The ancients were acquainted with several species of mackerel (scomber scomber), which Xenocrates represents as nutritious, but unpalatable and flatulent.
The anguilla, or common eel, and the congrus, or conger-eel, were despised by the Roman gourmands, but were greatly esteemed by the Greeks. Icesius says that eels are the best of fishes. See Athen. (l. c.)
It is supposed, by most of the classical commentators, that the accipenser was the sturgeon, but this is not quite agreed.—See this point fully discussed by Rondelet, Gesner, and Willoughby. The celebrated Artedi, and the writer of the article on Ichthyology in the ‘Encycl. Method.’ are quite decided in the affirmative. We need have little difficulty, then, in determining it to be the accipenser sturio. To our minds there can be no doubt but that it is the fish described by Constantine Porphyrogenita, under the name of βερζήτικον. (De Admin. Imp. 42.) Both in the days of the Romans, and under the Greek empire, the sturgeon was commonly procured from the Pontus or Black Sea. Its popularity appears to have been great in the days of Horace, but it had fallen into disrepute in the time of Pliny. It seems, however, to have retrieved its character afterwards; for one of the authorities quoted by Athenæus says that it was presented at the Roman banquets, crowned with garlands, and accompanied with the playing of pipes. See also Macrobius (Sat. iii, 16.) Martial speaks of it as a much-esteemed delicacy at the imperial table. The elops and the galeus rhodius were fishes nearly allied to the sturgeon. See Pliny and Athenæus.
The isinglass fish (accipenser huso), although described by Herodotus (Hist. iv, 53), Strabo (Geogr.), and Ælian (xiv, 23), is not noticed by the dietetical writers, unless we suppose it the fish alluded to by Athenæus (vii, 21), where see the notes of Coray and Schweighäuser.
Martial mentions the gobius, or gudgeon, as being the first of the viands presented at the banquets of the Venetians. (Xenia, Ep. 83.) Juvenal speaks of it as being a fish of little value, or, at least, low priced. (Sat. xi, 37.) It is, in fact, as Galen states, a very small fish; but he represents it as being delicious, digestible, and wholesome, especially when caught on a stony or rocky shore. Seth gives the same account of it. Diphilus, as quoted by Athenæus, says, that when its flesh is white the gudgeon is tender, wholesome, and digestible.
The perch, according to the same authority, bears a close resemblance to the gudgeon. Ausonius calls it the deliciæ mensarum. Galen calls it a delicious fish, which is not only of easy digestion but most wholesome. He adds that it, and other fishes of the same description, form blood of a middling consistence, that is to say, neither very watery nor too thick. Both the perca fluviatilis and the P. marina are described by Aristotle, Galen, Athenæus, and the other writers on dietetics.
The umber (sciæna umbra), a fish resembling the perch, but of great size, was in much esteem as a pickle, which was called saperda, and brought from Pontus. See Athen. (iii, 31), and Persius (Sat.)
The merle (labrus merula) is mentioned among the rock fishes by Galen. Diocles in Athenæus says it is of easy digestion and highly nutritive. The iülis, called donzella by the Italians, a fish of the same genus, is mentioned by Galen and Xenocrates as having soft flesh.
The fish called serran in French (serranus anthius Cuv.), and its congener the labrus hepatus L. are briefly noticed by the dietetical authorities as wholesome fishes.
On the salmon the Greek authors are entirely silent. It is briefly noticed by Pliny (H. N. ix, 32); but the first and only satisfactory account of it which is to be found in any Latin classic is contained in the Mosella of Ausonius. We shall give an extract from the lines in which it is first described:
Here we find marked the three progressive stages in the growth of the fish. The salar is the sea-trout, the fario is what in the north of Scotland is called the grilse, and the salmo is the full-grown salmon. Of the salmon he says:
The sea-trout is well described in the following line:
Nonnius considers the salmon to be the anchorago of Cassiodorus. (De Esu Piscium, 31.) Gesner holds the same opinion. (De Aquat.)
Ludovicus Nonnius confesses his inability to determine what the scarus was. It would seem to have been the fish now called labrus scarus L., a small fish, according to Bellonius, being seldom more than a fathom long. Xenocrates praises it as being very savoury and of easy digestion, but of difficult distribution and evacuation. For a curious account of it, see Macrobius (Sat. iii, 16.) The sargus nearly resembles the scarus, but is more astringent and nutritious. It is the sparus sargus L., and, according to Rondelet, is called sargo by the Italians. The melanurus (sparus m.) is very like to it in shape and qualities.
The aurata, called by Bruyer and Nonnius in French brame de mer; and by Ainsworth and Artedi, gilt-head in English, (namely, the sparus aurata L.) is said by Celsus and Mnesitheus as quoted by Athenæus, to be a fish of difficult digestion but very nutritious. Xenocrates says that its flesh is firm, white, of easy distribution, and nutritious.
The passer, called platessa by Ausonius, is supposed by Artedi and Nonnius to have been the plaice (pleuronectes platessa.) It is mentioned by Horace among the delicacies at the supper of Nasidienus. The solea or sole, called lingualaca by Festus and Varro, was nearly allied to it. It is the P. solea. Diphilus says that both are very savoury and nutritious.
The lamprey (petromyzon lampetra L.) is the mustella of Ausonius, the exormiston of Cassiodorus, the γαλάξιας of Galen, the ἐχένηις of Oppian, and the βδέλλα of Strabo. See Bruyer, Nonnius, and Rondelet. It was reckoned unwholesome.
The capros, or carp, is called by Archestratus “The flower of nectar.” (Athenæus Deipnos. vii.) It is the cyprinus carpio L.
The hake (gadus merluccius) is generally supposed to be the gadus of Athenæus (vii); the asellus of Ovid, Varro, and Pliny; and oniscus of Marcellus Sideta. It was reckoned wholesome. The ancients do not appear to have been acquainted with the gadus eglofinus, or haddock.
According to Willoughby, the Latin poet Ausonius is the only ancient author who has noticed the tench or cyprinus tinca. We are inclined, however, to think that it is the ψύλων of Aristotle (H. A. vi, 14), and the γναφεὺς of Athenæus (vii.) See Casaubon (l. c.), and Rondelet (de Piscibus.)
