great concussion and changes as continually attend a body\nexposed to so many violences and strokes from without, and having\nwithin it the origins of such evils as human reason cannot avert? For\nif it could, no understanding man would ever fall under stranguries,\ngripes, consumptions, or dropsies; with some of which Epicurus\nhimself did conflict and Polyaenus with others, while others of them\nwere the deaths of Neocles and Agathobulus. And this we mention not\nto disparage them, knowing very well that Pherecydes and Heraclitus,\nboth very excellent persons, labored under very uncouth and calamitous\ndistempers. We only beg of them, if they will own their own diseases\nand not by noisy rants and popular harangues incur the imputation of\nfalse bravery, either not to take the health of the whole body for\nthe ground of their content, or else not to say that men under the\nextremities of dolors and diseases can yet rally and be pleasant.\nFor a sound and hale constitution of body is indeed a thing that\noften happens, but a firm and steadfast assurance of its continuance\ncan never befall any intelligent mind. But as at sea (according to\nAeschylus)\n\n    Night to the ablest pilot trouble brings,[141]\n\nand so will a calm too, for no man knows what will be,\u2014so likewise is\nit impossible for a soul that dwells in a healthful body, and that\nplaces her good in the hopes she hath of that body, to perfect her\nvoyage here without frights or waves. For man\u2019s mind hath not, like the\nsea, its tempests and storms only from without it, but it also raises\nup from within far more and greater disturbances. And a man may with\nmore reason look for constant fair weather in the midst of winter than\nfor perpetual exemption from afflictions in his body. For what else\nhath given the poets occasion to term us creatures of a day, uncertain\nand unfixed, and to liken our lives to leaves that both spring and fall\nin the compass of a summer, but the unhappy, calamitous, and sickly\ncondition of the body, whose very utmost good we are warned to dread\nand prevent? For an exquisite habit, Hippocrates saith, is slippery and\nhazardous. And\n\n    He that but now looked jolly, plump, and stout,\n    Like a star shot by Jove, is now gone out;\n\nas it is in Euripides. And it is a vulgar persuasion, that very\nhandsome persons, when looked upon, oft suffer damage by envy and an\nevil eye; for (it is said) a body at its utmost vigor will through\ndelicacy very soon admit of changes.\n\n6. But now that these men are miserably unprovided for an undisturbed\nlife, you may discern even from what they themselves advance against\nothers. For they say that those who commit wickedness and incur the\ndispleasure of the laws live in constant misery and fear, for, though\nthey may perhaps attain to privacy, yet it is impossible they should\never be well assured of that privacy; whence the ever-impending fear of\nthe future will not permit them to have either complacency or assurance\nin their present circumstances. But they consider not how they speak\nall this against themselves. For a sound and healthy state of body\nthey may indeed oftentimes possess, but that they should ever be well\nassured of its continuance is impossible; and they must of necessity be\nin constant disquiet and pain for the body with respect to futurity,\nnever succeeding in attaining to that firm and steadfast assurance\nfrom it which they expect. But to do no wickedness will contribute\nnothing to our assurance; for it is not suffering justly but suffering\nin itself that is dismaying. Nor can it be a matter of trouble to\nbe engaged in villanies one\u2019s self, and not afflictive to suffer by\nthe villanies of others. Neither can it be said that the tyranny of\nLachares was less, if it was not more, calamitous to the Athenians,\nand that of Dionysius to the Syracusans, than they were to the tyrants\nthemselves; for it was disturbing that made them be disturbed; and\ntheir first oppressing and pestering of others gave them occasion to\nexpect to suffer ill themselves. Why should a man recount the outrages\nof rabbles, the barbarities of thieves, or the villanies of inheritors,\nor yet the contagions of airs and the concursions of seas, by which\nEpicurus (as himself writeth) was in his voyage to Lampsacus within\nvery little of drowning? The very composition of the body\u2014it containing\nin it the matter of all diseases, and (to use a pleasantry of the\nvulgar) cutting thongs for the beast out of its own hide, I mean pains\nout of the body\u2014is sufficient to render life perilous and uneasy, and\nthat to the good as well as to the bad, if they have learned to place\ntheir complacence and assurance in the body and the hopes they have\nof it, and in nothing else; as Epicurus hath written, as well in many\nother of his discourses as in that of Man\u2019s End.\n\n7. They therefore assign not only a treacherous and unsure ground of\ntheir pleasurable living, but also one in all respects despicable and\nlittle, if the escaping of evils be the matter of their complacence\nand last good. But now they tell us, nothing else can be so much as\nimagined, and nature hath no other place to bestow her good in but only\nthat out of which her evil hath been driven; as Metrodorus speaks in\nhis book against the Sophists. So that this single thing, to escape\nevil, he says, is the supreme good; for there is no room to lodge this\ngood in where nothing of what is painful and afflicting goes out.\nLike unto this is that of Epicurus, where he saith: The very essence\nof good arises from the escaping of bad, and a man\u2019s recollecting,\nconsidering, and rejoicing within himself that this hath befallen him.\nFor what occasions transcending joy (he saith) is some great impending\nevil escaped; and in this lies the very nature and essence of good, if\na man attain unto it aright, and contain himself when he hath done,\nand not ramble and prate idly about it. Oh the rare satisfaction and\nfelicity these men enjoy, that can thus rejoice for having undergone no\nevil and endured neither sorrow nor pain! Have they not reason, think\nyou, to value themselves for such things as these, and to talk as they\nare wont when they style themselves immortals and equals to Gods?\u2014and\nwhen, through the excessiveness and transcendency of the blessed things\nthey enjoy, they rave even to the degree of whooping and hollowing for\nvery satisfaction that, to the shame of all mortals, they have been the\nonly men that could find out this celestial and divine good that lies\nin an exemption from all evil? So that their beatitude differs little\nfrom that of swine and sheep, while they place it in a mere tolerable\nand contented state, either of the body, or of the mind upon the body\u2019s\naccount. For even the wiser and more ingenious sort of brutes do not\nesteem escaping of evil their last end; but when they have taken their\nrepast, they are disposed next by fulness to singing, and they divert\nthemselves with swimming and flying; and their gayety and sprightliness\nprompt them to entertain themselves with attempting to counterfeit all\nsorts of voices and notes; and then they make their caresses to one\nanother, by skipping and dancing one towards another; nature inciting\nthem, after they have escaped evil, to look after some good, or rather\nto shake off what they find uneasy and disagreeing, as an impediment to\ntheir pursuit of something better and more congenial.\n\n8. For what we cannot be without deserves not the name of good; but\nthat which claims our desire and preference must be something beyond a\nbare escape from evil. And so, by Jove, must that be too that is either\nagreeing or congenial to us, according to Plato, who will not allow us\nto give the name of pleasures to the bare departures of sorrows and\npains, but would have us look upon them rather as obscure draughts\nand mixtures of agreeing and disagreeing, as of black and white,\nwhile the extremes would advance themselves to a middle temperament.\nBut oftentimes unskilfulness and ignorance of the true nature of the\nextreme occasions some to mistake the middle temperament for the\nextreme and outmost part. Thus do Epicurus and Metrodorus, while\nthey make avoiding of evil to be the very essence and consummation\nof good, and so receive but as it were the satisfaction of slaves or\nof rogues newly discharged the gaol, who are well enough contented\nif they may but wash and supple their sores and the stripes they\nreceived by whipping, but never in their lives had one taste or sight\nof a generous, clean, unmixed, and unulcerated joy. For it follows\nnot that, if it be vexatious to have one\u2019s body itch or one\u2019s eyes to\nrun, it must be therefore a blessing to scratch one\u2019s self, and to\nwipe one\u2019s eye with a rag; nor that, if it be bad to be dejected or\ndismayed at divine matters or to be discomposed with the relations of\nhell, therefore the bare avoiding of all this must be some happy and\namiable thing. The truth is, these men\u2019s opinion, though it pretends so\nfar to outgo that of the vulgar, allows their joy but a straight and\nnarrow compass to toss and tumble in, while it extends it but to an\nexemption from the fear of hell, and so makes that the top of acquired\nwisdom which is doubtless natural to the brutes. For if freedom from\nbodily pain be still the same, whether it come by endeavor or by\nnature, neither then is an undisturbed state of mind the greater for\nbeing attained to by industry than if it came by nature. Though a man\nmay with good reason maintain that to be the more confirmed habit of\nthe mind which naturally admits of no disorder, than that which by\napplication and judgment eschews it.\n\nBut let us suppose them both equal; they will yet appear not one jot\nsuperior to the beasts for being unconcerned at the stories of hell\nand the legends of the Gods, and for not expecting endless sorrows\nand everlasting torments hereafter. For it is Epicurus himself that\ntells us that, had our surmises about celestial things and our foolish\napprehensions of death and the pains that ensue it given us no\ndisquiet, we had not then needed to contemplate nature for our relief.\nFor neither have the brutes any weak surmises of the Gods or fond\nopinions about things after death to disorder themselves with; nor\nhave they as much as imagination or notion that there is any thing in\nthese to be dreaded. I confess, had they left us the benign providence\nof God as a presumption, wise men might then seem, by reason of their\ngood hopes from thence, to have something towards a pleasurable life\nthat beasts have not. But now, since they have made it the scope of\nall their discourses of God that they may not fear him, but may be\neased of all concern about him, I much question whether those that\nnever thought at all of him have not this in a more confirmed degree\nthan they that have learned to think he can do no harm. For if they\nwere never freed from superstition, they never fell into it; and if\nthey never laid aside a disturbing conceit of God, they never took one\nup. The like may be said as to hell and the future state. For though\nneither the Epicurean nor the brute can hope for any good thence; yet\nsuch as have no forethought of death at all cannot but be less amused\nand scared with what comes after it than they that betake themselves\nto the principle that death is nothing to us. But something to them it\nmust be, at least so far as they concern themselves to reason about it\nand contemplate it; but the beasts are wholly exempted from thinking\nof what appertains not to them; and if they fly from blows, wounds,\nand slaughters, they fear no more in death than is dismaying to the\nEpicurean himself.\n\n9. Such then are the things they boast to have attained by their\nphilosophy. Let us now see what those are they deprive themselves of\nand chase away from them. For those diffusions of the mind that arise\nfrom the body, and the pleasing condition of the body, if they be\nbut moderate, appear to have nothing in them that is either great or\nconsiderable; but if they be excessive, besides their being vain and\nuncertain, they are also importune and petulant; nor should a man term\nthem either mental satisfactions or gayeties, but rather corporeal\ngratifications, they being at best but the simperings and effeminacies\nof the mind. But now such as justly deserve the names of complacencies\nand joys are wholly refined from their contraries, and are immixed with\nneither vexation, remorse, nor repentance; and their good is congenial\nto the mind and truly mental and genuine, and not superinduced. Nor is\nit devoid of reason, but most rational, as springing either from that\nin the mind that is contemplative and enquiring, or else from that part\nof it that is active and heroic. How many and how great satisfactions\neither of these affords us, he that would can never relate. But to\nhint briefly at some of them. We have the historians before us, which,\nthough they find us many and delightful exercises, still leave our\ndesire after truth insatiate and uncloyed with pleasure, through which\neven lies are not without their grace. Yea, tales and poetic fictions,\nwhile they cannot gain upon our belief, have something in them that is\ncharming to us.\n\n10. For do but think with yourself, with what a sting we read Plato\u2019s\nAtlantic and the conclusion of the Iliad, and how we hanker and gape\nafter the rest of the tale, as when some beautiful temple or theatre\nis shut up. But now the informing of ourselves with the truth herself\nis a thing so delectable and lovely as if our very life and being\nwere for the sake of knowing. And the darkest and grimmest things in\ndeath are its oblivion, ignorance, and obscurity. Whence, by Jove, it\nis that almost all mankind encounter with those that would destroy\nthe sense of the departed, as placing the very whole of their life,\nbeing, and satisfaction solely in the sensible and knowing part of the\nmind. For even the things that grieve and afflict us yet afford us a\nsort of pleasure in the hearing. And it is often seen that those that\nare disordered by what is told them, even to the degree of weeping,\nnotwithstanding require the telling of it. So he in the tragedy who is\ntold,\n\n    Alas! I now the very worst must tell,\n\nreplies,\n\n    I dread to hear it too, but I must hear.[142]\n\nBut this may seem perhaps a sort of intemperateness of delight in\nknowing every thing, and as it were a stream violently bearing down the\nreasoning faculty. But now, when a story that hath in it nothing that\nis troubling and afflictive treats of great and heroic enterprises with\na potency and grace of style such as we find in Herodotus\u2019s Grecian and\nin Xenophon\u2019s Persian history, or in what,\n\n    Inspired by heavenly Gods, sage Homer sung,\n\nor in the Travels of Eudoxus, the Foundations and Republics of\nAristotle, and the Lives of Famous Men compiled by Aristoxenus;\u2014these\nwill not only bring us exceeding much and great contentment, but such\nalso as is clean and secure from repentance. And who could take greater\nsatisfaction either in eating when a-hungry or drinking when a-dry\namongst the Phaeacians, than in going over Ulysses\u2019s relation of his\nown voyage and rambles? And what man could be better pleased with the\nembraces of the most exquisite beauty, than with sitting up all night\nto read over what Xenophon hath written of Panthea, or Aristobulus of\nTimoclea, or Theopompus of Thebe?\n\n11. But now these appertain all solely to the mind. But they chase\naway from them the delights that accrue from the mathematics also.\nThough the satisfactions we receive from history have in them something\nsimple and equal; but those that come from geometry, astronomy, and\nmusic inveigle and allure us with a sort of nimbleness and variety, and\nwant nothing that is tempting and engaging; their figures attracting\nus as so many charms, whereof whoever hath once tasted, if he be but\ncompetently skilled, will run about singing that in Sophocles,\n\n    I\u2019m mad; the Muses with new rage inspire me.\n    I\u2019ll mount the hill; my lyre, my numbers fire me.[143]\n\nNor doth Thamyras break out into poetic raptures upon any other score;\nnor, by Jove, Eudoxus, Aristarchus, or Archimedes. And when the lovers\nof the art of painting are so enamored with the charmingness of their\nown performances, that Nicias, as he was drawing the Evocation of\nGhosts in Homer, often asked his servants whether he had dined or no,\nand when King Ptolemy had sent him threescore talents for his piece,\nafter it was finished, he neither would accept the money nor part with\nhis work; what and how great satisfactions may we then suppose to have\nbeen reaped from geometry and astronomy by Euclid when he wrote his\nDioptrics, by Philippus when he had perfected his demonstration of the\nfigure of the moon, by Archimedes when with the help of a certain angle\nhe had found the sun\u2019s diameter to make the same part of the largest\ncircle that that angle made of four right angles, and by Apollonius and\nAristarchus who were the inventors of some other things of the like\nnature? The bare contemplating and comprehending of these now engender\nin the learners both unspeakable delights and a marvellous height of\nspirit. And it doth in no wise beseem me, by comparing with these the\nfulsome debauchees of victualling-houses and stews, to contaminate\nHelicon and the Muses,\u2014\n\n    Where swain his flock ne\u2019er fed,\n    Nor tree by hatchet bled.[144]\n\nBut these are the verdant and untrampled pastures of ingenious bees;\nbut those are more like the mange of lecherous boars and he-goats.\nAnd though a voluptuous temper of mind be naturally fantastic and\nprecipitate, yet never any yet sacrificed an ox for joy that he\nhad gained his will of his mistress; nor did any ever wish to die\nimmediately, might he but once satiate himself with the costly dishes\nand comfits at the table of his prince. But now Eudoxus wished he might\nstand by the sun, and inform himself of the figure, magnitude, and\nbeauty of that luminary, though he were, like Phaethon, consumed by\nit. And Pythagoras offered an ox in sacrifice for having completed the\nlines of a certain geometric diagram; as Apollodotus tells us,\n\n    When the famed lines Pythagoras devised,\n    For which a splendid ox he sacrificed.\n\nWhether it was that by which he showed that the [square of the] line\nthat regards the right angle in a triangle is equivalent to the\n[squares of the] two lines that contain that angle, or the problem\nabout the area of the parabolic section of a cone. And Archimedes\u2019s\nservants were forced to hale him away from his draughts, to be anointed\nin the bath; but he notwithstanding drew the lines upon his belly with\nhis strigil. And when, as he was washing (as the story goes of him), he\nthought of a manner of computing the proportion of gold in King Hiero\u2019s\ncrown by seeing the water flowing over the bathing-stool, he leaped up\nas one possessed or inspired, crying, \u201cI have found it\u201d (\u03b5\u1f55\u03c1\u03b7\u03ba\u03b1); which\nafter he had several times repeated, he went his way. But we never yet\nheard of a glutton that exclaimed with such vehemence, \u201cI have eaten,\u201d\nor of an amorous gallant that ever cried, \u201cI have kissed,\u201d among the\nmany millions of dissolute debauchees that both this and preceding\nages have produced. Yea, we abominate those that make mention of their\ngreat suppers with too luscious a gust, as men overmuch taken with mean\nand abject delights. But we find ourselves in one and the same ecstasy\nwith Eudoxus, Archimedes, and Hipparchus; and we readily give assent\nto Plato when he saith of the mathematics, that while ignorance and\nunskilledness make men despise them, they still thrive notwithstanding\nby reason of their charmingness, in despite of contempt.\n\n12. These then so great and so many pleasures, that run like perpetual\nsprings and rills, these men decline and avoid; nor will they permit\nthose that put in among them so much as to take a taste of them, but\nbid them hoist up the little sails of their paltry cock-boats and fly\nfrom them. Nay, they all, both he and she philosophers, beg and entreat\nPythocles, for dear Epicurus\u2019s sake, not to affect or make such account\nof the sciences called liberal. And when they cry up and defend one\nApelles, they write of him that he kept himself clean by refraining\nhimself all along from the mathematics. But as to history\u2014to pass\nover their aversedness to other kinds of compositions\u2014I shall only\npresent you with the words of Metrodorus, who in his treatise of the\nPoets writes thus: Wherefore let it never disturb you, if you know not\neither what side Hector was of, or the first verses in Homer\u2019s Poem, or\nagain what is in its middle. But that the pleasures of the body spend\nthemselves like the winds called Etesian or Anniversary, and utterly\ndetermine when once age is past its vigor, Epicurus himself was not\ninsensible; and therefore he makes it a problematic question, whether\na sage philosopher, when he is an old man and disabled for enjoyment,\nmay not still be recreated with having handsome girls to feel and grope\nhim, being not, it seems, of the mind of old Sophocles, who thanked God\nhe had at length escaped from this kind of pleasure, as from an untame\nand furious master. But, in my opinion, it would be more advisable for\nthese sensual lechers, when they see that age will dry up so many of\ntheir pleasures, and that, as Euripides saith,\n\nDame Venus is to ancient men a foe,[145] in the first place to collect\nand lay up in store, as against a siege, these other pleasures, as a\nsort of provision that will not impair and decay; that then, after\nthey have celebrated the venereal festivals of life, they may spend\na cleanly after-feast in reading over the historians and poets, or\nelse in problems of music and geometry. For it would never have come\ninto their minds so much as to think of these purblind and toothless\ngropings and spurtings of lechery, had they but learned, if nothing\nmore, to write comments upon Homer or Euripides, as Aristotle,\nHeraclides, and Dicaearchus did. But I verily persuade myself that\ntheir neglecting to take care for such provisions as these, and finding\nall the other things they employed themselves in (as they use to say\nof virtue) but insipid and dry, and being wholly set upon pleasure,\nand the body no longer supplying them with it, give them occasion to\nstoop to do things both mean and shameful in themselves and unbecoming\ntheir age; as well when they refresh their memories with their former\npleasures and serve themselves of old ones (as it were) long since dead\nand laid up in pickle for the purpose, when they cannot have fresh\nones, as when again they offer violence to nature by suscitating and\nkindling in their decayed bodies, as in cold embers, other new ones\nequally senseless, they having not, it seems, their minds stored with\nany congenial pleasure that is worth the rejoicing at.\n\n13. As to the other delights of the mind, we have already treated\nof them, as they occurred to us. But their aversedness and dislike\nto music, that affords us so great delights and such charming\nsatisfactions, a man could not forget if he would, by reason of the\ninconsistency of what Epicurus saith, when he pronounceth in his book\ncalled his Doubts that his wise man ought to be a lover of public\nspectacles and to delight above any other man in the music and shows\nof the Bacchanals; and yet he will not admit of music problems or\nof the critical enquiries of philologists, no, not so much as at a\ncompotation. Yea, he advises such princes as are lovers of the Muses\nrather to entertain themselves at their feasts either with some\nnarration of military adventures or with the importune scurrilities\nof drolls and buffoons, than to engage in disputes about music or in\nquestions of poetry. For this very thing he had the face to write in\nhis treatise of Monarchy, as if he were writing to Sardanapalus, or to\nNanarus satrap of Babylon. For neither would a Hiero nor an Attalus\nnor an Archelaus be persuaded to make a Euripides, a Simonides, a\nMelanippides, a Crates, or a Diodotus rise up from their tables, and\nto place such scaramuchios in their rooms as a Cardax, an Agrias, or\na Callias, or fellows like Thrasonides and Thrasyleon, to make people\ndisorder the house with hollowing and clapping. Had the great Ptolemy,\nwho was the first that formed a consort of musicians, but met with\nthese excellent and royal admonitions, would he not, think you, have\nthus addressed himself to the Samians:\n\n    O Muse, whence art thou thus maligned?\n\nFor certainly it can never belong to any Athenian to be in such enmity\nand hostility with the Muses. But\n\n    No animal accurst by Jove\n    Music\u2019s sweet charms can ever love.[146]\n\nWhat sayest thou now, Epicurus? Wilt thou get thee up betimes in\nthe morning, and go to the theatre to hear the harpers and flutists\nplay? But if a Theophrastus discourse at the table of Concords, or an\nAristoxenus of Varieties, or if an Aristophanes play the critic upon\nHomer, wilt thou presently, for very dislike and abhorrence, clap both\nthy hands upon thy ears? And do they not hereby make the Scythian\nking Ateas more musical than this comes to, who, when he heard that\nadmirable flutist Ismenias, detained then by him as a prisoner of war,\nplaying upon the flute at a compotation, swore he had rather hear his\nown horse neigh? And do they not also profess themselves to stand at an\nimplacable and irreconcilable defiance with whatever is generous and\nbecoming? And indeed what do they ever embrace or affect that is either\ngenteel or regardable, when it hath nothing of pleasure to accompany\nit? And would it not far less affect a pleasurable way of living, to be\ndisgusted with perfumes and odors, like beetles and vultures, than to\nshun and abhor the conversation of learned critics and musicians? For\nwhat flute or harp ready tuned for a lesson, or\n\n    What sweetest consort e\u2019er with artful noise,\n    Warbled by softest tongue and best tuned voice,\n\never gave Epicurus and Metrodorus such content as the disputes and\nprecepts about consorts gave Aristotle, Theophrastus, Hieronymus,\nand Dicaearchus? And also the problems about flutes, rhythms, and\nharmonies; as, for instance, why the slenderer of two flutes of the\nsame longitude should speak flatter?\u2014why, if you raise the pipe, will\nall its notes be sharp; and flat again, if you lower it?\u2014and why,\nwhen clapped to another, will it sound flatter; and sharper again,\nwhen taken from it?\u2014why also, if you scatter chaff or dust about the\norchestra of a theatre, will the sound be softened?\u2014and why, when one\nwould have set up a bronze Alexander for a frontispiece to a stage\nat Pella, did the architect advise to the contrary, because it would\nspoil the actors\u2019 voices?\u2014and why, of the several kinds of music, will\nthe chromatic diffuse and the harmonic compose the mind? But now the\nseveral humors of poets, their differing turns and forms of style, and\nthe solutions of their difficult places, have conjoined with a sort of\ndignity and politeness somewhat also that is extremely agreeable and\ncharming; insomuch that to me they seem to do what was once said by\nXenophon, to make a man even forget the joys of love, so powerful and\novercoming is the pleasure they bring us.\n\n14. Of all this these gentlemen have not the least share, nor do they\nso much as pretend or desire to have any. But while they are sinking\nand depressing their contemplative part into the body, and dragging it\ndown by their sensual and intemperate appetites, as by so many weights\nof lead, they make themselves appear little better than hostlers or\ngraziers that still ply their cattle with hay, straw, or grass, looking\nupon such provender as the properest and meetest food for them. And is\nit not even thus they would swill the mind with the pleasures of the\nbody, as hogherds do their swine, while they will not allow it can be\ngay any longer than it is hoping, feeling, or remembering something\nthat refers to the body; but will not have it either to receive or seek\nfor any congenial joy or satisfaction from within itself? Though what\ncan be more absurd and unreasonable than\u2014when there are two things that\ngo to make up the man, a body and a soul, and the soul besides hath\nthe prerogative of governing\u2014that the body should have its peculiar,\nnatural, and proper good, and the soul none at all, but must sit\ngazing at the body and simper at its passions, as if she were pleased\nand affected with them, though indeed she be all the while wholly\nuntouched and unconcerned, as having nothing of her own to choose,\ndesire, or take delight in? For they should either pull off the vizor\nquite, and say plainly that man is all body (as some of them do, that\ntake away all mental being), or, if they will allow us to have two\ndistinct natures, they should then leave to each its proper good and\nevil, agreeable and disagreeable; as we find it to be with our senses,\neach of which is peculiarly adapted to its own sensible, though they\nall very strangely intercommune one with another. Now the intellect is\nthe proper sense of the mind; and therefore that it should have no\ncongenial speculation, movement, or affection of its own, the attaining\nto which should be matter of complacency to it, is the most irrational\nthing in the world, if I have not, by Jove, unwittingly done the men\nwrong, and been myself imposed upon by some that may perhaps have\ncalumniated them.\n\n15. Then I said to him: If we may be your judges, you have not; yea,\nwe must acquit you of having offered them the least indignity; and\ntherefore pray despatch the rest of your discourse with assurance. How!\nsaid he, and shall not Aristodemus then succeed me, if you are tired\nout yourself? Aristodemus said: With all my heart, when you are as much\ntired as he is; but since you are yet in your vigor, pray make use of\nyourself, my noble friend, and don\u2019t think to pretend weariness. Theon\nthen replied: What is yet behind, I must confess, is very easy; it\nbeing but to go over the several pleasures contained in that part of\nlife that consists in action. Now themselves somewhere say that there\nis far more satisfaction in doing than in receiving good; and good may\nbe done many times, it is true, by words, but the most and greatest\npart of good consists in action, as the very name of beneficence tells\nus and they themselves also attest. For you may remember, continued he,\nwe heard this gentleman tell us but now what words Epicurus uttered,\nand what letters he sent to his friends, applauding and magnifying\nMetrodorus,\u2014how bravely and like a spark he quitted the city and went\ndown to the port to relieve Mithrus the Syrian,\u2014and this, though\nMetrodorus did not then do any thing at all. What and how great then\nmay we presume the pleasures of Plato to have been, when Dion by the\nmeasures he gave him deposed the tyrant Dionysius and set Sicily at\nliberty? And what the pleasures of Aristotle, when he rebuilt his\nnative city Stagira, then levelled with the ground, and brought back\nits exiled inhabitants? And what the pleasures of Theophrastus and of\nPhidias, when they cut off the tyrants of their respective countries?\nFor what need a man recount to you, who so well know it, how many\nparticular persons they relieved, not by sending them a little wheat\nor a measure of meal (as Epicurus did to some of his friends), but by\nprocuring restoration to the banished, liberty to the imprisoned, and\nrestitution of wives and children to those that had been bereft of\nthem? But a man could not, if he would, pass by the sottish stupidity\nof the man who, though he tramples under foot and vilifies the great\nand generous actions of Themistocles and Miltiades, yet writes these\nvery words to his friends about himself: \u201cYou have given a very gallant\nand noble testimony of your care of me in the provision of corn you\nhave made for me, and have declared your affection to me by signs\nthat mount to the very skies.\u201d So that, should a man but take that\npoor parcel of corn out of the great philosopher\u2019s epistle, it might\nseem to be the recital of some letter of thanks for the delivery or\npreservation of all Greece or of the commons of Athens.\n\n16. We will now forbear to mention that Nature requires very large and\nchargeable provisions to be made for accomplishing the pleasures of the\nbody; nor can the height of delicacy be had in barley bread and lentil\npottage. But voluptuous and sensual appetites expect costly dishes,\nThasian wines, perfumed unguents, and varieties of pastry works,\n\n    And cakes by female hands wrought artfully,\n    Well steep\u2019d in th\u2019 liquor of the gold-wing\u2019d bee;[147]\n\nand besides all this, handsome young lassies too, such as Leontion,\nBoidion, Hedia, and Nicedion, that were wont to roam about in\nEpicurus\u2019s philosophic garden. But now such joys as suit the mind must\nundoubtedly be grounded upon a grandeur of actions and a splendor of\nworthy deeds, if men would not seem little, ungenerous, and puerile,\nbut on the contrary, bulky, firm, and brave. But for a man to be elated\nwith pleasures, as Epicurus is, like tarpaulins upon the festivals of\nVenus, and to vaunt himself that, when he was sick of an ascites, he\nnotwithstanding called his friends together to certain collations and\ngrudged not his dropsy the satisfaction of good liquors, and that,\nwhen he called to remembrance the last words of Neocles, he was melted\nwith a peculiar sort of joy intermixed with tears,\u2014no man in his right\nsenses would call these true joys or satisfactions. Nay, I will be bold\nto say that, if such a thing as that they call a sardonic or grinning\nlaughter can happen to the mind, it is to be found in these forcings\nand crying laughters. But if any will needs have them still called by\nthe name of joys and satisfactions, let him but yet think how far they\nare exceeded by the pleasures that here ensue:\n\n    Our counsels have proud Sparta\u2019s glory clipt;\n\nand\n\n    Stranger, this is his country Rome\u2019s great star;\n\nand again this,\n\n    I know not which to guess thee, man or God.\n\nNow when I set before my eyes the brave achievements of Thrasybulus and\nPelopidas, of Aristides engaged at Plataea and Miltiades at Marathon,\nI am here constrained with Herodotus to declare it my opinion, that\nin an active state of life the pleasure far exceeds the glory. And\nEpaminondas herein bears me witness also, when he saith (as is\nreported of him), that the greatest satisfaction he ever received in\nhis life was that his father and mother had lived to see the trophy\nset up at Leuctra when himself was general. Let us then compare\nwith Epaminondas\u2019s Epicurus\u2019s mother, rejoicing that she had lived\nto see her son cooping himself up in a little garden, and getting\nchildren in common with Polyaenus upon the strumpet of Cyzicus. As\nfor Metrodorus\u2019s mother and sister, how extravagantly rejoiced they\nwere at his nuptials appears by the letters he wrote to his brother\nin answer to his; that is, out of his own books. Nay, they tell us\nbellowing that they have not only lived a life of pleasure, but also\nexult and sing hymns in the praise of their own living. Now, when our\nservants celebrate the festivals of Saturn or go in procession at the\ntime of the rural bacchanals, you would scarcely brook the hollowing\nand din they make, should the intemperateness of their joy and their\ninsensibleness of decorum make them act and speak such things as these:\n\n    Lean down, boy! why dost sit! let\u2019s tope like mad!\n    Here\u2019s belly-timber store; ne\u2019er spare it, lad.\n    Straight these huzza like wild. One fills up drink;\n    Another plaits a wreath, and crowns the brink\n    O\u2019 th\u2019 teeming bowl. Then to the verdant bays\n    All chant rude carols in Apollo\u2019s praise;\n    While one his door with drunken fury smites,\n    Till he from bed his pretty consort frights.\n\nAnd are not Metrodorus\u2019s words something like to these when he writes\nto his brother thus: It is none of our business to preserve the Greeks,\nor to get them to bestow garlands upon us for our wit, but to eat well\nand drink good wine, Timocrates, so as not to offend but pleasure our\nstomachs. And he saith again, in some other place in the same epistles:\nHow gay and how assured was I, when I had once learned of Epicurus\nthe true way of gratifying my stomach; for, believe me, philosopher\nTimocrates, our prime good lies at the stomach.\n\n17. In brief, these men draw out the dimensions of their pleasures\nlike a circle, about the stomach as a centre. And the truth is, it is\nimpossible for those men ever to participate of generous and princely\njoy, such as enkindles a height of spirit in us and sends forth to all\nmankind an unmade hilarity and calm serenity, that have taken up a sort\nof life that is confined, unsocial, inhuman, and uninspired towards\nthe esteem of the world and the love of mankind. For the soul of man\nis not an abject, little, and ungenerous thing, nor doth it extend its\ndesires (as polyps do their claws) unto eatables only,\u2014yea, these are\nin an instant of time taken off by the least plenitude,\u2014but when its\nefforts towards what is brave and generous and the honors and caresses\nthat accrue therefrom are now in their consummate vigor, this life\u2019s\nduration cannot limit them, but the desire of glory and the love of\nmankind grasp at whole eternity, and wrestle with such actions and\ncharms as bring with them an ineffable pleasure, and such as good men,\nthough never so fain, cannot decline, they meeting and accosting them\non all sides and surrounding them about, while their being beneficial\nto many occasions joy to themselves.\n\n    As he passes through the throngs in the city,\n    All gaze upon him as some Deity.[148]\n\nFor he that can so affect and move other men as to fill them with joy\nand rapture, and to make them long to touch him and salute him, cannot\nbut appear even to a blind man to possess and enjoy very extraordinary\nsatisfactions in himself. And hence it comes that such men are both\nindefatigable and undaunted in serving the public, and we still hear\nsome such words from them:\n\n    Thy father got thee for the common good;\n\nand\n\n    Let\u2019s not give off to benefit mankind.\n\nBut what need I instance in those that are consummately good? For if\nto one of the middling rank of bad men, when he is just a dying, he\nthat hath the power over him (whether his God or prince) should but\nallow one hour more, upon condition that, after he hath spent that\neither in some generous action or in sensual enjoyment, he should then\npresently die, who would in this time choose rather to accompany with\nLais or drink Ariusian wine, than to despatch Archias and restore the\nThebans to their liberties? For my part I believe none would. For I\nsee that even common sword-players, if they are not utter brutes and\nsavages, but Greek born, when they are to enter the list, though there\nbe many and very costly dishes set before them, yet take more content\nin employing their time in commending their poor wives to some of\ntheir friends, yea, and in conferring freedom on their slaves, than\nin gratifying their stomachs. But should the pleasures of the body be\nallowed to have some extraordinary matter in them, this would yet be\ncommon to men of action and business.\n\n    For they can eat good meat, and red wine drink,[149]\n\naye, and entertain themselves with their friends, and perhaps with\na greater relish too, after their engagements and hard services,\u2014as\ndid Alexander and Agesilaus, and (by Jove) Phocion and Epaminondas\ntoo,\u2014than these gentlemen who anoint themselves by the fireside, and\nare gingerly rocked about the streets in sedans. Yea, those make but\nsmall account of such pleasures as these, as being comprised in those\ngreater ones. For why should a man mention Epaminondas\u2019s denying to\nsup with one, when he saw the preparations made were above the man\u2019s\nestate, but frankly telling his friend, \u201cI thought you had intended\na sacrifice and not a debauch,\u201d when Alexander himself refused Queen\nAda\u2019s cooks, telling her he had better ones of his own, to wit,\ntravelling by night for his dinner, and a light dinner for his supper,\nand when Philoxenus writing to him about some handsome boys, and\ndesiring to know of him whether he would have him buy them for him,\nwas within a small matter of being discharged his office for it? And\nyet who might better have them than he? But as Hippocrates saith that\nof two pains the lesser is obscured by the greater, so the pleasures\nthat accrue from action and the love of glory, while they cheer and\nrefresh the mind, do by their transcendency and grandeur obliterate and\nextinguish the inferior satisfactions of the body.\n\n18. If then the remembering of former good things (as they affirm) be\nthat which most contributes to a pleasurable living, not one of us will\nthen credit Epicurus when he tells us that, while he was dying away in\nthe midst of the strongest agonies and distempers, he yet bore himself\nup with the memory of the pleasures he formerly enjoyed. For a man\nmay better see the resemblance of his own face in a troubled deep or\na storm, than a smooth and smiling remembrance of past pleasure in a\nbody tortured with such lancing and rending pains. But now the memories\nof past actions no man can put from him that would. For did Alexander,\nthink you, (or indeed could he possibly) forget the fight at Arbela?\nOr Pelopidas the tyrant Leontiadas? Or Themistocles the engagement at\nSalamis? For the Athenians to this very day keep an annual festival\nfor the battle at Marathon, and the Thebans for that at Leuctra;\nand so, by Jove, do we ourselves (as you very well know) for that\nwhich Daiphantus gained at Hyampolis, and all Phocis is filled with\nsacrifices and public honors. Nor is there any of us that is better\nsatisfied with what himself hath either eaten or drunk than he is with\nwhat they have achieved. It is very easy then to imagine what great\ncontent, satisfaction, and joy accompanied the authors of these actions\nin their lifetime, when the very memory of them hath not yet after five\nhundred years and more lost its rejoicing power. The truth is, Epicurus\nhimself allows there are some pleasures derived from fame. And indeed\nwhy should he not, when he himself had such a furious lechery and\nwriggling after glory as made him not only to disown his masters and\nscuffle about syllables and accents with his fellow-pedant Democritus\n(whose doctrines he stole verbatim), and to tell his disciples there\nnever was a wise man in the world besides himself, but also to put it\nin writing how Colotes performed adoration to him, as he was one day\nphilosophizing, by touching his knees, and that his own brother Neocles\nwas used from a child to say, \u201cThere neither is, nor ever was in the\nworld, a wiser man than Epicurus,\u201d and that his mother had just so many\natoms within her as, when they came together, must have produced a\ncomplete wise man? May not a man then\u2014as Callicratidas once said of the\nAthenian admiral Conon, that he whored the sea\u2014as well say of Epicurus\nthat he basely and covertly forces and ravishes Fame, by not enjoying\nher publicly but ruffling and debauching her in a corner? For as men\u2019s\nbodies are oft necessitated by famine, for want of other food, to prey\nagainst nature upon themselves, a like mischief to this does vain-glory\ncreate in men\u2019s minds, forcing them, when they hunger after praise and\ncannot obtain it from other men, at last to commend themselves.\n\n19. And do not they then that stand so well affected towards applause\nand fame themselves own they cast away very extraordinary pleasures,\nwhen they decline magistrature, public offices, and the favor and\nconfidences of princes, from whom Democritus once said the grandest\nblessings of human life are derived? For he will never induce any\nmortal to believe, that he that could so highly value and please\nhimself with the attestation of his brother Neocles and the adoration\nof his friend Colotes would not, were he clapped by all the Greeks at\nthe Olympiads, go quite out of his wits and even hollow for joy, or\nrather indeed be elated in the manner spoken of by Sophocles,\n\n    Puffed like the down of a gray-headed thistle.\n\nIf it be a pleasing thing then to be of a good fame, it is on the\ncontrary afflictive to be of an ill one; and it is most certain that\nnothing in the world can be more infamous than want of friendship,\nidleness, atheism, debauchery, and negligence. Now these are looked\nupon by all men except themselves as inseparable companions of their\nparty. But unjustly, some one may say. Be it so then; for we consider\nnot now the truth of the charge, but what fame and reputation they\nare of in the world. And we shall forbear at present to mention the\nmany books that have been written to defame them, and the blackening\ndecrees made against them by several republics; for that would look\nlike bitterness. But if the answers of oracles, the providence of the\nGods, and the tenderness and affection of parents to their issue,\u2014if\ncivil policy, military order, and the office of magistracy be things\nto be looked upon as deservedly esteemed and celebrated, it must of\nnecessity then be allowed also, that they that tell us it is none of\ntheir business to preserve the Greeks, but they must eat and drink so\nas not to offend but pleasure their stomachs, are base and ignominious\npersons, and that their being reputed such must needs extremely humble\nthem and make their lives untoward to them, if they take honor and a\ngood name for any part of their satisfaction.\n\n20. When Theon had thus spoken, we thought good to break up our walk\nto rest us awhile (as we were wont to do) upon the benches. Nor did\nwe continue any long space in our silence at what was spoken; for\nZeuxippus, taking his hint from what had been said, spake to us: Who\nwill make up that of the discourse which is yet behind? For it hath\nnot yet received its due conclusion; and this gentleman, by mentioning\ndivination and providence, did in my opinion suggest as much to us;\nfor these people boast that these very things contribute in no small\ndegree to the providing of their lives with pleasure, serenity,\nand assurance; so that there must be something said to these too.\nAristodemus subjoined then and said: As to pleasure, I think there hath\nbeen enough said already to evince that, supposing their doctrine to\nbe successful and to attain its own design, it yet doth but ease us of\nfear and a certain superstitious persuasion, but helps us not to any\ncomfort or joy from the Gods at all; nay, while it brings us to such a\nstate as to be neither disquieted nor pleased with them, it doth but\nrender us in the same manner affected towards them as we are towards\nthe Scythians or Hyrcanians, from whom we expect neither good nor harm.\nBut if something more must yet be added to what hath been already\nspoken, I think I may very well take it from themselves. And in the\nfirst place, they quarrel extremely with those that would take away\nall sorrowing, weeping, and sighing for the death of friends, and tell\nthem that such unconcernedness as arrives to an insensibility proceeds\nfrom some other worse cause, to wit, inhumanity, excessive vain-glory,\nor prodigious fierceness, and that therefore it would be better to be\na little concerned and affected, yea, and to liquor one\u2019s eyes and\nbe melted, with other pretty things of the like kind, which they use\nfoppishly to affect and counterfeit, that they may be thought tender\nand loving-hearted people. For just in this manner Epicurus expressed\nhimself upon the occasion of the death of Hegesianax, when he wrote to\nDositheus the father and to Pyrson the brother of the deceased person;\nfor I fortuned very lately to run over his epistles. And I say, in\nimitation of them, that atheism is no less an evil than inhumanity and\nvain-glory, and into this they would lead us who take away with God\u2019s\nanger the comfort we might derive from him. For it would be much better\nfor us to have something of the unsuiting passion of dauntedness and\nfear conjoined and intermixed with our sentiments of a Deity, than\nwhile we fly from it, to leave ourselves neither hope, comfort, nor\nassurance in the enjoyment of our good things, nor any recourse to God\nin our adversity and misfortunes.\n\n21. We ought, it is true, to remove superstition from the persuasion\nwe have of the Gods, as we would the gum from our eyes; but if that\nbe impossible, we must not root out and extinguish with it the belief\nwhich the most have of the Gods; nor is that a dismaying and sour\none either, as these gentlemen feign, while they libel and abuse the\nblessed Providence, representing her as a hobgoblin or as some fell and\ntragic fury. Yea, I must tell you, there are some in the world that\nfear God in an excess, for whom yet it would not be better not so to\nfear him. For, while they dread him as a governor that is gentle to the\ngood and severe to the bad, and are by this one fear, which makes them\nnot to need many others, freed from doing ill and brought to keep their\nwickedness with them in quiet and (as it were) in an enfeebled languor,\nthey come hereby to have less disquiet than those that indulge the\npractice of it and are rash and daring in it, and then presently after\nfear and repent of it. Now that disposition of mind which the greater\nand ignorant part of mankind, that are not utterly bad, are of towards\nGod, hath, it is very true, conjoined with the regard and honor they\npay him, a kind of anguish and astonished dread, which is also called\nsuperstition; but ten thousand times more and greater than this are the\ngood hope and true joy that attend it, which both implore and receive\nthe whole benefit of prosperity and good success from the Gods only.\nAnd this is manifest by the greatest tokens that can be; for neither do\nthe discourses of those that wait at the temples, nor the good times\nof our solemn festivals, nor any other actions or sights more recreate\nand delight us than what we see and do about the Gods ourselves, while\nwe assist at the public ceremonies, and join in the sacred balls, and\nattend at the sacrifices and initiations. For the mind is not then\nsorrowful, demiss, and heavy, as she would be if she were addressing\nto certain tyrants or cruel torturers; but on the contrary, where she\nis most apprehensive and fullest persuaded the Divinity is present,\nthere she most of all throws off sorrows, tears, and pensiveness, and\nlets herself loose to what is pleasing and agreeable, to the very\ndegree of tipsiness, frolic, and laughter. In amorous concerns, as the\npoet said once,\n\n    When old man and old wife think of love\u2019s fires,\n    Their frozen breasts will swell with new desires;\n\nbut now in the public processions and sacrifices not only the old man\nand the old wife, nor yet the poor and mean man only, but also\n\n    The dusty thick-legged drab that turns the mill,\n\nand household-slaves and day-laborers, are strangely elevated and\ntransported with mirth and jovialty. Rich men as well as princes are\nused at certain times to make public entertainments and to keep open\nhouses; but the feasts they make at the solemnities and sacrifices,\nwhen they now apprehend their minds to approach nearest the Divinity,\nhave conjoined with the honor and veneration which they pay him a\nmuch more transcending pleasure and satisfaction. Of this, he that\nhath renounced God\u2019s providence hath not the least share; for what\nrecreates and cheers us at the festivals is not the store of good wine\nand roast meat, but the good hope and persuasion that God is there\npresent and propitious to us, and kindly accepts of what we do. From\nsome of our festivals we exclude the flute and garland; but if God be\nnot present at the sacrifice, as the solemnity of the banquet, the rest\nis but unhallowed, unfeast-like, and uninspired. Indeed the whole is\nbut ungrateful and irksome to such a man; for he asks for nothing at\nall, but only acts his prayers and adorations for fear of the public,\nand utters expressions contradictory to his philosophy. And when he\nsacrifices, he stands by and looks upon the priest as he kills the\noffering but as he doth upon a butcher; and when he hath done, he goes\nhis way, saying with Menander,\n\n    To bribe the Gods I sacrificed my best,\n    But they ne\u2019er minded me nor my request.\n\nFor such a mien Epicurus would have us to put on, and neither to envy\nnor to incur the hatred of the common sort by doing ourselves with\ndispleasure what others do with delight. For, as Evenus saith,\n\n    No man can love what he is made to do.\n\nFor which very reason they think the superstitious are not pleased\nin their minds but in fear while they attend at the sacrifices and\nmysteries; though they themselves are in no better condition, if they\ndo the same things out of fear, and partake not either of as great good\nhope as the others do, but are only fearful and uneasy lest they should\ncome to be discovered cheating and abusing the public, upon whose\naccount it is that they compose the books they write about the Gods and\nthe Divine Nature,\n\n    Involved, with nothing truly said,\n    But all around enveloped;\n\nhiding out of fear the real opinions they contain.\n\n22. And now, after the two former ranks of ill and common men, we\nwill in the third place consider the best sort and most beloved of\nthe Gods, and what great satisfactions they receive from their clean\nand generous sentiments of the Deity, to wit, that he is the Prince\nof all good things and the Parent of all things brave, and can no\nmore do an unworthy thing than he can be made to suffer it. For he is\ngood, and he that is good can upon no account fall into envy, fear,\nanger, or hatred; for it is not proper to a hot thing to cool, but to\nheat; nor to a good thing to do harm. Now anger is by nature at the\nfarthest distance imaginable from complacency, and spleenishness from\nplacidness, and animosity and turbulence from humanity and kindness.\nFor the latter of these proceed from generosity and fortitude, but\nthe former from impotency and baseness. The Deity is not therefore\nconstrained by either anger or kindnesses; but that is because it is\nnatural to it to be kind and aiding, and unnatural to be angry and\nhurtful. But the great Jove, whose mansion is in heaven and who drives\nhis winged chariot, is the first that descends downwards and orders\nall things and takes the care of them. But of the other Gods one is\nsurnamed the Distributer, and another the Mild, and a third the Averter\nof Evil. And according to Pindar,\n\n    Apollo was by mighty Jove designed\n    Of all the Gods to be to man most kind.\n\nAnd Diogenes saith, that all things are the Gods\u2019, and friends have\nall things common, and good men are the Gods\u2019 friends; and therefore\nit is impossible either that a man beloved of the Gods should not be\nhappy, or that a wise and a just man should not be beloved of the Gods.\nCan you think then that they that take away Providence need any other\nchastisement, or that they have not a sufficient one already, when\nthey root out of themselves such vast satisfaction and joy as we that\nstand thus affected towards the Deity have? Metrodorus, Polyaenus,\nand Aristobulus were the confidence and rejoicing of Epicurus; the\nbetter part of whom he all his lifetime either attended upon in their\nsicknesses or lamented at their deaths. So did Lycurgus, when he was\nsaluted by the Delphic prophetess,\n\n    Dear friend to heavenly Jove and all the Gods.\n\nAnd did Socrates when he believed that a certain Divinity was used\nout of kindness to discourse him, and Pindar when he heard Pan sing\none of the sonnets he had composed, but a little rejoice, think you?\nOr Phormio, when he thought he had treated Castor and Pollux at his\nhouse? Or Sophocles, when he entertained Aesculapius, as both he\nhimself believed, and others too, that thought the same with him by\nreason of the apparition that then happened? What opinion Hermogenes\nhad of the Gods is well worth the recounting in his very own words.\n\u201cFor these Gods,\u201d saith he, \u201cwho know all things and can do all things,\nare so friendly and loving to me that, because they take care of me, I\nnever escape them either by night or by day, wherever I go or whatever\nI am about. And because they know beforehand what issue every thing\nwill have, they signify it to me by sending angels, voices, dreams, and\npresages.\u201d\n\n23. Very amiable things must those be that come to us from the\nGods; but when these very things come by the Gods too, this is what\noccasions vast satisfaction and unspeakable assurance, a sublimity of\nmind and a joy that, like a smiling brightness, doth as it were gild\nover our good things with a glory. But now those that are persuaded\notherwise obstruct the very sweetest part of their prosperity, and\nleave themselves nothing to turn to in their adversity; but when they\nare in distress, look only to this one refuge and port, dissolution\nand insensibility; just as if in a storm or tempest at sea, some one\nshould, to hearten the rest, stand up and say to them: Gentlemen,\nthe ship hath never a pilot in it, nor will Castor and Pollux come\nthemselves to assuage the violence of the beating waves or to lay the\nswift careers of the winds; yet I can assure you there is nothing at\nall to be dreaded in all this, for the vessel will be immediately\nswallowed up by the sea, or else will very quickly fall off and be\ndashed in pieces against the rocks. For this is Epicurus\u2019s way of\ndiscourse to persons under grievous distempers and excessive pains.\nDost thou hope for any good from the Gods for thy piety? It is thy\nvanity; for the blessed and incorruptible Being is not constrained by\neither angers or kindnesses. Dost thou fancy something better after\nthis life than what thou hast here? Thou dost but deceive thyself;\nfor what is dissolved hath no sense, and that which hath no sense is\nnothing to us. Aye; but how comes it then, my good friend, that you bid\nme eat and be merry? Why, by Jove, because he that is in a great storm\ncannot be far off a shipwreck; and your extreme peril will soon land\nyou upon Death\u2019s strand. Though yet a passenger at sea, when he is got\noff from a shattered ship, will still buoy himself up with some little\nhope that he may drive his body to some shore and get out by swimming;\nbut now the poor soul, according to these men\u2019s philosophy.\n\n    Has no escape beyond the hoary main.[150]\n\nYea, she presently evaporates, disperses, and perishes, even before the\nbody itself; so that it seems her great and excessive rejoicing must be\nonly for having learned this one sage and divine maxim, that all her\nmisfortunes will at last determine in her own destruction, dissolution,\nand annihilation.\n\n24. But (said he, looking upon me) I should be impertinent, should\nI say any thing upon this subject, when we have heard you but now\ndiscourse so fully against those that would persuade us that Epicurus\u2019s\ndoctrine about the soul renders men more disposed and better pleased to\ndie than Plato\u2019s doth. Zeuxippus therefore subjoined and said: And must\nour present debate be left then unfinished because of that? Or shall we\nbe afraid to oppose that divine oracle to Epicurus? No, by no means, I\nsaid; and Empedocles tells us that\n\n    What\u2019s very good claims to be heard twice.\n\nTherefore we must apply ourselves again to Theon; for I think he was\npresent at our former discourse; and moreover, he is a young man, and\nneeds not fear being charged by these young gentlemen with having a bad\nmemory.\n\n25. Then Theon, like one constrained, said: Well then, if you will\nneeds have me to go on with the discourse, I will not do as you did,\nAristodemus. For you were shy of repeating what this gentleman spoke,\nbut I shall not scruple to make use of what you have said; for I think\nindeed you did very well divide mankind into three ranks; the first of\nwicked and very bad men, the second of the vulgar and common sort, and\nthe third of good and wise men. The wicked and bad sort then, while\nthey dread any kind of divine vengeance and punishment at all, and are\nby this deterred from doing mischief, and thereby enjoy the greater\nquiet, will live both in more pleasure and in less disturbance for it.\nAnd Epicurus is of opinion that the only proper means to keep men from\ndoing ill is the fear of punishments. So that we should cram them with\nmore and more superstition still, and raise up against them terrors,\nchasms, frights, and surmises, both from heaven and earth, if their\nbeing amazed with such things as these will make them become the more\ntame and gentle. For it is more for their benefit to be restrained from\ncriminal actions by the fear of what comes after death, than to commit\nthem and then to live in perpetual danger and fear.\n\n26. As to the vulgar sort, besides their fear of what is in hell, the\nhope they have conceived of an eternity from the tales and fictions\nof the ancients, and their great desire of being, which is both the\nearliest and the strongest of all, exceed in pleasure and sweet content\nof mind that childish dread. And therefore, when they lose their\nchildren, wives or friends, they would rather have them be somewhere\nand still remain, though in misery, than that they should be quite\ndestroyed, dissolved, and reduced to nothing. And they are pleased when\nthey hear it said of a dying person, that he goes away or departs,\nand such other words as intimate death to be the soul\u2019s remove and not\ndestruction. And they sometimes speak thus:\n\n    But I\u2019ll even there think on my dearest friend;[151]\n\nand thus\n\n    What\u2019s your command to Hector? Let me know;\n    Or to your dear old Priam shall I go?[152]\n\nAnd (there arising hereupon an erroneous deviation) they are the\nbetter pleased when they bury with their departed friends such arms,\nimplements, or clothes as were most familiar to them in their lifetime;\nas Minos did the Cretan flutes with Glaucus,\n\n    Made of the shanks of a dead brindled fawn\n\nAnd if they do but imagine they either ask or desire any thing of\nthem, they are glad when they give it them. Thus Periander burnt his\nqueen\u2019s attire with her, because he thought she had asked for it and\ncomplained she was a-cold. Nor doth an Aeacus, an Ascalaphus, or an\nAcheron much disorder them whom they have often gratified with balls,\nshows, and music of every sort. But now all men shrink from that face\nof death which carries with it insensibility, oblivion, and extinction\nof knowledge, as being dismal, grim, and dark. And they are discomposed\nwhen they hear it said of any one, he is perished, or he is gone, or he\nis no more; and they show great uneasiness when they hear such words as\nthese:\n\n    Go to the wood-clad earth he must,\n    And there lie shrivelled into dust,\n    And ne\u2019er more laugh or drink, or hear\n    The charming sounds of flute or lyre;\n\nand these.\n\n    But from our lips the vital spirit fled\n    Returns no more to wake the silent dead.[153]\n\n27. Wherefore they must needs cut the very throats of them that shall\nwith Epicurus tell them, We men were born once for all, and we cannot\nbe born twice, but our not being must last for ever. For this will\nbring them to slight their present good as little, or rather indeed as\nnothing at all compared with everlastingness, and therefore to let it\npass unenjoyed and to become wholly negligent of virtue and action,\nas men disheartened and brought to a contempt of themselves, as being\nbut as it were of one day\u2019s continuance and uncertain, and born for no\nconsiderable purpose. For insensibility, dissolution, and the conceit\nthat what hath no sense is nothing to us, do not at all abate the fear\nof death, but rather help to confirm it; for this very thing is it that\nnature most dreads,\u2014\n\n    But may you all return to mould and wet,[154]\n\nto wit, the dissolution of the soul into what is without knowledge or\nsense. Now, while Epicurus would have this to be a separation into\natoms and void, he doth but further cut off all hope of immortality;\nto compass which (I can scarce refrain from saying) all men and women\nwould be well contented to be worried by Cerberus, and to carry water\ninto the tub full of holes, so they might but continue in being and not\nbe exterminated. Though (as I said before) there are not very many that\nstand in fear of these things, they being but the tenets of old women\nand the fabulous stories of mothers and nurses,\u2014and even they that do\nfear them yet believe that certain rites of initiation and purgation\nwill relieve them, by which being cleansed they shall play and dance\nin hell for ever, in company with those that have the privilege of a\nbright light, clear air, and the use of speech,\u2014still to be deprived of\nliving disturbs all both young and old. For it seems that we\n\n    Impatient love the light that shines on earth,[155]\n\nas Euripides saith. Nor are we easy or without regret when we hear this:\n\n    Him speaking thus th\u2019 eternal brightness leaves,\n    Where night the wearied steeds of day receives.\n\n28. And therefore it is very plain that with the belief of immortality\nthey take away the sweetest and greatest hopes the vulgar sort have.\nAnd what shall we then think they take away from the good and those\nthat have led pious and just lives, who expect no ill after death, but\non the contrary most glorious and divine things? For, in the first\nplace, champions are not used to receive the garland before they have\nperformed their exercises, but after they have contested and proved\nvictorious; in like manner is it with those that are persuaded that\ngood men have the prize of their conquests after this life is ended;\nit is marvellous to think to what a pitch of grandeur their virtue\nraises their spirits upon the contemplation of those hopes, among the\nwhich this is one, that they shall one day see those men that are now\ninsolent by reason of their wealth and power, and that foolishly flout\nat their betters, undergo just punishment. In the next place, none of\nthe lovers of truth and the contemplation of being have here their fill\nof them; they having but a watery and puddled reason to speculate with,\nas it were, through the fog and mist of the body; and yet they still\nlook upwards like birds, as ready to take their flight to the spacious\nand bright region, and endeavor to make their souls expedite and\nlight from things mortal, using philosophy as a study and preparation\nfor death. Thus I account death a truly great and accomplished good\nthing; the soul being to live there a real life, which here lives not\na waking life, but suffers things most resembling dreams. If then (as\nEpicurus saith) the remembrance of a dead friend be a thing every way\ncomplacent; we may easily from thence imagine how great a joy they\ndeprive themselves of who think they do but embrace and pursue the\nphantoms and shades of their deceased familiars, that have in them\nneither knowledge nor sense, but who never expect to be with them\nagain, or to see their dear father and dear mother and sweet wife, nor\nhave any hopes of that familiarity and dear converse they have that\nthink of the soul with Pythagoras, Plato, and Homer. Now what their\nsort of passion is like to was hinted at by Homer, when he threw into\nthe midst of the soldiers, as they were engaged, the shade of Aeneas,\nas if he had been dead, and afterwards again presented his friends with\nhim himself,\n\n    Coming alive and well, as brisk as ever;\n\nat which, he saith,\n\n    They all were overjoyed.[156]\n\nAnd should not we then,\u2014when reason shows us that a real converse with\npersons departed this life may be had, and that he that loves may both\nfeel and be with the party that affects and loves him,\u2014relinquish these\nmen that cannot so much as cast off all those airy shades and outside\nbarks for which they are all their time in lamentation and fresh\nafflictions?\n\n29. Moreover, they that look upon death as the commencement of another\nand better life, if they enjoy good things, are the better pleased with\nthem, as expecting much greater hereafter; but if they have not things\nhere to their minds, they do not much grumble at it, but the hopes of\nthose good and excellent things that are after death contain in them\nsuch ineffable pleasures and expectances, that they wipe off and wholly\nobliterate every defect and every offence from the mind, which, as on\na road or rather indeed in a short deviation out of the road, bears\nwhatever befalls it with great ease and moderation. But now, as to\nthose to whom life ends in insensibility and dissolution,\u2014since death\nbrings to them no removal of evils, though it is afflicting in both\nconditions, yet is it more so to those that live prosperously than to\nsuch as undergo adversity. For it cuts the latter but from an uncertain\nhope of doing better hereafter; but it deprives the former of a certain\ngood, to wit, their pleasurable living. And as those medicinal potions\nthat are not grateful to the palate but yet necessary give sick men\nease, but rake and hurt the well; just so, in my opinion, doth the\nphilosophy of Epicurus, which promises to those that live miserably\nno happiness in death, and to those that do well an utter extinction\nand dissolution of the mind, while it quite obstructs the comfort and\nsolace of the grave and wise and those that abound with good things, by\nthrowing them down from a happy living into a deprivation of both life\nand being. From hence then it is manifest, that the contemplation of\nthe loss of good things will afflict us in as great a measure as either\nthe firm hope or present enjoyment of them delights us.\n\n30. Yea, themselves tell us, that the contemplation of future\ndissolution leaves them one most assured and complacent good, to wit,\nfreedom from anxious surmises of incessant and endless evils, and\nthat Epicurus\u2019s doctrine effects this by stopping the fear of death\nby the belief in the soul\u2019s dissolution. If then deliverance from the\nexpectation of infinite evils be a matter of greatest complacence,\nhow comes it not to be afflictive to be bereft of eternal good things\nand to miss of the highest and most consummate felicity? For not to\nbe can be good for neither condition, but is on the contrary both\nagainst nature and ungrateful to all that have a being. But those it\neases of the evils of life through the evils of death have, it is very\ntrue, the want of sense to comfort them, while they, as it were, make\ntheir escape from life. But, on the other hand, they that change\nfrom good things to nothing seem to me to have the most dismaying end\nof all, it putting a period to their happiness. For Nature doth not\nfear insensibility as the entrance upon some new thing, but because\nit is the privation of our present good things. For to say that the\ndestruction of all that we call ours toucheth us not is absurd, for\nit toucheth us already by the very apprehension. And insensibility\nafflicts not those that are not, but those that are, when they think\nwhat damage they shall sustain by it in the loss of their beings\nand in being suffered never to emerge from annihilation. Wherefore\nit is neither the dog Cerberus nor the river Cocytus that has made\nour fear of death boundless; but the threatened danger of not being,\nrepresenting it as impossible for such as are once extinct to shift\nback again into being. For we cannot be born twice, and our not being\nmust last for ever; as Epicurus speaks. For if our end be in not being,\nand that be infinite and unalterable, then hath privation of good found\nout an eternal evil, to wit, a never ending insensibleness. Herodotus\nwas much wiser, when he said that God, having given men a taste of the\nsweets of life, seems to be envious in this regard,[157] and especially\nto those that conceit themselves happy, to whom pleasure is but a bait\nfor sorrow, they being but permitted to taste of what they must be\ndeprived of. For what solace or fruition or exultation would not the\nperpetual injected thought of the soul\u2019s being dispersed into infinity,\nas into a certain huge and vast ocean, extinguish and quell in those\nthat found their amiable good and beatitude in pleasure? But if it be\ntrue (as Epicurus thinks it is) that most men die in very acute pain,\nthen is the fear of death in all respects inconsolable; it bringing us\nthrough evils unto a deprivation of good.\n\n31. And yet they are never wearied with their brawling and dunning\nof all persons to take the escape of evil for a good, and yet not to\nrepute privation of good for an evil. But they still confess what\nwe have asserted, that death hath in it nothing of either good hope\nor solace, but that all that is complacent and good is then wholly\nextinguished; at which time those men look for many amiable, great, and\ndivine things, that conceive the minds of men to be unperishable and\nimmortal, or at least to go about in certain long revolutions of times,\nbeing one while upon earth and another while in heaven, until they are\nat last dissolved with the universe and then, together with the sun\nand moon, sublimed into an intellective fire. So large a field and one\nof so great pleasures Epicurus wholly cuts off, when he destroys (as\nhath been said) the hopes and graces we should derive from the Gods,\nand by that extinguishes both in our speculative capacity the desire of\nknowledge, and in our active the love of glory, and confines and abases\nour nature to a poor narrow thing, and that not cleanly neither, to\nwit, the content the mind receives by the body, as if it were capable\nof no higher good than the escape of evil.\n\n\n\n\nROMAN QUESTIONS.\n\n\n_Question 1._ Wherefore do the Romans require a new-married woman\nto touch fire and water?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not for one of these reasons; amongst elements\nand principles, one is masculine and the other feminine;\u2014one (fire)\nhath in it the principles of motion, the other (water) hath the faculty\nof a subject and matter? Or is it because fire refines and water\ncleanseth, and a married wife ought to continue pure and chaste? Or is\nit because fire without moisture doth not nourish, but is adust, and\nwater destitute of heat is barren and sluggish; so both the male and\nfemale apart are of no force, but a conjunction of both in marriage\ncompletes society? Or is the meaning that they must never forsake each\nother, but must communicate in every fortune, and although there be no\ngoods, yet they may participate with each other in fire and water?\n\n_Question 2._ Why do they light at nuptials five torches, neither\nmore nor less, which they call waxen tapers?\n\n_Solution._ Whether it be (as Varro saith) that the Praetors use\nthree, but more are permitted to the Aediles, and married persons do\nlight the fire at the Aediles\u2019 torches? Or is it that, having use of\nmany numbers, the odd number was reckoned better and perfecter upon\nother accounts, and therefore more adapted to matrimony? For the even\nnumber admits of division, and the equal parts of opposition and\nrepugnancy, whenas the odd cannot be divided, but being divided into\nparts leaves always an inequality. The number five is most matrimonial\nof odd numbers, for three is the first odd and two is the first even,\nof which five is compounded, as of male and female.\n\nOr rather, because light is a sign of generation, and it is natural to\na woman, for the most part, to bring forth so far as five successively,\nand therefore they use five torches? Or is it because they suppose that\nmarried persons have occasion for five Gods, Nuptial Jupiter, Nuptial\nJuno, Venus, Suada, and above all the rest Diana, whom women invocate\nin their travail and child-bed sickness?\n\n_Question 3._ What is the reason that, seeing there are so many\nof Diana\u2019s temples in Rome, the men refrain going into that only which\nstands in Patrician Street?\n\n_Solution._ Is it upon the account of the fabulous story, that a\ncertain man, ravishing a woman that was there worshipping the Goddess,\nwas torn in pieces by dogs; and hence this superstitious practice\narose, that men enter not in?\n\n_Question 4._ Why do they in all other temples of Diana ordinarily\nnail up stags\u2019 horns against the wall, whenas in that of the Aventine\nthey nail up the horns of cattle?\n\n_Solution._ Was it to put them in mind of an old casualty? For it\nis said, that among the Sabines one Antro Coratius had a very comely\ncow, far excelling all others in handsomeness and largeness, and was\ntold by a certain diviner that whoever should offer up that cow in\nsacrifice to Diana on the Aventine, his city was determined by fate to\nbe the greatest in the world and have dominion over all Italy. This\nman came to Rome, with an intention to sacrifice his cow there; but\na servant acquainted King Servius privately with this privacy, and\nthe king making it known to Cornelius the priest, Cornelius strictly\ncommands Antro to wash in Tiber before he sacrificed, for the law\nrequires men so to do who would sacrifice acceptably. Wherefore,\nwhilst Antro went to wash, Servius took the opportunity to sacrifice\nthe cow to the Goddess, and nailed up the horns to the wall in the\ntemple. These things are storied by Juba and Varro, only Varro hath not\ndescribed Antro by that name, neither doth he say that the Sabine was\nchoused by Cornelius the priest, but by the sexton.\n\n_Question 5._ Wherefore is it that those that are falsely reported\nto be dead in foreign countries, when they return, they receive not by\nthe doors, but getting up to the roof of the house, they let them in\nthat way?\n\n_Solution._ Verily the account which Varro gives of this matter\nis altogether fabulous. For he saith, in the Sicilian war, when there\nwas a great naval fight, and a very false report was rumored concerning\nmany as if they were slain, all of them returning home in a little\ntime died. But as one of them was going to enter in at his doors, they\nshut together against him of their own accord, neither could they be\nopened by any that attempted it. This man, falling in a sleep before\nthe doors, saw an apparition in his sleep advising him to let himself\ndown from the roof into the house, and doing so, he lived happily and\nbecame an old man; and hence the custom was confirmed to after ages.\nBut consider if these things be not conformable to some usages of the\nGreeks. For they do not esteem those pure nor keep them company nor\nsuffer them to approach their sacrifices, for whom any funeral was\ncarried forth or sepulchre made as if they were dead; and they say\nthat Aristinus, being one that was become an object of this sort of\nsuperstition, sent to Delphi to beg and beseech of the God a resolution\nof the anxieties and troubles which he had by reason of the custom then\nin force. Pythia answered thus;\u2014\n\n    The sacred rites t\u2019 which child-bed folks conform,\n    See that thou do to blessed Gods perform.\n\nAristinus, well understanding the meaning of the oracle, puts himself\ninto the women\u2019s hands, to be washed and wrapped in swaddling clouts,\nand sucks the breasts, in the same manner as when he was newly born;\nand thus all others do, and such are called Hysteropotmi (i.e. those\nfor whom a funeral was made while living). But some say that these\nceremonies were before Aristinus, and that the custom was ancient.\nWherefore it is not to be wondered at, if the Romans, when once they\nsuppose a man buried and to have his lot among the dead, do not think\nit lawful for him to go in at the door whereat they that are about to\nsacrifice do go out or those that have sacrificed do enter in, but\nbid them ascend aloft into the air, and thence descend into the open\ncourt of the house. For they constantly offer their sacrifices of\npurification in this open court.\n\n_Question 6._ Wherefore do women salute their relations with their\nmouth?\n\n_Solution._ What if it should be (as many suppose) that women were\nforbid to drink wine; therefore that those that drank it might not be\nundiscovered, but convicted when they met with their acquaintance,\nkissing became a custom? Or is it for the reason which Aristotle the\nphilosopher hath told us? Even that thing which was commonly reported\nand said to be done in many places, it seems, was enterprised by the\nTrojan women in the confines of Italy. For after the men arrived and\nwent ashore, the women set the ships on fire, earnestly longing to\nbe discharged of their roving and seafaring condition; but dreading\ntheir husbands\u2019 displeasure, they fell on saluting their kindred and\nacquaintance that met them, by kissing and embracing; whereupon the\nhusbands\u2019 anger being appeased and they reconciled, they used for the\nfuture this kind of compliment towards them. Or rather might this\nusage be granted to women as a thing that gained them reputation and\ninterest, if they appeared hereby to have many and good kindred and\nacquaintance? Or was it that, it being unlawful to marry kinswomen,\na courteous behavior might proceed so far as a kiss, and this was\nretained only as a significant sign of kindred and a note of a familiar\nconverse among them? For in former time they did not marry women nigh\nby blood,\u2014as now they marry not aunts or sisters,\u2014but of late they\nallowed the marrying of cousins for the following reason. A certain\nman, mean in estate, but on the other hand an honest and a popular man\namong the citizens, designed to marry his cousin being an heiress,\nand to get an estate by her. Upon this account he was accused; but\nthe people took little notice of the accusation, and absolved him of\nthe fault, enacting by vote that it might be lawful for any man to\nmarry so far as cousins, but prohibited it to all higher degrees of\nconsanguinity.