10. The order observed in calling upon senators for their opinions; and the altercation in the senate between Gaius Caesar, when consul, and Marcus Cato, who tried to use up the whole day in talk. BEFORE the passage of the law which is now observed in the proceedings of the senate, the order in calling for opinions varied. Sometimes the man was first called upon whom the censors had first enrolled in the senate, sometimes the consuls elect; some of the consuls, influenced by friendship or some personal relationship, used to call first upon anyone they pleased, as a compliment, contrary to the regular order. However, when the usual order was not followed, the rule was observed of not calling first upon any but a man of consular rank. It is said that Gaius Caesar, when he was consul with Marcus Bibulus, called upon only four senators out of order. The first of these was Marcus Crassus, but after Caesar had betrothed his daughter to Gnaeus Pompeius, he began to call upon Pompeius first. Caesar gave the senate his reason for this procedure, according to the testimony of Tullius Tiro, Cicero's freedman, who writes that he had the information from his patron. Ateius Capito has made the same statement in his work On Senatorial Conduct. In the same treatise of Capito is this passage: “The consul Gaius Caesar called upon Marcus Cato for his opinion. Cato did not wish to have the motion before the house carried, since he did not think it for the public good. For the purpose of delaying action, he made a long speech and tried to use up the whole day in talking. For it was a senator's right, when asked his opinion, to speak beforehand on any other subject he wished, and as long as he wished. Caesar, in his capacity as consul, summoned an attendant, and since Cato would not stop, ordered him to be arrested in the full tide of his speech and taken to prison. The senate arose in a body and attended Cato to the prison. But this,” he says, “aroused such indignation, that Caesar yielded and ordered Cato's release.”
10. Quid observatum de ordine rogandarum in senatu sententiarum; iurgiumqueinrgiumque in senatu C. Caesaris consulis et M. Catonis, diem dicendo eximentis. ANTE legem quae nunc de senatu habendo observatur, ordo rogandi sententias varius fuit. Alias primus rogabatur qui princeps a censoribus in senatum lectus fuerat, alias qui designati consules erant; quidam e consulibus, studio aut necessitudine aliqua adducti, quem is visum erat honoris gratia extra ordinem sententiam primum rogabant. Observatum tamen est, cum extra ordinem fieret, ne quis quemquam ex alio quam ex consulari loco sententiam primum rogaret. C. Caesar in consulatu, quem cum M. Bibulo gessit, quattuor solos extra ordinem rogasse sententiam dicitur. Ex his quattuor principem rogabat M. Crassum; sed, postquam filiam Cn. Pompeio desponderat, primumprimuim coeperat Pompeium rogare. Eius rei rationem reddidisse eum senatui Tiro Tullius, M. Ciceronis libertus, refert, itaque se ex patrono suo audisse scribit. Id ipsum Capito Ateius in libro quem De Officio Senatorio composuit, scriptum reliquit. In eodem libro Capitonis id quoque scriptum est: “C.,” inquit, “Caesar consul M. Catonem sententiam rogavit. Cato rem quae consulebatur, quoniam non e republica videbatur, perfici nolebat. Eius rei ducendae gratia longa oratione utebatur eximebatque dicendo diem. Erat enim ius senatori, ut sententiam rogatus diceret ante quicquid vellet aliae rei et quoad vellet. Caesar consul viatorem vocavit eumque, cum finem non faceret, prendi loquentem et in carcerem duci iussit. Senatus consurrexit et prosequebatur Catonem in carcerem. Hac,” inquit, “invidia facta Caesar destitit et mitti Catonem iussit.”
