On the Workmanship of God, or the Formation of Man

Lactantius (AD 240–317) · Liber de opificio Dei · PL 7, 11–78

1 Chap. I.—The introduction, and exhortation to Demetrianus PL 7, 11

How disturbed I am, and in the greatest necessities, you will be able to judge from this little book which I have written to you, Demetrianus, almost in unadorned words, as the mediocrity of my talent permitted, that you might know my daily pursuit, and that I might not be wanting to you, even now an instructor, but of a more honourable subject and of a better system. For if you afforded yourself a ready hearer in literature, which did nothing else than form the style, how much more teachable ought you to be in these true studies, which have reference even to the life! And I now profess to you, that I am hindered by no necessity of circumstance or time from composing something by which the philosophers of our sect which we uphold may become better instructed and more learned for the future, although they now have a bad reputation, and are commonly reproved, as living otherwise than is befitting for wise men, and as concealing their vices under the covering of a name; whereas they ought either to have remedied them, or to have altogether avoided them, that they might render the name of wisdom happy and uncorrupted, their life itself agreeing with their precepts. I, however, shrink from no labour that I may at once instruct ourselves and others. For I am not able to forget myself, and especially at that time when it is most necessary for me to remember; as also you do not forget yourself, as I hope and wish. For although the necessity of the state may turn you aside from true and just works, yet it is impossible that a mind conscious of rectitude should not from time to time look to the heaven.

I indeed rejoice that all things which are esteemed blessings turn out prosperously to you, but only on condition of their changing nothing of your state of mind. For I fear lest custom and the pleasantness of these subjects should, as usually happens, creep by degrees into your mind. Therefore I advise you,

“And repeating it, will again and again advise you,”

not to believe that you have these enjoyments of the earth as great or true blessings, since they are not only deceitful because they are doubtful, but also treacherous because they are pleasant. For you know how crafty that wrestler and adversary of ours is, and also often violent, as we now see that he is. He employs all these things which are able to entice as snares, and with such subtilty that they escape the notice of the eyes of the mind, so that they cannot be avoided by the foresight of man. Therefore it is the highest prudence to advance step by step, since he occupies the passes on both sides, and secretly places stumbling-blocks for our feet. Accordingly I advise you, either to disregard, if you are able according to your virtue, your prosperity in which you live, or not to admire it greatly. Remember your true parent, and in what city you have given your name, and of what rank you have been. You understand assuredly what I say. For I do not charge you with pride, of which there is not even a suspicion in your case; but the things which I say are to be referred to the mind, not to the body, the whole system of which has been arranged on this account, that it may be in subjection to the soul as to a master, and may be ruled by its will. For it is in a certain manner an earthen vessel in which the soul, that is, the true man himself, is contained, and that vessel indeed not made by Prometheus, as the poets say, but by that supreme Creator and Artificer of the world, God, whose divine providence and most perfect excellence it is neither possible to comprehend by the perception, nor to express in word.

I will attempt, however, since mention has been made of the body and soul, to explain the nature of each, as far as the weakness of my understanding sees through; and I think that this duty is especially to be undertaken on this account, because Marcus Tullius, a man of remarkable talent, in his fourth book on the Republic, when he had attempted to do this, concluded a subject of wide extent within narrow limits, lightly selecting the chief points. And that there might be no excuse, because he had not followed up this subject, he testified that neither inclination nor attention had been wanting to him. For in his first book concerning the Laws, when he was concisely summing up the same subject, he thus spoke: “Scipio, as it appears to me, has sufficiently expressed this subject in those books which you have read.” Afterwards, however, in his second book concerning the Nature of the Gods, he endeavoured to follow up the same subject more extensively. But since he did not express it sufficiently even there, I will approach this office, and will take upon myself boldly to explain that which a man of the greatest eloquence has almost left untouched. Perhaps you may blame me for attempting to discuss something in matters of obscurity, when you see that there have been men of such rashness who are commonly called philosophers, that they scrutinized those things which God willed to be abstruse and hidden, and investigated the nature of things in heaven and on earth, which are far removed from us, and cannot be examined by the eyes, nor touched by the hand, nor perceived by the senses; and yet they so dispute concerning the nature of these things, as to wish that the things which they bring forward may appear to be proved and known. What reason is there, I pray, why any one should think it an invidious thing in us, if we wish to look into and contemplate the system of our body, which is not altogether obscure, because from the very offices of the limbs, and the uses of the several parts, it is permitted us to understand with what great power of providence each part has been made?

Quam minime sim quietus et in summis necessitatibus, ex hoc libello poteris existimare; quem ad te rudibus pene verbis, prout ingenii mediocritas tulit, Demetriane, perscripsi, ut quotidianum studium meum et nosses, et non deessem tibi, praeceptor etiamnunc, sed honestioris rei meliorisque doctrinae. Nam si te in litteris, nihil aliud quam linguam instruentibus, auditorem satis strenuum praebuisti: quanto magis in his veris, et ad vitam pertinentibus, docilior esse debebis? Apud quem nunc profiteor, nulla me necessitate vel rei, vel temporis impediri, quominus aliquid excudam, quo philosophi nostrae sectae, quam tuemur, instructiores doctioresque in posterum fiant; quamvis nunc male audiant, castigenturque vulgo, quod aliter quam sapientibus convenit vivant, et vitia sub obtentu nominis celent, quibus illos aut mederi oportuit, aut ea prorsus effugere, ut beatum atque incorruptum sapientiae nomen vita ipsa cum praeceptis congruente praestarent. Ego tamen, ut nos ipsos simul et caeteros instruam, nullum laborem recuso. Neque enim possum oblivisci mei, tum praesertim, cum maxime opus sit meminisse; sicut ne tu quidem tui, ut spero, et opto. Nam licet te publicae rei necessitas a veris et justis operibus avertat: tamen fieri non potest, quin subinde in coelum aspiciat. Mens sibi conscia recti.

