Wine is a good thing on every occasion and for everyone: for those in a good mood, it’s an aid for intensifying happiness; for those who are healthy, it’s good for conserving health; it’s a consolation for those who are depressed, and a cure for those who are sick. For the wise Ecclesiastes would not have advised giving wine to those who are sad, to say nothing of Heracles, [who was] admired by the heroes for his valor no less than wisdom, who urged his grieving friends to drink, stating that the lifting and lowering of the wineglass would deliver them out of all sadness. (tr. Michael Fontaine, slightly adapted)
For instance, the factor that has the most bearing on health and sickness, and on moral goodness and badness, is whether or not there’s proportion between soul and body, but we don’t consider these things at all. We fail to see that when a relatively weak and frail body is the vehicle for a soul that has no weakness or pettiness in it, or when the combination of the two of them is imbalanced in the opposite way, the creature as a whole lacks proportion in the most important respects, and therefore lacks beauty. However, for those capable of seeing it, a creature whose soul and body are in balance is a vision of the utmost beauty and attractiveness. Think, for example, of a body which is out of proportion with itself, in the sense that it has one leg longer than the other or some other abnormality: it’s not just that it’s ugly, but also that it makes a lot of trouble for itself in a work context, as its lurching gait exhausts it and makes it liable to all sorts of injuries and accidents. The same goes, we’re bound to think, for the complex of soul and body that we call a living creature. Suppose its soul is stronger than its body. When the soul gets abnormally passionate, it makes the whole body quiver from within and fills it with illnesses; and when it’s intent upon study and research, it causes the body to waste away. Or again, when it’s involved in teaching or disputation, in public or in a private house, surrounded by arguments and competitiveness, it heats the body and churns it up, and induces fluxes, which fool most so-called healers into blaming the innocent party. On the other hand, the balance of power might lie with the body rather than the soul, so that a strong body has a petty, weak mind attached to it. If so, of the two fundamental desires that human beings possess—the bodily desire for food and the desire of the most divine part of us for knowledge… well, when the impulses of the stronger part win and reinforce their favourite, they turn the soul into something obtuse, dull, and forgetful, and give it the worst of all diseases, ignorance. (tr. Robin Waterfield)
exossas pullum a pectore, femora eius iungis in porrectum, surculo alligas, et impensam [conchicla farsilis] paras. et farcies alternis pisam lotam, cerebella, lucanicas et cetera. teres <piper,> ligusticum, origanum et gingiber, liquamen suffundis, passo et vino temperabis. facies ut ferveat, et, cum ferbuerit, mittis modice. et impensam cum condieris, alternis in pullo componis, omento tegis et in operculo deponis et in furnum mittis, ut coquantur paulatim, et inferes.
(Apicius, De Re Coquinaria 5.4.6)
Stuffed chicken or suckling pig
Bone [either] chicken [or suckling pig]. From the chicken remove the breast bone and the [upper joint bones of the] legs; hold it together by means of wooden skewers, and meanwhile prepare [the following dressing in this manner]: alternate [inside of the chicken or pig] peas with the pods [washed and cooked], brains, Lucanian sausage, etc. Now crush pepper, lovage, origany and ginger, moistened with broth, raisin wine and wine to taste, make it boil, when done, use it moderately for seasoning and alternately with the other dressing; wrap [the chicken, or pig] in caul, place it in a baking dish and put it in the oven to be cooked slowly, and serve. (tr. Joseph Dommers Vehling)
A person who took note of what happened would have come at once to the conclusion that beauty is something naturally regal, especially when, as in the present case of Autolycus, its possessor joins with it modesty and self-control. For in the first place, just as the sudden glow of a light at night draws all eyes to itself, so now the beauty of Autolycus compelled everyone to look at him. And second, there was not one of the onlookers who did not feel his soul stirred by the boy; some of them grew quieter than before, others even assumed some kind of a pose. Now it is true that all who are possessed by any kind of the gods seem well worth gazing at; but whereas in the case of other gods they have a tendency to look bugeyed, making terrifying sounds, and behave more vehemently, those who are inspired by chaste Eros have a more affectionate look, make their voices more gentle, and carry themselves in a way most befitting free men. Such was the demeanor of Callias at this time under the influence of Eros; and therefore he was an object well worth the gaze of those initiated into the worship of this god. (tr. Edgar Cardew Marchant & Otis Johnson Todd, revised by Jeffrey Henderson)
Haec eadem super Pythagora noster Taurus cum dixisset: “nunc autem” inquit “isti, qui repente pedibus illotis ad philosophos devertunt, non est hoc satis, quod sunt omnino ἀθεώρητοι, ἄμουσοι, ἀγεωομέτρητοι, sed legem etiam dant, qua philosophari discant. alius ait ‘hoc me primum doce’, item alius ‘hoc volo’ inquit ‘discere, istud nolo’; hic a Symposio Platonis incipere gestit propter Alcibiadae comisationem, ille a Phaedro propter Lysiae orationem. est etiam,” inquit “pro Iuppiter! qui Platonem legere postulet non vitae ornandae, sed linguae orationisque comendae gratia, nec ut modestior fiat, sed ut lepidior.” haec Taurus dicere solitus novicios philosophorum sectatores cum veteribus Pythagoricis pensitans. sed id quoque non praetereundum est, quod omnes, simul atque a Pythagora in cohortem illam disciplinarum recepti erant, quod quisque familiae, pecuniae habebat, in medium dabat, et coibatur societas inseparabilis, tamquam illud fuit anticum consortium, quod iure atque verbo Romano appellabatur “ercto non cito”.