11. The nature of the information which Aristoxenus has handed down about Pythagoras on the ground that it was more authoritative; and also what Plutarch wrote in the same vein about that same Pythagoras. AN erroneous belief of long standing has established itself and become current, that the philosopher Pythagoras did not eat of animals: also that he abstained from the bean, which the Greeks call ku/amos. In accordance with that belief the poet Callimachus wrote:I tell you too, as did Pythagoras,Withhold your hands from beans, a hurtful food.Also, as the result of the same belief, Marcus Cicero wrote these words in the first book of his work On Didination: “Plato therefore bids us go to our sleep in such bodily condition that there may be nothing to cause delusion and disturbance in our minds. It is thought to be for that reason too that the Pythagoreans were forbidden to eat beans, a food that produces great flatulency, which is disturbing to those who seek mental calm.” So then Cicero. But Aristoxenus the musician, a man thoroughly versed in early literature, a pupil of the philosopher Aristotle, in the book On Pythagoras which he has left us, says that Pythagoras used no vegetable more often than beans, since that food gently loosened the bowels and relieved them. I add Aristoxenus' own words: “Pythagoras among vegetables especially recommended the bean, saying that it was both digestible and loosening; and therefore he most frequently made use of it.” Aristoxenus also relates that Pythagoras ate very young pigs and tender kids. This fact he seems to have learned from his intimate friend Xenophilus the Pythagorean and from some other older men, who lived not long after the time of Pythagoras. And the same information about animal food is given by the poet Alexis, in the comedy entitled “The Pythagorean Bluestocking.” Furthermore, the reason for the mistaken idea about abstaining from beans seems to be, that in a poem of Empedocles, who was a follower of Pythagoras, this line is found:O wretches, utter wretches, from beans withhold your hands.For most men thought that kua/mous meant the vegetable, according to the common use of the word. But those who have studied the poems of Empedocles with greater care and knowledge say that here kua/mous refers to the testicles, and that after the Pythagorean manner they were called in a covert and symbolic way ku/amoi, because they are the cause of pregnancy and furnish the power for human generation: and that therefore Empedocles in that verse desired to keep men, not from eating beans, but from excess in venery. Plutarch too, a man of weight in scientific matters, in the first book of his work On Homer wrote that Aristotle gave the same account of the Pythagoreans: namely, that except for a few parts of the flesh they did not abstain from eating animals. Since the statement is contrary to the general belief, I have appended Plutarch's own words: “Aristotle says that the Pythagoreans abstained from the matrix, the heart, the a)kalh/fh and some other such things, but used all other animal food.” Now the a)kalh/fh is a marine creature which is called the sea-nettle. But Plutarch in his Table Talk says that the Pythagoreans also abstained from mullets. But as to Pythagoras himself, while it is well known that he declared that he had come into the world as Euphorbus, what Cleanthes and Dicaearchus have recorded is less familiar—that he was afterwards Pyrrhus Pyranthius, then Aethalides, and then a beautiful courtesan, whose name was Alco.
11. Quae qualiaque sint quae Aristoxenus quasi magis comperta de Pythagora memoriae mandavit; et quae item Plutarchus in eundem modum de eodem Pythagora scripserit. OPINIO vetus falsa occupavit et convaluit, Pythagoram philosophum non esitavisse ex animalibus, item abstinuisse fabulo, quem Graeci κύαμον appellant. Ex hac opinione Callimachus poeta scripsit: Καὶ κυάμων ἄπο χεῖρας ἔχειν, ἀνιῶντος ἐδεστοῦ, Κἀγώ, Πυθαγόρας ὡς ἐκέλευε, λέγω. Ex eadem item opinione M. Cicero in libro De Divinatione primo haec verba posuit: “Iubet igitur Plato sic ad somnum proficisci corporibus affectis, ut nihil sit quod errorem animis perturbationemque afferat. Ex quo etiam Pythagoreis interdictum putatur ne faba vescerentur, quae res habet inflationem magnam, tranquillitatem mentis quaerentibus contrariam.” Haec quidem M. Cicero. Sed Aristoxenus musicus, vir litterarum veterum diligentissimus, Aristoteli philosophi auditor, in libro quem De Pythagora reliquit, nullo saepius legumento Pythagoram dicit usum quam fabis, quoniam is cibus et subduceret sensim alvum et levigaret. Verba ipsa Aristoxeni subscripsi: Πυθαγόρας δὲ τῶν ὀσπρίων μάλιστα τὸν κύαμον ἐδοκίμασεν· λειαντικόν τε γὰρ εἶναι καὶ διαχωρητικόν· διὸ καὶ μάλιστα κέχρηται αὐτῷ. Porculis quoque minusculis et haedis tenerioribus victitasse, idem Aristoxenus refert. Quam rem videtur cognovisse e Xenophilo Pythagorico familiari suo, et ex quibusdam aliis natu maioribus, qui ab aetate Pythagorae minus diu aberant. Ac de animalibus Alexis etiam poeta in comoedia, quae Πυθαγορίζουσα inscribitur, docet. Videtur autem de κυάμῳ non esitato causam erroris fuisse, quia in Empedocli carmine, qui disciplinas Pythagorae secutus est, versus hic invenitur:Δειλοί, πάνδειλοι, κυάμων ἄπο χεῖρας ἔχεσθαι. Opinati enim sunt plerique κυάμους legumentum dici, ut a vulgo dicitur. Sed qui diligentius scitiusque carmina Empedocli arbitrati sunt, κυάμους hoc in loco testiculos significare dicunt, eosque more Pythagorae operte atque symbolice κυάμους appellatos, quod sint αἴτιοι τοῦ κυεῖν et geniturae humanae vim praebeant; idcircoque Empedoclen versu isto non a fabulo edendo, sed a rei veneriae prolubio voluisse homines deducere. Plutarchus quoque, homo in disciplinis gravi auctoritate, in primo librorum quos De Homero composuit, Aristotelem philosophum scripsit eadem ipsa de Pythagoricis scripsisse, quod non abstinuerint edundis animalibus, nisi pauca carne quadam. Verba ipsa Plutarchi, quoniam res inopinata est, subscripsi: Ἀριστοτέλης δὲ μήτρας καὶ καρδίας καὶ ἀκαλήφης καὶ τοιούτων τινῶν ἄλλων ἀπέχεσθαί φησιν τοὺς Πυθαγορικούς· χρῆσθαι δὲ τοῖς ἄλλοις. Ἀκαλήφη autem est animal marinum, quod “urtica” appellatur. Sed et piscibus mullis abstinere Pythagoricos, Plutarchus in Symposiacis dicit. Pythagoram vero ipsum, sicuti celebre est Euphorbum primo fuisse dictasse, ita haec remotiora sunt his quae Clearchus et Dicaearchus memoriae tradiderunt, fuisse eum postea Pyrrum Pyranthium, deinde Aethaliden, deinde feminam pulcra facie meretricemneretricem, cui nomen fuerat Alco.
