Noctes Atticae

Gellius, Aulus

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

That it is stated in Marcus Varro's books on Human Antiquities that the aediles and quaestors of the Roman people might be cited before a praetor by a private citizen.

WHEN from the secluded retreat of books and masters I had come forth among men and into the light of the forum, I remember that it was the

v2.p.447
subject of inquiry in many of the quarters frequented by those who gave public instruction in law, or offered counsel, whether a quaestor of the Roman people could be cited by a praetor. Moreover, this was not discussed merely as an academic question, but an actual instance of the kind had chanced to arise, in which a quaestor was to be called into court. Now, not a few men thought that the praetor did not have the right to summon him, since he was beyond question a magistrate of the Roman people and could neither be summoned, nor if he refused to appear could he be taken and arrested without impairing the dignity of the office itself which he held. But since at that time I was immersed in the books of Marcus Varro, as soon as I found that this matter was the subject of doubt and inquiry, I took down [*](From his bookcase.) the twenty-first book of his Human Antiquities, in which the following is written: [*](Fr. 3, Mirsch.)
It is lawful for those magistrates who have the power neither of summoning the people as individuals nor of arrest, even to be called into court by a private citizen. Marcus Laevinus, a curule aedile, was cited before a praetor by a private citizen; to-day, surrounded as they are by public servants, aediles not only may not be arrested, but even presume to disperse the people.

This is what Varro says in the part of his work which concerns the aediles, but in an earlier part of the same book he says [*](See xiii. 12. 6, above.) that quaestors have the right neither to summon nor to arrest. Accordingly, when both parts of the book had been read, all came over to Varro's opinion, and the quaestor was summoned before the praetor.

v2.p.449

The meaning of pomerium.

THE augurs of the Roman people who wrote books On the Auspices have defined the meaning of pomerium in the following terms:

The pomerium is the space within the rural district designated by the augurs along the whole circuit of the city without the walls, marked off by fixed bounds and forming the limit of the city auspices.
[*](That is to say, the pomerium separated the ager Romanus, or country district, from the city. The auspices could be taken only within the pomerium. When a furrow was drawn and the earth turned inward to mark the line of the city walls, the furrow represented the pomerium. On the derivation of the word see T.A.P.A. xliv. 19 ff.) Now, the most ancient pomerium, which was established by Romulus, was bounded by the foot of the Palatine hill. But that pomerium, as the republic grew, was extended several times and included many lofty hills. Moreover, whoever had increased the domain of the Roman people by land taken from an enemy had the right to enlarge the pomerium.

Therefore it has been, and even now continues to be, inquired why it is that when the other six of the seven hills of the city are within the pomerium, the Aventine alone, which is neither a remote nor an unfrequented district, should be outside the pomerium; and why neither king Servius Tullius nor Sulla, who demanded the honour of extending the pomerium, nor later the deified Julius, when he enlarged the pomerium, included this within the designated limits of the city.

Messala wrote [*](Fr. 3, Huschke; id., Bremer (ii, p. 265).) that there seemed to be several reasons for this, but above them all he himself approved one, namely, because on that hill Remus took the auspices with regard to founding the city, but found the birds unpropitious and was less

v2.p.451
successful in his augury than Romulus.
Therefore,
says he,
all those who extended the pomerium excluded that hill, on the ground that it was made ill-omened by inauspicious birds.

But speaking of the Aventine hill, I thought I ought not to omit something which I ran across recently in the Commentary of Elys, [*](The name is obviously corrupt; see critical note.) an early grammarian. In this it was written that in earlier times the Aventine was, as we have said, excluded from the pomerium, but afterwards by the authority of the deified Claudius it was admitted and honoured with a place within the limits of the pomerium.

A passage from the book of the augur Messala, in which he shows who the minor magistrates are and that the consul and the praetor are colleagues; and certain observations besides on the auspices.