(Aulus Gellius, Noct. Att. 1.9.8-12)
Having thus expressed himself about Pythagoras, my friend Taurus continued: “But nowadays these fellows who turn to philosophy on a sudden with unwashed feet, not content with being wholly ‘without purpose, without learning, and without scientific training,’ even lay down the law as to how they are to be taught philosophy. One says, ‘first teach me this,’ another chimes in, “I want to learn this, I don’t want to learn that’; one is eager to begin with the Symposium of Plato because of the revel of Alcibiades, another with the Phaedrus on account of the speech of Lysias. By Jupiter!” said he, “one man actually asks to read Plato, not in order to better his life, but to deck out his diction and style, not to gain in discretion, but in prettiness.” That is what Taurus used to say, in comparing the modern students of philosophy with the Pythagoreans of old. But I must not omit this fact either—that all of them, as soon as they had been admitted by Pythagoras into that band of disciples, at once devoted to the common use whatever estate and property they had, and an inseparable fellowship was formed, like the old-time association which in Roman legal parlance was termed an “undivided inheritance.” (tr. John C. Rolfe)
Ordo atque ratio Pythagorae ac deinceps familiae et successionis eius recipiendi instituendique discipulos huiuscemodi fuisse traditur: iam a principio adulescentes, qui sese ad discendum obtulerant, ἐφυσιογνωμόνει. id verbum significat mores naturasque hominum coniectatione quadam de oris et vultus ingenio deque totius corporis filo atque habitu sciscitari. tum qui exploratus ab eo idoneusque fuerat, recipi in disciplinam statim iubebat et tempus certum tacere: non omnes idem, sed alios aliud tempus pro aestimato captu sollertiae. is autem, qui tacebat, quae dicebantur ab aliis, audiebat, neque percontari, si parum intellexerat, neque commentari, quae audierat, fas erat; sed non minus quisquam tacuit quam biennium: hi prorsus appellabantur intra tempus tacendi audiendique ἀκουστικοί. ast ubi res didicerant rerum omnium difficillimas, tacere audireque, atque esse iam coeperant silentio eruditi, cui erat nomen ἐχεμυθία, tum verba facere et quaerere quaeque audissent scribere et, quae ipsi opinarentur, expromere potestas erat; hi dicebantur in eo tempore μαθηματικοί, ab his scilicet artibus, quas iam discere atque meditari inceptaverant: quoniam geometriam, gnomonicam, musicam ceterasque item disciplinas altiores μαθήματα veteres Graeci appellabant; vulgus autem, quos gentilicio vocabulo “Chaldaeos” dicere oportet, “mathematicos” dicit. exinde his scientiae studiis ornati ad perspicienda mundi opera et principia naturae procedebant ac tunc denique nominabantur φυσικοί.