12. Instances of disgrace and punishment inflicted by the censors, found in ancient records and worthy of notice. IF anyone had allowed his land to run to waste and was not giving it sufficient attention, if he had neither ploughed nor weeded it, or if anyone had neglected his orchard or vineyard, such conduct did not go unpunished, but it was taken up by the censors, who reduced such a man to the lowest class of citizens. So too, any Roman knight, if his horse seemed to be skinny or not well groomed, was charged with inpolitiae, a word which means the same thing as negligence. There are authorities for both these punishments, and Marcus Cato has cited frequent instances.
12. Notae et animadversiones censoriae in veteribus monumentis repertae memoria dignae. Si quis agrum suum passus fuerat sordescere eumque indiligenter curabat ac neque araverat neque purgaverat, sive quis arborem suam vineamque habuerat derelictui, non id sine poena fuit, sed erat opus censorium censoresque aerarium faciebant. Item, si quis eques Romanus equum habere gracilentum aut parum nitidum visus erat, “inpolitiae” notabatur; id verbum significat quasi tu dicas “incuriae.” Cuius rei utriusque auctoritates sunt et M. Cato id saepenumero adtestatus est.
13. On the possibility of curing gout by certain melodies played in a special way on the flute. I RAN across the statement very recently in the book of Theophrastus OnInspiration that many men have believed and put their belief on record, that when gouty pains in the hips are most severe, they are relieved if a flute-player plays soothing measures. That snake-bites are cured by the music of the flute, when played skilfully and melodiously, is also stated in a book of Democritus, entitled On Deadly Infections, in which he shows that the music of the flute is medicine for many ills that flesh is heir to. So very close is the connection between the bodies and the minds of men, and therefore between physical and mental ailments and their remedies.
13. Quod incentiones quaedam tibiarum certo modo factae ischiacis mederi possunt. Creditum hoc a plerisque esse et memoriae mandatum, ischia cum maxime doleant, tum, si modulis lenibus tibicen incinat, minui dolores, ego nuperrime in libro Theophrasti Περὶ Ἐνθουσιασμοῦ scriptum inveni. Viperarum morsibus tibicinium scite modulateque adhibitumadhilitum mederi, refert etiam Democriti liber, qui inscribiturinscrilitur Περὶ Λοιμῶν, in quo docet plurimis hominum morbidis medicinae fuisse incentiones tibiarum. Tanta prosus adfinitas est corporibus hominum mentibusque et propterea vitiis quoque aut medellis animorum et corporum.
14. A story told of Hostilius Mancinus, a curule aedile, and the courtesan Manilia; and the words of the decree of the tribunes to whom Manilia appealed. As I was reading the ninth book of the Miscellany of Ateius Capito, entitled On Public Decisions, one decree of the tribunes seemed to me full of old-time dignity. For that reason I remember it, and it was rendered for this reason and to this purport. Aulus Hostilius Mancinus was a curule aedile. He brought suit before the people against a courtesan called Manilia, because he said that he had been struck with a stone thrown from her apartment by night, and he exhibited the wound made by the stone. Manilia appealed to the tribunes of the commons. Before them she declared that Mancinus had come to her house in the garb of a reveller; that it would not have been to her advantage to admit him, and that when he tried to break in by force, he had been driven off with stones. The tribunes decided that the aedile had rightly been refused admission to a place to which it had not been seemly for him to go with a garland on his head; therefore they forbade the aedile to bring an action before the people.
14. Narratur historia de Hostilio Mancino aedili cur. et Manilia meretrice; verbaque decreti tribunorum ad quos a Manilia provocatum est. CUM librum IX. Atei Capitonis Coniectaneorum legeremus, qui inscriptus est De Iudiciis Publicis, decretum tribunorum visum est gravitatis antiquae plenum. Propterea id meminimus, idque ob hanc causam et in hanc sententiam scriptum est: Aulus Hostilius Mancinus aedilis curulis fuit. Is Maniliae meretrici diem ad populum dixit, quod e tabulato eius noctu lapide ictus esset, vulnusque ex eo lapide ostendebat. Manilia ad tribunos plebi provocavit. Apud eos dixit comessatorem Mancinum ad aedes suas venisse; eum sibi recipere non fuisse e re sua, sed cum vi inrumperetinruinperet, lapidibus depulsum. Tribuni decreverunt aedilem ex eo loco iure deiectum quo eum venire cum corollario non decuisset; propterea, ne cum populo aedilis ageret intercesserunt Defensa a culpa sententia ex historia Sallustii, quam iniqui eius cum insectatione maligni reprehenderint.