Ego quidem laetor omnia tibi, quae pro bonis habentur, prospere fluere; sed ita, si nihil de statu mentis immutent. Vereor enim ne paulatim consuetudo, et jucunditas earum rerum (sicut fieri solet) in animum tuum repat. Ideoque te moneo, Et repetens iterumque monebo ne oblectamenta ista terrae, pro magnis aut veris bonis habere te credas; quae sunt non tantum fallacia, quia dubia, verum etiam insidiosa, quia dulcia. Nam ille colluctator et adversarius noster scis quam sit astutus, et idem ipse violentus, sicuti nunc videmus. Is haec omnia, quae illicere possunt, pro laqueis habet, et quidem tam subtilibus, ut oculos mentis effugiant, ne possint hominis provisione vitari. Summa ergo prudentia est, pedetentim procedere; quoniam utrobique saluti insidet, et offensacula pedibus latenter opponit. Itaque res tuas prosperas, in quibus nunc agis, suadeo ut pro tua virtute aut contemnas, si potes, aut non magnopere mireris. Memento et veri parentis tui, et in qua civitate nomen dederis, et cujus ordinis fueris. Intelligis profecto quid loquar. Nec enim te superbiae arguo, cujus in te ne suspicio quidem ulla est: sed ea quae dico, ad mentem referenda sunt, non ad corpus, cujus omnis ratio ideo comparata est, ut animo tanquam domino serviat, et regatur nutu ejus. Vas est quidem corpus quodammodo fictile, quo animus, id est homo ipse verus continetur, et quidem non a Prometheo fictum (ut poetae loquuntur), sed a summo illo rerum conditore atque artifice Deo; cujus divinam providentiam perfectissimamque virtutem, nec sensu comprehendere, nec verbo enarrare possibile est.

Tentabo tamen, quoniam corporis et animi facta mentio est, utriusque rationem, quantum pusillitas intelligentiae meae pervidet, explicare. Quod officium hac de causa maxime suscipiendum puto, quod M. Tullius, vir ingenii singularis, in quarto de Republica libro, cum id facere tentasset, nihil prorsus effecit; nam materiam late patentem angustis finibus terminavit, leviter summa quaeque decerpens. Ac ne ulla esset excusatio, cur eum locum non fuerit executus, ipse testatus est, nec voluntatem sibi defuisse, nec curam. In libro enim de Legibus primo, cum hoc idem summatim stringeret, sic ait: Hunc locum satis (ut mihi videtur) in iis libris, quos legistis, expressit Scipio. Postea tamen in libro de Natura deorum secundo, hoc idem latius exequi conatus est. Sed quoniam ne ibi quidem satis expressit, aggrediar hoc munus et sumam mihi audacter explicandum, quod homo disertissimus pene omisit intactum. Forsitan reprehendas, quod in rebus obscuris coner aliquid disputare; cum videas tanta temeritate homines extitisse, qui vulgo philosophi nominantur, ut ea, quae abstrusa prorsus atque abdita Deus esse voluit, scrutarentur, ac naturam rerum coelestium terrenarumque conquirerent, quae a nobis longe remotae, neque oculis contrectari, neque tangi manu, neque percipi sensibus possunt: et tamen de illarum omnium ratione sic disputant, ut ea, quae afferunt, probata et cognita videri velint. Quid est tandem, cur nobis invidiosum quisquam putet, si rationem corporis nostri dispicere et contemplari velimus? Quae plane obscura non est; quia ex ipsis membrorum officiis, et usibus partium singularum, quanta vi providentiae quidque factum sit, intelligere nobis licet.

2 Chap. II.—Of the production of the beasts and of man PL 7, 14

For our Creator and Parent, God, has given to man perception and reason, that it might be evident from this that we are descended from Him, because He Himself is intelligence, He Himself is perception and reason. Since He did not give that power of reason to the other animals, He provided beforehand in what manner their life might be more safe. For He clothed them all with their own natural hair, in order that they might more easily be able to endure the severity of frosts and colds. Moreover, He has appointed to every kind its own peculiar defence for the repelling of attacks from without; so that they may either oppose the stronger animals with natural weapons, or the feebler ones may withdraw themselves from danger by the swiftness of their flight, or those which require at once both strength and swiftness may protect themselves by craft, or guard themselves in hiding-places. And so others of them either poise themselves aloft with light plumage, or are supported by hoofs, or are furnished with horns; some have arms in their mouth—namely, their teeth—or hooked talons on their feet; and none of them is destitute of a defence for its own protection.

But if any fall as a prey to the greater animals, that their race might not utterly perish, they have either been banished to that region where the greater ones cannot exist, or they have received a more abundant fruitfulness in production, that food might be supplied from them to the beasts which are nourished by blood, and yet their very multitude might survive the slaughter inflicted upon them, so as to preserve the race. But He made man—reason being granted to him, and the power of perceiving and speaking being given to him—destitute of those things which are given to the other animals, because wisdom was able to supply those things which the condition of nature had denied to him. He made him naked and defenceless, because he could be armed by his talent, and clothed by his reason. But it cannot be expressed how wonderfully the absence of those things which are given to the brutes contributes to the beauty of man. For if He had given to man the teeth of wild beasts, or horns, or claws, or hoofs, or a tail, or hairs of various colour, who cannot perceive how misshapen an animal he would be, as the dumb animals, if they were made naked and defenceless? For if you take from these the natural clothing of their body, or those things by which they are armed of themselves, they can be neither beautiful nor safe, so that they appear wonderfully furnished if you think of utility, and wonderfully adorned if you think of appearance: in such a wonderful manner is utility combined with beauty.

But with reference to man, whom He formed an eternal and immortal being, He did not arm him, as the others, without, but within; nor did He place his protection in the body, but in the soul: since it would have been superfluous, when He had given him that which was of the greatest value, to cover him with bodily defences, especially when they hindered the beauty of the human body. On which account I am accustomed to wonder at the senselessness of the philosophers who follow Epicurus, who blame the works of nature, that they may show that the world is prepared and governed by no providence; but they ascribe the origin of all things to indivisible and solid bodies, from the fortuitous meetings of which they say that all things are and were produced. I pass by the things relating to the work itself with which they find fault, in which matter they are ridiculously mad; I assume that which belongs to the subject of which we are now treating.

Dedit enim homini artifex ille noster ac parens Deus sensum atque rationem; ut ex eo appareret nos ab eo esse generatos, quia ipse intelligentia, ipse sensus ac ratio est. Caeteris animantibus quoniam rationalem istam vim non attribuit, quemadmodum tamen vita eorum tutior esset, ante providit. Omnes enim suis ex se pilis texit, quo facilius possent vim pruinarum ac frigorum sustinere. Singulis autem generibus, ad propulsandos impetus externos, sua propria munimenta constituit; ut aut naturalibus telis repugnent fortioribus, aut quae sunt imbecilliora, subtrahant se periculis pernicitate fugiendi, aut quae simul, et viribus, et celeritate indigent, astu se protegant, aut latibulis sepiant. Itaque alia eorum, vel plumis levibus in sublime suspensa sunt, vel suffulta ungulis, vel instructa cornibus; quibusdam in ore arma sunt dentes, aut in pedibus adunci ungues; nullique munimentum ad tutelam sui deest.