We may mention here, although somewhat out of place, that neither the Greeks nor Romans would appear to have used the frog as an article of food.
SECT. XCI.—ON THE TESTACEA, OR SHELL-FISH.
The testacea in general form a saltish and crude chyme; but of them the oysters have the softest flesh, and are most laxative. The chemæ, purpuræ, solenes, spondyli, buccinæ, cochleæ, and such like, are hard. And those covered with a soft shell (crustacea) such as the astaci, paguri, crabs, common lobsters, and those called squillæ, are of difficult digestion, nutritious, and bind the belly when often boiled in sweet water. The juices of all the testacea are laxative, and therefore from the land snails, although their flesh be hard, indigestible, nutritious, and contains bad juices, some make a sauce, with oil and pickle, which they use for opening the belly. The sea urchins (echini) are moderately cooling, contain little nourishment, and are diuretic.
Commentary. Coray correctly states in his ‘Notes on the Fragment of Xenocrates,’ that, in the ancient classification of animals, the ὀστρακώδη or ὀστρακόδερμα, were divided into the σκληρόστρακα, or testacea, comprehending oysters, muscles, &c.; and the μαλακόστρακα, or crustacea, comprehending the crabs, paguri, &c. But, as he remarks afterwards, the σκληρόστρακα were often called by the generic term, ὀστρακόδερμα. The ancient division of the lower classes of animals is derived from Aristotle’s ‘History of Animals’ (iv), and with some slight modifications it is the same as the classification adopted by Baron Cuvier. Pliny thus distinguishes the mollusca, crustacea, and testacea: “Piscium quidam sanguine carent, de quibus dicemus. Sunt autem tria genera: in primis quæ mollia appellantur (mollusca?): deinde contecta crustis tenuibus (crustacea?): postremo testis conclusa duris (testacea?). Mollia sunt, loligo, sepia, polypus, et cetera ejus generis,” &c. In another place, however, he introduces confusion by applying the term mollia to the crustacea. This mistake probably originated in the resemblance between the Greek terms μαλάκια and μαλακόστρακα. (Hist. Nat. ix.)
We may mention further, that, in Oppian’s delightful poem on ‘Fishing,’ the crustacea are described at book i, l. 259, the testacea at l. 283, and the mollusca at l. 638. On the terms used by Ælian, see ‘De Nat. Animal.’ (ix, 6, ed. Schneider.) Athenæus gives a long disquisition on these animals in the third book of the ‘Deipnosophistæ.’
Of the testacea described by the ancient writers on dietetics, we are inclined to refer the chema to the genus chema of modern naturalists, comprehending several species of the cockle: the purpura to the helix ianthina or purple fish, in particular: the solen to the genus solen or bag-fish: the spondylus to the genus spondylus or prickly oyster: the buccina to the buccinum harpa: the cochlea to the helix pomatia or edible snail: the astacus to the astacus fluviatilis or crawfish: the pagurus to the cancer pagurus or common crab: and the cancer to some variety of the same: the locusta to more than one species of the locusta or lobster; the squilla to the crangon vulgaris Cuv. or shrimp: and the leo marinus indefinitely to the genus cancer. We think it but right, however, to confess that our own acquaintance with this department of natural history is not so extensive as to warrant us in speaking authoritatively on these matters.
We shall now briefly notice the ancient opinions on their dietetical qualities. From Athenæus, we can only find room for the following extract: “Regarding the testacea (ὀστρακόδερμα) the Siphnian Diphilus writes thus: ‘Of the testacea, the squilla, astacus, locusta aquatica, cancer, and leo marinus, are of the same genus, but differ from one another: the leo is larger than the astacus; the locusta is more fleshy than the cancer; and the cancer, or crab, is heavy and indigestible.’ Mnesitheus, the Athenian, in his work on ‘Dietetics,’ says, that the locusta, cancer, squilla, and the like, are all of difficult digestion, and yet they are much easier digested than other fishes.”
Galen’s account of them is interesting, and our author’s is abridged from it. In general, he remarks, those which have hard flesh are most nutritious, but indigestible. They all contain saltish juices which are of a laxative nature. He says of the crustacea that they have all firm flesh, and are, therefore, difficult to digest, but nutritious. Aëtius and Oribasius copy from him without the slightest alteration of any consequence.
Frequent mention of the squilla occurs in the works of Horace, Juvenal, and Martial, as a favorite article of food. A poet in Athenæus says it should be prepared with fig leaves.
According to Dioscorides and Alexander, the echinus is stomachic and diuretic. Ælian, in like manner, calls it a restorative to a weak stomach. (N. A. xiii.)
Actuarius says that the crustacea hold an intermediate place between the fishes and mollusca; that they are, therefore, not so digestible as the mollusca, and form purer and thinner blood; that the testacea, as they get no exercise, are less proper; and that all form a thin and watery blood.
We need scarcely remark, that the Romans esteemed the cochlea, i. e. limaçon, or white snail, as an exquisite delicacy.
Simeon Seth’s account is entirely borrowed from Galen.
The receipts of Apicius for dressing the locusta and carabus contain pepper, cumin, rue, mint, vinegar, wine, and oil.
It appears from the following lines of Juvenal that British oysters were greatly esteemed by the Roman gourmands:
Rochester is supposed to be the ancient Rutupinum. Seneca represents them as whetters and not food. “Ostrea non cibi, sed oblectamenta sunt, ad edendum saturos cogentia.” The poet Matron, as quoted by Athenæus, calls them “the truffles of the sea.” Athenæus says that oysters caught in the sea adjacent to a lake or river are the best. Xenocrates remarks that sea oysters are small and saltish.
It does not appear that the ancients often used the sea tortoise or turtle fish as an article of food, and yet it is clear from Athenæus (viii, 17), that it was sometimes eaten. See Schweigh. (l. c.) Zenobius says that the flesh of the tortoise, if eaten in small quantities, is apt to produce tormina, and that if eaten largely, it purges. (Cent. iv, 32.) See also Actuarius (iv.) It is to be kept in view that the Mediterranean turtle is generally unwholesome, and the ancients in general could have little acquaintance with any other species. Ælian, however, makes mention of the Indian turtle. (N. A. xvi, 14.) See further Gesner (de Aquat. 1141.) The chelonopliagi, or turtle-eaters, are noticed by Strabo (xvi); Solinus (xvii); and Pliny (Hist. Nat. vii, 28.)