15. The defence of a passage in the historical works of Sallust, which his enemies attacked in a spirit of malicious criticism. THE elegance of Sallust's style and his passion for coining and introducing new words was met with exceeding great hostility, and many men of no mean ability tried to criticize and decry much in his writings. Many of the attacks on him were ignorant or malicious. Yet there are some things that may be regarded as deserving of censure, as for example the following passage in the History of Catiline, which has the appearance of being written somewhat carelessly. Sallust's words are these: “And for myself, although I am well aware that by no means equal repute attends the narrator and the doer of deeds, yet I regard the writing of history as one of the hardest of tasks; first because the style and diction must be equal to the deeds recorded; and in the second place, because such criticisms as you make of others' shortcomings are thought by most men to be due to malice and envy. Furthermore, when you commemorate the distinguished merit and fame of good men, while everyone is quite ready to believe you when you tell of things which he thinks he could easily do himself, everything beyond that he regards as fictitious, if not false.” The critics say: “He declared that he would give the reasons why it appears to be ' hard ' 'to write history'; and then, after mentioning the first reason, he does not give a second, but gives utterance to complaints. For it ought not to be regarded as a reason why the work of history is 'hard,' that the reader either misinterprets what is written or does not believe it to be true.” They maintain that he ought to say that such work is exposed and subject to misjudgments, rather than “hard”; for that which is “hard” is hard because of the difficulty of its accomplishment, not because of the mistaken opinions of other men. That is what those ill-natured critics say. But Sallust does not use arduus merely in the sense of “hard,” but as the equivalent of the Greek word xalepo/s, that is, both difficult and also troublesome, disagreeable and intractable. And the meaning of these words is not inconsistent with that of the passage which was just quoted from Sallust.
15. ELEGANTIA orationis Sallustii verborumque fingendi et novandi studium cum multa prorsus invidia fuit, multique non mediocri ingenio viri conati sunt reprehendere pleraque et obtrectare. In quibus plura inscite aut maligne vellicant. Nonnulla tamen videri possunt non indigna reprehensione; quale illud in Catilinae Historia repertum est, quod habeat eamearn speciem, quasi parum adtente dictum. Verba Sallustii haec sunt: “Ac mihi quidem, tametsi hautquaquam par gloria sequitur scriptorem et auctorem rerum, tamen inprimis arduum videtur res gestas scribere; primum, quod facta dictis exaequanda sunt; dein, quia plerique quae delicta reprehenderis malivolentia et invidia dicta putant. Ubi de magna virtute atque gloria bonorum memores, quae sibi quisque facilia factu putat, aequo animo accipit; supra ea, veluti ficta, pro falsis ducit” “Proposuit,” inquiunt, “dicturum causas quamobrem videatur esse ‘arduum,’ ‘res gestas scribere’; atque ibi cum primam causam dixerit, dein non alteram causam, sed querellas dicit.” “Non enim causa videri debet cur historiae opus ‘arduum’ sit, quod hi qui legunt aut inique interpretantur quae scripta sunt aut vera esse non credunt.” Obnoxiam quippe et obiectam falsis existimationibus eamearn rem dicendam aiunt quam “arduam”; quia quod est “arduum” sui operis difficultate est arduum, non opinionis alienae erroribus. Haec illi malivoli reprehensores dicunt. Sed “arduum” Sallustius non pro difficili tantum, sed pro eo quoque ponit quod Graeci χαλεπὸν appellant, quod est cum difficile, tum molestum quoque et incommodum et intractabile. Quorum verborum significatio a sententia Sallustii supra scripta non abhorret.
16. On the inflection of certain words by Varro and Nigidius contrary to everyday usage; and also a quotation of some instances of the same kind from the early writers, with examples. I LEARN that Marcus Varro and Publius Nigidius, the most learned of all the Romans, always said and wrote senatuis, domuis and fluctuis as the genitive case of the words senatus, domus and fluctus, and used senatui, domui, fluctui, and other similar words, with the corresponding dative ending. There is also a line of the comic poet Terence, which in the old manuscripts is written as follows:Because, I think, of that old dame (anuis) who died.Some of the early grammarians wished to give this authority of theirs the sanction of a rule; namely, that every dative singular ending in l, if it has not the same form as the genitive singular, makes the genitive singular by adding s, as pati patris, duci ducis, caedi caedis. “Therefore,” they say, “since we use senatui as the dative case, the genitive singular of that word is senatuis, not senatus.” But all are not agreed that we should use senatui in the dative case rather than senatu. For example, Lucilius in that same case uses victu and ann, and not victui and anui, in these verses:Since you to honest fare (victu) do waste and feasts prefer,and in another place:I'm doing harm to the old girl (anu).Vergil also in the dative case writes aspectu and not aspecui:Withdraw not from our view (aspectu)and in the Georgics:Nor give themselves to love's embrace (concubitu).Gaius Caesar too, a high authority on the Latin language, says in his Speech against Cato: “owing to the arrogance, haughtiness and tyranny dominateu) of one man.” Also in the First Action against Dolabella, Book I: “Those in whose temples and shrines they had been placed for an honour and an adornment (ornatu).” Also, in his books on analogy he decides that i should be omitted in all such forms.