\n\n_Question 7._ Why is a husband forbid to receive a gift from his\nwife, and a wife from her husband?\n\n_Solution._ What if the reason be as Solon writes it,\u2014describing\ngifts to be peculiar to dying persons, unless a man being entangled by\nnecessity or wheedled by a woman be enslaved to force which constrains\nhim, or to pleasure which persuades him,\u2014that thus the gifts of\nhusbands and wives became suspected? Or is it that they reputed a gift\nthe basest sign of benevolence (for strangers and they that have no\nlove for us do give us presents), and so took away such a piece of\nflattery from marriage, that to love and be beloved should be devoid of\nmercenariness, should be spontaneous and for its own sake, and not for\nany thing else? Or because women, being corrupted by receiving gifts,\nare thereby especially brought to admit strangers, did it seem to be\na weighty thing to require them to love their own husbands that give\nthem nothing? Or was it because all things ought to be common between\nthem, the husbands\u2019 goods being the wives\u2019, and the wives\u2019 goods the\nhusbands\u2019? For he that accepts that which is given learns thereby to\nesteem that which is not given the property of another; so that, by\ngiving but a little to each other, they strip each other of all.\n\n_Question 8._ Why were they prohibited from taking a gift of a\nson-in-law or of a father-in-law?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not of a son-in-law, that a man may not\nseem to convey a gift to his wife by his father\u2019s hands? and of a\nfather-in-law, because it seems just that he that doth not give should\nnot receive?\n\n_Question 9._ Wherefore is it that they that have wives at home,\nif they be returning out of the country or from any remote parts, do\nsend a messenger before, to acquaint them that they be at hand?\n\n_Solution._ Is not this an argument that a man believes his\nwife to be no idle gossip, whereas to come upon her suddenly and\nunexpectedly has a show as though he came hastily to catch her and\nobserve her behavior? Or do they send the good tidings of their coming\nbeforehand, as to them that are desirous of them and expect them?\nOr rather is it that they desire to enquire concerning their wives\nwhether they are in health, and that they may find them at home looking\nfor them? Or because, when the husbands are wanting, the women have\nmore family concerns and business upon their hands, and there are\nmore dissensions and hurly-burly among those that are within doors;\ntherefore, that the wife may free herself from these things and give a\ncalm and pleasant reception to her husband, she hath forewarning of his\ncoming?\n\n_Question 10._ Wherefore do men in divine service cover their\nheads; but if they meet any honorable personages when they have their\ncloaks on their heads, they are uncovered?\n\n_Solution._ The latter part of the question seems to augment the\ndifficulty of the former. If now the story told of Aeneas be true, that\nwhilst Diomedes was passing by he offered a sacrifice with his head\ncovered, it is rational and consequent that, while we cover our heads\nbefore our enemies, when we meet our friends and good men we should\nbe uncovered. This behavior before the Gods therefore is not their\npeculiar right, but accidental, continuing to be observed since that\nexample of Aeneas.\n\nIf there is any thing further to be said, consider whether we ought not\nto enquire only after the reason why men in divine service are covered,\nthe other being the consequence of it. For they that are uncovered\nbefore men of greater power do not thereby ascribe honor unto them, but\nrather remove envy from them, that they might not seem to demand or to\nendure the same kind of reverence which the Gods have, or to rejoice\nthat they are served in the same manner as they. But they worship the\nGods in this manner, either showing their unworthiness in all humility\nby the covering of the head, or rather fearing that some unlucky and\nominous voice should come to them from abroad whilst they are praying;\ntherefore they pluck up their cloaks about their ears. That they\nstrictly observed these things is manifest in this, that when they went\nto consult the oracle, they made a great din all about by the tinkling\nof brass kettles. Or is it as Castor saith, that the Roman usages were\nconformable to the Pythagoric notion that the daemon within us stands\nin need of the Gods without us, and we make supplication to them with a\ncovered head, intimating the body\u2019s hiding and absconding of the soul?\n\n_Question 11._ Why do they sacrifice to Saturn with an uncovered\nhead?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, that, whereas Aeneas hath\ninstituted the covering of the head in divine service, Saturn\u2019s\nsacrifice was much more ancient? Or is it that they are covered before\ncelestial Gods, but reckon Saturn an infernal and terrestrial God? Or\nis it that nothing of the truth ought to be obscure and darkened, and\nthe Romans repute Saturn to be the father of truth?\n\n_Question 12._ Why do they esteem Saturn the father of truth?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not the reason that some philosophers believe\nthat \u039a\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 (_Saturn_) is the same with \u03a7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 (_time_), and\ntime finds out truth? Or is it for that which was fabled of Saturn\u2019s\nage, that it was most just and most likely to participate of truth?\n\n_Question 13._ Why do they sacrifice to Honor (a God so-called)\nwith a bare head?\n\n_Solution._ Is it because glory is splendid, illustrious, and\nunveiled, for which cause men are uncovered before good and honorable\npersons; and for this reason they thus worship the God that bears the\nname of honor?\n\n_Question 14._ Why do sons carry forth their parents at funerals\nwith covered heads, but the daughters with uncovered and dishevelled\nhair?\n\n_Solution._ Is the reason because fathers ought to be honored by\ntheir sons as Gods, but be lamented by their daughters as dead, and\nso the law hath distributed to both their proper part? Or is it that\nwhat is not the fashion is fit for mourning? For it is more customary\nfor women to appear publicly with covered heads, and for men with\nuncovered. Yea, among the Greeks, when any sad calamity befalls them,\nthe women are polled close but the men wear their hair long, because\nthe usual fashion for men is to be polled and for women to wear their\nhair long. Or was it enacted that sons should be covered, for the\nreason we have above mentioned (for verily, saith Varro, they surround\ntheir fathers\u2019 sepulchres at funerals, reverencing them as the temples\nof the Gods; and having burnt their parents, when they first meet with\na bone, they say the deceased person is deified), but for women was it\nnot lawful to cover their heads at funerals? History now tells us that\nthe first that put away his wife was Spurius Carbilius, by reason of\nbarrenness; the second was Sulpicius Gallus, seeing her pluck up her\ngarments to cover her head; the third was Publius Sempronius, because\nshe looked upon the funeral games.\n\n_Question 15._ What is the reason that, esteeming Terminus a\nGod (to whom they offer their Terminalia), they sacrifice no living\ncreature to him?\n\n_Solution._ Was it that Romulus set no bounds to the country,\nthat it might be lawful for a man to make excursions, to rob, and to\nreckon every part of the country his own (as the Spartan said) wherever\nhe should pitch his spear; but Numa Pompilius, being a just man and a\ngood commonwealthsman and a philosopher, set the boundaries towards the\nneighboring countries, and dedicated those boundaries to Terminus as\nthe bishop and protector both of friendship and of peace, and it was\nhis opinion that it ought to be preserved pure and undefiled from blood\nand slaughter?\n\n_Question 16._ Why is it that the temple of Matuta is not to be\ngone into by maid-servants; but the ladies bring in one only, and her\nthey box and cuff?\n\n_Solution._ If to baste this maid be a sign that they ought not\nto enter, then they prohibit others according to the fable. For Ino,\nbeing jealous of her husband\u2019s loving the servant-maid, is reported to\nhave fell outrageously upon her son. The Grecians say the maid was of\nan Aetolian family, and was called Antiphera. Therefore with us also in\nChaeronea the sexton, standing before the temple of Leucothea (Matuta)\nholding a wand in his hand, makes proclamation that no man-servant nor\nmaid-servant, neither man nor woman Aetolian, should enter in.\n\n_Question 17._ Why do they not supplicate this Goddess for good\nthings for their own children, but for their brethren\u2019s and sisters\u2019\nchildren?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because Ino was a lover of her sister and\nnursed up her children, but had hard fortune in her own children? Or\notherwise, in that it is a moral and good custom, and makes provision\nof much benevolence towards relations?\n\n_Question 18._ Why do many of the richer sort pay tithe of their\nestates to Hercules?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, that Hercules sacrificed the tenth\npart of Geryon\u2019s oxen at Rome? Or that he freed the Romans from the\ndecimation under the Etrurians? Or that these things have no sufficient\nground of credit from history, but that they sacrificed bountifully to\nHercules, as to a certain monstrous glutton and gormandizer of good\ncheer? Or did they rather do it, restraining extravagant riches as a\nnuisance to the commonwealth, as it were to diminish something of that\nthriving constitution that grows up to the highest pitch of corpulency;\nbeing of opinion that Hercules was most of all honored with and\nrejoiced in these frugalities and contractions of abundance, and that\nhe himself was frugal, content with a little, and every way sparing in\nhis way of living?\n\n_Question 19._ Why do they take the month of January for the\nbeginning of the new year?\n\n_Solution._ Anciently March was reckoned the first, as is plain\nby many other marks and especially by this, that the fifth month from\nMarch was called Quintilis, and the sixth Sextilis, and so forward\nto the last. December was so called, being reckoned the tenth from\nMarch; hence it came to pass that some are of opinion and do affirm\nthat the Romans formerly did not complete the year with twelve months,\nbut with ten only, allotting to some of the months above thirty days.\nBut others give us an account that, as December is the tenth from\nMarch, January is the eleventh and February the twelfth; in which month\nthey use purifications, and perform funeral rites for the deceased\nupon the finishing of the year; but this order of the months being\nchanged, they now make January the first, because on the first day\nof this month (which day they call the Kalends of January) the first\nconsuls were constituted, the kings being deposed. But some speak\nwith a greater probability, which say that Romulus, being a warlike\nand martial man and reputing himself the son of Mars, set March in\nthe front of all the months, and named it from Mars; but Numa again,\nbeing a peaceable prince and ambitious to bring off the citizens from\nwarlike achievements, set them upon husbandry, gave the pre-eminence\nto January, and brought Janus into a great reputation, as he was more\naddicted to civil government and husbandry than to warlike affairs. Now\nconsider whether Numa hath not pitched upon a beginning of the year\nmost suitable to our natural disposition. For there is nothing at all\nin the whole circumvolution of things naturally first or last, but by\nlaw or custom some appoint one beginning of time, some another; but\nthey do best who take this beginning from after the winter solstice,\nwhen the sun, ceasing to make any further progress, returns and\nconverts his course again to us. For there is then a kind of tropic\nin nature itself, which verily increaseth the time of light to us and\nshortens the time of darkness, and makes the Lord and Ruler of the\nwhole current of nature to approach nearer to us.\n\n_Question 20._ When the women beautify the temple of the Goddess\nappropriate to women, which they call Bona, why do they bring no myrtle\ninto the house, although they be zealous of using all budding and\nflowering vegetables?\n\n_Solution._ Is not the reason (as the fabulous write the story)\nthis, that the wife of Faulius a diviner, having drunk wine secretly\nand being discovered, was whipped by her husband with myrtle rods;\nhence the women bring in no myrtle, but offer to her a drink-offering\nof wine, which they call milk? Or is it this, that, as they abstain\nfrom many things, so especially they reserve themselves chaste from all\nthings that appertain to venery when they perform that divine service;\nfor they do not only turn their husbands out of doors but banish from\nthe house every male kind, when they exercise this canonical obedience\nto their Goddess. They therefore reject myrtle as an abomination, it\nbeing consecrated to Venus; and the Venus whom at this day they call\nMurcia they anciently called Myrtia, as it would seem.\n\n_Question 21._ Why do the Latins worship a woodpecker, and all of\nthem abstain strictly from this bird?\n\n_Solution._ Is it because one Picus by the enchantments of his\nwife transformed himself, and becoming a woodpecker uttered oracles,\nand gave oraculous answers to them that enquired? Or, if this be\naltogether incredible and monstrous, there is another of the romantic\nstories more probable, about Romulus and Remus, when they were exposed\nin the open field, that not only a she-wolf gave them suck, but a\ncertain woodpecker flying to them fed them; for even now it is very\nusual that in meads and groves where a woodpecker is found there is\nalso a wolf, as Nigidius writes. Or rather, as they deem other birds\nsacred to various Gods, so do they deem this sacred to Mars? For it is\na daring and fierce bird, and hath so strong a beak as to drill an oak\nto the heart by pecking, and cause it to fall.\n\n_Question 22._ Why are they of opinion that Janus was\ndouble-faced, and do describe and paint him so?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because he was a native Greek of Perrhaebia\n(as they story it), and going down into Italy and cohabiting with the\nbarbarians of the country, changed his language and way of living? Or\nrather because he persuaded those people of Italy that were savage and\nlawless to a civil life, in that he converted them to husbandry and\nformed them into commonwealths?\n\n_Question 23._ Why do they sell things which pertain to funerals\nin the temple of Libitina, seeing they are of opinion that Libitina is\nVenus?\n\n_Solution._ Was it that this was one of the wise institutions of\nKing Numa, that they might learn not to esteem these things irksome\nnor fly from them as a defilement? Or rather is it to put us in\nmind that whatever is born must die, there being one Goddess that\npresides over them that are born and those that die? And at Delphi\nthere is the statue of Venus Epitymbia (on a tomb), to which at their\ndrink-offerings they call forth the ghosts of the deceased.\n\n_Question 24._ Why have they three beginnings and appointed\nperiods in the months which have not the same interval of days between?\n\n_Solution._ What if it be this (as Juba writes), that on the\nKalends the magistrates called (\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd) the people, and proclaimed\nthe Nones for the fifth, while the Ides they esteemed an holy day? Or\nrather that they who define time by the variations of the moon have\nobserved that the moon comes under three greatest variations monthly;\nthe first is when it is obscured, making a conjunction with the sun;\nthe second is when it gets out of the rays of the sun and makes her\nfirst appearance after the sun is down; the third is at her fulness,\nwhen it is full moon. They call her disappearance and obscurity the\nKalends, for every thing hid and privy they call _clam_, and\n_celare_ is to hide. The first appearance they call the Nones, by\na most fit notation of names, it being the new moon (novilunium); for\nthey call it new moon as we do. Ides are so called either by reason\nof the fairness and clear form (\u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2) of the moon standing forth in\nher complete splendor, or from the name of Jupiter (\u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2). But in this\nmatter we are not to search for the exact number of days, nor to abuse\nthis approximate mode of reckoning; seeing that even at this day, when\nthe science of astronomy has made so great increase, the inequality\nof the motion and course of the moon surpasseth all experience of\nmathematicians and cannot be reduced to any certain rule of reason.\n\n_Question 25._ Why do they determine that the days after the\nKalends, Nones, and Ides are unfit to travel or go a long journey in?\n\n_Solution._ Was it (as most men think, and Livy tells us) because\non the next day after the Ides of Quintilis (which they now call July),\nthe tribunes of the soldiery marching forth, the army was conquered\nby the Gauls in a battle about the river Allia and lost the city,\nwhereupon this day was reckoned unlucky; and superstition (as it loves\nto do) extended this observation further, and subjected the next days\nafter the Nones and Kalends to the same scrupulosity? Or what if this\nnotion meet with much contradiction? For it was on another day they\nwere defeated in battle, which they call Alliensis (from the river) and\ngreatly abominate is unsuccessful; and whereas there be many unlucky\ndays, they do not observe them in all the months alike, but every one\nin the month it happens in, and it is most improbable that all the next\ndays after the Nones and Kalends simply considered should contract\nthis superstition. Consider now whether\u2014as they consecrated the first\nof the months to the Olympic Gods, and the second to the infernals,\nwherein they solemnize some purifications and funeral rites to the\nghosts of the deceased\u2014they have so constituted the three which have\nbeen spoken of, as it were, the chief and principal days for festival\nand holy days, designating the next following these to daemons and\ndeceased persons, which days they esteemed unfortunate and unfit for\naction. And also the Grecians, worshipping their Gods at the new\nof the moon, dedicated the next day to heroes and daemons, and the\nsecond of the cups was mingled on the behalf of the male and female\nheroes. Moreover, time is altogether a number; and unity, which is the\nfoundation of a number, is of a divine nature. The number next is two,\nopposite to the first, and is the first of even numbers. But an even\nnumber is defective, imperfect, and indefinite; as again an odd number\nis determinate, definite, and complete. Therefore the Nones succeed\nthe Kalends on the fifth day, the Ides follow the Nones on the ninth,\nfor odd numbers do determine the beginnings. But those even numbers\nwhich are next after the beginnings have not that pre-eminence nor\ninfluence; hence on such days they take not any actions or journey in\nhand. Wherefore that of Themistocles hath reason in it. \u201cThe Day after\nthe feast contended with the Feast-day, saying that the Feast-day had\nmuch labor and toil, but she (the Day after the feast) afforded the\nfruition of the provision made for the Feast-day, with much leisure and\nquietness. The Feast-day answered after this wise: Thou speakest truth;\nbut if I had not been, neither hadst thou been.\u201d These things spake\nThemistocles to the Athenian officers of the army, who succeeded him,\nsignifying that they could never have made any figure in the world had\nnot he saved the city.\n\nSince therefore every action and journey worth our diligent management\nrequires necessary provision and preparation, but the Romans of old\nmade no family provision on feast-days, nor were careful for any thing\nbut that they might attend divine service,\u2014and this they did with all\ntheir might, as even now the priests enjoin them in their proclamations\nwhen they proceed to the sacrifices,\u2014in like manner they did not rush\npresently after their festival solemnities upon a journey or any\nenterprise (because they were unprovided), but finished that day in\ncontriving domestic affairs and fitting themselves for the intended\noccasion abroad. And as even at this day, after they have said their\nprayers and finished their devotion, they are wont to stay and sit\nstill in the temples, so they did not join working days immediately to\nholy days, but made some interval and distance between them, secular\naffairs bringing many troubles and distractions along with them.\n\n_Question 26._ Why do women wear for mourning white mantles and\nwhite kerchiefs?\n\n_Solution._ What if they do this in conformity to the Magi, who,\nas they say, standing in defiance of death and darkness, do fortify\nthemselves with bright and splendid robes? Or, as the dead corpse is\nwrapped in white, so do they judge it meet that the relations should be\nconformable thereto? For they beautify the body so, since they cannot\nthe soul; wherefore they wish to follow it as having gone before, pure\nand white, being dismissed after it hath fought a great and various\nwarfare. Or is it that what is very mean and plain is most becoming\nin these things? For garments dyed of a color argue either luxury or\nvanity. Neither may we say less of black than of sea-green or purple,\n\u201cVerily garments are deceitful, and so are colors.\u201d And a thing that\nis naturally black is not dyed by art but by nature, and is blended\nwith an intermixed shade. It is white only therefore that is sincere,\nunmixed, free from the impurity of a dye, and inimitable; therefore\nmost proper to those that are buried. For one that is dead is become\nsimple, unmixed, and pure, freed from the body no otherwise than from\na tingeing poison. In Argos they wear white in mourning, as Socrates\nsaith, vestments rinsed in water.\n\n_Question 27._ Why do they repute every wall immaculate and\nsacred, but the gates not so?\n\n_Solution._ Is it (as Varro hath wrote) that the wall is to be\naccounted sacred, that they might defend it cheerfully and even lay\ndown their lives for it? Upon this very account it appears that Romulus\nslew his brother, because he attempted to leap over a sacred and\ninaccessible place, and to render it transcendible and profane; but it\ncould not possibly be that the gates should be kept sacred, through\nwhich they carried many things that necessity required, even dead\ncorpses. When they built a city from the foundation, they marked out\nwith a plough the place on which they intended to build it, yoking a\nbull and a cow together; but when they did set out the bounds of the\nwalls, measuring the space of the gates, they lifted up the ploughshare\nand carried the plough over it, believing that all the ploughed part\nshould be sacred and inviolable.\n\n_Question 28._ Why do they prohibit the children to swear by\nHercules within doors, but command them to go out of doors to do it?\n\n_Solution._ Is the reason (as some say) that they are of opinion\nthat Hercules was not delighted in a domestic life, but chose rather\nto live abroad in the fields? Or rather because he was none of their\nnative country Gods, but a foreigner? For neither do they swear by\nBacchus within doors, he being a foreigner, if it be he whom the Greeks\ncall Dionysus. Or what if these things are uttered in sport to amuse\nchildren; and is this, on the contrary, for a restraint of a frivolous\nand rash oath, as Favorinus saith? For that which is done, as it were,\nwith preparation causes delay and deliberation. If a man judges as\nFavorinus doth of the things recorded about Hercules, it would seem\nthat this was not common to other Gods, but peculiar to him; for\nhistory tells us that he had such a religious veneration for an oath,\nthat he swore but once only to Phyleus, son of Augeas. Wherefore the\nPythia upbraids the Lacedaemonians with such swearing, as though it\nwould be more laudable and better to pay their vows than to swear.\n\n_Question 29._ Why do they not permit the new married woman\nherself to step over the threshold of the house, but the bridemen lift\nher over?\n\n_Solution._ What if the reason be that they, taking their first\nwives by force, brought them thus into their houses, when they went\nnot in of their own accord? Or is it that they will have them seem to\nenter into that place as by force, not willingly, where they are about\nto lose their virginity? Or is it a significant ceremony to show that\nshe is not to go out or leave her dwelling-place till she is forced,\neven as she goes in by force? For with us also in Boeotia they burn\nthe axletree of a cart before the doors, intimating that the spouse is\nbound to remain there, the instrument of carriage being destroyed.\n\n_Question 30._ Why do the bridemen that bring in the bride require\nher to say, \u201cWhere thou Caius art, there am I Caia\u201d?\n\n_Solution._ What if the reason be that by mutual agreement she\nenters presently upon participation of all things, even to share in\nthe government, and that this is the meaning of it, Where thou art\nlord and master of the family, there am I also dame and mistress of\nthe family; while these common names they use promiscuously, as the\nlawyers do Caius, Seius, Lucius, Titius, and the philosophers use the\nnames of Dion and Theon? Or is it from Caia Secilia, an honest and good\nwoman, married to one of Tarquinius\u2019s sons, who had her statue of brass\nerected in the temple of Sancus? On this statue were anciently hanged\nsandals and spindles, as significant memorials of her housewifery and\nindustry.\n\n_Question 31._ Why is that so much celebrated name Thalassius sung\nat nuptials?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not from wool-spinning? For the Romans call\nthe Greek \u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 (_wool-basket_) _talasus_. Moreover, when\nthey have introduced the bride, they spread a fleece under her; and\nshe, having brought in with her a distaff and a spindle, all behangs\nher husband\u2019s door with woollen yarn? Or it may be true, as historians\nreport, that there was a certain young man famous in military\nachievements, and also an honest man, whose name was Thalassius; now\nwhen the Romans seized by force on the Sabine daughters coming to\nsee the theatric shows, a comely virgin for beauty was brought to\nThalassius by some of the common sort of people and retainers to him,\ncrying out aloud (that they might go the more securely, and that none\nmight stop them or take the wench from them) that she was carried\nas a wife to Thalassius; upon which the rest of the rabble, greatly\nhonoring Thalassius, followed on and accompanied them with their loud\nacclamations, praying for and praising Thalassius; that proving a\nfortunate match, it became a custom to others at nuptials to call over\nThalassius, as the Greeks do Hymenaeus.[158]\n\n_Question 32._ Why do they that throw the effigies of men from a\nwooden bridge into the river, in the month of May, about the full moon,\ncall those images Argives?\n\n_Solution._ Was it that the barbarians that of old inhabited about\nthat place did in this manner destroy the Grecians which they took? Or\ndid their so much admired Hercules reform their practice of killing\nstrangers, and teach them this custom of representing their devilish\npractice by casting in of images? The ancients have usually called all\nGrecians Argives. Or else it may be that, since the Arcadians esteemed\nthe Argives open enemies by reason of neighborhood, they that belonged\nto Evander, flying from Greece and taking up their situation in Italy,\nkept up that malignity and enmity.\n\n_Question 33._ Why would they not in ancient times sup abroad\nwithout their sons, whilst they were in nonage?\n\n_Solution._ Was not this custom brought in by Lycurgus, when he\nintroduced the boys to the public mess, that they might be inured\nto use of pleasures modestly, not savagely and rudely, having their\nsuperiors by them as overseers and observers? Verily it is of no small\nconcernment that parents should carry themselves with all gravity\nand sobriety in the presence of their children. For when old men are\ndebauched, it will necessarily follow (as Plato saith) that young men\nwill be most debauched.\n\n_Question 34._ What is the reason that, when the other Romans\ndid offer their offerings and libations to the dead in the month of\nFebruary, Decimus Brutus (as Cicero saith) did it in December? He\nverily was the first who, entering upon Lusitania, passed from thence\nwith his army over the river Lethe.\n\n_Solution._ May it not be that, as many were wont to perform\nfuneral rites in the latter part of the day and end of the month, it is\nrational to believe that at the return of the year and end of the month\nalso he would honor the dead? For December is the last month. Or were\nthose adorations paid to the infernal Gods, and was it the season of\nthe year to honor them when all sorts of fruits had attained ripeness?\nOr is it because they move the earth at the beginning of seed-time,\nand it is most meet then to remember the ghosts below? Or is it that\nthis month is by the Romans consecrated to Saturn, whom they reckon to\nbe one of the infernal Gods and not of the supernal? Or that whilst\nthe great feast of Saturnals did last, thought to be attended with the\ngreatest feasting and voluptuous enjoyments, it was judged meet to crop\noff some first-fruits of these for the dead? Or what if it be a mere\nlie that only Brutus did sacrifice to the dead in this month, since\nthey solemnize funeral rites for Laurentia and offer drink-offerings at\nher tomb in the month of December?\n\n_Question 35._ Why do they adore Laurentia so much, seeing she was\na strumpet?\n\n_Solution._ They say that Acca Laurentia, the nurse of Romulus,\nwas diverse from this, and her they ascribe honor to in the month of\nApril. But this other Laurentia, they say, was surnamed Fabula, and\nshe became noted on this occasion. A certain sexton that belonged to\nHercules, as it seems, leading an idle life, used to spend most of his\ndays at draughts and dice; and on a certain time, when it happened\nthat none of those that were wont to play with him and partake of his\nsport were present, being very uneasy in himself, he challenged the\nGod to play a game at dice with him for this wager, that if he got the\ngame he should receive some boon from the God, if he lost it he would\nprovide a supper for the God and a pretty wench for him to lie with.\nWhereupon choosing two dice, one for himself and the other for the\nGod, and throwing them, he lost the game; upon which, abiding by his\nchallenge, he prepared a very splendid table for the God, and picking\nup Laurentia, a notorious harlot, he set her down to the good cheer;\nand when he had made a bed for her in the temple, he departed and shut\nthe doors after him. The report went that Hercules came, but had not\nto do with her after the usual manner of men, and commanded her to go\nforth early in the morning into the market-place, and whomsoever she\nfirst happened to meet with, him she should especially set her heart\nupon and procure him to be her copemate. Laurentia accordingly arising\nand going forth happened to meet with a certain rich man, a stale\nbachelor, whose name was Taruntius. He lying with her made her whilst\nhe lived the governess of his house, and his heiress when he died; some\ntime after, she died and left her estate to the city, and therefore\nthey have her in so great a reputation.\n\n_Question 36._ Why do they call one gate at Rome the Window, just\nby which is the bed-chamber of Fortune, so called?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because Servius, who became the most successful\nking, was believed to have conversed with Fortune, who came in to him\nat a window? Or may this be but a fable; and was it that Tarquinius\nPriscus the king dying, his wife Tanaquil, being a discreet and royal\nwoman, putting her head out at a window, propounded Servius to the\ncitizens, and persuaded them to proclaim him king; and that this place\nhad the name of it?\n\n_Question 37._ Why is it that, of the things dedicated to the\nGods, the law permits only the spoils taken in war to be neglected and\nby time to fall into decay, and permits them not to have any veneration\nnor reparation?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, that men may be of opinion that\nthe renown of ancestors fades away, and may always be seeking after\nsome fresh monument of fortitude? Or rather because time wears out the\nmarks of contention with our enemies, and to restore and renew them\nwere invidious and malicious? Neither among the Greeks are those men\nrenowned who were the first erectors of stone or brass trophies.\n\n_Question 38._ Why did Q. Metellus, being a high priest and\notherwise reputed a wise man and a statesman, prohibit the use of\ndivination from birds after the Sextile month, now called August?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not that\u2014as we make such observations about noon\nor early in the day, and also in the beginning or middle of the month\n(when the moon is new or increasing), but beware of the times of the\ndays or month\u2019s decline as unlucky\u2014so he also was of opinion that the\ntime of year after eight months was, as it were, the evening of the\nyear, when it declined and hastened towards an end? Or is it because\nthey must use thriving and full-grown birds? For such are in summer;\nbut towards autumn some are moulting and sickly, others chickens and\nunfledged, others altogether vanished and fled out of the country by\nreason of the season of the year.\n\n_Question 39._ Why is it unlawful for such as are not mustered\n(although they be otherwise conversant in the army) to slay an enemy or\nwound him?\n\n_Solution._ This thing Cato Senior hath made clear in a certain\nepistle, writing to his son and commanding him, if he be discharged of\nthe army having fulfilled his time there, to return; but if he stay, to\ntake commission from the general to march forth in order to wounding\nand slaying the enemy. Is it the reason, that necessity alone can give\nwarrant for the killing of a man, while he that doth this illegally and\nwithout commission is a murderer? Therefore Cyrus commended Chrysantas\nthat, when he was about to slay an enemy and had lifted up his scimitar\nto take his blow, hearing a retreat sounded, he let the man alone and\nsmote him not, as being prohibited. Or is it that, if a man conflicts\nand fights with his enemies and falls under a consternation, he ought\nto be liable to answer for it, and not escape punishment? For verily\nhe doth not advantage his side so much by smiting and wounding him,\nas he doth mischief by turning his back and flying. Therefore he that\nis disbanded is freed from martial laws; but when he doth petition\nto perform the office of a soldier, he doth again subject himself to\nmilitary discipline and put himself under the command of his general.\n\n_Question 40._ Wherefore was it unlawful for a priest of Jupiter\nto be anointed abroad in the air?\n\n_Solution._ Was it not because it was neither honest nor decent to\nstrip the sons naked whilst the father looked on, nor the son-in-law\nwhilst the father-in-law looked on? Neither in ancient times did they\nwash together. Verily Jupiter is the father, and that which is abroad\nin the open air may be especially said to be as it were in the sight\nof Jupiter. Or is it thus? As it is a profane thing for him to strip\nhimself naked in the temple or holy place, so did they reverence the\nopen air and firmament, as being full of Gods and Daemons? Wherefore we\ndo many necessary things within doors, hiding and covering ourselves in\nour houses from the sight of the Gods. Or is it that some things are\nenjoined to the priest only, other things to all by a law delivered by\nthe priest? With us (in Boeotia) to wear a crown, to wear long hair,\nto carry iron arms, and not to enter the Phocian borders are peculiar,\nproper pieces of the magistrate\u2019s service; but not to taste autumnal\nfruits before the autumnal equinox, and not to cut a vine before the\nspring equinox, are things required of all by the magistrate. For each\nof these has its season. After the same manner (as it appears) among\nthe Romans it is peculiar to the priest neither to make use of a horse,\nnor to be absent from home in a journey more than three nights, nor to\nput off his cap, on which account he is called Flamen.[159] Many other\nthings are enjoined to all sorts of men by the priest; of which one is\nnot to be anointed abroad in the open air. For the Romans have a great\nprejudice against dry unction; and they are of opinion that nothing\nhath been so great a cause to the Grecians of slavery and effeminacy as\ntheir fencing and wrestling schools, insinuating so much debauchery and\nidleness into the citizens, yea, vicious sloth and buggery; yea, that\nthey destroyed the very bodies of youths with sleeping, perambulations,\ndancing, and delicious feeding, whereby they insensibly fell from the\nuse of arms, and instead of being good soldiers and horsemen, loved to\nbe called nimble, good wrestlers, and pretty men. It is hard for them\nto avoid these mischiefs who are unclothed in the open air; but they\nthat are anointed within doors and cure themselves at home do commit\nnone of these vices.\n\n_Question 41._ Why had the ancient coin on one side the image of\ndouble-faced Janus stamped, and on the other side the stern or stem of\na ship?\n\n_Solution._ What if it be (as they commonly say) in honor of\nSaturn, that sailed over into Italy in a ship? Or, if this be no more\nthan what may be said of many others besides (for Janus, Evander, and\nAeneas all came by sea into Italy), a man may take this to be more\nprobable: whereas some things serve for the beauty of a city, some\nthings for necessary accommodation, the greatest part of the things\nthat beautify a city is a good constitution of government, and the\ngreatest part for necessary accommodation is good trading; whereas\nnow Janus had erected a good frame of government among them, reducing\nthem to a sober manner of life, and the river being navigable afforded\nplenty of all necessary commodities, bringing them in partly from the\nsea and partly from the out-borders of the country, their coin had a\nsignificant stamp, on one side the double-faced head of the legislator\n(as hath been said) by reason of the change made by him in their\naffairs, and on the other a small ship because of the river. They used\nalso another sort of coin, having engraven on it an ox, a sheep, and a\nsow, to show that they traded most in such cattle, and got their riches\nfrom these; hence were many of the names among the ancients derived, as\nSuillii, Bubulci, and Porcii, as Fenestella tells us.\n\n_Question 42._ Why do they use the temple of Saturn for a chamber\nof public treasury, as also an office of record for contracts?\n\n_Solution._ Is not this the reason, because this saying hath\nobtained credit, that there was no avarice or injustice among men while\nSaturn ruled, but faith and righteousness? Or was it that this God\npresided over the fruits of the field and husbandry? For the sickle\nsignified as much, and not, as Antimachus was persuaded and wrote with\nHesiod,\u2014\n\n    With crooked falk Saturn \u2019gainst heavens fought,\n    Cut off his father\u2019s privities, foul bout.\n\nMoney is produced from plenty of fruit and the vent of them, therefore\nthey make Saturn the author and preserver of their felicity. That\nwhich confirms this is that the conventions assembled every ninth day\nin the market-place (which they call Nundinae) they reckon sacred to\nSaturn, because the abundance of fruit gave the first occasion of\nbuying and selling. Or are these things far-fetched, and was the first\nthat contrived this Saturnine chamber of bank Valerius Publicola, upon\nthe suppression of the kings, being persuaded it was a strong place,\nconspicuous, and not easily undermined by treachery?\n\n_Question 43._ Wherefore did ambassadors, from whencesoever\nthey came to Rome, go to Saturn\u2019s temple, and there have their names\nrecorded before the treasurers?\n\n_Solution._ Was this the cause, that Saturn was a foreigner, and\ntherefore much rejoiced in strangers? Or is this better resolved by\nhistory? Anciently (as it seems) the quaestors sent entertainment to\nthe ambassadors (they called the present _lautia_), they took care\nalso of the sick, and buried their dead out of their public stock;\nbut now of late, because of the multitude of ambassadors that come,\nthat expense is left off; yet it remains still in use to bring the\nambassadors unto the treasurers, that their names may be recorded.\n\n_Question 44._ Why is it not lawful for Jupiter\u2019s priests to swear?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not the reason, that an oath is a kind of test\nimposed on a free people, but the body and mind of a priest ought\nto be free from imposition? Or is it not unlikely that he will be\ndisbelieved in smaller matters, who is entrusted with divine and\ngreater? Or is it that every oath concludes with an execration of\nperjury? And an execration is a fearful and a grievous thing. Hence\nneither is it thought fit that priests should curse others. Wherefore\nthe priestess at Athens was commended for refusing to curse Alcibiades,\nwhen the people required her to do it; for she said, I am a praying\nnot a cursing priestess. Or is it that the danger of perjury is of a\npublic nature, if a perjured and impious person presides in offering up\nprayers and sacrifices on the behalf of the city?\n\n_Question 45._ Why is it that in the solemn feast called Veneralia\nthey let wine run so freely out of the temple of Venus?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason (as some say), that Mezentius the\nEtrurian general sent to make a league with Aeneas, upon the condition\nthat he might have a yearly tribute of wine; Aeneas refusing, Mezentius\nengaged to the Etrurians that he would take the wine by force of arms\nand give it to them; Aeneas, hearing of his promise, devoted his wine\nto the Gods, and after the victory he gathered in the vintage, and\npoured it forth before the temple of Venus? Or is this a teaching\nceremony, that we should feast with sobriety and not excess, as if\nthe Gods were better pleased with the spillers of wine than with the\ndrinkers of it?\n\n_Question 46._ Wherefore would the ancients have the temple of\nHorta to stand always open?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason (as Antistius Labeo hath told us),\nthat _hortari_ signifies _to quicken one to an action_, that\nHorta is such a Goddess as exhorts and excites to good things, and that\nthey suppose therefore that she ought always to be in business, never\nprocrastinate, therefore not to be shut up or locked? Or is it rather\nthat Hora, as now they call her (the first syllable pronounced long),\nbeing a kind of an active and busy Goddess, very circumspect and\ncareful, they were of opinion that she was never lazy nor neglectful\nof human affairs? Or is it that this is a Greek name, as many others\nof them are, and signifies a Goddess that always oversees and inspects\naffairs; and that therefore she has her temple always open, as one that\nnever slumbers nor sleeps? But if Labeo deduceth _Hora_ aright\nfrom _hortari_, consider whether _orator_ may not rather be\nsaid to be derived from thence,\u2014since the orator, being an exhorting\nand exciting person, is a counsellor or leader of the people,\u2014and not\nfrom imprecation and prayer (_orando_), as some say.\n\n_Question 47._ Why did Romulus build the temple of Vulcan without\nthe city?\n\n_Solution._ What if it were by reason of that fabled grudge which\nVulcan had against Mars for the sake of Venus, that Romulus, being\nreputed the son of Mars, would not make Vulcan a cohabitant of the\nsame house or city with him? Or may this be a silly reason; and was\nthat temple at first built by Romulus for a senate house and a privy\ncouncil, for him to consult on state affairs together with Tatius,\nwhere they might be retired with the senators, and sit in consultation\nabout matters quietly without interruption from the multitude? Or was\nit that Rome was formerly in danger of being burnt from heaven; and he\nthought good to adore that God, but to place his habitation without the\ncity?\n\n_Question 48._ Wherefore did they, in the feasts called Consualia,\nput garlands on the horses and asses, and take these beasts off from\nall work?\n\n_Solution._ Was it not because they celebrated that feast to\nNeptune the cavalier, who was called Consus, and the ass takes part\nand share with the horse in his rest from labor? Or was it that, after\nnavigation came in and traffic by sea, there succeeded a kind of ease\nand leisure to the cattle in some kind or other?\n\n_Question 49._ Wherefore was it a custom among the candidates for\nmagistracy to present themselves in their togas without tunics, as Cato\ntells us?\n\n_Solution._ Was it not that they should not carry money in their\nbosoms to buy votes with? Or is it that they preferred no man as fit\nfor the magistracy for the sake of his birth, riches, or honors, but\nfor his wounds and scars; and that these might be visible to them that\ncame about them, they came without tunics to the elections? Or, as\nby courteous behavior, supplication, and submission, so by humbling\nthemselves in nakedness did they gain on the affections of the common\npeople?\n\n_Question 50._ Why did the Flamen Dialis (Jupiter\u2019s priest), when\nhis wife died, lay down his priestly dignity, as Ateius tells us?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not for this reason, because he that marries\na wife and loses her after marriage is more unfortunate than he that\nnever took a wife; for the family of a married man is completed, but\nthe family of him that is married and loseth his wife is not only\nincomplete but mutilated? Or is it because his wife joins with the\nhusband in consecration (as there are many sacred rites that ought\nnot to be performed unless the wife be present), but to marry another\nimmediately after he hath lost the former wife is not perhaps easy to\ndo, and besides is not convenient? Hence it was not lawful formerly to\nput away a wife, nor is it at this present lawful; except that Domitian\nin our remembrance, being petitioned, granted it. The priests were\npresent at this dissolution of marriage, doing many terrible, strange,\nand uncouth actions. But thou wilt wonder less, if thou art informed by\nhistory that, when one of the censors died, his partner was required\nto lay down his place. When Livius Drusus died, Aemilius Scaurus his\ncolleague would not abandon his government before one of the tribunes\nof the people committed him to prison.\n\n_Question 51._ Why is a dog set before the Lares, whom they\nproperly call Praestites, while the Lares themselves are covered with\ndogs\u2019 skins?\n\n_Solution._ Is it that Praestites are they that preside, and it\nis fit that presidents should be keepers, and should be frightful to\nstrangers (as dogs are) but mild and gentle to those of the family? Or\nis it rather what some Romans assert, that\u2014as some philosophers who\nfollow Chrysippus are of the opinion that evil spirits wander up and\ndown, which the Gods do use as public executioners of unholy and wicked\nmen\u2014so the Lares are a certain sort of furious and revengeful daemons,\nthat are observers of men\u2019s lives and families, and are here clothed\nwith dogs\u2019 skins and have a dog sitting by them, as being sagacious to\nhunt upon the foot and to prosecute wicked men?\n\n_Question 52._ Why do they sacrifice a dog to Mana Geneta, and\npray that no home-born should become good?\n\n_Solution._ Is the reason that Geneta is a deity that is employed\nabout the generation and purgation of corruptible things? For this word\nsignifies a certain flux (i.e. _Mana_ from _manare_) and\ngeneration, or a flowing generation; for as the Greeks do sacrifice a\ndog to Hecate, so do the Romans to Geneta on the behalf of the natives\nof the house. Moreover, Socrates saith that the Argives do sacrifice a\ndog to Eilioneia (Lucina) to procure a facility of delivery. But what\nif the prayer be not made for men, but for dogs puppied at home, that\nnone of them should be good; for dogs ought to be currish and fierce?\nOr is it that they that are deceased are pleasantly called good; and\nhence, speaking mystically in their prayer, they signify their desire\nthat no home-born should die? Neither ought this to seem strange; for\nAristotle says that it is written in the treaty of the Arcadians with\nthe Lacedaemonians that none of the Tegeates should be \u201cmade good\u201d on\naccount of aid rendered to the party of the Lacedaemonians, i.e. that\nnone should be slain.\n\n_Question 53._ Why is it that to this very day, while they hold\nthe games at the Capitol, they set Sardians to sale by a crier, and\na certain old man goes before in way of derision, carrying a child\u2019s\nbauble about his neck, which they call bulla?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because a people of the Tuscans called Veientes\nmaintained a fight a long time with Romulus, and he took this city\nlast of all, and exposed them and their king to sale by an outcry,\nupbraiding him with his madness and folly? And since the Tuscans were\nLydians at first, and Sardis was the metropolis of the Lydians, so they\nset the Veientes to sale under the name of Sardians, and to this day\nthey keep up the custom in a way of pastime.\n\n_Question 54._ Why do they call the flesh-market Macellum?\n\n_Solution._ Was it not by corrupting the word \u03bc\u03ac\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, _a\ncook_, as with many other words, that the custom hath prevailed?\nFor _c_ and _g_ are nigh akin to one another, and _g_\ncame more lately into use, being inserted among the other letters by\nSp. Carbilius; and now by lispers and stammerers _l_ is pronounced\ninstead of _r_. Or this matter may be made clear by a story. It\nis reported, that at Rome there was a stout man, a robber, who had\nrobbed many, and being taken with much difficulty, was brought to\ncondign punishment: his name was Macellus, out of whose riches a public\nmeat-market was built, which bare his name.\n\n_Question 55._ Why are the minstrels allowed to go about the city\non the Ides of January, wearing women\u2019s apparel?\n\n_Solution._ Is it for the reason here rehearsed? This sort of men\n(as it seems) had great privileges accruing to them from the grant of\nKing Numa, by reason of his godly devotion; which things afterward\nbeing taken from them when the Decemviri managed the government, they\nforsook the city. Whereupon there was a search made for them, and one\nof the priests, offering sacrifice without music, made a superstitious\nscruple of so doing. And when they returned not upon invitation, but\nled their lives in Tibur, a certain freedman told the magistrates\nprivately that he would undertake to bring them. And providing a\nplentiful feast, as if he had sacrificed to the Gods, he invited the\nminstrels; women-kind was present also, with whom they revelled all\nnight, sporting and dancing. There on a sudden the man began a speech,\nand being surprised with a fright, as if his patron had come in upon\nhim, persuaded the pipers to ascend the caravans that were covered all\nover with skins, saying he would carry them back to Tibur. But this\nwhole business was but a trepan; for he wheeling about the caravan,\nand they perceiving nothing by reason of wine and darkness, he very\ncunningly brought them all into Rome by the morning. Most of them, by\nreason of the night-revel and the drink that they were in, happened to\nbe clothed in flowered women\u2019s robes; whereupon, being prevailed upon\nby the magistrates and reconciled, it was decreed that they should go\nup and down the city on that day, habited after this manner.\n\n_Question 56._ Why are they of opinion that matrons first built\nthe temple of Carmenta, and at this day do they worship her most?\n\n_Solution._ There is a certain tradition that, when the women\nwere prohibited by the senate from the use of chariots drawn by a\npair of horses, they conspired together not to be got with child and\nbreed children, and in this manner to be revenged on their husbands\nuntil they revoked the decree and gratified them; which being done,\nchildren were begot, and the women, becoming good breeders and very\nfruitful, built the temple of Carmenta. Some say that Carmenta was\nEvander\u2019s mother, and going into Italy was called Themis, but as some\nsay, Nicostrata; who, when she sang forth oracles in verse, was called\nCarmenta by the Latins; for they call verses _carmina_. There are\nsome of opinion that Carmenta was a Destiny, therefore the matrons\nsacrifice to her. But the etymology of the word is from _carens\nmente_ (_beside herself_), by reason of divine raptures. Hence\nCarmenta had not her name from carmina; but contrariwise, her verses\nwere called carmina from her, because being inspired she sang her\noracles in verse.\n\n_Question 57._ What is the reason that, when the women do\nsacrifice to Rumina, they pour forth milk plentifully on the\nsacrifices, but offer no wine?\n\n_Solution._ Is it because the Latins call a breast _ruma_,\nand that tree (as they say) is called _ruminalis_ under which the\nshe-wolf drew forth her breast to Romulus? And as we call those women\nthat bring up children with milk from the breast breast-women, so did\nRumina\u2014who was a wet nurse, a dry nurse, and a rearer of children\u2014not\npermit wine, as being hurtful to the infants.\n\n_Question 58._ Why do they call some senators Patres Conscripti,\nand others only Patres?\n\n_Solution._ Is not this the reason, that those that were first\nconstituted by Romulus they called Patres and Patricians, as being\ngentlemen who could show their pedigree; but those that were elected\nafterwards from among the commonalty they called Patres Conscripti?\n\n_Question 59._ Why was one altar common to Hercules and the Muses?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because Hercules taught letters first to\nEvander\u2019s people, as Juba tells us? And it was esteemed an honorable\naction of those that taught their friends and relations; for it was\nbut of late that they began to teach for hire. The first that opened a\ngrammar school was Spurius Carbilius, a freeman of Carbilius, the first\nthat divorced his wife.\n\n_Question 60._ What is the reason that, of Hercules\u2019s two altars,\nthe women do not partake or taste of the things offered on the greater?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not because Carmenta\u2019s women came too late for\nthe sacrifices? The same thing happened also to the Pinarii; whence\nthey were excluded from the sacrificial feast, and fasting while others\nwere feasting, they were called Pinarii (from \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03ac\u03c9). Or is it upon\nthe account of that fabulous story of the coat and Dejaneira?\n\n_Question 61._ What is the reason that it\u2019s forbidden to\nmention, enquire after, or name the chief tutelary and guardian God\nof Rome, whether male or female?\u2014which prohibition they confirm with\na superstitious tradition, reporting that Valerius Soranus perished\nmiserably for uttering that name.\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason (as some Roman histories tell us),\nthat there are certain kinds of evocations and enchantments, with which\nthey are wont to entice away the Gods of their enemies, and to cause\ntheirs to come and dwell with them; and they feared lest this mischief\nshould befall them from others? As the Tyrians are said to bind fast\ntheir images with cords, but others, when they will send any of them\nto washing or purifying, require sureties for their return; so did the\nRomans reckon they had their God in most safe and secure custody, he\nbeing unexpressible and unknown? Or, as Homer hath versified,\n\n    The earth all Gods in common have?[160]\n\nthat men might worship and reverence all Gods that have the earth in\ncommon, so did the ancient Romans obscure the Lord of their Salvation,\nrequiring that not only this but all Gods should be reverenced by the\ncitizens?\n\n_Question 62._ Why among them that were called Feciales (in\nGreek, peace-makers) was he that was named Pater Patratus accounted\nthe chiefest? But this must be one who hath his father living, and\nchildren of his own; and he hath even at this time a certain privilege\nand trust, for the Praetors commit to those men\u2019s trust the persons\nof those who, by reason of comeliness and beauty, stand in need of an\nexact and chaste guardianship.\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, that they must be such whose\nchildren reverence them, and who reverence their parents? Or doth the\nname itself suggest a reason? For _patratum_ will have a thing to\nbe complete and finished; for he whose lot it is to be a father whilst\nhis father liveth is (as it were) perfecter than others. Or is it that\nhe ought to be overseer of oaths and peace, and (according to Homer) to\nsee before and behind? He is such a one especially, who hath a son for\nwhom he consults, and a father with whom he consults.\n\n_Question 63._ Why is he that is called Rex Sacrorum (who is king\nof priests) forbid either to take upon him a civil office or to make an\noration to the people?\n\n_Solution._ Was it that of old the kings did perform the most and\ngreatest sacred rites and offered sacrifices together with the priests;\nbut when they kept not within the bounds of moderation and became proud\nand insolent, most of the Grecians, depriving them of their authority,\nleft to them only this part of their office, to sacrifice to the Gods;\nbut the Romans, casting out kings altogether, gave the charge of the\nsacrifice to another, enjoining him neither to meddle with public\naffairs nor to hold office, so that they might seem to be subject to\nroyalty only in their sacrifices, and to endure the name of king only\nwith respect to the Gods? Hence there is a certain sacrifice kept by\ntradition in the market-place near the Comitia, which as soon as the\nking (i.e. the chief priest) hath offered, he immediately withdraws\nhimself by flight out of the market-place.\n\n_Question 64._ Why do they not suffer the table to be quite voided\nwhen it\u2019s taken away, but will have something always to remain upon it?\n\n_Solution._ What if it be that they would intimate that something\nof our present enjoyments should be left for the future, and that\nto-day we should be mindful of to-morrow? Or that they reckon it a\npiece of manners to repress and restrain the appetite in our present\nfruitions? For they less desire absent things, who are accustomed to\nabstain from those that are present. Or was it a custom of courtesy\ntowards household servants? For they do not love so much to take as to\npartake, deeming that they hold a kind of communion with their masters\nat the table. Or is it that no sacred thing ought to be suffered to be\nempty? And the table is a sacred thing.\n\n_Question 65._ Why doth not a man lie at first with a bride in the\nlight, but when it is dark?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not for modesty\u2019s sake, for at the first\ncongress he looks upon her as a stranger to him? Or is it that he may\nbe inured to go into his own wife with modesty? Or, as Solon hath\nwritten, \u201cLet the bride go into the bed-chamber gnawing a quince,\nthat the first salutation be not harsh and ungrateful.\u201d So did the\nRoman lawgiver command that, if there should be any thing absurd and\nunpleasant in her body, she should hide it? Or was it intended to cast\ninfamy upon the unlawful use of venery by causing that the lawful\nshould have certain signs of modesty attending it?\n\n_Question 66._ Why was one of the horse-race rounds called\nFlaminia?\n\n_Solution._ Is it because, when Flaminius, one of the ancients,\nbestowed a field on the city, they employed its revenue on the\nhorse-races, and with the overplus money built the way which they call\nFlaminia?\n\n_Question 67._ Why do they call the rod-bearers lictors?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, because these men were wont to\nbind desperate bullies, and they followed Romulus carrying thongs in\ntheir bosoms? The vulgar Romans say _alligare_, _to bind_,\nwhen the more refined in speech say _ligare_. Or is now _c_\ninserted, when formerly they called them _litores_, being\n_liturgi_, ministers for public service; for \u03bb\u1fc7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd until this day\nis writ for _public_ in many of the Grecian laws, which scarce any\nis ignorant of.\n\n_Question 68._ Why do the Luperci sacrifice a dog? The Luperci\nare they that run up and down naked (saving only their girdles) in the\nLupercal plays, and slash all that they meet with a whip.\n\n_Solution._ Is it not because these feats are done for the\npurification of the city? For they call the month February, and indeed\nthe very day Februatus, and the habit of whipping with thongs they call\n_februare_, the word signifying _to cleanse_. And to speak\nthe truth, all the Grecians have used, and some do use to this very\nday, a slain dog for an expiatory sacrifice; and among other sacrifices\nof purification, they offer whelps to Hecate, and sprinkle those that\nneed cleansing with the puppy\u2019s blood, calling this kind of purifying\npuppification. Or is it that _lupus_ is \u03bb\u03cd\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2, _a wolf_, and\nLupercalia are Lycaea; but a dog is at enmity with a wolf, therefore is\nsacrificed on the Lycaean festivals? Or is it because the dogs do bark\nat and perplex the Luperci as they scout about the city? Or is it that\nthis sacrifice is offered to Pan, and Pan loves dogs because of his\nherds of goats.\n\n_Question 69._ Why, upon the festival called Septimontium,\ndid they observe to abstain from the use of chariots drawn by a\npair of horses; and even until now, do they that regard antiquity\nstill abstain? They do observe the Septimontium feast in honor of\nthe addition of the seventh hill to the city, upon which it became\nSepticollis, seven-hilled Rome.\n\n_Solution._ What if it be (as some of the Romans conjecture)\nbecause the parts of the city are not as yet everywhere connected? Or\nif this conceit be nothing to the purpose, what if it be that, when the\ngreat work of building the city was finished and they determined to\ncease the increasing of the city any further, they rested themselves\nand rested the cattle that bore a share in the labor with them, and\nprovided accordingly that they might participate of the holiday by rest\nfrom labor? Or was it that they would have all the citizens always\npresent for the solemnity and return of a festival, especially that\nwhich was observed in remembrance of the compact uniting the parts of\nthe city; and that none should desert the city for whose sake the feast\nis kept, they were not allowed to use their yoke chariots that day?\n\n_Question 70._ Why do they call those Furciferi which are convict\nof thefts or any other of those slavish crimes?\n\n_Solution._ Was it this (which was an argument of the severity of\nthe ancients), that whenever any convicted his servant of any villany,\nhe enjoined him to carry the forked piece of timber that is under the\ncart (the tongue of the cart), and to go with it through the next\nvillages and neighborhood, to be seen of all, that they might distrust\nhim and be aware of him for the future? This piece of wood we call a\nprop, the Romans call it _furca_, _a fork_; hence he that\ncarries it about is called _furcifer_, _a fork-bearer_.\n\n_Question 71._ Why do they bind hay about the horns of oxen that\nare wont to push, that they may be shunned by him that meets them?\n\n_Solution._ It is that by reason of gormandizing and stuffing\ntheir guts oxen, asses, horses, and men become mischievous, as\nSophocles somewhere saith.\n\n    Like full-fed colt thou kickest up heels,\n    From stuffed paunch, cheeks, and full meals?\n\nTherefore the Romans say that M. Crassus had hay about his horns, for\nthey that were turbulent men in the commonwealth were wont to stand\nin awe of him as a revengeful man and one scarce to be meddled with;\nalthough afterwards it was said again, that Caesar had taken away\nCrassus\u2019s hay, being the first man of the republic that withstood and\naffronted him.\n\n_Question 72._ Why would they have the lanthorns of the\nsoothsaying priests (which formerly they called Auspices, and now\nAugures) to be always open at top, and no cover to be put upon them?\n\n_Solution._ Is it as the Pythagoreans do, who make little things\nsymbols of great matters,\u2014as forbidding to sit down upon a bushel\nand to stir up the fire with a sword,\u2014so that the ancients used many\nenigmatical ceremonies, especially about their priests, and such was\nthis of the lanthorn? For the lanthorn is like the body encompassing\nthe soul, the soul being the light withinside, and the understanding\nand judgment ought to be always open and quick-sighted, and never to be\nshut up or blown out. And when the winds blow, the birds are unsettled\nand do not afford sound prognostics, by reason of their wandering and\nirregularity in flying; by this usage therefore they teach that their\nsoothsayers must not prognosticate when there are high winds, but in\nstill and calm weather, when they can use their open lanthorns.\n\n_Question 73._ Why were priests that had sores about them forbid\nto use divination.\n\n_Solution._ Is not this a significant sign that, whilst they are\nemployed about divine matters, they ought not to be in any pain, nor\nhave any sore or passion in their minds, but to be cheerful, sincere,\nand without distraction? Or it is but rational, if no man may offer a\nvictim that hath a sore, nor use such birds for soothsaying, that much\nmore they should themselves be free from these blemishes, and be clean,\nsincere, and sound, when they go about to inspect divine prodigies;\nfor an ulcer seems to be a mutilation and defilement of the body.\n\n_Question 74._ Why did Servius Tullius build a temple of Small\nFortune, whom they call Brevis?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because he was of a mean original and in a\nlow condition, being born of a captive woman, and by fortune came to\nbe king of Rome? Or did not that change of his condition manifest the\ngreatness rather than the smallness of his fortune? But Servius most\nof all of them seems to ascribe divine influence to Fortune, giving\nthereby a reputation to all his enterprises. For he did not only\nbuild temples of Hopeful Fortune, of Fortune that averteth evil, of\nMild, Primogenial, and Masculine Fortune; but there is a temple also\nof Private Fortune, another of Regardful Fortune, another of Hopeful\nFortune, and the fourth of Virgin Fortune. But why should any one\nmention any more names, seeing there is a temple also of Ensnaring\nFortune, which they name Viscata, as it were ensnaring us when we are\nas yet afar off, and enforcing us upon business.[161] Consider this\nnow, whether it be that Servius found that great matters are effected\nby a small piece of Fortune, and that it often falls out that great\nthings are effected by some or do come to nought by a small thing\nbeing done or not done. He built therefore a temple of Small Fortune,\nteaching us to take care of our business, and not contemn things that\nhappen by reason of their smallness.\n\n_Question 75._ Why did they not extinguish a candle, but suffer it\nto burn out of its own accord.\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, that they adored it as being\nrelated and akin to unquenchable and eternal fire? Or is it a\nsignificant ceremony, teaching us that we are not to kill and destroy\nany animated creature that is harmless, fire being as it were an\nanimal? For it both needs nourishment and moves itself, and when it is\nextinguished it makes a noise as if it were then slain? Or doth this\nusage instruct us that we ought not to make waste of fire or water,\nor any other necessary thing that we have a super-abundance of, but\nsuffer those that have need to use them, leaving them to others when we\nourselves have no further use for them?\n\n_Question 76._ Why do they that would be preferred before others\nin gentility wear little moons on their shoes?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason (as Castor saith), that this is\na symbol of the place of habitation that is said to be in the moon,\nsignifying that after death souls should have the moon under their\nfeet again? Or was this a fashion of renown among families of greatest\nantiquity, as were the Arcadians of Evander\u2019s posterity, that were\ncalled men born before the moon (\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ad\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9)? Or is this, like many\nother customs, to put men who are lofty and high-minded in mind of the\nmutability of human affairs to either side, setting the moon before\nthem as an example,\n\n    When first she comes from dark to light,\n    Trimming, her face becomes fair bright,\n    Increasing, till she\u2019s full in sight;\n    Declining then, leaves nought but night?[162]\n\nOr was this for a doctrine of obedience to authority,\u2014that they would\nhave us not discontented under it; but, as the moon doth willingly obey\nher superior and conform unto him, always vamping after the rays of the\nsun (as Parmenides hath it), so they that are subjects to any prince\nshould be contented with their lower station, in the enjoyment of power\nand dignity derived from him?\n\n_Question 77._ Why are they of an opinion that the year is\nJupiter\u2019s, but the months Juno\u2019s?\n\n_Solution._ Is it because Jupiter and Juno reign over the\ninvisible Gods, who are no otherwise seen but by the eyes of our\nunderstanding, but the Sun and Moon over the visible? And the Sun\nverily causeth the year, and the Moon the months. Neither ought we to\nthink that they are bare images of them, but the Sun is Jupiter himself\nmaterially, and the Moon Juno herself materially. Therefore they name\nher Juno (_a juvenescendo_, the name signifying a thing that is\nnew or grows young) from the nature of the Moon; and they call her\nLucina (as it were _bright_ or _shining_), and they are of\nopinion that she helps women in their travail-pains. Whence is that of\nthe poets:\n\n    By azure heaven beset with stars,\n    By th\u2019 moon that hastens births;\n\nfor they suppose that women have the easiest travail at the full of the\nmoon.\n\n_Question 78._ What is the reason that a bird called\n_sinister_ in soothsaying is fortunate?\n\n_Solution._ What if this be not true, but the dialect deludes\nso many? For they render \u1f00\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd _sinistrum_; but to permit a\nthing is _sinere_, and they say _sine_ when they desire a\nthing to be permitted; therefore a prognostic permitting an action\n(being _sinisterium_) the vulgar do understand and call amiss\n_sinistrum_. Or is it as Dionysius saith, that when Ascanius,\nthe son of Aeneas, had pitched battle against Mezentius, a flash of\nlightning portending victory (as they prognosticated) came on his\nleft hand, and for the future they observed it so; or, as some others\nsay, that this happened to Aeneas? Moreover, the Thebans routing and\nconquering their enemies by the left wing of the army at Leuctra, they\ncontinued in all battles to give the left wing the pre-eminence. Or is\nit rather as Juba thinks, that to those that look toward the east the\nnorth is on the left hand, which verily some make the right hand and\nsuperior part of the world? Consider whether the soothsayers do not,\nas it were, corroborate left-hand things, as the weaker by nature,\nand do intimate as if they introduced a supply of that defect of power\nthat is in them. Or is it that they think that things terrestrial and\nmortal stand directly over against heavenly and divine things, and do\nconjecture that the things which to us are on the left hand the Gods\nsend down from their right hand?\n\n_Question 79._ Why was it lawful to bring the bones of one that\nhad triumphed (after he was dead and burnt) into the city and lay them\nthere, as Pyrrho the Liparaean hath told us?\n\n_Solution._ Was it for the honor they had for the deceased? For\nthey granted that not only generals and other eminent persons, but also\ntheir offspring, should be buried in the market-place, for example,\nValerius and Fabricius. And they say, when the posterity of these\npersons died, they were brought into the market-place, and a burning\nfirebrand was put under them and immediately taken away; and thus all\nthat might have caused envy was avoided, and the right to the honor was\nfully confirmed.\n\n_Question 80._ Why did they that publicly feasted the triumphers\nhumbly request the consuls, and by messengers sent beseech them, not to\ncome to their supper?\n\n_Solution._ Was it that it was necessary to give the supreme place\nand most honorable entertainment to the triumpher, and wait upon him\nhome after supper; whereas, the consuls being present, they might do\nsuch things to none other but them?\n\n_Question 81._ Why did not the tribune of the people wear a purple\ngarment, whenas each of the other magistrates wore one?\n\n_Solution._ What if the tribune is not a magistrate at all? For he\nneither hath lictors, nor sitting in tribunal doth he determine causes;\nneither do the tribunes, as the rest, enter upon their office at the\nbeginning of the year, nor do they cease when a dictator is chosen;\nbut as if they translated all magistratic power to themselves, they\ncontinue still, being (as it were) no magistrates, but holding another\nkind of rank. And as some rhetoricians will not have a prohibition to\nbe judicial proceeding, seeing it doth something contrary to judicial\nproceeding,\u2014for the one brings in an action at law and gives judgment\nupon it, but the other nonsuits it and dismisseth the cause,\u2014after\nthe like manner they are of opinion that tribuneship is rather a curb\nto magistracy, and that it is an order standing in opposition to\ngovernment rather than a piece of government itself; for the tribune\u2019s\noffice and authority is to withstand the magistrate\u2019s authority, even\nto curtail his extravagant power. Perhaps these and similar reasons\nmay be mere ingenious devices; but in truth, since tribuneship takes\nits original from the people, popularity is its stronghold, and it is\na great thing not to carry it above the rest of the people, but to be\nlike the citizens they have to do with in gesture, habit, and diet.\nState indeed becomes a consul and a praetor; but as for a tribune (as\nCaius Curio saith), he must be one that even is trampled upon, not\ngrave in countenance, nor difficult of access, nor harsh to the rabble,\nbut more tractable to them than to others. Hence it was decreed that\nthe tribune\u2019s doors should not be shut, but be open night and day\nas a haven and place of refuge for distressed people. And the more\ncondescending his outward deportment is, by so much the more doth he\nincrease in his power; for they dignify him as one of public use, and\nto be resorted to of all sorts even as an altar; therefore by the\nreverence they give him, he is sacred, holy, and inviolable; and when\nhe makes a public progress, it is a law that every one should cleanse\nand purify the body as defiled.\n\n_Question 82._ Why before the chief officers are rods carried\nbound together, with the axes fastened to them?\n\n_Solution._ What if it be a significant ceremony, to show that a\nmagistrate\u2019s anger ought not to be rash and ungrounded? Or is it that,\nwhile the rods are leisurely unloosing, they make deliberation and\ndelay in their anger, so that oftentimes they change their sentence as\nto the punishment? Now, whereas some sort of crimes are curable, some\nincurable, rods correct the corrigible, but the axes are to cut off the\nincorrigible.\n\n_Question 83._ What is the reason that the Romans, when they were\ninformed that the barbarians called Bletonesians had sacrificed a man\nto the Gods, sent for their magistrates to punish them; but when they\nmade it appear that they did it in obedience to a certain law, they\ndismissed them, but prohibited the like action for the future; whenas\nthey themselves, not many years preceding, buried two men and two women\nalive in the Forum Boarium, two of whom were Greeks and two Gauls?\nFor it seems absurd to do this themselves, and yet to reprimand the\nbarbarians as if they were committing profaneness.\n\n_Solution._ What if this be the reason, that they reckoned it\nprofane to sacrifice a man to the Gods, but necessary to do so to the\nDaemons? Or were they of opinion that they sinned that did such things\nby custom or law; but as for themselves, they did it being enjoined\nto it by the Sibylline books? For it is reported that one Elvia, a\nvirgin, riding on horseback was struck with lightning and cast from\nher horse, and the horse was found lying uncovered and she naked, as\nif on set purpose; her clothes had been turned up from her secret\nparts, also her shoes, rings, and head-gear all lay scattered up and\ndown, here and there; her tongue also was hanging out of her mouth.\nAnd when the diviners declared that it was an intolerable disgrace to\nthe holy virgins that it should be published, and that some part of\nthe abuse did touch the cavaliers, a servant of a certain barbarian\ncavalier informed, that three vestal virgins, Aemilia, Licinia, and\nMartia, about the same time had been deflowered, and for a long time\nplayed the whores with some men, among whom was Butetius, the said\ninformer\u2019s master. The virgins being convict were punished; and the\nfact appearing heinous, it was thought meet that the priest should\nconsult the Sibylline books, where there were oracles found foretelling\nthese things would come to pass for mischief to the republic, and\nenjoining them\u2014in order to avert the impending calamity\u2014to provide two\nGrecians and two Gauls, and bury them alive in that place, in order to\nthe appeasing some alien and foreign Daemons.\n\n_Question 84._ Why do they take the beginning of the day from the\nmidnight?\n\n_Solution._ Is the reason that the commonweal had a military\nconstitution at the first? For many matters of concern on military\nexpeditions are managed by night. Or did they make sunrising the\nbeginning of business, and the night the preparation for it? For men\nought to come prepared to action, and not to be in preparation when\nthey should be doing,\u2014as Myso is reported to have said to Chilo the\nWise, when he was making a fan in winter. Or as the noontide to many is\nthe time for finishing public and weighty affairs, so did it seem meet\nto make midnight the beginning? This hath this confirmation, that a\nRoman governor would make no league or confederation in the afternoon.\nOr is it impossible to take the beginning and end of the day from\nsunrising to sunsetting? For, as the vulgar measure the beginning of\nthe day by sense to be the first appearance of the sun, and take the\nfirst beginning of the night to be the complete withdrawment of the sun\nfrom sight, we shall thus have no equinoctial day; but the night which\nwe suppose comes nearest in equality to the day will be manifestly\nshorter than the day by the diameter of the sun. Which absurdity the\nmathematicians, going about to solve, have determined that, where the\ncentre of the sun toucheth the horizon, there is the true parting\npoint between day and night. But this contradicts sense; for it must\nfollow that whilst there is much light above the earth, yea, the sun\nilluminating us, we will not for all this confess it to be day, but\nmust say that it is still night. Whereas then it is hard to take the\nbeginning of the day from the rising and setting of the sun, by reason\nof the forementioned absurdities, it remains to take the zenith and the\nnadir for the beginning. The last is best, for the sun\u2019s course from\nnoon is by way of declination from us; but from midnight he takes his\ncourse towards us, as sunrising comes on.