Si qua vero in praedam majoribus cedunt, ne tamen stirps eorum funditus interiret, aut in ea sunt relegata regione, ubi majora esse non possunt; aut acceperunt uberem generandi foecunditatem, ut et bestiis, quae sanguine aluntur, victus suppeteret ex illis, et illatam tamen cladem, ad conservationem generis, multitudo ipsa superaret. Hominem autem, ratione concessa, et virtute sentiendi atque eloquendi data, eorum, quae caeteris animantibus attributa sunt, fecit expertem, quia sapientia reddere poterat, quae illi naturae conditio denegasset, statuit nudum, et inermem, quia et ingenio poterat armari, et ratione vestiri. Ea vero ipsa, quae mutis data, et homini denegata sunt, quam mirabiliter homini ad pulchritudinem faciant, exprimi non potest. Nam si in homine ferinos dentes, aut cornua, aut ungues, aut ungulas, aut caudam, aut varii coloris pilos addidisset; quis non sentiat quam turpe animal esset futurum, sicut muta, si nuda et inermia fingerentur? Quibus si detrahas, vel naturalem sui corporis vestem, vel ea quibus ex se armantur, nec speciosa poterunt esse, nec tuta; ut mirabiliter, si utilitatem cogites, instructa, si speciem, ornata videantur: adeo miro modo consentit utilitas cum decore.

Hominem vero, quem aeternum animal atque immortale fingebat, non forinsecus, ut caetera, sed interius armavit; nec munimentum ejus in corpore, sed in animo posuit: quoniam supervacuum fuit, cum illi, quod erat maximum, tribuisset, corporalibus eum tegere munimentis; cum praesertim pulchritudinem humani corporis impedirent. Unde ego philosophorum, qui Epicurum sequuntur, amentiam soleo mirari, qui naturae opera reprehendunt, ut ostendant, nulla providentia instructum esse ac regi mundum; sed originem rerum insecabilibus ac solidis corporibus assignant, quorum fortuitis concursionibus universa nascantur, et nata sint. Praetereo quae ad ipsum mundum pertinentia vitio dant, in quo ridicule insaniunt; id sumo, quod ad rem, de qua nunc agimus, pertinet.

3 Chap. III.—Of the condition of the beasts and man PL 7, 16

They complain that man is born in a more feeble and frail condition than that in which the other animals are born: for that these, as soon as they are produced from the womb, immediately raise themselves on their feet, and express their joy by running to and fro, and are at once fit for enduring the air, inasmuch as they have come forth to the light protected by natural coverings; but man, on the contrary, being naked and defenceless, is cast forth, and driven, as it were, from a shipwreck, to the miseries of this life; who is neither able to move himself from the place where he has been born, nor to seek the nourishment of milk, nor to endure the injury of time. Therefore they say that Nature is not the mother of the human race, but a stepmother, who has dealt so liberally with the dumb creation, but has so produced man, that, without resources, and without strength, and destitute of all aid, he can do nothing else than give tokens of the state of his frailty by wailing and lamentations; “as well he may, whose destiny it is to go through in life so many ills.”

And when they say these things they are believed to be very wise, because every one without consideration is displeased with his own condition; but I contend that they are never more foolish than when they say these things. For when I consider the condition of things, I understand that nothing ought to have been otherwise than it is—not to say could have been otherwise, for God is able to do all things: but it must be, that that most provident majesty made that which was better and more right.

I should like, therefore, to ask those censurers of the divine works, what they think to be wanting in man, on account of his being born in a more feeble condition. Do they think that men are, on this account, brought up worse? Or that they advance the less to the greatest strength of age? Or that weakness is a hindrance to their growth or safety, since reason bestows the things which are wanting? But, they say, the bringing up of man costs the greatest labours: in truth, the condition of the brute creation is better, because all these, when they have brought forth their young, have no care except for their own food; from which it is effected that, their teats being spontaneously distended, the nourishment of milk is supplied to their offspring, and that they seek this nourishment by the compulsion of nature, without any trouble on the part of the mothers. How is it with birds, which have a different nature? do they not undergo the greatest labours in bringing up their young, so that they sometimes appear to have something of human intelligence? For they either build their nests of mud, or construct them with twigs and leaves, and they sit upon the eggs without taking food; and since it has not been given to them to nourish their young from their own bodies, they convey to them food, and spend whole days in going to and fro in this manner; but by night they defend, cherish, and protect them. What more can men do? unless it be this only, that they do not drive away their young when grown up, but retain them bound by perpetual relationship and the bond of affection. Why should I say that the offspring of birds is much more fragile than that of man? Inasmuch as they do not bring forth the animal itself from the body of the mother, but that which, being warmed by the nourishment and heat of the body of the mother, produces the animal; and this, even when animated by breath, being unfledged and tender, is not only without the power of flying, but even of walking. Would he not, therefore, be most senseless, if any one should think that nature has dealt badly with birds, first, because they are twice born, and then because they are so weak, that they have to be nourished by food sought with labour by their parents? But they select the stronger, and pass by the more feeble animals.

I ask, therefore, from those who prefer the condition of the beasts to their own, what they would choose if God should give them the choice: would they prefer the wisdom of man together with his weakness, or the strength of the beasts together with their nature? In truth, they are not so much like the beasts as not to prefer even a much more fragile condition, provided that it be human, to that strength of theirs unattended with reason. But, in truth, prudent men neither desire the reason of man together with frailty, nor the strength of the dumb animals without reason. Therefore it is nothing so repugnant or contradictory, that either reason or the condition of nature should of necessity prepare each animal. If it is furnished with natural protection, reason is superfluous. For what will it contrive? What will it do? Or what will it plan? Or in what will it display that light of the intellect, when Nature of its own accord grants those things which are able to be the result of reason? But if it be endued with reason, what need will there be of defences for the body, when reason once granted is able to supply the office of nature? And this has such power for the adorning and protection of man, that nothing greater or better can be given by God. Finally, since man is possessed of a body which is not great, and of slight strength, and of infirm health, nevertheless, since he has received that which is of greater value, he is better equipped than the other animals, and more adorned. For though he is born frail and feeble, yet he is safe from all the dumb animals, and all those which are born with greater strength, though they are able to bear patiently the inclemency of the sky, yet are unable to be safe from man. Thus it comes to pass that reason bestows more on man than nature does on the dumb animals; since, in their case, neither greatness of strength nor firmness of body can prevent them from being oppressed by us, or from being made subject to our power.

