<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi1254.phi001.perseus-eng1:2.10-2.24</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi1254.phi001.perseus-eng1:2.10-2.24</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div type="translation" xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:latinLit:phi1254.phi001.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" n="2" subtype="book"><div type="textpart" n="10" subtype="chapter"><head>X</head><milestone unit="section" n="10arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>The meaning of <hi rend="italic">favisae Capitolinae;</hi> and what Marcus Varro replied to Servius Sulpicius, who asked him about that term.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>SERVIUS SULPICIUS, an authority on civil law and a man well versed in letters, wrote

<note>p. 140, Bremer. </note>
to Marcus Varro and asked him to explain the meaning of a term which was used in the records of the censors; the term in question was <hi rend="italic">favisae Capitolinae.</hi> Varro wrote in reply

<note>p. 199, Bipont.</note>
that he recalled that Quintus Catulus, when in charge of the restoration of the Capitol,

<note>After the destruction of the temple by fire in 83 B.C. In spite of Caesar's opposition (Suet. <hi rend="italic">Jul.</hi> xv), Catulus dedicated the new temple in 69 B. C.</note>
had said that it had been his desire to lower the area Capitolina,

<note>The open space in front of and around the temple of Jupiter.</note>
in order that the ascent to the temple might have more steps and that the podium might be higher, to correspond with the elevation and size of the pediment

<note>Sulla and Catulus in their restorations of the Capitoline temple used columns that were taller than those of the earlier building. Catulus wished to make the podium (or elevated platform) higher, to correspond with the greater elevation and size of the pediment (or gable). This he could have done most easily by lowering the area about the temple.</note>
; but that he had been unable to carry out his plan because the <hi rend="italic">favisae</hi> had prevented. These, he said, were certain underground chambers and cisterns in the area, in which  <pb n="v1.p.153"/>  it was the custom to store ancient statues that had fallen from the temple, and some other consecrated objects from among the votive offerings. And then Varro goes on to say in the same letter, that he had never found any explanation of the term <hi rend="italic">favisae</hi> in literature, but that Quintus Valerius Soranus used to assert that what we called by their Greek name <hi rend="italic">thesauri</hi> (treasuries) the early Latins termed <hi rend="italic">favisae,</hi> their reason being that there was deposited in them, not uncoined copper and silver, but stamped and minted money. His theory therefore was, he said, that the second letter had dropped out of the word <hi rend="italic">flavisae,</hi> and that certain chambers and pits, which the attendants of the Capitol used for the preservation of old and sacred objects, were called <hi rend="italic">favisae.</hi>

<note>For original <hi rend="italic">flavisae,</hi> from <hi rend="italic">flare.</hi> Minted or coined money had to be softened or melted before being cast or struck, and for this process the word <hi rend="italic">isflare;</hi> hence the directors of the mint were called Triumviri Auro Argento Aere Flando Feriundo, where <hi rend="italic">aere</hi> is of course an old dative. <hi rend="italic">Favisa</hi> is apparently for <hi rend="italic">*fovisa</hi> and cognate with <hi rend="italic">forea,</hi> <quote>pit.</quote></note>
</p></div><div type="textpart" n="11" subtype="chapter"><head>XI</head><milestone unit="section" n="11arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>Numerous important details about Sicinius Dentatus, the distinguished warrior.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>WE read in the annals that Lucius Sicinius Dentatus, who was tribune of the commons in the consulship of Spurius Tarpeius and Aulus Aternius,

<note>454 B.C.</note>
was a warrior of incredible energy; that he won a name for his exceeding great valour, and was called the Roman Achilles. It is said that he fought with the enemy in one hundred and twenty battles, and had not a scar on his back, but forty-five in front; that golden crowns were given him eight  <pb n="v1.p.155"/>  times, the siege crown once, mural crowns three times, and civic crowns fourteen times; that eighty-three neck-chains were awarded him, more than one hundred and sixty armlets, and eighteen spears; he was presented besides with twenty-five decorations

<note>The Romans awarded a great variety of military prizes, which are here enumerated, for the most part, in descending order of importance. <hi rend="italic">Phalerae</hi> were discs of metal worn on the breast like medals, or sometimes on the harness of horses; the spears were <hi rend="italic">hastae purae,</hi> unused (hence <quote>bloodless</quote> ) and perhaps sometimes headless weapons, although they are represented with heads on two tombstones (Cagnat et Chapot, <hi rend="italic">Arch. Rom.</hi> ii, p. 359, and <hi rend="italic">Bonner Jahrbücher,</hi> 114 (1905), Plate 1, Fig. 4). Besides golden crowns without a particular designation, there were others which are enunerated and described in v. 6.</note>
; he had a number of spoils of war,

<note>The armour of the defeated antagonist; cf. Livy xxii. 6. 5. etc.</note>
many of which were won in single combat; he took part with his generals in nine triumphal processions.</p></div><div type="textpart" n="12" subtype="chapter"><head>XII</head><milestone unit="section" n="12arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>A law of Solon, the result of careful thought and consideration, which at first sight seems unfair and unjust, but on close examination is found to be altogether helpful and salutary.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>AMONG those very early laws of Solon which were inscribed upon wooden tablets at Athens, and which, promulgated by him, the Athenians ratified by penalties and oaths, to ensure their permanence, Aristotle says

<note>Cf. <foreign xml:lang="grc">Pol. )Aqhn.</foreign> 8.</note>
that there was one to this effect: <quote>If because of strife and disagreement civil dissension shall ensue and a division of the people into two parties, and if for that reason each side, led by their angry feelings, shall take up arms and fight, then if anyone at that time, and in such a condition of civil discord, shall not ally himself with one or the other faction, but by himself and apart shall hold aloof from the common calamity of the State, let hint be deprived of his home, his country, and all his property, and be an exile and an outlaw.</quote></p><pb n="v1.p.157"/><p>When I read this law of Solon, who was a man of extraordinary wisdom, I was at first filled with something like great amazement, and I asked myself why it was that those who had held themselves aloof from dissension and civil strife were thought to be deserving of punishment. Then those who had profoundly and thoroughly studied the purpose and meaning of the law declared that it was designed, not to increase, but to terminate, dissension. And that is exactly so. For if all good men, who have been unequal to checking the dissension at the outset, do not abandon the aroused and frenzied people, but divide and ally themselves with one or the other faction, then the result will be, that when they have become members of the two opposing parties, and, being men of more than ordinary influence, have begun to guide and direct those parties, harmony can best be restored and established through the efforts of such men, controlling and soothing as they will the members of their respective factions, and desiring to reconcile rather than destroy their opponents.</p><p>The philosopher Favorinus thought that this same course ought to be adopted also with brothers, or with friends, who are at odds; that is, that those who are neutral and kindly disposed towards both parties, if they have had little influence in bringing about a reconciliation because they have not made their friendly feelings evident, should then take sides, some one and some the other, and through this manifestation of devotion pave the way for restoring harmony. <quote>But as it is,</quote> said he, <quote>most of the friends of both parties make a merit of abandoning the two disputants, leaving them to the tender  <pb n="v1.p.159"/>  mercies of ill-disposed or greedy advisers, who, animated by hatred or by avarice, add fuel to their strife and inflame their passions.</quote></p></div><div type="textpart" n="13" subtype="chapter"><head>XIII</head><milestone unit="section" n="13arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>That the early writers used <hi rend="italic">liberi</hi> in the plural number even of a single son or daughter. </p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>The early orators and writers of history or of poetry called even one son or daughter <hi rend="italic">liberi,</hi> using the plural. And I have not only noticed this usage at various times in the works of several other of the older writers, but I just now ran across it in the fifth book of Sempronius Asellio's <hi rend="italic">History.</hi>