\n\n_Question 85._ Wherefore did they not in ancient times suffer\nwomen to grind or play the cook?\n\n_Solution._ Haply, because they remembered the covenant that\nthey made with the Sabines; for after they had robbed them of their\ndaughters, and fighting many battles became reconciled, among other\narticles of agreement this was recorded, that a wife was not to grind\nnor play the cook for a Roman husband.\n\n_Question 86._ Why do they not marry wives in the month of May?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, that because May is between April\nand June,\u2014concerning which months they have an opinion that that is\nsacred to Venus, this to Juno, both of them being nuptial Gods,\u2014they\neither take an opportunity a little before May, or tarry till it be\nover? Or is it that in this month they offer the greatest expiatory\nsacrifice, now casting the images of men from a bridge into the river,\nand formerly men themselves? Moreover, it is by law required that the\nFlaminica, the reputed priestess of Juno, should be most sourly sullen\nduring the time, and neither wash nor trim up herself. Or is it because\nmany of the Latins in this month offer oblations unto the dead? And\ntherefore perhaps they worship Mercury in this month, which from Maia\nderives its name? Or, as some say, is May derived from elder age\n(maior) and Juno from younger (iunior)? For youth is more suitable to\nmatrimony, as Euripides hath said,\n\n    Old age the Cyprian queen must ever shun,\n    And Venus from old men in scorn doth run.\n\nTherefore they marry not in May, but tarry till June, which is\npresently after May.\n\n_Question 87._ Why do they part the hair of women when they are\nmarried with the point of a spear?\n\n_Solution._ What if it be a significant ceremony, showing that\nthey took their first wives in marriage by force of arms and war?\nOr is it that they may instruct them that they are to dwell with\nhusbands that are soldiers and warriors, and that they should put on\nsuch ornamental attire as is not luxurious or lascivious, but plain?\nSo Lycurgus commanded that all the gates and tops of houses should be\nbuilt with saw and hatchet, and no other sort of workmen\u2019s instrument\nshould be used about them; yea, he rejected all gayety and superfluity.\nOr doth this action parabolically intimate divorce, as that marriage\ncan be dissolved only by the sword? Or is it that most of these nuptial\nceremonies relate to Juno? For a spear is decreed sacred to Juno, and\nmost of her statues are supported by a spear, and she is surnamed\nQuiritis, and a spear of old was called _quiris_, wherefore they\nsurname Mars Quirinus?\n\n_Question 88._ Why do they call the money that is laid out upon\nthe public plays _lucar_?\n\n_Solution._ Is it because there are many groves consecrated to the\nGods about the city, which they call _luci_, and the revenue of\nthese they expend upon the said plays?\n\n_Question 89._ Why do they call the Quirinalia the Feast of Fools?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because they set apart that day for those that\nwere unacquainted with their own curiae, as Juba saith? Or was it for\nthem that did not sacrifice with their tribes, as the rest did, in the\nFornicalia, by reason of business or long journeys or ignorance, so\nthat it was allowed to them to solemnize that feast upon this day?\n\n_Question 90._ What is the reason that, when there is a sacrifice\nto Hercules, they mention no other God and no dog appears within the\nenclosure, as Varro saith?\n\n_Solution._ Is the reason of their naming no other God, because\nthey are of opinion that Hercules was but a half God? And, as some say,\nEvander built an altar to him and brought him a sacrifice, whilst he\nwas yet here among men. And of all creatures he had most enmity to a\ndog, for this creature always held him hard to it, as did Cerberus; and\nthat which most of all prejudiced him was that, when Oeonus, the son\nof Licymnius, was slain for a dog\u2019s sake by the Hippocoontidae, he was\nnecessitated to take up the cudgels, and lost many of his friends and\nhis brother Iphicles.\n\n_Question 91._ Why was it unlawful for the patricians to dwell\nabout the Capitol?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because M. Manlius, whilst he dwelt there,\naffected arbitrary government; upon whose account the family came under\nan oath of abjuration that no Manlius should for the future bear the\nname of Marcus? Or was this an ancient suspicion? For the potent men\nwould never leave calumniating Publicola, a most popular man, nor would\nthe common people leave fearing him till he had plucked down his house,\nwhich seemed to hang over the market-place.\n\n_Question 92._ Why do they put on a garland of oaken leaves on him\nthat saves a citizen in battle?\n\n_Solution._ Is it because it is easy to find an oak everywhere\nin the military expeditions? Or is it because a crown is sacred to\nJupiter and Juno, who in their opinion are the city guardians? Or was\nit an ancient custom among the Arcadians, who are something akin to the\noak? For they repute themselves the first men produced of the earth, as\nthe oak among the vegetables.\n\n_Question 93._ Why do they for the most part use vultures for\nsoothsaying?\n\n_Solution._ Was this the reason, because twelve vultures appeared\nto Romulus upon the building of Rome? Or because of all birds this is\nleast frequent and familiar? For it is not easy to meet with young\nvultures, but they fly to us unexpectedly from some remote parts;\ntherefore the sight of them is portentous. Or haply they learned this\nfrom Hercules, if Herodotus speak true that Hercules rejoiced most in\nthe beginning of an enterprise at the sight of a vulture, being of\nopinion that a vulture was the justest of all birds of prey. For first,\nhe meddles not with any living creature, neither doth he destroy any\nthing that hath breath in it, as eagles, hawks, and other fowls do that\nprey by night, but lives only upon dead carcasses; and next, he passeth\nby all those of his kind, for none ever saw a vulture feeding on a\nbird, as eagles and hawks do, which for the most part pursue birds like\nthemselves, and slay them, even as Aeschylus hath it,\n\n    A bird that preys on birds, how can\u2019t be clean?\n\nAnd verily this bird is not pernicious to men, for it neither destroys\nfruits nor plants, nor is hurtful to any tame animal. Moreover if it\nbe (as the Egyptians fabulously pretend) that the whole kind of them\nis of the female sex, and that they conceive by the reception of the\neast wind into their bodies, as the trees do by receiving the west\nwind, it is most probable that very certain and sound prognostics may\nbe made from them; whereas in other birds (there being so many rapines,\nflights, and pursuits about copulation) there are great disturbances\nand uncertainties attending them.\n\n_Question 94._ For what reason is the temple of Aesculapius placed\nwithout the city?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because they reckoned it a wholesomer kind of\nliving without the city than within? For the Greeks have placed the\nedifices belonging to Aesculapius for the most part on high places,\nwhere the air is pure and clear. Or is it that they suppose this God\nwas fetched from Epidaurus? For the temple of Aesculapius is not close\nby that city, but at a great distance from it. Or is it that, by a\nserpent that went on shore out of a trireme galley into the island and\ndisappeared, they think the God himself intimated to them the place of\nbuilding his temple?\n\n_Question 95._ Why was it ordained that they that were to live\nchaste should abstain from pulse?\n\n_Solution._ Did they, like the Pythagoreans, abominate beans for\nthe causes which are alleged, and the lathyrus and erebinthus as being\nnamed from Lethe and Erebus? Or was it because they used pulse for\nthe most part in their funeral feasts and invocations of the dead? Or\nrather was it because they should bring empty and slender bodies to\ntheir purifications and expiations? For pulse are windy, and cause a\ngreat deal of excrements that require purging off. Or is it because\nthey irritate lechery, by reason of their flatulent and windy nature?\n\n_Question 96._ Why do they inflict no other punishment on Vestal\nVirgins, when they are defiled, than burying them alive?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, because they burn the dead, and to\nbury her by fire who hath not preserved sacred the divine fire would be\nunjust? Or was it that they judged it a wicked act to cut off a person\nsanctified by the greatest ceremonial purification, and to lay hands on\na holy woman; and therefore they contrived a machine for her to die in\nof herself, and let her down into a vault made under ground, where was\nplaced a candle burning, also some bread and milk and water, and then\nthe den was covered with earth on top? Neither by this execrable manner\nof devoting them are they exempt from superstition; but to this day the\npriests going to the place perform purgatory rites.\n\n_Question 97._ What is the reason that, at the horse-race on the\nIdes of December, the lucky horse that beats is sacrificed as sacred\nto Mars; and a certain man, cutting off his tail, brings it to a place\ncalled Regia, and besmears the altar with the blood of it; but for the\nhead, one party coming down from the way called Sacred, and others from\nthe Suburra, do fight?\n\n_Solution._ Whether was it (as some say) that, reckoning that Troy\nwas taken by a horse, they punish a horse, as being the\n\n    Renowned Trojan race commixt with Latin boys?\n\nOr is it because a horse is a fierce, warlike, and martial beast,\ntherefore they do sacrifice to the Gods the things that are most\nacceptable and suitable; and he that conquers is offered, because\nvictory and prowess doth belong to that God? Or is it rather because to\nstand in battle is the work of God, and they that keep their ranks and\nfiles do conquer those that do not keep them but fly, and swiftness of\nfoot is punished as the maintenance of cowardice; so that hereby it is\nsignificantly taught that there is no safety to them that run away?\n\n_Question 98._ What is the reason that the censors entering upon\ntheir office do nothing before they have contracted for providing meat\nfor the sacred geese, and for polishing the statue?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, that they begin with those\nthings that savor of most frugality, and such things as want not much\ncharge and trouble? Or is it in grateful commemoration of what these\ncreatures did of old, when the Gauls invaded Rome and the barbarians\nscaled the walls of the Capitol by night? For the geese were sensible\nof it when the dogs were asleep, and they with their gaggling awaked\nthe watch? Or, seeing the censors are the conservers of such things as\nare of greatest and most necessary concern,\u2014to oversee and narrowly\ninspect the public sacrifices, and the lives, manners, and diet of\nmen,\u2014do they presently set before their consideration the most vigilant\ncreature, and by the watchfulness of these instruct the citizens not to\ndisregard or neglect sacred things? As for the polishing of the statue,\nit is necessary, for the minium (wherewith they of old colored the\nstatues) soon fades.\n\n_Question 99._ What is the reason that of the other priests they\ndepose any one that is condemned or banished, and substitute another in\nhis room; but remove not the augur from his priesthood so long as he\nlives, though he be convicted of the greatest crimes? They call them\naugurs who are employed in soothsaying.\n\n_Solution._ Is the reason (as some say) that they will have none\nto know the mysteries of the priests who is not a priest? Or that the\naugur is bound by oath to discover to none the management of sacred\nthings; therefore they refuse to absolve him from his oath, when he is\nreduced to a private capacity? Or is it that the name of augur is not a\ntitle of honor and dignity, but of skill and art? It would therefore be\nthe like case to depose a musician from being a musician or a physician\nfrom being a physician, with that of prohibiting a diviner from being a\ndiviner; seeing they cannot take away his faculty, though they deprive\nhim of the title. Moreover they do not substitute augurs, because they\nwill keep to the number of augurs that were at the beginning.\n\n_Question 100._ What is the reason that in the Ides of August\n(which at first they called Sextilis) all the men-servants and\nmaid-servants do feast, but the free women make it most of their\nbusiness to wash and purge their heads?\n\n_Solution._ Was it that King Servius about this day was born of\na captive maid-servant, and hence the servants have a vacation time\nfrom work; and that rinsing the head was a thing that took its original\nfrom a custom of the maid-servants upon the account of the feast, and\nfinally passed also into the free women?\n\n_Question 101._ Why do they finify their boys with necklaces,\nwhich they call _bullae_?\n\n_Solution._ What if this were for the honor of the wives which\nwere taken by force? For as many other things, so this might be one\nof the injunctions laid on their posterity. Or did they it in honor\nof Tarquin\u2019s manhood? For it is reported of him that, whilst he was\nbut a boy, being engaged in a battle against the Latins and Tuscans,\ncharging his enemies, he fell from his horse; yet animating those\nRomans which were engaged in the charge, he led them on courageously.\nThe enemies were put to a remarkable rout, and sixteen thousand were\nslain; whereupon he had this badge of honor bestowed upon him by\nhis father the king. Or was it that by the ancients it was neither\nlewd nor dishonorable to love beautiful slaves (as now the comedies\ntestify), but that they resolvedly abstained from free-born servants;\nand lest, by coming accidentally on naked boys, they should ignorantly\ntransgress, the free boys wore this mark of distinction? Or was this\na protector of good order, and after a manner a curb of incontinency;\nthey being ashamed to pretend to manhood before they have put off\nthe badge of children? That which they say who follow Varro is not\nprobable, that _boule_ by the Aeolians is called _bolla_,\nand this is put about children as a teaching sign of good counsel. But\nconsider whether they do not wear it for the moon\u2019s sake. For the\nvisible face of the moon, when it is halved, is not spherical, but\nshaped like a lentil or a quoit; and (as Empedocles supposeth) so is\nalso the side that is turned away from us.\n\n_Question 102._ Why do they name boys when they are nine days old,\nand girls when they are eight?\n\n_Solution._ Perhaps it\u2019s a natural reason, that girls are\nforwarder, for the female grows up and comes to full stature and\nperfection before the male. But they take the day after the seventh,\nbecause the seventh is dangerous to infants by reason of the\nnavel-string; for with many it falls off at seven days, and until it\nfalls off, an infant is more like a plant than an animal. Or is it,\nas the Pythagoreans reckon, that the even number is the feminine,\nand the odd number the masculine? For it is a fruitful number, and\nexcels the even in respect of its composition. And if these numbers be\ndivided into units, the even, like a female, hath an empty space in\nthe middle; the odd number always leaves a segment full in the middle,\nwherefore this is fit to be compared to the male, that to the female.\nOr is it thus, that of all numbers nine is the first square number made\nof three, which is an odd and perfect number, but eight is the first\ncube made of two, an even number; whence a male ought to be square,\nsuperexcelling, and complete; but a woman, like a cube, constant, a\ngood housewife, and no gadding gossip? This also may be added that,\nas eight is a cube from the root two, and nine a square from the root\nthree, so the female makes use of two names, and the males of three.\n\n_Question 103._ Why do they call those whose fathers are not known\n_Spurius_?\n\n_Solution._ It is not verily\u2014as the Grecians suppose and as the\nrhetoricians say in their determinations\u2014because they are begot of some\npromiscuous and common seed (as the Greeks say \u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2). But Spurius is\nfound among first names, as Sextus, Decimus, Caius. But the Romans do\nnot write all the letters of the first name; but either one letter, as\nT. for Titus, L. for Lucius, M. for Marcus; or two letters, as Ti. for\nTiberius, Cn. for Cnaeus; or three, as Sex. for Sextus, and Ser. for\nServius. Now Spurius is of those that are written with two letters,\nSp. But with these same letters they write _without father_, S.\nfor _sine_, and P. for _patre_, which truly hath caused the\nmistake. Moreover, we may meet with another reason, but it is more\nabsurd. They say, that the Sabines called the privities of a woman\n_spurius_; and therefore they call him so, by way of reproach, who\nis born of a woman unmarried and unespoused.\n\n_Question 104._ Why did they call Bacchus Liber Pater?\n\n_Solution._ Was the reason because they make him, as it were,\nthe father of liberty to tipplers? For most men become very audacious\nand are filled with too much licentious prattle, by reason of too\nmuch drink. Or is this it, that he hath supplied them with a libamen,\na drink-offering? Or is it, as Alexander hath said, that Bacchus is\ncalled Eleutherius from his having his abode about Eleutherae, a city\nof Boeotia?\n\n_Question 105._ For what cause was it, that on high holidays it\nwas not a custom for virgins to marry, but widows did marry then?\n\n_Solution._ Is the reason, as Varro saith, that virgins, forsooth,\nare married weeping, but women with joyful glee, and people are to\ndo nothing of a holiday with a heavy heart nor by compulsion? Or\nrather is it because it is decent for virgins to marry with more than\na few present, but for widows to marry with a great many present is\nindecent? For the first marriage is zealously affected, the second to\nbe deprecated; yea, they are ashamed to marry a second husband while\ntheir first husband lives, and they grieve at doing so even when he is\ndead. Hence they are pleased more with silence than with tumults and\npompous doings; and the feasts do attract the generality of people to\nthem, so that they cannot be at leisure on holidays for such wedding\nsolemnities. Or was it that they that robbed the Sabines of their\ndaughters that were virgins on the feast-day raised thereby a war, and\nlooked therefore upon it as unlucky to marry virgins on holidays?\n\n_Question 106._ Why do the Romans worship Fortuna Primigenia?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because Servius, being by Fortune born of\na servant-maid, came to rule king in Rome with great splendor? And\nthis is the supposition of most Romans. Or rather is it that Fortune\nhath bestowed on Rome itself its very original and birth? Or may not\nthis matter require a more natural and philosophical reason, even\nthat Fortune is the original of all things and that Nature itself is\nproduced out of things that come by Fortune, when events that come by\nchance fall into an order among themselves?\n\n_Question 107._ Why do the Romans call the artists who appear in\nthe worship of Bacchus _histriones_?\n\n_Solution._ Is it for the reason which C. Rufus tells us? For he\nsays, that in ancient time, C. Sulpicius and Licinius Stolo, being\nconsuls, a pestilence raging in Rome, all the actors upon the stage\nwere cut off; wherefore, upon the request of the Romans, many and good\nartists came from Etruria, among whom he that excelled in fame and had\nbeen longest experienced on the public stages was called Histrus, and\nfrom him they named all the stage-players.\n\n_Question 108._ Why do not men marry women that are near akin?\n\n_Solution._ Is this the reason, that they design by marriage to\naugment their family concerns and to procure many relations, by giving\nwives to strangers and marrying wives out of other families? Or do\nthey suspect that the contentions that would happen among relations\nupon marriage would destroy even natural rights? Or is it that,\nconsidering that wives by reason of weakness stand in need of many\nhelpers, they would not have near akin marry together, that their own\nkindred might stand by them when their husbands wrong them?\n\n_Question 109._ Why is it not lawful for the high priest of\nJupiter, which they call Flamen Dialis, to touch meal or leaven?\n\n_Solution._ Is it because meal is imperfect and crude nourishment?\nFor the wheat neither hath continued what it was, neither is it made\ninto bread as it must be; but it hath lost the faculty of seed, and\nhath not attained to usefulness for food. Wherefore the poet hath\nnamed meal, by a metaphor, _mill-murdered_ (\u03bc\u03c5\u03bb\u03ae\u03c6\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd), as if the\ncorn were spoiled and destroyed by grinding. Leaven, as it is made by\ncorruption, corrupts the mass that it is mingled with, for it is made\nthereby looser and weaker; and fermentation is a kind of corruption,\nwhich, if it be over much, makes the bread sour and spoils it.\n\n_Question 110._ Why is the same high priest forbid to touch raw\nflesh?\n\n_Solution._ Is it because custom makes them averse enough to\nraw flesh? Or is it that the same reason that makes them averse to\nmeal doth also make them averse to flesh; for it is neither a living\ncreature nor dressed food? Roasting or boiling, being an alteration and\nchange, doth change its form; but fresh and raw flesh offers not a pure\nand unpolluted object to the eye, but such as is offensive to the eye,\nand like that of a raw wound.\n\n_Question 111._ Why do they require the priest to abstain from a\ndog and a goat, and neither to touch or name them?\n\n_Solution._ Was it that they abominated the lasciviousness and\nstink of a goat, or that they suspected it to be a diseased creature?\nFor it seems this animal is more seized with the falling sickness\nthan other creatures, and is contagious to them that eat or touch it\nwhile it hath this disease; they say, the cause is the straightness\nof the windpipe, often intercepting the breath, a sign of which they\nmake the smallness of their voice to be; for it happens to men that\nare epileptical, that they utter a voice sounding much like the bleat\nof a goat. Now in a dog there may be less of lasciviousness and of an\nill scent; although some say that dogs are not permitted to go into\nthe high streets of Athens\u2014no, not into the island Delos\u2014by reason of\ntheir open coition; as if kine, swine, and horses did use coition in\nbed-chambers, and not openly and lawlessly. They do not know the true\nreason,\u2014that, because a dog is a quarrelsome creature, they therefore\nexpel dogs out of sanctuaries and sacred temples, giving safe access to\nsuppliants for refuge. Wherefore it is very likely that the priest of\nJupiter, being (as it were) an animated and sacred image, granted for\nrefuge to petitioners and suppliants, doth banish or fright away none.\nFor which cause a couch was set for him in the porch of the house, and\nthey that fell on their knees before him had indemnity from stripes\nor punishment that day; and if one in fetters came and addressed him,\nhe was unloosed, and his fetters were not laid down by the door but\nthrown from the roof. It would be therefore no advantage that he should\ncarry himself so mild and courteous, if there were a dog at the door,\nscaring and frighting them that petitioned for sanctuary. Neither did\nthe ancients at all repute this creature clean; for he is offered in\nsacrifice to none of the celestial Gods, but being sent to Hecate,\nan infernal Goddess, at the three cross-ways for a supper, takes a\nshare in averting calamities and in expiations. In Lacedaemon they cut\npuppies in pieces to Mars, that most cruel God. In Boeotia public\nexpiation is made by passing between the parts of a dog divided in\ntwain. But the Romans sacrifice a dog in the cleansing month, on the\nfestival which they call Lupercalia. Hence it was not without cause, to\nprohibit them whose charge it was to worship the highest and holiest\nGod from making a dog familiar and customed to them.\n\n_Question 112._ What is the reason that the priest of Jupiter is\nforbid to touch an ivy, or to pass over that way that is overspread\nwith vine branches?\n\n_Solution._ Is it not of the like nature with those precepts of\nPythagoras, not to eat in a chair, not to sit upon a measure called\na choenix, and not to step over a broom? For the Pythagoreans do not\ndread and refrain from these things, but they prohibit other things by\nthese. Now to go under a vine hath reference to wine, because it is\nnot lawful for a priest to be drunk. For the wine is above the heads\nof those that are drunk, and they are depraved and debased thereby;\nwhereas it is requisite that they should be above pleasure and conquer\nit, but not be subdued by it. As for the ivy,\u2014it being unfruitful and\nuseless to men, as also infirm, and by reason of its infirmity standing\nin need of other trees to climb upon, though by its shadow and sight\nof its greenness it doth bewitch the vulgar,\u2014what if they judge it not\nconvenient to nourish it about a house because it bringeth no profit,\nor to suffer it to clasp about any thing, seeing it is so hurtful to\nplants that bear it up, while it sticketh fast in the ground? Hence ivy\nis forbidden at the Olympic festivals, and neither at Athens in Juno\u2019s\nsacrifices, nor at Thebes in those belonging to Venus, can any wild ivy\nbe seen; though in the Agrionia and Nyctelia (which are services to\nBacchus for the most part performed in the dark) it is to be found. Or\nwas this a symbol of the prohibition of revels and sports of Bacchus?\nFor women that were addicted to Bacchanal sports presently ran to\nthe ivy and plucked it off, tearing it in pieces with their hands and\ngnawing it with their mouths, so that they are not altogether to be\ndisbelieved that say it hath a spirit in it that stirreth and moveth to\nmadness, transporting and bereaving of the senses, and that alone by\nitself it introduceth drunkenness without wine to those that have an\neasy inclination to enthusiasm.\n\n_Question 113._ Why are not these priests allowed to take upon\nthem or attempt civil authority, while they have a lictor and a curule\nchair for honor\u2019s sake, and in some sort of consolation for their being\nexcluded from magistracies?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because in some places of Greece the dignity\nof priesthood was equal with kingship, and therefore they designated\nnot ordinary persons to be priests? Or was it rather,\u2014since they\nhave appointed office-employments, whereas the charge of kings is\nunmethodical and indefinite,\u2014that it would not be possible, if both\nfell out at the same time, that he should be able to attend both, but\nhe must of necessity neglect one (both pressing together upon him),\nsometimes neglecting the worship of God, and sometimes injuring the\nsubjects? Or else, seeing that there is no less necessity than power\nattending the administration of civil government, and that the ruler\nof the people (as Hippocrates saith of the physician) doth see weighty\nmatters and hath to do with weighty matters, and from other men\u2019s\ncalamities procures troubles peculiar to himself, did they think him\nnot sacred enough to sacrifice to the Gods and manage the sacrifices\nwho had been present at the condemnation and execution of citizens, and\noften of some of his own kindred and family, as happened to Brutus?\n\n\n\n\nGREEK QUESTIONS.\n\n\n_Question 1._ Who are they at Epidaurus called \u039a\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 and\n\u1f0c\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9?\n\n_Solution._ The managers of the affairs of the commonwealth were\none hundred and eighty men; out of these they elected senators, which\nthey called \u1f04\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9. The most part of the common people were conversant\nin husbandry; these they called \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2, because (as may be supposed)\nthey were known by their dirty feet when they came into the city.\n\n_Question 2._ What woman was that among the Cumans called Onobatis?\n\n_Solution._ This was one of the women taken in adultery, which\nthey brought into the market-place, and set her upon a certain stone\nto be seen of all; from thence they took her and set her on ass-back,\nand led her round about the city, and afterwards set her up again upon\nthe stone; the rest of her life she led under disgrace. Her they called\nOnobatis (the woman that rode upon an ass); hence they abominated the\nstone as unclean. There was also a certain magistrate among them,\ncalled Phylactes (a conservator); he that had this office kept the\nprison for the rest of his time; but at the nocturnal convention of\nthe senators he came into the council, and laying hands on the kings\nled them forth, and detained them in custody until the senate had\ndetermined concerning them, by a vote given in private, whether they\nhad acted unrighteously or not.\n\n_Question 3._ Who is the \u1f59\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03ba\u03b1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 among the Solenses?\n\n_Solution._ They call the she-priest of Minerva so, because she\noffers certain sacrifices and oblations for the averting of impending\ncalamities.\n\n_Question 4._ Who are the \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 among the Cnidians, and who is\nthe \u1f08\u03c6\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1?\n\n_Solution._ The sixty select men chosen from among the nobles,\nwhom they used as overseers and principal counsellors for life in\nmatters of greatest concern, they called Amnemones (as a man may\nsuppose) because they were not accountable to any for what they did,\nor verily (in my opinion) rather because they were men carrying much\nbusiness in their memories. And he that put questions to vote was\ncalled Aphester.\n\n_Question 5._ Who were the \u03a7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03af among the Arcadians and\nLacedaemonians?\n\n_Solution._ When the Lacedaemonians were agreed with the\nTegeats, they made a league with them, and set up a common pillar on\nthe river Alpheus, upon which this is written, among other things,\n\u201cDrive out the Messenians from your borders, and make none of them\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03af, _good_.\u201d Aristotle interpreting this saith, that none\nof the Tegeats ought to be slain that endeavored to bring aid to the\nLacedaemonians.\n\n_Question 6._ Who is \u039a\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 among the Opuntians?\n\n_Solution._ The most of the Greeks did use barley at their ancient\nsacrifices, when the citizens offered their first-fruits; now they\ncalled him Crithologus who presided over the sacrifices and received\nthe first-fruits. They had two priests, one that had the chief charge\nof the divine things, the other of daemonic affairs.\n\n_Question 7._ What sort of clouds are the Ploiades?\n\n_Solution._ Showering clouds which were carried up and down\nwere, for the most part, called Ploiades, as Theophrastus hath said\nexpressly in his fourth book of Meteors: \u201cWhereas indeed the Ploiades\nare those clouds which have a consistency and are not so movable, but\nas to color white, which discover a kind of different matter, neither\nvery watery nor very windy.\u201d\n\n_Question 8._ Who is called Platychaetas among the Boeotians?\n\n_Solution._ They that had many neighboring houses or bordering\nfields were so called in the Aeolic dialect, as having wide\ndomains.[163] I will add one saying out of the Thesmophylacian law,\nseeing there are many....\n\n_Question 9._ Who is he among the people of Delphi who is called\n\u1f49\u03c3\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1? And why do they call one of the months Bysius?\n\n_Solution._ They call the slain sacrifice \u1f49\u03c3\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1 when the \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2\n(_the holy one_) is declared. There are five of these holy ones\nfor life, and these transact many things with the prophets, and\nsacrifice together with them, supposing that they are descended from\nDeucalion. The month Bysius, as many think, is the same as \u03a6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2\n(_natural_), for it is in the beginning of the spring, when\nmost things do sprout and put forth buds. But this is not the true\nreason. For the Delphians do not use _b_ for _ph_ (as the\nMacedonians, who say Bilippus, Balacrus, and Beronica, for Philippus,\nPhalacrus, and Pheronica), but instead of _p_; they for the most\npart saying \u03b2\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd for \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, and \u03b2\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd for \u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd.\nTherefore they say Bysius for Pysius, because in that month they\nenquire of and consult their God Apollo. This is their genuine and\ncountry way of speaking. For in that month an oracle is given forth,\nand they call that week the nativity of Apollo, and the name is\nPolythous, not because of their baking a sort of cakes called Pthides,\nbut because then their oracle is full of answers and prophecies. For\nit is but of late that oraculous answers were given to the enquirers\nevery month. In former times Pythia gave answers only once a year,\nwhich was on this day, as Callisthenes and Anaxandridas have told us.\n\n_Question 10._ What is Phyxemelum?\n\n_Solution._ It is one of the small plants that creep upon the\nground, upon whose branches the cattle treading do hinder, hurt,\nand spoil their growth. Where therefore they have attained some\nconsiderable bigness by growth, and escaped the injury of those that\nuse to feed upon them, they are called \u03c6\u03c5\u03be\u03af\u03bc\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1 (i.e. that have escaped\nthe danger of cattle), of which Aeschylus is witness.\n\n_Question 11._ Who are the \u1f08\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c6\u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9?\n\n_Solution._ The Eretrians inhabited the island of Corcyra. But\nwhen Charicrates set sail from Corinth with a considerable strength\nand overcame them in battle, the Eretrians took shipping and sailed to\ntheir native country; of which thing the inhabitants of that country\nhaving timely notice, gave them a repulse, and by slinging stones at\nthem impeded their landing. Now being not able either to persuade or\nforce their way, seeing the multitude was implacably bent against them,\nthey sailed into Thrace and took possession of that country, where\nthey say Metho first inhabited, of whose offspring Orpheus was. The\ncity therefore they call Methone, and of the neighboring inhabitants\nthe men are called Aposphendoneti, i.e. they that were repulsed with\nsling-stones.\n\n_Question 12._ What was Charila among the Delphians?\n\n_Solution._ The Delphians solemnized three nonennial feasts in\nregular order, of which they call one Stepterium, another Herois,\nand the third Charila. The Stepterium represents by imitation the\nfight which Apollo had with Python, and both his flight and pursuit\nafter the fight unto Tempe. For some say that he fled, as needing\npurification by reason of the slaughter; others say that he pursued\nPython wounded, and flying along the highway which they now call\nSacred, he just missed of being present at his death; for he found him\njust dead of his wound, and buried by his son, whose name was Aix, as\nthey say. Stepterium therefore is the representation of these or some\nsuch things. But as to Herois, it hath for the most part a mysterious\nreason which the Thyades are acquainted with; but by the things that\nare publicly acted one may conjecture it to be the calling up of Semele\nfrom the lower world. Concerning Charila, they fable some such things\nas these. A famine by reason of drought seized the Delphians, who\ncame with their wives and children as suppliants to the king\u2019s gate,\nwhereupon he distributed meal and pulse to the better known among them,\nfor there was not sufficient for all. A little orphan girl yet coming\nand importuning him, he beat her with his shoe, and threw his shoe in\nher face. She indeed was a poor wandering beggar-wench, but was not\nof an ignoble disposition; therefore withdrawing herself, she untied\nher girdle and hanged herself. The famine hereupon increasing and many\ndiseases accompanying it, Pythia gives answer to the king, that the\nmaid Charila who slew herself must be expiated. They with much ado at\nlast discovering that this was the maid\u2019s name which was smitten with a\nshoe, they instituted a certain sacrifice mixed with expiatory rites,\nwhich they yet solemnize to this day every ninth year. Whereat the king\npresides, distributing meal and pulse to all strangers and citizens\n(for they introduce a kind of an effigy of the wench Charila); and when\nall have received their doles, the king smites the idol with his shoe.\nUpon this the governess of the Thyades takes up the image and carries\nit away to some rocky place, and there putting a halter about its\nneck, they bury it in the place where they buried Charila when she had\nstrangled herself.\n\n_Question 13._ What is the beggars\u2019 meat among the Aenianes?\n\n_Solution._ Many have been the removes of the Aenianes. First\nthey inhabited the plain of Dotion; thence they were expelled by the\nLapithae to the Aethices; from thence they betook themselves to a\nregion of Molossia about the Aous, where they were called Paravaeans;\nafterward they took possession of Cirrha; they had no sooner landed\nat Cirrha (Apollo so commanding their king Oenoclus) but they went\ndown to the country bordering on the river Inachus, inhabited by the\nInachians and Achaeans. There was an oracle given to the latter, that\nthey would lose all their country if they should part with any of\nit,\u2014and to the Aenianes, that they would hold it if they should take it\nof such as freely resigned it. Temo, a noted man among the Aenianes,\nputting on rags and a scrip, like a beggar, addressed himself to the\nInachians; the king, in a way of reproach and scorn, gave him a clod\nof earth. He receives it and puts it up into his scrip, and absconds\nhimself, making much of his dole; for he presently forsakes the\ncountry, begging no more. The old men wondering at this, the oracle\ncame fresh to their remembrance; and going to the king, they told him\nthat he ought not to slight this man, nor suffer him to escape. Temo\nwell perceiving their designs, hastens his flight, and as he fled,\nvowed a hecatomb to Apollo. Upon this occasion the kings fought hand\nto hand; and when Phemius, the king of the Aenianes, saw Hyperochus,\nthe king of the Inachians, charging him with a dog at his heels, he\nsaid he dealt not fairly to bring a second with him to fight him;\nwhereupon Hyperochus going to drive away the dog, and turning himself\nabout in order to throw a stone at the dog, Phemius slays him. Thus the\nAenianes possessed themselves of that region, expelling the Inachians\nand Achaeans; but they reverence that stone as sacred, and sacrifice\nto it, wrapping it in the fat of the victim. And when they offer a\nhecatomb to Apollo, they sacrifice an ox to Jupiter, a choice part of\nwhich they distribute to Temo\u2019s posterity, and call it the beggars\u2019\nflesh.\n\n_Question 14._ Who were the Coliads among the Ithacans? And what\nwas a \u03c6\u03ac\u03b3\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2?\n\n_Solution._ After the slaughter of the suitors, some near\nrelated to the deceased made head against Ulysses. Neoptolemus, being\nintroduced by both parties as an arbitrator, determined that Ulysses\nshould remove and hasten out of Cephalenia, Zacynthus, and Ithaca,\nbecause of the blood that he had shed there; but that the friends and\nrelations of the suitors should pay a yearly mulct to Ulysses, for the\nwrong done to his family. Ulysses therefore passed over into Italy;\nthe mulct he devoted to his son, and commanded the Ithacans to pay it.\nThe mulct was meal, wine, honey-combs, oil, salt, and for victims the\nbetter grown of the _phagili_. Aristotle saith _phagilus_\nwas a lamb. And Telemachus, setting Eumaeus and his people at liberty,\nplaced them among the citizens; and the family of the Coliads is\ndescended from Eumaeus, and that of the Bucolians from Philoetius.\n\n_Question 15._ What is the wooden dog among the Locrians?\n\n_Solution._ Locrus was the son of Fuscius, the son of Amphictyon.\nOf him and Cabya came Locrus, with whom his father falling into\ncontention, and gathering after him a great number of citizens,\nconsulted the oracle about transplanting a colony. The oracle told him\nthat there he should build a city, where he should happen to be bit by\na wooden dog. He, wafting over the sea unto the next shore, trod upon\na cynosbatus (a sweet brier), and being sorely pained with the prick,\nhe spent many days there; in which time considering the nature of the\ncountry, he built Physcus and Hyantheia, and other towns which the\nOzolian Locrians inhabited. Some say that the Locrians were called\nOzolians (strong-scented people) from Nessus\u2014others again from Python\nthe serpent\u2014cast up there by the surf of the sea, and putrefying upon\nthe shore. And some say that the men wore pelts and ram-goat skins,\nliving for the most part among the herds of goats, and therefore were\nstrong-scented. Others contrariwise say that the country brought forth\nmany flowers, and that this name was from their sweet odor; among them\nthat assert this is Archytas the Amphissean, who hath wrote thus:\n\n    Macyna crowned with vines fragrant and sweet.\n\n_Question 16._ What manner of thing is that among the Megarians\ncalled \u1f00\u03c6\u03ac\u03b2\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1?\n\n_Solution._ Nisus, of whom Nisaea had its name, in the time of his\nreign married Abrota of Boeotia, the daughter of Onchestus and sister\nof Megareus, a woman (as it seems) excelling in prudence and singularly\nmodest. When she died, the Megarians cordially lamented her; and Nisus,\nwilling to perpetuate her memory and renown, gave command that the\nMegarian women should dress in apparel like unto that which she wore,\nand that dress they called for her sake aphabroma. And verily it is\nmanifest that the oracle countenanced the veneration of this woman; for\nwhen the Megarian women would often have altered their garments, the\noracle prohibited it.\n\n_Question 17._ Who was called \u03b4\u03bf\u03c1\u03cd\u03be\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2?\n\n_Solution._ The country of Megaris was anciently settled in\nvillages, the inhabitants being divided into five parts; and they\nwere called Heraenians, Piraenians, Megarians, Cynosurians, and\nTripodiscaeans. These the Corinthians drew into a civil war, for they\nalways contrived to bring the Megarians into their power. Yet they\nwaged war with much moderation and neighborly designs; for no man did\nat all injure the husbandman, and there was a stated ransom determined\nfor all that were taken captives. And this they received after the\nrelease of the prisoner, and not before; but he that took the captive\nprisoner brought him home, gave him entertainment, and then gave him\nliberty to depart to his own house. Wherefore he that brought in the\nprice of his ransom was applauded, and remained the friend of him that\nreceived it, and was called _doryxenus_, from his being a captive\nby the spear; but he that dealt fraudulently was reputed an unjust and\nunfaithful person, not only by the enemy but by his fellow-citizens\nalso.\n\n_Question 18._ What is \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03ba\u03af\u03b1?\n\n_Solution._ When the Megarians had expelled Theagenes the tyrant,\nthey managed the commonweal for some time with moderation. But then\n(to speak with Plato), when their orators had filled out to them, even\nto excess, the pure strong wine of liberty, they became altogether\ncorrupt, and the poor carried themselves insolently toward the richer\nsort in this among other things, that they entered into their houses\nand demanded that they might be feasted and sumptuously treated. But\nwhere they prevailed not, they used violence and abusive behavior, and\nat last enacted a law to enable them to fetch back from the usurers\nthe use-money which at any time they had paid, calling the execution\nthereof _palintocia_, i.e. the returning of use-money.\n\n_Question 19._ What is the Anthedon of which Pythia speaks,\n\n    Drink wine on th\u2019 lees, Anthedon\u2019s not thy home?\n\nFor Anthedon in Boeotia did not produce much wine.\n\n_Solution._ Of old they called Calauria Irene from a woman Irene,\nwhich they fable to be the daughter of Neptune and Melanthea, the\ndaughter of Alpheus. Afterwards, when the people of Anthes and Hyperes\nplanted there, they called the island Anthedonia and Hyperia. The\noracle, as Aristotle saith, was this:\n\n    Drink wine on th\u2019 lees, Anthedon\u2019s not thy home,\n    Nor sacred Hypera where thou drank\u2019st pure wine.\n\nThus Aristotle; but Mnasigeiton saith that Anthus, who was brother to\nHypera, was lost when he was an infant, and Hypera rambling about to\nfind him, came at Pherae to Acastus (or Adrastus), where by chance he\nfound Anthus serving as a wine-drawer. There while they were feasting,\nthe boy bringing a cup of wine to his sister, he knew her, and said to\nher softly,\n\n    Drink wine on th\u2019 lees, Anthedon\u2019s not thy home.\n\n_Question 20._ What is that darkness at the oak, spoken of in\nPriene?\n\n_Solution._ The Samians and Prienians waging war with each other,\nas at other times they sufficiently injured each other, so at a certain\ngreat fight the Prienians slew a thousand of the Samians. Seven years\nafter, fighting with the Milesians at the said oak, they lost all\nthe principal and chief of their citizens together, at the time when\nBias the Wise (who was sent ambassador from Priene to Samos) was\nfamous. This grievous and sad calamity befalling the women, there was\nestablished an execration and oath\u2014to be taken about matters of the\ngreatest concern\u2014by \u201cthe Darkness at the Oak,\u201d because their children,\nfathers, and husbands were there slain.\n\n_Question 21._ Who were they among the Cretans called \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9?\n\n_Solution._ They say that the Tyrrhenians took away by force from\nBrauron the daughters and wives of the Athenians, at the time when\nthey inhabited Lemnos and Imbros; from whence being driven they came\nto Laconia, and fell into a commixture with that people, even so far\nas to beget children on the native women. Thus, by reason of jealousy\nand calumnies, they were again constrained to leave Laconia, and with\ntheir wives and children to waft over into Crete, having Pollis and\nhis brother their governors. There waging war with the inhabitants\nof Crete, they were fain to permit many of them that were slain in\nbattle to lie unburied; in that at first they had no leisure, by reason\nof the war and peril they were in, and afterwards they shunned the\ntouching of the dead corpses, being corrupted by time and putrefied.\nTherefore Pollis contrived to bestow certain dignities, privileges, and\nimmunities, some on the priests of the Gods, and some on the buriers\nof the dead, consecrating their honors to the infernal Deities, that\nthey should remain perpetual to them. Then he divided to his brother a\nshare by lot. The first he named priests, the others _catacautae_\n(burners). But as to the government, each of them managed it apart,\nand had, among other tranquillities, an immunity from those injurious\npractices which other Cretans were wont to exercise towards one another\nprivily; for they neither wronged them, nor filched or robbed any thing\nfrom them.\n\n_Question 22._ What was the Sepulchre of the Boys at Chalcedon?\n\n_Solution._ Cothus and Arclus the sons of Zuthus came to Euboea\nto dwell, the Aeolians possessing the greatest part of the island at\nthat time. The oracle told Cothus, that he should prosper and conquer\nhis enemies if he bought the country. Therefore, going on shore a\nlittle after, he happened to meet with some children playing by the\nseaside; whereupon he fell to play with them, conforming himself to\ntheir humors and showing them many outlandish toys. Seeing the children\nvery desirous to have these, he refused to give them any upon any other\nterms than to receive land for them. The boys, taking up some earth\nfrom the ground, gave it to him, receiving the toys, and departed. The\nAeolians perceiving what was done,\u2014and the enemies sailing in upon\nthem,\u2014moved by indignation and grief, slew the children and buried them\nnear the wayside that goes from the city to the Euripus; and that\nplace is called the Sepulchre of the Boys.\n\n_Question 23._ Who is \u039c\u03b9\u03be\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03b3\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 in Argos? And who are the\n\u1f18\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9?\n\n_Solution._ They call Castor Mixarchagetas, and are of opinion\nthat he was buried in the country; but they worship Pollux as one of\nthe celestial Deities. Those which they supposed were able to drive\naway the falling sickness, they called Elasii (expellers), esteeming\nthem to be of the posterity of Alexida the daughter of Amphiaraus.\n\n_Question 24._ What is that which is called \u1f14\u03b3\u03ba\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 by the\nArgives?\n\n_Solution._ It was a custom among those that lost any of their\nkindred or acquaintance, presently after mourning to sacrifice to\nApollo, and thirty days after to Mercury. For they are of opinion that,\nas the earth receives the bodies of the deceased, so Mercury receives\ntheir souls. Giving then barley to Apollo\u2019s minister, they take the\nflesh of the sacrifice, and extinguishing the fire as polluted but\nkindling it again afresh, they boil this flesh, calling it \u1f14\u03b3\u03ba\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1.\n\n_Question 25._ Who are \u1f08\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03c1, \u1f08\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, and \u03a0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2?\n\n_Solution._ For we must not give credit to those that say that\nsuch are called _aliterii_ who, in the time of dearth, watch the\nmiller (\u1f00\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2) and steal the corn. But he was called\nAlastor who did exploits not to be forgotten (\u1f04\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1) but to be had\nin remembrance for a long time. Aliterius is he whom we should avoid\n(\u1f00\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9) and observe upon the account of his knavery. Such things\n(saith Socrates) were engraven in plates of brass.\n\n_Question 26._ What is the meaning of this, that the virgins that\nfollow those that lead the ox from Aenos to Cassiopaea sing, till they\napproach the borders, in this manner,\n\n    To native country dear O may ye ne\u2019er return?\n\n_Solution._ The Aenianes, being first driven out by the Lapithae,\ntook up their habitation about Aethacia, and then about Molossis and\nCassiopaea. But the country affording no staple commodity, and being\nill bestead with troublesome neighbors, they went into the Cirraean\nplain, under the conduct of Oenoclus their king. And when there were\ngreat droughts there, by warning from an oracle (as they say) they\nstoned Oenoclus; and betaking themselves to ramble again, they came\ninto this country which they now possess, being very pleasant and\nfruitful. Whence with good reason they pray to the Gods that they may\nnever return again to their ancient native country, but may abide where\nthey are in prosperity.\n\n_Question 27._ What is the reason that at Rhodes the crier never\nenters into the chapel of Ocridion?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because Ochimus espoused his daughter Cydippe\nto Ocridion? But Cercaphus, who was brother to Ochimus, falling in love\nwith the maid, persuaded the crier (for it was the custom to fetch the\nbrides by the crier) to bring her to him when she should be delivered\nto him. This being accordingly done, Cercaphus got the maid and fled;\nafterwards, when Ochimus was grown old, he returned. Wherefore it was\nenacted by the Rhodians that a crier should not enter into the chapel\nof Ocridion, because of the injustice done by him.\n\n_Question 28._ What is the reason that at Tenedos a piper might\nnot go into the temple of Tenes, and that no mention might be made of\nAchilles in that temple?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because, when his step-mother accused Tenes\nthat he would have lain with her, Molpus a piper bore false witness\nagainst him; whereupon Tenes took occasion to fly into Tenedos with his\nsister? And they say that Achilles was strictly charged by Thetis his\nmother not to slay Tenes, as one that was much respected by Apollo,\nand that the Goddess committed the trust to one of the household\nservants that he should take special care and put him in mind of it,\nlest Achilles should kill Tenes at unawares. But when Achilles made\nan incursion into Tenedos and pursued the sister of Tenes, being very\nfair, Tenes met him and defended his sister; whereupon she escaped,\nbut Tenes was slain. Achilles, knowing him as he fell down dead, slew\nhis own servant, because he being present did not admonish him to the\ncontrary. He buried Tenes, whose temple now remains, into which no\npiper enters, nor is Achilles named there.\n\n_Question 29._ Who was the \u03c0\u03c9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 amongst the Epidamnians?\n\n_Solution._ The Epidamnians, who were neighboring to the\nIllyrians, perceiving that the citizens that had frequent commerce\nwith them were debauched, and fearing an innovation, made choice of an\napproved man yearly from amongst them, who should deal as a factor with\nthe barbarians in all matters of trade and traffic, managing the whole\nbusiness of dealing and commerce on the behalf of all the citizens; and\nthis man was called _poletes_, or the seller.\n\n_Question 30._ What is the shore of Araenus in Thrace?\n\n_Solution._ The Andrians and Chalcidians sailing into Thrace to\nget them a seat, the city Sane being betrayed was delivered up to\nthem both in common; and being told that Acanthus was deserted by the\nbarbarians, they sent two spies thither. These approaching the city\nand perceiving all the enemies to be fled, the Chalcidian outruns\nthe other, intending to seize the city for the Chalcidians; but the\nAndrian, finding himself not able to overtake him, darts his lance and\nfixeth it exactly in the gates, and saith that he had first seized the\ncity for the Andrians. Hence a great contention arising, they agreed\ntogether without a war to make the Erythraeans, Samians, and Parians\numpires in all matters of controversy between them. The Erythraeans and\nSamians brought in the verdict for the Andrians, but the Parians for\nthe Chalcidians; hence the Andrians about this place bound themselves\nunder a curse, that they would not give wives in marriage to the\nParians nor take wives of them. Therefore they called the place the\nShore of Araenus (i.e. of the curse), whereas before it was called the\nShore of the Dragon.\n\n_Question 31._ In the solemn feasts to the honor of Ceres, why do\nthe Eretrian women roast their meat not at the fire, but by the sun;\nand why do they not call upon Kalligeneia?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because it came in course to the women which\nAgamemnon carried captive from Troy to solemnize a feast to Ceres in\nthis place, and while they were so doing, a fair wind arose, and they\nsuddenly made sail, leaving the sacrifices imperfect.\n\n_Question 32._ Who were the \u1f08\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 amongst the Milesians?\n\n_Solution._ The tyrants Thoas and Damasenor being deposed, two\nfactions got the government of the city, one of which was called\nPloutis, the other Cheiromacha, and the potent men prevailing, they\nsettled the state affairs in the association. And when they would sit\nin council about matters of greatest concern, they went on ship-board\nand launched out to a great distance from the shore; and when they were\nagreed upon a point in debate, they sailed back again, and upon this\naccount were called \u1f00\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 (_perpetual mariners_).\n\n_Question 33._ Why do the Chalcidians call a certain place about\nPyrsopius the \u1f08\u03ba\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u039b\u03ad\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7, _the Youth\u2019s Conventicle_?\n\n_Solution._ They say that Nauplius, being persecuted by the\nAchaeans, addressed himself to the Chalcidians for redress, making\nhis defence against the accusation and recriminating on the Achaeans.\nWhereupon the Chalcidians, refusing to deliver him into their hands\nlest he should be slain by treachery, granted him a guard of lusty\nyoung men, and appointed their post in that place where they had mutual\nsociety together and guarded Nauplius.\n\n_Question 34._ Who was he that sacrificed an ox to his benefactor?\n\n_Solution._ In a haven of Ithaca there was a pirate ship, in which\nhappened to be an old man who had earthen pots holding pitch. It fell\nout that an Ithacan skipper named Pyrrhias put into this port, who\nransomed the old man upon free cost, only upon his supplication and\nout of commiseration towards him, and at the request of the old man\nhe purchased also some of his tar-pots. The pirates departing and all\nfear of danger over, the old fellow brings Pyrrhias to his earthen\npots, and shows him a great deal of gold and silver blended amongst\nthe pitch; whereupon Pyrrhias attaining to great riches treated the\nold man well in all respects, and sacrificed an ox to him. Hence they\nsay proverbially that none hath sacrificed an ox to his benefactor but\nPyrrhias.\n\n_Question 35._ Why was there a custom amongst the Bottiaean maids,\nas they danced, to sing, \u201cLet us go to Athens\u201d?\n\n_Solution._ It is reported that the Cretans (in payment of a vow)\nsent the firstlings of men to Delphi; but when such as were sent found\nno plentiful provision there, they departed from thence in search of\na plantation, and first sat down at Japygia. From thence they went\nand possessed that part of Thrace which now they have, Athenians\nbeing mixed with them; for it is probable that Minos did not destroy\nthose young men which the Athenians sent in a way of tribute, but\nonly detained them in servitude. Some that were descended from these\nand were accounted Cretans were sent with others to Delphi; so the\nBottiaean daughters, in remembrance of their pedigree, sing on their\nfeast-days, \u201cLet us go to Athens.\u201d\n\n_Question 36._ Why do the Eleian women in their hymns beseech\nBacchus that he will come to their help with an ox\u2019s foot? The hymns\nrun thus: \u201cCome, O hero Bacchus, to thy holy temple placed by the sea;\nhasten with the Graces to thy temple with a neat\u2019s foot.\u201d Then they\nre-double this, \u201cO worthy Bull\u201d!\n\n_Solution._ Was it because some call Bacchus Bull-begot, and\nsome Bull? Or as some say ox-foot for a great foot; as the poet saith\nox-eye for a great eye, and \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03ca\u03bf\u03c2 for haughty? Or is it rather,\nbecause the foot of an ox is innocent and his bearing horns on his\nhead is pernicious, that so they desire the God may come to them mild\nand harmless? Or is it because many men are of opinion that this God\npresides over ploughing and sowing?\n\n_Question 37._ What is the meaning of that place at Tanagra,\nbefore the city, called Achilleum? For it is reported that the city had\nrather enmity than kindness for Achilles, in that he took Stratonice,\nthe mother of Poemander, by force of arms, and slew Acestor the son of\nEphippus.\n\n_Solution._ Now Poemander the father of Ephippus (whilst the\nregion of Tanagra was still inhabited by villagers), being besieged in\nStephon (a village so called) by the Achaeans because he refused to\naid them in the wars, left that country the same night, and fortified\nPoemandria. Policrithus the architect coming in, disparaging his works\nand making a ridicule of them, leaped over the ditch; Poemander,\nfalling into a rage, catched up a great stone suddenly to throw at\nhim, which had been hid there a great while, lying over some sacred\nnocturnal relics. This Poemander hurling rashly slung, and missing\nPolicrithus, slew his own son Leucippus. He was then forced by law\nto depart out of Boeotia and become a wandering and begging pilgrim;\nneither was that easy for him to do, because of the incursions which\nthe Achaeans made into the region of Tanagra. Wherefore he sent\nEphippus his son to beg aid of Achilles. He by persuasion prevailed\nwith Achilles to come, with Tlepolemus the son of Hercules, and with\nPeneleos the son of Hippalcmus, all of them their kindred. By these\nPoemander was introduced into Chalcis, and was absolved by Elephenor\nfrom the murder; he ascribed great honor to these men, and assigned\ngroves to each of them, of which this kept the name of Achilles\u2019s Grove.\n\n_Question 38._ Who amongst the Boeotians were the \u03a8\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, and who\nthe \u1f48\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9?\n\n_Solution._ They say that Minos\u2019s daughters\u2014Leucippe, Arsinoe,\nand Alcathoe\u2014falling mad, had a greedy appetite for man\u2019s flesh,\nand accordingly cast lots for their children. Whereupon it fell to\nLeucippe\u2019s lot to produce her son Hippasus to be cut in pieces. The\nhusbands of these women, that were clothed in coarse apparel by reason\nof sorrow and grief, were called Psoloeis, the women \u1f48\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9, that is\n\u1f40\u03bb\u03bf\u03b1\u03af (_destructive_). And to this day the Orchomenians call\ntheir posterity so. And it is so ordered that, in the yearly feast\ncalled Agrionia, there is a flight and pursuit of them by the priest\nof Bacchus, with a drawn sword in his hand. It is lawful for him to\nslay any of them that he takes, and Zoilus a priest of our time slew\none. This thing proved unlucky to them; for Zoilus, sickening upon a\nwound that he got, wasted away for a long time and died; whereupon\nthe Orchomenians, falling under public accusations and condemnations,\nremoved the priesthood from their family, and made choice of the best\nman in the whole multitude.\n\n_Question 39._ Why do the Arcadians stone those that go willingly\ninto the Lycaeum, while those that go in ignorantly they carry forth to\nEleutherae?\n\n_Solution._ Is it on the ground that they gained their liberty by\nbeing thus absolved, that the story has gained credit? And is this\nsaying \u201cto Eleutherae\u201d the same as \u201cinto the region of security,\u201d\nor \u201cthou shalt come to the seat of pleasure\u201d? Or is the reason to\nbe rendered according to that fabulous story, that of all the sons\nof Lycaon Eleuther and Lebadus alone were free from that conspiracy\nagainst Jupiter, and fled into Boeotia, where the Lebadenses use the\nlike civil polity to that of the Arcadians, and therefore they send\nthem to Eleutherae that enter unwittingly into the inaccessible temple\nof Jupiter? Or is it (as Architimus saith in his remarks on Arcadia)\nthat some that went into the Lycaeum unawares were delivered up to the\nPhliasians by the Arcadians, and by the Phliasians to the Megarians,\nand by the Megarians to the Thebans which inhabit about Eleutherae,\nwhere they are detained under rain, thunder, and other direful\njudgments from Heaven; and upon this account some say this place was\ncalled Eleutherae. But the report is not true that he that enters into\nthe Lycaeum casts no shadow, though it hath had a firm belief. And\nwhat if this be the reason of that report, that the air converted into\nclouds looks darkly on them that go in? Or that he that goes in falls\ndown dead?\u2014for the Pythagoreans say that the souls of the deceased do\nneither give a shadow nor wink. Or is it that the sun only makes a\nshadow, and the law bereaveth him that entereth here of the sight of\nthe sun? Though this they speak enigmatically; for verily he that goes\nin is called Elaphus, _a stag_. Hence the Lacedaemonians delivered\nup to the Arcadians Cantharion the Arcadian, who went over to the\nEleans whilst they waged war with the Arcadians, passing with his booty\nthrough the inaccessible temple, and fled to Sparta when the war was\nended; the oracle requiring them to restore the stag.\n\n_Question 40._ Who is Eunostus, the hero of Tanagra; and what is\nthe reason that women may not enter into his grove?\n\n_Solution._ Eunostus was the son of Elieus who came of Cephisus\nand Scias, but they say received his name from Eunosta, the nymph that\nbrought him up. This man was honest and just, and no less temperate and\naustere. They say that Ochna his niece fell in love with him, who was\none of the daughters of Colonus; and when he perceived that she tempted\nhim to lie with her, manifesting his indignation he went and accused\nher to her brethren. But she had cried Whore first and provoked her\nbrethren, Echimus, Leon, and Bucolus, to kill Eunostus, by her false\nsuggestion that he would have forced her; wherefore these laid wait for\nthe young man and slew him, upon which Elieus secured them. Now Ochna\ngrowing penitent and full of terror, as well to discharge the grief\nshe had for her beloved as out of commiseration towards her brethren,\nconfesses the whole truth to Elieus, and he declares it to Colonus,\nwho condemned them. Whereupon Ochna\u2019s brethren fled, but she broke her\nneck from some high place, as Myrtis the Anthedonian poetess hath told\nus. Therefore he kept the tomb and grove of Eunostus from the access\nand approach of women, insomuch that upon earthquakes, droughts, and\nother portents that often there happened, the Tanagrians made diligent\nsearch whether any woman had not by stealth got nigh to that place.\nAnd there are some (of whom Clidamus, a man of great fame, is one)\nwho report that Eunostus met them as he was going to the sea to wash\nhimself because a woman had entered into his grove. Diocles also, in\nhis Treatise concerning Shrines, relates the edict of the Tanagrians\nupon the things that Clidamus declared.\n\n_Question 41._ Whence is it that in Boeotia there is a river at\nEleon called Scamander?\n\n_Solution._ Deimachus, the son of Eleon and intimate friend of\nHercules, bore his part in the siege of Troy. But the war proving\nlong (as it seems), he took to him Glaucia the daughter of Scamander\nwho had fallen in love with him, and got her with child: soon after,\nfighting against the Trojans, he was slain. Glaucia, fearing that she\nmight be apprehended, fled to Hercules, and acquainted him with her\nlate affection towards Deimachus, and the familiarity she had with\nhim. Hercules, both out of commiseration to the woman, as also for joy\nthat there was an offspring left of so good a man and his intimate\nacquaintance, took Glaucia on shipboard; and when she was delivered of\na son, brought her into Boeotia, and committed her and her child to the\ncare of Eleon. The son was named Scamander, and came to reign over that\ncountry. He called the river Inachus by his own name Scamander, and\nthe next rivulet he named from his mother Glaucia; but the fountain he\ncalled Acidusa by his own wife\u2019s name, by whom he had three daughters,\nwhich they have a veneration for to this day, styling them virgins.\n\n_Question 42._ Whence was that proverbial speech, \u201cLet this\nprevail\u201d?\n\n_Solution._ Dinon the Tarentine general, being a man well skilled\nin military affairs, when the citizens manifested their dislike of\na certain opinion of his by lifting up of hands, as the crier was\ndeclaring the majority of votes, stretched forth his right hand and\nsaid, This is better. Thus Theophrastus hath told the story; and\nApollodorus in his Rhytinus adds this: When the crier had said, \u2018These\nare the most suffrages;\u2019 \u2018Aye, but,\u2019 saith Dinon, \u2018these are the best,\u2019\nand ratifies the suffrages of the minority.\n\n_Question 43._ Why is the city of the Ithacans called Alalcomenae?\n\n_Solution._ It is affirmed by most, that it was because Anticlea\nin the time of her virginity was forcibly seized upon by Sisyphus, and\nbrought forth Ulysses. But Ister the Alexandrian hath acquainted us in\nhis memoirs, that Anticlea was married to Laertes, and being brought\nto a place about the Alalcomeneum in Boeotia, was delivered of Ulysses;\nand therefore Ulysses called the city of Ithaca by the same name, to\nrenew the memory of the place in which he had been born.\n\n_Question 44._ Who are the _Monophagi_ in Aegina?\n\n_Solution._ Many of the Aeginetans that fought against Troy were\nslain in those wars, but more of them by storm in the voyaging by\nsea. The relations therefore receiving those few that were left, and\nobserving the other citizens overwhelmed with sorrow and grief, thought\nit not convenient to make any public appearances of joy or to sacrifice\nto the Gods; but every one entertained privately in his own house\nhis relations that were escaped with feasts and entertainments, they\nthemselves giving attendance to their fathers, kinsfolks, brethren,\nand acquaintance, none of other families being admitted thereto. Hence\nin imitation of these they celebrate a sacrifice to Neptune, which is\ncalled the Thiasi, in which they revel without any noise, each family\napart by itself, for the space of sixteen days, without any servant\nattending them; then offering sacrifices to Venus, they finish this\nsolemn feast. Upon this account they are called Monophagi, i.e. such as\nfeed apart by themselves.\n\n_Question 45._ What is the reason that the statue of Labradean\nJupiter in Caria is made so as to hold an axe lifted up, and not a\nsceptre or thunderbolt.\n\n_Solution._ Because Hercules slaying Hippolyta, and taking away\nfrom her amongst other weapons her pole-axe, presented it to Omphale.\nAfter Omphale the kings of the Lydians carried it, as part of the\nsacred regalities which they took by succession, until Candaules,\ndisdaining it, gave it to one of his favorites to carry. But afterwards\nGyges revolting waged war against him; Arselis also came to the aid\nof Gyges from the Mylassians with a great strength, slew Candaules\nwith his favorite, and carried away the pole-axe into Caria with other\nspoils; where furbishing up the statue of Jupiter, he put the axe into\nhis hand and called it the Labradean God,\u2014for the Lydians call an axe\n_labra_.\n\n_Question 46._ What is the reason that the Trallians call the\npulse \u1f44\u03c1\u03bf\u03b2\u03bf\u03c2 by the name \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 (i.e. _purifying_), and use it\nespecially in expiations and purifications.\n\n_Solution._ Was it because the Leleges and Minyae, in former times\ndriving out the Trallians, possessed themselves of the city and that\ncountry, and afterwards the Trallians returned and conquered them; and\nas many of the Leleges as were not slain or fled, but by reason of\nindigency and weakness were left there, they made no account of whether\nthey lived or died, and therefore enacted a law that any Trallian that\nslew one of the Minyae or Leleges should be guiltless, provided only\nthat he paid a measure of this pulse to the relatives of the slain\nperson?\n\n_Question 47._ Why is it spoken by way of proverb amongst the\nEleans, \u201cThou sufferest worse things than Sambicus\u201d?\n\n_Solution._ It is said that one Sambicus an Elean, having many\ncomrades with him, did break off many of the devoted bronze offerings\nplaced in Olympia and disposed of them, and at length robbed the\ntemple of Diana the Bishopess (which temple is in Elis, and is called\nAristarchaeum]. Presently after the committing of this sacrilege, he\nwas taken and tormented the space of a year, being examined concerning\nall his accessories, and so died; hence this proverb arose from his\nsuffering.\n\n_Question 48._ Why is the temple of Ulysses in Lacedaemon built\nhard by the monument of the Leucippides?\n\n_Solution._ One Ergiaeus, of the posterity of Diomedes, by the\npersuasion of Temenus stole the Palladium from Argos, Leager being\nconscious of and accessory to the felony, for he was one of the\nintimates of Temenus. Afterward Leager, by reason of a feud betwixt him\nand Temenus, went over into Lacedaemon and transported the Palladium\nthither. The kings receive him readily, and place the Palladium next to\nthe temple of the Leucippides, and sending to Delphi consult the oracle\nabout its safety and preservation. The oracle answered that they must\nmake one of them that stole it the keeper of it. So they erected there\nthe monument of Ulysses, especially since they supposed that hero was\nrelated to the city by the marriage of Penelope.\n\n_Question 49._ What is the reason that it is a custom amongst the\nChalcedonian women, that, if at any time they happen to meet with other\nwomen\u2019s husbands, especially magistrates, they cover one cheek?\n\n_Solution._ The Chalcedonians warred against the Bithynians, being\nprovoked thereto by every kind of injury. And Zipoetus being king of\nthe Bithynians, they brought out all their forces, with the addition of\nThracian auxiliaries, and were wasting the country with fire and sword.\nZipoetus then pitching his camp against them at a place called Phalium,\nthe Chalcedonians, fighting ill through desperateness and disorder,\nlost about eight thousand soldiers, but were not all cut off, Zipoetus\nin favor of the Byzantines yielding to a cessation of arms. Now, there\nbeing a great scarcity of men in the city of Chalcedon, most of the\nwomen were necessitated to marry their freedmen and aliens; others that\nchose widowhood rather than marriage to such, if they had any occasion\nto go before judges or magistrates, managed their own affairs, only\nwithdrawing their veil from one side of their face. Then the married\nwomen, imitating these as their betters, for modesty\u2019s sake took up the\nsame custom.\n\n_Question 50._ Why do the Argives bring their sheep to the grove\nof Agenor to take ram?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because Agenor took care to have the fairest\nsheep, and of all kings possessed the most flocks of sheep?\n\n_Question 51._ Why did the Argive boys on a certain feast-day call\nthemselves Ballacrades in sport?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because they report that the first people\nthat were brought by Inachus out of the countries into the plains,\nlived upon \u1f00\u03c7\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2, i.e. _wild pears_? But wild pears were first\ndiscovered by the Grecians in Peloponnesus, while that country was\ncalled Apia, whence wild pears came afterwards to be called \u1f04\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9.\n\n_Question 52._ For what reason do the men of Elis lead their mares\nout of their borders when they would have them leaped by their horses?\n\n_Solution._ Was it that of all kings Oenomaus was the greatest\nlover of horses, and being most fond of this creature, imprecated many\nand great curses upon horses that should leap mares in Elis; wherefore\nthe people, fearing his curse, do abominate this thing?\n\n_Question 53._ What was the reason of the custom amongst the\nGnossians, that those who borrowed money upon usury should snatch it\nand run away?\n\n_Solution._ Was it that, in case they should attempt to defraud\nthe usurers, they might be liable for the violence, and thereby receive\nfurther punishment?\n\n_Question 54._ What is the cause that in Samos they call upon\nVenus of Dexicreon?\n\n_Solution._ Was this the reason, that the women of Samos, by\nlasciviousness and bawdry falling into great debauchery, were reformed\nby Dexicreon, a mountebank, using some charms towards them? Or was it\nbecause Dexicreon, being the master of a ship, and sailing to Cyprus on\na trading voyage, and being about to take in his lading, was commanded\nby Venus to lade with water and nothing else, and sail back with all\npossible speed? Being persuaded hereto, he took in much water and\nset sail immediately; still winds and a calm detaining him, he sold\nhis water to merchants and seamen distressed with thirst, whereby he\ngathered up much money; from which he erected a statue to Venus, and\ncalled it by his own name. If this story be true, it is manifest that\nthe Goddess intended not only the enriching of one man, but the saving\nof many alive by one man.\n\n_Question 55._ What is the reason that amongst the Samians, when\nthey sacrifice to Mercury the munificent, they suffer a man to filch\nand steal garments if he will?\n\n_Solution._ Because, when at the command of the oracle they\ntransplanted themselves from that island into Mycale, they lived ten\nyears upon robbery; and after this, sailing back again into their\nisland, they conquered their enemies.\n\n_Question 56._ Whence is that place in the island Samos called\nPanaema (\u03a0\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1)?\n\n_Solution._ Was it because the Amazons, flying before Bacchus\nfrom the coasts of Ephesus, fell upon Samos, and thereupon Bacchus\nrigging up his ships wafted over, and joining battle slew abundance of\nthem about that place, which, by reason of the plenty of blood spilled\nthere, the beholders by way of admiration called Panaema? Some say\nthat this slaughter was about Phloeum, and show their bones there; but\nothers say also that Phloeum was rent off from Samos by the dreadful\nand hideous cry that was uttered at their death.\n\n_Question 57._ Upon what account was the Andron in Samos called\nPedetes?\n\n_Solution._ The Geomori got the government into their hands,\nafter Demoteles was slain, and after the dissolution of his monarchial\nconstitution. At this time the Megarians waged war with the\nPerinthians, being a Samian colony, and brought fetters with them (as\nthey say) to put on the captives. When the Geomori were acquainted\nwith these proceedings, they immediately sent aid, sending forth nine\ncommanders and manning thirty ships, two of which, launching forth and\nlying before the haven, were destroyed with lightning. The commanders,\nproceeding on their voyage in the rest, subdued the Megarians, and took\nsix hundred of them alive. They were so elevated with this victory,\nthat they meditated the subversion of this Geomoran oligarchy; but\nthe occasion was given by the states themselves writing to them that\nthey should bring the Megarian captives bound in their own fetters.\nWhen they received these letters, they showed them privately to the\nMegarians, persuading them to concur with them in a conspiracy to\nprocure the people\u2019s liberty. A consult was held in common between them\nabout this matter, and they decided that the best way was to beat off\nthe rings from the fetters, and put them on the legs of the Megarians,\nand fasten them with thongs to their girdles, that they might not\nfall off nor being loose hinder them in their going. Accordingly they\naccoutred the men in this manner, and giving each of them a scimitar,\nthey soon sailed back to Samos and landed, and accordingly led the\nMegarians through the market-place to the council-house, where all\nthe Geomori were sitting together. Then, the sign being given, the\nMegarians fell on and slew those men. Whereupon, the city being set at\nliberty, they admitted the Megarians (as many as would) into the number\nof citizens, and erecting a magnificent edifice, hung up the fetters\n(\u03c0\u03ad\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9) in it. From this the house was named \u03a0\u03b5\u03b4\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n_Question 58._ What is the reason that the chief priest of\nHercules in Antimachia at Cos, when he manageth the sacrifice, is\nclothed in women\u2019s apparel, and wears a mitre upon his head?\n\n_Solution._ Hercules, setting sail from Troy with six ships,\nwas attacked by a storm, and lost all his ships but one, with which\nonly he was forced by the wind upon the coast of Cos, and fell upon a\nplace called Laceter, saving nothing besides his men and armor. There\nhappening to meet with a flock of sheep, he requested one ram of the\nshepherd (the man was called Antagoras), who, being a robust-bodied\nyoung man, challenged Hercules to fight with him; and if he were\nworsted, Hercules should carry away the ram. As soon as this fellow\nengaged with Hercules, the Meropes came in to the aid of Antagoras;\nand the Grecians coming in to assist Hercules, a great fight ensued.