Can any one, then, when he sees that even elephants, with their vast bodies and strength, are subservient to man, complain respecting God, the Maker of all things, because he has received moderate strength, and a small body; and not estimate according to their deserts the divine benefits towards himself, which is the part of an ungrateful man, or (to speak more truly) of a madman? Plato, I believe, that he might refute these ungrateful men, gave thanks to nature that he was born a man. How much better and more soundly did he act, who perceived that the condition of man was better, than they did who would have preferred that they had been born beasts! For if God should happen to change them into those animals whose condition they prefer to their own, they would now immediately desire to return to their previous state, and would with great outcries eagerly demand their former condition, because strength and firmness of body are not of such consequence that you should be without the office of the tongue; or the free course of birds through the air, that you should be without the hands. For the hands are of greater service than the lightness and use of the wings; the tongue is of greater service than the strength of the whole body. What madness is it, therefore, to prefer those things which, if they were given, you would refuse to receive!

Queruntur, hominem nimis imbecillum et fragilem nasci, quam caetera animalia nascuntur; quae ut sunt edita ex utero, protinus in pedes suos erigi, et gestire discursibus, statimque aeri tolerando idonea esse, quod in lucem naturalibus indumentis munita processerint: hominem contra, nudum, et inermem tanquam ex naufragio in hujus vitae miserias projici et expelli; qui neque movere se loco, ubi effusus est, possit, nec alimentum lactis appetere, nec injuriam temporis ferre; itaque naturam, non matrem esse humani generis, sed novercam, quae cum mutis tam liberaliter se gesserit, hominem vero sic effuderit, ut inops, et infirmus, et omni auxilio indigens, nihil aliud possit, quam fragilitatis suae conditionem ploratu ac fletibus suis ominari: scilicet, Cui tantum in vita restet transire malorum. Quae cum dicunt, vehementer sapere creduntur, propterea quod unusquisque inconsiderate suae conditioni ingratus est: ego vero illos nunquam tam desipere contendo, quam cum haec loquuntur. Considerans enim conditionem rerum, intelligo nihil fieri aliter debuisse, ut non dicam, potuisse, quia Deus potest omnia; sed necesse est, ut providentissima illa majestas id effecerit, quod erat melius et rectius.

Libet igitur interrogare istos divinorum operum reprehensores, quid in homine deesse, quia imbecillior nascitur, credant? Num idcirco minus educentur homines? num minus ad summum robur aetatis provehantur; num imbecillitas aut incrementum impediat, aut salutem? quoniam quae desunt, ratio dependit. At hominis, inquiunt, educatio maximis laboribus constat: pecudum scilicet conditio melior, quod hae omnes, cum foetum ediderint, non nisi pastus sui curam gerunt; ex quo efficitur, ut uberibus sua sponte distentis, alimentum lactis foetibus ministretur, et id cogente natura, sine matrum sollicitudine appetant. Quid aves, quarum ratio diversa est, nonne maximos suscipiunt in educando labores? ut interdum aliquid humanae intelligentiae habere videantur: nidos enim, aut luto aedificant, aut virgultis et frondibus construunt; et ciborum expertes incubant ovis; et quoniam foetus de suis corporibus alere datum non est, cibos convehunt, et totos dies in hujusmodi discursatione consumunt, noctibus vero defendunt, fovent, protegunt. Quid amplius facere homines possunt? nisi hoc solum fortasse, quod non expellunt adultos, sed perpetua necessitudine ac vinculo charitatis adjunctos habent. Quid, quod avium foetus multo fragilior est, quam hominis: quia non materno corpore ipsum animal edunt; sed quod materni corporis fotu et calore tepefactum, animal efficiat, quod tamen cum spiritu fuerit animatum, id vero implume ac tenerum, non modo volandi, sed ambulandi quoque usu caret. Non ergo ineptissimus sit, si quis putet male cum volucribus egisse naturam, primum quod bis nascuntur; deinde, quod tam infirmae, ut sint quaesitis per laborem cibis a parentibus nutriendae. Sed illi fortiora eligunt, imbecilliora praetereunt.

Quaero igitur ab iis, qui conditionem pecudum suae praeferunt, quid eligant, si Deus his deferat optionem; utrum malint humanam sapientiam cum imbecillitate, an pecudum firmitatem cum illarum natura? Scilicet non tam pecudes sunt, ut non malint vel fragiliorem multo, quam nunc est, dummodo humanam, quam illam irrationabilem firmitatem. Sed videlicet prudentes viri, neque hominis rationem volunt cum fragilitate, neque mutorum firmitatem sine ratione. Quod nihil est tam repugnans, tamque contrarium, quod unumquodque animal, aut ratio instruat necesse est, aut conditio naturae. Si naturalibus munimentis instruatur, supervacua ratio est. Quid enim excogitabit? quid faciet? aut quid molietur? aut in quo lumen illud ingenii ostendet, cum ea, quae possunt esse rationis, ultro natura concedat? Si autem ratione sit praeditum, quid opus erit sepimentis corporis? cum semel concessa ratio naturae munus possit implere: quae quidem tantum valet ad ornandum tuendumque hominem, ut nihil potuerit majus ac melius a Deo dari. Denique cum et corporis non magni homo, et exiguarum virium, et valetudinis sit infirmae, tamen quoniam id, quod est majus accepit, et instructior est caeteris animalibus, et ornatior. Nam cum fragilis imbecillisque nascatur, tamen et a mutis omnibus tutus est, et ea omnia, quae firmiora nascuntur, etiamsi vim coeli fortiter patiuntur, ab homine tamen tuta esse non possunt. Ita fit, ut plus homini conferat ratio, quam natura mutis, quoniam in illis, neque magnitudo virium, neque firmitas corporis efficere potest, quominus aut opprimantur a nobis, aut nostrae subjecta sint potestati.

Potestne igitur aliquis, cum videat etiam boves lucas, aut equos, cum immanissimis etiam corporibus ac viribus servire homini, queri de opifice rerum Deo, quod modicas vires, quod parvum corpus acceperit? nec beneficia in se divina pro merito aestimat, quod est ingrati, aut (ut verius loquamur) insani. Plato, ut hos, credo, ingratos refelleret, naturae gratias egit, quod homo natus esset. Quod et ipsum quale sit, non est hujus materiae ponderare. Quanto melius, et sanius, qui sentit conditionem hominis esse meliorem, quam isti, qui se pecudes natos esse maluerunt. Quos si Deus in ea forte converterit animalia, quorum sortem praeferunt suae, jam profecto cupiant remigrare, magnisque clamoribus conditionem pristinam flagitent; quia non est tanti robur ac firmitas corporis, ut officio linguae careas, aut avium per aerem libera discursatio, ut manibus indigeas: plus enim manus praestant, quam levitas ususque pennarum, plus lingua, quam totius corporis fortitudo. Quae igitur amentia est, ea praeferre, quae, si data sint, accipere detrectes?

