Noctes Atticae

A discussion of the question why Sallust said that avarice rendered effeminate, not only a manly soul, but also the very body itself.

WHEN winter was already waning, we were walking with the philosopher Favorinus in the court of the Titian baths, [*](Otherwise unknown. The Baths of Titus were Thermae and the adj. is Titianae.) enjoying the mild warmth of the sun; and there, as we walked, Sallust's Catiline was being read, a book which Favorinus had seen in the hands of a friend and had asked him to read. The following passage from that book had been recited: [*](xi. 3.)

Avarice implies a desire for money, which no wise man covets; steeped as it were with noxious poisons, it renders the most manly body and soul effeminate; it is ever unbounded, nor can either plenty or want make it less.

Then Favorinus looked at me and said:

How does avarice make a man's body effeminate? For I seem to grasp in general the meaning of his statement that it has that effect on a manly soul, but how it also makes his body effeminate I do not yet comprehend.

I too,

said I,

have for a long time been putting myself that question, and if you had not anticipated me, I should of my own accord have asked you to answer it.

Scarcely had I said this with some hesitation, when one of the disciples of Favorinus, who seemed

to be an old hand in the study of literature, broke in:

I once heard Valerius Probus say that Sallust here used a kind of poetic circumlocution, and meaning to say that a man was corrupted by avarice, spoke of his body and soul, the two factors which indicate a man; for man is made up of body and soul.

Never,

replied Favorinus,

at least, so far as I know, was our Probus guilty of such impertinent and bold subtlety as to say that Sallust, a most skilful artist in conciseness, used poetic paraphrases.

There was with us at the time in the same promenade a man of considerable learning. He too, on being asked by Favorinus whether he had anything to say on the subject, answered to this effect:

We observe that almost all those whose minds are possessed and corrupted by avarice and who have devoted themselves to the acquisition of money from any and every source, so regulate their lives, that compared with money they neglect manly toil and attention to bodily exercise, as they do everything else. For they are commonly intent upon indoor and sedentary pursuits, in which all their vigour of mind and body is enfeebled and, as Sallust says, 'rendered effeminate.'

Then Favorinus asked to have the same words of Sallust read again, and when they had been read, he said:

How then are we to explain the fact, that it is possible to find many men who are greedy for money, but nevertheless have strong and active bodies?

To this the man replied thus:

Your answer is certainly to the point. Whoever,

said he,

is greedy for money, but nevertheless has a body that is strong and in good condition, must necessarily be possessed either by an interest in, or devotion to,

v1.p.239

other things as well, and cannot be equally niggardly in his care of himself. For if extreme avarice, to the exclusion of everything else, lay hold upon all a man's actions and desires, and if it extend even to neglect of his body, so that because of that one passion he has regard neither for virtue nor physical strength, nor body, nor soul—then, and then only, can that vice truly be said to cause effeminacy both of body and of soul, since such men care neither for themselves nor for anything else except money.

Then said Favorinus:

Either what you have said is reasonable, or Sallust, through hatred of avarice, brought against it a heavier charge than he could justify.

[*](The reading of the MSS., potuit, might perhaps be supported by such expressions as Catull. lxxvi. 16, hocfacias, sire id non pote, sive pole.)

Which was the birthday, according to Marcus Varro, of those born before the sixth hour of the night, or after it and in that connection, concerning the duration and limits of the days that are termed

civil

and are reckoned differently all over the world; and in addition, what Quintus Mucius wrote about that woman who claimed freedom from her husband's control illegally, because she had not taken account of the civil year.

IT is often inquired which day should be considered and called the birthday of those who are born in the third, the fourth, or any other hour of the night; that is, whether it is the day that preceded, or the day that followed, that night. Marcus Varro, in that book of his Human Antiquities which he wrote On Days, says: [*](xiii. Frag. 2, Mirsch.)

Persons who are born during the

v1.p.241

twenty-four hours between one midnight and the next midnight are considered to have been born on one and the same day.

From these words it appears that he so apportioned the reckoning of the days, that the birthday of one who is born after sunset, but before midnight, is the day after which that night began; but that, on the other hand, one who is born during the last six hours of the night is considered to have been born on the day which dawned after that night.

However, Varro also wrote in that same book [*](xiii. Frag. 3, Mirsch.) that the Athenians reckon differently, and that they regard all the intervening time from one sunset to the next as one single day. That the Babylonians counted still differently; for they called by the name of one day the whole space of time between sunrise and the beginning of the next sunrise; but that in the land of Umbria many said that from midday to the following midday was one and the same day.

But this,

he said,

is too absurd. For the birthday of one who is born among the Umbrians at mid-day on the first of the month will have to be considered as both half of the first day of the month and that part of the second day which comes before midday.

[*](That is, according to the Roman reckoning. By the alleged Umbrian reckoning, the first day of the month would begin at midday and end at the next midday.)

But it is shown by abundant evidence that the Roman people, as Varro said, reckoned each day from midnight to the next midnight. The religious ceremonies of the Romans are performed in part by day, others by night; but those which take place by night are appointed for certain days, not for nights; accordingly, those that take place during the last six hours of the night are said to take place on the day which dawns immediately after that night.

Moreover, the ceremony and method of taking the auspices point to the same way of reckoning; for the magistrates, whenever they must take the auspices, and transact the business for which they have taken the auspices, on the same day, take the auspices after midnight and transact tile business after midday, when the sun is high, and they are then said to have taken the auspices and acted on the same day. Again, when the tribunes of the commons, who are not allowed to be away from Rome for a whole day, leave the city after midnight and return after the first lighting of the lamps on the following day, but before midnight, they are not considered to have been absent for a whole day, since they returned before the completion of the sixth hour of the night, and were in the city of Rome for some part of that day.

I have read that Quintus Mucius, the jurist, also used to say [*](Fr. 7, Huschke; Jur. Civ. iv. 2, Bremer.) that a woman did not become her own mistress who, after entering upon marriage relations with a man on the day called the Kalends of January, left him, for the purpose of emancipating herself, on the fourth day before the Kalends of the following January; [*](Dec. 27th; December at that time had twenty-nine days.) for the period of three nights, during which the Twelve Tables [*](vi. 4.) provided that a woman must be separated from her husband for the purpose of gaining her independence, could not be completed, since the last [*](Posterioris is nom. pl. See Varro De Ling. Lat. viii. 66.) six hours of the third night belonged to the next year, which began on the first of January.

Now since I found all the above details about the duration and limits of days, pertaining to the observance and the system of ancient law, in the works of our early writers, I did not doubt that Virgil also

indicated the same thing, not directly and openly, but, as became one treating poetic themes, by an indirect and as it were veiled allusion to ancient observance. He says: [*](Aen. v. 738. )

1. For dewy Night has wheeled her way
2. Far past her middle course; the panting steeds
3. Of orient Morn breathe pitiless on me.

For in these lines he wished to remind us covertly, as I have said, that the day which the Romans have called

civil

begins after the completion of the sixth hour of the night.