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).
What Gaius Fabricius said of Cornelius Rufinus, an avaricious man, whose election to the consulship he supported, although he hated him and was his personal enemy.
FABRICIUS LUSCINUS was a man of great renown and great achievements. Publius Cornelius Rufinus was, to be sure, a man energetic in action, a good warrior, and a master of military tactics, but thievish and keen for money. This man Fabricius neither respected nor treated as a friend, but hated him because of his character. Yet when consuls were to be chosen at a highly critical period for the State, and that Rufinus was a candidate while his competitors were without military experience and untrustworthy, Fabricius used every effort to have the office given to Rufinus. [*](This was in 290 B.C. at the beginning of the last Samnite war. Rufinus was consul again in 277 B. C.) When many men expressed surprise at his attitude, in wishing an avaricious man, towards whom he felt bitter personal enmity, to be elected consul, he said:
I would rather be robbed by a fellow-citizen than sold [*](That is, sold into slavery by a victorious foe.) by the enemy.
This Rufinus afterwards, when he had been dictator and twice consul, Fabricius in his censorship expelled from the senate [*](In 275 B.C.) on the charge of extravagance, because he possessed ten pounds weight of silver plate. That remark of Fabricius about Rufinus I gave above in the form in which it appears in most historians; but Marcus Cicero, in the second book of the De Oratore, says [*](§268.) that it was not made by Fabricius to others, but to Rufinus himself, when he was thanking Fabricius because he had been elected consul through his help.
On the proper meaning of religiosus; and what changes the meaning of that word has undergone; and remarks of Nigidius Figulus on that subject, drawn from his Commentaries.
NIGIDIUS FIGULUS, in my opinion the most learned of men next to Marcus Varro, in the eleventh book of his Grammatical Commentaries, quotes [*](Fr. 4, Swoboda.) a truly remarkable line from an early poet: [*](p. 297, Ribbeck3, who reads: réligentem esse <téd> oportet, réligiosus né fuas, following Fleckeisen.)
but he does not name the author of the poem. And in the same connection Nigidius adds:
- Best it is to be religious, lest one superstitious be;
The suffix osus in words of this kind, such as vinosus, mulierosus, religiosus, always indicates an excessive amount of the quality in question. Therefore religiosus is applied to one who has involved himself in an extreme and superstitious devotion, which was regarded as a fault.
But in addition to what Nigidius says, by another shift in meaning religiosus began to be used of an upright and conscientious man, who regulates his conduct by definite laws and limits. Similarly too the following terms, which have the same origin, appear to have acquired different meanings; namely, religiosus dies and religiosa delubra. For those days are called religiosi which are of ill-fame and are hampered by an evil omen, so that on them one must refrain from offering sacrifice or beginning any new business whatever; they are, namely, the days that the ignorant multitude falsely and improperly call ne fasti. [*](On ne fasti dies it was impious for legal business to be carried on, or assemblies held.) Thus Marcus Cicero, in the ninth
Our forefathers maintained that the day of the battle at the Allia was more calamitous than that on which the city was taken; because the latter disaster was the result of the former. Therefore the one day is even now religiosus, while the other is unknown to the general public.Yet the same Marcus Tullius, in his speech On Appointing a Prosecutor, [*](Div. in Caec. 3.) uses the term religiosa delubra of shrines which are not ill-omened and gloomy, but full of majesty and sacredness. Masurius Sabinus too, in his Notes on Native Words, says: [*](Fr. 13, Huschke; p. 366, Bremer.)
Religiosus is that which because of some sacred quality is removed and withdrawn from us; the word is derived from relinquo, as is caerimonia from careo.[*](The sense of relinquo as= avoid is shown below (§ 10); that of careo is explained by Paul. Fest. (pp. 62 and 298, Lindsay, s.v. denariae and purimenstrio) as referring to doing without, or refraining from, certain things on ceremonial days. Some Roman etymologists derived caerimonia from the town of Caere, others from caritas; see Paul. Fest. p. 38, Linds. The origin of the word is uncertain. For religio some accept Cicero's derivation from relegere (Nat. Deor. ii. 72), others that of Lactantius (iv. 28) from religare.) According to this explanation of Sabinus, temples indeed and shrines—since an accumulation of these does not give rise to censure, as in case of things which are praised for their moderate use—since they are to be approached, not unceremoniously and thoughtlessly, but after purification and in due form, must be both revered and feared, rather than profaned; but those days are called religiosi which for the opposite reason, because they are of dire omen, we avoid. [*](That is, we avoid doing business, or undertaking any enterprise, on such days.) And Terence says: [*](Heaut. 228; Dziatzko reads: turn quód dem ei recte est; nám nil esse míhi religiost dícere.)
- Then too I give her nothing, except to say
All right;- For I avoid confessing my impecunious plight.
fond of wine), mulierosus (
fond of women), morosus (
whimsical), verbosus (
wordy), famosus (
notorious), [*](The meaning full of or abounding in does not suit all these words, although it is related to their meaning. Thus a habit (mos) easily becomes a whim, and one who is morosus is likely to be peevish; for a somewhat different idea see Cicero, Tusc. Disp. iv. 54, bene igitur nostri, cum omnia essent in moribus vitia, quod nullum erat iracundia foedius, iracundos solos morosos nomninaverunt. It should be noted too that famosus is used also in a good sense.) why are ingeniosus (
talented), formosus (
beautiful), officiosus (
dutiful), and speciosus (
showy), [*](Since speciosus is used also in a bad sense, it should perhaps be omitted (see crit. note); but cf. famosus, in the preceding list.) which are formed in the same way from ingenium, forma, officium, and species, why too are disciplinosus (
well-trained), consiliosus (
full of wisdom), victoriosus (
victorious), words coined by Marcus Cato, [*](Fr. inc. 42, Jordan.) why too facundiosts—for Sempronius Asellio in the thirteenth book of his History wrote, [*](Fr. 10, Peter.)
one should regard his deeds, not his words if they are less eloquent (facundiosa)—why, I say, are all these adjectives used, not in a bad, but in a good sense, although they too indicate an excessive amount of the quality which they signify? Is it because a certain necessary limit must be set for the qualities indicated by those words which I first cited? For favour if it is excessive and without limit, [*](As would be indicated by gratiosus, which, however, Gellius has not mentioned among the words which he first cited.) and habits if they are too many and varied, and words if they are unceasing, endless and deafening, and fame if it should be great and restless and begetting envy; all these are neither praiseworthy nor useful; but talent, duty, beauty, training, wisdom, victory and eloquence, being in