16. De vocabulis quibusdam a Varrone et Nigidio contra cotidiani sermonis consuetudinem declinatis; atque inibi id genus quaedam cum exemplis veterum relata. M. VARRONEM et P. Nigidium, viros Romani generis doctissimos, comperimus non aliter elocutos esse et scripsisse quam “senatuis” et “domuis” et “fluctuis,” qui est patrius casus ab eo quod est “senatus,” “domus” “fluctus”; huic “senatui,” “domui” “fluctui” ceteraque is consimilia pariter dixisse. Terentii quoque comici versus in libris veteribus itidem scriptus est:Eius ánuis causa, opínor, quae est emórtua. Hanc eorum auctoritatem quidam e veteribus grammaticis ratione etiam firmare voluerunt, quod omnis dativus singularis “i” littera finitus, si non similis est genetivi singularis, s littera addita genetivum singularem facit, ut “patri patris,” “duci ducis,” “caedi caedis.” “Cum igitur” inquiunt “in casu dandi ‘huic senatui’ dicamus, genetivus ex eo singularis ‘senatuis’ est, non ‘senatus.’” Set non omnes concedunt in casu dativo “senatui” magis dicendum quam “senatu.” Sicuti Lucilius in eodem casu “victu” et “anu” dicit, non “victui” nec “anui,” in hisce versibus:Quod sumptum atque epulas victu praeponis honestoet alio in loco:Anu noceo (inquit). Vergilius quoque in casu dandi “aspectu” dicit, non “aspectui”Teque aspectu ne subtrahe nostroet in Georgicis:Quod nec concubitu indulgent. C. etiam Caesar, gravis auctor linguae Latinae, in Anticatone, “unius,” inquit, “arrogantiae, superbiae dominatuque.” Item In Dolabellam actionis l. lib. I.: “Isti, quorum in aedibus fanisque posita et honori erant et ornatu.” In libris quoque analogicis omnia istiusmodi sine “i” littera dicenda censet.
17. A discussion of the natural quantity of certain particles, the long pronunciation of which, when prefixed to verbs, seems to be barbarous and ignorant; with several examples and explanations. IN the eleventh book of Lucilius are these lines:Thus base Asellus did great Scipio taunt:Unlucky was his censorship and bad.I hear that many read obiciebat with a long o, and they say that they do this in order to preserve the metre. Again farther on he says:I'd versify the words the herald Granius spoke.In this passage also they lengthen the prefix of the first word for the same reason. Again in the fifteenth book:Subicit huic humilem et suffercitus posteriorem,they read subicit with a long u, because it is not proper for the first syllable to be short in heroic verse. Likewise in the Epidicus of Plautus they lengthen the syllable con inHaste now, Epidicus, prepare yourself,And throw (conice) your mantle round about your neck.In Virgil too I hear that some lengthen the verb subicit in:Parnassian laurel tooLifts (subicit) 'neath large mother-shade its infant stem.But neither the preposition ob nor sub is long by nature, nor is con long either, except when it is followed by the letters which come directly after it in constituit and confecit, or when its n is lost, as in Sallust's faenoribus copertus. But in those instances which I have mentioned above the metre may be preserved without barbarously lengthening the prefixes; for the following letter in those words should be written with two i's, not with one. For the simple verb to which the above-mentioned particles are prefixed, is not icio, but iacio, and the perfect is not icit, but iecit. When that word is used in compounds, the letter a is changed into i, as happens in the verbs insilio and incipio, and thus the first i acquires consonantal force. Accordingly, that syllable, being pronounced a little longer and fuller, does not allow the first syllable to be short, but makes it long by position, and thus the rhythm of the verse and the correct pronunciation are preserved. What I have said leads also to a knowledge of this, that in the line which we find in the sixth book of Virgil:Unconquered chieftain, save me from these ills;Or do thou earth cast on (inice) me,iniice is to be written and pronounced as I have indicated above, unless anyone is so ignorant as to lengthen the preposition in in this word too for the sake of the metre. We ask then for what reason the letter o in obicibus is lengthened, since this word is derived from the verb obiicio, and is not at all analogous to motus, which is from moveo and is pronounced with a long o. I myself recall that Sulpicius Apollinaris, a man eminent for his knowledge of literature, pronounced obices and obicibus with a short o, and that in Virgil too he read in the same way the lines:And by what force the oceans fathomlessRise, bursting all their bounds (obicibus);but, as I have indicated, he gave the letter i, which in that word also should be doubled, a somewhat fuller and longer sound. It is consistent therefore that subices also, which is formed exactly like obices, should be pronounced with the letter u short. Ennius, in his tragedy which is entitled Achilles, uses subices for the upper air which is directly below the heavens, in these lines: By lofty, humid regions (subices) of the gods I swear, Whence comes the storm with savage roaring wind; yet, in spite of what I have said, you may hear almost everyone read subices with a long u. But Marcus Cato uses that very verb with another prefix in the speech which he delivered On his Consulship: “So the wind bears them to the beginning of the Pyrenees' range, where it extends (proicit) into the deep.” And so too Pacuvius in the Chryses:High Ida's cape, whose tongue into the deep extends (proicit).