IN the edict of the consuls by which they appoint the day for the centuriate assembly it is written in accordance with an old established form:

Let no minor magistrate presume to watch the skies.
[*](That is, for omens.) Accordingly, the question is often asked who the minor magistrates are. On this subject there is [*](This and the following verbs seem to be in epistolary past tenses; that is, Gellius uses the tenses which would represent the time from the standpoint of his future readers.) no need for words of mine, since by good fortune the first book of the augur Messala On Auspices is at hand, when I am writing this. Therefore I quote from that book Messala's own words: [*](Fr. 1, Huschke; 1a, Bremer (i, p. 263).)
The auspices of the patricians are divided into two classes. The
v2.p.453
greatest are those of the consuls, praetors and censors. Yet the auspices of all these are not the same or of equal rank, for the reason that the censors are not colleagues of the consuls or praetors, [*](Explained in § 6, below.) while the praetors are colleagues of the consuls. Therefore neither do the consuls or the praetors interrupt or hinder the auspices of the censors, nor the censors those of the praetors and consuls; but the censors may vitiate and hinder each other's auspices and again the praetors and consuls those of one another. The praetor, although he is a colleague of the consul, cannot lawfully elect either a praetor or a consul, as indeed we have learned from our forefathers, or from what has been observed in the past, and as is shown in the thirteenth book of the Commentaries of Gaius Tuditanus; [*](Fr. 8, Peter2; 2, Huschke; id., Bremer (i, p. 35).) for the praetor has inferior authority and the consul superior, and a higher authority cannot be elected by a lower, or a superior colleague by an inferior. At the present time, when a praetor elects the praetors, I have followed the authority of the men of old and have not taken part in the auspices at such elections. Also the censors are not chosen under the same auspices as the consuls and praetors. The lesser auspices belong to the other magistrates. Therefore these are called 'lesser' and the others 'greater' magistrates. When the lesser magistrates are elected, their office is conferred upon them by the assembly of the tribes, but full powers by a law of the assembly of the curiae; the higher magistrates are chosen by the assembly of the centuries.
[*](On these comitia see xv. 27, below.)

From this whole passage of Messala it becomes clear both who the lesser magistrates are and why they are so called. But he also shows that the praetor

v2.p.455
is a colleague of the consul, because they are chosen under the same auspices. Moreover, they are said to possess the greater auspices, because their auspices are esteemed more highly than those of the others.

Another passage from the same Messala, in which he argues that to address the people and to treat with the people are two different things; and what magistrates may call away the people when in assembly, and from whom.

THE same Messala in the same book has written as follows about the lesser magistrates [*](Fr. 2, Huschke: id., Bremer (i, p. 263).)

A consul may call away the people from all magistrates, when they are assembled for the elections or for another purpose. A praetor may at any time call away the people when assembled for the elections or for another purpose, except from a consul. Lesser magistrates may never call away the people when assembled for the elections or another purpose. Hence, whoever of them first summons the people to an election has the law on his side, because it is unlawful to take the same action twice with the people (bifariam cum populo agi), nor can one minor magistrate call away an assembly from another. But if they wish to address the people (contionem habere) without laying any measure before them, it is lawful for any number of magistrates to hold a meeting (contionem habere) at the same time.
From these words of Messala it is clear that cum populo agere,
to treat with the people,
differs from contionem habere,
to address the people.
For the former means to ask something of the people
v2.p.457
which they by their votes are to order or forbid; the latter, to speak to the people without laying any measure before them.

That humanitas does not mean what the common people think, but those who have spoken pure Latin have given the word a more restricted meaning.

THOSE who have spoken Latin and have used the language correctly do not give to the word humanitas the meaning which it is commonly thought to have, namely, what the Greeks call filanqrwpi/a, signifying a kind of friendly spirit and good-feeling towards all men without distinction; but they gave to humanitas about the force of the Greek paidei/a; that is, what we call eruditionem institutionemque in bonas artes, or

education and training in the liberal arts.
Those who earnestly desire and seek after these are most highly humanized. For the pursuit of that kind of knowledge, and the training given by it, have been granted to man alone of all the animals, and for that reason it is termed humanitas, or
humanity.

That it is in this sense that our earlier writers have used the word, and in particular Marcus Varro and Marcus Tullius, [*](De Orat. i. 71; ii. 72, etc.) almost all the literature shows. Therefore I have thought it sufficient for the present to give one single example. I have accordingly quoted the words of Varro from the first book of his Human Antiquities, beginning as follows: [*](Fr. 1, Mirsch.)