<note>Fr. 6, Peter.</note>
This Asellio was military tribune under Publius Scipio Africanus at Numantia and wrote a detailed account of the events in whose action he himself took part.</p><p>His words about Tiberius Gracchus, tribune of the commons, at the time when he was killed on the Capitol, are as follows: <quote>For whenever Gracchus left home, he was never accompanied by less than three or four thousand men.</quote> And farther on he wrote thus of the same Gracchus: <quote>He began to beg that they would at least defend him and his children (<hi rend="italic">liberi</hi>); and then he ordered that the one male child which he had at that time should be brought out, and almost in tears commended him to the protection of the people.</quote></p></div><div type="textpart" n="14" subtype="chapter"><head>XIV</head><milestone unit="section" n="14arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>That Marcus Cato, in the speech entitled <hi rend="italic">Against the Exile Tiberius,</hi> says <hi rend="italic">stitisses vadimonium</hi> with an <hi rend="italic">i,</hi> and not <hi rend="italic">stetisses;</hi> and the explanation of that word.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>IN an old copy of the speech of Marcus Cato, which is entitled <hi rend="italic">,Against the Exile Tiberius,</hi><note>xliii. Jordan.</note>
we find  <pb n="v1.p.161"/>  the following words: <quote>What if with veiled head you had kept your recognizance?</quote> Cato indeed wrote <hi rend="italic">stitisses,</hi> correctly; but revisers have boldly and falsely written an <hi rend="italic">e</hi> and put <hi rend="italic">stelisses</hi> in all the editions, on the ground that <hi rend="italic">stitisses</hi> is an unmeaning and worthless reading. Nay, it is rather they themselves that are ignorant and worthless, in not knowing that Cato wrote <hi rend="italic">stitisses</hi> because <hi rend="italic">sisteretur</hi> is used of recognizance, not <hi rend="italic">staretur.</hi></p></div><div type="textpart" n="15" subtype="chapter"><head>XV</head><milestone unit="section" n="15arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>To what extent in ancient days it was to old age in particular that high honours were paid; and why it was that later those same honours were extended to husbands and fathers; and in that connection some provisions of the seventh section of the Julian law.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>AMONG the earliest Romans, as a rule, neither birth nor wealth was more highly honoured than age, but older men were reverenced by their juniors almost like gods and like their own parents, and everywhere and in every kind of honour they were regarded as first and of prior right. From a dinner-party, too, older men were escorted home by younger men, as we read in the records of the past, a custom which, as tradition has it, the Romans took over from the Lacedaemonians, by whom, in accordance with the laws of Lycurgus, greater honour on all occasions was paid to greater age.</p><p>But after it came to be realised that progeny were a necessity for the State, and there was occasion to add to the productivity of the people by premiums and other inducements, then in certain respects greater deference was shown to men who had a wife, and to those who had children, than to older  <pb n="v1.p.163"/>  men who had neither wives nor children. Thus in chapter seven of the Julian law

<note>In 18 B.C. Augustus proposed a law <hi rend="italic">de maritandis ordinibus,</hi>imposing liabilities on the unmarried and offering rewards to those who married and reared children. It was violently opposed, but was finally passed in a modified form. See Suet. <hi rend="italic">Aug.</hi> xxxiv. In A.D. 9 the lex Papia Poppaea, called from the consules suffecti of the year, was added. The combined <hi rend="italic">Lex Iulia et Papia Poppaea</hi> contained at least 35 chapters (<hi rend="italic">Dig.</hi> 23. 2. 19). </note>
priority in assuming the emblems of power is given, not to the elder of the consuls, but to him who either has more children tinder his control than his colleague, or has lost them in war. But if both have an equal number of children, the one who has a wife, or is eligible for marriage, is preferred. If, however, both are married and are fathers of the same number of children, then the standard of honour of early times is restored, and the elder is first to assume the rods. But when both consuls are without wives and have the same number of sons, or are husbands but have no children, there is no provision in that law as to age. However, I hear that it was usual for those who had legal priority to yield the rods for the first month to colleagues who were either considerably older than they, or of much higher rank, or who were entering upon a second consulship.</p></div><div type="textpart" n="16" subtype="chapter"><head>XVI</head><milestone unit="section" n="16arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>Sulpicius Apollinaris' criticism of Caesellius Vindex for his explanation of a passage in Virgil. </p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>VIRGIL has the following lines in the sixth book:

<note>760 ff.</note><quote rend="blockquote"><l>Yon princeling, thou beholdest leaning there</l><l>Upon a bloodless

<note>See note 1, p. 155.</note>
lance, shall next emerge</l><l>Into the realms of day. He is the first</l><l>Of half-Italian strain, thy last-born heir,</l><l>To thine old age by fair Lavinia given,</l><pb n="v1.p.165"/><l>Called Silvius, a royal Alban name</l><l>(Of sylvan birth and sylvan nurture he),</l><l>A king himself and sire of kings to come,</l><l>By whom our race in Alba Longa reign.</l></quote></p><p>It appeared to Caesellius that there was utter inconsistency between  <quote rend="blockquote"><l>thy last-born heir</l></quote>  and  <quote rend="blockquote"><l>To thine old age by fair Lavinia given,</l><l part="I">Of sylvan birth.</l></quote>  For if, as is shown by the testimony of almost all the annals, this Silvius was born after the death of Aeneas, and for that reason was given the forename Postumus, with what propriety does Virgil add:  <quote rend="blockquote"><l>To thine old age by fair Lavinia given,</l><l part="I">Of sylvan birth?</l></quote>  For these words would seem to imply that while Aeneas was still living, but was already an old man, a son Silvius was born to him and was reared. Therefore Caesellius, in his <hi rend="italic">Notes on Early Readings,</hi> expressed the opinion that the meaning of the words was as follows: <quote><hi rend="italic">Postuma proles,</hi></quote> said he, <quote>does not mean a child born after the death of his father, but the one who was born last; this applies to Silvius, who was born late and after the usual time, when Aeneas was already an old man.</quote> But Caesellius names no adequate authority for this version, while that Silvius was born, as I have said, after Aeneas' death, has ample testimony.</p><p>Therefore Sulpicius Apollinaris, among other criticisms of Caesellius, notes this statement of his as  <pb n="v1.p.167"/>  an error, and says that the cause of the error is the phrase <hi rend="italic">quem tibi longaevo. <quote>Longaevo,</quote></hi> he says, <quote>does not mean 'when old,' for that is contrary to historical truth, but rather ' admitted into a life that is now long and unending, and made immortal.' For Anchises, who says this to his son, knew that after Aeneas had ended his life among men he would be immortal and a local deity, and enjoy a long and everlasting existence.</quote> Thus Apollinaris, ingeniously enough. But yet a <quote>long life</quote> is one thing, and an <quote>unending life</quote> another, and the gods are not called <quote>of great age,</quote> but <quote>immortal.</quote></p></div><div type="textpart" n="17" subtype="chapter"><head>XVII</head><milestone unit="section" n="17arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>Marcus Cicero's observations on the nature of certain prepositions; to which is added a discussion of the particular matter which Cicero had observed.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>AFTER careful observation Marcus Tullius noted that the prepositions <hi rend="italic">in</hi> and <hi rend="italic">con,</hi> when prefixed to nouns and verbs, are lengthened and prolonged when they are followed by the initial letters of <hi rend="italic">sapiens</hi> and <hi rend="italic">felix;</hi> but that in all other instances they are pronounced short.</p><p>Cicero's words are:

<note><hi rend="italic">Orator,</hi> § 159.</note>
<quote>Indeed, what can be more elegant than this, which does not come about from a natural law, but in accordance with a kind of usage? we pronounce the first vowel in <hi rend="italic">indoctus</hi> short, in <hi rend="italic">insanus</hi> long; in <hi rend="italic">immanis</hi> short, in <hi rend="italic">infelix</hi> long; in brief, in compound words in which the first letters are those which begin <hi rend="italic">sapiens</hi> and <hi rend="italic">felix</hi> the prefix is pronounced long, in all others short; thus we have conposuit but cōnsuevit, cŏncrepuit  <pb n="v1.p.169"/>  but <hi rend="italic">cōnficit.</hi> Consult the rules of grammar and they will censure your usage; refer the matter to your ears and they will approve. Ask why it is so; they will say that it pleases them. And language ought to gratify the pleasure of the ear.</quote></p><p>In these words of which Cicero spoke it is clear that the principle is one of euphony, but what are we to say of the preposition <hi rend="italic">pro?</hi> For although it is often shortened or lengthened, yet it does not conform to this rule of Marcus Tullius. For it is not always lengthened when it is followed by the first letter of the word <hi rend="italic">fecit,</hi> which Cicero says has the effect of lengthening the prepositions <hi rend="italic">in</hi> and <hi rend="italic">con.</hi> For we pronounce <hi rend="italic">prŏficisci, prŏfugere, prŏfundere, prŏfannu</hi> and <hi rend="italic">prŏfestumn</hi> with the first vowel short, but <hi rend="italic">prōferre, prōfligare</hi> and <hi rend="italic">prōficere</hi> with that syllable long. Why is it then that this letter, which, according to Cicero's observation, has the effect of lengthening, does not have the same effect by reason of rule or of euphony in all words of the same kind,

<note>That is beginning with <hi rend="italic">f.</hi></note>
but lengthens the vowel in one word and shortens it in another.</p><p>Nor, as a matter of fact, is the particle <hi rend="italic">con</hi> lengthened only when followed by that letter which Cicero mentioned: for both Cato and Sallust say <quote xml:lang="la">faenoribus copertus est.</quote>

<note>He is loaded with debt; Fr. 50, Jordan; Sail <hi rend="italic">Hist.</hi> iv. 52, Maurenbrecher.</note>
Moreover <hi rend="italic">cōligatus</hi> and <hi rend="italic">cōnexus</hi> are pronounced long.</p><p>But after all, in these cases which I have cited one can see that this particle is lengthened because the letter <hi rend="italic">n</hi> is dropped; for the loss of a letter is compensated by the lengthening of the syllable. This principle is observed also in the word <hi rend="italic">cōgo;</hi> and it is no contradiction that we pronounce <hi rend="italic">cŏegi</hi>  <pb n="v1.p.171"/>  short; for this form cannot be derived from <hi rend="italic">cōgo</hi> without violation of the principle of analogy.

<note>For <quote>analogy</quote> in this sense of <quote>regularity,</quote> see ii. 25. Gellius thought that <hi rend="italic">coegi</hi> was an irregular form because <hi rend="italic">oē</hi> did not contract, as <hi rend="italic">oi</hi> did in <hi rend="italic">cogo;</hi> but contraction of unlike vowels did not take place when the second was long; cf. <hi rend="italic">coāctus.</hi> Cicero's rule is correct, because a vowel is naturally long before <hi rend="italic">ns</hi> and <hi rend="italic">nf.</hi> The case of <hi rend="italic">pro</hi> is quite different. The <hi rend="italic">ō</hi> in <hi rend="italic">cōpertus</hi> is due to contraction from <hi rend="italic">co-opertus. Cōligatus</hi> is a very rare form; Skutsch, quoted by Hosius, thought it might come from <hi rend="italic">co-alligatus.</hi> The <hi rend="italic">ō</hi> in <hi rend="italic">cogo</hi> is also due to contraction (<hi rend="italic">co-ago, co-igo</hi>), which does not apply to the perfect <hi rend="italic">coegi.</hi> Compensatory lengthening takes place usually when an <hi rend="italic">s</hi> is lost, as in <hi rend="italic">cōnecto</hi> for <hi rend="italic">co-snecto,</hi> or <hi rend="italic">n</hi> before <hi rend="italic">s</hi> and <hi rend="italic">f;</hi> less commonly when <hi rend="italic">nc</hi> is lost before n.</note>
</p></div><div type="textpart" n="18" subtype="chapter"><head>XVIII</head><milestone unit="section" n="18arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>That Phaedo the Socratic was a slave; and that several others also were of that condition.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>PHAEDO of Elis belonged to that famous Socratic band and was on terms of close intimacy with Socrates and Plato. His name was given by Plato to that inspired dialogue of his on the immortality of the soul. This Phaedo, though a slave, was of noble person and intellect,

<note>It must be remembered that the slaves of the Greeks and Romans were often freeborn children, who had been cast off by their parents, or free men, who had been taken prisoner in war. Phaedo belonged to the latter class, and the details of his life are very uncertain.</note>
and according to some writers, in his boyhood was driven to prostitution by his master, who was a pander. We are told that Cebes the Socratic, at Socrates' earnest request, bought Phaedo and gave him the opportunity of studying philosophy. And he afterwards became a distinguished philosopher, whose very tasteful discourses on Socrates are in circulation.</p><p>There were not a few other slaves too who afterwards became famous philosophers, among them that Menippus whose works Marcus Varro emulated

<note>The word implies, not merely imitation, but rivalry, a recognized principle in classic literature; see <hi rend="italic">Revue des Études Latines,</hi> II. (1924), pp. 46ff.</note>
in those satires which others call <quote>Cynic,</quote> but he himself, <quote>Menippean.</quote>

<note>See note 1, p. 85.</note>
</p><pb n="v1.p.173"/><p>Besides these, Pompylus, the slave of the Peripatetic Theophrastus, and the slave of the Stoic Zeno who was called Persaeus, and the slave of Epicurus whose name was Mys, were philosophers of repute.