4 Chap. IV.—Of the weakness of man PL 7, 20

They also complain that man is liable to diseases, and to untimely death. They are indignant, it appears, that they are not born gods. By no means, they say; but we show from this, that man was made with no foresight, which ought to have been otherwise. What if I shall show, that this very thing was foreseen with great reason, that he might be able to be harassed by diseases, and that his life might often be cut short in the midst of its course? For, since God had known that the animal which He had made, of its own accord passed to death, that it might be capable of receiving death itself, which is the dissolution of nature, He gave to it frailty, which might find an approach for death in order to the dissolution of the animal. For if it had been of such strength that disease and sickness could not approach it, not even could death, since death is the consequence of diseases. But how could a premature death be absent from him, for whom a mature death had been appointed? Assuredly they wish that no man should die, unless when he has completed his hundredth year. How can they maintain their consistency in so great an opposition of circumstances? For, in order that no one may be capable of dying before a hundred years, something of the strength which is immortal must be given to him; and when this is granted, the condition of death must necessarily be excluded. But of what kind can that be, which can render a man firm and impregnable against diseases and attacks from without? For, inasmuch as he is composed of bones, and nerves, and flesh, and blood, which of these can be so firm as to repel frailty and death? That man, therefore, may not be liable to dissolution before that time which they think ought to have been appointed for him, of what material will they assign to him a body? All things which can be seen and touched are frail. It remains that they seek something from heaven, since there is nothing on earth which is not weak.

Since, therefore, man had to be so formed by God, that he should at some time be mortal, the matter itself required that he should be made with a frail and earthly body. It is necessary, therefore, that he should at some time receive death, since he is possessed of a body; for everybody is liable to dissolution and to death. Therefore they are most foolish who complain of premature death, since the condition of nature makes a place for it. Thus it will follow that he is subject also to diseases; for nature does not admit that infirmity can be absent from that body which is at some time to undergo dissolution. But let us suppose it to be possible, as they wish, that man is not born under those conditions by which he is subject to disease or death, unless, having completed the course of his life, he shall have arrived at the extremity of old age. They do not, therefore, see what would be the consequence if it were so arranged, that it would be plainly impossible to die at another time; but if any one can be deprived of nourishment by another, it will be possible for him to die. Therefore the case requires that man, who cannot die before an appointed day, should have no need of the nourishment of food, because it may be taken from him; but if he shall have no need of food, he will now not be a man, but will become a god. Therefore, as I have already said, they who complain of the frailty of man, make this complaint especially, that they were not born immortal and everlasting. No one ought to die unless he is old. On this account, in truth, he ought to die, because he is not God. But mortality cannot be united with immortality: for if a man is mortal in old age, he cannot be immortal in youth; neither is the condition of death foreign to him who is at some time about to die; nor is there any immortality to which a limit is appointed. Thus it comes to pass, that the exclusion of immortality for ever, and the reception of mortality for a time, place man in such a condition that he is at some time mortal.

Therefore the necessity is in all points suitable, that he ought not to have been otherwise than he is, and that it was impossible. But they do not see the order of consequences, because they have once committed an error in the main point itself. For the divine providence having been excluded from the affairs of men, it necessarily followed that all things were produced of their own accord. Hence they invented the notion of those blows and fortuitous meetings together of minute seeds, because they did not see the origin of things. And when they had thrown themselves into this difficulty, necessity now compelled them to think that souls were born together with bodies, and in like manner were extinguished together with bodies; for they had made the assumption, that nothing was made by the divine mind. And they were unable to prove this in any other way, than by showing that there were some things in which the system of providence appeared to be at fault. Therefore they blamed those things in which providence wonderfully expressed its divinity, as those things which I have related concerning diseases and premature death; whereas they ought to have considered, these things being assumed, what would be the necessary consequences (but those things which I have spoken are the consequences) if he were not liable to diseases, and did not require a dwelling, nor clothing. For why should he fear the winds, or rains, or colds, the power of which consists in this, that they bring diseases? For on this account he has received wisdom, that he may guard his frailty against things that would injure him. The necessary consequence is, that since he is liable to diseases for the sake of retaining his wisdom, he must also be liable to death; because he to whom death does not come, must of necessity be firm. But infirmity has in itself the condition of death; but where there shall be firmness, neither can old age have any place, nor death, which follows old age.

Moreover, if death were appointed for a fixed age, man would become most arrogant, and would be destitute of all humanity. For almost all the rights of humanity, by which we are united with one another, arise from fear and the consciousness of frailty. In short, all the more feeble and timid animals herd together, that, since they are unable to protect themselves by strength, they may protect themselves by their multitude; but the stronger animals seek solitudes, since they trust in their force and strength. If man also, in the same manner, had sufficient strength for the repelling of dangers, and did not stand in need of the assistance of any other, what society would there be? Or what system? What humanity? Or what would be more harsh than man? What more brutal? What more savage? But since he is feeble, and not able to live by himself apart from man, he desires society, that his life, passed in intercourse with others, may become both more adorned and more safe. You see, therefore, that the whole reason of man centres most of all in this, that he is born naked and fragile, that he is attacked by diseases, that he is punished by premature death. And if these things should be taken away from man, reason also, and wisdom, must necessarily be taken away. But I am discussing too long respecting things which are manifest, since it is clear that nothing ever was made, or could have been made, without providence. And if I should now wish to discuss respecting all its works in order, the subject would be infinite. But I have purposed to speak so much concerning the body of man only, that I may show in it the power of divine providence, how great it has been in those things only which are easy of comprehension and open; for those things which relate to the soul can neither be subjected to the eyes, nor comprehended. Now we speak concerning the vessel itself of man, which we see.