SECT. XCII.—ON THE MOLLUSCA.
The mollusca, such as polypi, sepiæ, and loligines, are hard and indigestible, and particularly the polypi. Their juices are saltish, but when digested they furnish considerable nourishment to the body.
Commentary. Galen remarks that the mollusca, or mollia, have no scales, nor any rough testaceous skin, but a soft one, like that of men. Their flesh, he says, is hard, indigestible, and contains a small proportion of saltish juices; but, if digested, it affords no little nourishment to the body. The sepia, or cuttle-fish, was anciently, and is at present, much used in Rome as an article of food. Pliny states that it is laxative. He adds that it is taken in food, boiled with oil, salt, and barley-meal. Simeon Seth says of it, that it is difficult to digest, but that, if digested, it affords considerable nourishment to the body, and engenders crude humours; on which account, it ought to be taken with acrid condiments, and an old thin wine drunk afterwards. Mnesitheus, as quoted by Athenæus, says that the flesh of the mollusca is indigestible and aphrodisiacal.
Apicius directs us to dress them in much the same way as recommended by Seth; that is to say, he recommends us to add to them spices, hot aromatics, wine, vinegar, and the like.
The sepia of the ancients was indisputably the sepia officinalis L. or cuttle-fish; the loligo probably the loligo parva of Rondelet, Angl. calamary. The term polypus is vaguely applied, and may comprehend several species of hydra.
SECT. XCIII.—ON THE CARTILAGINOUS FISHES.
Of the cartilaginous fishes, the torpedo and pastinaca have soft and sweet flesh, which passes readily downwards, is easily digested, and proves nutritive. The flairs (raiæ), skates (leviraiæ), monk fish (squatina), and the like, are harder and difficult to digest, and more nutritious. In general, those animals which have hard flesh are difficult to digest, and contain much nourishment. When properly digested, they furnish much and substantial nourishment.
Commentary. For an account of the σελάχη, or cartilaginea, see Aristotle (H. A. v); Pliny (H. N. ix, 40); Oppian (Halieut, i); Ælian (N. A. xi, 37.)
Galen says that they are called σελάχη from σέλας ἔχειν, because their flesh had a shining appearance at night. He states that they are moderately nutritious. He remarks, that the parts about the tail of such fishes are more fleshy than the middle.
According to Athenæus, the cartilaginous fishes in general are flatulent, fleshy, of difficult digestion, and, if eaten in great quantity, blunt the sight. (Deipnos. viii.)
Dr. Coray says that the French call the Ῥίνη ange or angelot, the Βάτος raie bouclée or cavellade, the Λειόβατος raie miralet, the Νάρκη torpille or raie torpille, and the Τρυγὼν pastinaque. Harduin gives them nearly the same French names. We are inclined to refer the ῥίνη to the squalus squatina L. monk or angel-fish: the βατὶς and λειόβατὶς to the raia batis and raia varia, two species of skate; the νάρκη to the raia torpedo or cramp-fish; and the τρυγὼν to the raia pastinaca L. or fire-flair.
SECT. XCIV.—ON THE CETACEA, OR LARGE FISHES.
The cetacea, such as the whales, seals, balance-fish, dolphin, and great tunnies, have hard and indigestible flesh, containing thick juices. When pickled, they are more moderately so. And of the other fishes, those which are most humid and excrementitious are most fitted for pickling; but there is the same difference in pickles as in the fishes from which they are formed.
Commentary. Under the class cetacea (κῆτος), the ancient naturalists ranked all the large fishes, such as the whale, the dolphin, the shark, &c. Aristotle was aware that the class called plagiuri by Artedi, comprehending the whale, the dolphin, &c. are viviparous, and have lungs like quadrupeds, instead of gills like fishes. The balæna of the Greeks was a species of physeter, or cachelot.
Galen states that the flesh of all the cetacea in its recent state is excrementitious, but when pickled becomes more attenuate, and easier converted into blood. He gives them, in short, the same characters as our author does.
For a full account of the pickled fishes of the ancients, we refer to the Fragment of Xenocrates, and the third book of Athenæus. We shall give the general character of them as delivered by the latter, upon the authority of the Siphnian Diphilus. He says that the pickles prepared from sea, lake, and river fishes afford little nourishment, contain few juices, are of a heating nature, are good for the belly, and whet the appetite. The old, he adds, are better and more acrid. Of all the pickled fishes, the most celebrated was the one brought from the Pontus, called saperda. According to Athenæus, it was prepared from the umber (sciæna umbra L.) See also Galen (de Alim. Facult. iii, 41.) Hippocrates says they are desiccant, attenuant, and for the most part laxative. (De Diæta.) Diphilus says they are whetters and laxatives; and hence Galen directs them to be taken at the commencement of a meal, and particularly recommends them for old men. Rhases speaks more unfavorably of them.
It may be proper in this place to give some account of the isitia, or isicia of the ancients. With regard to the etymology of the word, then, it is derived by Macrobius ab insectione. They consisted of minced meat, either flesh or fish, boiled or roasted, and seasoned with pepper, cumin, lovage, and the like. Apicius gives receipts for preparing several dishes of this kind, from the loligo, sepia, locusta, and swine’s liver. The last mentioned was inclosed in the omentum, or cowl, and must therefore have resembled the dish now called a haggis. Lampridius says that the emperor Heliogabalus was the first who prepared isicia from fishes, oysters, lobsters, squillæ, and the like. If this statement be true, the works of Apicius which we possess cannot be genuine. Isicia from shell-fish, the sepia, loligo, &c. are very favorably spoken of by Alexander Trallian (xi.) On the Isicia, see further Ludovicus Nonnius (de Piscium Esu, xxxviii), and Lambecius (ad Apic.)
SECT. XCV.—ON THE PROPERTIES OF WINE.