17. De natura quarundam particularumparticularuin quae praepositae verbis intendi atque produci barbare et inscite videntur, exemplis rationibusque plusculis disceptatum. LUCILII ex XI. versus sunt:Scipiadae magno improbus obiciebat Asellus,Lustrum illo censore malum infelixque fuisse.“Obiciebat” “o” littera producta multos legere audio, idque eo facere dicunt ut ratio numeri salva sit. Idem infra:Conicere in versus dictum praeconis volebamGrani.In hac quoque primi verbi praepositione “o” ob eandem causam producunt. Item XV.:Subicit huic humilem et suffercitus posteriorem,“subicit” “u” littera longa legunt, quia primam syllabam brevem esse in versu heroico non convenit. Item apud Plautum in Epidico “con” syllabam productam pronuntiant:Age núnciam orna te, Epidice, et palliolum incollum cónice. Apud Vergilium quoque “subicit” verbum produci a plerisque audio:etiam Parnasia laurusParva sub ingenti matris se subicit umbra. Sed neque “ob” neque “sub” praepositio producendi habet naturam, neque item “con,” nisi cum eam litterae secuntur quae in verbis “constituit” et “confecit” secundum eam primae sunt, vel cumcurl eliditur ex ea “n” littera, sicut Sallustius: “faenoribus,” inquit, “copertus.” In his autem quae supra posui et metrum esse integrum potest et praepositiones istae possunt non barbare protendi; secunda enim littera in his verbis per duo “i,” non per unum scribenda est. Nam verbum ipsum, cui supradictae particulae praepositae sunt, non est “icio,” sed “iacio” et praeteritum non “icit” facit, sed “iecit.” Id ubi compositum est, “a” littera in “i” mutatur, sicuti fit in verbis “insilio” et “incipio,” atque “i” ita vim consonantis,capit, et idcirco ea syllaba productius latiusque paulo pronuntiata priorem syllabam brevem esse non patitur, sed reddit eam positu longam, proptereaque et numerus in versu et ratio in pronuntiatu manet. Haec quae diximus eo etiam conducunt, ut quod apud Vergilium in sexto positum invenimus:Eripe me his, invicte, malis, aut tu mihi terram Inice,sic esse “iniice,” ut supra dixi, et scribendum et legendum sciamus, nisi quis tam indocilis est, ut in hoc quoque verbo “in” praepositionem metri gratia protendat. Quaerimus igitur in “obicibus” “o” littera qua ratione intendatur, cum id vocabulum factum sit a verbo “obiicio” et nequaquam simile sit quod a verbo “moveo” “motus” “o” littera longa dicitur. Equidem memini Sulpicium Apollinarem, virum praestanti litterarum scientia, “obicesotobices” et “obicibus” “o” littera correpta dicere, in Vergilio quoque sic eum legere:qua vi maria alta tumescantObicibus ruptis;sed ita ut diximus, “i” litteram, quae in hoc vocabulo quoque gemina esse debet, paulo uberius largiusque pronuntiabat. Congruens igitur est ut “subices” etiam, quod proinde ut “obices” compositum est, “u” littera brevi dici oporteat. Ennius in tragoedia quae Achilles inscribitur, “subices” pro aere alto ponit qui caelo subiectus est, in his versibus:per ego déum sublimas súbicesHúmidas, unde óritur imber sónitu saevo et spíritu;plerosque omnes tamen legere audias “u” littera producta. Id ipsum autem verbum M. Cato sub alia praepositione dicit in oratione quam De Consulatu Suo habuit: “Ita hos,” inquit, “fert ventus ad primorem Pyrenaeum, quo proicit in altum.” Et Pacuvius item in Chryse:Idae promúnturium, cuius lingua in altum prócit.