Iidem queruntur, hominem morbis et immaturae morti esse subjectum. Indignantur videlicet, non deos se esse natos. Minime, inquiunt: sed ex hoc ostendimus, hominem nulla providentia esse factum, quod aliter fieri debuit. Quid si ostendero, id ipsum magna ratione provisum esse, ut morbis vexari posset, et vita saepe in medio cursus sui spatio rumperetur? Cum enim Deus animal, quod fecerat, sua sponte ad mortem transire cognovisset, ut mortem ipsam, quae est dissolutio naturae, capere posset, dedit ei fragilitatem, quae morti aditum ad dissolvendum animal inveniret. Nam si ejus roboris fieret, ut ad eum morbus et aegritudo adire non posset, ne mors quidem posset, quoniam mors sequela morborum est. Immatura vero mors quomodo abesset ab eo, cui esset constituta matura? Nempe nullum hominem mori volunt, nisi cum centesimum aetatis compleverit annum. Quomodo illis in tanta repugnantia rerum ratio poterit constare? Ut enim ante annos centum mori quisque non possit, aliquid illi roboris, quod sit immortale, tribuendum est. Quo concesso, necesse est conditionem mortis excludi. Id autem ipsum cujusmodi potest esse, quod hominem contra morbos et ictus extraneos solidum atque inexpugnabilem faciat? Cum enim constet ex ossibus, et nervis, et visceribus, et sanguine, quid horum potest esse tam firmum, ut fragilitatem repellat ac mortem? Ut igitur homo indissolubilis sit ante id tempus, quod illi putant oportuisse constitui, ex qua ei materia corpus attribuent? Fragilia sunt omnia, quae videri, ac tangi possunt. Superest, ut aliquid ex coelo petant, quoniam in terra nihil est, quod non sit infirmum.

Cum ergo homo sic formandus esset a Deo, ut mortalis esset aliquando, res ipsa exigebat, ut terreno et fragili corpore fingeretur. Necesse est igitur, ut mortem recipiat quandolibet, quoniam corporalis est; corpus enim quodlibet solubile atque mortale est. Stultissimi ergo, qui de morte immatura queruntur; quoniam naturae conditio locum illi facit. Ita consequens erit, ut morbis quoque subjectus sit; neque enim patitur natura, ut abesse possit infirmitas ab eo corpore, quod aliquando solvendum est. Sed putemus fieri posse, quemadmodum volunt, ut homo non ea conditione nascatur, qua morbo mortive subjectus sit, nisi peracto aetatis suae spatio, ad ultimam processerit senectutem. Non igitur vident, si ita sit constitutum, quid sequatur, omni utique caetero tempore mori nullo modo posse: sed, si prohiberi ab altero victu potest, mori poterit; res igitur exigit, ut homini, qui ante certum diem mori non potest, ciborum alimentis, quia subtrahi possunt, opus non sit. Si opus cibo non erit, jam non homo ille, sed Deus fiet. Ergo (ut superius dixi) qui de fragilitate hominis queruntur, id potissimum queruntur, quod non immortales et sempiterni sint nati. Nemo, nisi senex, mori debet. Nempe ideo mori debet, quia Deus non est. Atqui mortalitas non potest cum immortalitate conjungi. Si enim mortalis est in senectute, immortalis esse in adolescentia non potest; nec est ab eo conditio mortis aliena, qui quandoque moriturus est; nec ulla immortalitas est, cui sit terminus constitutus. Ita fit, ut et immortalitas exclusa in perpetuum, et ad tempus recepta mortalitas, hominem constituat in ea conditione, ut sit in qualibet aetate mortalis.

Quadrat igitur necessitas undique, nec debuisse aliter fieri, nec fas fuisse. Sed isti rationem sequentium non vident, quia semel erraverunt in ipsa summa. Exclusa enim de rebus humanis divina providentia, necessario sequebatur, ut omnia sua sponte sint nata. Hinc invenerunt illas minutorum seminum plagas, et concursiones fortuitas, quia rerum originem non videbant. In quas se angustias cum conjecissent, jam cogebat eos necessitas existimare, animas cum corporibus nasci, et item cum corporibus extingui. Assumpserant enim nihil fieri mente divina. Quod ipsum non aliter probare poterant, quam si ostenderent esse aliqua, in quibus videretur providentiae ratio claudicare. Reprehenderunt igitur ea, in quibus vel maxime divinitatem suam providentia mirabiliter expressit, ut illa, quae retuli de morbis et immatura morte, cum debuerint cogitare, his assumptis, quid necessario sequeretur (sequuntur autem illa, quae dixi) si morbum non reciperet, neque tectis, neque vestibus indigeret. Quid enim ventos, aut imbres, aut frigora metueret, quorum vis in eo est, ut morbos afferant? Idcirco enim accepit sapientiam, ut adversus nocentia fragilitatem suam muniat. Sequatur necesse est, ut quoniam retinendae rationis causa morbos capit, etiam mortem semper accipiat; quia is ad quem mors non venit, firmus sit necesse est: infirmitas autem habet in se mortis conditionem; firmitas vero ubi fuerit, nec senectus locum potest habere, nec mors, quae sequitur senectutem.

Praeterea, si mors certae constituta esset aetati, fieret homo insolentissimus, et humanitate omni careret. Nam fere jura omnia humanitatis, quibus inter nos cohaeremus, ex metu, et conscientia fragilitatis oriuntur. Denique imbecilliora, et timidiora quaeque animalia congregantur, ut quoniam viribus tueri se nequeunt, multitudine tueantur: fortiora vero solitudines appetunt, quoniam robore viribusque confidunt. Homo quoque si eodem modo haberet ad propulsanda pericula suppetens robur, nec ullius alterius auxilio indigeret, quae societas esset? quaeve ratio? quae humanitas? aut quid esset tetrius homine? quid efferacius? quid immanius? Sed quoniam imbecillis est, nec per se potest sine homine vivere, societatem appetit, ut vita communis et ornatior fiat, et tutior. Vides igitur omnem hominis rationem in eo vel maxime stare, quod nudus fragilisque nascitur, quod morbis afficitur, quod immatura morte multatur. Quae si homini detrahantur, rationem quoque ac sapientiam detrahi, necesse est. Sed nimis diu de rebus apertis disputo, cum sit liquidum, nihil sine providentia, nec factum esse unquam, nec fieri potuisse. De cujus operibus universis, si nunc libeat disputare per ordinem, infinita materia est. Sed ego de uno corpore hominis tantum institui dicere, ut in eo divinae providentiae potestatem, quanta fuerit, ostendam his dumtaxat in rebus, quae sunt comprehensibiles et apertae; nam illa quae sunt animae, nec subjici oculis, nec comprehendi queunt. Nunc de ipso vase hominis loquimur, quod videmus.