He who has taken the subject of health into consideration ought also to be acquainted with the powers of wine. Wine in general is nutritious, but that which is red and thick is more particularly so; but its juices are not good. The sweet also is nutritious, but not stomachic. The astringent is stomachic, but is distributed with difficulty to the parts of the body, and nourishes less. The white nourishes less still. Wine of a yellow colour is the best of all. That which is old is more heating and desiccant than the new. Such, in the main, are the properties of wine. But wine in general resuscitates the natural heat within us, and therefore it improves digestion, and forms good blood. And being of a penetrating nature, it diffuses the nourishment all over the body, and therefore it recruits those who are emaciated by disease, for it gives them an appetite for food. It attenuates phlegm, clears away the bile by urine, and imparts a good colour. To the soul also it communicates gladness and pleasure, and improves the strength. Such are the good effects of the moderate use of wine. But its immoderate use produces just the reverse; wherefore, those who are drunk become changed, are delirious, and disposed to heavy sleep. On that account, such an immoderate use of wine ought to be avoided; but at greater intervals it may be drank liberally, for it promotes the discharges by urine and perspiration. But it is better in such cases to vomit, by taking, beforehand, of honied water, so that one may not be injured by it. When one has drunk largely, it is not proper to take much of any other food; but while drinking, one should eat boiled cabbage, and taste some sweetmeat, particularly almonds. These things relieve headach, and are not difficult to vomit. It is also very proper to take the infusion of wormwood before drinking, for of all things it is the best preservative from surfeit. If one experience any painful effects from wine, one should drink cold water, and the next day again the infusion of wormwood; and by using exercise, friction, the bath, and restricted food, in this way get restored to health.
Commentary. The opinions of the ancients on this interesting subject may be best learned by consulting Hippocrates (de Diæta, ii, 22, et alibi); Celsus (ii); Pliny (H. N. xiv and xxxiii, 22, 26); Dioscorides (v); Galen (de Sanit. tuend. v, 5, and de Alim. Facult. iii); Oribasius (Med. Col. v, and Euporist. i, 12); Aëtius (i); Athenæus (Deipnos. i); Macrobius (Saturnal.); Actuarius (de Diæta, 8); Simeon Seth (de Alimentis); Serapion (de Simplicibus, &c.); Haly Abbas (Theor. 30, and Pract. i, 8); Avicenna (i, 3, 2); Rhases (ad Mansor. iii, 5, and Continen. xxxvii); Alsaharavius (Theor. xiii, 2.) Stobæus gives an interesting collection of the opinions of the philosophers and poets. (Sermo xviii.)
For an ample account of the ancient and modern wines, the reader is particularly referred to the late ingenious and classical publication of Dr. Henderson. See also Barry (on Ancient Wines), and Canonherius (de Admirandis Vini Virtutibus.)
From the works of Moses and Homer, we learn that the art of converting the innocent juice of the grape into wine must have been a very early invention. Eustathius informs us that, in very ancient times, the wines were all of a dark colour; and hence Homer applies to the sea the epithet of wine-coloured, ὄινοπα πόντον. (Comment, in Iliad. I.) Achilles Tatius makes the same remark regarding the ancient wine, (ii, 67, ed. Salmasius.) However, in the time of Hippocrates, they had wines of all colours, as well as characters. He thus describes their general properties: Black and austere wines are of a drying nature, and are not laxative, nor diuretic, nor sialogogue. It is their heat that renders them desiccative, by consuming the humidity of the body. The soft dark wines are of a more moistening nature, and are more flatulent and laxative. The sweet dark wines are of a more moistening nature, but they are heating and flatulent by imparting humidity. The white austere wines are heating, but are rather diuretic than laxative. The new are more laxative than the old, as being a nearer approach to the fresh juice of the grape, and they are nutritious; and the fragrant wines than those of the same age which have no bouquet, because they are better concocted; and the thick than the thin. But thin sweet wines are more diuretic, laxative, and moistening, and form weak blood.
Celsus ranks the “vinum dulce vel lene” among the “res boni succi.” Sharp austere wine he places among the things which are most suitable for the stomach.
Dioscorides delivers very judiciously the different characters of wines. He concludes with remarking that, although habitual intoxication be prejudicial to the health, a moderate indulgence in wine for some days, especially after drinking water, is beneficial, by proving an alterative to the system, purging the secretions, and promoting the insensible perspiration.
From Pliny’s excellent statement of the medicinal and dietetical properties of wine, we select the following remarks: “Vino aluntur vires, sanguis, colorque hominum. Vino modico nervi juvantur, copiosiore læduntur, sic et oculi. Stomachus recreatur; appetentia ciborum invitatur; tristitia et cura hebetatur; urina et algor expellitur; somnus conciliatur. Præterea vomitiones sistit. Vetus coposiore aqua miscetur, magisque urinam expellit; minus siti resistit. Dulce minus inebriat sed stomacho innatat; austerum facilius concoquitur. Stomacho minus utile est pingue, nigrum, sed corpora magis alit. Tenue et austerum minus alit, magis stomachum nutrit.”