\nWhereat (they say) Hercules, overpowered by the multitude, betook\nhimself for refuge to a Thracian woman, and was concealed by disguising\nhimself in woman\u2019s apparel. But when afterwards, conquering the Meropes\nand passing under purification, he married the daughter of Alciopus, he\nput on a flowery robe. Hence the priests offer sacrifices in the place\nwhere the battle was fought, and the bridegrooms are clothed in women\u2019s\napparel when they receive their brides.\n\n_Question 59._ Whence was the race of Hamaxocylists in Megara?\n\n_Solution._ In that licentious democracy under which the\ndemanding back of interest money paid to usurers[164] was introduced\nand sacrilege was permitted, the Peloponnesians went on a pilgrimage\nto Delphi through the borders of Megara, and lodged in Aegira by the\nlake-side with their wives and children, in their caravans, as they\nbest could. There a resolute drunken company of the Megarians in a\nriotous and cruel manner overturned their wagons, and overwhelmed\nthem in the lake; so that many of the pilgrims were drowned. The\nMegarians indeed, by reason of the disorder of the government,\nneglected the punishment of this wickedness; but the Amphictyons,\ntaking into consideration the sanctity of this pilgrimage, punished\nthe actors of this villany, some with banishment, some with death.\nHence the posterity of these villains were called \u1f09\u03bc\u03b1\u03be\u03bf\u03ba\u03c5\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03af, i.e.\n_overturners of wagons_.\n\n\n\n\nOF THE LOVE OF WEALTH.\n\n\n1. Hippomachus, a master of the exercises, when some were commending\na tall man that had long hands as one that promised fair to be good\nat fisticuffs, replied, A fit man indeed, if the victor\u2019s laurel were\nto be hanged up aloft, and should be his that could best reach it and\ntake it down. We may say the same to those that esteem so extravagantly\nand repute it so great a felicity to possess fair fields, stately\nmansion-houses, and a great deal of money lying by them,\u2014that they\nwere in the right, if happiness were to be bought and sold. You may\nsee indeed many persons that choose rather to be rich and at the same\ntime very miserable, than to part with their money and become happy.\nBut, alas! indolency and repose of spirit, magnanimity, constancy,\nresolution, and contentment of mind,\u2014these are not a money-purchase.\nBeing wealthy is not despising wealth; nor is possessing things\nsuperfluous the same as not needing things superfluous.\n\n2. From what other evils then can riches free us, if they deliver us\nnot even from an inordinate desire of them? It is true, indeed, that by\ndrinking men allay their thirst after drink, and by eating they satisfy\ntheir longings after food, and he that said,\n\n    Bestow a coat, of your good will,\n    On poor Hipponax cold and chill\n\nif more clothes had been heaped on than he needed, would have thrown\nthem off, as being ill at ease. But the love of money is not abated by\nhaving silver and gold; neither do covetous desires cease by possessing\nstill more. But one may say to wealth, as to an insolent quack,\n\n    Thy physic\u2019s nought, and makes my illness worse.\n\nWhen this distemper seizes a man that wants only bread and a house to\nput his head in, ordinary raiment and such victuals as come first to\nhand, it fills him with eager desires after gold and silver, ivory and\nemeralds, hounds and horses; thus taking off the appetite, and carrying\nit from things that are necessary after things that are troublesome and\nunusual, hard to come by, and unprofitable when obtained. For no man is\npoor as to what nature requires and what suffices it; no man takes up\nmoney on use to buy meal or cheese, bread or olives; but you may see\none man run into debt for the purchase of a sumptuous house, another\nfor an adjoining olive-yard, another for corn-fields or vineyards,\nanother for Galatian mules, and another by a vain expense,\n\n    For horses fitly paired, with prancing feet\n    To draw the empty chariots through the street,[165]\n\nhas been plunged over head and ears into contracts and use-money, pawns\nand mortgages. Moreover, as they that use to drink after they have\nquenched their thirst, and to eat after their hunger is satisfied,\nvomit up even what they took when they were athirst or hungry; so they\nthat covet things useless and superfluous, enjoy not even those that\nare necessary. This is the character of these men.\n\n3. As for those that spend nothing although they possess much, and yet\nare always craving more, they may still more increase our wonder at\ntheir folly, especially when one calls to mind that of Aristippus, who\nwas wont to say, that when a man eats and drinks liberally and yet is\nnever the nearer being filled, he presently goes to the physician and\nenquires what is his disease and his indisposition and how he may get\nrid of it; but if one that has five beds desires ten, and having ten\ntables is for purchasing as many more, and having land and money in\ngood store is not at all filled, but still is bent, even breaking his\nnatural rest, upon getting more, and when he has never so much never\nhas enough, this man thinks he has no need of a physician to cure him\nand to show him from what cause his distemper arises. Indeed, when a\nman is athirst that hath not drunk at all, we expect that upon his\ndrinking his thirstiness should cease; but as for him that drinks and\ndrinks and so goes on without giving over, we do not think such a one\nneeds further repletion, but evacuation; and we advise him by all means\nto vomit, as knowing that his trouble proceeds not from the want of any\nthing, but from some sharp humor or preternatural heat that is within\nhim.\n\nAmong those persons, therefore, that are for increasing their substance\nand getting more, he that is poor and indigent may perhaps give over\nhis cares when he has got a house or found a treasure, or, by a\nfriend\u2019s help, has paid his debts and his creditors have discharged\nhim. But as for him that, having more than enough, yet still desires to\nhave more, it is not gold nor silver, not horses, sheep, or oxen, that\ncan cure him of this disease, but he needs evacuation and purgation.\nFor his distemper is not penury and want, but an insatiable desire\nand thirst after riches, proceeding from a depraved and inconsiderate\njudgment of things, which if it be not plucked out of men\u2019s minds, like\na thing twisting across and contracting them, they will always be in\nwant of superfluities, that is, be craving things they have no need of.\n\n4. When a physician visits a patient that has thrown himself upon his\nbed and lies there groaning and refusing to eat, he feels his pulse and\nasks him some questions; and finding that he is not at all feverish,\nhe tells him it is his mind that is distempered, and goes his way. When\nwe see therefore a man pining away for more means and sighing sadly\nat any expenses, forbearing no sordid or painful course that brings\nhim gain, when yet he hath houses and lands, herds and slaves, and\nclothes enough, what shall we call this man\u2019s disease but poverty of\nmind? For as for want of money, one friend, as Menander says, by being\na benefactor to him can cure it; but as to this other of the mind, all\na man\u2019s friends, living or dead, cannot satisfy it. It was therefore a\ngood saying of Solon concerning such persons:\n\n    Those men that after wealth aspire\n    Set no fixed bounds to their desire.\n\nTo those indeed that are wise, the riches that Nature requires are\nlimited, and confined within the compass of their real needs, as within\na circle drawn from a centre at a certain distance.\n\nThere is also this particular mischief in the love of wealth, that this\ndesire hinders and opposes its own satisfaction, which other desires\ndo procure. For no man abstains from a good morsel because he loves\ndainties, nor from wine because he thirsts after wine, as these men\nabstain from using money because they love money. Does it not look\nlike madness and a piteous distemper, for a man not to make use of a\ngarment because he shakes with cold, to refuse to eat bread because he\nis ready to famish with hunger, and not to use wealth because he is\ngreedy of getting it? This is the evil case that Thrasonides describes:\n\u201cI have such a thing within by me, I have it in my power, and I will\nthis thing (like those that are madly in love), but I do it not. When I\nhave locked and sealed up all, or have told out so much to the usurers\nand tradesmen, I scrape together and hunt after more; I quarrel and\ncontend with the servants, the ploughmen and debtors. O Apollo, hast\nthou ever seen a more wretched man, or any lover more miserable?\u201d\n\n5. Sophocles being asked by one whether he was able yet to company with\na woman; Heavens defend, said he, I have got my liberty, and by means\nof my old age have escaped those mad and furious masters. For it is\nvery fit and becoming that, when our pleasures leave us, those desires\nshould do so too, which, as Alcaeus says,\n\n    \u2019Twas never any man\u2019s good hap\n    Nor woman\u2019s wholly to escape.\n\nBut it is otherwise in the love of wealth, which, like a hard and\nsevere mistress, compels us to get what it forbids us to enjoy, and\nexcites an appetite but denies the pleasure of its gratification.\nStratonicus wittily abused the Rhodians for their profuseness, when\nhe said that they builded their houses as if they were immortal, but\nprovided for their tables as if they were to live but a little while.\nSo covetous men seem to be profuse by what they possess, when they\nare sordid wretches if you consider what they use and enjoy; for they\nendure labor, but taste no pleasure.\n\nDemades once came to Phocion\u2019s house and surprised him as he was at\ndinner; and when he saw his frugal and slender diet, I much wonder,\nPhocion, says he, that you should manage state affairs, and can dine as\nyou do. For this orator himself pleaded causes and harangued the people\nonly for his gut; and looking upon Athens as affording too little a\nsupply for his luxury, he fetched his provisions from Macedonia. For\nwhich cause Antipater, seeing him when he was an old man, compared him\nto a sacrifice when all was over and there remained nothing of the\nbeast but only the tongue and the stomach. But who would not wonder\nat thee, O wretched man, who, being able to live as thou dost,\u2014so\nsordidly, so unlike a man, bestowing nothing on anybody, being currish\nto thy friends, and without any ambition to serve the public,\u2014yet\nafflictest thyself and watchest whole nights, hirest out thy labors,\nliest at catch for inheritances, crouchest to every one, when thou art\nso well provided by thy sordid parsimony to live at ease?\n\nIt is reported of a certain Byzantine, that, surprising a whoremaster\nwith his wife that was very hard-favored, he cried out, O wretch,\nwhat compelled thee to do this?\u2014for her dowry is my solace. It is\nnecessary for kings, for procurators under them, for those that covet\npre-eminence and rule over cities, that they should heap up treasure;\nthey are forced through ambition, pride, and vain-glory to make feasts,\nto gratify friends, to maintain a retinue, to send presents, to feed\narmies, to purchase gladiators. But thou hast so much business lying\nupon thy hand, tormentest thyself, tumblest up and down, and all this\nwhile livest the life of a snail in thy shell through parsimony, and\nendurest all hardships, receiving no advantage at all; just like the\nbath-keeper\u2019s ass, that carries the wood and fuel for the fires and\nis always filled with the smoke and ashes of the stove, but itself is\nneither bathed nor warmed, washed nor cleansed there.\n\n6. I have said enough of this sort of covetousness, which makes a man\nlive the life of an ass or ant. But there is another sort of it which\nis more savage, that calumniates and gets inheritance by bad arts, that\npries into other men\u2019s affairs, that is full of thoughtfulness and\ncares, counting how many of their friends are yet alive, and after all\nenjoying nothing of what by all these arts has been heaped up.\n\nAs therefore we have a greater aversion and hatred against vipers,\npoisonous flies, and spiders than against bears and lions, because\nthey kill and destroy men, but serve themselves no farther of their\ncarcasses, which they do not feed upon as those other wild beasts do;\nso they that become bad and ill men through sordidness and parsimony\ndeserve more of our abhorrence than those that prove such by luxurious\nliving and excess, for they deprive others of what they are neither\nable nor inclined to make use of themselves. Hence it is that the\nluxurious, when they are rich and well provided, give some truce to\ntheir debaucheries; as Demosthenes said to some that were of opinion\nthat Demades ceased to be an ill man. Now, says he, you see him full\nand glutted, like lions, that then hunt not after prey. But as for the\nothers, who in the management of affairs propose no end to themselves\neither of pleasure or profit, their covetous desires have no truce or\ncessation, they being always empty and standing in need of all things.\n\n7. But some perhaps may plead on their behalf, that these men keep and\nhoard up their wealth for their children and heirs,\u2014to whom they part\nwith nothing whilst they are alive; but, like those mice that live in\nmines and pick up and eat the golden sands and ore, you cannot come by\nany of that gold, till you anatomize them to find it after they are\ndead. But to what end, I pray, would they leave such a deal of money\nand a great estate to their children and heirs? That they forsooth may\npreserve it also for others, and those others in like manner shall hand\nit down to their children (just like those earthen pipes the potters\nmake for a water-course, which retain none of the water themselves,\nbut one pipe only conveys it to the next), till some informing false\naccuser or tyrant appears and cuts off this keeper in trust, and when\nhis breath is stopped, derives and diverts the course of his wealth\ninto another channel; or, as they say, till some one that is the most\nwicked of the race devours and consumes all that those who went before\nhim had preserved. For not only, as Euripides says,\n\n    Children from slaves derived and baser blood\n    Prove prodigal and lewd, none come to good;\n\nbut it is as true of the children of the parsimonious; as Diogenes\nwittily abused this sort of men, when he said that it was better to\nbe a certain Megarian\u2019s ram than his son. For, under the pretence of\ntraining them up and instructing them, they undo and pervert them,\nimplanting in them their own love of money and meanness of spirit, and\nerecting as it were a fortress for the securing their inheritance in\nthe minds of their heirs.\n\nFor the instructions and lessons they give them are such as these: Gain\nas much and spend as little as may be; value yourself according to what\nyou are worth. But certainly this is not to instruct, but to contract\nand sew them up, just like a purse, the better to conceal and keep what\nis put into it. The purse indeed becomes foul and musty after money\nis put up in it; but the children of the covetous, before they are\nenriched by their parents, are replenished with covetous desires which\nthey derive from them. And indeed they pay them a deserved reward for\ntheir instructions, not loving them because they shall receive a great\nestate from them, but hating them because they have it not so soon as\nthey fain would. For being taught to admire nothing but wealth, nor\nknowing any other end of living but to get a great estate, they account\nthe life of their parents to be a hindrance to that of their own, and\nfancy so much time is taken from their own age as is added to theirs.\nWherefore, whilst their parents are yet living, they secretly always\nsteal their pleasures; and what they bestow upon their friends or spend\nupon their lusts, and even what they give to their teachers, is fetched\nas it were from another\u2019s estate, not from their own.\n\nBut when their parents are dead and they are once possessed of their\nkeys and seals, then their way of living is of another fashion, and\nthey put on another face and aspect, grave, severe, and morose. You\nhear no more of their former pastimes, nor of exercises with the ball\nand in wrestling, nor of the Academy or the Lyceum; but they are\nwholly taken up in examining the servants, looking over writings, in\ndebating matters with those that receive or owe them money. Their\nhurry of business and thoughtfulness will not give them leave to\ndine, and they are forced to make the night their time of bathing;\nthe gymnastic schools in which they were educated and the water of\nDirce are neglected. If any man ask him, Will you not go and hear the\nphilosopher? How can I, says he, now that my father is dead? I am not\nat leisure. O miserable wretch! What has thy father left thee to be\ncompared with what he has taken from thee, thy leisure and thy liberty?\nAnd yet it is not so much he that hath done it, as the wealth that\nflows round thee and overpowers thee, which, like the women Hesiod\nspeaks of,\n\n    Thee without firebrands burns, and unawares\n    Resigns thee up to dotage and gray hairs,[166]\n\nbringing on thy soul those cares\u2014like untimely wrinkles and old\nage\u2014that spring from covetous desires and multiplicity of business,\nthat shrivel up all thy vigor and gayety, all sense of honor, all\nkindness and humanity within thee.\n\n8. But some will say, Do you not see rich men live splendidly and spend\nhigh? To whom we answer: Dost thou not hear what Aristotle says, that\nsome there are that do not use wealth, and some that abuse it? For\nneither sort do what is fit and becoming; but what the one sort possess\ndoes neither advantage nor adorn them, and what the other sort have\ndoes both hurt and dishonor them.\n\nBut let us further consider, What is the use of riches, for which men\nso much admire them? Is it the enjoyment of what suffices nature? Alas!\nin this respect the wealthy have no advantage of those that are of a\nmeaner fortune; but wealth (as Theophrastus says) is really no wealth\nand need not be coveted, if Callias, the richest man of Athens, and\nIsmenias, the wealthiest of Thebes, made use but of the same things\nthat Socrates and Epaminondas did. For as Agathon sent away the music\nfrom the room where he feasted to the women\u2019s apartment, contenting\nhimself with the discourses of his guests, so you would reject and\nsend away the purple beds and the high prized tables and all other\nsuperfluous things, should you see that the rich make use of the same\nthings with the poor.\n\nI do not mean thou shouldst presently\n\n    Hang up the rudder in the smoke at ease,\n    And let the mules\u2019 and oxen\u2019s labor cease;[167]\n\nbut much rather the impertinent labor of goldsmiths, turners,\nperfumers, and cooks, when thou resolvest wisely and soberly to banish\nall useless things.\n\nBut if the things that suffice nature lie in common among those\nthat have and those that want riches,\u2014if rich men pride themselves\nonly in things superfluous, and thou art ready to praise Scopas of\nThessaly, who, when one begged somewhat of him he had in his house, as\na superfluous thing he had no use for, made answer, \u201cBut we rich men\ncount our felicity and happiness to lie in these superfluities, and not\nin those necessary things,\u201d\u2014if your case be thus, have a care you do\nnot seem like one that magnifies and prefers a pomp and public show at\na festival before life itself.\n\nOur country\u2019s feast of Bacchus was in old time celebrated in a more\nhomely manner, though with great mirth and jollity. One carried in\nprocession a vessel of wine and a branch of a vine, afterwards followed\none leading a goat, another followed him bearing a basket of dried\nfigs, and after all came a phallus. But all these are now despised and\nout of date, the procession being made with golden vessels and costly\ngarments, driving of chariots and persons in masquerade. And just thus\nthe things that are necessary and useful in riches are swallowed up by\nthose that are unprofitable and superfluous.\n\n9. The most of us commit the mistake of Telemachus. For he through\ninexperience, or rather want of good taste, when he saw Nestor\u2019s house\nfurnished with beds and tables, garments and carpets, and well stored\nwith sweet and pleasant wine, did not look upon him as so happy a man\nin being thus well provided with things necessary and useful; but when\nhe beheld the ivory, gold, and amber in Menelaus\u2019s house, he cried out\nin amazement:\u2014\n\n    Such, and not nobler, in the realms above,\n    My wonder dictates is the dome of Jove.[168]\n\nWhereas Socrates or Diogenes would have said rather:\u2014\n\n    What vain, vexatious, useless things I\u2019ve seen,\n    And good for nothing but to move one\u2019s spleen.\n\nThou fool, what is it thou sayest? When thou oughtest to have stripped\nthy wife of her purple and gaudy attire, that she might cease to live\nluxuriously and to run mad after strangers and their fashions, instead\nof this, dost thou adorn and beautify thy house, that it may appear\nlike a theatre or a stage to all comers?\n\n10. The happiness riches pretend to is such that it depends upon\nspectators and witnesses; else it would signify nothing at all. But it\nis quite otherwise when we consider temperance or philosophy, or such\nknowledge of the Gods as is requisite. For these, though unknown to all\nother mortals, communicate a peculiar light and great splendor within\nthe soul, and cause a joy that dwells with it as an inmate, whilst it\nenjoys the chiefest good, though neither Gods nor men may be privy to\nit. Such a thing is truth, virtue, or the beauty of geometrical and\nastrological sciences; and do riches, with their bravery and necklaces\nand all that gaudery that pleases girls, deserve to be compared with\nany of these? When nobody observes and looks on, riches are truly blind\nand deprived of light. For if a rich man makes a meal with his wife or\nfamiliars alone, he makes no stir about magnificent tables to eat on\nor golden cups to drink in, but uses those that come next to hand; and\nhis wife, without any gold or purple to adorn her, presents herself in\na plain dress. But when he makes a feast,\u2014that is, when the pomp and\ntheatre is to be fitted and prepared, and the scene of riches is to\nenter,\u2014\n\n    Then from the ships, with costly goods full fraught,\n    The trevets and the caldrons straight are brought;[169]\n\nthen they provide lamps, and much ado is made about the drinking-cups,\nthey put the cup-bearers into a new dress, they bring forth whatever\nis made of gold and silver or set with precious stones, thus plainly\ndeclaring that they would be looked upon by all for rich men. But even\nthough he should eat his meal alone, he wants hilarity of mind and that\ncontentment which alone makes a feast.\n\n\n\n\nHOW A MAN MAY INOFFENSIVELY PRAISE HIMSELF WITHOUT BEING LIABLE TO ENVY.\n\n\n1. He that talks big and arrogantly of himself, Herculanus, is\nuniversally condemned as a troublesome and ill-bred companion. But the\nmost, even of those who in words mightily declaim against him, seem to\napplaud him in their actions. Euripides could say,\n\n    If speech grew scarce, and at great rates were sold,\n    Commend himself what lavish fellow would?\n    But since the infinite treasure of the air\n    Praise gratis yields, none truth or falsehood spare;\n    Suffering no damage, though they give their ware.\n\nYet he often brings in his heroes intolerably boasting, and stuffs\ntheir most tragical adventures and passions with improper discourses of\nthemselves. So Pindar declares,\n\n    Unseasonably to glory\n    Makes harmony with fury;[170]\n\nbut he forbears not to extol his own raptures, which indeed, by the\nconfession of all men, are worthy of the noblest praise.\n\nBut those who are crowned for mastery in the games or in the learned\ncombats have others to celebrate their victories, that the people\u2019s\nears be not grated with the harsh noises of self-applause. And\nTimotheus is justly censured as unskilfully and irregularly setting\nforth his conquest of Phrynis, when he thus proudly boasted it in\nwriting: Happy man wast thou, Timotheus, when the crier proclaimed,\n\u2018The Milesian Timotheus hath vanquished the son of Carbo, the soft\nIonian poet.\u2019\n\nIt is true then, as Xenophon says, The most pleasant sound that a man\ncan hear is his own praise in another\u2019s mouth; but the most odious\nthing unto others is a man commending himself. For we brand them as\nimpudent who commend themselves, it becoming them to be modest though\nthey were praised by others; and we account them unjust in arrogating\nthat to themselves which another has the sole propriety of bestowing on\nthem. Besides, if we then are silent, we seem either angry or envious;\nbut if we second their discourse, we are presently entangled and forced\nto contribute more than we intended, speaking to men\u2019s faces what\nsounds well only behind their backs; and so we undertake rather the\nbase work of drudging flattery than any real offices of true honor.\n\n2. Yet, however, there is a time when a statesman may be the subject of\nhis own discourse, and give a free relation of things he has worthily\ndone or said, as well as other truths; taking care that it be not\nmerely for favor or reputation, but upon some emergent occasion, and\nespecially, when the deeds achieved by him or the parts that be in\nhim be good and honest, then he is not to forbear and say merely that\nhe hath done so or else much like. There is indeed a praise of this\nkind which bears very excellent and lovely fruit, from whose seeds\narise many of the same species very much meliorated and improved. And\ntherefore it is that the wise statesman seeks glory not as the reward\nor solace of his virtue, nor embraces it merely as the companion of his\nachievements, but because the being accounted an honorable person and\ngallant man affords a thousand opportunities of compassing many and\nmore desirable things. For it is easy and delightful to be of use to\nthose who are apt to believe and love us; whereas, if a man lie under\ncalumnies and suspicions, he cannot exert his virtue to the benefit of\nothers without committing a kind of violence upon them.\n\nThere may also be more reasons than these, which we must enquire into,\nthat, while we endeavor to avert a frivolous and nauseous applauding of\nourselves, we chance not to omit that sort which may be truly useful.\n\n3. The praise therefore is vain which a man heaps on himself to provoke\nothers also to praise him, and is chiefly contemptible, as proceeding\nfrom an importunate and unseasonable affectation of esteem.\n\nFor as they who are ready to die for food are compelled against nature\nto gnaw off their own flesh, and thus put a miserable end to their\nfamine; so they who mortally hunger after praise, unless some one\nafford them a little scantling alms of commendation, do violate the\nlaws of decency, shamelessly endeavoring to supply those wants by an\nunnatural extolling of themselves.\n\nBut when they do not on the bare consideration of themselves hunt\napplause, but strive to obscure the worth of others, by fighting\nagainst their praises and opposing their own works and practices to\ntheirs, they add to their vanity an envious and abhorred baseness. He\nwho thrusts his foot into another\u2019s dance is stigmatized with a proverb\nas a ridiculous and pragmatical clown; but upon envy and jealousy to\nthrust ourselves between the praises of others, or to interrupt the\nsame with our own self praise, is a thing that we ought equally to\nbeware of. Neither should we allow others to praise us at such a time,\nbut frankly yield the honor to those who are then celebrated, if their\nmerit be real; and though the persons be vicious or unworthy, yet must\nwe not take from them by setting up ourselves; but rather on the other\nhand we must reprove the unskilful applauders, and demonstrate their\nencomiums to be improperly and dangerously conferred. It is plain that\nthese errors must be avoided.\n\n4. But self-praise is not liable to disgrace or blame when it is\ndelicately handled by way of apology to remove a calumny or accusation.\nThus Pericles: But ye are angry at me, a man inferior to none, whether\nit be in the understanding or interpreting of necessary things;\na man who am a lover of my country, and above the meannesses of\nbribes. For, in speaking with this gallantry of himself, he was not\nonly free from arrogance, vanity, and ambition, but he demonstrated\nthe greatness and spirit of that virtue which could not be dejected\nitself, and even humbled and tamed the haughtiness of envy. Such men\nas these will hardly be condemned; but those who would vote against\nthem are won over to their cause, do receive infinite satisfaction,\nand are agreeably inspirited with this noble boasting, especially\nif that bravery be steady, and the ground firm on which it stands.\nThis history does frequently discover. For, when the Theban generals\naccused Pelopidas and Epaminondas that, the time for their office as\nBoeotarchs being expired, they did not forthwith give up their power,\nbut made an incursion into Laconia and repaired and re-peopled Messene,\nPelopidas, submitting himself and making many lowly entreaties, very\nhardly obtained his absolution; but Epaminondas loftily glorying in\nthose actions, and at last declaring he would willingly be put to\ndeath so that they would set up his accusation, \u201cEpaminondas hath\nwasted Laconia, hath settled Messene, and happily united Arcadia into\none state, against our will,\u201d they admired him, and the citizens,\nwondering at the cheerful greatness of his courage, dismissed him with\nunspeakable pleasantness and satisfaction.\n\nTherefore, when Agamemnon thus reproached Diomedes,\n\n    O son of Tydeus!\u2014he whose strength could tame\n    The bounding steeds, in arms a mighty name,\u2014\n    Canst thou remote the mingling hosts descry,\n    With hands inactive and a careless eye?\n\nSthenelus is not to be much condemned for saying,\n\n    Ourselves much greater than our ancestors\n    We boast;[171]\n\nfor Sthenelus had not been calumniated himself, but he only patronized\nhis abused friend; and so the cause excused that freedom of speech,\nwhich seemed otherwise to have something of the glorioso.\n\nBut Cicero\u2019s magnifying his diligence and prudence in Catiline\u2019s trial\nwas not very pleasing to the Romans; yet when Scipio said, they ought\nnot to judge Scipio, who had enstated them in the power of judging all\nmen, they ascended crowned to the Capitol, and sacrificed with him. For\nCicero was not necessitated to this, but merely spurred by the desire\nof glory; while the danger wherein Scipio stood delivered him from envy.\n\n5. Now talking after an high and glorious manner proves advantageous,\nnot only to persons in danger of the law or such like eminent distress,\nbut to those also who are clouded in a dull series of misfortunes; and\nthat more properly than when they appear splendid in the world. For\nwhat addition can words make to those who already seem possessed of\nreal glory, and do lie indulging and basking in her beams? But those\nwho at present are incapable of ambition, if they express themselves\nloftily, seem only to bear up against the storms of Fortune, to\nundergird the greatness of their souls, and to shun that pity and\ncommiseration which supposes a shipwrecked and forlorn condition.\nAs therefore those who in walking affect a stiffness of body and a\nstretched-out neck are accounted effeminate and foppish, but are\ncommended if in fencing and fighting they keep themselves erect and\nsteady; so the man grappling with ill fortune, if he raise himself to\nresist her,\n\n    Like some stout boxer, ready with his blow,[172]\n\nand by a bravery of speech transform himself from abject and miserable\nto bold and noble, is not to be censured as obstinate and audacious,\nbut honored as invincible and great. So, although Homer described\nPatroclus in the happinesses of his life as smooth and without envy,\nyet in death he makes him have something of the bravo, and a soldier\u2019s\ngallant roughness:\n\n    Had twenty mortals, each thy match in might,\n    Opposed me fairly, they had sunk in fight.[173]\n\nSo Phocion, though otherwise very mild, after the sentence passed on\nhim, showed the greatness of his mind in many respects; particularly\nto one of his fellow-sufferers, who miserably cried out and bewailed\nhis misfortune, What, says he, is it not a pleasure to thee to die with\nPhocion?\n\n6. Further, a man of state has not less but greater liberty to speak\nany thing of himself when his merits are rewarded with injurious and\nunkind returns. Achilles usually gave the Gods their glory, and spoke\nmodestly in this manner:\n\n    Whene\u2019er, by Jove\u2019s decree, our conquering powers\n    Shall humble to the dust Troy\u2019s lofty towers.\n\nBut when he was unhandsomely reproached and aspersed with contumelies,\nhe added swelling words to his anger, and these in his own applause:\n\n    I sacked twelve ample cities on the main;\n\nand also these:\n\n    It was not thus, when, at my sight amazed,\n    Troy saw and trembled, as this helmet blazed.[174]\n\nFor apologies claim a great liberty of speech and boasting, as\nconsiderable parts of their defence.\n\nThemistocles also, having been guilty of nothing distasteful either in\nhis words or actions, yet perceiving the Athenians glutted with him and\nbeginning to neglect him, forbore not to say: Why, O ye happy people,\ndo ye weary out yourselves by still receiving benefits from the same\nhands? Upon every storm you fly to the same tree for shelter; yet, when\nit is fair again, you despoil it of its leaves as you go away.\n\n7. They therefore who are injured usually recount their good actions to\nthe ingrate. And, if they also praise those excellences which others\nare pleased to condemn, they are not only pardonable but altogether\nwithout blame. For it is evident they do not reproach others, but\napologize for themselves.\n\nThis gave Demosthenes a glorious freedom, yet allayed the offensive\nbrightness of his own praises, which almost everywhere shine through\nhis whole Oration on the Crown, in which he extols those embassies and\ndecrees which were so much objected against him.\n\n8. Not much unlike this is the insinuating delicacy of an antithesis,\nwhen a person, being accused for any thing as a crime, demonstrates its\nopposite to be base and vicious. So Lycurgus, being upbraided by the\nAthenians for stopping a sycophant\u2019s mouth with money, said: And what\nkind of citizen do you then take me to be, who, having so long managed\nthe affairs of the republic amongst you, am at last found rather to\nhave given than to have received money unjustly? And Cicero, Metellus\nobjecting he had cast more by his evidence against them than ever he\nhad acquitted by his pleading for them, replies: Who therefore will not\nfreely declare that Cicero has more honesty and faith than eloquence?\nMany expressions of this nature are in Demosthenes; particularly,\nBut who might not justly have slain me, if I had endeavored in word\nonly to sully the honors and glorious titles which the city hath? Or,\nWhat, think you, would those vile fellows have said, if, whilst I had\nbeen curiously poring on other things, the cities had rejected our\nalliance?[175] And all his forementioned oration ingeniously dresses\nthese antitheses and solutions of cases with the subtle ornaments of\nhis own praise.\n\n9. But this may very profitably be learned therein, that, delicately\ntempering the encomiums of his auditors with the things relating to\nhimself, he secures himself from being liable to envy, nor becomes\nsuspected of self-love. There he relates in what manner the Athenians\nbehaved themselves to the Euboeans, in what manner to the Thebans, and\nwhat benefits they conferred upon those of Byzantium and Chersonesus;\nin all which he confesses his part was only that of their minister or\nsteward. Thus by a rhetorical deceit, he finely and insensibly instils\nhis own praises into his hearers, who pleasingly hang upon his words,\nand rejoice at the commemoration of those worthy deeds. Now this joy is\nimmediately seconded by admiration, and admiration is succeeded by a\nliking and love of that person who so wisely administered the affairs.\nThis Epaminondas seems to have considered, when reviled by Meneclidas,\nas though he had an higher opinion of himself than ever Agamemnon had.\nIf it be so, says he, Thebans, \u2019tis you have puffed me up; you, by\nwhose help alone I overthrew the Lacedaemonian empire in one day.\n\n10. But since for the most part men are exceedingly displeased with\nthose who are the trumpeters of their own fame, but if they sound\nforth another\u2019s, are delighted and give them cheerful acclamations;\nit is hence grown a frequent custom amongst orators, by a seasonable\nextolling those who have like purposes, actions, and manner of life\nwith theirs, to assure and wheedle over the auditory to themselves.\nFor the hearers know that, though the panegyrist solemnizes another\u2019s\nworth, he has yet the same endowments of virtue, so that his encomiums\nwill redound to himself. For as he who reproaches any man for faults\nof which he himself is guilty cannot but perceive he principally\nupbraids himself, so the virtuous, by giving applauses to the virtuous,\noffer their own praises to the apprehensive, who will presently cry\nout, And are not you one of these? Therefore Alexander honoring\nHercules, and Androcottus again honoring Alexander, in effect proposed\nthemselves to be in like manner honored by others. So Dionysius\nscoffing Gelon, and calling him the Gelos (or laughing-stock) of\nSicily, was not aware that through envy he had happened to infringe the\ngreatness of his own authority and power.\n\n11. These things the man of state must know and observe. Now those\nwho are forced upon their own praises are the more excusable, if they\narrogate not the causes wholly to themselves, but ascribe them in part\nto Fortune and in part to God. Achilles therefore said:\n\n    Since now at length the powerful will of heaven\n    The dire destroyer to our arm has given.[176]\n\nAnd Timoleon did well, who erected a fane to Fortune, and dedicated\nhis house to the Good Genius, to whom he referred the felicity of his\nattempts. But best of all, Python of Aenos, after he had slain Cotys,\ncoming to Athens and perceiving the orators very busy in applauding\nhim to the people, which displeased many and stirred them up to envy,\nthus speaks: These things, ye Athenians, some of the Gods have done;\nour hands were only the instruments of their work. Sylla also prevented\nenvy by perpetually praising Fortune, not his own prowess; and at last\nsurnamed himself Epaphroditus, in acknowledgment that his success\nproceeded from the care of Venus. For men will more readily impute a\ndefeat to chance or the pleasure of some God than to the virtue of\nthe conqueror; for the one they think to be a good not pertinent to\nthe conqueror, but the other to be a proper defect of their own,\nwhich proceedeth from themselves. The laws therefore of Zaleucus were\nreceived by the Locrians with the more willingness and delight, because\nhe had told them Minerva constantly appeared to him and dictated and\ninstructed him in those laws, and that they were none of them his own\ninventions.\n\n12. This kind of excuses may be framed as convenient remedies or\npreventions when we have to do with persons of a difficult or\nenvious humor. But it is not amiss to use some little revocations\nor corrections of what may seem spoken to our praise, before those\nwho are of a sedate and composed temper. If any commend us as those\nwho have learning, riches, or authority, we should hinder them from\nchoosing such topics, and rather desire of them, if they can, to\ntake notice of us as innocent, good, and useful. Thus we do not so\nmuch confer as transfer praises, and seem not to be puffed up with\nour applauders, but rather to be offended that they have not praised\nconveniently and for truly meritorious things. We hide also inferior\nwith better qualifications; yet not as desiring to be commended, but\nas teaching to commend aright. Such forms as these may be referred\nhither: It is true, I have not walled the city with stones or brick;\nbut if you will view my fortifications, you shall find armor, and\nhorses, and confederates.[177] But more apt is that of Pericles. When\nhis friends bewailed him in the extremities of death, they put him\nin mind of his authority and the great offices he had discharged, as\nalso what victories, trophies, and cities he had left the Athenians;\nbut he, raising himself a little, reproved them as fixing only upon\ncommon encomiums, and enlarging rather on those of fortune than on\nthose of virtue, whereas they neglected the greatest matter, which was\nmore peculiar to himself,\u2014that he had never been the occasion of any\nAthenian\u2019s wearing black. And hence the orator may learn, if he be a\ngood man, to transfer the eulogiums of his eloquence to his virtuous\nlife and manners; and the commander who is admired and applauded for\nhis conduct and happy fortune in the wars may freely propose his\nclemency or justice as more worthy to be praised. Nay, further, it\nbecomes even an emperor, upon a profusion of such glutting praises as\nflatterers are commonly guilty of, to say something of this nature:\n\n    No God am I. Why do ye equal me\n    Thus to th\u2019 immortal powers.[178]\n\nIf you know me well, let my justice or temperance, my equanimity or\nhumanity, be rather spoken of. For even envy herself can easily concede\nthe lesser honors to him who refuses the greater; nor will it rob\nany of true encomiums, not to expect false and vain ones. Therefore\nseveral princes, who permitted not themselves to be called Gods or\nthe offspring of the Gods, have yet assumed the titles Philadelphus,\nPhilometor, Evergetes, or Theophilus; and were never offended when they\nwere honored with those glorious yet human appellations.\n\nAgain, they who in their writings and sayings are absolute votaries\nto wisdom by no means will be called \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03af (or wise men), but can\npresently swallow the epithet of philosophers (or lovers of wisdom), or\nthat of proficients, or any other easy name which sounds not big nor\nexposes them to envy; and so they beget and preserve a good esteem. But\nyour rhetorical sophisters, whilst in their orations they gape for the\nextraordinary acclamations of divine, angelical, wonderful, lose even\nthose common ones of manly or pretty well.\n\n13. Now as skilful painters, that they may not offend those that have\nweak eyes, allay their over-bright and gaudy colors by tempering\nthem with darker; so there are some who will not represent their own\npraises altogether glaring and immoderately splendid, but cast in\nsome defects, some scapes or slight faults, to take away the danger of\ndispleasure or envy. Epeus intolerably brags of his skill in boxing.\n\n    I\u2019ll crush my adversary\u2019s body, break his bones;\n\nyet he would seem to qualify all with this,\n\n    Is\u2019t not enough that I\u2019m in fight unskilled?[179]\n\nBut, to say truth, to excuse his arrogance with so base a confession is\nridiculous. He then who would be an exact man corrects himself for his\nforgetfulness, ignorance, ambition, or eagerness for certain knowledge\nand discourses. So does Ulysses when he says of the Sirens,\n\n    Thus the sweet charmers warbled o\u2019er the main,\n    My soul takes wing to meet the heavenly strain;\n    I give the sign, and struggle to be free;\n\nand again, when he sang of his visit to the Cyclops,\n\n    Their wholesome counsel rashly I declined,\n    Curious to view the man of monstrous kind,\n    And try what social rites a savage lends.[180]\n\nAnd for the most part it is a good antidote against envy, to mix\namongst our praises those faults that are not altogether ungenerous and\nbase. Therefore many temper them not only with confessions of poverty\nor unskilfulness, but even of vile descent. So Agathocles, carousing\namongst the Sicilian youth in golden bowls very curiously wrought,\ncommanded earthen pots to be brought in. See (says he) what diligence,\nlaboriousness, and fortitude can do! Once we made muggen jugs, but now\nvessels of gold. For his original was so mean and contemptible, that\nit was thought he had served in a potter\u2019s shop who at last governed\nalmost all Sicily.\n\n14. These are the outward preventions or remedies against diseases\nthat may arise from the speaking of one\u2019s self. There are some others\ninward, which Cato has recourse to when he tells us he was envied for\nneglecting his domestic affairs and being vigilant whole nights in\nthose of his country. So with this:\n\n    How shall I boast, who grew so easily,\n    Though mustered \u2019mongst the common soldiery;\n    Great in my fortune as the bravest be?\n\nAnd this:\n\n    But I am loath to lose past labor\u2019s gains;\n    Nor will retreat from a fresh troop of pains.[181]\n\nFor as they who obtain great possessions of houses or lands gratis and\nwith little difficulty are under the eye of envy, but not if their\npurchases were troublesome and dear, so it is with them who arrive at\nhonor and applause.\n\n15. Well then, since it is evident we may praise ourselves not only\ninoffensively and without being liable to envy, but with great\nadvantage too; that we may seem not to do this for itself, but for a\nfurther and better end, first consider whether it may prove for the\ninstruction of the company, by exciting them to a virtuous emulation.\nFor so Nestor\u2019s relation of his own achievements inflamed Patroclus\nand nine others with a vehement desire of single combat; and we know\nthe counsel that brings persuasive deeds as well as words, a lively\nexemplar, and an immediate familiar incentive, insouls a man with\ncourage, moves, yea, vehemently spurs him up to such a resolution of\nmind as cannot doubt the possibility and success of the attempt. This\nwas the reason of that chorus in Lacedaemon consisting of boys, young\nmen, and old men, which thus sang in parts:\u2014\n\n    Old Men.   Once we were young, and bold and strong.\n\n    Boys.      And we shall be no less ere long.\n\n    Young Men. We now are such; behold us, if you will.[182]\n\nWell and politicly in this public entertainment did the legislator\npropose to the youth obvious and domestic examples of such as had\nalready performed the things he exhorted them to.\n\n16. Moreover, it is not only available for the exciting of a generous\nemulation, but sometimes requisite for the silencing and taming an\ninsolent and audacious man, to talk a little gloriously of one\u2019s self.\nAs Nestor in this:\n\n    I have conversed with men more gallant far\n    Than you; much your superiors they in all things were,\n    Nor did they ever to contemn me dare.[183]\n\nAnd Aristotle writes to Alexander, that not only those who have mighty\nempires may think highly of themselves, but they also who have worthy\nthoughts and notions of the Gods. Such a remark as this is also\nprofitable against enemies, and recalls the spirits:\n\n    Weak sons of misery our strength oppose.[184]\n\nAnd such a reflection as that of Agesilaus, who said concerning\nthe king of Persia, when he heard him called the Great: And who is\ngreater than I, unless he be more just? So Epaminondas answered the\nLacedaemonians, when they had spun out a long accusation against the\nThebans: I see then we have forced you out of your wonted humor of\nshort speech.\n\nThe like to these are proper against adversaries; but amongst our\nfriends and fellow-citizens a seasonable glorying is good not only to\nhumble and throw down their haughtiness, but if they be fearful or\nastonished, to fetch back their courage and teach them to rally up\nthemselves again. Therefore Cyrus in perils and battles talked at a\nthundering rate, but otherwise was mild and gentle in discourse. And\nAntigonus the Second generally was modest and free from blustering; but\nat the sea-fight at Cos,\u2014one of his friends saying, See you not how\nmuch greater the number of the enemy\u2019s ships is than ours?\u2014he answers,\nAnd for how many ships dost thou reckon me?\n\nThis Homer seems to have considered, who makes Ulysses, when his\nfriends were dismayed at the noise and horrible waves of Charybdis,\nimmind them of his former stratagems and valor:\n\n    O friends! O often tried in adverse storms!\n    With ills familiar in more dreadful forms!\n    Deep in the dire Cyclopean den you lay,\n    Yet safe return\u2019d,\u2014Ulysses led the way.[185]\n\nFor this kind of praise is not such as the haranguers to the people\nor sophistical beggars use, nor those who affect popular humming and\napplause; but a necessary pledge of that courage and conduct which\nmust be given to hearten up our friends. For we know that opinion\nand confidence in him whom we esteem endued with the fortitude and\nexperience of a complete captain is, in the crisis of a battle, no\nsmall advantage to the obtaining of the day.\n\n17. We have before declared the opposing of himself to the reputation\nand credit of another to be altogether unbefitting a worthy man; but\nwhere a vicious praise becomes hurtful and corruptive, creating an\nearnestness after evil things or an evil purpose in great matters,\nit is not unprofitable to refuse it; but it becomes us to direct the\nminds of the company towards better sentiments of things, showing them\nthe difference. For certainly any one will be pleased when he sees\nmany voluntarily abstaining from the vices they heard cried down and\nreproved; but if baseness be well accounted of, and honor be made to\nattend on him who pursues pleasure or avarice, where is the nature so\nhappily strong that can resist, much less conquer, the temptation?\nTherefore a generous and discreet person must set himself against\nthe praises, not of evil men, but of evil actions; for this kind of\ncommendation perverts the judgments of men, and miserably leads them\nto imitate and emulate unworthy practices as laudable. But they may\nbe easily bewrayed by confronting them with opposite truths. Theodorus\nthe tragedian is reported to have said to Satyrus the comedian, It is\nnot so wonderful an art to move the theatre\u2019s laughter as to force its\ntears. But if some philosopher should have retorted, Aye; but, friend,\nit is not so fit and seemly to make men weep, as to remove and free\nthem from their sorrows, it is likely by this odd way of commending\nhimself he would have delighted his hearer, and endeavored to alter\nor secure his judgment. So Zeno knew how to speak for himself, when\nthe great number of Theophrastus\u2019s scholars was opposed to the fewness\nof his, saying, His chorus is indeed greater than mine, but mine is\nsweeter. And Phocion, while Leosthenes yet prospered, being asked by\nthe orators what good he had done the city, replies: Nothing but this,\nthat in my government of you there have been no funeral orations, but\nall the deceased were buried in the sepulchres of their ancestors. So\nCrates, by way of antithesis to this epitaph of the glutton,\n\n    What I have eat is mine; in words my will\n    I\u2019ve had, and of my lust have took my fill,\n\nwell opposes these,\n\n    What I have learnt is mine; I\u2019ve had my thought,\n    And me the Muses noble truths have taught.\n\nThis kind of praise is amiable and advantageous, teaching to admire and\nlove convenient and profitable things instead of the superfluous and\nvain. Thus much for the stating of the question, in what cases and how\nfar self-praise may be inoffensive.\n\n18. Now the order of the discourse requires to show how an uncomely and\nunseasonable affectation of praise may be avoided. Discourse of a man\u2019s\nself usually sallies from self-love, as from its fort, and is there\nobserved to lay wait, even in those who are vulgarly thought free\nenough from ambition. Therefore, as it is one of the rules of health to\navoid dangerous and unwholesome places, or being in them to take the\ngreater care, so ought there to be a like rule concerning converse and\nspeaking of one\u2019s self. For this kind of talk has slippery occasions,\ninto which we unawares and indiscernibly are apt to fall.\n\nFor first (as is above said), ambition usually intrudes into the\npraises of others with some flourishing remarks to adorn herself. For\nlet a person be commended by his equal or inferior, the mind of the\nambitious is tickled and rubbed at the hearing of his praise, and\nimmediately he is hurried by an intemperate desire and precipitation\nafter the like; as the appetite of the hungry is sharpened by seeing\nothers eat.\n\n19. In the second place, the story of men\u2019s prosperous actions\nnaturally carries them into the humor of boasting; and joy so far\ntransports them, that they swell with their own words when they would\ngive you a relation of their victories or their success in the business\nof the state, or of their other publicly applauded actions or orations,\nand find it difficult to contain themselves and preserve a mean. In\nwhich kind of error it is observable that soldiers and mariners are\nmost entangled. Nor is it infrequent with those who return from the\ngovernment of provinces and the management of great affairs. Such as\nthese, when mention is once made of illustrious and royal personages,\npresently thrust in some eulogies of themselves, as proceeding from\nthe favor and kind opinion of those princes: and then they fancy they\nseem not at all to have praised themselves, but to have given only a\nbare account what great men have said honorably of them. So another\nsort, little different from these, think they are not discerned when\nthey tell you all the familiarities of kings and emperors with them and\ntheir particular applying themselves to them in discourse, and appear\nto recount them, not as thereby intending their own honor, but as\nbringing in considerable evidences of singular affability and humanity\nin persons so exceeding great.\n\nWe see then what reason we have to look narrowly to ourselves, that,\nwhilst we confer praises on others, we give no ground for suspicion\nthat we make them but the vehicles of our own, and that, \u201cin pretending\nto celebrate Patroclus,\u201d under his name we mean romantically ourselves.\n\n20. Further, that kind of discourse which consists in dispraising and\nfinding fault is dangerous, and yields opportunity to those that watch\nit for the magnifying their own little worth. Of this old men are\ninclinable to be guilty, when, by chastising and debasing others for\ntheir vices, they exalt themselves as wonderfully great in the opposite\nvirtues. Indeed to these there must be a very large concession, if\nthey be reverend not only in age, but in virtue and place; for it is\nnot altogether an unprofitable way, since it may sometimes create an\nextraordinary zeal and emulation of honor in those who are thus spurred\nup. But otherwise that sort of humor is carefully to be shunned; for\nreproof is often bitter, and wants a great deal of caution to sweeten\nand correct it. Now this is not done by the tempering our own praises\nwith the reprehension of another; for he is an unworthy and odious\nfellow who seeks his own credit through any man\u2019s disgrace, basely\nendeavoring to build a slight reputation of his virtue upon the\ndiscovery of another\u2019s crimes.\n\n21. Lastly, as they who are naturally inclined to a dangerous sort of\nlaughter,\u2014which is a kind of violent passion or disease,\u2014must preserve\nespecially the smooth parts of the body from tickling incentives, which\ncause these parts to yield and relent, thus provoking the passion; so\nthey whose minds are soft and propense to the desires of reputation\nmust carefully beware that they be not precipitated by the ticklings\nof another\u2019s praises into a vaporing of themselves. They ought rather\nto blush, if they hear themselves commended, and not put on a brazen\nface. They ought modestly and handsomely to reprove their applauders as\nhaving honored them too much, and not chide them for having been too\nsparing in their praise. Yet in this many offend, putting those who\nspeak advantageously of them in mind of more things of the same nature;\nendeavoring to make a huge heap of creditable actions, till by what\nthey themselves add they spoil all that their friends have conferred to\nthe promoting their esteem.\n\nSome there are who flatter themselves, till they are stupidly puffed\nup; others allure a man to talk of himself, and take him by casting\nsome little gilded temptation in his way; and another sort for a little\nsport will be putting questions, as those in Menander to the silly\nbraggadocio soldier:\n\n             How did you get this wound?\n             By a furious dart.\n             For heaven\u2019s sake, how?\n             As from my scaling ladder\n    I mounted the proud walls. See here! Behold!\n             Then I proceed to show my wound\n    With earnest look; but they spoiled all with laughter.\n\n22. We must be watchful in all these cases, that we neither of\nourselves drop into our own inconvenient praises, nor be hooked into\nthem by others. Now the best and most certain way of security is to\nlook back upon such as we can remember guilty of this fault, and to\nconsider how absurd and ugly it is accounted by all men, and that\nhardly any thing is in converse a greater disturbance than this.\n\nHence it is that, though there be no other quality in such persons\nunpleasing, yet, as if Nature had taught us to abhor and fly it, we\nhasten out to get a little fresh air; and even the very parasite and\nindigent flatterers are uneasy, when the wealthy and great men by whose\nscraps they live begin to admire and extol themselves; nay, they give\nout that they pay the greatest portion of the shot, when they must give\near to such vanities. Therefore he in Menander cries out,\n\n    They kill me\u2014I am a macerated guest\u2014\n    With their wise sayings and their soldier\u2019s brags;\n    How base these gloriosos are!\n\nBut these faults are not only to be objected against common soldiers\nand upstarts who detain others with gaudy and proud relations of their\nown actions, but also against sophists, philosophers, and commanders\nwho grow full of themselves and talk at a fastuous rate. Therefore it\nis fit we still remember that another\u2019s dispraise always accompanies\nthe indiscreet praises of ourselves; that the end of vain-glory is\ndisgrace; and that, as Demosthenes tells us, the company will both be\noffended and judge otherwise of us than we would have them.[186] Let\nus then forbear to talk of ourselves, unless the profit that we or our\nhearers may thence probably reap be considerably great.\n\n\n\n\nCONCERNING THE PROCREATION OF THE SOUL AS DISCOURSED IN TIMAEUS.[187]\n\nTHE FATHER TO AUTOBULUS AND PLUTARCH WISHETH HEALTH.\n\n\n1. Since it is your opinion that it would be requisite for me to\ncollect together what I have discoursed and written dispersedly in\nseveral treatises explaining, as we apprehended his sense and meaning,\nwhat opinion Plato had concerning the soul, as requiring a particular\ncommentary by itself; therefore I have compiled this discourse,\nwhich asks for your consideration and pardon not only because the\nmatter itself is by no means easy to be handled, but also because the\ndoctrines herein contained are somewhat contrary to those held by most\nof the Platonic philosophers. And I will first rehearse the words as\nthey run originally in the text itself of Timaeus.[188]\n\n\u201cThere being one substance not admitting of division, but continuing\nstill the same, and another liable to be divided among several bodies,\nout of both these he produced for a middle mixture a third sort of\nSubstance, partaking of the nature of the Same and of the nature of the\nOther, and placed it in the midst between that which was indivisible\nand that which was subject to be corporeally divided. Then taking all\nthree, he blended them into one form, forcibly adapting to the Same\nthe nature of the Other, not readily condescending to a mixture. Now\nwhen he had thus mixed them with the Substance, and reduced the three\ninto one, he again divided this whole matter into so many parts as were\nthought to be necessary; every one of these parts being composed of the\nSame, the Other, and the Substance. And thus he began his division.\u201d\n\nBy the way, it would be an endless toil to recite the contentions and\ndisputes that have from hence arisen among his interpreters, and to you\nindeed superfluous, who are not ignorant yourselves of the greatest\npart.\n\nBut seeing that Xenocrates won to his opinions several of the most\neminent philosophers, while he defined the substance of the soul to be\nnumber moved by itself; and that many adhered to Crantor the Solian,\nwho affirmed the soul to consist partly of an essence perceptible to\nthe mind, partly of a nature concerned with sensible things and subject\nto opinions; I am apt to believe that the perspicuity of these matters\nclearly dilucidated will afford you a fair entrance into the knowledge\nof the rest.\n\n2. Nor does either of the two conjectures require many words of\nexplanation. For the one side pretends that by the mixture of the\ndivisible and indivisible substance no other thing is meant than the\ngeneration or original of number, seeing that the unit is undividable\nbut multitude is subject to division; however, that out of these is\nbegot number, unity terminating plurality and putting a period to\ninfinity, which they call the unlimited binary. This binary Zaratas,\nthe scholar of Pythagoras, named the mother, but the unit the father\nof number; and therefore he believed those numbers were the best which\napproached nearest in resemblance to the unit. Nevertheless, this\nnumber cannot be said to be the soul; for it neither has the power\nto move, neither can it be moved. But the Same and the Other being\nblended together, of which one is the original of motion and mutation,\nthe other of rest and stability, from these two springs the soul, which\nis no less active or passive itself to stay or to be stayed, than to\nmove or to be moved.\n\nBut the followers of Crantor, supposing the proper function of the\nsoul to consist in judging of those things which are discernible to\nthe understanding and those which are liable to sense, as also of the\ndifferences and similitudes of these things, as well in themselves as\nin reference one to another, allege the soul to be composed of all,\nto the end she may have a true knowledge of the whole. Now the things\nof which the All is composed are fourfold,\u2014the intelligible nature,\nalways immutable and still the same, and the sensitive nature, which\nis passive and subject to alteration; and also the nature of the Same,\nand the nature of the Other, in regard the two former in some measure\nparticipate also of diversity and identity.\n\n3. All these philosophers likewise equally hold that the soul neither\nderives its beginning from time nor is the product of generation, but\nthat it is endued with several faculties and virtues, into which Plato,\nas it were, melting and dissolving its substance for contemplation\u2019s\nsake, supposes it in his discourse to have had its original from\nprocreation and mixture.\n\nThe same was his opinion concerning the world; for he knew it to be\nuncreated and without end, but not perceiving it so easy to apprehend\nhow the structure was reared, or by what order and government\nsupported, unless by admitting its beginning and the causes thereto\nconcurring, he followed that method to instruct himself. These things\nbeing thus generally by them laid down, Eudorus will allow to neither\nside any share of probability; and indeed to me they both seem to have\nwandered from the opinion of Plato, if we intend to make the most\nlikely rule our guide,\u2014which is not to advance our own conceits,\nbut to come as close as we can to his sense and meaning. Now as to\nthis same mixture (as they call it) of the intelligible and sensitive\nsubstance, no reason appears why it should be more the original of the\nsoul than of any other thing that ye can name. For the whole world\nitself and every one of its parts pretend to no other composition\nthan of a sensitive and an intelligible substance, of which the one\naffords matter and foundation, the other form and figure to the whole\nmass. And then again, whate\u2019er there is of material substance, framed\nand structured by participation and assimilation of the intelligible\nnature is not only to be felt but visible to the eye; whenas the soul\nstill soars above the reach of all natural apprehension. Neither did\nPlato ever assert the soul to be number, but a perpetually self-moving\nnature, the fountain and principle of motion. Only he embellished and\nadorned the substance of it with number, proportion, and harmony;\nas being a subject capable of receiving the most goodly form which\nthose ornaments could produce. So that I cannot believe it to be the\nsame thing to compose the soul according to number, and to affirm the\nsoul to be number itself. Nor can it be said to be harmony because\nharmoniously composed, as he has clearly demonstrated in his Treatise\nof the Soul. But plain it is, that those philosophers understood not\nthe meaning of the Same and the Other. For they tell us how the Same\ncontributes rest, the Other motion toward the generation of the soul.\nThough Plato himself, in his treatise entitled the Sophist, disposes\nand distinguishes Essence, the Same, the Other, together with Motion\nand Rest, as being five things altogether differing one from another\nand void of mutual affinity.\n\n4. But these men are generally, as the most part of Plato\u2019s readers,\ntimorous and vainly perplexed, using all their endeavors by wresting\nand tormenting his sense to conceal and hide what he has written,\nas if it were some terrible novelty not fit for public view, that\nthe world and the soul neither had their beginning and composition\nfrom eternity, nor had their essence from a boundless immensity of\ntime,\u2014of which we have particularly spoken already. So that now it\nshall suffice to say no more than this, that these writers confound and\nsmother (if they do not rather utterly abolish) his eager contest and\ndispute in behalf of the Gods, wherein Plato confesses himself to have\nbeen transported with an ambitious zeal, even beyond the strength of\nhis years, against the atheists of his time. For if the world had no\nbeginning, Plato\u2019s opinion vanishes,\u2014that the soul, much elder than the\nbody, is the principle of all motion and alteration, or (to use his own\nwords) their chieftain and first efficient cause, whose mansion is in\nNature\u2019s secret retirements. But what the soul is what the body, and\nwhy the soul is said to have been elder than the body, shall be made\nappear in the progress of this discourse. The ignorance of this seems\nto have been the occasion of much doubt and incredulity in reference to\nthe true opinion.\n\n5. First therefore, I shall propose my own sentiments concerning these\nthings, desiring to gain credit no otherwise than by the most probable\nstrength of arguments, explaining and reconciling to the utmost of\nmy ability truth and paradox together; after which I shall apply\nboth the explication and demonstration to the words of the text. In\nmy opinion then the business lies thus. The world, saith Heraclitus,\nneither did any one of all the Gods nor any mortal man create,\u2014as if\nhe had been afraid that, not being able to make out the creation by a\nDeity, we should be constrained to acknowledge some man to have been\nthe architect of the universe. But certainly far better it is, in\nsubmission to Plato\u2019s judgment, to avow, both in discourse and in our\nsongs of praise, that the glory of the structure belongs to God,\u2014for\nthe frame itself is the most beautiful of all masterpieces, and God the\nmost illustrious of all causes,\u2014but that the substance and materials\nwere not created, but always ready at the ordering and disposal of the\nOmnipotent Builder, to give it form and figure, as near as might be,\napproaching to his own resemblance. For the creation was not out of\nnothing, but out of matter wanting beauty and perfection, like the rude\nmaterials of a house, a garment, or a statue, lying first in shapeless\nconfusion. For before the creation of the world there was nothing but\na confused heap; yet was that confused heap neither without a body,\nwithout motion, nor without a soul. The corporeal part was without form\nor consistence, and the moving part stupid and headlong; and this was\nthe disorder of a soul not guided by reason. God neither incorporated\nthat which is incorporeal, nor conveyed a soul into that which had\nnone before; like a person either musical or poetical, who does not\nmake either the voice or the movement, but only reduces the voice with\nharmony, and graces the movement with proper measures. Thus God did not\nmake the tangible and resistant solidity of the corporeal substance,\nnor the imaginative or moving faculties of the soul; but taking these\ntwo principles as they lay ready at hand,\u2014the one obscure and dark, the\nother turbulent and senseless, both imperfect without the bounds of\norder and decency,\u2014he disposed, digested, and embellished the confused\nmass, so that he brought to perfection a most absolute and glorious\ncreature. Therefore the substance of the body is no other than that\nall-receiving Nature, the seat and nurse of all created beings.\n\n6. But the substance of the soul, in Philebus, he called an infinite\nbeing, the privation of number and proportion; having neither\nperiod nor measure either of diminution or excess or distinction or\ndissimilitude. But as to that order which he alleges in Timaeus to\nbe the mixture of nature with the indivisible substance, but which\nbeing applied to bodies becomes liable to division,\u2014he would not have\nit thought to be a bulk made up by units or points, nor longitude\nand breadth, which are qualities more consentaneous to bodies\nthan to the soul, but that disorderly unlimited principle, moving\nboth itself and other substances, that which he frequently calls\nnecessity, and which within his treatise of laws he openly styles\nthe disorderly, ill-acting, or harm-doing soul. For such was this\nsoul of herself; but at length she came to partake of understanding,\nratiocination, and harmony, that she might be the soul of the world.\nNow that all-receiving principle of matter enjoyed both magnitude,\nspace, and distance; but beauty, form, and measure of proportion it\nhad none. However, all these it obtained, to the end that, when it\ncame to be thus embellished and adorned, it might assume the form\nof all the various bodies and organs of the earth, the sea, the\nheavens, the stars, and of all those infinite varieties of plants\nand living creatures. Now as for those who attribute to this matter,\nand not to the soul, that which in Timaeus is called necessity, in\nPhilebus vast disproportion and unlimited exorbitancy of diminution\nand excess,\u2014they can never maintain it to be the cause of disorder,\nsince Plato always alleges that same matter to be without any form or\nfigures, and altogether destitute of any quality or effectual virtue\nproperly belonging to it; comparing it to such oils as have no scent\nat all, which the perfumers mix in their tinctures. For there is no\nlikelihood that Plato would suppose that to be the cause and principle\nof evil which is altogether void of quality in itself, sluggish, and\nnever to be roused on to action, and yet at the same time brand this\nimmensity with the harsh epithets of base and mischievous, and call it\nnecessity repugnant and contumaciously rebellious against God. For\nthis same necessity, which renverses heaven (to use his own phrase\nin his Politicus) and turns it the quite contrary way from decency\nand symmetry, together with innate concupiscence, and that inbred\nconfusion of ancient nature, hurly-burly\u2019d with all manner of disorder,\nbefore they were wrought and kneaded into the graceful decorum of\nthe world,\u2014whence came they to be conveyed into several varieties of\nforms and beings, if the subject, which is the first matter, were void\nof all quality whatsoever and deprived of all efficient cause; more\nespecially the Architect being so good of himself, and intending a\nframe the nearest approaching to his own perfections? For besides these\nthere is no third principle. And indeed, we should stumble into the\nperplexed intricacies of the Stoics, should we advance evil into the\nworld out of nonentity, without either any preceding cause or effect of\ngeneration, in regard that among those principles that have a being,\nit is not probable that either real good or that which is destitute of\nall manner of quality should afford birth or substance to evil. But\nPlato escaped those pitfalls into which they blundered who came after\nhim; who, neglecting what he carefully embraced, the third principle\nand energetic virtue in the middle between God and the first matter,\nmaintain the most absurd of arguments, affirming the nature of evils\nto have crept in spontaneously and adventitiously, I know not how nor\nby what strange accidents. And yet they will not allow an atom of\nEpicurus so much as a moment\u2019s liberty to shift in its station, which,\nas they say, would infer motion out of nonentity without any impulsive\ncause; nevertheless themselves presuming all this while to affirm that\nvice and wickedness, together with a thousand other incongruities and\nvexations afflicting the body, of which no cause can be ascribed to any\nof the principles, came into being (as it were) \u201cby consequence.\u201d\n\n7. Plato however does not so; who, despoiling the first matter of\nall manner of distinction, and separating from God, as far as it is\npossible, the causes of evil, has thus delivered himself concerning\nthe world, in his Politicus. \u201cThe world,\u201d saith he, \u201creceived from the\nIllustrious Builder all things beautiful and lovely; but whatsoever\nhappens to be noxious and irregular in heaven, it derives from its\nancient habit and disposition, and conveys them into the several\ncreatures.\u201d And a little farther in the same treatise he saith: \u201cIn\nprocess of time, when oblivion had encroached upon the world, the\ndistemper of its ancient confusion more prevailed, and the hazard\nis, lest being dissolved it should again be sunk and plunged into\nthe immense abyss of its former irregularity.\u201d But there can be no\ndissimilitude in the first matter, as being void of quality and\ndistinction.\n\nOf which when Eudemus with several others was altogether ignorant, he\nseems deridingly to cavil with Plato, and taxes him with asserting the\nfirst matter to be the cause, the root, and principle of all evil,\nwhich he had at other times so frequently dignified with the tender\nappellations of mother and nurse. Whereas Plato gives to matter only\nthe titles of the mother and nurse; but the cause of evil he makes\nto be the moving force residing within it, not governed by order and\nreason, though not without a soul neither, which, in his treatise of\nthe Laws, he calls expressly the soul repugnant and in hostility with\nthat other propitiously and kindly acting. For though the soul be the\nprinciple of motion, yet is it the understanding and intelligence which\nmeasures that motion by order and harmony, and is the cause of both.\nFor God could not have brought to rest mere sleepy and sluggish matter,\nbut he brought it to rest when it had been troubled and disquieted by\na senseless and stupid cause. Neither did he infuse into nature the\nprinciples of alteration and affections; but when it was under the\npressure of those unruly disorders and alterations, he discharged it\nof its manifold enormities and irregularities, making use of symmetry,\nproportion, and number. For these are the most proper instruments, not\nby alteration and lawless motion to distract the several beings with\npassions and distinctions, but rather to render them fixed and stable,\nand nearest in their composition to those things that in themselves\ncontinue still the same upon the equal poise of diuturnity. And this,\nin my judgment, is the sense and meaning of Plato.\n\n8. Of which the easy reconciliation of his seeming incongruities and\ncontradiction of himself may serve for the first proof. For indeed no\nmen of judgment would have objected to the most Bacchanalian sophister,\nmore especially to Plato, the guilt of so much inconvenience and\nimpudent rashness in a discourse by him so elaborately studied, as to\naffirm the same nature in one place never to have been created, in\nanother to have been the effects of generation;\u2014in Phaedrus to assert\nthe soul eternal, in Timaeus to subject it to procreation. The words\nin Phaedrus need no repetition, as being familiar to nearly every one,\nwherein he proves the soul to be incorruptible in regard it never had a\nbeginning, and to have never had a beginning because it moves itself.\nBut in Timaeus, \u201cGod,\u201d saith he, \u201cdid not make the soul a junior to\nthe body, as now we labor to prove it to have been subsequent to the\nbody. For he would never have suffered the more ancient, because linked\nand coupled with the younger, to have been governed by it; only we,\nguided I know not how by chance and inconsiderate rashness, frame odd\nkind of notions to ourselves. But God most certainly composed the soul\nexcelling the body both in seniority of origin and in power, to be\nmistress and governess of her inferior servant.\u201d[189] And then again\nhe adds, how that the soul, being turned upon herself, began the divine\nbeginning of an eternal and prudent life. \u201cNow,\u201d saith he, \u201cthe body\nof heaven became visible; but the soul being invisible, nevertheless\nparticipating of ratiocination and harmony, by the best of intelligible\nand eternal beings she was made the best of things created.\u201d[190] Here\nthen he determines God to be the best of sempiternal beings, the soul\nto be the most excellent of temporal existences. By which apparent\ndistinction and antithesis he denies that the soul is eternal, and that\nit never had a beginning.\n\n9. And now what other or better reconciliation of these seeming\ncontrarieties than his own explanation, to those that are willing\nto apprehend it? For he declares to have been without beginning the\nnever procreated soul, that moved all things confusedly and in an\nirregular manner before the creation of the world. But as for that\nwhich God composed out of this and that other permanent and choicest\nsubstance, making it both prudent and orderly, and adding of his own,\nas if it were for form and beauty\u2019s sake, intellect to sense, and\norder to motion, and which he constituted prince and chieftain of\nthe whole,\u2014that he acknowledges to have had a beginning and to have\nproceeded from generation. Thus he likewise pronounces the body of the\nworld in one respect to be eternal and without beginning, in another\nsense to be the work of creation. To which purpose, where he says\nthat the visible structure, never in repose at first but restless in\na confused and tempestuous motion, was at length by the hand of God\ndisposed and ranged into majestic order,\u2014where he says that the four\nelements, fire and water, earth and air, before the stately pile was by\nthem embellished and adorned, caused a prodigious fever and shivering\nague in the whole mass of matter, that labored under the combats of\ntheir unequal mixtures, by his urging these things, he gives those\nbodies room in the vast abyss before the fabric of the universe.\n\nAgain, when he says that the body was younger than the soul, and that\nthe world was created, as being of a corporeal substance that may\nbe seen and felt,\u2014which sort of substances must necessarily have a\nbeginning and be created,\u2014it is evidently demonstrable from thence that\nhe ascribes original creation to the nature of bodies. But he is far\nfrom being repugnant or contradictory to himself in these sublimest\nmysteries. For he does not contend, that the same body was created\nby God or after the same manner, and yet that it was before it had\na being,\u2014which would have been to act the part of a juggler; but he\ninstructs us what we ought to understand by generations and creation.