5 Chap. V.—Of the figures and limbs of animals PL 7, 24

In the beginning, when God was forming the animals, He did not wish to conglobate and collect them into a round shape, that they might be able easily to put themselves in motion for walking, and to turn themselves in any direction; but from the highest part of the body He lengthened out the head. He also carried out to a greater length some of the limbs, which are called feet, that, being fixed on the ground with alternate motions, they might lead forward the animal wherever his inclination had borne him, or the necessity of seeking food had called him. Moreover, He made four limbs standing out from the very vessel of the body: two behind, which are in all animals—the feet; also two close to the head and neck, which supply various uses to animals. For in cattle and wild beasts they are feet like the hinder ones; but in man they are hands, which are produced not for walking, but for acting and controlling. There is also a third class, in which those former limbs are neither feet nor hands; but wings, which, having feathers arranged in order, supply the use of flying. Thus one formation has different forms and uses; and that He might firmly hold together the density itself of the body, by binding together greater and small bones, He compacted a kind of keel, which we call the spine; and He did not think fit to form it of one continued bone, lest the animal should not have the power of walking and bending itself. From its middle part, as it were, He has extended in a different direction transverse and flat bones, by which, being slightly curved, and almost drawn together to themselves as into a circle, the inward organs may be covered, that those parts which needed to be soft and less strong might be protected by the encircling of a solid framework. But at the end of that joining together which we have said to resemble the keel of a ship, He placed the head, in which might be the government of the whole living creature; and this name was given to it, as indeed Varro writes to Cicero, because from this the senses and the nerves take their beginning.

But those parts, which we have said to be lengthened out from the body, either for the sake of walking, or of acting, or of flying, He would have to consist of bones, neither too long, for the sake of rapidity of motion, nor too short, for the sake of firmness, but of a few, and those large. For either they are two as in man, or four as in a quadruped. And these He did not make solid, lest in walking sluggishness and weight should retard; but He made them hollow, and full of marrow within, to preserve the vigour of the body. And again, He did not make them equally extended to the end; but He conglobated their extremities with coarse knots, that they might be able more easily to be bound with sinews, and to be turned more easily, from which they are called joints. These knots He made firmly solid, and covered with a soft kind of covering, which is called cartilage; for this purpose, that they might be bent without galling or any sense of pain. He did not, however, form these after one fashion. For He made some simple and round into an orb, in those joints at least in which it was befitting that the limbs should move in all directions, as in the shoulders, since it is necessary that the hands should move and be twisted about in any direction; but others He made broad, and equal, and round towards one part, and that plainly in those places where only it was necessary for the limbs to be bent, as in the knees, and in the elbows, and in the hands themselves. For as it was at the same time pleasant to the sight, and useful, that the hands should move in every direction from that position from which they spring; so assuredly, if this same thing should happen to the elbows, a motion of that kind would be at once superfluous and unbecoming. For then the hand, having lost the dignity which it now has, through its excessive flexibility, would appear like the trunk of an elephant; and man would be altogether snake-handed,—an instance of which has been wonderfully effected in that monstrous beast. For God, who wished to display His providence and power by a wonderful variety of many things, inasmuch as He had not extended the head of that animal to such a length that he might be able to touch the earth with his mouth, which would have been horrible and hideous, and because He had so armed the mouth itself with extended tusks, that even if he touched the earth the tusks would still deprive him of the power of feeding, He lengthened out between these from the top of the forehead a soft and flexible limb, by which he might be able to grasp and lay hold of anything, lest the prominent magnitude of the tusks, or the shortness of the neck, should interfere with the arrangement for taking food.

In principio, cum Deus fingeret animalia, noluit ea in rotundam formae speciem conglobare atque colligere, ut et moveri ad ambulandum, et flectere se in quamlibet partem facile possent: sed ex ipsa corporis summa produxit caput; item produxit membra quaedam longius, quae vocantur pedes, ut alternis motibus solo fixa producerent animal, quo mens tulisset, aut quo petendi cibi necessitas provocasset. Ex ipso autem vasculo corporis quatuor fecit extantia: bina posterius, quae sunt in omnibus pedes; item bina capiti et collo proxima, quae varios animantibus usus praebent. In pecudibus enim ac feris sunt posterioribus pedes similes, in homine autem manus; quae non sunt ad ambulandum, sed ad faciendum temperandumque sunt natae. Est et tertium genus, in quo priora illa, neque pedes, neque manus sunt, sed alae, in quibus pennae per ordinem fixae volandi exhibent usum. Ita una fictio diversas species et usus habet. Atque ut ipsam corporis crassitudinem firmiter comprehenderet, majoribus et brevibus ossibus invicem colligatis, quasi carinam compegit, quam nos spinam dicimus, eamque noluit ex uno perpetuoque osse formare, ne gradiendi flectendique se facultatem animal non haberet. Ex ejus parte quasi media costas, id est transversa et plana ossa porrexit in diversum, quibus clementer curvatis, et in se velut in circulum pene conductis, interna viscera contegantur, ut ea, quae mollia et minus valida fieri opus erat, illius solidae cratis amplexu possent esse munita. In summa vero constructionis ejus, quam similem navis carinae diximus, caput collocavit, in quo esset regimen totius animantis; datumque illi hoc nomen est, ut quidem Varro ad Ciceronem scribit, quod hinc capiant initium sensus ac nervi.

Ea vero, quae diximus de corpore, vel ambulandi, vel faciendi, vel volandi causa esse producta, neque nimium longis, propter celerem mobilitatem, neque nimium brevibus, propter firmitatem, sed et paucis et magnis ossibus constare voluit. Aut enim bina sunt ut in homine; aut quaterna, ut in quadrupede: quae tamen non fecit solida, ne in gradiendo pigritia et gravitas retardaret, sed cavata et ad vigorem corporis conservandum medullis intrinsecus plena; eaque rursus non aequaliter porrecta finivit: sed summas eorum partes crassioribus nodis conglobavit, ut et substringi nervis facilius, et verti tutius possent, unde sunt vertibula nominata. Eos nodos firmiter solidatos leni quodam operculo texit, quod dicitur cartilago; scilicet, ut sine attritu et sine sensu doloris aliquo flecterentur. Eosdem tamen non in unum modum informavit: alios enim fecit simplices, et in orbem rotundos, in iis dumtaxat articulis, in quibus moveri membra in omnes partes oportebat, ut in scapulis; quoniam manus utrolibet agitari et contorqueri necessarium est: alios autem latos, et aequales, et in unam partem rotundos, et in his utique locis, ubi tantummodo curvari membra oportebat, ut in genibus et in cubitis, et in manibus ipsis. Nam sicut manus ex eo loco, unde oriuntur, ubique versus moveri, speciosum simul et utile fuit: sic profecto, si hoc idem etiam cubitis accideret, et supervacuus esset ejus modi motus, et turpis.

