[32] The tortoise, whose movements are extremely slow, lives extremely long. Thus, everything is proportionate in nature, and the sloth of the tortoise with which nature could be charged is not really absolute sloth, that is, when considered in the tortoise, but relative sloth. From this, many considerations can be drawn.
Did the Latin people perhaps call the head testam as we jokingly call it la Coccia [the Nut], and did the Italian word testa perhaps come from this and the French tête?
What Metastasio says in his Estratti della poetica d’Aristotele,1 Gravina in his Treatise Della tragedia, where he talks about meter (chapter 26),2 and I in my Discorso on Breme in relation to the medium of imitation,3 which can be as the artist chooses, in marble or bronze or verse or prose, etc., is true. And, in particular, what I have said seems to me true without exception. But, with regard to Metastasio, since he says it in defense of Opera, it should be noted that the elements of the medium must not be discordant, otherwise the imitation is barbaric, as perhaps might be said about Opera, where on the one hand there is a true and real man imitating a man, that is, the person represented, and then on the other there is the song from the mouth of the man, imitating not the song but the speech of the same person. This observation (consideration) can be extended to many other ill-composed mediums of imitation. As far as singing is concerned, however, it should be observed that even the ancients sang their tragedies, as the name itself suggests, even though perhaps this was in the beginning, when tragedy was in the hands of the coarse rabble who invented it, and the practice either did not last or, if it did, that was only because it had started in this way and they either did not dare or did not wish to change it. And this was perhaps the reason that tragedy and comedy were done in verse, so on the basis of this practice, with its lowly origin, we should not evaluate the judgment of the Greeks in this particular. Perhaps they would have composed tragedy and comedy in prose if these had been inventions of taste, and not the laborious product of a wide variety of circumstances and old customs, etc.
It can be observed that in Celsus,4 who is particularly noted (and praised) for his simplicity and ease of style, on account of which he is supposed to have moved away from popular Latin less than others, there are frequent and numerous phrases, constructions, expressions, idioms, etc., and even words that are entirely genuinely Italian or that resemble Italian. I am referring to those words that are not commonly held to be derived from Latin or common to the two languages but particular to our own, and which, if they were found not in Celsus but in some modern Latin writer, would be regarded as little less than barbarisms—even now, that is, despite the fact that they actually are in Celsus—unless we specifically remembered, or his authority was cited to us. For example, in book 1, chapter 3, after the middle: “interdum valetudinis causa recte fieri, experimentis credo; cum eo tamen ne quis qui valere et senescere volet, hoc quotidianum habeat” [“on account of health I believe from experiment that it is sometimes rightly practiced; nevertheless with this reservation that no one who wants to keep well, and live to old age, should make it a daily habit”].5 (Con questo però che [With this however that], etc., that is, purchè [provided that], a locution that is genuinely Italian.) And in bk. 2, ch. 8, near the end: “quos lienis male habet, si tormina prehenderunt, deinde versa sunt vel in aquam inter cutem, vel in intestinorum laevitatem, vix ulla medicina periculo subtrahit” [“if dysentery has seized upon those with disease of the spleen which has then turned into dropsy, or into the passing of their food undigested, scarcely any medicine can save them from danger”].6 It’s true that you find a similar phrase, namely prehendo, with the meaning of cogliere [seize], but it is used by the Latin comic writers. And likewise bk. 2, ch. 11, end: “huc potius confugiendum est, cum eo tamen ut sciamus, hic ut nullum periculum, ita levius auxilium esse” [“recourse is rather to be had to this, not forgetting that while we recognize an absence of danger, its efficacy is thus the less”].7 And ch. 17, a little before the middle: “recte medicina ista tentatur, cum eo tamen ne praecordia dura sint, neve” [“this treatment may properly be tried, so long as the parts below the ribs are neither indurated, nor”], etc.8 and bk. 3, ch. 5, end: “scire licet … satius esse consistente jam incremento febris aliquid offerre, quam increscente … cum eo tamen ut nullo tempore