18. Some stories of the elder Publius Africanus, taken from the annals and well worth relating. How greatly the earlier Scipio Africanus excelled in the splendour of his merits, how lofty and noble of spirit he was, and to what an extent he was upheld by consciousness of his own rectitude, is evident from many of his words and acts. Among these are the following two instances of his extreme self-confidence and sense of superiority. When Marcus Naevius, tribune of the commons, accused him before the people and declared that he had received money from king Antiochus to make peace with him in the name of the Roman people on favourable and easy terms, and when the tribune added sundry other charges which were unworthy of so great a man, then Scipio, after a few preliminary remarks such as were called for by the dignity and renown of his life, said: “I recall, fellow citizens, that this is the day on which in Africa in a mighty battle I conquered Hannibal the Carthaginian, the most bitter enemy of your power, and won for you a splendid peace and a glorious victory. Let us then not be ungrateful to the gods, but, I suggest, let us leave this worthless fellow, and go at once to render thanks to Jupiter, greatest and best of gods.” So saying, he turned away and set out for the Capitol. Thereupon the whole assembly, which had gathered to pass judgment on Scipio, left the tribune, accompanied Scipio to the Capitol, and then escorted him to his home with the joy and expressions of gratitude suited to a festal occasion. The very speech is in circulation which is believed to have been delivered that day by Scipio, and those who deny its authenticity at least admit that these words which I have quoted were spoken by Scipio. There is also another celebrated act of his. Certain Petilii, tribunes of the commons, influenced they say by Marcus Cato, Scipio's personal enemy, and instigated to appear against him, insisted most vigorously in the senate on his rendering an account of the money of Antiochus and of the booty taken in that war; for he had been deputy to his brother Lucius Scipio Asiaticus, the commander in that campaign. Thereupon Scipio arose, and taking a roll from the fold of his toga, said that it contained an account of all the money and all the booty; that he had brought it to be publicly read and deposited in the treasury. “But that,” said he, “I shall not do now, nor will I so degrade myself.” And at once, before them all, he tore the roll across with his own hands and rent it into bits, indignant that an account of money taken in war should be required of him, to whose account the salvation of the Roman State and its power ought to be credited.
18. De P. Africano superiore sumpta quaedam ex annalibus memoratu dignissimadignissinla. SCIPIO AFRICANUS antiquior quanta virtutum gloria praestiterit et quam fuerit altus animi atque magnificus et qua sui conscientia subnixus, plurimis rebus quae dixit quaeque fecit declaratum est. Ex quibus sunt haec duo exempla eius fiduciae atque exuperantiae ingentis. Cum M. Naevius tribunus plebis accusaret eum ad populum diceretque accepisse a rege Antiocho pecuniam, ut condicionibus gratiosis et mollibus pax cum eo populi Romani nomine fieret, et quaedam item alia crimini daret indigna tali viro, tum Scipio pauca praefatus quae dignitas vitae suae atque gloria postulabat, “Memoria,” inquit, “Quirites, repeto, diem esse hodiernum quo Hannibalem Poenum imperio vestro inimicissimum magno proelio vici in terra Africa pacemque et victoriam vobis peperi spectabilem. Non igitur simus adversum deos ingrati et, censeo, relinquamus nebulonem hunc, eamus hinc protinus Iovi optimo maximo gratulatum.” Id cum dixisset, avertit et ire ad Capitolium coepit. Tum contio universa, quae ad sententiam de Scipione ferendam convenerat, relicto tribuno, Scipionem in Capitolium comitata atque inde ad aedes eius cum laetitia et gratulatione sollemni prosecuta est. Fertur etiam oratio quae videtur habita eo die a Scipione, et qui dicunt eamearn non veram, non eunt infitias quin haec quidem verba fuerint, quae dixi, Scipionis. Item aliud est factum eius praeclarum. Petilii quidam tribuni plebis a M., ut aiunt, Catone, inimico Scipionis, comparati in eum atque inmissi, desiderabant in senatu instantissime ut pecuniae Antiochinae praedaeque in eo bello captae rationem redderet; fuerat enim L. Scipioni Asiatico, fratri suo, imperatori in ea provincia legatus. Ibi Scipio exsurgitexurgit et, prolato e sinu togae libro, rationes in eo scriptas esse dixit omnis pecuniae omnisque praedae; illatum, ut palam recitaretur et ad aerarium deferretur. “Sed enim id iam non faciam,” inquit, “nec me ipse afficiam contumelia,” eumque librum statim coram discidit suis manibus et concerpsit, aegre passus quod cui salus imperii ac reipublicae accepta ferri deberet rationem pecuniae praedatae posceretur.
19. What Marcus Varro wrote in his Philosophical-historical Treatise on restricting the diet of immature children. IT has been found that if immature children eat a great deal and sleep too much, they become so sluggish as to have the dulness of a sufferer from insomnia or lethargy; and their bodies are stunted and under-developed. This is stated by numerous other physicians and philosophers and also by Marcus Varro in that section of his Philosophical-historical Treatise which is entitled Catus, or On Bringing up Children.