The information supplied by Galen on this subject is most ample, but in too diffuse a shape to suit our narrow limits. Upon the whole, he states, thin wines are diuretic, but supply little nourishment, whereas the thick are proportionally nutritious. He says that the Falernian, especially the sweeter kind, is one of the most wholesome wines. Athenæus gives an interesting account of the Falernian, upon the authority of Galen. He says it is fit to be drank after it is ten years old, and from fifteen to twenty; but that, when older, it occasions headach and affects the nerves. He describes two kinds of it, the sweet and the austere. The latter, he adds, is of a tawny colour, that is to say, a colour intermediate between the white and black. Dr. Henderson concludes, that the modern Madeira is a near approach to the ancient Falernian. Brasavolus and C. Avantius compare it to a wine known in modern Rome by the name of greco di soma. Galen gives very minute directions for forcing this wine, or giving it premature age by heat. (De Antid. i, and de Simpl. iv.) Vitruvius, for this purpose, gives directions for building the wine-cellar close to the kitchen. (vi.) Athenæus says, that wine digests the food, and, being of a subtle nature, promotes the distribution of it. We learn from him that the ancients sometimes used their wines cooled with ice. (Deipnos. iii, 99.) He thus describes the different characters of the wines used in his time; that is to say, about the middle of the second century, P. C. Of wines, some are white, some tawny, and some dark coloured. The white is in nature the thinnest, diuretic, and heating, and being digestible it inflames the head, for it is a wine that has a tendency upwards. A dark-coloured wine, which is not of a sweet nature, is very nutritious and astringent. Sweet wines, whether of a white or tawny colour, are very nutritious; for they lubricate the passage, and thickening the humours, prove less troublesome to the head. The nature of sweet wines is to remain for a time in the præcordia, and to prove expectorant, as Diocles and Praxagoras tell. Mnesitheus the Athenian says dark-coloured wine is very nutritious, the white very diuretic and very subtle, and the tawny dry, and of all wines the one that most promotes the digestion of food. Wines carefully prepared with salt water are not of an intoxicating nature, they loosen the belly, occasion pains of the stomach, and produce flatulence, but promote digestion. Such are the Myndian and the Halicarnassian. The Coan is well prepared with salt water; the Rhodian has a less proportion of it; the Cnidian engenders blood, is nutritious, and laxative, but when drunk in large quantities it upsets the stomach; the Lesbian has less astringency and is more diuretic; the Chian is a most delicious wine, and especially the kind called Ariusian; but there are three varieties of it, the austere, the sweet, and the intermediate.—Of the Italian wines, the most delicious are the Alban and the Falernian. The Adrian is a diffusible, diaphoretic, and safe wine. (i, 25.) According to Galen, the cæcuban, so frequently mentioned by Horace, was not any one sort of wine, but a general name applied to all generous and old wines. (De Succ. bon. 2.) Old wine was much sought after: Galen says everything is impaired by age but wine. (De Antidot.) The Falernian was reckoned best from ten to twenty: the Surrentine was not thought good until twenty-five. (Athen. i.)
According to Actuarius, the thick wines are most nourishing and form the thickest blood, but are apt to occasion visceral obstructions; while, on the other hand, the thin wines are more stomachic and less nourishing. The sweet are the contrary; but the white are less hot than the others; the gold-coloured are more hot; and then the red.
Wine, says Simeon Seth, is not only nutritious, but promotes in a great degree the distribution of the food over the body, rousing, and at the same time increasing the vital heat, and with it the urinary and other secretions. It suits best, he says, with persons of a cold and dry temperament; and, therefore, it is most proper for old men. He adds that the immoderate use of wine dissolves the vital tone, depresses the natural heat, and occasions apoplexy, epilepsy, and tumours of the body. Macrobius attempts to trace a resemblance between the effects of habitual intoxication and those resulting from exposure to extreme cold. “Quæcunque nimium algentibus, eadem contingunt ebriis. Fiunt enim tremuli, pallidi, graves; et saltu tumultuantis spiritus artus suos et membra quatiuntur. Idem corporis torpor ambobus, eadem linguæ titubatio. Multis etiam morbus ille quem παράλυσιν Græci vocant sic nimio vino, et multo algore contingit.” In like manner, a modern writer, Andreas Baccius, maintains that some wines are of a cold nature.
Haly Abbas gives nearly the same characters of wine as Seth. His account of all the wines, natural and artificial, used in his time, is most ample.
Alsaharavius forbids wine to be taken when the stomach is quite empty, or after a full meal. When taken seasonably, he says it improves the appetite, increases the vital heat, nourishes the body, and clears the senses.
Avicenna, with his usual judgment and industry, collects all the information of preceding authors, to which he adds his own opinions. He remarks that the immoderate use of wine induces disease of the liver and brain, and debilitates the nerves.
Wine, says Rhases, warms the stomach and liver, and dispels flatulence, promotes digestion, provokes the urinary and alvine discharges, and gladdens the mind.
Serapion copies mostly from Galen in delivering the general characters of wine. He disapproves of wine made with salt water. For an account of it, see Pliny and Athenæus, (l. c.)
The ancients were scarcely more agreed respecting the intoxicating properties of wine than they were as to the powers of the cabbage in counteracting them. Old Cato the Censor, who was in the practice “of warming his virtue with wine,” describes the following method of cooling it: “Si voles in convivio multum bibere cænareque, ante cæenam esto crudam brassicam quantum voles ex aceto, et item ubi cænaveris comesto aliqua V. folia, reddent te quasi nihil ederis, biberisque, bibesque quantum voles.” (De R. R. 156.) See a long dissertation on this property of the cabbage in Athenæus (Deipnos. i, ad finem); also Pliny (Hist. Nat. xx, 34); Pseudo-Dioscorides (Euporist. i, 24); Nonnius (14); Simeon Seth (in voce Brassica); Geopon. (xii, 17); Avicenna, Rhases, and Serapion give the same character of it. Plutarch affirms that almonds also are a preservative from intoxication. (Quæst. vi.)
Before quitting this subject, we must notice certain peculiar modes of preparing wine. The mustum was wine newly made, or the fresh juice of the grape. The protropum was the juice which runs from grapes without pressing. The mulsum was a preparation of wine and honey. Dioscorides recommends two parts of wine to one of honey; but there does not appear to have been any fixed proportion. The sapa, called by the Greeks hepsema and siræum, according to Pliny, is must boiled to a third; and the defrutum the same reduced to a half. They are now called robs, a term borrowed from the Arabians. The carenum, according to Isidorus, is must reduced to two thirds. The passum was a sweet wine prepared from grapes which had been much dried in the sun. The passum creticum, which is much praised by Pliny and Athenæus, and is often mentioned by our author, the learned Andreas Baccius and Nonnius believe to have resembled the modern malmsey. We have already mentioned a peculiar species of wine prepared with salt water. The ancients also gave artificial qualities to wine by adding rosin, pitch, and other substances to the casks in which it was deposited. See ‘Geoponica’ (vii.) Dioscorides gives receipts for preparing a great variety of vinous tinctures. These were used only for medicinal purposes. (Mat. Med. v.)