is qui deficit non sit sustinendus” [“It should be recognized … that it is better to give some food when the increase in the fever has become stationary, rather than while it is increasing … nevertheless with this proviso that there is no time at which a patient who is failing should not be supported”].9 In the same way ch. 22, middle, and ch. 24, end, and bk. 4, ch. 6.10 And ch. 6, after the middle: “in vicem ejus dari potest vel intrita ex aqua, etc.” [“in its place can be given either bread soaked in water”]11 (in vece di questa [instead of this]), and also elsewhere he uses this same phrase; note that here it does not mean alternatively, but [33] absolutely instead, i.e., excluding other food, etc. The other place where he uses it is bk. 4, ch. 6, in the same absolute way.1 And bk. 4, ch. 2, end: “post quae vix fieri potest ut idem incommodum maneat” [“after the above measures it is scarcely possible for the same discomfort to persist”]2 (simply in the same way that we say incomodo for a minor illness). And ch. 22: “quod fere post longos morbos vis pestifera huc se inclinat, quae ut alias partes liberat, sic hanc ipsam (nimirum coxas) quoque affectam prehendit” [“for it is generally after prolonged illness that a pestiferous force directs itself here (that is to the hips) and, as it releases other parts, seizes upon this, which now becomes the seat of the disease”].3 And ch. 28 of bk. 5, § 17: “nam et rubet (impetiginis genus primum) et durior est, et exulcerata est, et rodit” [“for there is redness (in the first kind of impetigo) and some hardness, and ulceration and itching”] (as we commonly say, sometimes neutrally and often also impersonally, for prurire [to itch]). And also there, just below: “squamulae ex summa cute discedunt, rosio major est” [“small scales are detached from the surface of the skin, there is more itching”]. And just below, referring to another type of impetigo, he says: “in summa cute finditur, et vehementius rodit” [“there are cracks in the surface of the skin and more active itching”]. Here, anyone would be mistaken who thought that for rodere [to itch], Celsus meant the same as erodere, since: (1) he always uses the latter when he means corrosion; (2) in the examples that I am about to quote, where the passive of rodere is used, the accompaniment of other words shows that he means not corrosion but itching; and thus he says here in the following section, in relation to another complaint: “in quo per minimas pustulas cutis exasperatur et rubet leviterque roditur” [“in which the skin is roughened by very small pustules, and is reddened and itches very slightly”], and just below, about another kind of the aforesaid complaint: “in qua similiter quidem, sed magis cutis exasperaturque exulceraturque ac vehementius et roditur et rubet et interdum etiam pilos remittit” [“in which there is a similar but greater roughness of skin, with ulceration, more severe itching and redness, and sometimes it even loosens the hair”];4 (3) in the section preceding 17, he gives these words as a full definition of scabies or mange: “Scabies vero est durior cutis, rubicunda; ex qua pustulae oriuntur, quaedam humidiores, quaedam sicciores. Exit ex quibusdam sanies, fitque ex his continuata exulceratio PRURIENS, serpitque in quibusdam cito. Atque in aliis quidem ex toto desinit, in aliis vero certo tempore anni revertitur. Quo asperior est, quoque PRURIT magis, eo difficilius tollitur. Itaque eam quae talis est, ἀγρίαν [fierce] id est feram, Graeci appellant” [“scabies is harder, the skin is ruddy; from which the pustules arise, some moist, some dry. Sanies weeps from some of these, from which a persistent ITCHING ulceration develops, which in some cases spreads rapidly. And while in some persons it vanishes completely, in others it returns at a definite time of the year. The rougher the skin, and the more IT ITCHES, the harder it is to bear. Hence the Greeks call such scabies ἀγρίαν, that is, fierce”].5 Then he moves on to remedies that he deals with in a few lines without saying another wor