19. Quid M. Varro in Logistorico scripserit de moderando victu puerorum inpubium. PUEROS inpubes compertum est, si plurimo cibo nimioque somno uterentur, hebetiores fieri ad veterni usque aut eluci tarditatem, corporaque eorum inprocera fieri minusque adolescere. Idem plerique alii medicorum philosophorumque et M. Varro in Logistorico scripsit, quae inscripta est Catus aut De Liberis Educandis.
20. On the punishment by the censors of men who had made untimely jokes in their hearing; also a deliberation as to the punishment of a man who had happened to yawn when standing before them. AMONG the severities of the censors these three examples of the extreme strictness of their discipline are recorded in literature. The first is of this sort: The censor was administering the usual oath regarding wives, which was worded as follows: “Have you, to the best of your knowledge and belief, a wife?” The man who was to take the oath was a jester, a sarcastic dog, and too much given to buffoonery. Thinking that he had a chance to crack a joke, when the censor asked him, as was customary, “Have you, to the best of your knowledge and belief, a wife?” he replied: “I indeed have a wife, but not, by Heaven! such a one as I could desire.” Then the censor reduced him to a commoner for his untimely quip, and added that the reason for his action was a scurrilous joke made in his presence. Here is another instance of the sternness of the same officials. The censors deliberated about the punishment of a man who had been brought before them by a friend as his advocate, and who had yawned in court very clearly and loudly. He was on the point of being condemned for his lapse, on the ground that it was an indication of a wandering and trifling mind and of wanton and undisguised indifference. But when the man had sworn that the yawn had overcome him much against his will and in spite of his resistance, and that he was afflicted with the disorder known as oscedo, or a tendency to yawning, he was excused from the penalty which had already been determined upon. Publius Scipio Africanus, son of Paulus, included both these stories in a speech which he made when censor, urging the people to follow the customs of their forefathers. Sabinus Masurius too in the seventh book of his Memoirs relates a third instance of severity. He says: “When the censors Publius Scipio Nasica and Marcus Popilius were holding a review of the knights, they saw a horse that was very thin and ill-kept, while its rider was plump and in the best of condition. 'Why is it,' said they, 'that you are better cared for than your mount?' 'Because,' he replied, 'I take care of myself, but Statius, a worthless slave, takes care of the horse.' This answer did not seem sufficiently respectful, and the man was reduced to a commoner, according to custom.” Now Statius was a slave-name. In old times there were many slaves of that name. Caecilius too, the famous comic poet, was a slave and as such called Statius. But afterwards this was made into a kind of surname and he was called Caecilius Statius.
20. Notati a censoribus qui audientibus iis dixerant ioca quaedam intempestiviter; ac de eius quoque nota deliberatum qui steterat forte apud eos oscitabundus. INTER censorum severitates tria haec exempla in litteris sunt castigatissimae disciplinae. Unum est huiuscemodi: Censor agebat de uxoribus sollemne iusiurandum; verba erant ita concepta: “Ut tu ex animi tui sententia uxorem habes?” Qui iurabat cavillator quidam et canicula et nimis ridicularius fuit. Is locum esse sibi loci dicundi ratus, cum ita uti mos erat censor dixisset, “Ut tu ex animi tui sententia uxorem habes?” “Habeo equidem,” inquit, “uxorem, sed non hercle ex animi mei sententia.” Tum censor eum, quod intempestive lascivisset, in aerarios rettulit, causamque hanc ioci scurrilis apud se dicti subscripsit. Altera severitas eiusdem sectae disciplinaeque est. Deliberatum est de nota eius qui ad censores ab amico advocatus est et in iure stans dare nimis et sonore oscitavit; atque inibi ut plecteretur fuit, tamquam illud indicium esset vagi animi et alucinantis et fluxae atque apertae securitatis. Sed cum ille deiurasset invitissimum sese ac repugnantem oscitatione victum tenerique eo vitio quod “oscedo” appellatur, tum notae iam destinatae exemptus est. Publius Scipio Africanus, Pauli filius, utramque historiam posuit in oratione quam dixit in censura, cum ad maiorum mores populum hortaretur. Item aliud refert Sabinus Masurius in septimo Memoriali severe factum: “Censores,” inquit, “Publius Scipio Nasica et Marcus Popilius cum equitum censum agerent, equum nimis strigosum et male habitum, sed equitem eius uberrimum et habitissimum viderunt et ‘cur,’” inquiunt, “ita est, ut tu sis quam equus curatior? ‘Quoniam,’ inquit, ‘ego me curo, equum Statius nihili servos.’ Visum est parum esse reverens responsum relatusque in aerarios, ut mos est.” “Statius” autem servile nomen fuit. Plerique apud veteres servi eo nomine fuerunt. Caecilius quoque, ille comoediarum poeta inclutus, servus fuit et propterea nomen habuit “Statius.” Sed postea versum est quasi in cognomentum, appellatusque est “Caecilius Statius.”