It is scarcely necessary for us to remark that the ancients generally drank their wines diluted either with hot or cold water. Hence the poet Juvenal says: “Quando vocatus adest calidæ gelidæque minister.” (Sat. v, 63.) According to Pliny, Staphylus first introduced this practice (H. N. viii, 56); but Athenæus refers it to Melampus (ii.) It would appear, however, from some passages in the ‘Ecclesiazusæ’ of Aristophanes, and from Eustathius’s Commentary on Homer (Iliad, ix, 203), that the ancients often drank their wines undiluted. It was customary, during the time of dinner, to drink off a cup of pure wine to “the good deity.” See Athenæus (xv, 17), with the learned note of Schweighäuser. The wine and water were commonly mixed together according to certain fixed proportions, such as one part of wine and two of water, or two of wine and three of water, or equal parts of both. (Eustathius in Odyss. vii.) In winter it was the rule to drink equal parts of wine and hot water; but in summer two parts of water were added to one of wine. (Anonymus de Diæta ap. Phys. et Med. Min. ed. Ideler, p. 197.) It would appear that it was a common practice to drink wine with other hot things in the morning during the cold months of winter. (Hierophilus de Nutr. Meth. ed. Ideler.)
SECT. XCVI.—ON HONEY AND HYDROMEL OR HONIED WATER.
Boiled honey is rather nutritious than laxative; but when unboiled the contrary. It agrees with cold and humid temperaments, but in the warm it is converted into bile. Honied water does not agree well with those who are affected with bitter bile, being converted into bile. In such constitutions the honied water ought to be very weak; but it is not proper for those whose bowels are easily affected. The honied water may be prepared by adding eight parts of water to the honey, and thus boiling it until it cease from frothing. It is expedient also to clear away the scum as soon as formed.
Commentary. Honey, says Hippocrates, when eaten with other food, is nutritious, and improves the colour; but, when taken alone, it rather attenuates than recruits. Actuarius says that scummed honey, when taken with other food, is nutritious and laxative. Democritus said, that health was best promoted by lubricating the inside with honey, and the outside with oil. Honey and bread formed the favorite food of the Pythagoreans. Athenæus (Deipnos. ii, 7.) See also Oribasius (Synops. iv, 38); Haly Abbas (v, 27); Simeon Seth (in voce Mel.)
Galen gives the following account of the phenomenon of a honey shower: “I have sometimes known in the season of summer a great quantity of honey to be found upon the leaves of trees, shrubs, and certain herbs, so that the country people said, jesting, ‘Jupiter has rained honey.’ A cold night, as for summer, had preceded (for it happened in summer); but the temperature of the former day had been hot and dry. It was thought, therefore, by those who were skilled in nature, that an exhalation from the earth and waters, finely attenuated and concocted by the heat of the sun, had been condensed and collected by the cold of the succeeding night. This phenomenon occurs rarely with us; but it takes place frequently in Mount Lebanon every summer.” (De Alim. Facult.) See also Fragmentum Theophrasti (de Melle, ed. Heinsius.) Ernestus Faber states that the honey here described is the manna of cedars. (De Manna Ebræorum, 12.)
A wine prepared from honey and aromatics is much commended by an intelligent writer on dietetics as possessing more heat and dryness than any other species of wine, and improving the appetite and colour. (Anonym. Tract. de Cibis ap. Ermerins Anecdota Græca, p. 237.)
Our author has given one method of preparing the hydromel, or honied water. Different modes are described by other authors. Thus, Mesue recommends seven parts of water to one of honey. It appears from Hippocrates, however, that it was taken more or less diluted. Pliny and Dioscorides make mention of hydromel prepared by mixing two parts of water with one of honey. This seems to have been the strongest hydromel. A species of hydromel carefully prepared, and kept for a considerable time, was esteemed a delicious beverage. Ludovicus Nonnius compares it to the mead used by certain nations of the north. They prepare it with hops and yeast, so that it is made to emulate the nature of wine. The Greeks and Romans did not make use either of hops or yeast.
In imitation of Galen, who, under the head of honey (de Simpl.), treats also of sugar, we shall give a brief account of the latter in this place. The saccharum, then, which is mentioned by Theophrastus (Frag. l. c.), Dioscorides (ii, 104), Galen (l. c.), Strabo (Geogr. xv), Pliny (H. N. xii, 17), and other ancient authors, was a natural concretion forming on various reeds, but more especially upon the bamboo cane (bambusa arundinacea.) The bamboo is noticed by Herodotus (Hist. iii, 98), and by Ctesias (Photii Lex.) Moses Chorenensis, a writer of the fifth century (Geogr. Armen.), is the first who makes mention of sugar procured from the cane by boiling.
SECT. XCVII.—ON SLEEP.
It remains, after having treated of everything connected with diet, to say something of sleep, which is generally taken after every other thing. Sleep, then, may be briefly defined to be a relaxation of the vital powers, occasioned by a suitable moisture irrigating the brain. When properly taken it may produce many good effects. It digests the food, concocts the humours, soothes pain, alleviates lassitude, and relaxes that which is contracted. It is also calculated to produce oblivion of mental sufferings, and to rectify the distracted powers of reason. The most suitable season for sleep is after a meal. But that during the day does not agree with all, because the time spent in sleep is not sufficient for the complete digestion of the food; and, when the digestion is interrupted unseasonably, those who rise from sleep at noon are often troubled with acidity and flatulence, and sometimes even with a gurgling noise in their bowels, unless from habit or sufficient rest these bad effects be obviated. The best season for sleep is the night, for the humidity and drowsy stillness of night contribute to perfect digestion. Wherefore after these nocturnal slumbers we feel the most desire for evacuation. The proper limit to sleep should be the complete digestion of the food, as may be ascertained by the eructations, and by tapping over the stomach; after which it may be not unuseful to awake in order to evacuate the excrementitious remains of the digestion.