d about the nature of the complaint. Then, in the next section, he refers to the first kind of impetigo, which “similitudine scabiem repraesentat, nam et rubet” [“presents a resemblance to scabies, for there is redness”], etc., as above, where it is clear that he has in mind what he had said above about scabies: that it is red, hard, ulcerous, he said, as I have noted above with underlinings, but he did not say that it corroded: so how can impetigo be like scabies “nam rodit,” because it itches? But he did say that scabies prurit [itches], and this material symptom would be lacking in impetigo if rodit is not taken in the same sense, and in any case, it cannot be taken to mean corrode.6 See whether Forcellini or the Appendix has anything about rodere in the meaning of to itch.7 There isn’t anything, and so this meaning is new and should be added to Italian dictionaries, namely rodere for to itch (it is not a neuter verb, however, since we have seen its passive), even though it can be argued for and against. Note also that rodere for erodere is indeed rare in Celsus, though it is found in bk. 7, ch. 2, toward the end.8 In bk. 7, ch. 23,9 there is the word rosio, whose meaning is not clear and which can be explained in one way or another, though it can scarcely be taken, indeed cannot be taken, for the action of corroding, but for the sensation, in other words an acute itch: “fereque a die tertio spumans bilis alvo cum rosione redditur” [“generally from the third day frothy bile is passed in an itching motion”]. And this seems to me, in fact, to be its clear meaning in this passage, as appears from the context, in which neither before nor after is there reference to effects or remedies or anything else analogous to corrosion. Rodere is also found with dubious meaning three times in bk. 7, ch. 26, § 4, toward the end10 and in ch. 27, after the middle.11 And bk. 6, ch. 2, end: “Si parum per haec proficitur, vehementioribus uti licet, cum eo ut sciamus,” (without the tamen) “utique in recenti vitio id inutile esse” [“If there is little benefit from these measures, it is permissible to use stronger ones, while bearing in mind that, at any rate when the disease is of recent origin, this is useless”].12 And ibid., ch. 18, § 7: [34] “Si quidquid laesum est, extra est, neque intus reconditum, eodem medicamento tinctum linamentum superdandum est, et quidquid ante adhibuimus cerato contegendum. In hoc autem casu neque acribus cibis utendum neque asperis nec alvum comprimentibus” [“If the lesion is external, not hidden inside, lint may be soaked in the same medicament and applied; and whatever is put on is to be covered by a cerate. In such a case also neither acrid nor coarse food is to be taken nor such as constipates”].1 Likewise often elsewhere, in primo casu, in eo casu, etc., in the same way as we say: in this case, in the first case, etc. And bk. 7, ch. 2, after the middle: “Semper autem ubi scalpellus admovetur, id agendum est ut et quam minimae et quam paucissimae plagae sint, cum eo tamen ut necessitati succurramus et in modo et in numero” [“But when the scalpel is used care should always be taken that the incisions made are as few and as small as possible, but enough in number to afford the necessary relief”].2 And ch. 7, § 7: “At quibus id in angulo est, potest adhiberi curatio, cum eo ne” (without the tamen) “ignotum sit esse difficilem” [“But when limited to the angle, treatment is possible, so long as we do not forget that it is difficult”].3 And ch. 16: “quia et rumpi facilius motu ventris potest, et non aeque magnis inflammationibus pars ea (venter), exposita est” [“because they can be broken more easily by the abdominal movement, and because that part of the body (the belly) is not especially exposed to severe inflammations”].4 And ch. 22: “adurendus est tenuibus et acutis ferramentis quae ipsis venis infigantur, cum eo ne amplius quam has urant” [“must be burned with finely pointed cauteries, which penetrate into the veins themselves, but so that nothing deeper than the veins is burned”] (without the tamen).5 And ch. 27, middle: “Sub quibus perveniri ad sanitatem potest, cum eo tamen quod non” (note the quod non instead of ne, which is also closer to the Italian phrase) “ignoremus, orto cancro saepe affici stomachum” [“By such measures it is possible to effect a cure, but we must not ignore the fact that once canker has started, the stomach is often affected”]6 (the edition that I am using does not have a comma after orto cancro, even though there is a great abundance of punctuation). And bk. 8, ch. 10, § 7 from the beginning: “Quibus periculis etiam magis id expositum quod juxta ipsos articulos ictum est” [“And it is more exposed to these dangers if the fracture is close to joints”].7 In short, the whole structure of Celsus’s prose is such that, by coming infinitely close to Italian in its manner, turn, construction, phrasing, expressions, and words, it demonstrates, more than perhaps any other Latin prose of the classical age, even to those who did not already know, that the Italian language is derived from the Latin. I, therefore, have no doubt that this prose was very similar to, and was taken to a very large extent in its modes of expression, and also to some extent in its words, from the common speech of Rome, or Latin.