Praxiteles, who, because of his surpassing art, is unknown to no one of any liberal culture (humaniori).
He does not use humanior in its usual sense of
v2.p.459
good-natured, amiable, and kindly,
although without knowledge of letters, for this meaning does not at all suit his thought; but in that of a man of
some cultivation and education,
who knew about Praxiteles both from books and from story.

The meaning of Marcus Cato's phrase

betwixt mouth and morsel.

THERE is a speech by Marcus Cato Censorius On the Improper Election of Aediles. In that oration is this passage: [*](lxv. 1, Jordan.)

Nowadays they say that the standing-grain, still in the blade, is a good harvest. Do not count too much upon it. I have often heard that many things may come inter os atque offam, or 'between the mouth and the morsel'; but there certainly is a long distance between a morsel and the blade.
Erucius Clarus, who was prefect of the city and twice consul, a man deeply interested in the customs and literature of early days, wrote to Sulpicius Apollinaris, the most learned man within my memory, begging and entreating that he would write him the meaning of those words. Then, in my presence, for at that time I was a young man in Rome and was in attendance upon him for purposes of instruction, Apollinaris replied to Clarus very briefly, as was natural when writing to a man of learning, that
between mouth and morsel
was an old proverb, meaning the same as the poetic Greek adage:
  1. 'Twixt cup and lip there's many a slip.

v2.p.461

That Plato attributes a line of Sophocles to Euripides; and some other matters of the same kind.

THERE is an iambic trimeter verse of notorious antiquity:

  1. By converse with the wise wax tyrants wise.
This verse Plato in his Theaetetus [*](Really Theages 6, p. 125 B.) attributes to Euripides. I am very much surprised at this; for I have met it in the tragedy of Sophocles entitled Ajax the Locrian [*](Fr. 13, Nauck2.) and Sophocles was born before Euripides.

But the following line is equally well known:

  1. I who am old shall lead you, also old.
And this is found both in a tragedy of Sophocles, of which the title is Phthiotides, [*](Id. 633.) and in the Bacchae of Euripides. [*](193.)

I have further observed that in the Fire-bringing Prometheus of Aeschylus and in the tragedy of Euripides entitled Ino an identical verse occurs, except for a few syllables. In Aeschylus it runs thus: [*](Fr. 208, Nauck2 (Coeph. 576).)

  1. When proper, keeping silent, and saying what is fit.
In Euripides thus: [*](Id. 413.)
  1. When proper, keeping silent, speaking when 'tis safe.
But Aeschylus was considerably the earlier writer. [*](According to tradition Euripides was born on the day of the battle of Salamis (480 B.C.), Aeschylus took part in the fight, and Sophocles, then about sixteen years old, figured in the celebration of the victory. Christ, Griech. Lit., assigns Euripides' birth to 484.)

v2.p.463

Of the lineage and names of the Porcian family.

WHEN Sulpicius Apollinaris and I, with some others who were friends of his or mine, were sitting in the library of the Palace of Tiberius, it chanced that a book was brought to us bearing the name of Marcus Cato Nepos. We at once began to inquire who this Marcus Cato Nepos was. And thereupon a young man, not unacquainted with letters, so far as I could judge from his language, said:

This Marcus Cato is called Nepos, not as a surname, but because he was the grandson of Marcus Cato Censorius through his son, and father of Marcus Cato the ex-praetor, who slew himself with his own sword at Utica during the civil war. There is a book of Marcus Cicero's about the life of the last-named, entitled Laus Catonis, or A Eulogy of Cato, in which Cicero says [*](Fr. 1, p. 987, Orelli2.) that he was the great-grandson of Marcus Cato Censorius. Therefore the father of the man whom Cicero eulogized was this Marcus Cato, whose orations are circulated under the name of Marcus Cato Nepos.

Then Apollinaris. very quietly and mildly, as was his custom when passing criticism, said:

I congratulate you, my son, that at your age you have been able to favour us with a little lecture on the family of Cato, even though you do not know who this Marcus Cato was, about whom we are now inquiring. For the famous Marcus Cato Censorius had not one, but several grandsons, although not all were sprung from the same father. For the famous Marcus Cato, who was both an orator and
v2.p.465
a censor, had two sons, born of different mothers and of very different ages; since, when one of them was a young man, his mother died and his father, who was already well on in years, married the maiden daughter of his client Salonius, from whom was born to him Marcus Cato Salonianus, a surname which he derived from Salonius, his mother's father. But from Cato's elder son, who died when praetorelect, while his father was still living, and left some admirable works on The Science of Law, there was born the man about whom we are inquiring, Marcus Cato, son of Marcus, and grandson of Marcus. He was an orator of some power and left many speeches written in the manner of his grandfather; he was consul with Quintus Marcius Rex, and during his consulship went to Africa and died in that province. But he was not, as you said he was, the father of Marcus Cato the ex-praetor, who killed himself at Utica and whom Cicero eulogized; nor because he was the grandson of Cato the censor and Cato of Utica was the censor's great-grandson does it necessarily follow that the former was the father of the latter. For this grandson whose speech was just brought to us did, it is true, have a son called Marcus Cato, but he was not the Cato who died at Utica, but the one who, after being curule aedile and praetor, went to Gallia Narbonensis and there ended his life. But by that other son of Censorius, a far younger man, who, as I said, was surnamed Salonianus, two sons were begotten: Lucius and Marcus Cato. That Marcus Cato was tribune of the commons and died when a candidate for the praetorship; he begot Marcus Cato the ex-praetor, who committed suicide at Utica during the civil war, and when Marcus
v2.p.467
Tullius wrote the latter's life and panegyric he said that he was the great-grandson of Cato the censor. You see therefore that the branch of the family which is descended from Cato's younger son differs not only in its pedigree, but in its dates as well; for because that Salonianus was born near the end of his father's life, as I said, his descendants also were considerably later than those of his elder brother. This difference in dates you will readily perceive from that speech itself, when you read it.

Thus spoke Sulpicius Apollinaris in my hearing. Later we found that what he had said was so, when we read the Funeral Eulogies and the Genealogy of the Porcian Family.

That the most elegant writers pay more attention to the pleasing sound of words and phrases (what the Greeks call eu)fwni/a, or

euphony
) than to the rules and precepts devised by the grammarians.

VALERIUS PROBUS was once asked, as I learned from one of his friends, whether one ought to say has urbis or has urbes and hanc turrem. or hanc turrim.

If,
he replied,
you are either composing verse or writing prose and have to use those words, pay no attention to the musty, fusty rules of the grammarians, but consult your own ear as to what is to be said in any given place. What it favours will surely be the best.
Then the one who had asked the question said:
What do you mean by 'consult my ear'?
and he told me that Probus answered:
Just as Vergil did his, when in different passages
v2.p.469
he has used urbis and urbes, following the taste and judgment of his ear. For in the first Georgic, which,
said he,
I have read in a copy corrected by the poet's own hand, he wrote urbis with an i. These are the words of the verses: [*](Georg. i. 25.)
  1. O'er cities (urbis) if you choose to watch, and rule
  2. Our lands, O Caesar great.
But turn and change it so as to read urbes, and somehow you will make it duller and heavier. On the other hand, in the third Aeneid he wrote urbes with an e: [*](Aen. iii. 106.)
  1. An hundred mighty cities (urbes) they inhabit.
Change this too so as to read urbis and the word will be too slender and colourless, so great indeed is the different effect of combination in the harmony of neighbouring sounds. Moreover, Vergil also said turrim, not turrem, and securim, not securem:
  1. A turret (turrim) on sheer edge standing, [*](Aen. ii. 460.)
and
  1. Has shaken from his neck the ill-aimed axe (securim). [*](Aen. ii. 224.)
These words have, I think, a more agreeable lightness than if you should use the form in e in both places.
But the one who had asked the question, a boorish fellow surely and with untrained ear, said:
I don't just understand why you say that one form is better and more correct in one place and the other in the other.
Then Probus, now somewhat impatient, retorted:
Don't trouble then to inquire whether you ought to say urbis or urbes. For since
v2.p.471
you are the kind of man that I see you are and err without detriment to yourself, you will lose nothing whichever you say.

With these words then and this conclusion Probus dismissed the man, somewhat rudely, as was his way with stupid folk. But I afterwards found another similar instance of double spelling by Vergil. For he has used tres and tris in the same passage with such fineness of taste, that if you should read differently and change one for the other, and have any ear at all, you would perceive that the sweetness of the sound is spoiled. These are the lines, from the tenth book of the Aeneid: [*](Aen. x. 350.)