\nTherefore, says he, at first all these things were void of measure and\nproportion; but when God first began to beautify the whole, the fire\nand water, earth and air, having perhaps some prints and footsteps of\ntheir forms, lay in a huddle jumbled all together,\u2014as probable it is\nthat all things are, where God is absent,\u2014which then he reduced to a\ncomely perfection varied by number and order. Moreover, having told us\nbefore that it was a work not of one but of a twofold proportion to\nbind and fasten the bulky immensity of the whole, which was both solid\nand of a prodigious profundity, he then comes to declare how God, after\nhe had placed the water and the earth in the midst between the fire and\nthe air, incontinently closed up the heavens into a circular form. Out\nof these materials, saith he, being four in number, was the body of the\nworld created, agreeing in proportion, and so amicably corresponding\ntogether, that being thus embodied and confined within their proper\nbounds, it is impossible that any dissolution should happen from their\nown contending force, unless he that riveted the whole frame should\ngo about again to rend it in pieces;\u2014most apparently teaching us,\nthat God was not the parent and architect of the corporeal substance\nonly, or of the bulk and matter, but of the beauty and symmetry and\nsimilitude that adorned and graced the whole. The same we are to\nbelieve, he thought, concerning the soul; that there is one which\nneither was created by God nor is the soul of the world, but a certain\nself-moving and restless efficacy of a giddy and disorderly agitation\nand impetuosity, irrational and subject to opinion; while the other is\nthat which God himself, having accoutred and adorned it with suitable\nnumbers and proportions, has made queen regent of the created world,\nherself the product of creation also.\n\n10. Now that Plato had this belief concerning these things, and did\nnot for contemplation\u2019s sake lay down these suppositions concerning\nthe creation of the world and the soul,\u2014this, among many others, seems\nto be an evident signification that, as to the soul, he avers it to be\nboth created and not created, but as to the world, he always maintains\nthat it had a beginning and was created, never that it was uncreated\nand eternal. What necessity therefore of bringing any testimonies out\nof Timaeus? For the whole treatise, from the beginning to the end,\ndiscourses of nothing else but of the creation of the world. As for\nthe rest, we find that Timaeus, in his Atlantic, addressing himself\nin prayer to the Deity, calls God that being which of old existed\nin his works, but now was apparent to reason. In his Politicus, his\nParmenidean guest acknowledges that the world, which was the handiwork\nof God, is replenished with several good things, and that, if there be\nany thing in it which is vicious and offensive, it comes by mixture\nof its former incongruous and irrational habit. But Socrates, in the\nPolitics, beginning to discourse of number, which some call by the name\nof wedlock, says: \u201cThe created Divinity has a circular period, which\nis, as it were, enchased and involved in a certain perfect number;\u201d\nmeaning in that place by created Divinity no other than the world\nitself.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n11. The first pair of these numbers consists of one and two, the second\nof three and four, the third of five and six; neither of which pairs\nmake a tetragonal number, either by themselves or joined with any other\nfigures. The fourth consists of seven and eight, which, being added all\ntogether, produce a tetragonal number of thirty-six. But the quaternary\nof numbers set down by Plato have a more perfect generation, of even\nnumbers multiplied by even distances, and of odd by uneven distances.\nThis quaternary contains the unit, the common original of all even and\nodd numbers. Subsequent to which are two and three, the first plane\nnumbers; then four and nine, the first squares; and next eight and\ntwenty-seven, the first cubical numbers (not counting the unit). Whence\nit is apparent, that his intention was not that the numbers should be\nplaced in a direct line one above another, but apart and oppositely one\nagainst the other, the even by themselves, and the odd by themselves,\naccording to the scheme here given. In this manner similar numbers will\nbe joined together, which will produce other remarkable numbers, as\nwell by addition as by multiplication.\n\n  1  2\n  3  4\n  5  6\n  7  8\n\n[Illustration:\n\n          1\n          /\\\n         /  \\\n      2 /  5 \\ 3\n       /      \\\n    4 /   13   \\ 9\n     /          \\\n  8 /     35     \\ 27\n   - - - - - - - -\n]\n\n12. By addition thus: two and three make five, four and nine make\nthirteen, eight and twenty-seven make thirty-five. Of all which numbers\nthe Pythagoreans called five the nourisher, that is to say, the\nbreeding or fostering sound, believing a fifth to be the first of all\nthe intervals of tones which could be sounded. But as for thirteen,\nthey called it the remainder, despairing, as Plato himself did, of\nbeing ever able to divide a tone into equal parts. Then five and\nthirty they named harmony, as consisting of the two cubes eight and\ntwenty-seven, the first that rise from an odd and an even number, as\nalso of the four numbers, six, eight, nine, and twelve, comprehending\nboth harmonical and arithmetical proportion. Which nevertheless will be\nmore conspicuous, being made out in a scheme to the eye.\n\n[Illustration]\n\nAdmit a right-angled parallelogram, A B C D, the lesser side of which\nA B consists of five, the longer side A C contains seven squares. Let\nthe lesser division be unequally divided into two and three squares,\nmarked by E; and the larger division in two unequal divisions more of\nthree and four squares, marked by F. Thus A E F G comprehends six, E B\nG I nine, F G C H eight, and G I H D twelve. By this means the whole\nparallelogram, containing thirty-five little square areas, comprehends\nall the proportions of the first concords of music in the number of\nthese little squares. For six is exceeded by eight in a sesquiterce\nproportion (3: 4), wherein the diatessaron is comprehended. And six is\nexceeded by nine in a sesquialter proportion (2: 3), wherein also is\nincluded the fifth. Six is exceeded by twelve in duple proportion (1:\n2), containing the octave; and then lastly, there is the sesquioctave\nproportion of a tone in eight to nine. And therefore they call that\nnumber which comprehends all these proportions harmony. This number\nis 35, which being multiplied by 6, the product is 210, which is the\nnumber of days, they say, which brings those infants to perfection that\nare born at the seventh month\u2019s end.\n\n13. To proceed by way of multiplication,\u2014twice 3 make 6, and 4\ntimes 9 thirty-six, and 8 times 27 produce 216. Thus six appears to\nbe a perfect number, as being equal in its parts; and it is called\nmatrimony, by reason of the mixture of the first even and odd. Moreover\nit is composed of the original number, which is one, of the first\neven number, which is two, and the first odd number, which is three.\nThen for 36, it is the first number which is as well quadrangular as\ntriangular, being quadrangular from 6, and triangular from 8.[191] The\nsame number arises from the multiplication of the first two square\nnumbers, 4 and 9; as also from the addition of the three cubical\nnumbers, 1, 8, and 27, which being put together make up 36. Lastly,\nyou have a parallelogram with unequal sides, by the multiplication of\n12 by 3, or 9 by 4. Take then the numbers of the sides of all these\nfigures, the 6 of the square, the 8 of the triangle, the 9 for the one\nparallelogram, and the 12 for the other; and there you will find the\nproportions of all the concords. For 12 to 9 will be a fourth, as nete\nto paramese. To eight it will prove a fifth, as nete to mese. To six it\nwill be an octave, as nete to hypate. And the two hundred and sixteen\nis the cubical number proceeding from six which is its root, and so\nequal to its own perimeter.\n\n14. Now these numbers aforesaid being endued with all these properties,\nthe last of them, which is 27, has this peculiar to itself, that it\nis equal to all those that precede together; besides, that it is the\nperiodical number of the days wherein the moon finishes her monthly\ncourse; the Pythagoreans make it to be the tone of all the harmonical\nintervals. On the other side, they call thirteen the remainder, in\nregard it misses a unit to be half of twenty-seven. Now that these\nnumbers comprehend the proportions of harmonical concord, is easily\nmade apparent. For the proportion of 2 to 1 is duple, which contains\nthe diapason; as the proportion of 3 to 2 sesquialter, which embraces\nthe fifth; and the proportion of 4 to 3 sesquiterce, which comprehends\nthe diatessaron; the proportion of 9 to 3 triple, including the\ndiapason and diapente; and that of 8 to 2 quadruple, comprehending the\ndouble diapason. Lastly, there is the sesquioctave in 8 to 9, which\nmakes the interval of a single tone. If then the unit, which is common,\nbe counted as well to the even as the odd numbers, the whole series\nwill be equal to the sum of the decade. For the even numbers[192] (1\n+ 2 + 4 + 8) give 15, the triangular number of five. On the other\nside, take the odd numbers, 1, 3, 9, and 27, and the sum is 40; by\nwhich numbers the skilful measure all musical intervals, of which they\ncall one a diesis, and the other a tone. Which number of 40 proceeds\nfrom the force of the quaternary number by multiplication. For every\none of the first four numbers being by itself multiplied by four, the\nproducts will be 4, 8, 12, 16, which being added all together make 40,\ncomprehending all the proportions of harmony. For 16 is a sesquiterce\nto 12, duple to 8, and quadruple to 4. Again, 12 holds a sesquialter\nproportion to 8, and triple to 4. In these proportions are contained\nthe intervals of the diatessaron, diapente, diapason, and double\ndiapason. Moreover, the number 40 is equal to the two first tetragons\nand the two first cubes being taken both together. For the first\ntetragons are 1 and 4, the first cubes are 8 and 27, which being added\ntogether make 40. Whence it appears that the Platonic quaternary is\nmuch more perfect and fuller of variety than the Pythagoric.\n\n15. But since the numbers proposed did not afford space sufficient for\nthe middle intervals, therefore there was a necessity to allow larger\nbounds for the proportions. And now we are to tell you what those\nbounds and middle spaces are. And first, concerning the medieties (or\nmean terms); of which that which equally exceeds and is exceeded by\nthe same number is called arithmetical; the other, which exceeds and\nis exceeded by the same proportional part of the extremes, is called\nsub-contrary. Now the extremes and the middle of an arithmetical\nmediety are 6, 9, 12. For 9 exceeds 6 as it is exceeded by 12, that\nis to say, by the number three. The extremes and middle of the\nsub-contrary are 6, 8, 12, where 8 exceeds 6 by 2, and 12 exceeds 8\nby 4; yet 2 is equally the third of 6, as 4 is the third of 12. So\nthat in the arithmetical mediety the middle exceeds and is exceeded\nby the same number; but in the sub contrary mediety, the middle term\nwants of one of the extremes, and exceeds the other by the same part\nof each extreme; for in the first 3 is the third part of the mean; but\nin the latter 4 and 2 are third parts each of a different extreme.\nWhence it is called sub-contrary. This they also call harmonic, as\nbeing that whose middle and extremes afford the first concords; that is\nto say, between the highest and lowermost lies the diapason, between\nthe highest and the middle lies the diapente, and between the middle\nand lowermost lies the fourth or diatessaron. For suppose the highest\nextreme to be placed at nete and the lowermost at hypate, the middle\nwill fall upon mese, making a fifth to the uppermost extreme, but a\nfourth to the lowermost. So that nete answers to 12, mese to 8, and\nhypate to 6.\n\n16. Now the more readily to find out these means Eudorus hath taught\nus an easy method. For after you have proposed the extremities, if you\ntake the half part of each and add them together, the product shall be\nthe middle, alike in both duple and triple proportions, in arithmetical\nmediety. But as for sub-contrary mediety, in duple proportion, first\nhaving fixed the extremes, take the third part of the lesser and the\nhalf of the larger extreme, and the addition of both together shall\nbe the middle; in triple proportion, the half of the lesser and the\nthird part of the larger extreme shall be the mean. As for example, in\ntriple proportion, let 6 be the least extreme, and 18 the biggest; if\nyou take 3 which is the half of 6, and 6 which is the third part of\n18, the product by addition will be 9, exceeding and exceeded by the\nsame proportional parts of the extremes. In this manner the mediums are\nfound out; and these are so to be disposed and placed as to fill up the\nduple and triple intervals. Now of these proposed numbers, some have no\nmiddle space, others have not sufficient. Being therefore so augmented\nthat the same proportions may remain, they will afford sufficient space\nfor the aforesaid mediums. To which purpose, instead of a unit they\nchoose the six, as being the first number including in itself a half\nand third part, and so multiplying all the figures below it and above\nit by 6, they make sufficient room to receive the mediums, both in\ndouble and triple distances, as in the example below:\u2014\n\n  12    2 |       |  3     18\n  24    4 |   6   |  9     54\n  48    8 |       | 27    162\n\nNow Plato laid down this for a position, that the intervals of\nsesquialters, sesquiterces, and sesquioctaves having once arisen from\nthese connections in the first spaces, the Deity filled up all the\nsesquiterce intervals with sesquioctaves, leaving a part of each, so\nthat the interval left of the part should bear the numerical proportion\nof 256 to 243.[193] From these words of Plato they were constrained\nto enlarge their numbers and make them bigger. Now there must be two\nnumbers following in order in sesquioctave proportion. But the six\ndoes not contain a sesquioctave; and if it should be cut up into parts\nand the units bruised into fractions, this would strangely perplex\nthe study of these things. Therefore the occasion itself advised\nmultiplication; so that, as in changes in the musical scale, the whole\nscheme was extended in agreement with the first (or base) number.\nEudorus therefore, imitating Crantor, made choice of 384 for his\nfirst number, being the product of 64 multiplied by 6; which way of\nproceeding the number 64 led them to, having for its sesquioctave 72.\nBut it is more agreeable to the words of Plato to introduce the half of\n384. For the remainder of that will bear a sesquioctave proportion in\nthose numbers which Plato mentions, 256 and 243, if we make use of 192\nfor the first number. But if the same number be made choice of doubled,\nthe remainder (or leimma) will have the same proportion, but the\nnumbers will be doubled, i.e. 512 and 486. For 256 is in sesquiterce\nproportion to 192, as 512 to 384. Neither was Crantor\u2019s reduction of\nthe proportions to this number without reason, which made his followers\nwilling to pursue it; in regard that 64 is both the square of the\nfirst cube, and the cube of the first square; and being multiplied by\n3, the first odd and trigonal, and the first perfect and sesquialter\nnumber, it produces 192, which also has its sesquioctave, as we shall\ndemonstrate.\n\n17. But first of all, we shall better understand what this leimma or\nremainder is and what was the opinion of Plato, if we do but call\nto mind what was frequently bandied in the Pythagorean schools. For\ninterval in music is all that space which is comprehended by two sounds\nvaried in pitch. Of which intervals, that which is called a tone is\nthe full excess of diapente above diatessaron; and this being divided\ninto two parts, according to the opinion of the musicians, makes two\nintervals, both which they call a semitone. But the Pythagoreans,\ndespairing to divide a tone into equal parts, and therefore perceiving\nthe two divisions to be unequal, called the lesser leimma (or defect),\nas being lesser than the half. Therefore some there are who make the\ndiatessaron, which is one of the concords, to consist of two tones and\na half; others, of two tones and leimma. In which case sense seems\nto govern the musicians, and demonstration the mathematicians. The\nproof by demonstration is thus made out. For it is certain from the\nobservation of instruments that the diapason has double proportion,\nthe diapente a sesquialter, the diatessaron a sesquiterce, and the\ntone a sesquioctave proportion. Now the truth of this will easily\nappear upon examination, by hanging two weights double in proportion\nto two strings, or by making two pipes of equal hollowness double in\nlength, the one to the other. For the bigger of the pipes will yield\nthe deep sound, as hypate to nete; and of the two strings, that which\nis extended by the double weight will be acuter than the other, as nete\nto hypate; and this is a diapason. In the same manner two longitudes\nor ponderosities, being taken in the proportion of 3: 2, will produce\na diapente; and three to four will yield a diatessaron; of which the\nlatter carries a sesquiterce, the former a sesquialter proportion.\nBut if the same inequality of weight or length be so ordered as nine\nto eight, it will produce a tonic interval, no perfect concord, but\nharmonical enough; in regard the strings being struck one after another\nwill yield so many musical and pleasing sounds, but all together a\ndull and ungrateful noise. But if they are touched in consort, either\nsingle or together, thence a delightful melody will charm the ear. Nor\nis all this less demonstrable by reason. For in music, the diapason\nis composed of the diapente and diatessaron. But in numbers, the\nduple is compounded of the sesquialter and sesquiterce. For 12 is a\nsesquiterce to 9, but a sesquialter to 8, and a duple to 6. Therefore\nis the duple proportion composed of the sesquialter and sesquiterce,\nas the diapason of the diapente and diatessaron. For here the diapente\nexceeds the diatessaron by a tone; there the sesquialter exceeds\nthe sesquiterce by a sesquioctave. Whence it is apparent that the\ndiapason carries a double proportion, the diapente a sesquialter, the\ndiatessaron a sesquiterce, and the tone a sesquioctave.\n\n18. This being thus demonstrated, let us see whether the sesquioctave\nwill admit a division into two equal parts; which if it will not do,\nneither will a tone. However, in regard that 9 and 8, which make the\nfirst sesquioctave, have no middle interval, but both being doubled,\nthe space that falls between causes two intervals, thence it is\napparent that, if those distances were equal, the sesquioctave also\nmight be divided into equal parts. Now the double of 9 is 18, that\nof 8 is 16, the intermedium 17; by which means one of the intervals\nbecomes larger, the other lesser; for the first is that of 18 to 17,\nthe second that of 17 to 16. Thus the sesquioctave proportion not being\nto be otherwise than unequally divided, consequently neither will the\ntone admit of an equal division. So that neither of these two sections\nof a divided tone is to be called a semitone, but according as the\nmathematicians name it, the remainder. And this is that which Plato\nmeans, when he says, that God, having filled up the sesquiterces with\nsesquioctaves, left a part of each; of which the proportion is the same\nas of 256 to 243. For admit a diatessaron in two numbers comprehending\nsesquiterce proportion, that is to say, in 256 and 192; of which two\nnumbers, let the lesser 192 be applied to the lowermost extreme, and\nthe bigger number 256 to the uppermost extreme of the tetrachord.\nWhence we shall demonstrate that, this space being filled up by two\nsesquioctaves, such an interval remains as lies between the numbers 256\nand 243. For the lower string being forced a full tone upward, which is\na sesquioctave, it makes 216; and being screwed another tone upward it\nmakes 243. Which 243 exceeds 216 by 27, and 216 exceeds 192 by 24. And\nthen again of these two numbers, 27 is the eighth of 216, and 24 the\neighth of 192. So the biggest of these two numbers is a sesquioctave\nto the middle, and the middle to the least; and the distance from the\nleast to the biggest, that is from 192 to 243, consists of two tones\nfilled up with two sesquioctaves. Which being subtracted, the remaining\ninterval of the whole between 243 and 256 is 13, for which reason they\ncalled this number the remainder. And thus I am apt to believe the\nmeaning and opinion of Plato to be most exactly explained in these\nnumbers.\n\n19. Others, placing the two extremes of the diatessaron, the acute part\nin 288, and the lower sound in 216, in all the rest observe the same\nproportions, only that they take the remainder between the two middle\nintervals. For the base, being forced up a whole tone, makes 243; and\nthe upper note, screwed downward a full tone, begets 256. Moreover 243\ncarries a sesquioctave proportion to 216, and 288 to 256; so that each\nof the intervals contains a full tone, and the residue is that which\nremains between 243 and 256, which is not a semitone, but something\nless. For 288 exceeds 256 by 32, and 243 exceeds 216 by 27; but 256\nexceeds 243 by 13. Now this excess is less than half of the former. So\nit is plain that the diatessaron consists of two tones and the residue,\nnot of two tones and a half. Let this suffice for the demonstration of\nthese things. Nor is it a difficult thing to believe, by what has been\nalready said, wherefore Plato, after he had asserted that the intervals\nof sesquialter, sesquiterce, and sesquioctave had arisen, when he comes\nto fill up the intervals of sesquiterces with sesquioctaves, makes\nnot the least mention of sesquialters; for that the sesquialter is\nsoon filled up, by adding the sesquiterce to the sesquioctave, or the\nsesquioctave to the sesquiterce.\n\n20. Having therefore shown the manner how to fill up the intervals,\nand to place and dispose the medieties, had never any person taken the\nsame pains before, I should have recommended the further consideration\nof it to the recreation of your fancies; but in regard that several\nmost excellent musicians have made it their business to unfold these\nmysteries with a diligence more than usually exact,\u2014more especially\nCrantor, Clearchus, and Theodorus, all born in Soli,\u2014it shall suffice\nonly to show how these men differed among themselves. For Theodorus,\nvarying from the other two, and not observing two distinct files or\nrows of numbers, but placing the duples and triples in a direct line\none before another, grounds himself upon that division of the substance\nwhich Plato calls the division in length, making two parts (as it were)\nout of one, not four out of two. Then he says, that the interposition\nof the mediums ought to take place in that manner, to avoid the trouble\nand confusion which must arise from transferring out of the first\nduple into the first triple the intervals which are ordained for the\nsupplement of both.... But as for those who take Crantor\u2019s part, they\nso dispose their numbers as to place planes with planes, tetragons with\ntetragons, cubes with cubes, opposite to one another, not taking them\nin file, but alternatively odd to even. [Here is some great defect in\nthe original.]\n\n21. ... Which, being in themselves permanently the same, afford the\nform and species; but being subject to corporeal division, they become\nthe matter and subject to receive the other\u2019s impression, the common\nmixture being completed out of both. Now the indivisible substance,\nwhich is always one and the same, is not to be thought to be incapable\nof division by reason of its smallness, like the most minute of bodies,\ncalled atoms. But as it is unmixed, and not to be any way affected,\nbut pure and altogether of one sort, it is said not to consist of\nparts, but to be indivisible. By means of which purity, when it comes\nin any manner whatsoever to approach and gently touch compounded\ndivisible and differing substances, all their variety ceases and they\ncrowd together into one habit by sympathy and similitude. If now any\none will call that substance which admits corporeal separation matter,\nas a nature subject to the former and partaking of it, the use of\nthat equivocal term will nothing disadvantage our discourse. But they\nare under a mistake that believe the corporeal to be blended with the\nindivisible matter. First, for that Plato does not here make use of any\none of its names; whereas in other places he calls it the receptacle\nand nurse, capable of both receiving and fostering the vast infinity\nof created beings; not divisible among bodies, but rather the body\nitself parted and divided into single individuals. Then again, what\ndifference would there be between the creation of the world and that\nof the soul, if the composition of each proceeded from both matter and\nthe intelligible essence? Certainly Plato, as endeavoring to separate\nthe generation of the body from that of the soul, tells us that the\ncorporeal part was by God seated and deposited within it, and that\nit was outwardly covered and enveloped by it; and after he had thus\nwrought the soul to its perfection out of proportion, he then proceeds\nto this argument concerning matter, of which he had no occasion to make\nmention before when he was producing the soul, as being that which had\nnot its existence from matter.\n\n22. The same may be said against the followers of Posidonius. For they\nseem not altogether to separate the soul from matter; but imagining\nthe essence of limitations to be divisible in reference to bodies,\nand intermixing it with the intelligible essence, they defined the\nsoul to be an idea (or essential form) of that which has extension in\nevery direction, subsisting in an harmonical proportion of numbers.\nFor (they say) all mathematical objects are disposed between the first\nintelligible and sensible beings; and since the soul contains the\nsempiternal nature of things intelligible and the pathetic nature of\nthings subjected to sense, it seems but rational that it should consist\nof a substance between both. But they were ignorant that God, when\nthe soul was already brought to perfection, afterwards making use of\nthe limitations of bodies to form and shape the matter, confined and\nenvironed the dissipated and fleeting substance within the compass of\ncertain surfaces composed of triangles adapted together. And it is\neven more absurd to make the soul an idea. For the soul is always in\nmotion; the idea is incapable of motion; the one never to be mixed with\nthat which is subjected to sense, the other wrought into the substance\nof the body. Moreover, God could be said only to imitate an idea, as\nhis pattern; but he was the artificer of the soul, as of a work of\nperfection. Now enough has been already said to show that Plato does\nnot assert number to be the substance of the soul, only that it is\nordered and proportioned by number.\n\n23. However this is a common argument against both the former\nopinions, that neither in corporeal limits nor in numbers there is\nthe least footstep or appearance of that power by which the soul\nassumes to itself to judge of what is subject to sense. For it was\nthe participation of the intelligible principle that endued it with\nunderstanding and the perceiving faculty. But as for opinion, belief,\nimagination, and its being affected with qualities relating to the\nbody, no man could ever dream that they proceeded simply either from\nunits, or lines, or surfaces. For not only the souls of mortals have\na power to judge of what is subject to sense; but the soul of the\nworld also, says Plato, \u201cwhen it revolves upon itself, and happens\nonce to touch upon any fluid and roving substance or upon any thing\nindivisible, then being moved throughout its whole self, it gives\nnotice with what this or that thing is identical, to what heterogeneal,\nand in what relations especially and in what manner it happens to be\nand to be affected towards each created thing.\u201d[194] Here he gives at\nthe same time an intimation of the ten Categories or Predicaments; but\nafterwards he gives us a clearer manifestation of these things. \u201cFor\nwhen true reason,\u201d says he, \u201cis fixed upon what is subject to sense,\nand the circle of the Other, observing a just and equal motion, conveys\nits intelligence to the whole soul, then both opinion and belief\nbecome steadfast and certain; on the other side, when it is settled\nupon ratiocination, and the circle of the Same, turning readily and\neasily, furnishes its intimations, then of necessity knowledge arrives\nto perfection. And indeed, whoever shall affirm that any thing in\nwhich these two operations take place is any thing besides a soul, may\ndeservedly be thought to speak any thing rather than the truth.\u201d\n\nFrom whence then does the soul enjoy this motion whereby it comprehends\nwhat is subject to sense, different from that other intelligible motion\nwhich ends in knowledge? This is a difficult task to resolve, unless\nwe steadfastly assert that Plato here did not compose the soul, so\nsingly considered, but the soul of the world also, of the parts above\nmentioned,\u2014of the more worthy indivisible substance, and of the less\nworthy divisible in reference to bodies. And this soul of the world is\nno other than that motion which gives heat and vigor to thought and\nfancy, and sympathizes with what is subject to sense, not created, but\nexisting from eternity, like the other soul. For Nature, which had\nthe power of understanding, had also the power of opining. But the\nintelligible power is subject neither to motion nor affection, being\nestablished upon a substance that is still the same. The other is\nmovable and fleeting, as being engaged to an unstable, fluctuating, and\ndisunited matter. In regard the sensible substance was so far from any\norder, that it was without shape and boundless. So that the power which\nis fixed in this was capable of producing no clear and well-grounded\nnotions and no certain or well-ordered movements, but only sleepy\ndreams and deliriums, which amuse and trouble corporeal stupidity;\nunless by accident they lighted upon the more worthy substance. For\nit was in the middle between the sensible and discerning faculty, and\nhad a nature conformable and agreeable to both; from the sensible\napprehending substance, and borrowing from judgment its power of\ndiscerning things intelligible.\n\n24. And this the express words of Plato declare. \u201cFor this is my\nopinion,\u201d saith he, \u201cin short, that being, place, and generation were\nthree distinct things even before the heavens were created.\u201d[195] By\nplace he means matter, as being the seat and receptacle; by being or\nexistence, the intelligible nature; and by generation, the world not\nbeing yet created, he designs only that substance which was subject to\nchange and motion, disposed between the forming cause and the thing\nformed, transmitting hither those shapes and figures which were there\ncontrived and moulded. For which reason it was called divisible;\nthere being a necessity of distributing sense to the sensitive, and\nimagination to the imaginative faculty. For the sensitive motion, being\nproper to the soul, directs itself to that which is outwardly sensible.\nAs for the understanding, it was fixed and immovable of itself, but\nbeing settled in the soul and becoming its lord and governor, it turns\nupon itself, and accomplishes a circular motion about that which is\nalways permanent, chiefly laboring to apply itself to the eternally\ndurable substance. With great difficulty therefore did they admit\na conjunction, till the divisible at length intermixing with the\nindivisible, and the restlessly hurried with the sleepy and motionless,\nconstrained the Other to meet and join with the Same. Yet the Other was\nnot motion, as neither was the Same stability, but the principle of\ndistinction and diversity. For both the one and the other proceed from\na different principle; the Same from the unit, the Other from the duad;\nand these were first intermixed with the soul, being fastened and bound\ntogether by number, proportion, and harmonical mediums; so that the\nOther being riveted into the Same begets diversity and disagreement;\nand the Same being fermented into the Other produces order. And this\nis apparent from the first powers of the soul, which are judgment and\nmotion. Motion immediately shows itself in the heavens, giving us an\nexample of diversity in identity by the circumvolution of the fixed\nstars, and of identity in diversity by the order of the planets. For\nin them the Same bears the chiefest sway; in terrestrial bodies,\nthe contrary principle. Judgment has two principles,\u2014understanding\nfrom the Same, to judge of things in general, and sense from the\nOther, to judge of things in particular. Reason is a mixture of both,\nbecoming intellect in reference to things intelligible, and opinion\nin things subject to sense; making use of the interdisposed organs\nof imagination and memory, of which these in the Same produce the\nOther, and those in the Other make the Same. For understanding is the\nmotion of the considerative faculty about that which is permanent and\nstable. Opinion is a continuance of the perceptive faculty upon that\nwhich is continually in motion. But as for fancy or imagination, being\na connection of opinion with sense, the Same has placed it in the\nmemory; and the Other moves it again in the difference between past and\npresent, touching at the same time upon diversity and identity.\n\n25. But now let us take a draught of the corresponding composition\nof the soul from the structure of the body of the universe. There we\nfind fire and earth, whose nature is such as not to admit of mixture\none with another but with great difficulty, or rather is altogether\nobstinately refractory to mixture and constancy. God therefore, placing\nair and water in the middle between both,\u2014the air next the fire, the\nwater next the earth,\u2014first of all tempered the middlemost one with\nanother, and next, by the assistance of these two, he brought the\ntwo extreme elements not only to mix with the middlemost, but also\nto a mutual closure or conjunction between themselves. Then he drew\ntogether those contrary powers and opposing extremes, the Same and the\nOther, not immediately, the one adjoining to the other, but placing\nother substances between; the indivisible next the Same, and the\ndivisible next the Other, disposing each to each in convenient order,\nand mixing the extremes with the middlemost. After which manner he\ninterweaved and tissued the whole into the form and composition of the\nsoul, completing, as far as it was possible, similitude out of things\ndifferent and various, and one out of many. Therefore it is alleged by\nsome, that Plato erroneously affirmed the nature of the Other to be an\nenemy to mixture, as being not only capable to receive it, but a friend\nof change. Whereas that should have been rather said of the nature of\nthe Same; which, being stable and an utter adversary to mutability, is\nso far from an easy and willing condescension to mixture, that it flies\nand abhors it, to the end it may preserve itself pure and free from\nalteration. But they who make these objections against Plato betray\ntheir own ignorance, not understanding that the Same is the idea (or\nessential form) of those things that always continue in the same state\nand condition, and that the Other is the idea of those things which are\nsubject to be variously affected; and that it is the peculiar nature\nof the one to disjoin and separate into many parts whatever it happens\nto lay hold upon, and of the other to cement and assimilate scattered\nsubstances, till they resume one particular form and efficacy.\n\n26. And these are the powers and virtues of the soul of the universe.\nAnd when they once enter into the organs of corruptible bodies, being\nthemselves incorruptible, there the form of the binary and boundless\nprinciple shows itself most briskly, while that of the unmixed and\npurer principle lies as it were dormant in obscurity. And thus\nit happens, that a man shall rarely observe any human passion or\nmotion of the understanding, void of reason, where there shall not\nsomething appear either of desire or emulation, joy or grief. Several\nphilosophers therefore will have the passions to be so many sorts of\nreasonings, seeing that desire, grief, and anger are all the effects\nof judgment. Others allege the virtues themselves to be derived from\npassions; fortitude depending on fear, temperance on voluptuousness,\nand justice on love of gain. Now the soul being both speculative and\npractical, contemplating as well generals as particulars, and seeming\nto comprehend the one by the assistance of the intellect and the\nother by the aid of sense, common reason, which encounters the Same\nin the Other and the Other in the Same, endeavors by certain limits\nand distinctions to separate one from many and the divisible from the\nindivisible; but she cannot accomplish her design nor be purely in one\nor the other, in regard the principles are so oddly interwoven and\nintermixed and confusedly huddled together.\n\nFor this reason did God constitute a receptacle for the Same and the\nOther, out of the indivisible and divisible substance, to the end there\nmight be order in variety. Now this was generation. For without this\nthe Same could have no variety, and therefore no motion or generation;\nand the Other could have no order, and therefore no consistence or\ngeneration. For should we grant the Same to be different from the\nOther, and the Other to be the Same with itself, such a commixture\nwould produce nothing generative, but would want a third something,\nlike matter, to receive both and be disposed of by both. And this is\nthat matter which God first composed, when he bounded the movable\nnature of bodies by the steadfastness of things intelligible.\n\n27. Now then, as voice, merely voice, is only an insignificant and\nbrutish noise, but speech is the expression of the mind by significant\nutterance; as harmony consists of sounds and intervals,\u2014a sound being\nalways one and the same, and an interval being the difference and\ndiversity of sounds, while both being mixed together produce air and\nmelody;\u2014thus the passive nature of the soul was without limits and\nunstable, but afterwards became determinate, when limits were set and a\ncertain form was given to the divisible and manifold variety of motion.\nThus having comprised the Same and the Other, by the similitudes and\ndissimilitudes of numbers which produce concord out of disagreement, it\nbecomes the life of the world, sober and prudent, harmony itself, and\nreason overruling necessity mixed with persuasion. This necessity is by\nmost men called fate or destiny, by Empedocles friendship and discord,\nby Heraclitus the opposite straining harmony of the world, as of a\nbow or harp, by Parmenides light and darkness, by Anaxagoras mind and\ninfinity, by Zoroaster God and Daemon, naming one Oromasdes, the other\nArimanius. Though as for Euripides, he makes use of the disjunctive\nerroneously for the copulative, where he says,\n\n                    Jove, whether he be\n    Necessity, that Nature\u2019s force controls,\n    Or the intelligence of human souls\n\nFor, indeed, the powers which bear dominion over the universe are\nnecessity and wisdom. This is that therefore which the Egyptians\nintimate in their fables, feigning that, when Horus was punished and\ndismembered, he bequeathed his spirit and blood to his father, but his\nflesh and his fat to his mother. There is no part of the soul which\nremains pure and unmixed, or separate from the rest; for, according\nto the opinion of Heraclitus, \u201charmony latent is of greater value\nthan that which is visible,\u201d as being that wherein the blending Deity\nconcealed and sunk all varieties and dissimilitudes. Nevertheless,\nthere appears in the irrational part a turbulent and boisterous\ntemerity; in the rational part, an orderly and well-marshalled\nprudence; in the sensitive part, the constraint of necessity; but in\nthe understanding, entire and perfect command of itself. The limiting\nand bounding power sympathizes with the whole and the indivisible,\nby reason of the nearness of their relations; on the other side,\nthe dividing power fixes itself upon particulars, by virtue of the\ndivisible substance; and the whole rejoices at the mutation of the Same\nby means of the Other, as occasion requires. In the like manner, the\nvarious inclinations of men to virtue and vice, to pleasure and toil,\nas also the enthusiasms and raptures of lovers, the combats of honor\nwith lustful desires, plainly demonstrate the mixture of the divine and\nimpassible with the moral and corporeal part; of which Plato himself\ncalls the one concupiscence of pleasures, natural to ourselves; the\nother an opinion introduced from without, aspiring to the chiefest\ngood. For passible qualities of the soul arise from herself; but she\nparticipates of understanding, as being infused from without, by the\nmore worthy principle.\n\n28. Nor is the celestial nature privileged from this double society\nand communion. For sometimes it is seen to incline one way or the\nother, but it is set right again by the more powerful revolution of\nthe Same, and governs the world. Nay, there shall come a time, as it\nhas happened already, when the world\u2019s moving wisdom shall grow dull\nand drowsy, drowned in oblivion of its own duty; while that which\nis familiar and agreeable to the body from the beginning draws and\nwinds back the right-hand motion of the universe, causing the wheels\nto go slow and heavy. Yet shall it not be able to dash in pieces the\nwhole movement, for that the better part, rousing and recollecting\nherself and observing the pattern and exemplar of God, shall with\nhis aid reduce all things again into their former order. Thus it is\ndemonstrable by many proofs, that the soul was not altogether the\nworkmanship of the Deity, but that having in itself a certain portion\nof innate evil, it was by him digested and beautified who limited\ninfinity by unity, to the end it might be a substance within the\ncompass of certain limits; intermixing order and mutation, variety and\nresemblance, by the force of the Same and the Other; and lastly working\ninto all these, as far as it was possible, a mutual community and\nfriendship by the assistance of numbers and harmony.\n\n29. Concerning which things, although you have heard frequent\ndiscourses, and have likewise read several arguments and disputes\ncommitted to writing upon the same subjects, it will not be amiss for\nme also to give a short account, after a brief repetition of Plato\u2019s\nown words. \u201cGod,\u201d said he, \u201cin the first place withdrew one part from\nthe whole; which done, he took away the double of that; then a third\npart, sesquialter in proportion to the second, and triple to the first;\nthen a fourth part, double to the second; next a fifth part, being the\ntriple of the third; then a sixth, eight times the first; and lastly a\nseventh, being twenty-seven times the first. This done, he filled up\nthe duple and triple intervals, retrenching also from thence certain\nother particles, and placing them in the midst of those intervals; so\nthat in every interval there might be two medieties, the one exceeding\nand being exceeded by one and the same part of the extremes, the other\nexceeding and being exceeded by the same number. Now in regard that\nfrom these connections in the first spaces there arose the intervals\nof sesquialters, sesquiterces, and sesquioctaves, he filled up all the\nsesquiterce intervals with sesquioctaves, leaving a part of each, so\nthat the interval left of the part might bear the numerical proportion\nof 256 to 243.\u201d[196]\n\nHere the question will be first concerning the quantity, next\nconcerning the order, and in the third place concerning the force and\nvirtue of the numbers. As to the quantity, we are to consider which he\ntakes in the double and triple intervals. As to the order, whether they\nare to be placed in one row, according to the direction of Theodorus,\nor (as Crantor will have them) in the form of a _\u039b_, placing the\nunit at the top, and the duples and triples apart by themselves in two\nseveral files. Lastly, we are to examine of what use and virtue they\nare in the structure and composition of the soul.\n\n30. As to the first, we shall relinquish the opinion of those who\naffirm that it is enough, in proportions, to consider the nature of\nthe intervals, and of the medieties which fill up their vacancies; and\nthat the demonstration can be made out for any numbers whatsoever that\nhave spaces sufficient to receive the aforesaid proportions. For this\nbeing granted, it makes the demonstration obscure, without the help of\nschemes, and drives us from another theory, which carries with it a\ndelight not unbecoming philosophy.\n\n     1\n    2 3\n   4   9\n  8     27\n\nBeginning therefore from the unit, let us place the duples and triples\napart; and there will be on the one side, 2, 4, 8; on the other 3, 9,\n27;\u2014seven numbers in all, proceeding forward by multiplication four\nsteps from the unit, which is assumed as the common base.... For not\nonly here, but upon other occasions, the sympathy of the quaternary\nnumber with the septenary is apparent. There is this peculiar to that\ntetractys or quaternary number thirty six, so much celebrated by the\nPythagoreans, which is more particularly worthy admiration,\u2014that it is\ncomposed of the first four even numbers and the first four odd numbers;\nand it is the fourth connection made of numbers put together in order.\nThe first connection is of one and two; the second of odd numbers....\nFor placing the unit, which is common to both, before, he first takes\neight and then twenty-seven, as it were pointing out with the finger\nwhere to place each particular sort.\n\n[These places are so depraved in the original, that the sense is lost.]\n\nBut it belongs to others to explain these things more accurately and\ndistinctly; while we content ourselves with only what remains, as\npeculiarly proper to the subject in hand.\n\n31. For it was not out of vain-glory, to boast his skill in the\nmathematical sciences, that Plato inserted in a treatise of natural\nphilosophy this discourse of harmonical and arithmetical medieties, but\nbelieving them both apt and convenient to demonstrate the structure and\ncomposition of the soul. For some there are who seek these proportions\nin the swift motions of the spheres of the planets; others rather in\nthe distances, others in the magnitude of the stars; others, more\naccurate and nice in their enquiry, seek for the same proportions in\nthe diameters of the epicycles; as if the Supreme Architect, for the\nsake of these, had adapted the soul, divided into seven parts, to\nthe celestial bodies. Many also there are, who hither transfer the\ninventions of the Pythagoreans, tripling the distances of bodies from\nthe middle. This is done by placing the unit next the fire; three next\nthe Antichthon, or earth which is opposite to our earth; nine next the\nEarth; 27 next the Moon; 81 next to Mercury; 243 upon Venus; and 729\nupon the Sun. The last (729) is both a tetragonal and cubical number,\nwhence it is, that they also call the sun a tetragon and a cube. By\nthis way of tripling they also reduce the other stars to proportion.\nBut these people may be thought to dote and to wander very much from\nreason, if there be any use of geometrical demonstration, since by\ntheir mistakes we find that the most probable proofs proceed from\nthence; and although geometers do not always make out their positions\nexactly, yet they approach the nearest to truth when they say that the\ndiameter of the sun, compared with the diameter of the earth, bears\nthe proportion of 12 to 1; while the diameter of the earth to that of\nthe moon carries a triple proportion. And for that which appears to be\nthe least of the fixed stars, the diameter of it is no less than the\nthird part of the diameter of the earth, and the whole globe of the\nearth to the whole globe of the moon is as twenty-seven to one. The\ndiameters of Venus and the earth bear a duple, the globes or spheres\nof both an octave proportion. The width of the shadow which causes an\neclipse holds a triple proportion to the diameter of the moon; and the\ndeviation of the moon from the middle of the signs, either to the one\nor the other side, is a twelfth part. Her positions as to the sun,\neither in triangular or quadrangular distances, give her the form when\nshe appears as in the first quarter and gibbous; but when she comes\nto be quite round, that is, when she has run through half the signs,\nshe then makes (as it were) a kind of diapason harmony with six notes.\nBut in regard the motions of the sun are slowest when he arrives at\nthe solstices, and swiftest when he comes to the equinoxes, by which\nhe takes from the day or adds to the night, the proportion holds thus.\nFor the first thirty days after the winter solstice, he adds to the\nday a sixth part of the length whereby the longest night exceeds\nthe shortest; the next thirty days he adds a third part; to all the\nrest till the equinox he adds a half; and so by sextuple and triple\ndistances he makes even the irregularity of time.\n\nMoreover, the Chaldaeans make the spring to hold the proportion of a\ndiatessaron to autumn; of a diapente to the winter, and of a diapason\nto the summer. But if Euripides rightly divides the year, where he says,\n\n    Four months the parching heats of summer reign,\n    And four of hoary winter\u2019s cold complain;\n    Two months doth vernal pride the fields array,\n    And two months more to autumn tribute pay,\n\nthen the seasons shall be said to change in octave proportion.\n\nOthers there are, who fancy the earth to be in the lowest string of the\nharp, called proslambanomenos; and so proceeding, they place the moon\nin hypate, Mercury and Venus in the diatoni and lichani; the sun they\nlikewise place in mese, as in the midst of the diapason, a fifth above\nthe earth and a fourth from the sphere of the fixed stars.\n\n32. But neither doth this pleasant conceit of the latter come near the\ntruth, neither do the former attain perfect accuracy. However, they\nwho will not allow the latter to depend upon Plato\u2019s sentiments will\nyet grant the former to partake of musical proportions; so that, there\nbeing five tetrachords, called \u1f51\u03c0\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03b6\u03b5\u03c5\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd,\nand \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, in these five distances they place all the planets;\nmaking the first tetrachord from the Moon to the Sun and the planets\nwhich move with the Sun, that is, Mercury and Venus; the next from the\nSun to the fiery planet of Mars; the third between this and Jupiter;\nthe fourth from thence to Saturn; and the fifth from Saturn to the\nsphere of the fixed stars. So that the sounds and notes which bound\nthe five tetrachords bear the same proportion with the intervals\nof the planets. Still further, we know that the ancient musicians\nhad two notes called hypate, three called nete, one mese, and one\nparamese, thus confining their scale to seven standing notes, equal\nin number to the number of the planets. But the moderns, adding the\nproslambanomenos, which is a full tone in descent from hypate, have\nmultiplied the scheme into the double diapason, and thereby confounded\nthe natural order of the concords; for the diapente happens to be\nbefore the diatessaron, with the addition of the whole tone in the\nbass. Whereas Plato makes his addition in the upper part; for in his\nRepublic[197] he says, that every one of the eight spheres rolls about\na Siren which is fixed upon each of the tuneful globes, and that they\nall sing one counterpoint without diversity of modulation, taking\nevery one their peculiar concords, which together complete a melodious\nconsort.\n\nThese Sirens sing for their pleasure divine and heavenly tunes, and\naccompany their sacred circuit and dance with an harmonious song of\neight notes. Nor was there necessity of a fuller chorus, in regard that\nwithin the confines of eight notes lay the first bounds and limits of\nall duple and triple proportions; the unit being added to both the even\nand odd numbers. And certainly from hence it was that the ancients\nraised their invention of nine Muses; of which eight were employed in\ncelestial affairs, as Plato said; the ninth was to take care of things\nterrestrial, and to reduce and reform the inequality and confusion of\nerror and jarring variance.\n\n33. Now then consider whether the soul does not roll and turn and\nmanage the heavens and the celestial bodies by means of those\nharmonious concords and equal motions that are wrought and fermented\nwithin her, being herself most wise and most just. And such she became\nby virtue of harmonical proportions, whose images representing things\nincorporeal are imprinted into the discernible and visible parts and\nbodies of the world. But the chief and most predominating power is\nvisibly mixed in the soul, which renders her harmonious and obedient\nto herself, the other parts unanimously yielding to her as the most\nsupreme and the divinest part of all. For the Sovereign Artificer and\nCreator finding a strange disorder and erroneous confusion in the\nmotions of the decomposed and unruly soul, which was still at variance\nwith herself, some things he divided and separated, others he brought\ntogether and reconciled to a mutual sympathy, making use of harmony and\nnumbers. By virtue of which, the slightest and meanest of insensible\nsubstances, even stocks and stones, the rinds of trees, and sometimes\neven the rennets of beasts, by various mixtures, compositions, and\ntemperatures, may become the charming objects of the sight, or afford\nmost pleasing perfumes and wholesome medicaments for the relief of\nmankind, or be wrought and hollowed to send forth pleasing musical\nsounds. And for this reason it was that Zeno of Citium encouraged and\npersuaded youth to frequent the theatres, there to observe the variety\nof melodious sounds that proceeded from horns or cornets, wooden\nhautboys, flutes and reeds, or any other musical instruments to which\nthe contrivance of art had rightly applied the reason of number and\nproportion. Not that we will here maintain, with the Pythagoreans, that\nall things resemble number, for that requires a long discourse to prove\nit. But where mutual society and sympathy arise out of discord and\ndissimilitude, that the cause of this is moderation and order, produced\nby the power of harmony and number, was a thing not concealed even from\nthe poets. And these give to what is friendly and kind the epithet\n\u201cevenly fitted;\u201d while, on the other side, men of rugged and malicious\ndispositions they called \u201cunevenly tempered,\u201d as if enmity and discord\nwere nothing but a sort of a disproportion. For this reason, he who\nwrites Pindar\u2019s elegy gives him this encomium,\n\n    To foreigners agreeable, to citizens a friend;[198]\n\nthe poet plainly inferring complacency of humor and the aptitude of a\nperson to fit himself to all tempers to be an excellency aspiring to\nvirtue itself. Which Pindar himself also testifies, saying of Cadmus,\nthat he listened to true music from Apollo himself.[199] Nor must we\nbelieve that the theologists, who were the most ancient philosophers,\nordered the pictures and statues of the Gods to be made with musical\ninstruments in their hands because they thought the Gods no better than\npipers or harpers, but to signify that no work was so becoming to the\nGods as accord and harmony.\n\nNow then, as it would be absurd and ridiculous for any man to search\nfor sesquiterces, sesquialters, and duples in the neck, or belly,\nor sides of a lute or harp,\u2014though every one of these must also be\nallowed their symmetry of length and thickness,\u2014the harmony and\nproportion of concords being to be sought for in the sound; so it\nis most probable that the bodies of the stars, the distances of\nspheres, and the swiftness of the motions and revolutions, have their\nsundry proportions, as well one to another as to the whole fabric,\nlike instruments of music well set and tuned, though the measure of\nthe quantity be unknown to us. However, we are to imagine that the\nprincipal effect and efficacy of these numbers and proportions, which\nthe Supreme Architect made use of, is that same agreement, harmony, and\nconsent of the soul with itself, by means of which she replenished the\nheavens themselves, when she came to actuate and perform her office\nthere, with so many infinite beauties, and by which she governs the\nearth by virtue of the several seasons, and other alterations wisely\nand artificially measured and varied as well for the generation as\npreservation of all terrestrial productions.\n\n\n\n\nTHAT A PHILOSOPHER OUGHT CHIEFLY TO CONVERSE WITH GREAT MEN.[200]\n\n\n1. The resolution which you have taken to enter into the friendship\nand familiarity of Sorcanus, that by the frequent opportunities of\nconversing with him you may cultivate and improve a soil which gives\nsuch early promises of a plentiful harvest, is an undertaking which\nwill not only oblige his relations and friends, but redound very much\nto the advantage of the public; and (notwithstanding the peevish\ncensures of some morose or ignorant people) it is so far from being an\nargument of an aspiring and vain-glorious temper, that it shows you to\nbe a lover of virtue and good manners, and a zealous promoter of the\ncommon interest of mankind.\n\nThey themselves are rather to be accused of an indirect but more\nvehement sort of ambition, who would not upon any terms be found in the\ncompany or so much as be seen to give a civil salute to a person of\nquality. For how unreasonable would it be to enforce a well-disposed\nyoung gentleman, and one who needs the direction of a wise governor,\nto such complaints as these: \u201cWould that I might change myself from\na Pericles or a Cato to a cobbler like Simon or a grammarian like\nDionysius, that I might like them have the conversation of such a man\nas Socrates, enjoy his company, and hear his instructive lessons of\nmorality.\u201d\n\nSo far, I am sure, was Aristo of Chios from being of their humor, that\nwhen he was censured for exposing and prostituting the dignity of\nphilosophy by his freedom to all comers, he answered, that he could\nwish that Nature had given understanding to wild beasts, that they\ntoo might be capable of being his hearers. Shall we then deny that\nprivilege to men of interest and power, which this good man would have\ncommunicated (if it had been possible) to the brute beasts? But these\nmen have taken a false notion of philosophy, they make it much like the\nart of statuary, whose business it is to carve out a lifeless image in\nthe most exact figure and proportions, and then to raise it upon its\npedestal, where it is to continue for ever. The true philosophy is of a\nquite different nature; it is a spring and principle of motion wherever\nit comes; it makes men active and industrious, it sets every wheel and\nfaculty a going, it stores our minds with axioms and rules by which to\nmake a sound judgment, it determines the will to the choice of what\nis honorable and just; and it wings all our faculties to the swiftest\nprosecution of it. It is accompanied with an elevation and nobleness\nof mind, joined with a coolness and sweetness of behavior, and backed\nwith a becoming assurance and inflexible resolution. And from this\ndiffusiveness of the nature of good it follows, that the best and most\naccomplished men are inclined to converse with persons of the highest\ncondition. Indeed a physician, if he have any good nature and sense of\nhonor, would be more ready to cure an eye which is to see and watch\nfor a great many thousands, than that of a private person; how much\nmore then ought a philosopher to form and fashion, to rectify and cure\nthe soul of such a one, who is (if I may so express it) to inform the\nbody politic,\u2014who is to think and understand for so many others, to\nbe in so great measure the rule of reason, the standard of law, and\nmodel of behavior, by which all the rest will square and direct their\nactions? Suppose a man to have a talent at finding out springs and\ncontriving of aqueducts (a piece of skill for which Hercules and other\nof the ancients are much celebrated in history), surely he could not so\nsatisfactorily employ himself in sinking a well or deriving water to\nsome private seat or contemptible cottage, as in supplying conduits to\nsome fair and populous city, in relieving an army just perishing with\nthirst, or in refreshing and adorning with fountains and cool streams\nthe beautiful gardens of some glorious monarch. There is a passage of\nHomer very pertinent to this purpose, in which he calls Minos \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f40\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u1f40\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd, which, as Plato interprets it, signifies _the\ndisciple and companion of Jupiter_. For it were beneath his dignity\nindeed to teach private men, such as care only for a family or indulge\ntheir useless speculations; but kings are scholars worthy the tuition\nof a God, who, when they are well advised, just, good, and magnanimous,\nnever fail to procure the peace and prosperity of all their subjects.\nThe naturalists tell us that the eryngium hath such a property with\nit, that if one of the flock do but taste it, all the rest will stand\nstock still in the same place till the shepherd hath taken it out\nof its mouth. Such quickness of action does it have, pervading and\nspreading itself over every thing that is near it, as if it were fire.\nThe effects of philosophy, however, are different according to the\ndifference of inclinations in men. If indeed it lights on one who loves\na dull and inactive sort of life, that makes himself the centre and\nthe little conveniences of life the circumference of all his thoughts,\nsuch a one does contract the sphere of her activity, so that having\nonly made easy and comfortable the life of a single person, it fails\nand dies with him; but when it finds a man of a ruling genius, one\nfitted for conversation and able to grapple with the difficulties of\npublic business, if it once possess him with principles of honesty,\nhonor, and religion, it takes a compendious method, by doing good to\none, to oblige a great part of mankind. Such was the effect of the\nconversation of Anaxagoras with Pericles, of Plato with Dion, and of\nPythagoras with the principal statesmen of all Italy. Cato himself took\na voyage, when he had the concern of an expedition lying upon him, to\nsee and hear Athenodorus; and Scipio sent for Panaetius, when he was\ncommissioned by the senate \u201cto take a survey alike of the outrages\nand the good order which were practised in their provinces,\u201d[201] as\nPosidonius observes. Now what a pretty sort of return would it have\nbeen in Panaetius to send word back,\u2014\u201cIf indeed you were in a private\ncapacity, John a Nokes or John a Stiles, that had a mind to get into\nsome obscure corner or cell, to state cases and resolve syllogisms, I\nshould very gladly have accepted your invitation; but now, because you\nare the son of Paulus Aemilius who was twice consul, and grandson of\nthat Scipio who was surnamed from his conquest of Hannibal and Africa,\nI cannot with honor hold any conversation with you!\u201d\n\n2. The objections which they bring from the two kinds of discourse, one\nof which is mental, the other expressed in words or interpretative of\nthe former, are so stale and pedantical, that they are best answered by\nlaughter or silence; and we merely quote the old saying, \u201cI knew this\nbefore Theognis was born.\u201d However, thus much shall be said, that the\nend of them both is friendship,\u2014in the first case with ourselves, in\nthe second case with another. For he that hath attained to virtue by\nthe methods of philosophy hath his mind all in tune and good temper;\nhe is not struck with those reproaches of conscience, which cause the\nacutest sense of pain and are the natural punishments of our follies;\nbut he enjoys (the great prerogative of a good man) to be always easy\nand in amity with himself.\n\n    No factious lusts reason\u2019s just power control,\n    Nor kindle civil discord in his soul.\n\nHis passion does not stand in defiance to his reason, nor do his\nreasonings cross and thwart one the other, but he is always consistent\nwith himself. But the very joys of wicked men are tumultuary and\nconfused, like those who dwell in the borders of two great empires at\nvariance, always insecure, and in perpetual alarms; whilst a good man\nenjoys an uninterrupted peace and serenity of mind, which excels the\nother not only in duration, but in sense of pleasure too. As for the\nother sort of discourse, that which consists in expression of itself\nto others, Pindar says very well, that it was not mercenary in old\ntime, nor indeed is it so now; but by the baseness and ambition of a\nfew it is made use of to serve their poor secular interests. For if\nthe poets represent Venus herself as much offended with those who make\na trade and traffic of the passion of love, how much more reasonably\nmay we suppose that Urania and Clio and Calliope have an indignation\nagainst those who set learning and philosophy to sale? Certainly the\ngifts and endowments of the Muses ought to be privileged from such mean\nconsiderations.\n\nIf indeed some have made fame and reputation one of the ends of their\nstudies, they used it only as an instrument to get friends; since we\nfind by common observation that men praise only those whom they love.\nIf they sought its own praise, they were as much mistaken as Ixion\nwhen he embraced a cloud instead of Juno; for there is nothing so\nfleeting, so changeable, and so inconstant as popular applause; it is\nbut a pompous shadow, and hath no manner of solidity and duration in\nit. But a wise man, if he design to engage in business and matters of\nstate, will so far aim at fame and popularity as that he may be better\nenabled to benefit others; for it is a difficult and very unpleasant\ntask to do good to those who are disaffected to our persons. It is the\ngood opinion men have of us which disposes men to give credit to our\ndoctrine. As light is a greater good to those who see others by it\nthan to those who only are seen, so is honor of a greater benefit to\nthose who behold it than to those whose glory is beheld. But even one\nwho withdraws himself from the noise of the world, who loves privacy\nand indulges his own thoughts, will show that respect to the good word\nof the people which Hippolytus did to Venus,\u2014though he abstain from\nher mysteries, he will pay his devotions at a distance;[202] but he\nwill not be so cynical and sullen as not to hear with gladness the\ncommendations of virtuous men like himself; he will neither engage\nhimself in a restless pursuit of wealth, interest, or honor, nor will\nhe on the other hand be so rustic and insensible as to refuse them in\na moderate degree, when they fairly come in his way; in like manner he\nwill not court and follow handsome and beautiful youth, but will rather\nchoose such as are of a teachable disposition, of a gentle behavior,\nand lovers of learning. The charms and graces of youth will not make\na philosopher shy of their conversation, when the endowments of their\nminds are answerable to the features of their bodies. The case is the\nsame when greatness of place and fortune concur with a well-disposed\nmind in the same person; he will not therefore forbear loving and\nrespecting such a one, nor be afraid of the name of a courtier, nor\nthink it a curse that such attendance and dependence should be his fate.\n\n    They that strive most Dame Venus to eschew\n    Do fault as much as they who her pursue.[203]\n\nThe application is easy to the matter in hand.\n\nA philosopher therefore, if he is of a retired humor, will not shun\nsuch persons; while one who generously designs his studies for the\npublic advantage will cheerfully embrace their advances of friendship,\nwill not force them after a troublesome manner to hear him, will\nlay aside his scholastical terms and distinctions, and will rejoice\nto discourse and pass his time with them when they are willing and\ndisposed.\n\n    3. I plough the spacious Berecynthian fields,\n       Full six days\u2019 journey wide,[204]\n\nsays one boastingly in the poet; the same man, if he were as much a\nlover of mankind as of husbandry, would much rather bestow his pains on\nsuch a farm, the fruits of which would serve a great number, than to\nbe always dressing the olive-yard of some cynical malecontent, which,\nwhen all was done, would scarce yield oil enough to dress a salad or\nto supply his lamp in the long winter evenings. Epicurus himself, who\nplaces happiness in the profoundest quiet and sluggish inactivity, as\nthe only secure harbor from the storms of this troublesome world, could\nnot but confess that it is both more noble and delightful to do than to\nreceive a kindness;[205] for there is nothing which produces so humane\nand genuine a sort of pleasure as that of doing good. He who first\ngave the names to the three Graces well understood this, for they all\nsignify delectation and joy,[206] and these surely are far greater and\npurer in him who does the good turn. This is so evidently true, that\nwe all receive good turns blushing and with some confusion, but we are\nalways gay and well pleased when we are conferring one.\n\nIf then it is so pleasant to do good to a few, how are their hearts\ndilated with joy who are benefactors to whole cities, provinces, and\nkingdoms? And such benefactors are they who instil good principles into\nthose upon whom so many millions do depend. On the other hand, those\nwho debauch the minds of great men\u2014as sycophants, false informers, and\nflatterers, worse than both, manifestly do\u2014are the centre of all the\ncurses of a nation, as men who do not only infuse deadly poison into\nthe cistern of a private house, but into the public springs of which\nso many thousands are to drink. The people therefore laughed at the\nhangers-on of Callias, whom, as Eupolis says, neither fire nor brass\nnor steel could keep from supping with him; but as for the favorites\nof those execrable tyrants Apollodorus, Phalaris, and Dionysius, they\nracked them, they flayed them alive, they roasted them at slow fires,\nthey looked on them as the very pests of society and disgraces of\nhuman nature; for to debauch a simple person is indeed an ill thing,\nbut to corrupt a prince is an infinite mischief. In like manner, he\nwho instructs an ordinary man makes him to pass his life decently and\nwith comfort; but he who instructs a prince, by correcting his errors\nand clearing his understanding, is a philosopher for the public, by\nrectifying the very mould and model by which whole nations are formed\nand regulated. It is the custom of all nations to pay a peculiar honor\nand deference to their priests; and the reason of it is, because they\ndo not only pray for good things for themselves, their own families and\nfriends, but for whole communities, for the whole state of mankind.\nYet we are not so fond as to think that the priests cause the Gods to\nbe givers of good things, or inspire a vein of beneficence into them;\nbut they only make their supplications to a being which of itself is\ninclinable to answer their requests. But in this a good tutor hath\nthe privilege above the priests,\u2014he effectually renders a prince more\ndisposed to actions of justice, moderation, and mercy, and therefore\nhath a greater satisfaction of mind when he reflects upon it.\n\n4. For my own part, I cannot but think that an ordinary mechanic\u2014for\ninstance, a maker of musical instruments\u2014would be much more attentive\nand pleased at his work, if he knew that his harp would be touched by\nthe famous Amphion, and in his hand serve for the builder of Thebes,\nor if that Thales had bespoke it, who was so great a master that\nby the force of his music he pacified a popular tumult amongst the\nLacedaemonians. A good-natured shipwright would ply his work more\nheartily, if he were making the steerage for the admiral galley of\nThemistocles when he fought for the liberty of Greece, or of Pompey\nwhen he went on his expedition against the pirates: what ecstasy of\ndelight then must a philosopher be in, when he reflects that his\nscholar is a man of authority, a prince or great potentate, that he is\nemployed in so public a work, giving laws to him who is to give laws to\na whole nation, who is to punish vice, and to reward the virtuous with\nriches and honor? The builder of the Argo certainly would have been\nmightily pleased, if he had known what noble mariners were to row in\nhis ship, and that at last she should be translated into heaven; and a\ncarpenter would not be half so much pleased to make a coach or plough,\nas to make the tablets on which Solon\u2019s laws were to be engraved. In\nlike manner the discourses and rules of philosophy, being once deeply\nstamped and imprinted on the minds of great personages, will stick so\nclose, that the prince shall seem no other than justice incarnate and\nanimated law. This was the design of Plato\u2019s voyage into Sicily,\u2014he\nhoped that the lectures of his philosophy would serve for laws to\nDionysius, and bring his affairs again into a good posture. But the\nsoul of that unfortunate prince was like paper scribbled all over with\nthe characters of vice; its piercing and corroding quality had stained\nquite through, and sunk into the very substance of his soul. Whereas,\nif such persons are to profit by sage lessons, they must be taken when\nthey are at full speed.\n\n\n\n\nA DISCOURSE CONCERNING SOCRATES\u2019S DAEMON.\n\nCAPHISIAS, TIMOTHEUS, ARCHIDAMUS, CHILDREN OF ARCHINUS, LYSITHIDES,\nOTHER COMPANIONS.\n\n\n1. I heard lately, Caphisias, a neat saying of a painter, comprised in\na similitude upon those that came to view his pictures. For he said,\nthe ignorant and unskilful were like those that saluted a whole company\ntogether, but the curious and knowing like those that complimented each\nsingle person; for the former take no exact, but only one general view\nof the performance; but those that with judgment examine part by part\ntake notice of every stroke that is either well or ill done in the\nwhole picture. The duller and lazy sort are abundantly satisfied with a\nshort account and upshot of any business. But he that is of a generous\nand noble temper, that is fitted to be a spectator of virtue, as of a\ncurious piece of art, is more delighted with the particulars. For, upon\na general view, much of fortune is discovered; but when the particulars\nare examined, then appear the art and contrivance, the boldness in\nconquering intervening accidents, and the reason that was mixed with\nand tempered the heat and fury of the undertakers. Suppose us to be\nof this sort, and give us an account of the whole design, how from\nthe very beginning it was carried on, what company you kept, and what\nparticular discourse you had that day;\u2014a thing so much desired, that\nI protest I would willingly go to Thebes to be informed, did not the\nAthenians already suspect me to lean too much to the Boeotian interest.\n\nCaphisias. Indeed Archidamus, your kind eagerness after this\nstory is so obliging, that, putting myself above all business (as\nPindar says), I should have come on purpose to give you a relation.\nBut since I am now come upon an embassy, and have nothing to do until\nI receive an answer to my memorial, to be uncivil and not to satisfy\nthe request of an obliging friend would revive the old reproach that\nhath been cast upon the Boeotians for morose sullenness and hating good\ndiscourse, a reproach which began to die in the time of Socrates. But\nas for the rest of the company, pray sir, are they at leisure to hear\nsuch a story?\u2014for I must be very long, since you enjoin me to add the\nparticular discourses that passed between us.\n\nArch. You do not know the men, Caphisias, though they are\nworthy your acquaintance; men of good families, and no enemies to\nyou. This is Lysithides, Thrasybulus\u2019s nephew; this Timotheus, the\nson of Conon; these Archinus\u2019s sons; and all the rest my very good\nacquaintance, so that you need not doubt a favorable and obliging\naudience.\n\nCaph. Very well; but where shall I begin the story? How much\nof these affairs are you acquainted with already?\n\nArch. We know, Caphisias, how matters stood at Thebes before\nthe exiles returned,\u2014how Archias, Leontidas, and their associates,\nhaving persuaded Phoebidas the Spartan in the time of peace to surprise\nthat castle, banished some of the citizens, awed others, took the\npower into their own hands, and tyrannized against all equity and\nlaw. We understood Melon\u2019s and Pelopidas\u2019s designs, having (as you\nknow) entertained them, and having conversed with them ever since they\nwere banished. We knew likewise that the Spartans fined Phoebidas for\ntaking the Cadmea, and in their expedition to Olynthus cashiered\nhim; but sent a stronger garrison, under Lysinoridas and two more, to\ncommand the castle; and further, that Ismenias presently after his\ntrial was basely murdered. For Gorgidas wrote constantly to the exiles,\nand sent them all the news; so that you have nothing to do but only to\ninform us in the particulars of your friends\u2019 return and the seizing of\nthe tyrants.\n\n2. Caph. In those days, Archidamus, all that were concerned\nin the design, as often as our business required, used to meet at\nSimmias\u2019s house, who then lay lame of a blow upon his shin. This we\ncovered with a pretence of meeting for improvement and philosophical\ndiscourse, and, to take off all suspicion, we many times invited\nArchias and Leontidas, who were not altogether averse to such\nconversation. Besides, Simmias, having been a long time abroad and\nconversant with different nations, was lately returned to Thebes, full\nof all sorts of stories and strange relations. To him Archias, when\nfree from business, would resort with the youth of Thebes, and sit and\nhear with a great deal of delight; being better pleased to see us mind\nphilosophy and learning than their illegal actions. Now the same day in\nwhich it was agreed that about night the exiles should come privately\nto town, a messenger, whom none of us all but Charon knew, came from\nthem by Pherenicus\u2019s order, and told us that twelve of the youngest of\nthe exiles were now hunting on the mountain Cithaeron, and designed\nto come at night, and that he was sent to deliver this and to know in\nwhose house they should be received, that as soon as they entered they\nmight go directly thither. This startling us, Charon put an end to all\nour doubts by offering to receive them in his house. With this answer\nthe messenger returned.\n\n3. But Theocritus the soothsayer, grasping me by the hand, and looking\non Charon that went just before us, said: That Charon, Caphisias, is\nno philosopher, nor so general nor so acute a scholar as thy brother\nEpaminondas, and yet you see that, Nature leading him, under the\ndirection of the law, to noble actions, he willingly ventures on the\ngreatest danger for the benefit of his country; but Epaminondas, who\nthinks he knows more of virtue than any of the Boeotians, is dull and\ninactive; and though opportunity presents, though there cannot be a\nfairer occasion, and though he is fitted to embrace it, yet he refuseth\nto join, and will not make one in this generous attempt. And I replied:\nCourageous Theocritus, we do what upon mature deliberation we have\napproved, but Epaminondas, being of a contrary opinion and thinking it\nbetter not to take this course, rationally complies with his judgment,\nwhilst he refuseth to meddle in those matters which his reason upon\nour desire cannot approve, and to which his nature is averse. Nor can\nI think it prudent to force a physician to use fire and a lancet, that\npromiseth to cure the disease without them. What, said Theocritus, doth\nhe not approve of our method? No, I replied, he would have no citizens\nput to death without a trial at law; but if we would endeavor to free\nour country without slaughter and bloodshed, none would more readily\ncomply; but since we slight his reasons and follow our own course, he\ndesires to be excused, to be guiltless of the blood and slaughter of\nhis citizens, and to be permitted to watch an opportunity when he may\ndeliver his country according to equity and right. For this action\nmay go too far, Pherenicus, it is true, and Pelopidas may assault the\nbad men and the oppressors of the people; but Eumolpidas and Samidas,\nmen of extraordinary heat and violence, prevailing in the night, will\nhardly sheathe their swords until they have filled the whole city with\nslaughter and cut in pieces many of the chief men.