(Aulus Gellius, Noct. Att. 1.9.1-7)
It is said that the order and method followed by Pythagoras, and afterwards by his school and his successors, in admitting and training their pupils were as follows: At the very outset he “physiognomized” the young men who presented themselves for instruction. That word means to inquire into the character and dispositions of men by an inference drawn from their facial appearance and expression, and from the form and bearing of their whole body. Then, when he had thus examined a man and found him suitable, he at once gave orders that he should be admitted to the school and should keep silence for a fixed period of time; this was not the same for all, but differed according to his estimate of the man’s capacity for learning quickly. But the one who kept silent listened to what was said by others; he was, however, religiously forbidden to ask questions, if he had not fully understood, or to remark upon what he had heard. Now, no one kept silence for less than two years, and during the entire period of silent listening they were called ἀκουστικοί or “auditors.” But when they had learned what is of all things the most difficult, to keep quiet and listen, and had finally begun to be adepts in that silence which is called ἐχεμυθία or “continence in words,” they were then allowed to speak, to ask questions, and to write down what they had heard, and to express their own opinions. During this stage they were called μαθηματικοί or “students of science,” evidently from those branches of knowledge which they had now begun to learn and practise; for the ancient Greeks called geometry, gnomonics, music and other higher studies μαθήματα or “sciences”; but the common people apply the term mathematici to those who ought to be called by their ethnic name, Chaldaeans. Finally, equipped with this scientific training, they advanced to the investigation of the phenomena of the universe and the laws of nature, and then, and not till then, they were called φυσικοί or “natural philosophers.” (tr. John C. Rolfe)
Si quae non nupta mulier domum suam patefecerit omnium cupiditati palamque sese in meretricia vita collocarit, virorum alienissimorum conviviis uti instituerit, si hoc in urbe, si in hortis, si in Baiarum illa celebritate faciat, si denique ita sese gerat non incessu solum, sed ornatu atque comitatu, non flagrantia oculorum, non libertate sermonum, sed etiam complexu, osculatione, actis, navigatione, conviviis, ut non solum meretrix, sed etiam proterva meretrix procaxque videatur: cum hac si qui adulescens forte fuerit, utrum hic tibi, L. Herenni, adulter an amator, expugnare pudicitiam an explere libidinem voluisse videatur? obliviscor iam iniurias tuas, Clodia, depono memoriam doloris mei; quae abs te crudeliter in meos me absente facta sunt, neglego; ne sint haec in te dicta, quae dixi. sed ex te ipsa requiro, quoniam et crimen accusatores abs te et testem eius criminis te ipsam dicunt se habere. si quae mulier sit eius modi, qualem ego paulo ante descripsi, tui dissimilis, vita institutoque meretricio, cum hac aliquid adulescentem hominem habuisse rationis num tibi perturpe aut perflagitiosum esse videatur? ea si tu non es, sicut ego malo, quid est, quod obiciant Caelio?
(Cicero, Pro Caelio 49-50)
If any woman, not being married, has opened her house to the passions of everybody, and has openly established herself in the way of life of a harlot, and has been accustomed to frequent the banquets of men with whom she has no relationship; if she does so in the city in country houses and in that most frequented place, Baiae, if in short she behaves in such a manner, not only by her gait, but by her style of dress, and by the people who are seen attending her, and not only by the eager glances of her eyes and the freedom of her conversation, but also by embracing men, by kissing them at water parties and sailing parties and banquets so as not only to seem a harlot, but a very wanton and lascivious harlot, I ask you, O Lucius Herennius, if a young man should happen to have been with her, is he to be called an adulterer or a lover? does he seem to have been attacking chastity or merely to have aimed at satisfying his desires? I forget for the present all the injuries which you have done me, O Clodia; I banish all recollection of my own distress; I put out of consideration your cruel conduct to my relations when I was absent. You are at liberty to suppose that what I have just said was not said about you. But I ask you yourself, since the accusers say that they derived the idea of this charge from you, and that they have you yourself as a witness of its truth; I ask you, I say, if there be any woman of the sort that I have just described, a woman unlike you, a woman of the habits and profession of a harlot, does it appear an act of extraordinary baseness, or extraordinary wickedness, for a young man to have had some connection with her? If you are not such a woman,—and I would much rather believe that you are not—then, what is it that they impute to Caelius?
But precious youth is like a fleeting dream; in no time grievous and hideous old age, hateful as well as dishonoured, hangs over one’s head. It makes a man unrecognisable and hampers eyes and mind when it is poured round. (tr. Douglas E. Gerber)
And thus would one of the proud youths speak: “If you are indeed God, and have listened to the voice of God, and if perhaps you think you are some great and mighty man, act as your mind is set and hold back no longer! But in this, I think, you have not spoken rightly, nor shall you persuade me, stranger; so indeed should you win good repute and prosperity. Tell me what I ask—for I declare that I am a friend of your house—if you are indeed God, and have listened to the voice of God.” Thus would one speak, and coming up would deal a wound against the lower portion of his belly, where he was girded with his apron, and he would sometimes bring forth a word which were better left unspoken. And immediately dark blood flowed from the wound, quieting pain and strife, and bringing forgetfulness of every ill; this is, to be sure, the only due that is paid to miserable mortals, and never does the proud spirit forbode death of whoever should drink this down, when it is mingled in the bowl. In the lower belly was the far-shadowing spear fixed, a glancing blow, but it cut clean to the bone—harsh man, worker of violence, who did not hesitate to do these evil deeds!—and immediately the spear pierced the flesh and out flowed the immortal blood of God, the ichor, such as flows in the blessed gods. And for him in utter obedience his heart remained enduring as he was struck; and he let no tear fall from his eyelids to the ground, but in silence watched his father, constantly waiting, and he spoke in prayer, looking up to the broad heaven: “Father, indeed this is a great marvel that my eyes behold; in such a way now you favor men of violence who in wantonness devise mischief against me!” (tr. David Bauwens; based on August Taber Murray’s translation of the Iliad as revised by George E. Dimock)
Crambe Repetita 