Commentary. The philosophy of sleep is ingeniously treated of by Hippocrates (de Insomniis), and by Aristotle (in his treatise de Somno et Vigilia.) Aristotle states that digestion goes on best during sleep. Pliny’s definition of sleep seems to be taken from Hippocrates: “Est autem somnus nihil aliud quam animi in medium sese recessus.” (H. N. x, 97.) Alexander Aphrodisiensis, in like manner, says, “Know that, during the day, the natural principle is less occupied with its own peculiar operations, I mean the digestion of the food, the changes of the chyle, sanguification, distribution, assimilation, and the like, the mind being engaged in its other energies, namely, the five senses, fantasy, reasoning, and memory; but during night, on the other hand, nature operates more, and the mind less.” (Problem i, 118.) See also particularly Oribasius (Med. Coll. vi, 4); Actuarius (de Diæta, 11); Avicenna (i, 3, 3); Rhases (ad Mansor. iv, 3); Haly Abbas (Theor. v, 35); Alsaharavius (Theor. xi, 3); Averrhoes (Collect. i, 21.) Averrhoes defines sleep to be the recession of the sensorial powers from their organs to the internal parts; and hence, he remarks, those who sleep with their eyes open do not perceive the objects nearest to them. The vital heat being then collected internally, he adds, the powers of the digestive faculty are increased. Rhases agrees with Galen that moderate sleep forms good blood; but that too much corrupts the juices, that is to say, impairs digestion. Haly Abbas remarks that, during sleep, the animal powers are suspended, while the vital and natural continue unaffected; and, therefore, the mind or principle of life being then disengaged, as it were, from one of its offices, is the abler to perform the others aright. Hence, he adds, digestion is best performed during sleep. Alsaharavius approves of taking rest after a meal, but recommends an hour to elapse before going to sleep.
The reader will find in Stentzel’s little treatise, entitled ‘Διατριβὴ περι τοῦ ὕπνου,’ an interesting exposition of the opinions of the ancient philosophers and physicians on this subject. There is an ingenious disquisition on the nature of sleep in the commentary of Stephanus on the Prognostics of Hippocrates. In reference to Aristotle’s division of causes, he decides that the efficient cause of sleep is the rest of the particular senses, and of the general sensorium: the material, a humidity which is carried to the roots of the nerves, and prevents the exit of the vital spirit; the formal or organic, the brain, in which the humidity is collected; and the final, or end which sleep serves, the recreation of the powers. (Dietz, T. i, 142.)
SECT. XCVIII.—ON WATCHFULNESS.
The cure of watchfulness in disease, whether proceeding from pain, fever, or some acute symptom, will be treated of under the head of Fevers. But we shall now treat of the watchfulness of those in health. If their watchfulness proceed from sorrow, care, or any mental emotions, we must endeavour if possible to remove the offending cause, and then to divert the attention by agreeable sounds. For this purpose, some seek after the gentle noise of waters, by which they are soothed and lulled to rest. After proper digestion, they should use baths, especially in the evening, and a moistening diet, such as lettuces and the like. They may also mix the green leaves of the black poppy with condiments, and eat fish of easy digestion. They should also use plenty of wine which is light and not old. When about to go to bed, their heads should be anointed with rose oil, or with oil in which the heads of poppies or mandrake have been boiled. And the oil of dill not too old is soporific. I have known rest succeeding suddenly to fatigue produce this effect. Moderate coition will sometimes do the same. Others easily procure rest by having their head and feet cooled. But if their watchfulness be occasioned by their stomachs being oppressed by the quantity or bad quality of the food (and I have known this happen, in like manner as in others it arises from an unseasonable abstinence or diminution of their accustomed food), this ought to be inquired into and the cause removed.
Commentary. We have mentioned, in the 74th Section, that Galen cured himself of watchfulness by eating freely of lettuces. See further Oribasius (Med. Collect, vi); Averrhoes (Collectan. ii, 5); Alsaharavius (Theor. xi, 3); Rhases (Contin. xxxi, Aphorism, iii.) Indigestion, as regards both food and drink, is stated by Hippocrates as one of the common effects of protracted insomnolency. (De Diæt. in Morb. Acut. 13.) According to Damascius, the commentator on Hippocrates, the causes of insomnolency are, heat of the brain, an intemperament alone, or the prevalence of a bilious humour. (Ed. Dietz. T. ii, 298.)
Rhases recommends lettuces, the tepid bath, the affusion of tepid water on the head, and diluted wine. He also recommends mandragora and opium, which, he says, Galen states will produce soporific effects, not only when taken internally, but when rubbed on the forehead, and applied to the nostrils. He particularly approves of the following liniment: Pound the bark of mandragora, the seed of black henbane, and opium, with the juice of lettuce, and rub into the temples. He further mentions, that having fallen into a state of insomnolency from too much application to study, he cured himself by eating lettuces and using the oil of the water lily externally. (Aph. u. s.)
SECT. XCIX.—ON SOMNOLENCY.
If, on the other hand, the sleep be profound and heavy, we must abstain from frequent baths and cooling unguents; we must use masticatories, and upon the whole change the regimen for one of a hotter, drier, and less nutritive character, because the affection is occasioned by a cold and humid matter irrigating the brain.
Commentary. See the Commentary on the Sections on Lethargy and Carus in Book Third.
SECT. C.—THE EPISTLE OF DIOCLES ON THE PRESERVATION OF HEALTH.—DIOCLES TO KING ANTIGONUS.