\n\n4. Anaxidorus, overhearing this discourse of mine to Theocritus (for\nhe was just by), bade us be cautious, for Archias with Lysanoridas the\nSpartan were coming from the castle directly towards us. Upon this\nadvice we left off; and Archias, calling Theocritus aside together with\nLysanoridas, privately discoursed him a long while, so that we were\nvery much afraid lest they had some suspicion or notice of our design,\nand examined Theocritus about it. In the mean time Phyllidas (you know\nhim, Archidamus) who was then secretary to Archias the general, who\nknew of the exiles coming and was one of the associates, taking me\nby the hand, as he used to do, before the company, found fault with\nthe late exercises and wrestling he had seen; but afterwards leading\nme aside, he enquired after the exiles, and asked whether they were\nresolved to be punctual to the day. And upon my assuring that they\nwere, then he replied, I have very luckily provided a feast to-day to\ntreat Archias, make him drunk, and then deliver him an easy prey to\nthe invaders. Excellently contrived, Phyllidas, said I, and prithee\nendeavor to draw all or most of our enemies together. That, said he, is\nvery hard, nay, rather impossible; for Archias, being in hopes of the\ncompany of some noble women there, will not yield that Leontidas should\nbe present, so that it will be necessary to divide the associates into\ntwo companies, that we may surprise both the houses. For, Archias and\nLeontidas being taken off, I suppose the others will presently fly,\nor staying make no stir, being very well satisfied if they can be\npermitted to be safe and quiet. So, said I, we will order it; but about\nwhat, I wonder, are they discoursing with Theocritus? And Phyllidas\nreplied, I cannot certainly tell, but I have heard that some omens and\noracles portend great disasters and calamities to Sparta; and perhaps\nthey consult him about those matters. Theocritus had just left them,\nwhen Phidolaus the Haliartian meeting us said: Simmias would have you\nstay here a little while, for he is interceding with Leontidas for\nAmphitheus, and begs that instead of dying, according to the sentence,\nhe may be banished.\n\n5. Well, said Theocritus, this happens very opportunely, for I had\na mind to ask what was seen and what found in Alcmena\u2019s tomb lately\nopened amongst you, for perhaps, sir, you were present when Agesilaus\nsent to fetch the relics to Sparta. And Phidolaus replied: Indeed I\nwas not present at the opening of the grave, for I was not delegated,\nbeing extremely concerned and very angry with my fellow-citizens\nfor permitting it to be done. There were found no relics of a body;\nbut a small brazen bracelet, and two earthen pipkins full of earth,\nwhich now by length of time was grown very hard and petrified. Upon\nthe monument there was a brazen plate full of strange, because very\nancient, letters; for though, when the plate was washed, all the\nstrokes were very easily perceived, yet nobody could make any thing\nof them; for they were a particular, barbarous, and very like the\nEgyptian character. And therefore Agesilaus, as the story goes, sent\na transcript of them to the king of Egypt, desiring him to show them\nto the priests, and if they understood them, to send him the meaning\nand interpretation. But perhaps in this matter Simmias can inform us,\nfor at that time he studied their philosophy and frequently conversed\nwith the priests upon that account. The Haliartii believe the great\nscarcity and overflowing of the pool that followed were not effects of\nchance, but a particular judgment upon them for permitting the grave\nto be opened. And Theocritus, after a little pause, said: Nay, there\nseem some judgments to hang over the Lacedaemonians themselves, as\nthose omens about which Lysanoridas just now discoursed me portend.\nAnd now he is gone to Haliartus to fill up the grave again, and, as\nthe oracle directs, to make some oblations to Alcmena and Aleus; but\nwho this Aleus is, he cannot tell. And as soon as he returns, he must\nendeavor to find the sepulchre of Dirce, which not one of the Thebans\nthemselves, besides the captains of the horse, knows; for he that goes\nout of his office leads his successor to the place alone, and in the\ndark; there they offer some sacrifices, but without fire, and leaving\nno mark behind them, they separate from one another, and come home\nagain in the dark. So that I believe, Phidolaus, it will be no easy\nmatter for him to discover it. For most of those that have been duly\nelected to that office are now in exile; nay, all besides Gorgidas and\nPlato; and they will never ask those, for they are afraid of them. And\nour present officers are invested in the castle with the spear only and\nthe seal, but know nothing of the tomb, and cannot direct him.\n\n6. Whilst Theocritus was speaking, Leontidas and his friends went out;\nand we going in saluted Simmias, sitting upon his couch, very much\ntroubled because his petition was denied. He, looking up upon us,\ncried out: Good God! The savage barbarity of these men! And was it not\nan excellent remark of Thales, who, when his friends asked him, upon\nhis return from his long travels, what strange news he brought home,\nreplied, \u201cI have seen a tyrant an old man.\u201d For even he that hath\nreceived no particular injury, yet disliking their stiff pride and\nhaughty carriage, becomes an enemy to all lawless and unaccountable\npowers. But Heaven perhaps will take these things into consideration.\nBut, Caphisias, do you know that stranger that came lately hither,\nwho he is? And I replied, I do not know whom you mean. Why, said he,\nLeontidas told me that there was a man at night seen to rise out of\nLysis\u2019s tomb, with great pomp and a long train of attendants, and that\nhe had lodged there all night upon beds made of leaves and boughs; for\nthe next morning such were discovered there, with some relics of burnt\nsacrifices and some milk-oblations; and that in the morning he enquired\nof every one he met, whether he should find Polymnis\u2019s sons at home. I\nwonder, said I, who it is, for by your description I guess him to be no\nmean man.\n\n7. Well, said Phidolaus, when he comes we will entertain him; but at\nthe present, Simmias, if you know any thing more of those letters\nabout which we were talking, pray let us have it; for it is said that\nthe Egyptian priests took into consideration the writing of a certain\ntable which Agesilaus had from us when he opened Alcmena\u2019s tomb. As for\nthe table, replied Simmias, I know nothing of it; but Agetoridas the\nSpartan came to Memphis with letters from Agesilaus to Chonouphis the\npriest, whilst I, Plato, and Ellopio the Peparethian, studied together\nat his house. He came by order of the king, who enjoined Chonouphis,\nif he understood the writing, to send him the interpretation with all\nspeed. And he in three days\u2019 study, having collected all the different\nsorts of characters that could be found in the old books, wrote back\nto the king and likewise told us, that the writing enjoined the Greeks\nto institute games in honor of the Muses; that the characters were\nsuch as were used in the time of Proteus, and that Hercules, the son\nof Amphitryo, then learned them; and that the Gods by this admonished\nthe Greeks to live peaceably and at quiet, to contend in philosophy\nto the honor of the Muses, and, laying aside their arms, to determine\nwhat is right and just by reason and discourse. We then thought that\nChonouphis spoke right; and that opinion was confirmed when, as we were\nsailing from Egypt, about Caria some Delians met us, who desired Plato,\nbeing well skilled in geometry, to solve an odd oracle lately delivered\nby Apollo. The oracle was this: \u201cThen the Delians and all the other\nGreeks should enjoy some respite from their present evils, when they\nhad doubled the altar at Delos.\u201d They, not comprehending the meaning\nof the words, after many ridiculous endeavors (for each of the sides\nbeing doubled, they had framed a body, instead of twice, eight times\nas big) made application to Plato to clear the difficulty. He, calling\nto mind what the Egyptian had told him, said that the God was merry\nupon the Greeks, who despised learning; that he severely reflected on\ntheir ignorance, and admonished them to apply themselves to the deepest\nparts of geometry; for this was not to be done by a dull short-sighted\nintellect, but one exactly skilled in the natures and properties of\nlines; it required skill to find the true proportion by which alone a\nbody of a cubic figure can be doubled, all its dimensions being equally\nincreased. He said that Eudoxus the Cnidian or Helico the Cyzicenian\nmight do this for them; but that was not the thing desired by the God;\nfor by this oracle he enjoined all the Greeks to leave off war and\ncontention, and apply themselves to study, and, by learning and arts\nmoderating the passions, to live peaceably with one another, and profit\nthe community.\n\n8. Whilst Simmias was speaking, my father Polymnis came in, and sitting\ndown by him said: Epaminondas desires you and the rest of the company,\nunless some urgent business requires your attendance, to stay for\nhim here a little while, designing to bring you acquainted with this\nstranger, who is a very worthy man; and the design upon which he comes\nis very genteel and honorable. He is a Pythagorean of the Italian sect,\nand comes hither to make some offerings to old Lysis at his tomb,\naccording to divers dreams and very notable appearances that he hath\nseen. He hath brought a good sum of money with him, and thinks himself\nbound to satisfy Epaminondas for keeping Lysis in his old age; and is\nvery eager, though we are neither willing nor desire him, to relieve\nhis poverty. And Simmias, glad at this news, replied: You tell me,\nsir, of a wonderful man and worthy professor of philosophy; but why\ndoth he not come directly to us? I think, said my father, he lay all\nnight at Lysis\u2019s tomb; and therefore Epaminondas hath now led him to\nthe Ismenus to wash; and when that is done, they will be here. For\nbefore he came to our house, he lodged at the tomb, intending to take\nup the relics of the body and transport them into Italy, if some genius\nat night should not advise him to forbear.\n\n9. As soon as my father had ended this discourse, Galaxidorus cried\nout: Good Gods! how hard a matter is it to find a man pure from vanity\nand superstition! For some are betrayed into those fooleries by their\nignorance and weakness; others, that they may be thought extraordinary\nmen and favorites of Heaven, refer all their actions to some divine\nadmonition pretending dreams, visions, and the like surprising\nfooleries for every thing they do. This method indeed is advantageous\nto those that intend to settle a commonwealth, or are forced to keep\nthemselves up against a rude and ungovernable multitude; for by this\nbridle of superstition they might manage and reform the vulgar; but\nthese pretences seem not only unbecoming philosophy, but quite opposite\nto all those fine promises she makes. For having promised to teach us\nby reason what is good and profitable, falling back again to the Gods\nas the principle of all our actions, she seems to despise reason, and\ndisgrace that demonstration which is her peculiar glory; and she relies\non dreams and visions, in which the worst of men are oftentimes as\nhappy as the best. And therefore your Socrates, Simmias, in my opinion\nfollowed the most philosophical and rational method of instructions,\nchoosing that plain and easy way as the most genteel and friendly unto\ntruth, and scattering to the sophisters of the age all those vain\npretences which are as it were the smoke of philosophy. And Theocritus\ntaking him up said: What, Galaxidorus, and hath Meletus persuaded you\nthat Socrates contemned all divine things?\u2014for that was part of his\naccusation. Divine things! by no means, replied Galaxidorus; but having\nreceived philosophy from Pythagoras and Empedocles, full of dreams,\nfables, superstitions, and perfect raving, he endeavored to bring\nwisdom and things together, and make truth consist with sober sense.\n\n10. Be it so, rejoined Theocritus, but what shall we think of his\nDaemon? Was it a mere juggle? Indeed, nothing that is told of\nPythagoras regarding divination seems to me so great and divine.\nFor, in my mind, as Homer makes Minerva to stand by Ulysses in all\ndangers, so the Daemon joined to Socrates even from his cradle some\nvision to guide him in all the actions of his life; which going before\nhim, shed a light upon hidden and obscure matters and such as could\nnot be discovered by unassisted human understanding; of such things\nthe Daemon often discoursed with him, presiding over and by divine\ninstinct directing his intentions. More and greater things perhaps\nyou may learn from Simmias and other companions of Socrates; but once\nwhen I was present, as I went to Euthyphron the soothsayer\u2019s, it\nhappened, Simmias,\u2014for you remember it,\u2014that Socrates walked up to\nSymbolum and the house of Andocides, all the way asking questions and\njocosely perplexing Euthyphron. When standing still upon a sudden and\npersuading us to do the like, he mused a pretty while, and then turning\nabout walked through Trunk-makers\u2019 Street, calling back his friends\nthat walked before him, affirming that it was his Daemon\u2019s will and\nadmonition. Many turned back, amongst whom I, holding Euthyphron, was\none; but some of the youths keeping on the straight way, on purpose (as\nit were) to confute Socrates\u2019s Daemon, took along with them Charillus\nthe piper, who came in my company to Athens to see Cebes. Now as they\nwere walking through Gravers\u2019 Row, near the court-houses, a herd of\ndirty swine met them; and being too many for the street and running\nagainst one another, they overthrew some that could not get out of\nthe way, and dirted others; and Charillus came home with his legs and\nclothes very dirty; so that now and then in merriment they would think\non Socrates\u2019s Daemon, wondering that it never forsook the man, and that\nHeaven took such particular care of him.\n\n11. Then Galaxidorus: And do you think, Theocritus, that Socrates\u2019s\nDaemon had some peculiar and extraordinary power? And was it not that\nthis man had by experience confirmed some part of the common necessity\nwhich made him, in all obscure and inevident matters, add some weight\nto the reason that was on one side? For as one grain doth not incline\nthe balance by itself, yet added to one of two weights that are of\nequal poise, makes the whole incline to that part; thus an omen or\nthe like sign may of itself be too light to draw a grave and settled\nresolution to any action, yet when two equal reasons draw on either\nside, if that is added to one, the doubt together with the equality is\ntaken off, so that a motion and inclination to that side is presently\nproduced. Then my father continuing the discourse said: You yourself,\nGalaxidorus, have heard a Megarian, who had it from Terpsion, say that\nSocrates\u2019s Daemon was nothing else but the sneezing either of himself\nor others; for if another sneezed, either before, behind him, or on his\nright hand, then he pursued his design and went on to action; but if on\nthe left hand, he desisted. One sort of sneezing confirmed him whilst\ndeliberating and not fully resolved; another stopped him when already\nupon action. But indeed it seems strange that, if sneezing was his only\nsign, he should not acquaint his familiars with it, but pretend that\nit was a Daemon that encouraged or forbade him. For that this should\nproceed from vanity or conceit is not agreeable to the veracity and\nsimplicity of the man; for in those we knew him to be truly great,\nand far above the generality of mankind. Nor is it likely so grave\nand wise a man should be disturbed at a casual sound or sneezing,\nand upon that account leave off what he was about, and give over his\npremeditated resolutions. Besides all, Socrates\u2019s resolution seems\nto be altogether vigorous and steady, as begun upon right principles\nand mature judgment. Thus he voluntarily lived poor all his life,\nthough he had friends that would have been very glad and very willing\nto relieve him; he still kept close to philosophy, notwithstanding\nall the discouragements he met with; and at last, when his friends\nendeavored and very ingeniously contrived his escape, he would not\nyield to their entreaties, but met death with mirth and cheerfulness,\nand appeared a man of a steady reason in the greatest extremity. And\nsure these are not the actions of a man whose designs, when once fixed,\ncould be altered by an omen or a sneeze; but of one who, by some more\nconsiderable guidance and impulse, is directed to practise things\ngood and excellent. Besides, I have heard that to some of his friends\nhe foretold the overthrow of the Athenians in Sicily. And before\nthat time, Perilampes the son of Antiphon, being wounded and taken\nprisoner by us in that pursuit at Delium, as soon as he heard from the\nambassadors who came from Athens that Socrates with Alcibiades and\nLaches fled by Rhegiste and returned safe, blamed himself very much,\nand blamed also some of his friends and captains of the companies\u2014who\ntogether with him were overtaken in their flight about Parnes by\nour cavalry and slain there\u2014for not obeying Socrates\u2019s Daemon and\nretreating that way which he led. And this I believe Simmias hath heard\nas well as I. Yes, replied Simmias, many times, and from many persons;\nfor upon this, Socrates\u2019s Daemon was very much talked of at Athens.\n\n12. Why then, pray, Simmias, said Phidolaus, shall we suffer\nGalaxidorus drollingly to degrade so considerable a prophetic spirit\ninto an omen or a sneeze; which the vulgar and ignorant, it is true,\nmerrily use about small matters; but when any danger appears, then we\nfind that of Euripides verified,\u2014\n\n    None near the edge of swords will mind such toys.[207]\n\nTo this Galaxidorus rejoined: Sir, if Simmias hath heard Socrates\nhimself speak any thing about this matter, I am very ready to hear and\nbelieve it with you; but yet what you and Polymnis have delivered I\ncould easily demonstrate to be weak and insignificant. For as in physic\nthe pulse or a whelk is itself but a small thing, yet is a sign of no\nsmall things to the physicians; and as the murmuring of the waves or\nof a bird, or the driving of a thin cloud, is a sign to the pilot of a\nstormy heaven and troubled sea; thus to a prophetic soul, a sneeze or\nan omen, though no great matter simply considered in itself, yet may be\nthe sign and token of considerable impending accidents. For every art\nand science takes care to collect many things from few, and great from\nsmall. And as if one that doth not know the power of letters, when he\nsees a few ill-shapen strokes, should not believe that a man skilled in\nletters could read in them the famous battles of the ancients, the rise\nof cities, the acts and calamities of kings, and should assert that\nsome divine power told him the particulars, he would by this ignorance\nof his raise a great deal of mirth and laughter in the company; so\nlet us consider whether or no we ourselves, being altogether ignorant\nof every one\u2019s power of divination by which he guesseth at what is to\ncome, are not foolishly concerned when it is asserted that a wise man\nby that discovers some things obscure and inevident in themselves,\nand moreover himself declares that it is not a sneeze or voice, but\na Daemon, that leads him on to action. This, Polymnis, particularly\nrespects you, who cannot but wonder that Socrates, who by his meekness\nand humility hath humanized philosophy, should not call this sign\na sneeze or a voice, but very pretendingly a Daemon; when, on the\ncontrary, I should have wondered if a man so critical and exact in\ndiscourse, and so good at names as Socrates, should have said that it\nwas a sneeze, and not a Daemon, that gave him intimation; as much as if\nany one should say that he is wounded by a dart, and not with a dart\nby him that threw it; or as if any one should say that a weight was\nweighed by the balance, and not with the balance by the one who holds\nit. For any effect is not the effect of the instrument, but of him\nwhose the instrument is, and who useth it to that effect; and a sign is\nan instrument, which he that signifies any thing thereby useth to that\neffect. But, as I said before, if Simmias hath any thing about this\nmatter, let us quietly attend; for no doubt he must have a more perfect\nknowledge of the thing.\n\n13. Content, said Theocritus; but let us first see who these are that\nare coming, for I think I see Epaminondas bringing in the stranger.\nUpon this motion, looking toward the door, we saw Epaminondas with his\nfriends Ismenidorus and Bacchylidas and Melissus the musician leading\nthe way, and the stranger following, a man of no mean presence; his\nmeekness and good-nature appeared in his looks, and his dress was\ngrave and becoming. He being seated next Simmias, my brother next me,\nand the rest as they pleased, and all silent, Simmias speaking to my\nbrother said: Well, Epaminondas, by what name and title must I salute\nthis stranger?\u2014for those are commonly our first compliments, and the\nbeginning of our better acquaintance. And my brother replied: His name,\nSimmias, is Theanor; by birth he is a Crotonian, a philosopher by\nprofession, no disgrace to Pythagoras\u2019s fame; for he hath taken a long\nvoyage from Italy hither, to evidence by generous actions his eminent\nproficiency in that school.\n\nThe stranger subjoined: But you, Epaminondas, hinder the performance\nof the best action; for if it is commendable to oblige friends, it is\nnot discommendable to be obliged; for a benefit requires a receiver\nas well as a giver; by both it is perfected, and becomes a good work.\nFor he that refuseth to receive a favor, as a ball that is struck\nfairly to him, disgraceth it by letting it fall short of the designed\nmark; and what mark are we so much pleased to hit or vexed to miss,\nas our kind intentions of obliging a person that deserves a favor? It\nis true, when the mark is fixed, he that misseth can blame nobody but\nhimself; but he that refuseth or flies a kindness is injurious to the\nfavor in not letting it attain the desired end. I have told you already\nwhat was the occasion of my voyage; the same I would discover to all\npresent, and make them judges in the case. For after the opposite\nfaction had expelled the Pythagoreans, and the Cylonians had burned the\nremains of that society in their school at Metapontum, and destroyed\nall but Philolaus and Lysis,\u2014who being young and nimble escaped the\nflame,\u2014Philolaus flying to the Lucanians was there protected by his\nfriends, who rose for his defence and overpowered the Cylonians; but\nwhere Lysis was, for a long time nobody could tell; at last Gorgias the\nLeontine, sailing from Greece to Italy, seriously told Arcesus that he\nmet and discoursed Lysis at Thebes. Arcesus, being very desirous to\nsee the man, as soon as he could get a passage, designed to put to sea\nhimself; but age and weakness coming on, he took care that Lysis should\nbe brought to Italy alive, if possible; but if not, the relics of his\nbody. The intervening wars, usurpations, and seditions hindered his\nfriends from doing it whilst he lived; but since his death, Lysis\u2019s\nDaemon hath made very frequent and very plain discoveries to us of his\ndeath; and many that were very well acquainted with the matter have\ntold us how courteously you received and civilly entertained him, how\nin your poor family he was allowed a plentiful subsistence for his age,\ncounted a father of your sons, and died in peace. I therefore, although\na young man and but one single person, have been sent by many who are\nmy elders, and who, having store of money, offer it gladly to you who\nneed it, in return for the gracious friendship bestowed upon Lysis.\nLysis, it is true, is buried nobly, and your respect, which is more\nhonorable than a monument, must be acknowledged and requited by his\nfamiliars and his friends.\n\n14. When the stranger had said this, my father wept a considerable\ntime, in memory of Lysis; but my brother, smiling upon me, as he used\nto do, said: What do we do, Caphisias? Are we to give up our poverty\nto wealth, and yet be silent? By no means, I replied, let us part with\nour old friend and the excellent breeder of our youth; but defend\nher cause, for you are to manage it. My dear father, said he, I have\nnever feared that wealth would take possession of our house, except\non account of Caphisias\u2019s body; for that wants fine attire, that he\nmay appear gay and gaudy to his numerous company of lovers, and great\nsupplies of food, that he may be strong to endure wrestling and other\nexercises of the ring. But since he doth not give up poverty, since\nhe holds fast his hereditary want, like a color, since he, a youth,\nprides himself in frugality, and is very well content with his present\nstate, what need have we, and what shall we do with wealth? Shall we\ngild our arms? Shall we, like Nicias the Athenian, adorn our shield\nwith gold, purple, and other gaudy variety of colors, and buy for you,\nsir, a Milesian cloak, and for my mother a purple gown? For I suppose\nwe shall not consume any upon our belly, or feast more sumptuously\nthan we did before, treating this wealth as a guest of quality and\nhonor! Away, away, son, replied my father; let me never see such a\nchange in our course of living. Well, said my brother, we would not\nlie lazily at home, and watch over our unemployed riches; for then the\nbestower\u2019s kindness would be a trouble, and the possession infamous.\nWhat need then, said my father, have we of wealth? Upon this account,\nsaid Epaminondas, when Jason, the Thessalian general, lately sent me a\ngreat sum of money and desired me to accept it, I was thought rude and\nunmannerly for telling him that he was a knave for endeavoring, whilst\nhe himself loved monarchy, to bribe one of democratical principles\nand a member of a free state. Your good will, sir (addressing the\nstranger), which is generous and worthy a philosopher, I accept and\npassionately admire; but you offer physic to your friends who are\nin perfect health! If, upon a report that we were distressed and\noverpowered, you had brought men and arms to our assistance, but being\narrived had found all in quietness and peace, I am certain you would\nnot have thought it necessary to leave those supplies which we did not\nthen stand in need of. Thus, since now you came to assist us against\npoverty as if we had been distressed by it, and find it very peaceable\nand our familiar inmate, there is no need to leave any money or arms to\nsuppress that which gives us no trouble or disturbance. But tell your\nacquaintance that they use riches well, and have friends here that use\npoverty as well. What was spent in keeping and burying Lysis, Lysis\nhimself hath sufficiently repaid, by many profitable instructions, and\nby teaching us not to think poverty a grievance.\n\n15. What then, said Theanor, is it mean to think poverty a grievance?\nIs it not absurd to fly and be afraid of riches, if no reason, but\nan hypocritical pretence, narrowness of mind, or pride, prompts one\nto reject the offer? And what reason, I wonder, would refuse such\nadvantageous and creditable enjoyments as Epaminondas now doth? But,\nsir,\u2014for your answer to the Thessalian about this matter shows you very\nready,\u2014pray answer me, do you think it commendable in some cases to\ngive money, but always unlawful to receive it? Or are the givers and\nreceivers equally guilty of a fault? By no means, replied Epaminondas;\nbut, as of any thing else, so the giving and receiving of money is\nsometimes commendable and sometimes base. Well then, said Theanor,\nif a man, gives willingly what he ought to give, is not that action\ncommendable in him? Yes. And when it is commendable in one to give, is\nit not as commendable in another to receive? Or can a man more honestly\naccept a gift from any one, than from him that honestly bestows? No.\nWell then, Epaminondas, suppose of two friends, one hath a mind to\npresent, the other must accept. It is true, in a battle we should avoid\nthat enemy who is skilful in hurling his weapon; but in civilities\nwe should neither fly nor thrust back that friend that makes a kind\nand genteel offer. And though poverty is not so grievous, yet on the\nother side, wealth is not so mean and despicable a thing. Very true,\nreplied Epaminondas; but you must consider that sometimes, even when a\ngift is honestly bestowed, he is more commendable who refuses it. For\nwe have many lusts and desires, and the objects of those desires are\nmany. Some are called natural; these proceed from the very constitution\nof our body, and tend to natural pleasures; others are acquired,\nand rise from vain opinions and mistaken notions; yet these by the\nlength of time, ill habits, and bad education are usually improved,\nget strength, and debase the soul more than the other natural and\nnecessary passions. By custom and care any one, with the assistance of\nreason, may free himself from many of his natural desires. But, sir,\nall our arts, all our force of discipline, must be employed against\nthe superfluous and acquired appetites; and they must be restrained\nor cut off by the guidance or edge of reason. For if the contrary\napplications of reason can make us forbear meat and drink, when\nhungry or thirsty, how much more easy is it to conquer covetousness\nor ambition, which will be destroyed by a bare restraint from their\nproper objects, and a non-attainment of their desired end? And pray,\nsir, are you not of the same opinion? Yes, replied the stranger. Then,\nsir, continued Epaminondas, do you not perceive a difference between\nthe exercise itself and the work to which the exercise relates? For\ninstance, in a wrestler, the work is the striving with his adversary\nfor the crown, the exercise is the preparation of his body by diet,\nwrestling, or the like. So in virtue, you must confess the work to be\none thing and the exercise another. Very well, replied the stranger.\nThen, continued Epaminondas, let us first examine whether to abstain\nfrom the base unlawful pleasures is the exercise of continence, or the\nwork and evidence of that exercise? The work and evidence, replied the\nstranger. But is not the exercise of it such as you practise, when\nafter wrestling, where you have raised your appetites like ravenous\nbeasts, you stand a long while at a table covered with plenty and\nvariety of meats, and then give it to your servants to feast on, whilst\nyou offer mean and spare diet to your subdued appetites? For abstinence\nfrom lawful pleasure is exercise against unlawful. Very well, replied\nthe stranger. So, continued Epaminondas, justice is exercise against\ncovetousness and love of money; but so is not a mere cessation from\nstealing or robbing our neighbor. So he that doth not betray his\ncountry or friends for gold doth not exercise against covetousness, for\nthe law perhaps deters, and fear restrains him; but he that refuseth\njust gain and such as the law allows, voluntarily exercises, and\nsecures himself from being bribed or receiving any unlawful present.\nFor when great, hurtful, and base pleasures are proposed, it is very\nhard for any one to contain himself, who hath not often despised those\nwhich he had power and opportunity to enjoy. Thus, when base bribes and\nconsiderable advantages are offered, it will be difficult to refuse,\nunless he hath long ago rooted out all thoughts of gain and love of\nmoney; for other desires will nourish and increase that appetite, and\nhe will easily be drawn to any unjust action who can scarce forbear\nreaching out his hand to a proffered present. But he that will not\nlay himself open to the favors of friends and the gifts of kings, but\nrefuseth even what Fortune proffers, and keeps off his appetite, that\nis eager after and (as it were) leaps forward to an appearing treasure,\nis never disturbed or tempted to unlawful actions, but hath great and\nbrave thoughts, and hath command over himself, being conscious of none\nbut generous designs. I and Caphisias, dear Simmias, being passionate\nadmirers of such men, beg the stranger to suffer us to be taught and\nexercised by poverty to attain that height of virtue and perfection.\n\n16. My brother having finished this discourse, Simmias, nodding twice\nor thrice, said: Epaminondas is a great man, but this Polymnis is the\ncause of his greatness, who gave his children the best education, and\nbred them philosophers. But, sir, you may end this dispute at leisure\namong yourselves. As for Lysis (if it is lawful to discover it), pray,\nsir, do you design to take him out of his tomb and transport him into\nItaly, or leave him here amongst his friends and acquaintance, who\nshall be glad to lie by him in the grave? And Theanor with a smile\nanswered: Lysis, good Simmias, no doubt is very well pleased with the\nplace, for Epaminondas supplied him with all things necessary and\nfitting. But the Pythagoreans have some particular funeral ceremonies,\nwhich if any one wants, we conclude he did not make a proper and\nhappy exit. Therefore, as soon as we learned from some dreams that\nLysis was dead (for we have certain marks to know the apparitions of\nthe living from images of the dead), most began to think that Lysis,\ndying in a strange country, was not interred with the due ceremonies,\nand therefore ought to be removed to Italy that he might receive them\nthere. I coming upon this design, and being by the people of the\ncountry directed to the tomb, in the evening poured out my oblations,\nand called upon the soul of Lysis to come out and direct me in this\naffair. The night drawing on, I saw nothing indeed, but thought I heard\na voice saying: Move not those relics that ought not to be moved, for\nLysis\u2019s body was duly and religiously interred; and his soul is sent\nto inform another body, and committed to the care of another Daemon.\nAnd early this morning, asking Epaminondas about the manner of Lysis\u2019s\nburial, I found that Lysis had taught him as far as the incommunicable\nmysteries of our sect; and that the same Daemon that waited on Lysis\npresided over him, if I can guess at the pilot from the sailing of\nthe ship. The paths of life are large, but in few are men directed\nby the Daemons. When Theanor had said this, he looked attentively on\nEpaminondas, as if he designed a fresh search into his nature and\ninclinations.\n\n17. At the same instant the chirurgeon coming in unbound Simmias\u2019s leg\nand prepared to dress it; and Phyllidas entering with Hipposthenides,\nextremely concerned, as his very countenance discovered, desired me,\nCharon, and Theocritus to withdraw into a private corner of the porch.\nAnd I asking, Phyllidas, hath any new thing happened?\u2014Nothing new to\nme, he replied, for I knew and told you that Hipposthenides was a\ncoward, and therefore begged you not to communicate the matter to him\nor make him an associate. We seeming all surprised, Hipposthenides\ncried out: For Heaven\u2019s sake, Phyllidas, don\u2019t say so, don\u2019t think\nrashness to be bravery, and blinded by that mistake ruin both us and\nthe commonwealth; but, if it must be so, let the exiles return again in\npeace. And Phyllidas in a passion replied, How many, Hipposthenides,\ndo you think are privy to this design? Thirty I know engaged. And why\nthen, continued Phyllidas, would you singly oppose your judgment to\nthem all, and ruin those measures they have all taken and agreed to?\nWhat had you to do to send a messenger to desire them to return and not\napproach to-day, when even chance encouraged and all things conspired\nto promote the design?\n\nThese words of Phyllidas troubled every one; and Charon, looking\nvery angrily upon Hipposthenides, said: Thou coward! what hast thou\ndone? No harm, replied Hipposthenides, as I will make appear if you\nwill moderate your passion and hear what your gray-headed equal can\nallege. If, Phyllidas, we were minded to show our citizens a bravery\nthat sought danger, and a heart that contemned life, there is day\nenough before us; why should we wait till the evening? Let us take\nour swords presently, and assault the tyrants. Let us kill, let us be\nkilled, and be prodigal of our blood. If this may be easily performed\nor endured, and if it is no easy matter by the loss of two or three\nmen to free Thebes from so great an armed power as possesses it, and\nto beat out the Spartan garrison,\u2014for I suppose Phyllidas hath not\nprovided wine enough at his entertainment to make all Archias\u2019s guard\nof fifteen hundred men drunk; or if we despatch him, yet Arcesus and\nHerippidas will be sober, and upon the watch,\u2014why are we so eager to\nbring our friends and families into certain destruction, especially\nsince the enemy hath some notice of their return? For why else should\nthe Thespians for these three days be commanded to be in arms and\nfollow the orders of the Spartan general? And I hear that to-day,\nafter examination before Archias when he returns, they design to\nput Amphitheus to death; and are not these strong proofs that our\nconspiracy is discovered? Is it not the best way to stay a little,\nuntil an atonement is made and the Gods reconciled? For the diviners,\nhaving sacrificed an ox to Ceres, said that the burnt offering\nportended a great sedition and danger to the commonwealth. And besides,\nCharon, there is another thing which particularly concerns you; for\nyesterday Hypatodorus, the son of Erianthes, a very honest man and my\ngood acquaintance, but altogether ignorant of our design, coming out of\nthe country in my company, accosted me thus: Charon is an acquaintance\nof yours, Hipposthenides, but no great crony of mine; yet, if you\nplease, advise him to take heed of some imminent danger, for I had a\nvery odd dream relating to some such matter. Last night methought I\nsaw his house in travail; and he and his friends, extremely perplexed,\nfell to their prayers round about the house. The house groaned, and\nsent out some inarticulate sounds; at last a raging fire broke out of\nit, and consumed the greatest part of the city; and the castle Cadmea\nwas covered all over with smoke, but not fired. This was the dream,\nCharon, that he told me. I was startled at the present, and that fear\nincreased when I heard that the exiles intended to come to-day to your\nhouse, and I am very much afraid that we shall bring mighty mischiefs\non ourselves, yet do our enemies no proportionable harm, but only give\nthem a little disturbance; for I think the city signifies us, and the\ncastle (as it is now in their power) them.\n\n18. Then Theocritus putting in, and enjoining silence on Charon, who\nwas eager to reply, said: As for my part, Hipposthenides, though all\nmy sacrifices were of good omen to the exiles, yet I never found any\ngreater inducement to go on than the dream you mentioned; for you say\nthat a great and bright fire, rising out of a friend\u2019s house, caught\nthe city, and that the habitation of the enemies was blackened with\nsmoke, which never brings any thing better than tears and disturbance;\nthat inarticulate sounds broke out from us shows that none shall make\nany clear and full discovery; only a blind suspicion shall arise, and\nour design shall appear and have its desired effect at the same time.\nAnd it is very natural that the diviners should find the sacrifices\nill-omened; for both their office and their victims belong not to the\npublic, but to the men in power. Whilst Theocritus was speaking, I\nsaid to Hipposthenides, Whom did you send with this message? for if it\nwas not long ago, we will follow him. Indeed, Caphisias, he replied,\nit is unlikely (for I must tell the truth) that you should overtake\nhim, for he is upon the best horse in Thebes. You all know the man,\nhe is master of the horse to Melon, and Melon from the very beginning\nhath made him privy to the design. And I, observing him to be at the\ndoor, said: What, Hipposthenides, is it Clido, he that last year at\nJuno\u2019s feast won the single horse-race? Yes, the very same. Who then,\ncontinued I, is he that hath stood a pretty while at the court-gate and\ngazed upon us? At this Hipposthenides turning about cried out: Clido,\nby Hercules! I\u2019ll lay my life some unlucky accident hath happened.\nClido, observing that we took notice of him, came softly from the gate\ntowards us; and Hipposthenides giving him a nod and bidding him deliver\nhis message to the company, for they were all sure friends and privy\nto the whole plot, he began: Sir, I know the men very well, and not\nfinding you either at home or in the market-place, I guessed you were\nwith them, and came directly hither to give you a full account of the\npresent posture of affairs. You commanded me with all possible speed\nto meet the exiles upon the mountain, and accordingly I went home to\ntake horse, and called for my bridle; my wife said it was mislaid,\nand stayed a long time in the hostry, tumbling about the things and\npretending to look carefully after it; at last, when she had tired my\npatience, she confessed that her neighbor\u2019s wife had borrowed it last\nnight; this raised my passion and I chid her, and she began to curse,\nand wished me a bad journey and as bad a return; all which curses, pray\nGod, may fall upon her own head. At last my passion grew high, and I\nbegan to cudgel her, and presently the neighbors and women coming in,\nthere was fine work; I am so bruised that it was as much as I could do\nto come hither to desire you to employ another man, for I protest I am\namazed and in a very bad condition.\n\n19. Upon this news we were strangely altered. Just before we were\nangry with the man that endeavored to put it off; and now the time\napproaching, the very minute just upon us, and it being impossible to\ndefer the matter, we found ourselves in great anxiety and perplexity.\nBut I, speaking to Hipposthenides and taking him by the hand, bade\nhim be of good courage, for the Gods themselves seemed to invite us\nto action. Presently we parted. Phyllidas went home to prepare his\nentertainment, and to make Archias drunk as soon as conveniently\nhe could; Charon went to his house to receive the exiles; and I\nand Theocritus went back to Simmias again, that having now a good\nopportunity, we might discourse with Epaminondas.\n\n20. We found them engaged in a notable dispute, which Galaxidorus and\nPhidolaus had touched upon before; the subject of the enquiry was\nthis,\u2014What kind of substance or power was the famed Daemon of Socrates?\nSimmias\u2019s reply to Galaxidorus\u2019s discourse we did not hear; but he\nsaid that, having once asked Socrates about it and received no answer,\nhe never repeated the same question; but he had often heard him\ndeclare those to be vain pretenders who said they had seen any divine\napparition, while to those who affirmed that they heard a voice he\nwould gladly hearken, and would eagerly enquire into the particulars.\nAnd this upon consideration gave us probable reasons to conjecture that\nthis Daemon of Socrates was not an apparition, but rather a sensible\nperception of a voice, or an apprehension of some words, which after\nan unaccountable manner affected him; as in a dream there is no real\nvoice, yet we have fancies and apprehensions of words which make us\nimagine that we hear some speak. This perception in dreams is usual,\nbecause the body whilst we are asleep is quiet and undisturbed; but\nwhen we are awake, meaner thoughts creep in, and we can hardly bring\nour souls to observe better advertisements. For being in a hurry of\ntumultuous passions and distracting business, we cannot compose our\nmind or make it listen to the discoveries. But Socrates\u2019s understanding\nbeing pure, free from passion, and mixing itself with the body no\nmore than necessity required, was easy to be moved and apt to take an\nimpression from every thing that was applied to it; now that which was\napplied was not a voice, but more probably a declaration of a Daemon,\nby which the very thing that it would declare was immediately and\nwithout audible voice represented to his mind. Voice is like a stroke\ngiven to the soul, which receives speech forcibly entering at the ears\nwhilst we discourse; but the understanding of a more excellent nature\naffects a capable soul, by applying the very thing to be understood to\nit, so that there is no need of another stroke. And the soul obeys,\nas it stretches or slackens her affections, not forcibly, as if it\nwrought by contrary passions, but smoothly and gently, as if it moved\nflexible and loose reins. And sure nobody can wonder at this, that hath\nobserved what great ships of burden are turned by a small helm, or seen\na potter\u2019s wheel move round by the gentle touch of one finger. These\nare lifeless things, it is true; but being of a frame fit for motion,\nby reason of their smoothness, they yield to the least impulse. The\nsoul of man, being stretched with a thousand inclinations, as with\ncords, is the most tractable instrument that is, and if once rationally\nexcited, easy to be moved to the object that is to be conceived;\nfor here the beginnings of the passions and appetites spread to the\nunderstanding mind, and that being once agitated, they are drawn back\nagain, and so stretch and raise the whole man. Hence you may guess how\ngreat is the force of a conception when it hath entered the mind; for\nthe bones that are insensible, the nerves, the flesh that is full of\nhumors, and the heavy mass composed of all these, lying quiet and at\nrest, as soon as the soul gives the impulse and raiseth an appetite\nto move towards any object, are all roused and invigorated, and every\nmember seems a wing to carry it forward to action. Nor is it impossible\nor even very difficult to conceive the manner of this motion and\nstirring, by which the soul having conceived any thing draweth after\nher, by means of appetites, the whole mass of the body. But inasmuch\nas language, apprehended without any sensible voice, easily excites;\nso, in my opinion, the understanding of a superior nature and a more\ndivine soul may excite an inferior soul, touching it from without,\nlike as one speech may touch and rouse another, and as light causes\nits own reflection. We, it is true, as it were groping in the dark,\nfind out one another\u2019s conceptions by the voice; but the conceptions\nof the Daemons carry a light with them, and shine to those that are\nable to perceive them, so that there is no need of words such as men\nuse as signs to one another, seeing thereby only the images of the\nconceptions, and being unable to see the conceptions themselves unless\nthey enjoy a peculiar and (as I said before) a divine light. This\nmay be illustrated from the nature and effect of voice; for the air\nbeing formed into articulate sounds, and made all voice, transmits the\nconception of the soul to the hearer; so that it is no wonder if the\nair, that is very apt to take impressions, being fashioned according\nto the object conceived by a more excellent nature, signifies that\nconception to some divine and extraordinary men. For as a stroke upon a\nbrazen shield, when the noise ariseth out of a hollow, is heard only by\nthose who are in a convenient position, and is not perceived by others;\nso the speeches of the Daemon, though indifferently applied to all, yet\nsound only to those who are of a quiet temper and sedate mind, and such\nas we call holy and divine men. Most believe that Daemons communicate\nsome illuminations to men asleep, but think it strange and incredible\nthat they should communicate the like to them whilst they are awake\nand have their senses and reason vigorous; as wise a fancy as it is to\nimagine that a musician can use his harp when the strings are slack,\nbut cannot play when they are screwed up and in tune. For they do not\nconsider that the effect is hindered by the unquietness and incapacity\nof their own minds; from which inconveniences our friend Socrates was\nfree, as the oracle assured his father whilst he was a boy. For that\ncommanded him to let young Socrates do what he would, not to force or\ndraw him from his inclinations, but let the boy\u2019s humor have its free\ncourse; to beg Jupiter\u2019s and the Muses\u2019 blessing upon him, and take no\nfarther care, intimating that he had a good guide to direct him, that\nwas better than ten thousand tutors and instructors.\n\n21. This, Phidolaus, was my notion of Socrates\u2019s Daemon, whilst he\nlived and since his death; and I look upon all they mention about\nomens, sneezings, or the like, to be dreams and fooleries. But what\nI heard Timarchus discourse upon the same subject, lest some should\nthink I delight in fables, perhaps it is best to conceal. By no means,\ncried Theocritus, let\u2019s have it; for though they do not perfectly agree\nwith it, yet I know many fables that border upon truth; but pray first\ntell us who this Timarchus was, for I never was acquainted with the\nman. Very likely, Theocritus, said Simmias; for he died when he was\nvery young, and desired Socrates to bury him by Lampocles, the son of\nSocrates, who was his dear friend, of the same age, and died not many\ndays before him. He being eager to know (for he was a fine youth, and\na beginner in philosophy) what Socrates\u2019s Daemon was, acquainting none\nbut Cebes and me with his design, went down into Trophonius\u2019s cave, and\nperformed all the ceremonies that were requisite to gain an oracle.\nThere he stayed two nights and one day, so that his friends despaired\nof his return and lamented him as lost; but the next morning he came\nout with a very cheerful countenance, and having adored the God, and\nfreed himself from the thronging inquisitive crowd, he told us many\nwonderful things that he had seen and heard; for this was his relation.\n\n22. As soon as he entered, a thick darkness surrounded him; then, after\nhe had prayed, he lay a long while upon the ground, but was not certain\nwhether awake or in a dream, only he imagined that a smart stroke fell\nupon his head, and that through the parted sutures of his skull his\nsoul fled out; which being now loose, and mixed with a purer and more\nlightsome air, was very jocund and well pleased; it seemed to begin to\nbreathe, as if till then it had been almost choked, and grew bigger\nthan before, like a sail swollen by the wind; then he heard a small\nnoise whirling round his head, very sweet and ravishing, and looking up\nhe saw no earth, but certain islands shining with a gentle fire, which\ninterchanged colors according to the different variation of the light,\ninnumerable and very large, unequal, but all round. These whirling, it\nis likely, agitated the ether, and made that sound; for the ravishing\nsoftness of it was very agreeable to their even motions. Between these\nislands there was a large sea or lake which shone very gloriously,\nbeing adorned with a gay variety of colors mixed with blue; some few of\nthe islands swam in this sea, and were carried to the other side of the\ncurrent; others, and those the most, were carried up and down, tossed,\nwhirled, and almost overwhelmed.\n\nThe sea in some places seemed very deep, especially toward the south,\nin other parts very shallow; it ebbed and flowed, but the tides\nwere neither high nor strong; in some parts its color was pure and\nsea-green, in others it looked muddy and as troubled as a pool. The\ncurrent brings those islands that were carried over to the other side\nback again; but not to the same point, so that their motions are not\nexactly circular, but winding. About the middle of these islands,\nthe ambient sea seemed to bend into a hollow, a little less, as it\nappeared to him, than eight parts of the whole. Into this sea were two\nentrances, by which it received two opposite fiery rivers, running in\nwith so strong a current, that it spread a fiery white over a great\npart of the blue sea. This sight pleased him very much; but when he\nlooked downward, there appeared a vast chasm, round, as if he had\nlooked into a divided sphere, very deep and frightful, full of thick\ndarkness, which was every now and then troubled and disturbed. Thence a\nthousand howlings and bellowings of beasts, cries of children, groans\nof men and women, and all sorts of terrible noises reached his ears;\nbut faintly, as being far off and rising through the vast hollow; and\nthis terrified him exceedingly.\n\nA little while after, an invisible thing spoke thus to him: Timarchus,\nwhat dost thou desire to understand? And he replied, Every thing; for\nwhat is there that is not wonderful and surprising? We have little\nto do with those things above, they belong to other Gods; but as for\nProserpina\u2019s quarter, which is one of the four (as Styx divides them)\nthat we govern, you may visit it if you please. But what is Styx? The\nway to hell, which reaches to the contrary quarter, and with its head\ndivides the light; for, as you see, it rises from hell below, and as it\nrolls on touches also the light, and is the limit of the extremest part\nof the universe. There are four divisions of all things; the first is\nof life, the second of motion, the third of generation, and the fourth\nof corruption. The first is coupled to the second by a unit, in the\nsubstance invisible; the second to the third by understanding, in the\nSun; and the third to the fourth by nature, in the Moon. Over every one\nof these ties a Fate, daughter of Necessity, presides; over the first,\nAtropos; over the second, Clotho; and Lachesis over the third, which\nis in the Moon, and about which is the whole whirl of generation. All\nthe other islands have Gods in them; but the Moon, belonging to earthly\nDaemons, is raised but a little above Styx. Styx seizes on her once in\na hundred and seventy-seven second revolutions; and when it approaches,\nthe souls are startled, and cry out for fear; for hell swallows up a\ngreat many, and the Moon receives some swimming up from below which\nhave run through their whole course of generation, unless they are\nwicked and impure. For against such she throws flashes of lightning,\nmakes horrible noises, and frights them away; so that, missing their\ndesired happiness and bewailing their condition, they are carried down\nagain (as you see) to undergo another generation. But, said Timarchus,\nI see nothing but stars leaping about the hollow, some carried into\nit, and some darting out of it again. These, said the voice, are\nDaemons; for thus it is. Every soul hath some portion of reason; a man\ncannot be a man without it; but as much of each soul as is mixed with\nflesh and appetite is changed, and through pain or pleasure becomes\nirrational. Every soul doth not mix herself after one sort; for some\nplunge themselves into the body, and so in this life their whole frame\nis corrupted by appetite and passion; others are mixed as to some part,\nbut the purer part still remains without the body,\u2014it is not drawn\ndown into it, but it swims above, and touches the extremest part of\nthe man\u2019s head; it is like a cord to hold up and direct the subsiding\npart of the soul, as long as it proves obedient and is not overcome by\nthe appetites of the flesh. That part that is plunged into the body\nis called the soul, but the uncorrupted part is called the mind, and\nthe vulgar think it is within them, as likewise they imagine the image\nreflected from a glass to be in that. But the more intelligent, who\nknow it to be without, call it a Daemon. Therefore those stars which\nyou see extinguished imagine to be souls whose whole substances are\nplunged into bodies; and those that recover their light and rise from\nbelow, that shake off the ambient mist and darkness, as if it were\nclay and dirt, to be such as retire from their bodies after death;\nand those that are carried up on high are the Daemons of wise men and\nphilosophers. But pray pry narrowly, and endeavor to discover the tie\nby which every one is united to a soul. Upon this, Timarchus looked as\nsteadfastly as he could, and saw some of the stars very much agitated,\nand some less, as the corks upon a net; and some whirled round like\na spindle, having a very irregular and uneven motion, and not being\nable to run in a straight line. And thus the voice said: Those that\nhave a straight and regular motion belong to souls which are very\nmanageable, by reason of their genteel breeding and philosophical\neducation, and which upon earth do not plunge themselves into the foul\nclay and become irrational. But those that move irregularly, sometimes\nupwards, sometimes downwards, as striving to break loose from a vexing\nchain, are yoked to and strive with very untractable conditions, which\nignorance and want of learning make headstrong and ungovernable.\nSometimes they get the better of the passions, and draw them to the\nright side; sometimes they are drawn away by them, and sink into sin\nand folly, and then again endeavor to get out. For the tie, as it were\na bridle on the irrational part of the soul, when it is pulled back,\ndraws in repentance for past sins, and shame for loose and unlawful\npleasures, which is a pain and stroke inflicted on the soul by a\ngoverning and prevailing power; till by this means it becomes gentle\nand manageable, and like a tamed beast, without blows or torment, it\nunderstands the minutest direction of the Daemon. Such indeed are but\nvery slowly and very hardly brought to a right temper; but of that\nsort which from the very beginning are governable and obedient to the\ndirection of the Daemon, are those prophetic souls, those intimates of\nthe Gods. Such was the soul of Hermodorus the Clazomenian, of which it\nis reported that for several nights and days it would leave his body,\ntravel over many countries, and return after it had viewed things and\ndiscoursed with persons at a great distance; till at last, by the\ntreachery of his wife, his body was delivered to his enemies, and they\nburnt the house while the inhabitant was abroad. It is certain, this\nis a mere fable. The soul never went out of the body, but it loosened\nthe tie that held the Daemon, and permitted it to wander; so that\nthis, seeing and hearing the various external occurrences, brought\nin the news to it; yet those that burnt his body are even till this\ntime severely tormented in the deepest pit of hell. But this, youth,\nyou shall more clearly perceive three months hence; now depart. The\nvoice continuing no longer, Timarchus (as he said) turned about to\ndiscover who it was that spoke; but a violent pain, as if his skull\nhad been pressed together, seized his head, so that he lost all sense\nand understanding; but in a little while recovering, he found himself\nin the entrance of the cave, where he at first lay down.\n\n23. This was Timarchus\u2019s story; and when at Athens, in the third month\nafter he had heard the voice, he died. We, amazed at the event, told\nSocrates the whole tale. Socrates was angry with us for not discovering\nit whilst Timarchus was alive; for he would very gladly have had a more\nfull discovery from his own mouth. I have done, Theocritus, with the\nstory and discourse; but pray, shall we not entreat the stranger to\ndiscuss this point? For it is a very proper subject for excellent and\ndivine men. What then, said Theanor, shall we not have the opinion of\nEpaminondas, who is of the same school, and as well learned as myself\nin these matters? But my father with a smile said: Sir, that is his\nhumor; he loves to be silent, he is very cautious how he proposeth any\nthing, but will hear eternally, and is never weary of an instructive\nstory; so that Spintharus the Tarentine, who lived with him a long\ntime, would often say that he never met a man that knew more, or spake\nless. Therefore, pray sir, let us have your thoughts.\n\n24. Then, said Theanor, in my opinion, that story of Timarchus\nshould be accounted sacred and inviolable, and consecrated to God;\nand I wonder that any one should disbelieve his report, as Simmias\nhas related it. Swans, horses, dogs, and dragons we sometimes call\nsacred; and yet we cannot believe that men are sacred and favorites\nof Heaven, though we confess the love of man and not the love of\nbirds to be an attribute of the Deity. Now as one that loves horses\ndoth not take an equal care of the whole kind, but always choosing\nout some one excellent, rides, trains, feeds, and loves him above the\nrest; so amongst men, the superior powers, choosing, as it were, the\nbest out of the whole herd, breed them more carefully and nicely;\nnot directing them, it is true, by reins and bridles, but by reason\nimparted by certain notices and signs, which the vulgar and common\nsort do not understand. For neither do all dogs know the huntsman\u2019s,\nnor all horses the jockey\u2019s signs; but those that are bred to it are\neasily directed by a whistle or a hollow, and very readily obey. And\nHomer seems to have understood the difference I mention; for some of\nthe prophets he calls augurs, some priests, some such as understood\nthe voice of the very Gods, were of the same mind with them, and could\nforetell things; thus,\n\n    Helenus Priam\u2019s son the same decreed,\n    On which consulting Gods before agreed.\n\nAnd in another place,\n\n    As I heard lately from th\u2019 immortal Gods.[208]\n\nFor as those that are not near the persons of kings or commanders\nunderstand their minds by fire-signals, proclamation, sound of trumpet,\nor the like, but their favorites receive it from their own mouth; so\nthe Deity converses immediately but with very few, and very seldom; but\nto most he gives signs, from which the art of divination is gathered.\nSo that the Gods direct the lives of very few, and of such only whom\nthey intend to raise to the highest degree of perfection and happiness.\nThose souls (as Hesiod sings) that are not to be put into another body,\nbut are freed from all union with flesh, turn guardian Daemons and\npreside over others. For as wrestlers, when old age makes them unfit\nfor exercise, have some love for it still left, delight to see others\nwrestle, and encourage them; so souls that have passed all the stages\nof life, and by their virtue are exalted into Daemons, do not slight\nthe endeavors of man, but being kind to those that strive for the same\nattainments, and in some sort banding and siding with them, encourage\nand help them on, when they see them near their hope and ready to\ncatch the desired prize. For the Daemon doth not go along with every\none; but as in a shipwreck, those that are far from land their friends\nstanding on the shore only look upon and pity, but those that are near\nthey encourage and wade in to save; so the Daemon deals with mankind.\nWhilst we are immersed in worldly affairs, and are changing bodies, as\nfit vehicles for our conveyance, he lets us alone to try our strength,\npatiently to stem the tide and get into the haven by ourselves; but\nif a soul hath gone through the trials of a thousand generations, and\nnow, when her course is almost finished, strives bravely, and with a\ngreat deal of labor endeavors to ascend, the Deity permits her proper\nGenius to aid her, and even gives leave to any other that is willing to\nassist. The Daemon, thus permitted, presently sets about the work; and\nupon his approach, if the soul obeys and hearkens to his directions,\nshe is saved; if not, the Daemon leaves her, and she lies in a\nmiserable condition.\n\n25. This discourse was just ended, when Epaminondas looking upon me,\nsaid: Caphisias, it is time for you to be at the ring, your usual\ncompany will expect you; we, as soon as we break company, will take\ncare of Theanor. And I replied: Sir, I\u2019ll go presently, but I think\nTheocritus here hath something to say to you and me and Galaxidorus.\nLet\u2019s hear it in God\u2019s name, said he; and rising up, he led us into a\ncorner of the porch. When we had him in the midst of us, we all began\nto desire him to make one in the conspiracy. He replied that he knew\nthe day appointed for the exiles\u2019 return, and that he and Gorgidas had\ntheir friends ready upon occasion; but that he was not for killing any\nof the citizens without due process of law, unless some grave necessity\nseemed to warrant the execution. Besides, it was requisite that there\nshould be some unconcerned in the design; for such the multitude would\nnot be jealous of, but would think what they advised was for the good\nof the commonwealth, that their counsels proceeded from the love they\nhad for their country, and not from any design of procuring their own\nsafety. This motion we liked; he returned to Simmias and his company,\nand we went to the ring, where we met our friends, and as we wrestled\ntogether, communicated our thoughts to one another, and put things in\norder for action. There we saw Philip and Archias very spruce, anointed\nand perfumed, going away to the prepared feast; for Phyllidas, fearing\nthey would execute Amphitheus before supper, as soon as he had brought\nLysanoridas going, went to Archias, and putting him in hopes of the\nwoman\u2019s company he desired, and assuring him she would be at the place\nappointed, soon trepanned him into stupid carelessness and sensuality\nwith his fellow-wantons.\n\n26. About the night, the wind rising, the sharpness of the weather\nincreased, and that forced most to keep within doors; we meeting with\nDamoclides, Pelopidas, and Theopompus received them, and others met\nother of the exiles; for as soon as they were come over Cithaeron,\nthey separated, and the stormy weather obliged them to walk with their\nfaces covered, so that without any fear or danger they passed through\nthe city. Some as they entered had a flash of lightning on their\nright-hand, without a clap of thunder, and that portended safety and\nglory; intimating that their actions should be splendid and without\ndanger.\n\n27. When we were all together in the house (eight and forty in number),\nand Theocritus in a little room by himself offering sacrifice, there\nwas heard on a sudden a loud knocking at the gate; and presently one\ncame and told us that two of Archias\u2019s guard, who had some earnest\nbusiness with Charon, knocked at the gate, demanding entrance, and\nwere very angry that they were not admitted sooner. Charon surprised\ncommanded the doors to be opened presently, and going to meet them\nwith a garland on his head, as if he had been sacrificing or making\nmerry, asked their business. One of them replied, Philip and Archias\nsent us to tell you that you must come before them presently. And\nCharon demanding why they sent for him in such haste, and if all was\nwell; We know nothing more, the messenger returned, but what answer\nshall we carry back? That, replied Charon, putting off his garland and\nputting on his cloak, I follow you; for should I go along with you, my\nfriends would be concerned, imagining that I am taken into custody. Do\nso, said they, for we must go and carry the governor\u2019s orders to the\ncity guard. With this they departed, but Charon coming in and telling\nus the story, we were all very much surprised, imagining the design\nhad been discovered; and most suspected Hipposthenides, and thought\nthat he, having endeavored to hinder their coming through Chido and\nfailed, now the time for the dangerous attempt unavoidably approached,\ngrew faint-hearted and made a discovery of the plot. And this seemed\nprobable, for he did not appear at Charon\u2019s house with the rest,\nand so was looked upon by every one to be a rascal and a turncoat;\nyet we all were of opinion that Charon ought to obey the governor\u2019s\norders and go to them. Then he, commanding his son to be brought to\nhim,\u2014the prettiest youth, Archidamus, in all Thebes, skilled in most\nexercises, scarce fifteen years old, but very strong and lusty for his\nage,\u2014thus said: Friends, this is my only and my beloved son, and him I\nput into your hands, conjuring you by all that\u2019s good, if you find me\ntreacherous, to kill him and have no mercy upon him for my sake; but\nas for your parts, sirs, be provided against the worst that can come;\ndo not yield your bodies tamely to be butchered by base fellows, but\nbehave yourselves bravely, and preserve your souls invincible for the\ngood and glory of your country. When Charon had ended, we admired the\nhonesty and bravery of the man, but were angry at his suspicion, and\nbade him take away his son. Charon, said Pelopidas, we should have\ntaken it more kindly, if you had removed your son into another house,\nfor why should he suffer for being in our company? Nay, let us send him\naway now, that, if we fall, he may live, and grow up to punish the\ntyrants and be a brave revenger of our deaths. By no means, replied\nCharon, he shall stay here, and run the same danger with you all, for\nit is not best that he should fall into the power of his enemies; and\nyou, my boy, be daring above thy age, and with these brave citizens\nventure upon necessary dangers for the defence of liberty and virtue;\nfor we have good hopes still left, and perhaps some God will protect us\nin this just and generous undertaking.\n\n28. These words of his, Archidamus, drew tears from many; but he not\nshedding so much as one, and delivering his son to Pelopidas, went\nout of the door, saluting and encouraging every one as he went. But\nyou would have been exceedingly surprised at the serene and fearless\ntemper of the boy, with a soul as great as that of Achilles\u2019s son;\nfor he did not change color or seem concerned, but drew out and tried\nthe goodness of Pelopidas\u2019s sword. In the mean time Diotonus, one of\nCephisodorus\u2019s friends, came to us with his sword girt and breastplate\non; and understanding that Archias had sent for Charon, he chid our\ndelay, and urged us to go and set upon the house presently; for so we\nshould be too quick for them, and take them unprovided. Or, if we did\nnot like that proposal, he said, it was better to go out and fall upon\nthem while they were scattered and in confusion, than to coop ourselves\nup altogether in one room, and like a hive of bees be taken off by our\nenemies. Theocritus likewise pressed us to go on, affirming that the\nsacrifices were lucky, and promised safety and success.\n\n29. Upon this, whilst we were arming and setting ourselves in order,\nCharon came in, looking very merrily and jocund, and with a smile\nsaid: Courage, sirs, there is no danger, but the design goes on very\nwell; for Archias and Philip, as soon as they heard that according to\ntheir order I was come, being very drunk and weakened in body and\nunderstanding, with much ado came out to me; and Archias said, I hear\nthat the exiles are returned, and lurk privately in town. At this I\nwas very much surprised, but recovering myself asked, Who are they,\nsir, and where? We don\u2019t know, said Archias, and therefore sent for\nyou, to enquire whether you had heard any clear discovery; and I, as it\nwere surprised, considering a little with myself, imagined that what\nthey heard was only uncertain report, and that none of the associates\nhad made this discovery (for then they would have known the house),\nbut that it was a groundless suspicion and rumor about town that came\nto their ears, and therefore said: I remember, whilst Androclidas was\nalive, that a great many idle lying stories were spread abroad, to\ntrouble and amuse us; but, sir, I have not heard one word of this, yet\nif you please, I will enquire what ground there is for it, and if I\nfind any thing considerable, I shall give you notice. Yes, pray, said\nPhyllidas, examine this matter very narrowly; slight no particular,\nbe very diligent and careful, foresight is very commendable and safe.\nWhen he had said this, he led back Archias into the room, where they\nare now drinking. But, sirs, let us not delay, but begging the God\u2019s\nassistance, put ourselves presently upon action. Upon this, we went to\nprayers, and encouraged one another.\n\n30. It was now full supper-time, the wind was high, and snow and\nsmall rain fell, so that the streets and narrow lanes we passed\nwere all empty. They that were to assault Leontidas and Hypates,\nwhose houses joined, went out in their usual clothes, having no arms\nbesides their swords; amongst those were Pelopidas, Democlides, and\nCephisodorus. Charon, Melon, and the rest that were to set upon\nArchias, put on breastplates, and shady fir or pine garlands upon\ntheir heads; some dressed themselves in women\u2019s clothes, so that they\nlooked like a drunken company of mummers. But our enemies\u2019 unlucky\nFortune, Archidamus, resolving to make their folly and carelessness as\nconspicuous as our eagerness and courage, and having, as in a play,\nintermixed a great many dangerous underplots into our plan, now, at\nthe very point of its execution, presented to us a most unexpected\nand hazardous adventure. For whilst Charon, as soon as ever he parted\nfrom Archias and Philip, was come back and was setting us forward to\nexecute the design, a letter from Archias, the chief-priest of Athens,\nwas sent to Archias our governor, which contained a full discovery of\nthe plot, in what house the exiles met, and who were the associates.\nArchias being now dead drunk, and quite beside himself with expectation\nof the desired women, took the letter; and the bearer saying, \u201cSir,\nit contains matter of concern,\u201d \u201cMatters of concern to-morrow,\u201d he\nreplied, and clapped it under his cushion; and calling for the glass,\nhe bade the servant fill a brimmer, and sent Phyllidas often to the\ndoor to see if the women were coming.\n\n31. The hopes of this company made them sit long; and we coming\nopportunely quickly forced our way through the servants to the hall,\nand stood a little at the door, to take notice of every one at table;\nour shady garlands and apparel disguising our intentions, all sat\nsilent, in expectation of what would follow. But as soon as Melon,\nlaying his hand upon his sword, was making through the midst of them,\nCabirichus (who was the archon chosen by lot) catching him by the\narm cried out to Phyllidas, Is not this Melon? Melon loosed his hold\npresently, and drawing out his sword, made at staggering Archias,\nand laid him dead on the floor; Charon wounded Philip in the neck,\nand whilst he endeavored to defend himself with the cups that were\nabout him, Lysitheus threw him off his seat, and ran him through. We\npersuaded Cabirichus to be quiet, not to assist the tyrants, but to\njoin with us to free his country, for whose good he was consecrated\ngovernor and devoted to the Gods. But when being drunk he would not\nharken to reason, but grew high, began to bustle, and turned the\npoint of his spear upon us (for our governors always carry a spear\nwith them), I catching it in the midst, and raising it higher than my\nhead, desired him to let it go and consult his own safety, for else\nhe would be killed. But Theopompus, standing on his right side and\nsmiting him with his sword, said: Lie there, with those whose interest\nyou espoused; thou shalt not wear the garland in freed Thebes, nor\nsacrifice to the Gods any more, by whom thou hast so often curst thy\ncountry, by making prayers so many times for the prosperity of her\nenemies. Cabirichus falling, Theocritus standing by snatched up the\nsacred spear, and kept it from being stained; and some few of the\nservants that dared to resist we presently despatched; the others that\nwere quiet we shut up in the hall, being very unwilling that they\nshould get abroad and make any discovery, till we knew whether the\nother company had succeeded in their attempt.\n\n32. They managed their business thus: Pelopidas and those with him went\nsoftly and knocked at Leontidas\u2019s gate; and a servant coming to demand\ntheir business, they said, they came from Athens, and brought a letter\nfrom Callistratus to Leontidas. The servant went and acquainted his\nmaster, and was ordered to open the door; as soon as it was unbarred,\nthey all violently rushed in, and overturning the servant ran through\nthe hall directly to Leontidas\u2019s chamber. He, presently suspecting what\nwas the matter, drew his dagger and stood upon his guard; an unjust\nman, it is true, and a tyrant, but courageous and strong of his hands;\nbut he forgot to put out the candle and get amongst the invaders in the\ndark, and so appearing in the light, as soon as they opened the door,\nhe ran Cephisodorus through the belly. Next he engaged Pelopidas,\nand cried out to the servants to come and help; but those Samidas and\nhis men secured, nor did they dare to come to handy blows with the\nstrongest and most valiant of the citizens. There was a smart encounter\nbetween Pelopidas and Leontidas, for the passage was very narrow, and\nCephisodorus falling and dying in the midst, nobody else could come to\nstrike one blow. At last Pelopidas, receiving a slight wound in the\nhead, with repeated thrusts overthrew Leontidas, and killed him upon\nCephisodorus, who was yet breathing; for he saw his enemy fall, and\nshaking Pelopidas by the hand, and saluting all the rest, he died with\na smile upon his face. This done, they went to the house of Hypates,\nand entering after the same manner, they pursued Hypates, flying over\nthe roof into a neighbor\u2019s house, and caught and killed him.\n\n33. From thence they marched directly to us, and we met in the piazza;\nand having saluted and told one another our success, we went all to\nthe prison. And Phyllidas, calling out the keeper, said: Philip and\nArchias command you to bring Amphitheus presently before them. But\nhe, considering the unseasonableness of the time, and that Phyllidas,\nas being yet hot and out of breath, spoke with more than ordinary\nconcern, suspected the cheat, and replied to Phyllidas: Pray, sir, did\never the governors send for a prisoner at such a time before? Or ever\nby you? What warrant do you bring? As he was prating thus, Phyllidas\nran him through,\u2014a base fellow, upon whose carcass the next day many\nwomen spat and trampled. We, breaking open the prison door, first\ncalled out Amphitheus by name, and then others, as every one had a\nmind; they, knowing our voice, jocundly leaped out of their straw in\nwhich they lay, with their chains upon their legs. The others that\nwere in the stocks held out their hands, and begged us not to leave\nthem behind. These being set free, many of the neighbors came in to\nus, understanding and rejoicing for what was done. The women too, as\nsoon as they were acquainted with the flying report, unmindful of the\nBoeotian strictness, ran out to one another, and enquired of every\none they met how things went. Those that found their fathers or their\nhusbands followed them; for the tears and prayers of the modest women\nwere a very great incitement to all they met.\n\n34. Our affairs being in this condition, understanding that\nEpaminondas, Gorgidas, and their friends were drawing into a body about\nMinerva\u2019s temple, I went to them. Many honest worthy citizens at first\njoined, and their number continually increased. When I had informed\nthem in the particulars of what was done, and desired them to march\ninto the market-place to assist their friends, they proclaimed liberty;\nand the multitude were furnished with, arms out of the piazzas, that\nwere stuffed with spoil, and the neighboring armorers\u2019 shops. Then\nHipposthenides with his friends and servants appeared, having by chance\njoined the trumpeters that were coming to Thebes, against the feast of\nHercules. Straight some gave the alarm in the market-place, others in\nother parts of the city, distracting their enemies on all sides, as\nif the whole city was in arms. Some, lighting smoky fire, concealed\nthemselves in the cloud and fled to the castle, drawing to them the\nselect band which used to keep guard about the castle all night. The\ngarrison of the castle, when these poured in among them scattered and\nin disorder, though they saw us all in confusion, and knew we had\nno standing compact body, yet would not venture to make a descent,\nthough they were above five thousand strong. They were really afraid,\nbut pretended they dared not move without Lysanoridas\u2019s orders, who,\ncontrary to his usual custom, was absent from the castle that day. For\nwhich neglect, the Spartans (as I was told), having got Lysanoridas\ninto their hands, fined him heavily; and having taken Hermippidas and\nArcesus at Corinth, they put them both to death without delay. And\nsurrendering the castle to us upon articles, they marched out with\ntheir garrison.\n\n\n\n\nOF CURIOSITY, OR AN OVER-BUSY INQUISITIVENESS INTO THINGS IMPERTINENT.\n\n\n1. If a dwelling-house, by reason of its ill situation or contrivance,\nbe not commodiously light and airy, or too much exposed to ill weather\nand unhealthy, it is most advisable entirely to quit such a habitation,\nunless perhaps, through continuance of time, neighborhood of friends,\nor any other endearing circumstance, a man should become much wedded\nto the place; in which case it may be possible, by the alteration of\nwindows and new placing of doors and staircases, either to remove or to\nlessen these inconveniences. By such like remedies, even whole cities\nhave been much amended and improved both as to health and pleasantness;\nand it is said of the place of my nativity particularly, that, while it\nonce lay open to the western winds, and to the beams of the declining\nsun streaming over the top of Parnassus, it was by Chaeron turned\ntoward the east; but it is thought that Empedocles the naturalist\nsecured that whole region round about from the pestilence, by closing\nup the rift of a certain mountain, from whence a contagious southerly\ndamp breathed forth upon the flat of that country. And now, since there\nare several noxious qualities and distempered passions that lurk within\nthe body too, which is the more immediate habitation of the soul,\u2014and\nwhich, like the dark and tempestuous weather that is without, do cloud\nand disturb it,\u2014therefore the like method which has been observed in\ncuring the defects and annoyances of an ill-contrived and unhealthy\ndwelling may be followed here, in rendering the body a more commodious,\nserviceable, and delightful mansion for the soul. Wherein that it\nmay enjoy its desired calmness and serenity, it will conduce beyond\nall other expedients whatsoever, that those blind, tumultuous, and\nextravagant passions should be expelled or extinguished utterly; or, if\nthat cannot be, yet that they be so far reduced and moderated, and so\nprudently applied and accommodated to their proper objects, that the\nmischief and disorder of them (at least) may be removed.