  1. Three (tres) Thracians too from Boreas' distant race,
  2. And three (iris) whom Idas sent from Ismarus' land.
In one place he has tres, in the other tris; weigh and ponder both, and you will find that each sounds most suitable in its own place. But also in this line of Vergil, [*](Aen. ii. 554.)
  1. This end (haec finis) to Priam's fortunes then,
if you change haec and say hic finis, it will be hard and unrhythmical and your ears will shrink from the change. Just as, on the contrary, you would make the following verse of Vergil less sweet, if you were to change it: [*](Aen. i. 241.)
  1. What end (quem finem) of labours, great king, dost thou grant?
For if you should say quam das finem, you would somehow make the sound of the words harsh and somewhat weak.

v2.p.473

Ennius too spoke of rectos cupressos, or

straight cypresses,
contrary to the accepted gender of that word, in the following verse:
  1. On cliffs the nodding pine and cypress straight. [*](Ann. 490, Vahlen.2 Ennius also has longi cupressi in Ann. 262.)
The sound of the word, I think, seemed to him stronger and more vigorous, if he said rectos cupressos rather than rectas. But, on the other hand, this same Ennius in the eighteenth book of his Annals [*](Ann. 454, Vahlen2, cf. ii. 26. 4.) said aere fulva instead of fulvo, not merely because Homer said h)e/ra baqei=a, [*](Iliad xx. 446; xxi. 6.) but because this sound, I think, seemed more sonorous and agreeable.

In the same way Marcus Cicero also thought it smoother and more polished to write, in his fifth Oration against Verres, [*](ii. 5. 169.) fretiu rather than freto. He says

divided by a narrow strait (fretu)
; for it would have been heavier and more archaic to say perangusto freto. Also in his second Oration against Verres, making use of a like rhythm, he said [*](ii. 2. 191.)
by an evident sin,
using peccatu instead of peccato; for I find this written in one or two of Tiro's copies, of very trustworthy antiquity. These are Cicero's words:
No one lived in such a way that no part of his life was free from extreme disgrace, no one was detected in such manifest sin (peccatu) that while he had been shameless in committing it, he would seem even more shameless if he denied it.

Not only is the sound of this word more elegant in this passage, but the reason for using the word is definite and sound. For hic peccatus, equivalent to peccatio, is correct and good Latin, just as many of the early writers used incestus (criminal), not of the one who committed the crime, but of the crime

v2.p.475
itself, and tributus, where we say tributum (tribute). Adlegatus (instigation) too and arbitratus (judgment) are used for adlegatio and arbitratio, and preserving these forms we say arbitratu and adlegatu meo. So then Cicero said in manifesto peccatu, as the early writers said in manifesto incestu, not that it was not good Latin to say peccato, but because in that context the use of peccatu was finer and smoother to the ear.

With equal regard for our ears Lucretius made funis feminine in these verses: [*](ii. 1153.)

  1. No golden rope (aurea funis), methinks, let down from heaven
  2. The race of mortals to this earth of ours,
although with equally good rhythm he might have used the more common aureus funis and written:
  1. Aureus e caelo demisit funis in arva.

Marcus Cicero calls [*](In Verr. iv. 99.) even priests by a feminine term, antistitae, instead of antislites, which is demanded by the grammarians' rule. For while he usually avoided the obsolete words used by the earlier writers, yet in this passage, pleased with the sound of the word, he said:

The priests of Ceres and the guardians (antistitae) of her shrine.
To such a degree have writers in some cases followed neither reason nor usage in choosing a word, but only the ear, which weighs words according to its own standards. [*](cf. Hor. Epist. i. 7. 98.)
And as for those who do not feel this,
says Marcus Cicero himself, [*](Orat. 168.) when speaking about appropriate and rhythmical language,
I know not what ears they have, or what there is in them resembling a man.

v2.p.477

But the early grammarians have noted this feature in Homer above all, that when he had said in one place [*](Iliad xvi. 583.) koloiou/s te yhra/s te,

both crows and starlings,
in another place [*](Iliad xvii. 755.) he did not use yhrw=n te, but yarw=n:
  1. As lights a cloud of starlings (yarw=n) or of daws,
not conforming to general usage, but seeking the pleasing effect peculiar to the word in each of the two positions; for if you change one of these for the other, you will give both a harsh sound.