<note>I. 438, Arn. </note>
</p><p>Diogenes the Cynic also served as a slave, but he was a freeborn man, who was sold into slavery. When Xeniades of Corinth wished to buy him and asked whether he knew any trade, Diogenes replied: <quote>I know how to govern free men.</quote>

<note>The word for free men and children is the same (<hi rend="italic">liberi</hi>), but it seems impossible to reproduce the word play in English.</note>
Then Xeniades, in admiration of his answer, bought him, set him free, and entrusting to him his own children, said: <quote>Take my children to govern.</quote></p><p>But as to the well-known philosopher Epictetus, the fact that he too was a slave is too fresh in our memory to need to be committed to writing, as if it had been forgotten.</p></div><div type="textpart" n="19" subtype="chapter"><head>XIX</head><milestone unit="section" n="19arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>On the nature of the verb <hi rend="italic">rescire;</hi> and its true and distinctive meaning.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>I HAVE observed that the verb <hi rend="italic">rescire</hi> has a peculiar force, which is not in accord with the general meaning of other words compounded with that same preposition; for we do not use <hi rend="italic">rescire</hi> in the same way that we do <hi rend="italic">rescribere</hi> (write in reply), <hi rend="italic">relegere</hi> (reread), <hi rend="italic">restituere</hi> (restore), . . . and <hi rend="italic">substituere</hi> (put in the place of);

<note>As <hi rend="italic">substituere</hi> does not contain <hi rend="italic">re-,</hi> it seems clear that there is a lacuna before that word, but it seems impossible to fill the gap.</note>
but <hi rend="italic">rescire</hi> is properly said of one who learns of something that is hidden, or unlooked for and unexpected.</p><pb n="v1.p.175"/><p>But why the particle <hi rend="italic">re</hi> has this special force in this one word alone, I for my part am still inquiring. For I have never yet found that <hi rend="italic">rescivi</hi> or <hi rend="italic">rescire</hi> was used by those who were careful in their diction, otherwise than of things which were purposely concealed, or happened contrary to anticipation and expectation; although <hi rend="italic">scire</hi> itself is used of everything alike, whether favourable or unfavourable, unexpected or expected. Thus Naevius in the <hi rend="italic">Triphallus</hi> wrote:

<note>v. 96, Ribbeck<hi rend="sup">3</hi></note>
<quote rend="blockquote"><l>If ever I discover (<hi rend="italic">rescivero</hi>) that my son</l><l>Has borrowed money for a love affair,</l><l>Straightway I'll put you where you'll spit no more.

<note>Literally, <quote>spit down</quote> into one's bosom, referring to he wooden fork about the slave's neck which would prevent his, and to spitting as a charm for averting evil.</note>
</l></quote>  Claudius Quadrigarius in the first book of his <hi rend="italic">Annals</hi> says:

<note>Fr. 16, Peter.</note>
<quote>When the Lucanians discovered (<hi rend="italic">resciverunt</hi> ) that they had been deceived and tricked.</quote> And again in the same book Quadrigarius uses that word of something sad and unexpected:

<note>Fr. 19, Peter. </note>
<quote>When this became known to the relatives (<hi rend="italic">rescierunt provinqui</hi>) of the hostages, who, as I have pointed out above, had been delivered to Pontius, their parents and relatives rushed into the street with hair in disarray.</quote> Marcus Cato writes in the fourth book of the <hi rend="italic">Origins:</hi>

<note>Fr. 87, Peter.</note>
<quote>Then next day the dictator orders the master of the horse to be summoned: I will send you, if you wish, with the cavalry.' It is too late,' said the master of the horse, 'they have found it out already (<hi rend="italic">rescicere</hi>).'</quote></p></div><pb n="v1.p.177"/><div type="textpart" n="20" subtype="chapter"><head>XX</head><milestone unit="section" n="20arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>That for what we commonly call <hi rend="italic">virvaria</hi> the earlier writers did not use that term; and what Publius Scipio used for this word in his speech to the people, and afterwards Marcus Varro in his work <hi rend="italic">On Farming.</hi></p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>IN the third book of his treatise <hi rend="italic">On Farming,</hi><note>iii. 3. 1.</note>
Marcus Varro says that the name <hi rend="italic">leporaria</hi> is given to certain enclosures, now called <hi rend="italic">vivaria,</hi> in which wild animals are kept alive and fed. I have appended Varro's own words: <quote>There are three means of keeping animals on the farm—bird houses, <hi rend="italic">leporaria</hi> (warrens), and fish-ponds. I am now using the term <hi rend="italic">ornithones</hi> of all kinds of birds that are ordinarily kept within the walls of the farmhouse. <hi rend="italic">Leporaria</hi> I wish you to understand, not in the sense in which our remote ancestors used the word, of places in which only hares are kept, but of all enclosures which are connected with a farm-house and contain live animals that are fed.</quote> Farther on in the same book Varro writes:

<note>iii. 3. 8.</note>
<quote>When you bought the farm at Tusculum from Marcus Piso, there were many wild boars in the <hi rend="italic">leporarium.</hi></quote></p><p>But the word <hi rend="italic">vivaria,</hi> which the common people now use—the Greek <foreign xml:lang="grc">para\de/isoi</foreign>

<note>The word means an enclosed park, handsomely laid ou and stocked with game; also, a garden, and in Septuagint <hi rend="italic">Gen.</hi> 2. 8, the garden of Eden, Paradise.</note>
and Varro's <hi rend="italic">leporaria</hi>—I do not recall meeting anywhere in the older literature. But as to the word <hi rend="italic">roboraria,</hi> which we find in the writings of Scipio, who used the purest diction of any man of his time, I have heard several learned men at Rome assert that this means what we call <hi rend="italic">vivaria</hi> and that the name came from the <quote>oaken</quote> planks of which the enclosures were made, a kind of enclosure which we see in many places in Italy. This is the passage  <pb n="v1.p.179"/>  from Scipio's fifth oration <hi rend="italic">Against Claudius Asellus:</hi>

<note><hi rend="italic">Orato. Rom. Frag.</hi> p. 184, Myer<hi rend="sup">2</hi>.</note>
<quote>When he had seen the highly-cultivated fields and well-kept farmhouses, he ordered them to set up a measuring rod on the highest spot in that district; and from there to build a straight road, in some places through the midst of vineyards, in others through the <hi rend="italic">roborarium</hi> and the fish-pond, in still others through the farm buildings.</quote></p><p>Thus we see that to pools or ponds of water in which live fish are kept in confinement, they gave their own appropriate name of <hi rend="italic">piscinae,</hi> or <quote>fishponds.</quote></p><p><hi rend="italic">Apiaria</hi> too is the word commonly used of places in which bee-hives are set; but I recall almost no one of those who have spoken correctly who has used that word either in writing or speaking. But Marcus Varro, in the third book of his treatise <hi rend="italic">On Farming,</hi> remarks:

<note>iii. 16. 12.</note>
<quote>This is the way to make <foreign xml:lang="grc">melissw=nes,</foreign> which some call <hi rend="italic">mellaria,</hi> or 'places for storing honey.'</quote> But this word which Varro used is Greek; for they say <foreign xml:lang="grc">melissw=nes,</foreign> just as they do <foreign xml:lang="grc">a)mpelw=nes</foreign> (vineyards) and <foreign xml:lang="grc">dafnw=nes</foreign> (laurel groves).</p></div><div type="textpart" n="21" subtype="chapter"><head>XXI</head><milestone unit="section" n="21arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>About the constellation which the Greeks call <foreign xml:lang="grc">a(/maca</foreign> and the Romans <hi rend="italic">septentriones;</hi> and as to the origin and meaning of both those words.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>SEVERAL of us, Greeks and Romans, who were pursuing the same studies, were crossing in the same boat from Aegina to the Piraeus. It was night, the sea was calm, the time summer, and the sky  <pb n="v1.p.181"/>  bright and clear. So we all sat together in the stern and watched the brilliant stars. Then those of our company who were acquainted with Grecian lore discussed with learning and acumen such questions as these: what the <foreign xml:lang="grc">a(/maca,</foreign> or <quote>Wain,</quote> was, and what Boötes, which was the Great, and which the Little Bear and why they were so called; in what direction that constellation moved in the course of the advancing night, and why Homer says