Since of all kings you are the most skilled in the arts, and have lived very long, and are skilled in all philosophy, and have attained the highest rank in mathematics, I, supposing that the science which treats of all things that relate to health is a branch of philosophy becoming a king and befitting to you, have written you this account of the origin of diseases, of the symptoms which precede them, and of the modes by which they may be alleviated. For neither does a storm gather in the heavens but it is preceded by certain signs which seamen and men of much skill attend to, nor does any disease attack the human frame without having some precursory symptom. If, then, you will only be persuaded by what we say regarding them, you may attain a correct acquaintance with these things. We divide the human body into four parts: the head, the chest, the belly, and the bladder.—When a disease is about to fix in the head, it is usually announced beforehand by vertigo, pain in the head, heaviness in the eyebrows, noise in the ears, and throbbing of the temples; the eyes water in the morning, attended with dimness of sight; the sense of smell is lost, and the gums become swelled. When any such symptoms occur, the head ought to be purged, not indeed with any strong medicine, but taking the tops of hyssop and sweet marjoram, pound them and boil them in a pot with half a hemina of must or rob, rinse the mouth with this in the morning before eating, and evacuate the humours by gargling. There is no gentler remedy than this for affections of the head. Mustard in warm honied water also answers the purpose very well. Take a mouthful of this in the morning before eating, gargle and evacuate the humours. The head also should be warmed by covering it in such a manner as that the phlegm may be readily discharged. Those who neglect these symptoms are apt to be seized with the following disorders: Inflammations of the eyes, cataracts, pain of the ears as if from a fracture, strumous affections of the neck, sphacelus of the brain, catarrh, quinsy, running ulcers called achores, caries, enlargement of the uvula, defluxion of the hairs, ulceration of the head, pain in the teeth.—When some disease is about to fall upon the chest, it is usually announced by some of the following symptoms: There are profuse sweats over the whole body, and particularly about the chest, the tongue is rough, expectoration saltish, bitter, or bilious, pains suddenly seizing the sides or shoulder-blades, frequent yawning, watchfulness, oppressed respiration, thirst after sleep, despondency of mind, coldness of the breast and arms, trembling of the hands. These symptoms may be relieved in the following manner: Procure vomiting after a moderate meal without medicine. Vomiting also when the stomach is empty will answer well; to produce which first swallow some small radishes, cresses, rocket, mustard, and purslain, and then by drinking warm water procure vomiting. Upon those who neglect these symptoms the following diseases are apt to supervene: Pleurisy, peripneumony, melancholy, acute fevers, frensy, lethargy, ardent fever attended with hiccough.—When any disease is about to attack the bowels, some of the following symptoms announce its approach: In the first place, the belly is griped and disordered, the food and drink seem bitter, heaviness of the knees, inability to bend the loins, pains over the whole body unexpectedly occurring, numbness of the legs, slight fever; when any of these occur, it will be proper to loosen the belly by a suitable diet without medicine. There are many articles of this description which one may use with safety, such as beets boiled in honied water, boiled garlic, mallows, dock, the herb mercury, honied cakes; for all these things are laxative of the bowels. Or, if any of these symptoms increase, mix bastard saffron with all these decoctions, for thereby they will be rendered sweeter and less dangerous. The smooth cabbage boiled in a large quantity of water is also beneficial; this decoction with honey and salt may be drank to the amount of about four heminæ, or the water of chick-peas or tares boiled may be drank in the same manner. Those who neglect the afore-mentioned symptoms are apt to be seized with the following affections: Diarrhœa, dysentery, lientery, ileus, ischiatic disease, tertian fever, gout, apoplexy, hemorrhoids, rheumatism.—When any disease is about to seize the bladder, the following symptoms are its usual precursors: A sense of repletion after taking even a small quantity of food, flatulence, eructation, paleness of the whole body, deep sleep, urine pale and passed with difficulty, swellings about the privy parts. When any of these symptoms appear, their safest cure will be by aromatic diuretics. Thus the roots of fennel and parsley may be infused in white fragrant wine, and drunk every day when the stomach is empty in the morning to the amount of two cyathi, with water in which carrot, myrtle, or elecampane has been macerated (you may use any of these you please, for all are useful); and the infusion of chick-peas in water may be drank in like manner. On those who neglect these symptoms the following diseases are apt to supervene: Dropsy, enlargement of the spleen, pain of the liver, calculus, inflammation of the kidneys, strangury, distension of the belly. Regarding all these symptoms it may be remarked that children ought to be treated with gentler remedies, and adults with more active.—I have now to give you an account of the seasons of the year in which each of these complaints occur, and what things ought to be taken and avoided. I begin with the winter solstice.—Of the winter solstice: This season disposes men to catarrhs and defluxions, until the vernal equinox. It will be proper then to take such things as are of a heating nature, drink wine little diluted, or drink pure wine, or of the decoction of marjoram, and indulge in venery. From the winter solstice to the vernal equinox are ninety days.—Of the vernal equinox: This season increases phlegm in men, and the sweetish humours in the blood until the rising of the pleiades. Use therefore juicy and acrid things, take labour, and indulge in venery. To the rising of the pleiades are forty-six days.—Of the rising of the pleiades: This season increases the bitter bile, and bitter humours in men, until the summer solstice. Use therefore all sweet things, laxatives of the belly, and indulge but sparingly in venery. To the summer solstice are forty-five days.—Of the summer solstice: This season increases the formation of black bile in men, until the autumnal equinox. Use therefore cold water, and everything that is fragrant; and do not indulge in venery, or do so more sparingly than is generally directed regarding these matters. To the autumnal equinox are ninety-three days.—Of the autumnal equinox: This season increases phlegm and thin rheums in men until the setting of the pleiades. Use therefore remedies for removing rheums, have recourse to acrid and succulent things, take no vomits, and abstain from labour and venery. To the setting of the pleiades are forty-five days.—Of the setting of the pleiades: This season increases phlegm in men until the winter solstice. Take therefore all sour things, drink as much as is agreeable of a weak wine, use fat things, and labour strenuously. To the winter solstice are forty-five days.
Commentary. This Diocles was an ancient physician of great eminence. Galen often mentions him along with his idol, Hippocrates, as the greatest of medical authorities. Cælius Aurelianus frequently quotes his opinions in respectful terms, although belonging to a different sect from his own. Pliny says that he was next to Hippocrates in fame as in time. Octavius Horatianus calls him the younger Hippocrates. Athenæus mentions a work of his on Poisons, and another on Cookery.
Le Clerc questions the authenticity of this epistle, but seems to have had no other grounds for his scepticism than the general suspicion which has attached to all the Epistolæ Græcanicæ since the memorable controversy between the Honorable Mr. Boyle and Dr. Bentley on the authenticity of the Epistles of Phalaris. It is published in the ‘Bibliotheca Græca’ of Albertus Fabricius, who appears to have been satisfied as to its genuineness. Mr. Moir, the author of ‘Outlines of the Ancient History of Medicine,’ condemns it as apocryphal, upon the authority of Schulze. (p. 76.) All we shall say on this point is, that the evidence against the authority of this Epistle appears to us to be very inconclusive.