In my judgment, the Libellus de arte dicendi, published under Celsus’s name by Sixtus Popma in Cologne in 1569, and reprinted as a very rare text by Fabricius at the end of the Bibliotheca Latina, is a compendium or an extract or a collection of pieces from Celsus’s work on eloquence, which was part of his great work on the arts, of which only the part on medicine survives.8 And I identify it as being by Celsus from the easy elegance or, rather, the elegant ease utterly typical of Celsus, which is found in various passages scattered throughout this brief work, mixed with a residue that is confused, or inelegant, and even barbarous and unintelligible, and which demonstrates the other part of my judgment, namely, that this is not wholly the work of Celsus, as Fabricius seems to have believed (bk. 4, ch. 8, end of p. 506), in addition to which, as I see from Tiraboschi, not all of [35] what Quintilian quotes from the work of Celsus is to be found here.1 Curius Fortunatianus the Rhetor in Pithou’s Latin Rhetoricians, p. 69, also quotes Celsus.2 I also find many expressions and words that convince me that the book was indeed taken from Celsus because they are frequent and familiar in his books on Medicine, e.g., § 3: “Oratoris artibus nemo instrui potest, nisi cui ingenium et frequens studium est. Primum animi sit” (absolute) “oportet quaedam naturalis ad videndas ediscendasque res potentia. Tum vox,” (note the omission of sit oportet, and the dependence of this period on the one preceding, which is extremely frequent in Celsus) “latus, decor, valetudo, frugalitas, laboris patientia” [“No one can be instructed in the art of oratory if he is not predisposed and is not constant in study. First of all it is necessary that there be a certain natural capacity of the mind to see and learn things. Then the voice, the strength of the lungs, personal decorum, health, moderation, and physical fitness”]. And the whole of § 3 is in a completely Celsian style. And § 4: Super hoc, for furthermore, used by Celsus, and the particle ubi for when, whereas, if, which is frequently used by Celsus, and also often used here, that is, in §§ 9 and 10 three times, § 11 twice, and § 17 twice. And § 10: “Neque alienum est, ubi longior fuerit expositio vel narratio, extrema ita finire, ut admoneas quaecumque dixeris” [“And it will not be out of place, should the exposition or the narration have been somewhat long, to conclude by recalling everything you have said”]. And ibid. just below: “Nec semper debet orator veterum se praeceptis addicere, sed scire debet incidere novam materiam quae novi aliquid postulet” [“Nor should the orator always return to the precepts of the ancients, rather he should know that a new topic may arise that will require something new”]. And the word incidere is used in a similar way in § 11: “Evenit ut ante sit respondendum quam sit ponenda narratio, ut pro Milone: Incidit caussae genus quod summam habet quaestionis” [“It can happen that one has to respond before the narration is done, as in the oration in defense of Milo: a kind of case can arise which contains the fundamentals of a question”]. And ibid., earlier: “Alterum genus est in quo utique” (a very familiar expression in Celsus) “aeque supervacua narratio est” [“The other kind is the one in which the narration is without question equally useless”] and likewise § 12: “haec enim verisimilia sunt, non utique vera” [“plausible things, without question not true�
��]. And § 13: “Cum autem diu dicere volet, omne argumentum ornatius exequetur” [“When instead he wishes to expand he will present every argument in a rather ornate way”]. And ibid.: “Si unum argumentum validum est et unum frivolum, a valido incipies, frivolum persequeris, rursum validum repetes” [“If one argument is stronger and one weak, start with the stronger one, continue with the weaker, and then pick up the stronger one again”]. And ibid.: “Cum aliquibus partibus causa laborat, utilius ordinem quaestionum confundimus, quas ex toto tractare non expedit” [“When the case shows signs of flagging in some part or other, it is more useful to reconfigure the order of the questions that we do not need to deal with in their entirety”]. This expression is entirely Celsian, in whom it is very common, whereas in other writers, if found at all, it is rare, in my opinion, and this is almost sufficient in itself to lead me to believe that the book really is taken from Celsus. What’s more, this expression is lifted bodily from Greek ἐξ ἅπαντος, a language that Celsus’s resembles, both in its style in general and in many turns of phrase, expressions, idioms, etc., in particular (and the simplicity and form of the construction as a whole, as well as in its parts and the way they are linked together, etc.), as if it were a mother tongue, in the same way that it resembles Italian as if it were a daughter tongue. In § 3 the adverb in totum for totally is also found, which, if I remember rightly, [36] is also found frequently in Celsus.
Zibaldone Page 19