<note><hi rend="italic">Iliad,</hi> xviii. 489; <hi rend="italic">Odyss.</hi> v. 275 <foreign xml:lang="grc">)/Arkton</foreign> . . . <foreign xml:lang="grc">oi)/h d'</foreign> <foreign xml:lang="grc">a)/mmoro/s e)sti loetrw=n )Wkeanoi=o.</foreign></note>
that this is the only constellation that does not set, in view of the fact that there are some other stars that do not set.</p><p>Thereupon I turned to our compatriots and said: <quote>Why don't you barbarians tell me why we give the name of <hi rend="italic">septentriones</hi> to what the Greeks call <foreign xml:lang="grc">a(/maca.</foreign> Now ' because we see seven stars' is not a sufficient answer, but I desire to be informed at some length,</quote> said I, <quote>of the meaning of the whole idea which we express by the word <hi rend="italic">septentriones.</hi></quote></p><p>Then one of them, who had devoted himself to ancient literature and antiquities, replied: "The common run of grammarians think that the word <hi rend="italic">septentriones</hi> is derived solely from the number of stars. For they declare that <hi rend="italic">triones</hi> of itself has no meaning, but is a mere addition to the word; just as in our word <hi rend="italic">quinquatrus,</hi> so called because five is the number of days after the Ides,

<note>The <hi rend="italic">quinquatrtus,</hi> or festival of Minerva, was so called because it came on the fifth day after the Ides (fifteenth) of March.</note>
<hi rend="italic">atrus</hi> means nothing. But for my part, I agree with Lucius Aelius

<note>Fr. 42, Fun.</note>
and Marcus Varro,

<note><hi rend="italic">De Ling. Lat.</hi> vii. 4. 74.</note>
who wrote that oxen were called <hi rend="italic">triones,</hi> a rustic term it is true, as if they were <hi rend="italic">terriones,</hi>

<note>A word made up from <hi rend="italic">terra,</hi> <quote>earth</quote> ; the derivation is a fanciful one. <hi rend="italic">Triones</hi> is connected with <hi rend="italic">tero,</hi> <quote>rub, tread,</quote> etc.</note>
that is to say, adapted to  nominibus regionibusque docere nos ipse vellet,  <pb n="v1.p.183"/>  ploughing and cultivating the earth. Therefore this constellation, which the early Greeks called <foreign xml:lang="grc">a(/maca</foreign> merely from its form and position, because it seemed to resemble a wagon, the early men also of our country called <hi rend="italic">septentriones,</hi> from oxen yoked together, that is, seven stars by which yoked oxen (<hi rend="italic">triones</hi>) seem to be represented. After giving this opinion, Varro further added," said he, <quote>that he suspected that these seven stars were called <hi rend="italic">triones</hi> rather for the reason that they are so situated that every group of three neighbouring stars forms a triangle, that is to say, a three-sided figure.</quote></p><p>Of these two reasons which he gave, the latter seemed the neater and the more ingenious; for as we looked at that constellation, it actually appeared to consist of triangles.

<note>This is true, whatever the origin of the name.</note>
</p></div><div type="textpart" n="22" subtype="chapter"><head>XXII</head><milestone unit="section" n="22arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>Information about the wind called Iapyx and about the names and quarters of other winds, derived from the discourses of Favorinus.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>AT Favorinus' table, when he dined with friends, there was usually read either an old song of one of the lyric poets, or something from history, now in Greek and now in Latin. Thus one day there was read there, in a Latin poem,

<note>Perhaps Horace, <hi rend="italic">Odes,</hi> i. 3. 4 or iii. 27. 20. Gellius mentions Horace by name only once, in § 25, below.</note>
the word <hi rend="italic">Iapyx,</hi> the name of a wind, and the question was asked what wind this was, from what quarter it blew, and what was the origin of so rare a term; and we also asked Favorinus to be so good as to inform us about the names and quarters of the other winds,  <pb n="v1.p.185"/>  since there was no general agreement as to their designations, positions or number.</p><p>Then Favorinus ran on as follows: <quote>It is well known,</quote> said he, " that there are four quarters and regions of the heavens—east, west, south and north. East and west are movable and variable points;

<note>Since the Latin terms for <quote>east</quote> and <quote>west</quote> mean the sun's <quote>rising</quote> and <quote>setting.</quote></note>
south and north are permanently fixed and unalterable. For the sun does not always rise in exactly the same place, but its rising is called either <hi rend="italic">equinoctial</hi> when it runs the course which is called <foreign xml:lang="grc">i)shmerino/s</foreign> (with equal days and nights), or <hi rend="italic">solsticial,</hi> which is equivalent to <foreign xml:lang="grc">qerinai\ tropai/</foreign> (summer turnings), or <hi rend="italic">brumal,</hi> which is the same as <foreign xml:lang="grc">xeimerinai\ tropai/,</foreign> or 'winter turnings.' So too the sun does not always set in the same place; for in the same way its setting is called <hi rend="italic">equinoctial, solstitial,</hi> or <hi rend="italic">brumal.</hi> Therefore the wind which blows from the sun's spring, or <hi rend="italic">equinoctial,</hi> rising is called <hi rend="italic">eurus,</hi> a word derived, as your etymologists say, from the Greek which means ' that which flows from the east.' This wind is called by the Greeks by still another name, <foreign xml:lang="grc">a)fhliw/ths,</foreign> or 'in the direction of the sun'; and by the Roman sailors, <hi rend="italic">subsolanus</hi> (lying beneath the sun). But the wind that comes from the summer and solstitial point of rising

<note>This at the summer solstice would be far to the north.</note>
is called in Latin <hi rend="italic">aquilo,</hi> in Greek <foreign xml:lang="grc">bore/as,</foreign> and some say it was for that reason that Homer called

<note><hi rend="italic">Odyss.</hi> v. 296.</note>
it <foreign xml:lang="grc">ai)qrhgene/ths,</foreign> or 'ether-born'

<note>That is, from the clear, bright sky, often attending the sunrise.</note>
; but <hi rend="italic">boreas,</hi> they think, is so named <foreign xml:lang="grc">a)po\ th=s boh=s,</foreign> 'from the loud shout,' since its blast is violent and noisy. To the third wind, which blows from the point of the winter rising—the Romans call it <hi rend="italic">volturnus</hi>—many of the Greeks give a compound name, <foreign xml:lang="grc">eu)ro/notos,</foreign> because it is between <hi rend="italic">eurus</hi> and <hi rend="italic">notus.</hi> These  <pb n="v1.p.187"/>  then are the three east winds: <hi rend="italic">aquilo, volturnus</hi> and <hi rend="italic">curus,</hi> and <hi rend="italic">eurus</hi> lies between the other two. Opposite to and facing these are three other winds from the west: <hi rend="italic">caurus,</hi> which the Greeks commonly call <foreign xml:lang="grc">a)rgesth/s</foreign>