\n\nAmong these may deservedly be accounted that sort of curiosity, which,\nby its studious prying into the evils of mankind, seems to be a\ndistemper of envy and ill-nature.\n\n    Why envious wretch, with such a piercing ray,\n    Blind to thine own, dost others\u2019 faults survey?\n\nIf the knowledge of ill can reward the industrious search with so much\ndelight and pleasure, turn the point of thy curiosity upon thyself and\nthine own affairs, and thou shalt within doors find matter enough for\nthe most laborious enquiries, plentiful as\n\n    Water in Aliso\u2019s stream, or leaves about the oak.\n\nSo vast a heap of offences shalt thou find in thy own conversation,\nsuch variety of perturbations in thy soul, and manifold failures in\nthy duty. To take a distinct and orderly survey of all which, that of\nXenophon will be good direction, who said, that it was the manner of\ndiscreet housekeepers to place their weapons of war, utensils for the\nkitchen, instruments of husbandry, and furniture for religious and\nsacred services, each in several and proper repositories. So every\nman that would make an exact enquiry into and take a just account\nof himself, should first make a particular search into the several\nmischiefs that proceed from each passion within him, whether it be\nenvy or jealousy, covetousness or cowardice, or any other vicious\ninclination; and then distribute and range them all (as it were) into\ndistinct apartments.\n\nThis done, make thy reviews upon them with the most accurate\ninspection, so that nothing may divert thee from the severest scrutiny;\nobstruct every prospect that looks towards thy neighbors\u2019 quarters,\nand close up all those avenues which may lead thee to any foreign\ncuriosity; become an eavesdropper to thine own house, listen to the\nwhispers of thine own walls, and observe those secret arts of the\nfemale closet, the close intrigues of the parlor, and the treacherous\npractices of thy servants, which thy own windows will discover to thee.\nHere this inquisitive and busy disposition may find an employment\nthat will be of use and advantage, and is neither ill-natured nor\nimpertinent; while every man shall call himself to this strict\nexamination.\n\n    Where have I err\u2019d? What have I said, or done?\n    What duty, when, and how have I foregone?\n\n2. But now, as the poets feign concerning Lamia, that upon her going to\nbed she lays aside her eyes among the attirements of her dressing-box,\nand is at home for the most part blind and drowsy too, and puts on\nher eyes only when she goes abroad a gadding; so it is with most\nmen, who, through a kind of an affected ignorance and artificial\nblindness, commonly blunder and stumble at their own threshold, are the\ngreatest strangers to their own personal defects, and of all others\nleast familiarly acquainted with their own domestic ills and follies.\nBut when they look abroad, their sight is sharpened with all the\nwatchful and laborious curiosity imaginable, which serves as deforming\nspectacles to an evil eye, that is already envenomed by the malignity\nof a worse nature.\n\nAnd hence it is, that a person of this busy meddlesome disposition is\na greater friend to them he hates than to himself; for overlooking\nhis own concerns, through his being so heedfully intent on those of\nother men, he reproves and exposes their miscarriages, admonishes them\nof the errors and follies they ought to correct, and affrights them\ninto greater caution for the future; so that not only the careless and\nunwary, but even the more sober and prudent persons, may gain no small\nadvantage from the impertinence and ill-nature of inquisitive people.\n\nIt was a remarkable instance of the prudence of Ulysses, that, going\ninto the regions of departed souls, he would not exchange so much as\none word with his mother there till he had first obtained an answer\nfrom the oracle and despatched the business he came about; and then,\nturning to her, he afforded some small time for a few impertinent\nquestions about the other women upon the place, asking which was Tyro,\nand which the fair Chloris, and concerning the unfortunate Epicasta,\nwhy,\n\n    Noosed to a lofty beam, she would suspended die.[209]\n\nBut we through extreme sloth and ignorance, being stupidly careless of\nour own affairs, must be idly spending our time and talk either about\nour neighbor\u2019s pedigree, how that such a one had a tapster for his\ngrandfather, and that his grandmother was a laundress; or that another\nowes three or four talents, and is not able to pay the interest. Nay,\nand such trivial stuff as this we busy ourselves about,\u2014where such a\nman\u2019s wife has been all this while; and what it was, that this and the\nother fellow have been talking of in a corner. But the wise Socrates\nemployed his curiosity to better purpose, when he went about enquiring\nby what excellent precepts Pythagoras obtained so great authority among\nhis followers; and Aristippus, meeting Ischomachus at the Olympic\ngames, asked him what those notions were with which Socrates had so\npowerfully charmed the minds of his young scholars; upon the slight\ninformation whereof, he was so passionately inflamed with a desire of\ngoing to Athens, that he grew pale and lean, and almost languished till\nhe came to drink of the fountain itself, and had been acquainted with\nthe person of Socrates, and more fully learned that philosophy of his,\nthe design of which was to teach men how to discover their own ills and\napply proper remedies to them.\n\n3. But to some sort of men their own life and actions would appear\nthe most unpleasant spectacle in the world, and therefore they fly\nfrom the light of their conscience, and cannot bear the torture of\none reflecting thought upon themselves; for when the soul, being once\ndefiled with all manner of wickedness, is scared at its own hideous\ndeformity, it endeavors to run from itself, and ranging here and there,\nit pampers its own malignity with malicious speculations on the ills of\nothers.\n\nIt is observed of the hen that, loathing the plenty of meat that is\ncast before her on a clean floor, she will be scratching in a hole or\nspurning the dunghill, in search of one single musty grain. So these\nover-busy people, neglecting such obvious and common things into which\nany man may enquire and talk of without offence, cannot be satisfied\nunless they rake into the private and concealed evils of every family\nin the neighborhood. It was smartly said by the Egyptian, who, being\nasked what it was he carried so closely, replied, it was therefore\ncovered that it might be secret. Which answer will serve to check\nthe curiosity of those impertinent men who will be always peeping\ninto the privacies of others; for assuredly there is nothing usually\nmore concealed than what is too foul to be seen; nor would it be kept\nso close, were it either fit or safe it should be known. Without\nknocking at the door, it is great rudeness to enter another\u2019s house,\nand therefore in former times were rappers fitted to the gates, that\nby the noise thereof notice might be given to the family; for the\nsame purpose are porters appointed now, lest, a stranger coming in\nunawares, the mistress or daughter of the family might be surprised\nbusy or undressed, or a servant be seen under correction, or the maids\nbe overheard in the heat of their scolding. But a person of this\nprying busy temper, who would disdain the being invited to a sober\nand well-governed house, will yet even forcibly intrude himself as a\nspy into the indecencies of private families; and he pries into those\nvery things which locks, bolts, and doors were intended to secure from\ncommon view, for no other end but to discover them to all the world.\nAristo said that those winds were the most troublesome which blew up\none\u2019s garments and exposed one\u2019s nakedness; but these inquisitive\npeople deprive us of all the shelter or security of walls and doors,\nand like the wanton air, which pervades the veil and steals through\nthe closest guards of virgin modesty, they insinuate into those\ndivertisements which are hidden in the retirements of the night, and\nstrip men even to their very skin.\n\n4. So that\u2014as it is merrily said by the comedian concerning Cleon,\nthat \u201chis hands were in Aetolia, and his soul in Thieftown\u201d[210]\u2014the\nhands and feet, eyes and thoughts of inquisitive persons are straggling\nabout in many places at once. Neither the mansions of the great, nor\nthe cottages of the poor, nor the privy chambers of princes, nor\nthe recesses of the nuptial alcove, can escape the search of their\ncuriosity; they are familiar to the affairs of strangers, and will\nbe prying into the darkest mysteries of state, although it be to the\nmanifest peril of their being ruined by it. For as to him that will be\ncuriously examining the virtues of medicinal herbs, the unwary taste\nof a venomous plant conveys a deleterious impression upon the brain,\nbefore its noxious quality can be discerned by the palate; so they\nthat boldly pry into the ills of great persons usually meet with their\nown destruction, sooner than they can discover the dangerous secret\nthey enquire after. And so it happens that, when the rashly curious\neye, not contented to expatiate in the free and boundless region of\nreflected light, will be gazing at the imperial seat of brightness, it\nbecomes a sacrifice to the burning rays, and straight sinks down in\npenal darkness.\n\nIt was therefore well said by Philippides the comedian, who, being\nasked by King Lysimachus what he desired might be imparted to him,\nreplied, Any thing but a secret. And indeed, those things in the courts\nof princes that are most pleasant in themselves and most delightful to\nbe known,\u2014such as balls, magnificent entertainments, and all the shows\nof pomp and greatness,\u2014are exposed to common view, nor do they ever\nhide those divertisements and enjoyments which are the attendants of\na prosperous estate; but in what cases soever they seem reserved,\u2014as\nwhen they are conceiving some high displeasure, or contriving the\nmethods of a revenge, or raging under a fit of jealousy, or suspicious\nof the disloyal practices of their children, or dubious concerning\nthe treachery of a favorite,\u2014come not near nor intermeddle, for every\nthing is of a dreadful aspect and of very dangerous access that is thus\nconcealed. Fly from so black a cloud, whose darkness condenses into a\ntempest; and it will be time enough, when its fury breaks forth with\nflash and thunder, for thee to observe upon whose head the mischief\nfalls.\n\n5. But to avoid the danger of this curiosity, divert thy thoughts to\nmore safe and delightful enquiries; survey the wonders of nature in\nthe heavens, earth, the sea, and air; in which thou hast a copious\nchoice of materials for the more sublime, as well as the more easy and\nobvious contemplations. If thy more piercing wit aspires to the noblest\nenquiries, consider the greater luminary in its diurnal motion, in\nwhat part of heaven its morning beams are kindled, and where those\nchambers of the night are placed which entertain its declining lustre.\nView the moon in all her changes, the just representation of human\nvicissitudes, and learn the causes that destroy and then restore her\nbrightness:\u2014\n\n    How from an infant-spark sprung out of night,\n    She swells into a perfect globe of light;\n    And soon her beauties thus repaired die,\n    Wasting into their first obscurity.[211]\n\nThese are indeed the great secrets of Nature, whose depth may perhaps\namaze and discourage thy enquiries. Search therefore into things\nmore obvious,\u2014why the fruits of plants are shaped into such variety\nof figures; why some are clothed with the verdure of a perennial\nspring, and others, which sometime were no less fresh and fair, like\nhasty spendthrifts, lavish away the bounty of Heaven in one summer\u2019s\ngayety, and stand naked to the succeeding frosts. But such harmless\nspeculations will perchance affect thee little, and it may be thou\nhast that malignity in thy temper which, like venomous beasts that\ncannot live out of stink and putrefaction, must be ever preying upon\nthe follies and miseries of mankind. Peruse therefore the histories\nof the world, wherein thou shalt find such vast heaps of wickedness\nand mischiefs, made up of the downfalls and sudden deaths of great\nmen,[212] the rapes and defilements of women, the treacheries of\nservants, the falseness of friends, the arts of poisoning, the fatal\neffects of envy and jealousy, the ruin of families, dethroning of\nprinces, with many other such direful occurrences as may not only\ndelight and satisfy, but even cloy and nauseate thy ill-natured\ncuriosity.\n\n6. But neither (as it appears) are such antiquated evils any agreeable\nentertainment to people of this perverse disposition; they hearken\nmost to modern tragedies, and such doleful accidents as may be grateful\nas well for the novelty as the horror of the relation. All pleasant\nand cheerful converse is irksome to them; so that if they happen into\na company that are talking of weddings, the solemnities of sacred\nrites, or pompous processions, they make as though they heard not, or,\nto divert and shorten the discourse, will pretend they knew as much\nbefore. Yet, if any one should relate how such a wench had a child\nbefore the time, or that a fellow was caught with another man\u2019s wife,\nor that certain people were at law with each other, or that there\nwas an unhappy difference between near relations, he no longer sits\nunconcerned or minds other things, but\n\n    With ears pricked up, he listens. What, and when,\n    And how, he asks; pray say, let\u2019s hear\u2019t again!\n\nAnd indeed, that proverbial saying, \u201cIll news goes quick and far,\u201d was\noccasioned chiefly by these busy ill-natured men, who very unwillingly\nhear or talk of any thing else. For their ears, like cupping-glasses\nthat attract the most noxious humors in the body, are ever sucking in\nthe most spiteful and malicious reports; and, as in some cities there\nare certain ominous gates through which nothing passes but scavenger\u2019s\ncarts or the sledges of malefactors, so nothing goes in at their ears\nor out of their mouths but obscene, tragical, and horrid relations.\n\n    Howling and woe, as in a jail or hell,\n    Always infest the places where they dwell.\n\nThis noise is to them like the Sirens\u2019 song and the sweetest melody,\nthe most pleasant hearing in the world.\n\nNow this curiosity, being an affectation of knowledge in things\nconcealed, must needs proceed from a great degree of spite and envy.\nFor men do not usually hide, but ambitiously proclaim whatever is\nfor their honor or interest to be known; and therefore to pry into\nwhat is industriously covered can be for no other purpose than\nthat secret delight curious persons enjoy in the discovery of other\nmen\u2019s ills,\u2014which is spite,\u2014and the relief they gather thence, to\nease themselves under their tormenting resentment at another\u2019s\nprosperity,\u2014which is envy;\u2014both which spring from that savage and\nbrutal disposition which we call ill-nature.\n\n7. But how ungrateful it is to mankind to have their evils enquired\ninto appears from hence; that some have chosen rather to die than\ndisclose a secret disease to their physician. Suppose then that\nHerophilus or Erasistratus, or Aesculapius himself when he was upon\nearth, should have gone about from house to house, enquiring whether\nany there had a fistula in ano or cancer in utero to be cured. Although\nsuch a curiosity as this might in them seem much more tolerable, from\nthe charity of their design and the benefit intended by their art; yet\nwho would not rebuke the saucy officiousness of that quack who should,\nunsent for, thus impudently pry into those privy distempers which the\nmodesty or perhaps the guilt of the patient would blush or abhor to\ndiscover, though it were for the sake of a cure? But those that are of\nthis curious and busy humor cannot forbear searching into these, and\nother ills too that are of a more secret nature; and\u2014what makes the\npractice the more exceedingly odious and detestable\u2014the intent is not\nto remedy, but expose them to the world. It is not ill taken, if the\nsearchers and officers of the customs do inspect goods openly imported,\nbut only when, with a design of being vexatious and troublesome, they\nrip up the unsuspected packets of private passengers; and yet even this\nthey are by law authorized to do, and it is sometimes to their loss, if\nthey do not. But curious and meddlesome people will be ever enquiring\ninto other men\u2019s affairs, without leave or commission, though it be to\nthe great neglect and damage of their own.\n\nIt is farther observable concerning this sort of men, how averse they\nare to living long in the country, as being not able to endure the\nquiet and calm of a retired solitude. But if by chance they take a\nshort ramble to their country-house, the main of their business there\nis more to enquire into their neighbors\u2019 concerns than their own; that\nthey may know how other men\u2019s fruit-trees are blasted, the number of\ncattle they have lost, and what a scanty harvest they are like to have,\nand how well their wine keeps; with which impertinent remarks having\nfilled their giddy brains, the worm wags, and away they must to the\ntown again. Now a true bred rustic, if he by chance meet with any news\nfrom the city, presently turns his head another way, and in his blunt\nlanguage thus reflects upon the impertinence of it:\n\n    One can\u2019t at quiet eat, nor plough one\u2019s lond;\n    Zo much us country-voke they bear in hond\n    With tales, which idle rascals blow about,\n    How kings (and well, vhat then?) vall in and out.\n\n8. But the busy cit hates the country, as a dull unfashionable thing,\nand void of mischief; and therefore keeps himself to the town, that he\nmay be among the crowds that throng the courts, exchange, and wharfs,\nand pick up all the idle stories. Here he goes about pumping, What news\nd\u2019ye hear? Were not you upon the exchange to-day, sir? The city\u2019s in\na very ticklish posture, what d\u2019ye think on\u2019t? In two or three hours\u2019\ntime we may be altogether by the ears. If he\u2019s riding post, he will\nlight off his horse, and even hug and kiss a fellow that has a story\nto tell him; and stay never so long, till he hears it out. But if any\none upon demand shall answer, No news! he replies, as in a passion,\nWhat, have you been neither at the exchange or market to-day? Have\nyou not been towards the court lately? Have you not heard any thing\nfrom those gentlemen that newly came out of Italy? It was (methinks)\na good piece of policy among the Locrians, that if any person coming\nfrom abroad but once asked concerning news, he was presently confined\nfor his curiosity; for as cooks and fishmongers wish for plenty in the\ncommodities they trade with, so inquisitive people that deal much in\nnews are ever longing for innovations, alterations, variety of action,\nor any thing that is mischievous and unlucky, that they may find store\nof game for their restless ill-nature to hunt and prey upon. Charondas\nalso did well in prohibiting comedians by law from exposing any citizen\nupon the stage, unless it were for adultery or this malignant sort of\ncuriosity. And indeed there is a near affinity between these two vices,\nfor adultery is nothing else but the curiosity of discovering another\nman\u2019s secret pleasures, and the itch of knowing what is hidden; and\ncuriosity is (as it were) a rape and violence committed upon other\npeople\u2019s privacies.\n\n9. And now as the accumulation of notions in the head usually begets\nmultiplicity of words,\u2014for which reason Pythagoras thought fit to\ncheck the too early loquacity of his scholars, by imposing on them\nfive years\u2019 silence from their first admission,\u2014so the same curiosity\nthat is thus inquisitive to know is no less intemperate in talking\ntoo, and must needs be as ill-spoken as it is ill-natured. And hence\nit is that curiosity does not only become a restraint to the vices and\nfollies of others, but is a disappointment also to itself. For all\nmankind are exceeding shy of inquisitive persons: no serious business\nis consulted of where they are; and if they chance to surprise men in\nthe negotiation of any affair, it is presently laid aside as carefully\nas the housewife locks up her fish from the cat; nor (if it be possible\nto avoid it) is any thing of moment said or done in their company. But\nwhatever is freely permitted to any other people to see, hear, or talk\nof, is kept as a great secret from persons of this busy impertinent\ndisposition; and there is no man but would commit his letters, papers,\nand writings to the care of a servant or a stranger, rather than to an\nacquaintance or relation of this busy and blabbing humor.\n\nBy the great command which Bellerophon had over his curiosity, he\nresisted the solicitations of a lustful woman, and (though it were to\nthe hazard of his life) abstained from opening the letters wherein he\nwas designed to be the messenger of his own destruction. For curiosity\nand adultery (as was intimated before) are both vices of incontinence;\nonly they are aggravated by a peculiar degree of madness and folly,\nbeyond what is found in most other vices of this nature. And can there\nany thing be more sottish, than for a man to pass by the doors of so\nmany common prostitutes that are ready to seize him in the streets,\nand to beleaguer the lodgings of some coy and recluse female that\nis far more costly, and perhaps far less comely too, than a hackney\nthree-penny strumpet? But such is plainly the frensy of curious\npersons, who, despising all those things that are of easy access and\nunenvied enjoyment,\u2014such as are the divertisements of the theatre, the\nconversation of the ingenious, and the discourses of the learned,\u2014must\nbe breaking open other men\u2019s letters, listening at their neighbors\u2019\ndoors, peeping in at their windows, or whispering with their servants;\na practice which (as it deserves) is commonly dangerous, but ever\nextremely base and ignominious.\n\n10. Now to dissuade inquisitive persons (as much as possible) from\nthis sneaking and most despicable humor, it would contribute much,\nif they would but recollect and review all their past observations.\nFor as Simonides, using at certain times to open two chests he kept\nby him, found that wherein he put rewards ever full, and the other\nappointed for thanks always empty; so, if inquisitive people did but\nnow and then look into their bag of news, they would certainly be\nashamed of that vain and foolish curiosity which, with so much hazard\nand trouble to themselves, had been gathering together such a confused\nheap of worthless and loathsome trash. If a man, in reading over the\nwritings of the ancients, should rake together all the dross he could\nmeet with, and collect into one volume all the unfinished scraps of\nverse in Homer, the incongruous expressions in the tragedians, or those\nobscenities of smutty Archilochus for which he was scorned and pointed\nat, would not such a filthy scavenger of books well deserve that curse\nof the tragedian,\n\n    Pox on your taste! Must you, like lice and fleas,\n    Be always fed with scabs and nastiness?\n\nBut without this imprecation, the practice itself becomes its own\npunishment, in the dishonest and unprofitable drudgery of amassing\ntogether such a noisome heap of other men\u2019s vices and follies; a\ntreasure much resembling the city Poneropolis (or _Rogue-town_),\nso called by King Philip after he had peopled it with a crew of rogues\nand vagabonds. For curious people do so load their dirty brains with\nthe ribaldry and solecisms of other men\u2019s writings, as well as the\ndefects and blemishes of their lives, that there is not the least room\nleft in their heads for one witty, graceful, or ingenious thought.\n\nThere is a sort of people at Rome who, being unaffected with any thing\nthat is beautiful and pretty, either in the works of art or nature,\ndespise the most curious pieces in painting or sculpture, and the\nfairest boys and girls that are there exposed to sale, as not worth\ntheir money; therefore they much frequent the monster-market, looking\nafter people of distorted limbs and preternatural shapes, of three eyes\nand pointed heads, and mongrels\n\n    Where kinds of unlike form oft blended be\n    Into one hideous deformity.[213]\n\nAll which are sights so loathsome, that they themselves would\nabhor them were they compelled often to behold them. And if they\nwho curiously enquire into those vicious deformities and unlucky\naccidents that may be observed in the lives of other men would only\nbind themselves to a frequent recollection of what they had seen and\nheard, there would be found very little delight or advantage in such\nungrateful and melancholy reflections.\n\n11. Now since it is from the use and custom of intermeddling in the\naffairs of other men that this perverse practice grows up into such a\nvicious habit, therefore the best remedy thereof is, that beginning (as\nit were) at a distance, and with such things as do less excite the itch\nof our curiosity, we gradually bring ourselves to an utter desuetude of\nenquiring into or being concerned at any of those things that do not\npertain unto us. Therefore let men first make trial of themselves in\nsmaller and less considerable matters. As for the purpose, why should\nit be thought such a severe piece of self-denial for any man, as he\npasses by, to forbear reading the inscriptions that are upon a monument\nor gravestone, or the letters that are drawn on walls and sign-posts,\nif it were but considered that there is nothing more, either for\ndelight or benefit, to be learned thereby, but that certain people\nhad a desire to preserve the memory of their friends and relations by\nengraving their names on brass or marble, or that some impudent quack\nor rooking tradesman wants money, and knows no other way to draw men to\ntheir shop or lodgings, but by decoying billets and the invitation of\na show-board? The taking notice of which and such like things may seem\nfor the present harmless; yet there is really a secret mischief wrought\nby it, while men, suffering their minds to rove so inconsiderately at\nevery thing they see, are inured to a foolish curiosity in busying\nthemselves about things impertinent. For as skilful huntsmen do not\npermit their beagles to fling or change, but lead them forth in\ncouples, that their noses may be kept sharp for their proper game,\n\n    With scent most quick of nostrils after kind,\n    The tracks of beast so wild in chase to find;\n\nso ought persons of an inquisitive temper to restrain the wanton\nexcursions of their curiosity, and confine it to observations of\nprudence and sobriety. Thus the lion and eagle, which walk with their\nclaws sheathed to keep them always pointed for their prey, are an\nexample of that discretion which curious persons should imitate, by\ncarefully preserving those noble faculties of wit and understanding,\nwhich were made for useful and excellent enquiries, from being dulled\nand debauched with low and sottish speculations.\n\n12. The second remedy of this curiosity is that we accustom ourselves\nin passing by not to peep in at other men\u2019s doors or windows, for in\nthis case the hand and eye are much alike guilty; and Xenocrates said,\n\u201cOne may as well go as look into another man\u2019s house,\u201d because the eye\nmay reach what the hand cannot, and wander where the foot does not\ncome. And besides, it is neither genteel nor civil thus to gaze about.\nA well-bred person will commonly discover very little that is either\nmeet or delightful to look on; but foul dishes perhaps lying about the\nfloor, or wenches in lazy or immodest postures, and nothing that is\ndecent or in good order; but as one said upon this occasion,\n\n    For ought that\u2019s here worth seeing, friend, you may\n    Ev\u2019n turn your prying look another way.\n\nAnd yet laying aside this consideration of uncomely sights, this very\nstaring and glancing of the eyes to and fro implies such a levity\nof mind and so great a defect in good manners, as must needs render\nthe practice in itself very clownish and contemptible. When Diogenes\nobserved Dioxippus, a victor in the Olympic games, twisting his neck\nas he sat in his chariot, that he might take the better view of a\nfair damsel that came to see the sport, Look (says he) what a worthy\ngamester goes there, that even a woman can turn him which way she\nlists. But these busy-brained people do so twist and turn themselves\nto every frivolous show, as if they had acquired a verticity in their\nheads by their custom of gazing at all things round about them. Now\n(methinks) it is by no means seemly, that the sense which ought\nto behave itself as a handmaid to the soul (in doing its errands\nfaithfully, returning speedily, and keeping at home with submissive and\nreserved modesty) should be suffered, like a wanton and ungovernable\nservant, to be gadding abroad from her mistress, and straying about at\nher pleasure. But this happens according to that of Sophocles,\n\n    And then the Aenianian\u2019s colts disdain\n    Bridle and bit, nor will abide the rein.[214]\n\nFor so the senses, not exercised and well managed, will at every turn\nbreak loose into wild excursions, and hurry reason along with them into\nthe same extravagance.\n\nIt is said of Democritus, that he voluntarily put out his eyes by the\nreflection of a burning-glass, that (as by the darkening of windows,\nsometimes done for the same purpose) he might not by the allurements\nof sense be called off from attending to his purely intellectual\ncontemplations. Although the story be false, yet this at least is\ntrue, that those men who are most addicted to profound speculations\ndo least of all converse with impressions of sense. And therefore,\nto prevent that interruption and disturbance which either noise or\nimpertinent visits might be to their philosophical enquiries, they\nplaced their studies at some distance from cities, and called the night\n_Euphrone_ (from \u03b5\u1f54\u03c6\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, of _good understanding_), thinking\nthat its quiet and stillness from all disturbances made it the fittest\nseason for meditation.\n\n13. Farther, to forbear mixing with a crowd of fellows that are\nquarrelling in the market-place, or to sit still while the mad rabble\nare rioting in the streets, or at least to get out of hearing of it,\nwill not be very difficult to any man that considers how little there\nis to be gained by intermeddling with busy and unquiet people, and how\ngreat the certain advantage is of bridling our curiosity, and bringing\nit under subjection to the commands of reason. And thus, when by this\nmore easy discipline a man hath acquired some power over himself,\nexercises of greater difficulty are to be attempted; as, for instance,\nto forbear the theatre upon the tempting fame of some new and much\napplauded play; to resist the importunity of a friend that invites thee\nto a ball, an entertainment at the tavern, or a concert of music; and\nnot to be transported if thou chance at a distance to hear the din at a\nrace-course, or the noise at the circus. For as Socrates advises well,\nthat men should abstain from tasting those meats and drinks which, by\ntheir exquisite pleasantness, tempt the palate to exceed the sober\nmeasures of thirst and hunger, so are all those oblectations of the ear\nand eye to be avoided which are apt to entice men into impertinence or\nextravagance. When Araspes had commended the fair Panthea to Cyrus, as\na beauty worth his admiration, he replied: For that very reason I will\nnot see her, lest, if by thy persuasion I should see her but once, she\nherself might persuade me to see her often, and spend more time with\nher than would be for the advantage of my own affairs. So Alexander,\nupon like consideration, would not trust his eyes in the presence of\nthe beautiful queen of Persia, but kept himself out of the reach of\nher charms, and treated only with her aged mother. But we, alas! (that\nno opportunity may be lost of doing ourselves all the mischief we\ncan by our curiosity) cannot forbear prying into sedans and coaches,\nor gazing at the windows or peeping under the balconies, where women\nare; nay, we must be staring about from the house-top, to spy out all\noccasions of our ruin, and are all the while so sottishly inconsiderate\nas to apprehend no danger from giving such a boundless license to our\nwandering eyes.\n\n14. Now as, in point of justice and honesty, it conduces much to\nprevent our defrauding and overreaching other men if we now and then\nin smaller matters voluntarily abate somewhat of our strict dues, and\nas it is a means to keep men chaste and continent to all other women\nif they sometimes forbear the lawful enjoyment of their own wives, so\nwill these excesses of curiosity be cured by the same restraints, if,\ninstead of enquiring into what concerns other men, we can prevail with\nourselves so far as not to hear or see all that is done in our own\nhouses, nor to listen to every thing that may be told us concerning\nourselves or our private affairs. Oedipus by his curiosity fell into\ngreat mischief; for, being of a parentage to himself unknown and now\nat Corinth where he was a stranger, he went about asking questions\nconcerning himself, and lighting on Laius he slew him; and then by\nthe marriage of the queen, who was his own mother, he obtained the\ngovernment. Not contented with the thoughts of being thus happy, he\nmust needs once more (against all the persuasions of his wife) be\nenquiring concerning himself; when, meeting with an old man that was\nprivy to the whole contrivance, he pressed him earnestly to reveal the\nsecret. And when he now began to suspect the worst, the old man cried\nout,\n\n    Alas! So sad a tale to tell I dread;\n\nbut he, burning with impatience of knowing all, replied,\n\n    And I to hear\u2019t: but yet it must be said.[215]\n\nThus oddly mixed with pain and pleasure is this restless itch of\ncuriosity, that, like a healing wound, will hazard the loss of blood\nrather than want the seeming ease of being rubbed and scratched. But\nsuch as either by good nature or good discipline are free from this\ndisease, and have experienced the invaluable felicity of a calm and\nundisturbed spirit, will rather rejoice in being ignorant than desire\nto be informed of the wickedness and the miseries that are in the\nworld, and will sit down well satisfied in this opinion,\n\n    How sage and wise art thou, oblivion![216]\n\n15. Wherefore, as a farther help to check the impatience of our\ncuriosity, it will contribute much to practise such acts of abstinence\nas these. If a letter be brought thee, lay it aside for some time\nbefore thou read it; and do not (as many do) eagerly fall upon the seal\nwith tooth and nail, as soon as ever it comes to thy hands, as if it\nwere scarce possible to open it with sufficient speed; when a messenger\nreturns, do not hastily rise up and run towards him, as if thou couldst\nnot hear what he had to say time enough; and if any one makes an offer\nto tell thee something that is new, say that thou hadst rather it were\ngood and useful.\n\nWhen, at a public dissertation I sometime made at Rome, Rusticus\n(who afterwards perished by the mere envy of Domitian) was one of my\nauditors, a messenger comes suddenly in with an express from Caesar;\nupon which, when I offered to be silent till he had perused the paper,\nhe desired me to proceed, nor would so much as look into it till the\ndiscourse was ended and the audience dismissed; all that were present\nmuch admiring the gravity of the man. In great persons, whose power\nencourages them to greater licentiousness, this vicious curiosity is\nhardly curable; for when it is arrived in them to the consistence of an\ninveterate habit, they will never undergo those previous restraints\nupon their outward actions which are necessary to destroy the evil\nhabit within them. For such as are thus inured will be breaking up\nother men\u2019s letters, intruding upon the privacies of their friends,\nmaking bold enquiries into the unfathomable mysteries of religion,\nprofaning sacred places and holy offices by their coming where and\ndoing what they ought not, and even prying into the most secret acts\nand discourses of princes; all or any of which odious practices it will\nbe hard for any one after long custom to forbear, but especially for\ngreat persons.\n\n16. And indeed princes themselves\u2014who are concerned to have as\nparticular knowledge of all things as they can, and to whom it is in\nsome sort necessary for the ends of government to maintain spies and\nintelligencers about them\u2014are yet usually hated for nothing more than\ntheir retaining this lewd sort of people in quality of eavesdroppers\nof state and public informers. The first that employed this kind of\nofficers was Darius in his younger years, when he could not confide in\nhimself nor durst trust any one else. The Sicilian tyrants afterwards\nplanted them in Syracuse; but upon a revolution that happened there,\nthe people first fell upon these informers, and destroyed them without\nmercy. Of near affinity with these are common accusers, which, from\na particular occasion imported in the word, were called sycophants,\nfig-blabbers; because, upon the prohibited exportation of that fruit,\nthey became informers against those that broke this order. Much the\nlike sort of people were those at Athens, where a dearth of grain\nhappened and the corn-sellers were commanded to bring out their stores\nfor public sale; and those that went about listening at the mills and\nprying into granaries, that they might find matter of information\nagainst offenders, were thence called aliterians or (if you please)\nmill-clackers. Which consideration, superadded to the rest that has\nbeen said, is enough to render this sort of malignant curiosity\nextremely execrable, and to be highly abhorred and most carefully\navoided by every man who would desire, for mere reputation\u2019s sake, not\nto be ranked among that profligate crew of villains which are looked\nupon as the most detestable of all mankind.\n\n\n\n\nHOW A MAN MAY BE SENSIBLE OF HIS PROGRESS IN VIRTUE.\n\n\nMY FRIEND SOSSIUS SENECIO,\n\n1. Is it possible, do you think, that all the arguments in the world\ncan make a man sensibly assured that he is a proficient in virtue, upon\nthis supposition, that his proceedings do not in the least alleviate\nand abate his folly, but that the vice in him, weighing in equal\nbalance against his good inclinations, holds him down, as\n\n    Heavy lead pulls down the yielding net?\n\nIn the study of music or grammar, I am sure, such a conclusion would be\nvery absurd; for the scholar could never be certain that he had made\nany improvement in those sciences, if all the while he is a learning he\ndid not exhaust by little and little his former ignorance about them,\nbut remained during the whole progress of his application under the\nsame degree of unskilfulness as at first setting out.\n\nThe like may be said of those that are under the hands of a physician.\nAccording to this assertion, if the patient take physic which does\nnot recruit his strength or give him ease by abating the severity of\nthe distemper, it is absolutely impossible that he should discern any\nalteration in himself, before the contrary habit is perfectly and in\nthe highest degree induced, and his body thoroughly sound and well.\nAs in these instances you cannot say the persons have advanced any\nthing, so long as they perceive no sensible change in themselves by\nthe abatement of the contrary weight, and do not find that their minds\nare elevated, as it were, in the opposite scale; just so, in truth,\nis it with those that profess philosophy. They cannot be assured of\nany progress or improvement, if the soul do not gradually advance and\npurge off the rest of its former imperfections, but still lie under\nthe like equal pressure and grievance of pure, absolute, unmixed evil,\ntill it have attained the state of perfect, supreme good; for the truth\nof it is, a wise man cannot in a moment of time change from the lowest\ndegree of vice imaginable to the most heroic perfection of virtue, if\nhe only make a brisk attempt to throw off vice all at once, and do not\nconstantly and resolutely endeavor by little and little to lighten the\nburthen and dispossess the evil habit of it.\n\nYou know very well how much trouble those give themselves who maintain\nthis assertion, and what strange questions they raise with regard to\nit,\u2014for instance, why a wise virtuous man should never perceive how he\nbecame such, but should either be quite ignorant, or at least doubt,\nthat ever by little and little, now adding something, now subtracting\nand removing others, he advanced to the aggregate perfection of virtue.\nNow if (as they affirm) the change from bad to good were either so\nquick and sudden, as that he that was extremely vicious in the morning\nmay become eminently virtuous at night, or that any one going to bed\nwicked might chance to rise a virtuous man next morning, and, having\nall the former day\u2019s errors and imperfections absolutely removed out of\nhis mind, might say to them, as it is in the poet,\n\n    Vain dreams! farewell, like spectres haste away,\n    At the new light of virtue\u2019s glorious day;[217]\n\ndo you think that any one in the world could be ignorant of so\nextraordinary a conversion, and perfectly shut his eyes upon the beams\nof virtue and wisdom so fully and manifestly breaking in upon his soul?\nIn my opinion, if any person should have Caeneus\u2019s foolish wish, and\nbe changed (as it is reported he was) from one sex to the other, it\nis more probable that such a one should be altogether ignorant of the\nmetamorphosis, than that any should, from a lazy, unthinking, debauched\nfellow, commence a wise, prudent, and valiant hero, and from a sottish\nbestiality advance to the perfection of divine life, and yet know\nnothing at all of the change.\n\n2. It is very good advice, Measure the stone by your rule, and not\nyour rule by the stone. But the Stoics have not observed it; for they,\nnot applying principles to things, but forcing things which have no\nfoundation of agreement in nature to agree to their principles, have\nfilled philosophy with a number of difficulties. One of the hardest\nto be solved is this, that all men whatsoever (except him who is\nabsolutely perfect) are equally vicious. Hence is that enigma, called\nprogress or proficiency, which, though it has puzzled the learned to\nsolve, is in my opinion very foolish; for it represents those that have\nadvanced a little, and are partly free from inordinate passions and\ndistempers of mind, to be as unhappy as those that are guilty of the\nmost heinous enormities. And indeed the assertion is so absurd, that\ntheir own actions are enough to confute it; for while they maintain\nin their schools that Aristides and Phalaris are equally unjust, that\nBrasidas and Dolon are equal cowards, and that Plato and Meletus are\nequally senseless, still in all affairs of life they seem to reject\nand avoid the latter of these, as too harsh and severe to be softened\ninto compliance, but credit and quote the former in all their writings,\nas persons of extraordinary worth and esteem. This is what the Stoics\nassert.\n\n3. But we, who can better agree with Plato in this point, finding by\nobservation that in all kinds of evils, especially that of a weak and\nunmanaged disposition of mind, there are several degrees of more and\nless (for herein one advance differs from another, that the miserable\ndarkness which the soul lies under begins more sensibly to abate, when\nreason by little and little illuminates and purges the soul), may be\nbold to affirm that the change from bad to good is very easily and\nmanifestly discernible; not as if one were drawn out of a pit on a\nsudden, and could give no account of the degrees of the ascent, but so\nplain that the several steps and advances may be computed.\n\nThe first argument that comes in my mind is this, by way of simile;\npray examine it. You know the art of navigation; when the seamen\nhoist sail for the main ocean, they give judgment of their voyage by\nobserving together the space of time and the force of the wind that\ndriveth them, and compute that, in all probability, in so many months,\nwith such a gale, they have gone forward to such or such a place. Just\nso it is in the study of philosophy; one may, if he mind it, give a\nprobable conjecture of a scholar\u2019s proceedings. He that is always at\nhis business, constantly upon the road, never makes any steps or halts,\nnor meets with obstacles and lets in the way, but under the conduct\nof right reason travels smoothly, securely, and quietly along, may be\nassured that he has one true sign of a proficient. This of the poet,\n\n    Add many lesser numbers in account,\n    Your total will to a vast sum amount,[218]\n\nnot only holds true as to the increase of money, but also may serve as\na rule to the knowledge of the advance of every thing else, especially\nof proficiency in virtue. Reason, besides its ordinary influence,\nrequires the constancy of application and address which is necessary\nand usual in all other affairs. Whereas, on the contrary, the irregular\nproceedings and inconsistent silly assertions of some philosophers\ndo not only lay rubs in the way, and break the measures of a virtuous\nimprovement, but seem to give great advantage to vice, during their\nlingering and idling upon their journey, to tempt them into by-paths,\nor over-persuade them to return whence they set out.\n\nAstronomers tell us that planets, after they have finished their\nprogressive motion, for some small time acquiesce and become\nstationary, as they term it. Now in the study of philosophy it is\nnot so; there is no point of rest or acquiescence during the whole\nprocedure, for the nature of progress is to be always advancing, more\nor less. The scales in which our actions are, as it were, weighed\ncannot at all stand in equilibrio, but our soul is continually either\nraised by the addition of good, or cast with the counterpoise of evil.\n\nTherefore, as the oracle told the Cirrhaeans that they ought to\nfight continually, day and night; so you and every wise man ought to\nbe perpetually upon your guard, and if you can be assured that you\nmaintain a constant combat with vice, that you are always at enmity\nwith it and never so much as come to terms, or receive any diversions,\napplications, or avocations, as so many heralds from the enemies\u2019\ncamp, in order to a treaty with it; then you may, with a great deal\nof confidence and alacrity, go on with the management of your warlike\nexpedition, and very reasonably at last expect a conquest, and enjoy a\ncrown of righteousness for your reward.\n\n4. It is another very good argument to prove that by labor and exercise\nyou have shaken off all stupidity and sluggishness of temper, and that\nyou are arrived at a perfection of virtue, if for the future your\nresolutions be more firm and your application more intense than they\nwere when you first set out. This appears true, if you but observe its\ncontrary; for it is a very bad sign if, after a small time spent in\ntrial, you find many and repeated intermissions, or your affections\nyielding or cool in the pursuit. This may be illustrated by what\nis observable in the growth of a cane. At first it appears above\nground with a full and pleasing sprout, which by little and little,\ntaper-wise, by a continued and equal distribution of matter, rises to\na very great height. Towards the root you may observe that there are\nformed certain steps and joints, which are at a considerable distance\nfrom one another, because (there) the juice is plentiful and strong.\nBut toward the top the nutrimentive particles vibrate and palpitate,\nas if they were quite spent with the length of their journey, and\nthereupon, you see, they form themselves many small, weak, and tender\njoints, as so many supports and breathing-places. So it happens with\nthose that study philosophy: at first setting out they take long\nsteps and make great advances; but if, after some attempts, they\nperceive not in themselves any alteration for the better, but meet\nwith frequent checks and avocations the further they go, ordinarily\nthey faint, make any excuses to be off from their engagement, despond\nof ever going through with it, and thereupon proceed no farther. But,\non the contrary, he that is winged with desire flies at the proposed\nadvantage, and by a stout and vigorous pursuit cuts off all pretences\nof delay from crowding in upon him or hindering his journey.\n\nIn love, it is a sign the passion is predominant, if the lover be\nnot only pleased in the enjoyment of the beloved object (for that\u2019s\nordinary), but also troubled and grieved at the absence of it. After\na manner not unlike this, many youngsters (as I\u2019ve observed) stand\naffected at the study of philosophy. At first, they buckle to their\nwork with the greatest concern and emulation imaginable; but as soon\nas ever they are diverted, either by business or any little pretences,\nthe heat of their affection immediately flies off, and they sit down\nignorant and very well content. But\n\n    He that perceives the pleasing sting of love,\n    Whose poignant joy his trembling heart doth move,[219]\n\nwill not only show that he is a proficient by his virtuous demeanor and\nagreeableness in all company and discourse; but if he be called from\nhis business, you may perceive him all on fire, in pain, and uneasy in\nwhatsoever he does, whether alone or in company, and so concerned that\nhe is unmindful of his best friends till he is restored to the quest of\nhis beloved philosophy. All of us ought to imitate such a noble example\nin all our studies. We must not be affected with good discourse only\nwhile we are in place, as we are with rich fragrant perfumes (which\nwe never mind, but while we are a smelling to them); but if by chance\nmarriage, an estate, love, or a campaign take us from our business, we\nmust still hunger and thirst after virtue; and the more our proficiency\nis advanced, by so much the more ought our desire to know what we\nhave not attained disquiet and excite us to the further pursuit and\nknowledge of it.\n\n5. The grave account which Hesiod gives of proficiency is, in my\njudgment, either the very same, or comes very near to this which I\nhave now set down. Proficiency is (says he) when all difficulties\nare removed, all unevenness smoothed and cleared, and the way made\neasy and passable. It must be smoothed by frequent exercise, cleared\nby beams of divine light that guide the way to true philosophy,\nnothing at all of the clouds of doubt, error, or inconstancy in good\nresolutions remaining, which are as usually incident to learners in\ntheir first attempts upon philosophy, as distraction and solicitudes\nare to those who, sailing from a known land, cannot yet discover the\nplace whither they are bound. Thus I have known impatient sophisters\nskip over common and ordinary notions, before they have learned or\nattained better, and lose themselves in the middle of their journey\nin so troublesome a maze, that they would be willing to return (if\nthey could) to their primitive state of quiet, inactive ignorance.\nSextius, a nobleman of Rome, may serve for an instance of this. He\nquitted all offices and places of honor, that he might more freely and\nundisturbedly apply himself to the study of philosophy. At first he\nmet with many difficulties; and finding himself unable to encounter or\nconquer them, out of very despair and despondency, he had thoughts of\nthrowing himself out of a little boat into the river Tiber. Parallel\nto this is a merry story told of Diogenes of Sinope; when he first put\non his gown, it happened to be at a time when the Athenians celebrated\na festival with extraordinary banquets, night-drinking, sports, and\npageantry usual at great solemnities. The philosopher, as he lay in\nthe holidays in the corner of the street, muffled up in his clothes,\nto try if he could take a nap, had some running thoughts in his head,\nwhich checked the resolutions he had taken as to a philosophical life,\nand troubled him extremely. He reasoned with himself, that there\nwas no necessity for his entering into so troublesome and singular\na way of living, that he thereby deprived himself of all the sweets\nand pleasures of life, and the like. While he was thinking thus with\nhimself, he espied (as the story goes) a mouse venturing toward him,\nand now and then nibbling at a mouldy crust that he had in his pouch.\nThis sight (which is much) turned his thoughts, and made him vexed and\ntroubled at himself as much on the other side. What (says he) is the\nmatter with thee, Diogenes? Thou seest this tiny mouse lives well, and\nis very glad of thy scraps; but thou, who must needs be a person of\nquality, forsooth, art extremely sorry and out of humor, because thou\ndost not feast upon down-beds, and canst not have the genteel privilege\nat this merry time to be drunk as well as others.\n\nAnother rational argument of gradual proficiency is when avocations\nare not frequent upon us, and when they happen, very short; while the\nsubstantial rules and precepts of wisdom, as if they had been violently\ndriven out, presently return upon our minds, and dispossess all empty\ntrouble and disconsolate thoughts.\n\n6. And because scholars do not only fancy to themselves difficulties\nbig enough to divert their weak resolutions, but also often meet with\nserious persuasions from their friends to leave their studies, and\nbecause sometimes such smart jests and drolls are put upon them as have\noften discouraged, frequently quite converted, the endeavors of some;\nit may seem to you a very good argument of a proficient, if you find\nyourself indifferent and unconcerned in that point. As, for example,\nnot to be cut to the heart and repine, when you are told that such and\nsuch persons by name, your equals once, live splendidly at court, have\nmarried great fortunes, or have appeared publicly at the head of a\ngreat many freeholders, that are ready to vote for them for some great\noffice or representative\u2019s place. He that is neither discomposed nor\nvery much affected by such news as this is manifestly in the right,\nand has philosophy by the surer handle. For it is impossible we should\nleave admiring things which most men esteem, if the habit of virtue\nwere not deeply rooted in us. To avoid passionately what every one\ncries down may be in some persons the effect of anger and ignorance;\nbut utterly to despise what is admired abroad is a certain sign of true\nand solid wisdom and resolution. With what satisfaction and complacency\nmany persons advanced to such a height of virtue compare themselves\nwith others, and break out in these verses of Solon!\n\n    We will not change Virtue\u2019s immortal crown\n    For a whole mine of gold.\n    Gold is uncertain; but what we possess\n    Is still our own, and never can be less.\n\nNone can deny but that it was very great in Diogenes to compare his\nshifting from the city of Corinth to Athens, and from Thebes to\nCorinth, to the king of Persia\u2019s taking his progress in the spring\nto Susa, in winter to Babylon, and to Media in summer. Nor was it an\nargument of a much less spirit in Agesilaus, who, hearing this same\nking of Persia styled the Great, presently asked, In what is he greater\nthan I, if he be not juster than I am? Aristotle himself had exactly\nsuch notions in the like case; for, writing to Antipater about his\nscholar Alexander, he says of him, that he ought not to value himself\nin this respect, that he was advanced above others; for whoever had a\ntrue notion of God was really as great as he. And Zeno too deserves\nto be mentioned, who, hearing Theophrastus commended above any of the\nphilosophers for his number of scholars, put it off thus: His choir is\nindeed larger than mine, but mine has the sweeter voices.\n\n7. From all these instances you may collect this great truth, that\nwhenever you do, by setting the comforts of virtue and the difficulties\nand errors of study one against the other, perceive that you have\nutterly expelled all emulation, jealousy, and every thing else that\nuses to disturb or discourage young men, you may then assuredly\nconclude with yourself that you have made very laudable progress.\n\nAnother argument of proficiency in virtue is the alteration of your\nvery style of writing, and of your way of managing any argument or\ndiscourse. Most of those that nowadays design for scholars (in ordinary\nspeaking) do prosecute almost none but popular studies; to furnish\nout discourse, and make themselves, as the phrase is, plausible men;\nsome few of them there are who, like silly larks, are taken with the\nglaring light of natural philosophy, and, measuring themselves by their\nown levity and conceit, think they are able presently to attain the\nheight of that science. Others like young whelps (\u2019tis Plato\u2019s simile)\nlove to snap and bite at one another, only to gratify a contentious,\nsceptical, and sophistical humor, which they at first got by bad\ntuition and ill-managed studies. Some again, as soon as ever they are\ninitiated in the principles of logic, presently commence sophisters.\nOthers spend their whole time in collecting sentences and historical\nnarrations. These (as Anacharsis said of the Grecians, that he saw\nno occasion they had for money, but only to count and tell it over)\nhave nothing at all to do, but go about singing and repeating what\nthey have collected into commonplace books, without any other benefit\nor satisfaction from their labors. To these you may apply that of\nAntiphanes, which one ingeniously turned to Plato\u2019s scholars. This\nAntiphanes said merrily, that in a certain city the cold was so intense\nthat words were congealed as soon as spoken, but that after some time\nthey thawed and became audible, so that the words spoken in winter were\narticulated next summer. Even so, the many excellent precepts of Plato,\nwhich he instilled into the tender ears of his scholars, were scarce\nperceived and distinguished by many of them, till they grew men and\nattained the warm vigorous summer of their age.\n\nSuch a cool disposition to virtue and philosophy, as that philosopher\nsaid was in Plato\u2019s scholars when young, often lasts in the most of\nus (as was hinted before) till our judgments grow to a solid firmness\nand maturity, and we begin to value those precepts that are able to\nbeget a composure and greatness of mind, and diligently to trace and\nfollow those discourses and precepts whose tracks (as it is in Aesop\u2019s\nfables) rather look inward than outward, to ourselves rather than\nothers. Sophocles said of himself, that in writing his tragedies he\nfirst of all abated and pricked the tumor of Aeschylus\u2019s invention,\nthen corrected the harshness and over artifice of his composition, and,\nlast of all, changed his very style and elocution, the thing which is\nmost considerably persuasive, and which most of all conduces to good\nmanners. Even so, young students, when they pass from the fulness and\nluxuriancy of panegyric and declamation to that more solid part of\nphilosophy that regulates manners and smooths all rugged and disorderly\npassions, then begin really to attain true and solid proficiency.\n\n8. Hereupon let me advise you this,\u2014whenever you read the writings\nor hear the orations of the philosophers, attend always things more\nthan words, and be not taken with what is curious and of a delicate\nthread and contexture, more than that which is strong, nervous,\nand beneficial. So also, in perusing poems or histories, be sure\nthat nothing escape you that is appositely said, in relation to\nthe cultivating of manners or the calming turbulent, immoderate\npassions; but always give it a note, and make it surely your own.\nSimonides said that a student in philosophy should be like a bee. That\nlaborious creature, when it is amongst flowers, makes it its business\nindustriously to extract the yellow honey out of them all; while\nothers care and seek for nothing else except the smell and the color.\nSo, while some others employ their time in reading the poets only for\ndiversion, or for the wit and fancy which usually adorn their works,\nyou (my dear friend) like a bee amongst a swarm of drones, observe\nand collect what is sweet, palatable, and worthy your pains, and seem\nalready, by your constant custom and application, to have attained a\nperfect knowledge of what is eminently good and proper.\n\nAs to those that peruse the works of Plato and Xenophon only for the\nstyle\u2019s sake, and do cull out what is elegant and Attic, as the cream\nand flower of those authors, pray what do they do but as it were\nadmire the fragrancy and flavor of medicinal drugs, yet, at the same\ntime, neither understand nor enquire after their healing and purgative\nqualities? Whereas, those that have advanced to a higher degree of\nperfection can extract benefit, not only from philosophical discourses,\nbut also from every thing they see or do, and thence draw something\nthat may be proper and fit for their purpose. I will give you some\nexamples of Aeschylus and other very eminent men, which may be very pat\nto this purpose. Aeschylus chanced to be a spectator at the Isthmian\ngames, where some were engaged at sword play; seeing one of the\ncombatants wounded, and observing that the theatre immediately made a\ngreat shouting and hollowing upon it, he jogged one Ion, an inhabitant\nof the island Chios, who sat next to him, and whispered him thus, Do\nyou see what exercise can do? He that is wounded holds his peace, and\nthe spectators cry out.\n\nBrasidas, the Lacedaemonian captain, by chance caught a mouse\namong some dry figs; and, being bit by her, let her go, with this\nexclamation, By Hercules! there is no creature so little or so weak,\nthat it cannot preserve its life if it dares but defend it.\n\nDiogenes may serve for a thousand instances; when he saw a boy drink\nout of the palm of his hand, he threw away his dish, which he used to\ncarry always with him in his wallet. Thus sedulity and application have\na singular virtue to make us knowing and able to extract motives to\nvirtue from every thing that we meet with.\n\nNor is it a difficult matter to attain such a temper of mind, if\nthe candidates for virtue intermix discourse and reading with\ntheir actions; not only \u201cexercising themselves amidst dangers\u201d (as\nThucydides[220] said to some), but also engaging pleasures, disputing\nhard questions, examining precedents, pleading causes, and so (to try\nthemselves thoroughly) undertaking some magistracy or public office,\ngiving thereby demonstration of their opinions and resolution, or\nrather establishing their resolution by exercise. Whereas, those that\nare not bred to it, but like novices spy out and catch at any thing\nthat is curious in books, and pragmatically run away with it either\nto the Exchange, the College, or some club or tavern, deserve no\nmore the name of philosophers, than those quacks that only truck off\nvile drugs and potions merit the character and value of physicians.\nThose sophisters seem to me not unlike the bird mentioned in Homer,\nand to have something of its quality. Whatsoever they catch abroad\nthey presently bring home with them, and cram it into their unfledged\nchicks, their illiterate scholars, starving their own empty crops the\nwhile, as the poet has it; for they neither digest nor convert what\nthey take into true nourishment.\n\n9. It is then indispensably our duty so to manage our discourse, that\nit may be beneficial both to ourselves and others, we not incurring\nthe censure of being thought vain-glorious or arrogant by any; to be\nalways readier to hear than to teach; and, especially, so to abate\nand moderate all vehemency and passionate quarrelling about trivial\nquestions, as that we may cease to attend and manage disputations with\nthe same indifferency as you may have seen some exercise hurlbats and\ncudgelling,\u2014that is, so as to leave the stage with more satisfaction\nfor having had a true hit or coming off conqueror, than for having\neither learned ourselves or taught our antagonist any manner of skill\nby the engagement.\n\nAn evenness and mildness of temper in all such affairs, which never\nwill suffer us to enter the lists with vehemency and passion, nor to\nbe hot and concerned in settling an argument, nor to scold and give\nbad words when we have vanquished our adversary, nor to be very much\ndejected if we chance to be quite baffled, is (I think) a true sign\nof a great proficient in virtue. Aristippus was a great example of\nthis; for when in a set disputation he was baffled by the sophistry\nand forehead of an impudent, wild, and ignorant disputant, and\nobserved him to be flushed and high with the conquest; Well! says the\nphilosopher, I am certain, I shall sleep quieter to-night than my\nantagonist.\n\nNot only upon the close and event of our philosophical contests, but\neven in the midst of disputation, we may (privately) take an estimate\nof this good quality in us, which is a sign of a true proficient;\nfor example, if, upon a greater appearance of auditors than was\nexpected, we be not afraid nor in confusion; if, at the thinness of the\ncongregation, when there are but a few to hear us, we be not dejected\nand troubled; and lastly, if, when we are to speak before a numerous or\nhonorable assembly, we do not, for want of fitting preparation, miss\nthe opportunity for ever.\n\nIt is reported that two as famous orators as ever were, Demosthenes\nand Alcibiades, were somewhat weak and faulty in this point. The\ntimorousness of the former is known to every school-boy; and as for\nAlcibiades, though he was (as must be confessed) as sagacious and\nhappy in his thoughts as any man whatever, yet, for want of a little\nassurance in speaking a thing, he very often miserably lost himself\nin his pleadings; for he would falter and make pauses in the very\nmiddle of his orations, purely for want of a single word or some neat\nexpression, that he had in his papers but could not presently remember.\nTo give you another instance of the prince of poets, Homer; he was so\nblinded with an over-confidence of his abilities in poetry, that he\nhas slipped a false quantity, and left it on record, in the very first\nverse of his Iliads.\n\nSeeing then the learnedest men and greatest artists have failed and may\nfail for want of caution or confidence, it ought more nearly to concern\nthose that earnestly follow virtue, not to slip the least opportunity\nof improvement, either by company or otherwise; and not overmuch to\nregard the throng or applause of the theatre, when they do exercise or\nmake any solemn harangue.\n\n10. Nor is it enough that one take care of all his discourses and\norations; but he ought also to observe that the whole tenor of his\nactions be guided by profit rather than vain pomp, and by truth\nrather than ostentation. For if a passionate lover who has placed his\naffection upon any beloved object seeks no witnesses to attest its\nsincerity, but has such an eager desire when alone and in private,\nthat, like a covered flame, it burns more vigorously and insensibly for\nbeing shut up; much more ought a moralist and a philosopher who has\nattained both the habit and exercise of virtue sit down self-contented,\nand applaud himself in private, neither needing nor desiring encomiasts\nor auditors from abroad.\n\nThere is an humor in some of the poets, of an old peevish housekeeper,\nthat calls to his maid aloud: Do you see, Dionysia (that is his maid\u2019s\nname), I am now pleased, and have laid by all choler and passion. Just\nsuch like is the practice of some, who, as soon as they have done any\nthing which is obliging and civil, presently blaze it abroad, and\nturn their own heralds. Such men show plainly that they look beyond\nthemselves for satisfaction; that they are desirous of praise and\napplause; and that they never were admitted near spectators of virtue,\nnever saw her in her noble, royal dress, but only had some transient\nsight of her in a dream or an empty airy phantasm; and indeed, that\nthey expose their actions to the public, as painters do their pictures,\nto be gazed at and admired by the gaping multitude.\n\nAnother sign of a proficient in virtue is, when the proficient has\ngiven any thing to his friend or done any kindness for any one, if he\nkeeps it to himself and does not blab it to anybody; and (which is\nmore) if he hath voted right against a majority of biassed suffragans,\nwithstood the dishonest attempts of some rich and powerful man,\ngenerously rejected bribes when offered, abstained from inordinate\ndrinking when athirst and alone, or at night, when none sees or knows\nwhat he does, lastly, if he hath conquered the briskest attempts\nof love (as is said of Agesilaus); if (I say) he contain himself\nfrom speaking of such actions, and do not in company boast of his\nperformances. This I affirm,\u2014such a one as can prove and try himself\nby himself, and be fully satisfied in the verdict of his conscience,\nas of an unexceptionable witness and spectator of what is right and\ngood, shows plainly that his reason looks inward and is well rooted\nwithin him, and that the man (as Democritus said) is accustomed to take\nsatisfaction from himself.\n\nTo borrow a simile from husbandmen and those that are concerned in the\nbusiness of the fields, they are always best pleased to see those ears\nof corn which decline and by reason of their fulness bend downwards to\nthe earth, but look upon those as empty, deceitful, and insignificant,\nwhich, because they have nothing in them, grow bolt upright and appear\nabove the rest. So it is amongst students in philosophy; those that are\nmost empty-headed, and have least firmness and solidity, have always\nthe greatest share of confidence, formality, and stiffness in their\naddress, look biggest, walk with the most state, and top upon and\ncondemn others, with the highest arrogance and severity of any living.\nBut when once their brains begin to fill and become well poised with\nsolid notions, they look down into themselves, and quite lay aside that\ninsolent and arrogant humor, which is proper only to youngsters.\n\nGive me leave to illustrate this by one simile more. When you pour\nwater into bottles or any other vessels, upon its being instilled\ninto them, the air that was in them before presently flies out and\ngives place to the more substantial body. Even so it is with those\nthat have had many good precepts instilled into them, and their minds\nreplenished with solid truths. They presently find that all empty\nvanity flies off; that the imposthume of pride breaks; that they do not\nvalue themselves for beard and gown only, but bend their actions and\nendeavors to the bettering of their rational faculties; and, lastly,\nthat when they reprove they begin at home, turning the edge of their\nsatire and invective upon themselves, even when at the same time\nthey are civil and complaisant to all others beside. It is indeed an\nargument of a generous and truly brave disposition in a scholar, not to\nassume the name and character of one, and, as some use to do, to put\nthe philosopher amongst his titles; but if any out of respect chance to\ngive him that compellation, to be surprised, blush, and with a modest\nsmile answer him in that of the poet,\n\n    You compliment your friend; he whom you so commend\n    Must needs be more than man,\u2014far more than I pretend.[221]\n\nAeschylus says of a young woman that, if ever she have played the\nwanton, you may discover it in her eyes, and read her affections in\namorous glances which she cannot conceal; so a young scholar, if he be\nonce entered in the mysteries and have tasted the sweets of philosophy,\ncannot possibly suppress the passion and concern for it; as Sappho\nsays, his tongue falters when he would speak its praise; his heart is\nwarm with affection;\n\n    A secret flame does run through every part.\n\nYou would admire and love the assurance and composedness of his looks,\nthe affectionateness of his eyes, and especially the winning decency\nand agreeableness of his words and expressions.\n\nThose that are to be initiated in the ceremonies of the Gods run\nto their temples at first with a great deal of noise, clamor, and\nrudeness; but as soon as the solemnity is seen and over, they\nattend with a profound silence and religious fear. So it is with the\ncandidates in philosophy; you may perceive a throng, noise, and pother\nabout the school-doors, by reason that several press thither eagerly,\nrudely, and violently for reputation, more than learning; but when\nyou are once in, and manifestly see the great light, as if some royal\nshrine were opened unto you, you are presently possessed with a quite\ndifferent notion of things; are struck with silence and admiration,\nand begin, with humility and a reverend composure, to comply with and\nfollow the divine oracle. That which Menedemus said in another case\nis very apposite to this sort of men. Those that went to the school\nof Athens were first of all (\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03af) _wise_, next (\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03b9)\n_lovers of wisdom_, then orators, and at last, in course of time,\nplain common men; for the longer they applied themselves to study and\nphilosophy, so much the more all vanity, pride, and pedantry abated in\nthem, and the nearer they came to plain, downright, honest men.\n\n11. Again, as it is with those that are indisposed and out of\norder,\u2014some, if a tooth or finger do but ache, presently run to a\nphysician; others send for one to their houses, if they find themselves\nbut the least feverish and desire his advice and assistance; but those\nthat are either melancholical, or but any ways crazed in their heads,\ncan not endure so much as the looks of a physician, but either keep\nout of sight when he comes or command him to be gone, being altogether\ninsensible of their condition,\u2014so, in persons that commit any heinous\ncrime or fall into any error, I look upon those as perfectly incurable,\nwho take it ill to be admonished of their fault and look upon reproof\nand admonition as the greatest rudeness and incivility in the world,\nwhereas those that can quietly hearken and submit to the advice of\nfriends and superiors deserve a more favorable opinion, and may be\nthought to be of a much better disposition. But the greatest character\nof hopeful men, and such as may be probably excellent proficients in\ntime, belongs to those who, upon a commission of a fault, immediately\napply themselves to such as will reprove and correct them; who plainly\ndisclose their grief and open their malady; who do not rejoice in\nconcealing their distemper, and are not content to have their troubles\nunknown; lastly, who make a full confession of what they have done\namiss, and desire the help of a friend to examine and direct them for\nthe future. Diogenes, I am sure, was of this opinion. He said, that\nwhosoever would be certainly and constantly in the right must get\neither a virtuous good friend or an incensed ill-natured enemy to his\nmonitor; the one by gentle admonition to reprove and persuade him, the\nother to work upon him by severity, and awe him into a virtuous course\nof life.\n\nThere is a sort of men in the world, that are so vain and foolish\nas to take a pride in being the first discoverers of their own\nimperfections; if they have but a rent or spot in their clothes, or\nhave got a torn pair of shoes on, they are the most forward of any to\ntell it in company; and (which is more) they are very apt, out of a\nsilly, empty, arrogant humor, to make themselves the subject of their\ndrollery, if they are of a dwarfish stature or any way deformed; yet\n(which is strange) these very men, at the very same time, endeavor to\nexcuse and palliate the internal imperfections of the mind and the\nmore ugly deformities of the soul, as envy, evil-custom, detraction,\nvoluptuousness, &c., and will not suffer any one either to see or probe\nthem. These are, as it were, so many sore places, and they cannot\nendure to have them touched and meddled with. Such men as these (I may\nbe bold to say) have very few signs of proficiency, or rather none at\nall.\n\nNow, on the contrary, he that examines his own failings with the\ngreatest severity, that impartially blames or corrects himself as\noften as he does amiss, or (which is almost as commendable) grows\nfirmer and better by present advice, as well as more able and ready to\nendure a reprimand for the future, seems to me truly and sincerely to\nhave rejected and forsaken vice.\n\nIt is certainly our duty to avoid all appearance of evil, and to be\nashamed to give occasion even to be reputed vicious; yet evil reports\nare so inconsiderable to a wise man, that, if he have a greater\naversion to the nature of evil than to the infamy that attends it,\nhe will not fear what is said of him abroad, nor what calumnies are\nraised, if so be he be made the better by them. It was handsomely said\nof Diogenes, when he saw a young spark coming out of a tavern, who at\nthe sight of him drew back: Do not retire, says he, for the more you\ngo backward, the more you will be in the tavern. Even so every vicious\nperson, the more he denies and palliates vice, the more aggravates and\nconfirms it, and with surer footing goes farther into wickedness; like\nsome persons of ordinary rank and quality, who, while they assume above\nthemselves, and out of arrogance would be thought rich, are made really\npoor and necessitous, by pretending to be otherwise.\n\nHippocrates, a man of wonderful skill in physic, was very ingenuous\nin this point, and fit to be imitated by the greatest proficients in\nphilosophy. He confessed publicly, that he had mistaken the nature\nof the sutures in the skull, and has left an acknowledgment of his\nignorance upon record, under his own hand; for he thought it very\nunworthy a man of his profession not to discover where he was in the\nwrong, seeing others might suffer and err by his authority. And,\nindeed, it had been very unreasonable, if he, whose business and\nconcern it was to save others and to set them right, should not have\nhad the courage to cure himself, and to discover his weakness and\nimperfections in his own faculty.\n\nPyrrhon and Bion (two eminent philosophers) have given rules of\nproficiency; but they seem rather signs of a complete habit of virtue,\nthan a progressive disposition to it. Bion told his friend, that they\nthen might be assured of their proficiency, when they could endure a\nreproof from anybody with the same indifferency and unconcernedness as\nthey could hear the highest encomiums, even such a one as this of the\npoet:\n\nSir,\n\n    Some heavenly flame inspires your breast;\n    Live great, rejoice, and be for ever blest.[222]\n\nThe other, to wit, Pyrrhon, being at sea and in great danger, by reason\nof a tempest that arose, took particular notice (as the story goes)\nof a hog that was on board, which all the while very unconcernedly\nfed upon some corn which lay scattered about; he showed it to his\ncompanions, and told them that they ought to acquire by reading and\nphilosophy such an apathy and unconcernedness in all accidents and\ndangers as they saw that poor creature naturally have.\n\n12. The opinion which is said to be Zeno\u2019s may deserve our\nconsideration. He said that any one might give a guess at his\nproficiency from the observation of his dreams, if when asleep he\nfancied nothing that was immodest, nor seemed to consent to any wicked\nactions or dishonest intentions, but found his fancy and passions of\nhis mind undisturbed, in a constant calm, as it were, always serene,\nand enlightened with the beams of divine reason. This very notion was\nhinted by Plato[223] (as I interpret his words), where he is describing\nand delineating the soul which is tyrannical in its nature, and showing\nwhat manner of operations its fantasy and irrational appetite exert.\nWhen a man is asleep, he says, a vicious person designs the satisfying\nincestuous lust, has a longing for all sorts of meat indifferently,\nwhether allowed or prohibited, and satisfies his appetite and desire in\nall manner of intemperance which is loose and unregarded, which, in the\nday-time, either the laws shame him out of, or fear to offend restrains.