<note>From <foreign xml:lang="grc">a)rgh/s,</foreign> <quote>white, brilliant.</quote> The Latin equivalent was <hi rend="italic">argestis,</hi> which, according to Isidor (<hi rend="italic">Orig.</hi> xiii. 11. 10), the common people corrupted into <hi rend="italic">agrestis.</hi></note>
or 'clearing'; this blows from the quarter opposite <hi rend="italic">aquilo.</hi> There is a second, <hi rend="italic">favonius,</hi>

<note>Perhaps connected with <hi rend="italic">foveo,</hi> as a mild, pleasant wind; see <hi rend="italic">Thes. Ling. Lat., s. v.</hi> Or with <hi rend="italic">faveo, Faunus,</hi> Walde, <hi rend="italic">Etym. Lat. Dict.</hi></note>
which in Greek is called <foreign xml:lang="grc">ze/furos,</foreign> blowing from the point opposite to <hi rend="italic">eurus;</hi> and a third, <hi rend="italic">Africus,</hi> which in Greek is <foreign xml:lang="grc">li/y,</foreign>

<note>From <foreign xml:lang="grc">lei/bw,</foreign> Lat. <hi rend="italic">libo,</hi> <quote>pour, pour out.</quote></note>
or 'wet-bringing,' blows in opposition to <hi rend="italic">volturnus.</hi> These two opposite quarters of the sky, east and west, have, as we see, six winds opposite to one another. But the south, since it is a fixed and invariable point, has but one single south wind; this in Latin is termed <hi rend="italic">auster,</hi> in Greek <foreign xml:lang="grc">no/tos,</foreign> because it is cloudy and wet, for <foreign xml:lang="grc">noti/s</foreign> is the Greek for 'moisture."

<note>'The derivation of <hi rend="italic">auster</hi> is uncertain; see <hi rend="italic">Thes. Ling. Lat., s. v.</hi> Walde connects it with words meaning <quote>east</quote> and <quote>eastern,</quote> adding <quote>Merkwiirdig ist die Bedeutung 'Sudwind,' nicht 'Ostwind'; doch ist auch in der Vogelschau die Richtung gegen Osten teilweise durch die Richtung nach Sūden abgelost.</quote> But Thurneysen (<hi rend="italic">T. L. L.</hi>) remarks:  <quote rend="blockquote"><l><quote>Sed ab his Latini nominis significatus nimium distat.</quote></l></quote></note>
The north too, for the same reason, has but one wind. This, called in Latin <hi rend="italic">septentrionarius,</hi> in Greek <foreign xml:lang="grc">a)parkti/as,</foreign> or 'from the region of the Bear,' is directly opposite to <hi rend="italic">auster.</hi> From this list of eight winds some subtract four, and they declare that they do so on the authority of Homer,

<note><hi rend="italic">Odyss.</hi> v. 295, 331.</note>
who knows only four winds: <hi rend="italic">eurus, auster, aquilo</hi> and <hi rend="italic">favonius,</hi> blowing from the four quarters of the heaven which we have named primary, so to speak; for they regard the east and west as broader, to be sure, but nevertheless single and not divided into three parts. There are others, on the contrary, who make twelve winds instead of eight, by inserting a third group  <pb n="v1.p.189"/>  of four in the intervening space about the south and north, in the same way that the second four are placed between the original two at east and west.</p><p>"There are also some other names of what might be called special winds, which the natives have coined each in their own districts, either from the designations of the places in which they live or from some other reason which has led to the formation of the word. Thus our Gauls

<note>That is, the Gauls of Gallia Narbonensis. Favorinus was a native of Arelate, the modern Aries.</note>
call the wind which blows from their land, the most violent wind to which they are exposed, <hi rend="italic">circius,</hi> doubtless from its whirling and stormy character; the Apulians give the name <hi rend="italic">Iapyx</hi>—the name by which they themselves are known (<hi rend="italic">Iapzyges</hi>)—to the wind that blows from the mouth of <foreign xml:lang="grc">)Iapugi/a</foreign> itself, from its inmost recesses, as it were.

<note>Text and meaning are very uncertain. No satisfactory explanation of <hi rend="italic">ore</hi> or <hi rend="italic">sinibus</hi> has been offered, so far as I know. Apuleius, <hi rend="italic">De Mundo</hi> 14, says: Apuli <quote>Iapagem</quote> eum venture ) ex Iapygae sinu, id est ex ipso Gargano venientem (appellant).</note>
This is, I think, about the same as <hi rend="italic">caurus;</hi> for it is a west wind and seems to blow from the quarter opposite <hi rend="italic">eurus.</hi> Therefore Virgil says

<note><hi rend="italic">Aen.</hi> viii. 709.</note>
that Cleopatra, when fleeing to Egypt after the sea-fight, was borne onward by Iapyx, and he called

<note><hi rend="italic">Aen.</hi> xi. 678.</note>
an Apulian horse by the same name as the wind, that is, Iapyx. There is also a wind named <hi rend="italic">caecias,</hi> which, according to Aristotle

<note><hi rend="italic">Meteor.</hi> ii. 6; <hi rend="italic">Prob.</hi> xxvi. 29.</note>
blows in such a way as not to drive away clouds, but to attract them. This, he says, is the origin of the proverbial line:

<note>Trag. fr. adesp. 75, Nauck.<hi rend="sup">2</hi></note>
<quote rend="blockquote"><l>Attracting to oneself, as <hi rend="italic">caecias</hi> does the clouds.</l></quote></p><p>Moreover, besides these which I have mentioned there are in various places other names of winds, of new coinage and each peculiar to its own region,  <pb n="v1.p.191"/>  for example the <hi rend="italic">Atabulus</hi> of Horace;

<note><hi rend="italic">Serm.</hi> i. 5. 78. The wind corresponds to the sirocco. Porphyrio, <hi rend="italic">ad loc.</hi> gives the fanciful derivation, <foreign xml:lang="grc">a)po\ tou= e)s</foreign> <foreign xml:lang="grc">th\n a)/thn ba/llein pa/nta.</foreign> The <hi rend="italic">Thes. Ling. Lat.</hi> connects it with <hi rend="italic">Atabuli,</hi> the name of an Aethiopian tribe.</note>
these too I intended to discuss; I would also have added those which are called <hi rend="italic">etesiae</hi>

<note><quote>Periodic,</quote> or <quote>trade</quote> winds, referring especially to the Egyptian monsoon, which blow from the north-west during the whole summer (Herodotus, ii, 20); used also of winds which blow from the north in the Aegean for forty days after the rising of the Dog-star.</note>
and <hi rend="italic">prodromi,</hi>

<note><quote>Preceding</quote> the <hi rend="italic">etesiae,</hi> and blowing north-north-east for eight days before the rising of the Dog-star.</note>
which at a fixed time of year, namely when the dog-star rises, blow from one or another quarter of the heavens; and since I have drunk a good bit, I would have rated on about the meaning of all these terms, had I not already done a deal of talking while all of you have been silent, as if I were delivering 'an exhibition speech.' But for one to do all the talking at a large dinner-party," said he, <quote>is neither decent nor becoming.</quote></p><p>This is what Favorinus recounted to us at his own table at the time I mentioned, with extreme elegance of diction and in a delightful and graceful style throughout. But as to his statement that the wind which blows from the land of Gaul is called <hi rend="italic">circius,</hi> Marcus Cato in his <hi rend="italic">Origins</hi>

<note>Fr. 93, Peter.</note>
calls that wind, not <hi rend="italic">circius,</hi> but <hi rend="italic">cercius.</hi> For writing about the Spaniards who dwell on this side the Ebro, he set down these words: <quote>But in this district are the finest iron and silver mines, also a great mountain of pure salt; the more you take from it, the more it grows. The <hi rend="italic">cercius</hi> wind, when you speak, fills your mouth; it overturns an armed man or a loaded wagon.</quote></p><p>In saying above that the <foreign xml:lang="grc">e)thsi/ai</foreign> blow from one or another quarter of the heavens, although following the opinion of many, I rather think I spoke hastily.

<note>Gellius, as he sometimes does elsewhere, refers to Favorinus' statement as if it were his own. Gronovius' proposed change to <hi rend="italic">dixit</hi> and <hi rend="italic">dixerit</hi> is unnecessary.</note>
<pb n="v1.p.193"/>  For in the second book of Publius Nigidius' treatise <hi rend="italic">On Wind</hi> are these words:

<note>Fr. 104, Swoboda.</note>
<quote>Both the <foreign xml:lang="grc">e)thsi/ai</foreign> and the annual south winds follow the sun.</quote> We ought therefore to inquire into the meaning of <quote>follow the sun.</quote></p></div><div type="textpart" n="23" subtype="chapter"><head>XXIII</head><milestone unit="section" n="23arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>A discussion and comparison of passages taken from the comedy of Menander and that of Caecilius, entitled Plocium.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>I OFTEN read comedies which our poets have adapted and translated from the Greeks—Menander or Posidippus, Apollodorus or Alexis, and also some other comic writers. And while I am reading them, they do not seem at all bad; on the contrary, they appear to be written with a wit and charm which you would say absolutely could not be surpassed. But if you compare and place beside them the Greek originals from which they came, and if you match individual passages, reading them together alternately with care and attention, the Latin versions at once begin to appear exceedingly commonplace and mean; so dimmed are they by the wit and brilliance of the Greek comedies, which they were unable to rival.</p><p>Only recently I had an experience of this kind. I was reading the <hi rend="italic">Plocium</hi> or <hi rend="italic">Necklace</hi> of Caecilius, much to the delight of myself and those who were present. The fancy took us to read also the <hi rend="italic">Plocium</hi> of Menander, from which Caecilius had translated the said comedy. But after we took Menander in hand, good Heavens! how dull and lifeless, and how different from Menander did Caecilius appear!  <pb n="v1.p.195"/>  Upon my word, the armour of Diomedes and of Glaucus were not more different in value.

<note>Homer (<hi rend="italic">Iliad</hi> vi. 234 ff) tells us that Diomedes proposed to exchange armour with Glaucus in token of friendship. Diomedes' arms of bronze cost nine oxen; those of Glaucus, inlaid with gold, a hundred. Hence <quote>gold for bronze</quote> became proverbial.</note>
Our reading had reached the passage where the aged husband was complaining of his rich and ugly wife, because he had been forced to sell his maid-servant, a girl skilled at her work and very good looking, since his wife suspected her of being his mistress. I shall say nothing of the great difference; but I have had the lines of both poets copied and submitted to others for their decision. This is Menander:

<note>Fr. 402, Kock; p. 428, <hi rend="italic">L.C.L.</hi></note>
<quote rend="blockquote"><l>Now may our heiress fair on both ears sleep.</l><l>A great and memorable feat is hers;</l><l>For she has driven forth, as she had planned,</l><l>The wench that worried her, that all henceforth</l><l>Of Crobyle alone the face may see,</l><l>And that the famous woman, she my wife,</l><l>May also be my tyrant. From the face</l><l>Dame Nature gave her, she's an ass 'mong apes,</l><l>As says the adage. I would silent be</l><l>About that night, the first of many woes.</l><l>Alas that I took Crobyle to wife,</l><l>With sixteen talents and a foot of nose.</l><l>Then too can one her haughtiness endure?</l><l>By Zeus Olympius and Athena, no '</l><l>She has dismissed a maid who did her work</l><l>More quickly than the word was given her,</l><l>More quickly far than one will bring her back!</l></quote>  But Caecilius renders it thus:

<note>vv. 142ff., Ribbeck<hi rend="sup">3</hi>.</note>
<quote rend="blockquote"><l>In very truth is he a wretched man,</l><l>Who cannot hide his woe away from home;</l><pb n="v1.p.197"/><l>And that my wife makes me by looks and acts:</l><l>If I kept still, I should betray myself</l><l>No less. And she has all that you would wish</l><l>She had not, save the dowry that she brought.</l><l>Let him who's wise a lesson take from me,</l><l>Who, like a free man captive to the foe,</l><l>Am slave, though town and citadel are safe.</l><l>What! wish her safe who steals whate'er I prize?</l><l>While longing for her death, a living corpse am I.</l><l>She says I've secret converse with our maid—</l><l>That's what she said, and so be laboured me</l><l>With tears, with prayers, with importunities,</l><l>That I did sell the wench. Now, I suppose,</l><l>She blabs like this to neighbours and to friends:</l><l>" Which one of you, when in the bloom of youth,</l><l>Could from her husband win what I from mine</l><l>Have gained, who've robbed him of his concubine."</l><l>Thus they, while I, poor wretch, am torn to shreds.</l></quote></p><p>Now, not to mention the charm of subject matter and diction, which is by no means the same in the two books, I notice this general fact—that some of Menander's lines, brilliant, apt and witty, Caecilius has not attempted to reproduce, even where lie might have done so; but he has passed them by as if they were of no value, and has dragged in some other farcical stuff; and what Menander took from actual life, simple, realistic and delightful, this for some reason or other Caecilius has missed. For example, that same old husband, talking with another old man, a neighbour of his, and cursing the arrogance of his rich wife, says:

<note>Fr. 403, Kock; p. 428, <hi rend="italic">L. C. L.</hi></note>
<pb n="v1.p.199"/>  <quote rend="blockquote"><l>I have to wife an heiress ogress, man!</l><l>I did not tell you that? What, really? no?</l><l>She is the mistress of my house and lands,</l><l>Of all that's hereabout. And in return</l><l>I have by Zeus! the hardest of hard things.</l><l>She scolds not only me, but her son too,</l><l>Her daughter most of all.—You tell a thing</l><l>There's no contending with.—I know it well.</l></quote>  But in this passage Caecilius chose rather to play the buffoon than to be appropriate and suitable to the character that he was representing. For this is the way he spoiled the passage:

<note>vv. 158 ff., Ribbeck<hi rend="sup">3</hi>. </note>
<quote rend="blockquote"><l>But tell me, sir; is your wife captious, pray?—</l><l>How can you ask?—But in what manner, then?—</l><l>I am ashamed to tell. When I come home</l><l>And sit beside her, she with fasting