\n\nAs now those brute beasts that are accustomed to labor will not, if\nthe reins be let loose, either turn aside or offer to leave the track\nor stumble in it, so it is with the brutal faculty of the mind; when\nit is once made tame and manageable by the strength of reason, then\nit is unwilling carelessly to transgress or saucily to disobey its\nsovereign\u2019s commands or to comply with any inordinate lusts, either in\nsleep or sickness; but it carefully observes and maintains its dictates\nto which it is accustomed, and by frequent exercise advances to perfect\nstrength and intention of virtue.\n\nWe find even in our own nature the strange effects of custom. Man is\nnaturally able, by much exercise and the use of a stoical apathy,\nto bring the body and all its members into subjection, so that not\none organ shall perform its operation,\u2014the eyes shall not burst out\nwith tears upon the sight of a lamentable object, the heart shall not\npalpitate upon the apprehension of fear, and the passions shall not\nbe roused at the sight of any beautiful person, whether man or woman.\nNow it is much more probable that the faculties of the sense may be so\nbrought in subjection by undergoing such exercise as we speak of, that\nall its imaginations and motions may be smoothed and made agreeable\nto right reason, even when we are asleep and keep not sentry. It is\nreported of Stilpo the philosopher, that he thought he saw Neptune in\nhis sleep, and that he seemed very much displeased with him, because\nhe had not (as was usual with his priests) sacrificed an ox in honor\nof him. Not in the least daunted at the apparition, he thus boldly\naccosted it: Neptune! what\u2019s this business you here complain of? You\ncome hither like a child, and are angry with me, because I did not\nborrow money and run in debt to please you, and fill the city with\ncostly odors, but privately sacrificed to you in my own house such\nordinary victims as I could get. At this confident reply, Neptune\nsmiled, and (as the story goes) reached him his hand, as an assurance\nof his good-will to him, and told him that for his sake he would send\nthe Megarians abundance of fish that season.\n\nIn the main we may conclude thus much, that those that have clear and\npleasant dreams, and are not troubled with any frightful, strange,\nvicious, or irregular apparitions in their sleep, may assure themselves\nthat they have some indications and dawnings of proficiency; whereas,\non the contrary, those dreams which are mixed with any pain, fear,\ncowardly aversions from good, childish exultation, or silly grief, so\nthat they are both frightful and unaccountable, are like the breaking\nwaves or the billows of the sea; for the soul, not having attained\na perfect evenness of temper, but being under the formation of laws\nand precepts from whose guidance and discovery it is free in time of\nsleep, is then slacked from its usual intenseness, and laid open to all\npassions whatever.\n\nWhether this temper we speak of be an argument of proficiency, or an\nindication of some other habit which has taken deep root in the soul,\ngrown strong and immovable by all the power of reason, I leave to you\nto consider and determine.\n\n13. Seeing then an absolute apathy or freedom from all passions\nwhatsoever is a great and divine perfection, and, withal, considering\nthat progress seems to consist in a certain remission and moderation\nof those very passions we carry about us, it unavoidably follows, that\nif we will observe our passions, with relation to one another and also\nto themselves, we may easily find out their differences. For example,\nfirst, we may observe from the passions compared with themselves\nwhether our desires be now more moderate than they used to be, fear\nand anger less and more calm, and whether or no we are more able to\nquench the heat and flame of our passions than we used to be.\n\nSecondly, by comparing them with one another, we may observe whether we\nnow have a greater share of shame than of fear, whether emulation be\nwithout any mixture of envy, whether we have greater desire of glory\nthan of riches, whether we offend (as the musicians term it) in the\nDorian or base or in the Lydian or treble notes,\u2014that is, whether we\nare more inured to abstinence and hardship than otherwise,\u2014whether we\nare unwilling rather than forward to appear in public, and, lastly,\nwhether we are undue admirers of the persons or performances of others,\nor despisers both of them and what they can do.\n\nAs it is a good sign of recovery of a sick person if the distemper lie\nin the less principal parts of the body; so in proficiency, if vicious\nhabits be changed into more tolerable passions, it is a symptom that\nthey are going off and ready to be quenched. Phrynis the musician,\nto his seven strings adding two more, was asked by the magistrates,\nwhether he had rather they should cut the upper or lower of them, the\nbase or treble. Now it is our business to cut off (as it were) both\nwhat is above and below, if we would attain to the true medium and\nequality; for proficiency in the first place remits the excess, and\nsweetens the harmony of the evil affections, which is (according to\nSophocles)\n\n    The madman\u2019s greatest pleasure and disease.\n\n14. We have already said that we ought to transfer our judgment to\naction, and not to suffer our words to remain bare and naked words,\nbut to reduce them to deeds; and that this is the chiefest sign of\na proficient. Now another manifest indication is a desire of those\nthings we commend, and a readiness to perform those things which we\nadmire, but whatsoever we discommend, neither to will or endure it. It\nis probable that all the Athenians highly extolled the courage and\nvalor of Miltiades. But Themistocles (who professed that the trophies\nof Miltiades broke his sleep, and often forced him out of his bed) did\nnot only praise and admire what he had done, but was manifestly struck\nwith a zeal and emulation of his performances. Therefore we may be\nassured that we have profited little, while we think it a vanity to\nadmire those that have done well, and cannot possibly be raised to an\nimitation of them.\n\nTo love the person of any man is not sufficient, except it have a\nmixture of emulation; no more is that love of virtue ardent and\nexciting, which does not put us forward, and create in our breasts\n(instead of envy to them) a zealous affection for all good men, and\na desire of equal perfection with them. For it is not enough (as\nAlcibiades was wont to say) that the heart should be turned upside down\nby hearing the discourses of a philosopher, and that the tears should\ngush from the eyes; but he that is a proficient indeed, comparing\nhimself with the designs and actions of a good perfect man, is pricked\nat the same with the consciousness of his own weakness, and transported\nwith hope and desire, and big with irresistible assurance; and indeed\nsuch a one is (as Simonides says) like a little sucking foal running\nby the mother\u2019s side, and desires to be incorporated into the very\nsame nature with a good man. For this is an especial sign of true\nproficiency, to love and affect their way of life whose actions we\nemulate, and, upon account of an honorable opinion we always entertain\nfor them, to do as they do. But whosoever he is that entertains a\ncontentious or malicious design against his betters, let him be assured\nthat he is possessed with a greedy desire of honor or greatness, but\nhas neither a true respect nor admiration for virtue.\n\n15. When therefore we once begin so to love good men, as not only\n(according to Plato) to esteem the wise man himself happy, and him who\nhears his discourses sharer in his felicity, but also to admire and\nlove his habit, gait, look, and very smile, so as to wish ourselves to\nbe that very person, then we may be assured that we have made very good\nproficiency.\n\nThis assurance will be advanced, if we do not only admire good men\nin prosperity, but like lovers, who are taken ever with the lisping\nand pale looks of their mistresses (as Araspes is said to have been\nsmitten with the tears and dejected looks of a mournful and afflicted\nPanthea), have an affection for virtue in its most mournful dress, so\nas not at all to dread the banishment of Aristides, the imprisonment of\nAnaxagoras, the poverty of Socrates, nor the hard fate of Phocion, but\nto embrace and respect their virtues, even under such injustice, and\nupon thoughts of it, to repeat this verse of Euripides,\u2014\n\n    How do all fortunes decently become\n    A generous, well-tuned soul!\n\nThis is certain, if any one addresses himself to virtue with this\nresolution, not to be dejected at the appearance of difficulty, but\nheartily admires and prosecutes its divine perfection, none of the\nevil we have spoken of can divert his good intentions. To what I have\nsaid I may add this, that when we go upon any business, undertake any\noffice, or chance upon any affair whatever, we must set before our\neyes some excellent person, either alive or dead; and consider with\nourselves what Plato for the purpose would have done in this affair,\nwhat Epaminondas would have said, how Lycurgus or Agesilaus would\nhave behaved themselves, that, addressing ourselves and adorning our\nminds at these mirrors, we may correct every disagreeing word and\nirregular passion. It is commonly said, that those that have got by\nheart the names of the Idaei Dactyli make use of them as charms to\ndrive away fear, if they can but confidently repeat them one by one;\nso the consideration and remembrance of good men, being present and\nentertained in our minds, do preserve our proficiency in all affections\nand doubts regular and immovable; wherefore you may judge that this is\nalso a token of a proficient in virtue.\n\n16. You may observe further, that not to be in a confusion, not to\nblush, not to hide or correct your clothes or any thing about you, at\nthe unexpected appearance of an honorable and wise person, but to have\nan assurance as if you were often conversant with such, is almost a\nperfect demonstration of a very intelligent person.\n\nIt is reported of Alexander, that one night seeing a messenger joyfully\nrunning towards him and stretching out his hand, as if he had something\nto deliver to him, he said to the apparition, Friend, what news do you\nbring me? Is Homer risen from the dead? That admirable monarch thought\nthat nothing was wanting to his great exploits but such a herald as\nHomer.\n\nConsider this, if a young man thrive in the world, it is customary for\nhim to desire nothing more than to be seen in the company of virtuous\nand good men, to show them his whole furniture, his table, his wife and\nchildren, his study, his diary or collections; and he is so pleased\nwith himself, that he wishes his father or tutor were alive, that they\nmight see him in so good a way of living; and he could heartily pray\nthat they were alive, to be spectators of his life and actions. But,\non the contrary, those that have neglected their business, or lost\nthemselves in the world, cannot endure the sight or company of their\nrelations without a great deal of fear and confusion.\n\n17. Join this, if you please, to what we said before; for it is no\nsmall sign, if the proficient thus esteem every little fault a great\none, and studiously observe and avoid all. For, as those persons who\ndespair of ever being rich make little account of small expenses,\nthinking that little added to a little will never make any great\nsum, but when they come once to have got a competency, and hope to be\nat last very rich, it advances their desires, so it happens in the\naffairs of virtue;\u2014he that does not quiet his mind by saying with\nhimself, \u201cWhat matters it what comes after? if for the present it be so\nand so, yet better days will come,\u201d but who attends every thing, and\nis not careless if the least vice pass uncondemned, but is troubled\nand concerned at it, such a one makes it appear that he has attained\nsomething that is pure, which he brightens by use and will not suffer\nto corrupt. For a preconceived opinion that nothing we have is valuable\n(according to Aeschylus) makes us careless and indifferent about every\nthing.\n\nIf any one be to make a dry wall or an ordinary hedge, it matters\nnot much if he makes use of ordinary wood or common stone, any old\ngravestones, or the like; so wicked persons, who confusedly mix\nand blend all their designs and actions in one heap, care not what\nmaterials they put together. But the proficients in virtue, who have\nalready laid the golden solid foundation of a virtuous life, as of\na sacred and royal building, take especial care of the whole work,\nexamine and model every part of it according to the rule of reason,\nbelieving that it was well said by Polycletus, that the hardest work\nremained for them to do whose nails must touch the clay;\u2014that is, to\nlay the top stone is the great business and masterpiece of the work.\nThe last stroke gives beauty and perfection to the whole piece.\n\n\n\n\nOF FORTUNE.\n\nMORTALS\u2019 AFFAIRS FORTUNE NOT COUNSEL RULES.[224]\n\n\n1. And does not justice rule the affairs of mortals,\u2014nor impartiality,\nnor moderation, nor decorum? But was it of Fortune and long of Fortune\nthat Aristides remained obstinate in his poverty, although he could\nhave made himself master of much wealth? And that Scipio, when he had\ntaken Carthage, neither received nor so much as saw any part of the\nbooty? Was it of Fortune and long of Fortune that Philocrates, having\nreceived a sum of gold of King Philip, laid it out in whores and fish?\nAnd that Lasthenes and Euthycrates, by measuring their happiness by\ntheir bellies and the most abject of follies, lost Olynthus? Was it\nof Fortune that Alexander son of Philip refrained from the captive\nwomen himself, and punished those that offered them any indignity;\nwhile Alexander, son of Priam, long of an evil Daemon and Fortune,\nfirst vitiated his host\u2019s wife and then took her away with him, and\nfilled both the continents with war and calamities? And if such things\nas these can come by Fortune, what hinders but that we may as well\nplead that cats, goats, and monkeys are constrained by Fortune to be\nravenous, lustful, and ridiculous?\n\n2. But if there be such things to be found as moderation, justice, and\nfortitude, how can it stand with reason there should not be such a\nthing as wisdom also? And if there be wisdom, how can it be but there\nmust be good counsel? For moderation is (as they are used to say) a\ncertain sort of wisdom; and justice cannot subsist without wisdom.\nCertainly we call that good counsel and wisdom that render us manful\nin pleasures continence and moderation; in dangers and hardships,\nendurance and resolution; and in communities and public business,\nequality and justice. And therefore if we will needs have it that\nthe effects of conduct belong to Fortune, let then both the effects\nof justice and moderation belong to Fortune also. Nay, by Jove, let\nstealing be ascribed to Fortune too, and cutting of purses, and a\nlustful lewd life; and let us quit our reasoning quite, and turn\nourselves loose to Fortune, to be carried and driven, like filth and\ndust, before an impetuous wind. If there be no such thing as conduct,\nit must of necessity follow, that there should be no such thing as\nadvising about our affairs, nor any consultation or enquiry about\nutility; and that Sophocles did talk idly when he said:\n\n    Whate\u2019er is sought,\n    It may be caught;\n    But what we shun\n    Will from us run;[225]\n\nand when elsewhere he made this distribution of things:\n\n    I learn what\u2019s to be taught,\n    I seek what\u2019s to be sought;\n    I beg the rest of Heaven.\n\nFor what is to be sought or what is to be learned by mortals, if all\nthings go by Fortune? And what senate of a republic is not overthrown,\nor what council of a prince is not dissolved, if all things are subject\nto Fortune?\u2014which we use to upbraid with blindness because we blindly\nfall into it. And indeed how can we otherwise choose, when we first\npluck good counsel like our eyes out of our heads, and then take us a\nblind guide of our lives?\n\n3. Imagine that now some one of us should say,\n\n    Seers\u2019 affairs Fortune not eyesight rules,\n\nnor yet the eyes, which Plato calls light-bearers; and again,\n\n    Hearers\u2019 affairs are by blind Fortune ruled,\n\nand not by a certain power receptive of the strokes of the air,\nconveyed to it through the organ of the ear and brain. It would beseem\nus then, doubtless, to pay a due respect to our sense. But our sight,\nhearing, and smelling, with the other parts of our bodies\u2019 faculties,\nwere bestowed upon us by nature to minister unto good conduct and\ndiscretion. And \u201cIt is the mind that sees, and the mind that hears; the\nrest are deaf and blind.\u201d And as, were there not a sun, we might, for\nall the other stars, pass our days in darkness (as Heraclitus says); so\nhad man neither mind nor reason, his life would be, for all his senses,\nnothing better than that of brutes. But it is by neither Fortune nor\nchance that we exceed them and bear sway over them; but Prometheus\n(that is, reason) is the cause,\n\n    Which gives both horse and ass and oxen strong,\n    To carry us and ease our labor long,[226]\n\nas Aeschylus speaks. For the greater part of brutes are much happier\nthan we, as to the fortune and form of their constitution; for some of\nthem are armed with horns, some with teeth, and some with stings; and\nthe urchin\u2019s back, (saith Empedocles) bristles with prickly thorns;\nothers again are shod, others are clad with scales, others with shaggy\nhair, and others with hard claws and hoofs; but man alone (as Plato\nspeaks) was left by Nature naked, unarmed, unshod, and uncovered. But\nall those ills she sweetened with one gift,\u2014reason, care, and forecast.\n\n    Small is the strength of poor frail man;\n    Yet by his shifting wit he can\n    Enslave the arts and properties\n    Of all on land, in sea and skies.\n\nThe lightest and swiftest things are horses; but they run for man. A\ndog is a fierce and an angry animal; but it guards man. Fish is the\nsweetest thing, and swine the fattest; but they are man\u2019s nourishment\nand cheer. What is bigger than an elephant? But this also is become\nman\u2019s plaything, and a spectacle at public solemnities, and it learns\nto skip, dance, and kneel. Such things as these are not introduced in\nvain, but that we may learn by them whither knowledge advances man,\nand above what things it sets him, and how he comes to be master, and\nexceed all other things.\n\n    For we nor boxers nor good wrestlers are,\n    Nor yet good runners.[227]\n\nYea, in all these we are far more unhappy than the brutes. But by our\nexperience, memory, wit, and dexterity (as Anaxagoras speaks) we make\nuse of what is theirs; we press out their honey, we milk them, we\ncatch them, and drive them up and down as we please. So that in all\nthis there is nothing that depends on Fortune, but all on counsel and\nforecast.\n\n4. Moreover, the affairs of carpenters are affairs of mortals, and so\nare those of copper-founders, builders, and statuaries; amongst whom\nyet we can see nothing brought to perfection by chance or at random.\nFor that there falls in but little of Fortune to an expert artist,\nwhether founder or builder, but that the most and greatest part of\ntheir workmanship is performed by mere art, hath been thus insinuated\nby a certain poet:\n\n    Go forth into the street, ye craftsmen all,\n    Who on grim-visaged Ergana do call,\n    That\u2019s stuck with sacred baskets all around.\n\nFor the trades have Ergana and Minerva for their patroness, and not\nFortune. It is indeed reported of one that, as he was drawing a horse\nand had hit right in all the rest, both shapes and colors, but was not\nwell satisfied with the draught he had made of a puff of froth that\nwas tempered by the bit and wrought out with the horse\u2019s breathing,\nhe therefore had often wiped it off; but that at length he in a great\nfume struck his sponge full of colors, as it was, against the board,\nand that this, as it lighted, to admiration made a most lively impress,\nand so filled up what was defective in the piece. This is the only\nartificial work of Fortune that history mentions. Artists everywhere\nmake use of rules, lines, measures, and arithmetical proportions,\nthat their works may nowhere have in them any thing that is casual or\nfortuitous. And the truth is, arts are styled a sort of petty wisdoms,\nthough they might be much better called certain sheddings or filings\nof it sprinkled upon the several needful services of human life; as is\nobscurely riddled to us in the fire feigned to have been first divided\nby Prometheus, and then scattered up and down the world. For just so,\ncertain little particles and fragments of wisdom as it were crumbled\nand broken small fell into ranks and methods.\n\n5. It seems therefore very strange how it came to pass that arts should\nstand in no need of Fortune to compass their proper end, but that which\nis the greatest and most complete of all arts, and which is the very\nsum of man\u2019s worth and commendation, should prove to be nothing at all.\nBut there is a kind of good counsel in stretching and slackening of\nstrings, which they call the art of music; and in dressing of meats,\nwhich we call cookery; and in washing of clothes, which we call the art\nof fulling; and we teach our children how to put on their shoes and\nclothes, and to take their meat in their right hand, and hold their\nbread in their left; as being sensible that even such common things\nas these do not come by Fortune, but require attention and heed. But\ndo the greatest things and the most important to a happy state require\nno wisdom, and have no share in rational proceeding and forecast? Yet\nno man ever wetted clay and then left it, as if there would be bricks\nby chance and Fortune; nor, having provided wool and leather, sat\nhim down and prayed to Fortune that they might be made clothes and\nshoes for him; nor can any man, when he hath amassed together much\ngold and silver, and furnished himself with a multitude of slaves and\nattendants, and enclosed himself in a great palace with many gates,\nand set out costly couches and tables, fancy to himself that, if he\nhave not wisdom with them, these things will be his happiness, and an\nundisturbed, blissful, and unchangeable life. One asked Iphicrates the\ngeneral, by way of taunt, what he was? For he was neither spearman nor\narcher, nor yet bore light armor. I am (replied he) one that commands\nand uses all these.\n\n6. In like manner wisdom is itself neither gold nor silver nor fame\nnor wealth nor health nor strength nor beauty. What then is it? It is\nwhat can use all these with decorum, and by means of which every one\nof these is made pleasant, commendable, and useful, and without which\nthey become useless, unprofitable, and prejudicial, and the burthen and\nshame of their possessors. Hesiod\u2019s Prometheus therefore gives very\ngood advice to Epimetheus:\n\n    Brother, be sure you never take\n    A boon from Jove, but giv\u2019t him back,[228]\n\nmeaning things of Fortune and external. For, as if he had bid him not\nto play on a flute if ignorant of music, nor to read a book if he\nknew not his letters, nor to ride if he understood not a horse, so\nit would be if he advised him not to govern if a fool, nor to be a\nrich man if a miser, and not to marry if apt to be ruled by a woman.\nFor success above desert is to fools an occasion of misthinking, as\nDemosthenes[229] saith; yes, and good fortune above desert is to the\nunwise an occasion of misdoing.\n\n\n\n\nOF VIRTUE AND VICE.\n\n\n1. It is apparent that clothes make a man warm, not by warming him\nthemselves or by imparting heat to him (for every garment is of itself\ncold, which is the reason that we see those that are very hot and in\na fever often shifting and changing one thing for another), but what\nheat a man exhales out of himself, that the garment lying close to his\nbody keeps together and contracts, and when it hath driven it inward,\nit will not suffer it again to dissipate. This being the very case of\nexternal affairs too, it is this that cheats vulgar heads, by making\nthem think that, if they might but enclose themselves in great houses\nand heap together abundance of slaves and riches, they might then live\nto their own minds. But an agreeable and gay life is not to be found\nwithout us; on the contrary, it is man that out of his own temper, as\nout of a spring, adds pleasure and gayety to the things about him:\n\n    The house looks merrier when the fire burns.\n\nAnd wealth is the more agreeable, and fame and power the more\nresplendent, when they have the joy of the mind to accompany them;\nsince we see how that through a mild and tame disposition men can bear\npoverty, banishment, and old age easily and sweetly.\n\n2. For as odors perfume threadbare coats and poor rags, while Prince\nAnchises\u2019s ulcer sent forth a loathsome purulence,\n\n    When the foul tent dript on his purple robe,\n\neven so every state and condition of life, if accompanied with virtue,\nis undisturbed and delightful. But when vice is intermixed, it renders\neven the things that appear splendid, sumptuous, and magnificent most\ndistasteful, nauseous, and unacceptable to the possessors.\n\n    This man\u2019s thought happy in the market-place,\n    But when he ope\u2019s his doors, hell is his case;\n\n    The woman governs all, commands and brawls.\n\nThough one may without any great difficulty get rid of a wicked\ncross-grained wife, if he be but a man and not a slave. But a man\ncannot write a bill of divorce to his vice, and thereby free himself\nfrom further trouble, and procure his own repose by living apart; but\nit still cohabits with him, and dwells in his very bowels, and cleaves\nto him both by night and by day;\n\n    It burns without a torch, and hastens crude old age,[230]\n\nbeing through its vain glory a burthensome fellow-traveller, and\nthrough its voracity a chargeable table-companion, and a troublesome\nbed-fellow by breaking and spoiling one\u2019s sleep at night with cares,\nanxieties, and surmises. For when he does sleep his body is indeed\nat rest and quiet, but his mind is through superstition in terrors,\ndreams, and frights.\n\n    When in my slumbers sorrows fill me,\n    Then frightful dreams and visions kill me,\n\nsaith one; just thus envy, fear, anger, and lust affect us. For by\nday-time our vice, by looking abroad and fashioning herself to the\nmanner of others, grows shamefaced, and finds herself obliged to\nmask her own disorders, and does not yield herself up wholly to her\nappetites, but oftentimes resists and struggles with them. But in\ntimes of sleep, when it escapes both the opinions of men and the laws,\nand is at the remotest distance from awe and respect, it stirs every\ndesire, and raises up its malignity and lewdness. For it attempts (as\nPlato speaks) the embraces of a mother, it purveys unlawful meats, and\nrefrains from no sort of action, enjoying villany, as far as it is\npracticable, in shades and phantoms, that end in no real pleasure or\naccomplishment of desire, but have only power to stir up and enrage\ndisorders and distempers.\n\n3. Where then is the pleasure of vice, if there be nowhere to be found\neither freedom from care or exemption from trouble, or satisfaction or\nundisturbedness or repose? A sound complexion and good health of body\ngive indeed both place and birth to the flesh\u2019s pleasures; but there\ncannot be engendered a gayety and cheerfulness in the mind, unless\nundauntedness, assurance, or an immovable serenity be the foundation.\nNay, if some hope or satisfaction should simper a little, this would\nbe soon puddled and disturbed by some sudden eruption of care, like a\nsmooth sea by a rock.\n\n4. Heap up gold, gather together silver, raise up walks, fill your\nhouse with slaves and the town with debtors; if you do not appease\nthe disorders of your own mind, and stint your unsatiable desire, and\ndeliver yourself from fears and cares, you do but rack wine for a man\nin a fever, and administer honey to a man disturbed with bile, and\nprepare meat and good cheer for people that have the flux or gripes,\nwho can neither retain it nor be strengthened by it, but are over and\nabove spoiled by it. Do you not see how sick persons loathe, spit out,\nand refuse the finest and most costly meats, though they be proffered\nand forced upon them; and how again, when their complexion alters, and\ngood spirits, sweet blood, and a connatural heat are engendered, they\nget up and gladly and willingly eat brown bread, cheese, and cresses?\nSuch a disposition as this is it that reason works in the mind. And\nyou will have sufficiency, if you will but learn what a notable and\ngenerous mind is. You will live luxuriously in poverty, and be a\nprince; and you will be as much in love with a vacant and private life\nas with that of a general or king. If you once apply to philosophy, you\nwill never live without pleasure, but you will learn to be everywhere\npleased, and with every thing. You will be pleased with wealth for\nmaking you beneficial to many, and with poverty for not having much to\ncare for; with fame for being honored, and with obscurity for being\nunenvied.\n\n\n\n\nCONJUGAL PRECEPTS.\n\nPLUTARCH TO POLLIANUS AND EURYDICE SENDETH GREETING.\n\n\nNow that the nuptial ceremonies are over, and that the priestess of\nCeres has joined you both together in the bands of matrimony according\nto the custom of the country, I thought a short discourse of this\nnature might not be either unacceptable or unseasonable, but rather\nserve as a kind epithalamium to congratulate your happy conjunction;\nmore especially, since there can be nothing more useful in conjugal\nsociety than the observance of wise and wholesome precepts, suitable to\nthe harmony of matrimonial converse. For among the variety of musical\nmoods and measures there is one which is called Hippothoros, a sort\nof composition to the flute and hautboy, made use of to encourage and\nprovoke stallions to cover mares. But philosophy being furnished with\nmany noble and profitable discourses, there is not any one subject that\ndeserves a more serious study than that of wedlock, whereby they who\nare engaged in a long community of bed and board are more steadfastly\nunited in affection, and made more pliable one to another in humor and\ncondition. To this purpose, having reduced under several short heads\nand similes some certain instructions and admonitions which you, as\ntutored up in philosophy, have frequently already heard, I send you the\ncollection as a present, beseeching the Muses so with their presence\nto assist the Goddess Venus, that the harmony of your mutual society\nand complacency in domestic diligences may outcry the melodious\nconcords of lute or harp, while you live united together by reason and\nphilosophy. Therefore it was that the ancients placed the statue of\nVenus by that of Mercury, to signify that the pleasures of matrimony\nchiefly consist in the sweetness of conversation. They also set the\nGraces and Suadela, the Goddess of Eloquence, together, to show that\nthe married couple were to act only by persuasion, and not to use the\nviolences of wrangling and contention.\n\n1. Solon advised that the bride should eat a quince before she entered\nthe nuptial sheets; intimating thereby, in my opinion, that the man\nwas to expect his first pleasures from the breath and speech of his\nnew-married bed-fellow.\n\n2. In Boeotia it is the custom, when they veil the virgin bride, to set\nupon her head a chaplet of wild asparagus, which from a thorny stalk\naffords a most delicious fruit, to let us understand that a new-married\nwoman, discreetly brooking at the beginning the first distastes of\nmarriage restraints, grows yieldingly complaisant at length, and makes\nconforming wedlock a happiness to each. And indeed such husbands\nwho cannot bear with the little disdains and first froppishness of\nimprudent youth are like to those that choose the sour grapes and leave\nto others the ripe delicious clusters. On the other side, those young\nladies that take a disdain to their husbands by reason of their first\ndebates and encounters may be well compared to those that patiently\nendure the sting but fling away the honey.\n\n3. It especially behooves those people who are newly married to avoid\nthe first occasions of discord and dissension; considering that vessels\nnewly formed are subject to be bruised and put out of shape by many\nslight accidents, but when the materials come once to be settled and\nhardened by time, nor fire nor sword will hardly prejudice the solid\nsubstance.\n\n4. Fire takes speedy hold of straw or hare\u2019s fur, but soon goes out\nagain, unless fed with an addition of more fuel. Thus that same love,\nwhose flames are nourished only by heat of youth and looser charms of\nbeauty, seldom proves of long continuance or grows to wedlock maturity,\nunless it have taken a deep root in conformity of manners, and mutual\naffection be enlivened by the intermixture of souls as well as bodies,\nwhile prudence and discretion feed the noble flame.\n\n5. They who bait their hooks with intoxicated drugs with little pains\nsurprise the hungry fish, but then they prove unsavory to the taste and\ndangerous to eat. Thus women that by the force of charms and philters\nendeavor to subdue their husbands to the satisfaction of their pleasure\nbecome at length the wives of madmen, sots, and fools. For they whom\nthe sorceress Circe had enchanted, being then no better than swine and\nasses, were no longer able to please or do her service. But she loved\nUlysses entirely, whose prudence avoided her venomous intoxications and\nrendered his conversation highly grateful.\n\n6. They who rather choose to be the mistresses of senseless fools than\nthe obedient wives of wise and sober husbands are like those people\nthat prefer misguidance of the blind before the conduct of them that\ncan see and know the way.\n\n7. They will not believe that Pasiphae, the consort of a prince, could\never be enamored of a bull, and yet themselves are so extravagant as to\nabandon the society of their husbands,\u2014men of wisdom, temperance, and\ngravity,\u2014and betake themselves to the bestial embraces of those who are\ngiven wholly to riot and debauchery as if they were dogs or goats.\n\n8. Some men, either unable or unwilling to mount themselves into their\nsaddles through infirmity or laziness, teach their horses to fall upon\ntheir knees, and in that posture to receive their riders. In like\nmanner there are some persons who, having married young ladies not\nless considerable for the nobility of their birth than their wealthy\ndowries, take little care themselves to improve the advantages of such\na splendid conjunction, but with a severe moroseness labor to depress\nand degrade their wives, proud of the mastery and vaunting in domestic\ntyranny. Whereas in this case it becomes a man to use the reins of\ngovernment with as equal regard to the quality and dignity of the woman\nas to the stature of the horse.\n\n9. We behold the moon then shining with a full and glorious orb, when\nfarthest distant from the sun; but, as she warps back again to meet\nher illustrious mate, the nearer she makes her approach, the more she\nis eclipsed until no longer seen. Quite otherwise, a woman ought to\ndisplay the charms of her virtue and the sweetness of her disposition\nin her husband\u2019s presence, but in his absence to retire to silence and\nreservedness at home.\n\n10. Nor can we approve the saying of Herodotus, that a woman lays\naside her modesty with her shift. For surely then it is that a chaste\nwoman chiefly vails herself with bashfulness, when, in the privacies\nof matrimonial duties, excess of love and maiden reverence become the\nsecret signals and testimonies of mutual affection.\n\n11. As in musical concords, when the upper strings are so tuned as\nexactly to accord, the base always gives the tone; so in well-regulated\nand well-ordered families, all things are carried on with the\nharmonious consent and agreement of both parties, but the conduct and\ncontrivance chiefly redounds to the reputation and management of the\nhusband.\n\n12. It is a common proverb, that the sun is too strong for the north\nwind; for the more the wind ruffles and strives to force a man\u2019s upper\ngarment from his back, the faster he holds it, and the closer he wraps\nit about his shoulders. But he who so briskly defended himself from\nbeing plundered by the wind, when once the sun begins to scald the air,\nall in a dropping sweat is then constrained to throw away not only\nhis flowing garment but his tunic also. This puts us in mind of the\npractice of most women, who, being limited by their husbands in their\nextravagances of feasting and superfluities of habit, presently fill\nthe house with noise and uproar; whereas, if they would but suffer\nthemselves to be convinced by reason and soft persuasion, they would of\nthemselves acknowledge their vanity and submit to moderation.\n\n13. Cato ejected a certain Roman out of the senate for kissing his\nwife in the presence of his daughter. It is true, the punishment was\nsomewhat too severe; but if kissing and colling and hugging in the\nsight of others be so unseemly, as indeed it is, how much more indecent\nis it to chide and brawl and maunder one at another while strangers\nare in company? If lawful familiarity and caresses between man and\nwife are not to be allowed but in their private retirements, shall the\nbitter interchanges and loud discoveries of invective and inconsiderate\npassion be thought an entertainment pleasingly proper for unconcerned\nand public ears?\n\n14. As there is little or no use to be made of a mirror, though in a\nframe of gold enchased with all the sparkling variety of the richest\ngems, unless it render back the true similitude of the image it\nreceives; so is there nothing of profit in a wealthy dowry, unless the\nconditions, the temper, the humor of the wife be conformable to the\nnatural disposition and inclination of the husband, and he sees the\nvirtues of his own mind exactly represented in hers. Or, if a fair and\nbeautiful mirror that makes a sad and pensive visage look jocund and\ngay, or a wanton or smiling countenance show pensive and mournful,\nis therefore presently rejected as of no value; thus may not she be\nthought an angry, peevish, and importunate woman, that louts and\nlowers upon the caresses of a husband, and when he courts the pastime\nof her affections, entertains him with frumps and taunts, but when she\nfinds him serious in business, allures him then with her unseasonable\ntoyings to pleasure and enjoyment? For the one is an offence of\nimpertinency, the other a contempt of her husband\u2019s kindness. But,\nas geometricians affirm that lines and surfaces are not moved of\nthemselves, but according to the motions of the bodies to which they\nbelong, so it behooves a woman to challenge no peculiar passion or\naffection as her own, but to share with her husband in business, in his\nrecreations, in his cares, and in his mirth.\n\n15. As they who are offended to see their wives eat and drink freely\nin their company do but whet their appetites to glut and gormandize in\ncorners by themselves; so they who refuse to frolic in retirement with\ntheir wives, or to let them participate of their private pastimes and\ndalliances, do but instruct them to cater for their own pleasures and\ndelights.\n\n16. The Persian kings, when they contain themselves within the limits\nof their usual banquets, suffer their married wives to sit down at\ntheir tables; but when they once design to indulge the provocations\nof amorous heats and wine, then they send away their wives, and call\nfor their concubines, their gypsies, and their songstresses, with\ntheir lascivious tunes and wanton galliards. Wherein they do well, not\nthinking it proper to debauch their wives with the tipsy frolics and\ndissolute extravagances of their intemperance.\n\nIf therefore any private person, swayed by the unruly motions of his\nincontinency, happen at any time to make a trip with a kind she-friend\nor his wife\u2019s chambermaid, it becomes not the wife presently to lower\nand take pepper in the nose, but rather to believe that it was his\nrespect to her which made him unwilling she should behold the follies\nof ebriety and foul intemperance.\n\n17. Princes that be addicted to music increase the number of excellent\nmusicians; if they be lovers of learning, all men strive to excel in\nreading and in eloquence; if given to martial exercises, a military\nardor rouses straight the drowsy sloth of all their subjects. Thus\nhusbands effeminately finical only teach their wives to paint and\npolish themselves with borrowed lustre. The studious of pleasure render\nthem immodest and whorish. On the other side, men of serious, honest,\nand virtuous conversations make sober, chaste, and prudent wives.\n\n18. A young Lacedaemonian lass, being asked by an acquaintance of hers\nwhether she had yet embraced her husband, made answer, No; but that he\nhad embraced her. And after this manner, in my opinion, it behooves an\nhonest woman to behave herself toward her husband, never to shun nor\nto disdain the caresses and dalliances of his amorous inclinations,\nwhen he himself begins; but never herself to offer the first occasion\nof provocation. For the one savors of impudent harlotry, the other\ndisplays a female pride and imperiousness void of conjugal affection.\n\n19. It behooves a woman not to make peculiar and private friendships of\nher own, but to esteem only her husband\u2019s acquaintance and familiars\nas hers. Now as the Gods are our chiefest and most beneficial friends,\nit behooves her to worship and adore only those Deities which her\nhusband reputes and reverences for such. But as for quaint opinions and\nsuperstitious innovations, let them be exterminated from her outermost\nthreshold. For no sacrifices or services can be acceptable to the Gods,\nperformed by women, as it were, by stealth and in secret, without the\nknowledge of the husband.\n\n20. Plato asserts those cities to be the most happy and best regulated\nwhere these expressions, \u201cThis is mine,\u201d \u201cThis is not mine,\u201d are\nseldomest made use of. For that then the citizens enjoy in common, so\nfar as is convenient, those things that are of greatest importance. But\nin wedlock those expressions are utterly to be abolished. For as the\nphysicians say that the right side being bruised or beaten communicates\nits pain to the left; so indeed the husband ought to sympathize in the\nsorrows and afflictions of the woman, and much more does it become the\nwife to be sensible of the miseries and calamities of the husband;\nto the intent that, as knots are made fast by knitting the bows of a\nthread one within another, so the ligaments of conjugal society may\nbe strengthened by the mutual interchange of kindness and affection.\nThis Nature herself instructs us, by mixing us in our bodies; while\nshe takes a part from each, and then blending the whole together\nproduces a being common to both, to the end that neither may be able\nto discern or distinguish what was belonging to another, or lay claim\nto assured propriety. Therefore is community of estate and purses\nchiefly requisite among married couples, whose principal aim it ought\nto be to mix and incorporate their purchases and disbursements into\none substance, neither pretending to call this hers or that his, but\naccounting all inseparably peculiar to both. However, as in a goblet\nwhere the proportion of water exceeds the juice of the grape, yet still\nwe call the mixture wine; in like manner the house and estate must be\nreputed the possession of the husband, although the woman brought the\nchiefest part.\n\n21. Helen was covetous, Paris luxurious. On the other side, Ulysses was\nprudent, Penelope chaste. Happy therefore was the match between the\nlatter; but the nuptials of the former brought an Iliad of miseries as\nwell upon the Greeks as barbarians.\n\n22. The question being put by some of his friends to a certain Roman,\nwhy he had put away his wife, both sober beautiful, chaste, and rich,\nthe gentleman, putting forth his foot and showing his buskin, said:\nIs not this a new, handsome, complete shoe?\u2014yet no man but myself\nknows where it pinches me. Therefore ought not a woman to boast either\nof her dower, her parentage, or beauty; but in such things as most\ndelight a husband, pleasantness of converse, sweetness of disposition,\nand briskness of humor, there to show nothing of harshness, nothing\ndistasteful, nothing offensive, but from day to day to study behavior\njocund, blithe, and conformable to his temper. For as physicians are\nmuch more afraid of fevers that proceed from hidden causes, which\nhave been by little and little contracting for a long time together,\nthan those that receive their nourishment from apparent and manifest\nunconcoctions; thus, if daily continued, the petty snubs and frumps\nbetween man and wife, though perhaps unknown to others, are of that\nforce that above all things else they canker conjugal affection, and\ndestroy the pleasure of cohabitation.\n\n23. King Philip so far doted on a fair Thessalian lady, that she\nwas suspected to have used some private arts of fascination towards\nhim. Wherefore Olympias labored to get the supposed sorceress into\nher power. But when the queen had viewed her well, and duly examined\nher beauty, beheld the graces of her deportment, and considered her\ndiscourse bespake her no less than a person of noble descent and\neducation; Hence, fond suspicions, hence vainer calumnies! said she,\nfor I plainly find the charms which thou makest use of are in thyself.\nCertainly therefore a lawful wife surpasses the common acceptation\nof happiness when, without enhancing the advantages of her wealth,\nnobility, and form, or vaunting the possession of Venus\u2019s cestus\nitself, she makes it her business to win her husband\u2019s affection by her\nvirtue and sweetness of disposition.\n\n24. Another time the same Olympias, understanding that a young courtier\nhad married a lady, beautiful indeed, but of no good report, said:\nSure, the Hotspur had little brains, otherwise he would never have\nmarried with his eyes. For they are fools who in the choice of a wife\nbelieve the report of their sight or fingers; like those who telling\nout the portion in their thoughts take the woman upon content, never\nexamining what her conditions are, or whether she is proper to make him\na fit wife or no?\n\n25. Socrates was wont to give this advice to young men that accustomed\nthemselves to their mirrors:\u2014if ill-favored, to correct their deformity\nby the practice of virtue; if handsome, not to blemish their outward\nform with inward vice. In like manner, it would not be amiss for a\nmistress of a family, when she holds her mirror in her hands, to\ndiscourse her own thoughts:\u2014if deformed, thus, Should I prove lewd\nand wicked too?\u2014on the other side, thus the fair one, What if chaste\nbeside? For it adds a kind of veneration to a woman not so handsome,\nthat she is more beloved for the perfections of her mind than the\noutside graces of her body.\n\n26. Dionysius, the tyrant of Sicily, sent several costly presents of\nrich apparel, necklaces, and bracelets to the daughters of Lysander,\nwhich however the father would never permit the virgins to accept,\nsaying: These gaudy presents will procure more infamy than honor to\nmy daughters. And indeed, before Lysander, Sophocles in one of his\ntragedies had uttered the following sentence to the same effect:\n\n    Mistake not, silly wretch; this pompous trim\n    Rather disgraces than proclaims thee great,\n    And shows the rage of thy lascivious heat.\n\nFor, as Crates said, that is ornament which adorns; and that adorns\na woman which renders her more comely and decent. This is an honor\nconferred upon her, not by the lustre of gold, the sparkling of\nemeralds and diamonds, nor splendor of the purple tincture, but by the\nreal embellishments of gravity, discretion, humility, and modesty.\n\n27. They who offer to Juno as the Goddess of Wedlock never consecrate\nthe gall with the other parts of the sacrifice, but having drawn\nit forth, they cast it behind the altar. Which constitution of the\nlawgiver fairly implies that all manner of passionate anger and\nbitterness of reproach should be exterminated from the thresholds of\nnuptial cohabitation. Not but that a certain kind of austerity becomes\nthe mistress of a family; which however should be like that of wine,\nprofitable and delightful, not like aloes, biting and medicinally\nungrateful to the palate.\n\n28. Plato observing the morose and sour humor of Xenocrates, otherwise\na person of great virtue and worth, admonished him to sacrifice to\nthe Graces. In like manner, I am of opinion that it behooves a woman\nof moderation to crave the assistance of the Graces in her behavior\ntowards her husband, thereby (according to the saying of Metrodorus) to\nrender their society mutually harmonious to each other, and to preserve\nher from being waspishly proud, out of a conceit of her fidelity and\nvirtue. For it becomes not a frugal woman to be neglectful of decent\nneatness, nor one who has great respect to her husband to refrain\ncomplacency in her conversation; seeing that, as the over-rigid humor\nof a wife renders her honesty irksome, so sluttery begets a hatred of\nher sparing and pinching housewifery.\n\n29. She who is afraid to laugh or to appear merry and gay before her\nhusband, for fear of waking his jealousy, may be said to resemble one\nthat forbears to anoint herself at all, lest she should be thought\nto use unnecessary or harlotry perfumes, or that neglects to wash\nher face, to avoid the suspicion of painting. Thus we find that\npoets and orators, who desire to shun the tiring tediousness of a\nlow, vulgar, and drowsy style, ingeniously labor to detain and move\nboth their readers and their auditors by the quaintness of their\ninvention, grandeur of the subject, and lively representation of the\nhumors and conditions which they bring upon the stage. From whence a\ndiscreet mistress of a family may likewise learn to avoid all manner of\nover-nice curiosity and squeamish affectation, all excess of jollity\nsavoring of the courtesan, and every thing tending to profuse pomp; but\nshe will rather employ all her wit and art in exhibiting to her husband\nall the graces of life and character, accustoming him to honesty and\ndecency joined with pleasure and delight. Nevertheless, if there be any\nwoman so severe and reserved by nature that no means can be found to\nmake her blithe and sportive, it behooves her husband to give way to\nher temper; and, as Phocion answered Antipater, who commanded him to\ndo an ill thing that misbecame his quality, I cannot be thy friend and\nflatter thee at one and the same time, in like manner ought a man to\nrest satisfied with the virtues of a chaste wife, though her serious\ndisposition will not permit her to act the airy part of a mistress.\n\n30. The Egyptian women were anciently never wont to wear shoes, to the\nend they might accustom themselves to stay at home. But altogether\ndifferent is the humor of our women; for they, unless allowed their\njewels, their bracelets, and necklaces, their gaudy vestments, gowns,\nand petticoats, all bespangled with gold, and their embroidered\nbuskins, will never stir abroad.\n\n31. Theano, as she was dressing herself one morning in her chamber, by\nchance discovered some part of her naked arm. Upon which, one of the\ncompany crying out, Oh, what a lovely arm is there!\u2014\u2019Tis very true,\nsaid she, but yet not common. Thus ought a chaste and virtuous woman\nnot only to keep her naked arms from open view, but to lock up her\nvery words and set a guard upon her lips, especially in the company of\nstrangers, since there is nothing which sooner discovers the qualities\nand conditions of a woman than her discourse.\n\n32. Phidias made the statue of Venus at Elis with one foot upon the\nshell of a tortoise, to signify two great duties of a virtuous woman,\nwhich are to keep at home and be silent. For she is only to speak to\nher husband, or by her husband. Nor is she to take amiss the uttering\nher mind in that manner, through another more proper organ.\n\n33. Princes and kings honor themselves in giving honor to philosophers\nand learned men. On the other side, great personages admired and\ncourted by philosophers are no way honored by their flatteries, which\nare rather a prejudice and stain to the reputation of those that use\nthem. Thus it is with women, who in honoring and submitting to their\nhusbands win for themselves honor and respect, but when they strive to\nget the mastery, they become a greater reproach to themselves than to\nthose that are so ignominiously henpecked. But then again, it behooves\na husband to control his wife, not as a master does his vassal, but as\nthe soul governs the body, with the gentle hand of mutual friendship\nand reciprocal affection. For as the soul commands the body, without\nbeing subject to its pleasures and inordinate desires, in like manner\nshould a man so exercise his authority over his wife, as to soften it\nwith complaisance and kind requital of her loving submission.\n\n34. Philosophers assert that, of bodies which consist of several\nparts, some are composed of parts distinct and separate, as a navy\nor army royal; others of contiguous parts, as a house or a ship; and\nothers of parts united at the first conception, equally partaking of\nlife and motion and growing together, as are the bodies of all living\ncreatures. Thus, where people wed for pure affection, that marriage\nmay be said to resemble those bodies whose parts are solidly fixed\ntogether. They who marry for the sake of great portions, or else\ndesirous of offspring, are like to bodies whose parts are contiguous\nand cleave close to one another; and they who only bed together,\nif there be any such, resemble bodies whose parts are distinct and\nwithout dependency. Now, as physicians say that liquids are the only\nbodies which most easily intermix without any difference of propriety\nor respect one with another; so should it be said of people joined\ntogether in matrimony, that there is a perfect mixture of bodies and\nestates, of friends and relations. Therefore the Roman law prohibits\nnew married people from giving and receiving mutual presents one from\nanother; not that they should not participate one with another, but to\nshow that they were not to enjoy any thing but what they possess in\ncommon.\n\n35. In Leptis, a city of Libya, it was an ancient custom for the bride,\nthe next day after the nuptial solemnity, to send home to the mother of\nthe bridegroom to borrow a boiler, which she not only refused to lend,\nbut sent back word that she had none to spare; to the end that the\nnew married woman, having by that means tried the disposition of her\nmother-in-law, if afterwards she found her humor peevish and perverse,\nmight with more patience brook her unkindness, as being no more\nthan what she expected. Rather it becomes the daughter to avoid all\noccasions of distaste. For it is natural to some mothers to be jealous\nthat the wife deprives her of that filial tenderness which she expects\nfrom her son. For which there is no better cure than for a wife so to\ncontrive the gaining of her husband\u2019s love as not to lessen or withdraw\nhis affection from his mother.\n\n36. It is generally observed that mothers are fondest of their sons, as\nexpecting from them their future assistance when they grow into years,\nand that fathers are kindest to their daughters, as standing most in\nneed of their paternal succor. And perhaps, out of that mutual respect\nwhich the man and his wife bear one to another, either of them would\nseem to carry greater affection for that which is proper and familiar\nto the other. But this pleasing controversy is easily reconciled. For\nit becomes a woman to show the choicest of her respects and to be more\ncomplaisant to the kindred of her husband than to her own; to make her\ncomplaints to them, and conceal her discontents from her own relations.\nFor the trust which she reposes in them causes them to confide in her,\nand her esteem of them increases their respects to her.\n\n37. The commanders of the Grecian auxiliaries that marched in aid of\nCyrus gave these instructions to their soldiers, that, if their enemies\nadvanced whooping and hallowing to the combat, they should receive the\ncharge, observing an exact silence; but on the other side, if they\ncame on silently, then to rend the air with their martial shouts. Thus\nprudent wives, when their husbands in the heat of their passion rant\nand tear the house down, should make no returns, but quietly hold\ntheir peace; but if they only frown out their discontents in moody\nanger, then, with soft language and gently reasoning the case, they may\nendeavor to appease and qualify their fury.\n\n38. Rightly therefore are they reprehended by Euripides, who introduce\nthe harp and other instruments of music at their compotations. For\nmusic ought rather to be made use of for the mitigation of wrath and\nto allay the sorrows of mourning, not to heighten the voluptuousness\nof those that are already drowned in jollity and delight. Believe\nyourselves then to be in an error that sleep together for pleasure,\nbut when angry and at variance make two beds, and that never at that\ntime call to your assistance the Goddess Venus, who better than any\nother knows how to apply a proper remedy to such distempers; as Homer\nteaches us, where he brings in Juno using this expression:\n\n    Your deadly feuds will I myself appease,\n    And th\u2019 amorous bed shall be the charming place\n    Where all your strife shall in embracing cease.[231]\n\n39. Though it becomes a man and his wife at all times to avoid all\noccasions of quarrelling one with another, yet is there no time so\nunseasonable for contention as when they are between the same sheets.\nAs the woman in difficult labor said to those that were about to lay\nher upon her bed; How, said she, can this bed cure these pains, since\nit was in this very bed that my pleasures were the cause of all my\nthroes? And still less will those reproaches and contests which the bed\nproduces be reconciled at any other time or place.\n\n40. Hermione seems to be in the right, speaking to this effect in one\nof the tragedies of Euripides:\n\n    The lewd discourse of women void of shame\n    Ruined my honor and my virtuous name.[232]\n\nHowever, these mischiefs rarely happen but where women at variance and\njealous of their husbands open not only their door but their ears to\nwhole swarms of twattling gossips, that widen the difference. For then\nit behooves a prudent woman to shut her ears and beware of listening to\nsuch enchanting tattlers, calling to mind the answer of Philip, when\nhe was exasperated by his friends against the Greeks for cursing and\nreviling him, notwithstanding all the benefits they had received at\nhis hands: What would they have done, said he, had we used them with\nunkindness and severity? The same should be the reply of a prudent\nwoman to those she-devils, when they bewail her condition, and cry, A\nwoman so loving, so chaste and modest, and yet abused by her husband!\nFor then should she make answer, What would he do, should I begin to\nhate him and to do him wrong?\n\n41. A certain master, whose slave had been run away from him for\nseveral months together, after a long search at length found him\nsuddenly in a workhouse, and said, Where could I have desired to meet\nwith thee more to my wish than in such a place as this? Thus, when a\nwoman is grown jealous of her husband and meditates nothing but present\ndivorce, before she be too hasty, let her reason with herself in this\nmanner: In what condition would my rival choose to see me with greater\nsatisfaction than as I am, all in a fret and fume, enraged against my\nhusband, and ready to abandon both my house and marriage-bed together?\n\n42. The Athenians yearly solemnized three sacred seed-times: the first\nin Scirus, in memory of the first invention by their ancestors of\nploughing and sowing; the second at a place called Rharia; and the\nthird under Pelis, which they call \u0392\u03bf\u03c5\u03b6\u03cd\u03b3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd in commemoration of the\nfirst spanning of oxen to the plough. But more sacred than all these\nis the nuptial ploughing and sowing, in order to the procreation of\nchildren. And therefore Sophocles rightly calls Venus the fruitful\nCytherea. For which reason it highly imports both the man and the\nwoman, when bound together by the holy tie of wedlock, to abstain from\nall unlawful and forbidden copulation, and from ploughing and sowing\nwhere they never desire to reap any fruit of their labor, or, if the\nharvest come to perfection, they conceal and are ashamed to own it.\n\n43. The orator Gorgias, in a full assembly of the Grecians, resorting\nfrom all parts to the Olympic games, making an oration to the people,\nwherein he exhorted them to live in peace, unity, and concord among\none another, Melanthus cried out aloud: This man pretends to give us\nadvice, and preaches here in public nothing but love and union, who in\nhis own private family is not able to keep his wife and his maid from\nbeing continually together by the ears, and yet there are only they\nthree in the house. For it seems that Gorgias had a kindness for his\nservant, which made her mistress jealous. And therefore it behooves\nthat man to have his family in exquisite order who will undertake\nto regulate the failing of his friends or the public miscarriages,\nespecially since the misbehavior of men toward their wives is far\nsooner divulged among the people than the transgressions of women\nagainst their husbands.\n\n44. It is reported that the scent of sweet perfumes will make a cat\ngrow mad. Now, supposing those strong perfumes which are used by many\nmen should prove offensive to their wives, would it not be a great\npiece of unnatural unkindness to discompose a woman with continual fits\nrather than deny himself a pleasure so trivial? But when it is not\ntheir husbands\u2019 perfuming themselves, but their lascivious wandering\nafter lewd and extravagant women, that disturbs and disorders their\nwives, it is a great piece of injustice, for the tickling pleasure of a\nfew minutes, to afflict and disquiet a virtuous woman. For since they\nwho are conversant with bees will often abstain from women, to prevent\nthe persecution of those little but implacable enemies of unclean\ndalliance, much rather ought a man to be pure from the pollutions of\nharlotry, when he approaches his chaste and lawful wife.\n\n45. They whose business it is to manage elephants never put on white\nfrocks, nor dare they that govern wild bulls appear in red, those\ncreatures being scared and exasperated by those colors. And some report\nthat tigers, when they hear a drum beat afar off, grow mad and exercise\ntheir savage fury upon themselves. If then there are some men that are\noffended at the gay and sumptuous habit of their wives, and others that\nbrook as ill their gadding to plays and balls, what reason is there\nthat women should not refrain those vanities rather than perplex and\ndiscontent their husbands, with whom it becomes their modesty to live\nwith patience and sobriety.\n\n46. What said a woman to King Philip, that pulled and hauled her to him\nby violence against her will? Let me go, said she, for when the candles\nare out, all women are alike. This is aptly applied to men addicted to\nadultery and lust. But a virtuous wife, when the candle is taken away,\nought then chiefly to differ from all other women. For when her body is\nnot to be seen, her chastity, her modesty, and her peculiar affection\nto her husband ought then to shine with their brightest lustre.\n\n47. Plato admonishes old men to carry themselves with most gravity in\nthe presence of young people, to the end the awe of their example may\nimprint in youth the greater respect and reverence of age. For the\nloose and vain behavior of men stricken in years breeds a contempt of\ngray hairs, and never can expect veneration from juvenility. Which\nsober admonition should instruct the husband to bear a greater respect\nto his wife than to all other women in the world, seeing that the\nnuptial chamber must be to her either the school of honor and chastity\nor that of incontinency and wantonness. For he that allows himself\nthose pleasures that he forbids his wife, acts like a man that would\nenjoin his wife to oppose those enemies to which he has himself already\nsurrendered.\n\n48. As to what remains, in reference to superfluity of habit and decent\nhousehold furniture, remember, dear Eurydice, what Timoxenas has\nwritten to Aristylla.\n\nAnd do you, Pollianus, never believe that women will be weaned from\nthose toys and curiosities wherein they take a kind of pride, and which\nserve for an alleviation of their domestic solitude, while you yourself\nadmire the same things in other women, and are taken with the gayety\nof golden beakers, magnificent pictures for your houses, and rich\ntrappings for your mules and horses. For it were a strange moroseness\nto debar a woman those ornamental vanities which naturally her sex\nadmire, nor will it easily be endured without regret, where she sees\nthe man much more indulgent to his own humor.\n\nSince then thou art arrived at those years which are proper for the\nstudy of such sciences as are attained by reason and demonstration,\nendeavor to complete this knowledge by conversing with persons that\nmay be serviceable to thee in such a generous design. And as for thy\nwife, like the industrious bee, gather everywhere from the fragrant\nflowers of good instruction, replenish thyself with whatever may be\nof advantage to her, and impart the same to her again in loving and\nfamiliar discourse, both for thy own and her improvement.\n\n    For father thou and mother art to her;\n    She now is thine, and not the parent\u2019s care.[233]\n\nNor is it less to thy commendation to hear what she returns:\n\n    And you, my honored husband, are my guide\n    And tutor in philosophy beside,\n    From whose instructions I at once improve\n    The fruits of knowledge and the sweets of love\n\nFor such studies as these fix the contemplations of women upon what is\nlaudable and serious, and prevent their wasting time upon impertinent\nand pernicious vanity. For that lady that is studious in geometry will\nnever affect the dissolute motions of dancing. And she that is taken\nwith the sublime notions of Plato and Xenophon will look with disdain\nupon the charms and enchantments of witches and sorcerers; and if any\nridiculous astrologer promises to pull the moon down from the sky,\nshe will laugh at the ignorance and folly of the women who believe in\nhim, being herself well grounded in astronomy, and having heard about\nAganice, the daughter of Hegetor, a Thessalian lord, who understanding\nthe reason of the eclipses of the moon, and knowing beforehand the time\nof her being obscured by the shadow of the earth, made the credulous\nwomen believe that it was she who at those times unhinged the moon and\nremoved her from the sky.\n\nTrue it is, that never any woman brought forth a perfect child\nwithout the assistance and society of man, but there are many whose\nimaginations are so strongly wrought upon by the sight or bare relation\nof monstrous spectacles, that they bring into the world several\nsorts of immature and shapeless productions. Thus, unless great care\nbe taken by men to manure and cultivate the inclinations of their\nwives with wholesome and virtuous precepts, they often breed among\nthemselves the false conceptions of extravagant and loose desires.\nBut do thou, Eurydice, make it thy business to be familiar with the\nlearned proverbs of wise and learned men, and always to embellish\nthy discourse with their profitable sentences, to the end thou mayst\nbe the admiration of other women, that shall behold thee so richly\nadorned without the expense or assistance of jewels or embroideries.\nFor pearls and diamonds are not the purchase of an ordinary purse; but\nthe ornaments of Theano, Cleobuline, Gorgo the wife of King Leonidas,\nTimoclea the sister of Theagenes, the ancient Roman Claudia, or\nCornelia the daughter of Scipio,\u2014already so celebrated and renowned\nfor their virtues,\u2014will cost but little, yet nothing will set thee out\nmore glorious or illustrious to the world, or render thy life more\ncomfortable and happy. For if Sappho, only because she could compose\nan elegant verse, had the confidence to write to a haughty and wealthy\ndame in her time\n\n    Dead thou shalt lie forgotten in thy tomb,\n    Since not for thee Pierian roses bloom,[234]\n\nwhy may it not be much more lawful for thee to boast those great\nperfections that give thee a greater privilege, not only to gather the\nflowers, but to reap the fruits themselves, which the Muses bestow upon\nthe lovers and real owners of learning and philosophy?\n\n\nEND OF VOL. II.\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[1] See Section 7, where the form of the dialogue shows that Plutarch\ncounted Anacharsis among the Seven, and left out Periander. (G.)\n\n[2] Hesiod, Works and Days, 744.\n\n[3] Il. IV. 261.\n\n[4] \u1f0c\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bc\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1, \u1f04\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03a0\u03af\u03c4\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6, \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2 \u039c\u03b9\u03c4\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2\n\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n[5] Hesiod, Works and Days, 41.\n\n[6] Il. V. 341.\n\n[7] \u039c\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f04\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd, _Ne quid nimis_.\n\n[8] Called \u03ba\u03c5\u03c8\u03ad\u03bb\u03b7 in Greek, whence the child was named Cypselus. (G.)\n\n[9] Il. XI. 542.\n\n[10] Il. X. 249; Odyss. VIII. 351.\n\n[11] Il. VI. 282.\n\n[12] Odyss. IV. 230; Il. XIV. 216.\n\n[13] Il. VI. 130.\n\n[14] See. Il. XX. 57.\n\n[15] From Aeschylus. The whole passage is quoted in Plato\u2019s Republic,\nend of Book II. (G.)\n\n[16] Odyss. XI. 228.\n\n[17] Il. XXII. 210.\n\n[18] Il. IV. 84.\n\n[19] From the Niobe of Aeschylus, Frag. 151.\n\n[20] Odyss. XXIV. 11.\n\n[21] Odyss. XI. 72.\n\n[22] Il. XVI. 856.\n\n[23] Eurip. Iph. Aul. 1218.\n\n[24] Eurip. Phoeniss. 524.\n\n[25] From Menander.\n\n[26] Odyss. VI. 148.\n\n[27] Il. II. 189.\n\n[28] Il. I. 24.\n\n[29] Il. I. 225.\n\n[30] Il. I. 223.\n\n[31] Il. XXIII. 24.\n\n[32] Odyss. VIII. 329.\n\n[33] Il. VIII. 198.\n\n[34] Il. IV. 104.\n\n[35] Odyss. VIII. 249 and 492.\n\n[36] Il. XV. 82.\n\n[37] Il. VIII. 358.\n\n[38] Il. VI. 188; Odyss. VI. 46; Il. XXIV. 526.\n\n[39] Theognis, vss. 177, 178.\n\n[40] Odyss. IV. 197; Il. XXIV. 526.\n\n[41] Il. V. 352.\n\n[42] Odyss. XVIII. 333.\n\n[43] Soph. Oed. Tyr. 2.\n\n[44] Eurip. Phoeniss. 1006.\n\n[45] Il. VII. 329.\n\n[46] Il. III. 276.\n\n[47] Il. I. 3 and 5.\n\n[48] From Euripides.\n\n[49] Hesiod, Works and Days, 86.\n\n[50] Hesiod, Works and Days, 717.\n\n[51] Il. XXIV. 527; VII. 69; Odyss. VIII. 81.\n\n[52] Il. XI. 540.\n\n[53] Hesiod, Works and Days, 289.\n\n[54] Il. XI. 90.\n\n[55] Il. XX. 242; Hesiod, Works and Days, 313.\n\n[56] Hesiod, Works and Days, 287.\n\n[57] Odyss. XIX. 360.\n\n[58] Odyss. IV. 93.\n\n[59] Eurip. Medea, 598; Phoeniss. 549.\n\n[60] From the Aeolus of Euripides.\n\n[61] Il. XVI. 97; Odyss. XI. 421; Il. IX. 452; Il. III. 365.\n\n[62] For this and the four following quotations, see Il. I. 59, 90,\n220, 349; IX. 458\n\n[63] Odyss. VI. 254.\n\n[64] Odyss. XVIII. 282.\n\n[65] Odyss. XIII. 216.\n\n[66] Hesiod, Works and Days, 744; Il. IV. 306.\n\n[67] Eurip. Hippol. 424.\n\n[68] For this and the five following quotations, see Il. I. 163; II.\n226; I. 128; II. 281; IV. 402 and 404.\n\n[69] Il. IV. 357. For the four following, see Il. IX. 34 and 70; IV.\n431; X. 325.\n\n[70] Il. VII. 215. For the three following, see Il. II. 220; VII. 226\nand 231.\n\n[71] See Aristophanes, Frag. 397.\n\n[72] Il. XI. 313. For the four following, see Odyss. III. 52; Il. XXIV.\n560 and 584; Odyss. XVI. 274.\n\n[73] Il. III. 320; XVI. 233.\n\n[74] Il. VI. 444; XVII. 671.\n\n[75] Il. XIII. 354.\n\n[76] Odyss. III. 20; Il. XXIII. 570; XVII. 170.\n\n[77] Il. VI. 160; Odyss. III. 265.\n\n[78] Il. XVI. 422; XIII. 121.\n\n[79] See note on the same passage of Aeschylus (Sept. 591), vol. I. p.\n210. (G.)\n\n[80] Il. XXIII. 297.\n\n[81] From the Aeolus of Euripides, Frag. 19.\n\n[82] Eurip. Electra, 428.\n\n[83] Eurip. Iphig. Aul. 29.\n\n[84] From the Chrysippus of Euripides, Frag. 838.\n\n[85] From Menander.\n\n[86] Hesiod, Works and Days, 348.\n\n[87] The word here used (\u1f40\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd) denotes a game among the\nGrecians, which Suidas describes to be the setting of quails in a round\ncompass or ring, and striking at the heads of them; and he that in the\nring struck down one had liberty to strike at the rest in order, but he\nthat missed was obliged to set up quails for others; and this they did\nby turns.\n\n[88] From the Aeolus of Euripides, Frag. 20.\n\n[89] Il. III. 39; XVII. 142.\n\n[90] Il. II. 173; VII. 47; XIX. 216; XI. 608.\n\n[91] Il. I. 225; XXIII. 483 and 474-479; XIII. 824.\n\n[92] Il. XXI. 331.\n\n[93] Il. V. 428; XI. 543.\n\n[94] Hesiod, Works and Days, 40 and 266.\n\n[95] The first two quotations are from Euripides (the first from his\nCresphontes); the other two are from unknown tragic poets. (G.)\n\n[96] Thucyd. I. 42.\n\n[97] Hesiod, Theogony, 64.\n\n[98] Eurip. Ion, 732.\n\n[99] Eurip. Hippol. 218.\n\n[100] Odyss. XXII. I.\n\n[101] Odyss. XVI. 181.\n\n[102] Soph. Antigone, 523.\n\n[103] Il. XI. 643; Odyss. IV. 178.\n\n[104] Il. VIII. 281; Odyss. I. 65; Il. VII. 109.\n\n[105] Thucyd. III. 82.\n\n[106] Plat. Repub. V. 474 D.\n\n[107] Il. X. 249.\n\n[108] Eurip. Alcestis, 1159, and elsewhere in Euripides.\n\n[109] Il. XVI. 141.\n\n[110] From the Myrmidons of Aeschylus, Frag. 131.\n\n[111] Odyss. X. 329.\n\n[112] Eurip. Phoeniss. 472.\n\n[113] Il. XIV. 195.\n\n[114] From the Ino of Euripides, Frag. 416.\n\n[115] From the Erechtheus of Euripides, Frag. 364.\n\n[116] Il. XIV. 84.\n\n[117] Il. XI. 654.\n\n[118] Il. XVI. 33.\n\n[119] Il. II. 215.\n\n[120] \u039b\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, the Releaser. See Pind. Frag. 124.\n\n[121] Eurip. Orestes, 667.\n\n[122] Eurip. Ion, 732.\n\n[123] See Demosth. Ol. II. p. 24, 3.\n\n[124] See Il. IX. 108.\n\n[125] Odyss. I. 157.\n\n[126] Aristophanes, Acharn. 503.\n\n[127] Thucyd. I. 70.\n\n[128] From Euripides, \u1f0c\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f30\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2, \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f15\u03bb\u03ba\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b2\u03c1\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n[129] Il. XI. 313; VIII. 234.\n\n[130] Il. IX. 461.\n\n[131] Il. XIII. 116; V. 171.\n\n[132] Eurip. Phoeniss. 1688; Hercules Furens, 1250.\n\n[133] Il. V. 800.\n\n[134] II. 464.\n\n[135] Il. VI. 347.\n\n[136] Il. VI. 326.\n\n[137] Il. IX. 109.\n\n[138] Odyss. XXII. 6.\n\n[139] Odyss. VIII. 246, 248.\n\n[140] Odyss. IV. 605.\n\n[141] Aeschylus, Suppliants, 770.\n\n[142] Soph. Oed. Tyr. 1169, 1170.\n\n[143] From the Thamyras of Sophocles, Frag. 225.\n\n[144] Eurip. Hippol. 75.\n\n[145] Eurip. Aeolus, Frag. 23.\n\n[146] Pindar, Pyth. I. 25.\n\n[147] From the Cressae of Euripides, Frag. 470.\n\n[148] Odyss. VIII. 173.\n\n[149] See Il. V. 341.\n\n[150] Odyss. V. 410.\n\n[151] Il. XXII. 390.\n\n[152] Eurip. Hecuba, 422.\n\n[153] Il. IX. 408\n\n[154] Il. VII. 99.\n\n[155] Eurip. Hippol. 193.\n\n[156] Il. V. 514 and 515.\n\n[157] Herod. VII. 46.\n\n[158] See Livy, I. 9, 12.\n\n[159] See Varro, Ling. Lat. V. 84: Quod in Latio capite velato erant\nsemper, ac caput cinctum habebant _filo_, _flamines_ dicti. Festus, s.\nv. Flamen Dialis: Flamen, quasi _filamen_. (G.)\n\n[160] Il. XV. 198.\n\n[161] For an account of the various titles of Fortune at Rome, see\nPreller, R\u00f6mische Mythologie, X. \u00a7 1; and Plutarch on the Fortune of\nthe Romans, \u00a7\u00a7 5, 10. (G.)\n\n[162] From Sophocles, Frag. 786.\n\n[163] See the word \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 (probably corrupt) in Liddell and\nScott\u2019s Greek Lexicon. (G.)\n\n[164] Called \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03ba\u03af\u03b1. See above, Question 18. (G.)\n\n[165] Il. XV. 453.\n\n[166] Hesiod, Works and Days, 708.\n\n[167] Hesiod, Works and Days, 45.\n\n[168] Odyss. IV. 74.\n\n[169] See Il. XXIII. 259.\n\n[170] Pindar, Olymp. IX. 58.\n\n[171] Il. IV. 370 and 405.\n\n[172] Soph. Trachin. 442.\n\n[173] Il. XVI. 847.\n\n[174] Il. I. 128; IX. 328; XVI. 70.\n\n[175] Demosthenes on the Crown, p. 260, 1; p. 307, 9.\n\n[176] Il. XXII. 379.\n\n[177] Demosthenes on the Crown, p. 325, 22.\n\n[178] Odyss. XVI. 187.\n\n[179] Il. XXIII. 673 and 670.\n\n[180] Odyss. XII. 192; IX. 228.\n\n[181] From the Philoctetes of Euripides, Frag. 785 and 787.\n\n[182] See Vol. 1. p. 91.\n\n[183] Il. I. 260.\n\n[184] Il. VI. 127.\n\n[185] Odyss. XII. 209.\n\n[186] See Demosthenes on the Crown, p. 270, 3.\n\n[187] See Boeckh\u2019s dissertation _Ueber die Bildung der Weltseele im\nTimaeos des Platon_, now reprinted in his Kleine Schriften, III. pp.\n109-180. For the passages relating to music, see Westphal\u2019s _Harmonik\nund Melop\u00f6ie der Griechen_, pp. 134-136. See also the note prefixed to\nPlutarch on Music, vol. I. p. 102. (G.).\n\n[188] Timaeus, p. 35 A-B.\n\n[189] Timaeus, p. 34 B.\n\n[190] Timaeus, p. 36 E.\n\n[191]\n\n[Illustration]\n\n              *\n            *   *\n          *   *   *\n        *   *   *   *\n      *   *   *   *   *\n    *   *   *   *   *   *\n  *   *   *   *   *   *   *\n\nSee note on Platonic Questions, No. V. \u00a7 2. Thirty-six is called the\ntriangular of eight, because a triangle thus made of thirty-six points\nwill have eight points on each side. (G.)\n\n[192] That is, in the quaternary, \u00a7 11. See the diagram, p. 339. (G.)\n\n[193] Timaeus, p. 36 A.\n\n[194] Timaeus, p. 37 A.\n\n[195] Timaeus, p. 52 D.\n\n[196] Timaeus, p. 35 B.\n\n[197] X. p. 617 B.\n\n[198] \u1f0d\u03c1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd \u03be\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f45\u03b4\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\n[199] See Boeckh\u2019s note on Pindar, Frag. 8. The quotation from Pindar\nis corrupt; but the sense given above is derived from other quotations\nof the same passage. (G.)\n\n[200] This epistolary discourse was wrote against an ill-bred sort of\nphilosophers who neither would take the charge of education of great\npersons themselves, nor would suffer others to do it. Tho\u2019 the author\nseems here only to vindicate his friend, it is in truth an apology for\nhimself, who bred up an emperor, and spent most part of his time (to\ngood purpose) in the greatest court in the world. This and several\nother of his moral discourses seems to be hastily dictated, so that\nthere is no great choice in his words or measure in his periods, or\nstrict method in the whole. However, the treasure of ancient learning\nand good sense which is to be found in him, as it was frequently made\nuse of by the most eloquent Greek Fathers, so is it sufficient to\nrecommend his works to all lovers of learning and good manners. (K. C.)\n\nMuch of this version is a mere paraphrase. (G.)\n\n[201] Odyss. XVII. 487.\n\n[202] Eurip. Hippol. 102.\n\n[203] From the Veiled Hippolytus of Euripides, Frag. 431.\n\n[204] From the Niobe of Aeschylus, Frag. 153.\n\n[205] Almost the same words with those of our Saviour, It is more\nblessed to give than to receive. So that a man can scarcely be a true\nEpicurean without practising some of the maxims of Christianity.\n\n[206] Aglaia, Euphrosyne, and Thalia.\n\n[207] From the Autolycus, a lost Satyrdrama of Euripides, Frag. 284,\nvs. 22. (G.)\n\n[208] Il. VII. 44 and 58.\n\n[209] Odyss. XI. 278.\n\n[210] Aristophanes, Knights, 79.\n\n[211] From Sophocles, Frag. 786.\n\n[212] See Aeschylus, Suppliants, 937.\n\n[213] From the Theseus of Euripides, Frag. 383.\n\n[214] Soph. Electra, 724.\n\n[215] Soph. Oed. Tyr. 1169 and 1170.\n\n[216] Eurip. Orestes, 213.\n\n[217] Eurip. Iph. Taur. 569.\n\n[218] Hesiod, Works and Days, 361.\n\n[219] From Sophocles, Frag. 757.\n\n[220] Thucyd. I. 18.\n\n[221] Odyss. XVI. 187.\n\n[222] Odyss. VI. 187; XXIV. 402.\n\n[223] Republic, IX. p. 571 C.\n\n[224] From Chaeremon, Frag. 2.\n\n[225] Soph. Oed. Tyr. 110.\n\n[226] From the Prometheus Released of Aeschylus, Frag. 188.\n\n[227] Odyss. VIII. 246.\n\n[228] Hesiod, Works and Days, 86.\n\n[229] Olynth. I. p. 16, 1.\n\n[230] Hesiod, Works and Days, 705.\n\n[231] II. XIV. 205 and 209.\n\n[232] Eurip. Andromache, 930.\n\n[233] See Il. VI. 429.\n\n[234] Sappho, Frag. 68 (Bergk).\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. 2 (of 5) : $b Comprising all his works collected under the title of \"Morals\"","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":185175}