<note>That is, <quote>nauseous.</quote></note>
breath</l><l>Straight kisses me.—There's no mistake in that.</l><l>She'd have you spew up what you've drunk abroad.</l></quote></p><p>It is clear what your judgment ought to be about that scene also, found in both comedies, which is about of the following purport: The daughter of a poor man was violated during a religious vigil. This was unknown to her father, and she was looked upon as a virgin. Being with child as the result of that assault, at the proper time she is in labour. An honest slave, standing before the door of the house, knowing nothing of the approaching delivery of his master's daughter, and quite unaware that violence had been offered her, hears the groans and prayers of the girl labouring in childbirth; he gives expression to his fear, anger, suspicion, pity and grief. In the Greek comedy all these emotions and  <pb n="v1.p.201"/>  feelings of his are wonderfully vivid and clear, but in Caecilius they are all dull and without any grace and dignity of expression. Afterwards, when the same slave by questioning has found out what has happened, in Menander he utters this lament:

<note>Fr. 404, Kock; p. 430, <hi rend="italic">L. C. L.</hi></note>
<quote rend="blockquote"><l>Alas! thrice wretched he who weds, though poor,</l><l>And children gets. How foolish is the man</l><l>Who keeps no watch o'er his necessities,</l><l>And if he luckless be in life's routine,</l><l>Can't use his wealth as cloak, but buffeted</l><l>By ev'ry storm, lives helpless and in grief.</l><l>All wretchedness he shares, of blessings none,</l><l>Thus sorrowing for one I'd all men warn.</l></quote>  Let us consider whether Caecilius was sufficiently inspired to approach the sincerity and realism of these words. These are the lines of Caecilius, in which he gives some mangled fragments from Menander, patching them with the language of tragic bombast:

<note>vv. 169 ff., Ribbeck.<hi rend="sup">2</hi></note>
<quote rend="blockquote"><l>Unfortunate in truth the man, who poor,</l><l>Yet children gets, to share his poverty.</l><l>His fortune and his state at once are clear;</l><l>The ill fame of the rich their set conceals.</l></quote></p><p>Accordingly, as I said above, when I read these passages of Caecilius by themselves, they seem by no means lacking in grace and spirit, but when I compare and match them with the Greek version, I feel that Caecilius should not have followed a guide with whom he could not keep pace.</p></div><pb n="v1.p.203"/><div type="textpart" n="24" subtype="chapter"><head>XXIV</head><milestone unit="section" n="24arg"/><!--<argument>--><p>On the ancient frugality; and on early sumptuary laws.</p><!--</argument>--><p><milestone unit="section" n="1"/>FRUGALITY among the early Romans, and moderation in food and entertainments were secured not only by observance and training at home, but also by public penalties and the inviolable provisions of numerous laws. Only recently I read in the <hi rend="italic">Miscellanies</hi><note>Fr. 5, Huschke; 6, Bremer.</note>
of Ateius Capito an old decree of the senate, passed in the consulship of Gaius Fannius and Marcus Valerius Messala,

<note>161 B.C.</note>
which provides that the leading citizens, who according to ancient usage <quote>interchanged</quote> at the Melagesian games

<note>The Megalensian or Megalesian festival, on April 4. The games eventually extended from the 4th to the 10th inclusive. Only the nobles gave dinner parties on the 4th; the plebeians celebrated at the Cerealia, April 19.</note>
(that is, acted as host to one another in rotation), should take oath before the consuls in set terms, that they would not spend on each dinner more than one hundred and twenty asses in addition to vegetables, bread and wine; that they would not serve foreign, but only native, wine, nor use at table more than one hundred pounds' weight of silverware.</p><p>But subsequent to that decree of the senate the law of Fannius was passed, which allowed the expenditure of one hundred asses a day at the Roman and the plebeian games,

<note>The <hi rend="italic">ludi Romani</hi> in Cicero's time extended from Sept. 5 to 19; the <hi rend="italic">ludi plebei,</hi> at first probably held on one day, finally lasted from Nov. 4 to 17.</note>
at the Saturnalia,

<note>Originally on Dec. 17; extended to seven days, of which five (under Augustus, three) were legal holidays.</note>
and on certain other days; of thirty asses on ten additional days each month; but on all other days of only ten. This is the law to which the poet Lucilius alludes when he says:

<note>1172, Marx.</note>
<quote rend="blockquote"><l>The paltry hundred pence of Fannius.</l></quote>  <pb n="v1.p.205"/>  In regard to this some of the commentators on Lucilius have been mistaken in thinking that Fannius' law authorized a regular expenditure of a hundred asses on every kind of day. For, as I have stated above, Fannius authorized one hundred asses on certain holidays which he expressly named, but for all other days he limited the daily outlay to thirty asses for some days and to ten for others.</p><p>Next the Licinian law was passed

<note>Probably in 103 B.C.</note>
which, while allowing the outlay of one hundred asses on designated days, as did the law of Fannius, conceded two hundred asses for weddings and set a limit of thirty for other days; however, after naming a fixed weight of dried meat and salted provisions for each day, it granted the indiscriminate and unlimited use of the products of the earth, vine and orchard. This law the poet Laevius mentions in his <hi rend="italic">Erotopaegnia.</hi>

<note>Fr. 23, Bährens, <hi rend="italic">Fray. Poet. Rom.,</hi> p. 292. <hi rend="italic">Erotopaegnia</hi> means <quote>Playful Verses about Love</quote> ; a sixth book is cited by Charisius (i. 204 K). One fragment indicates that Laevius was a contemporary of Varro. His brief and scanty fragments show great variety in metre (cf. Prisc. ii. 258 K), and innovations in diction (Gell. xix. 7.)</note>
These are the words of Laevius, by which he means that a kid that had been brought for a feast was sent away and the dinner served with fruit and vegetables, as the Licinian law had provided:  <quote rend="blockquote"><l>The Licinian law is introduced,</l><l>The liquid light to the kid restored.</l></quote>  Lucilius also has the said law in mind in these words:  <quote rend="blockquote"><l>Let us evade the law of Licinius.

<note>1200, Marx.</note>
</l></quote></p><p>Afterwards, when these laws were illegible from the rust of age and forgotten, when many men of abundant means were gormandizing, and recklessly  <pb n="v1.p.207"/>  pouring their family and fortune into an abyss of dinners and banquets, Lucius Sulla in his dictatorship proposed a law to the people, which provided that on the Kalends, Ides and Nones, on days of games, and on certain regular festivals, it should be proper and lawful to spend three hundred sesterces on a dinner, but on all other days no more than thirty.</p><p>Besides these laws we find also an Aemilian law,

<note>78 B. C. Another Aemilian sumptuary law was passed in 115 B.C.</note>
setting a limit not on the expense of dinners, but on the kind and quantity of food.</p><p>Then the law of Antius,

<note>Passed a few years after the Aemilian law.</note>
besides curtailing outlay, contained the additional provision, that no magistrate or magistrate elect should dine out anywhere, except at the house of stipulated persons.</p><p>Lastly, the Julian law came before the people during the principate of Caesar Augustus,

<note>Cf. Suet. <hi rend="italic">Aug.</hi> xxxiv, 1.</note>
by which on working days two hundred sesterces is the limit, on the Kalends, Ides and Nones and some other holidays, three hundred, but at weddings and the banquets following them, a thousand.</p><p>Ateius Capito says

<note>Fr, 6, Huschke; 7, Bremer.</note>
that there is still another Edict—but whether of the deified Augustus or of Tiberius Caesar I do not exactly remember—by which the outlay for dinners on various festal days was increased from three hundred sesterces to two thousand, to the end that the rising tide of luxury night be restrained at least within those limits.</p></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>