Jam enim manus amissa dignitate, quam nunc habet, mobilitate nimia proboscidi similis videretur, essetque homo plane anguimanus: quod genus in illa immanissima bellua mirabiliter effectum est. Deus enim, qui providentiam et potestatem suam multarum rerum mirabili varietate voluit ostendere, quoniam caput ejus animalis non tam longe porrexerat, ut terram posset ore contingere, quod erat futurum horribile atque tetrum, et quia os ipsum profusis dentibus sic armaverat, ut etiamsi contingeret, pascendi tamen facultatem dentes adimerent; produxit inter eos a summa fronte molle ac flexibile membrum, quo prendere, quo tenere quodlibet posset, ne rationem victus capiendi, vel dentium prominens magnitudo, vel cervicis brevitas impediret.

6 Chap. VI.—Of the error of Epicurus, and of the limbs and their use PL 7, 27

I cannot here be prevented from again showing the folly of Epicurus. For all the ravings of Lucretius belong to him, who, in order that he might show that animals are not produced by any contrivance of the divine mind, but, as he is wont to say, by chance, said that in the beginning of the world innumerable other animals of wonderful form and magnitude were produced; but that they were unable to be permanent, because either the power of taking food, or the method of uniting and generating, had failed them. It is evident that, in order to make a place for his atoms flying about through the boundless and empty space, he wished to exclude the divine providence. But when he saw that a wonderful system of providence is contained in all things which breathe, what vanity was it (O mischievous one!) to say that there had been animals of immense size, in which the system of production ceased!

Since, therefore, all things which we see are produced with reference to a plan—for nothing but a plan can effect this very condition of being born—it is manifest that nothing could have been born without a plan. For it was previously foreseen in the formation of everything, how it should use the service of the limbs for the necessaries of life; and how the offspring, being produced from the union of bodies, might preserve all living creatures by their several species. For if a skilful architect, when he designs to construct some great building, first of all considers what will be the effect of the complete building, and previously ascertains by measurement what situation is suitable for a light weight, in what place a massive part of the structure will stand, what will be the intervals between the columns, what or where will be the descents and outlets of the falling waters and the reservoirs,—he first, I say, foresees these things, that he may begin together with the very foundations whatever things are necessary for the work when now completed,—why should any one suppose that, in the contrivance of animals, God did not foresee what things were necessary for living, before giving life itself? For it is manifest that life could not exist, unless those things by which it exists were previously arranged.

Therefore Epicurus saw in the bodies of animals the skill of a divine plan; but that he might carry into effect that which he had before imprudently assumed, he added another absurdity agreeing with the former. For he said that the eyes were not produced for seeing, nor the ears for hearing, nor the feet for walking, since these members were produced before there was the exercise of seeing, hearing, and walking; but that all the offices of these members arose from them after their production. I fear lest the refutation of such extravagant and ridiculous stories should appear to be no less foolish; but it pleases me to be foolish, since we are dealing with a foolish man, lest he should think himself too clever. What do you say, Epicurus? Were not the eyes produced for seeing? Why, then, do they see? Their use, he says, afterwards showed itself. Therefore they were produced for the sake of seeing, since they can do nothing else but see. Likewise, in the case of the other limbs, use itself shows for what purpose they were produced. For it is plain that this use could have no existence, unless all the limbs had been made with such arrangement and foresight, that they might be able to have their use.

For what if you should say, that birds were not made to fly, nor wild beasts to rage, nor fishes to swim, nor men to be wise, when it is evident that living creatures are subject to that natural disposition and office to which each was created? But it is evident that he who has lost the main point itself of the truth must always be in error. For if all things are produced not by providence, but by a fortuitous meeting together of atoms, why does it never happen by chance, that those first principles meet together in such a way as to make an animal of such a kind, that it might rather hear with its nostrils, smell with its eyes, and see with its ears? For if the first principles leave no kind of position untried, monstrous productions of this kind ought daily to have been brought forth, in which the arrangement of the limbs might be distorted, and the use far different from that which prevails. But since all the races of animals, and all the limbs, observe their own laws and arrangements, and the uses assigned to them, it is plain that nothing is made by chance, since a perpetual arrangement of the divine plan is preserved. But we will refute Epicurus at another time. Now let us discuss the subject of providence, as we have begun.

Non possum hoc loco teneri, quominus Epicuri stultitiam rursum coarguam; illius enim sunt omnia quae delirat Lucretius: qui, ut ostenderet animalia non artificio aliquo divinae mentis, sed, ut solet, fortuito esse nata; dixit, in principio mundi alias quasdam innumerabiles animantes miranda specie et magnitudine fuisse natas, sed eas permanere non potuisse, quod illas aut sumendi cibi facultas, aut coeundi generandique ratio defecisset. Videlicet ut et atomis suis locum faceret per infinitum et inane volitantibus, divinam providentiam voluit excludere. Sed cum videret in omnibus quae spirant. mirabilem Providentiae inesse rationem, quae (malum!) vanitas erat dicere fuisse animalia prodigiosa, in quibus nascendi ratio cessaret?

Quoniam igitur omnia quae videmus cum ratione nata sunt, id enim ipsum nasci, efficere nisi ratio non potest, manifestum est, nihil omnino rationis expers potuisse generari. Ante enim provisum est in singulis quibusque fingendis, quatenus et ministerio membrorum ad necessaria vitae uteretur, et quatenus adjugatis corporibus elata soboles, universas generatim conservaret animantes. Nam si peritus architectus, cum magnum aliquod aedificium facere constituit, primo omnium cogitat, quae summa perfecti aedificii futura sit, et ante emetitur, quem locum leve pondus expectet, ubi magni operis statura sit moles, quae columnarum intervalla, qui, aut ubi aquarum cadentium decursus et exitus, et receptacula, haec, inquam, prius providet, ut quaecumque sunt perfecto jam operi necessaria, cum ipsis fundamentis pariter ordiatur: cur Deum quisquam putet in machinandis animalibus non ante providisse, quae ad vivendum necessaria essent, quam ipsam vitam daret? Quae utique constare non posset, nisi prius effecta essent quibus constat.

Videbat igitur Epicurus in corporibus animalium divinae rationis solertiam: sed ut efficeret, quod ante imprudenter assumpserat, adjecit aliud deliramentum superiori congruens. Dixit enim, neque oculos ad videndum esse natos, neque aures ad audiendum, neque pedes ad ambulandum, quoniam membra haec prius nata sunt quam esset usus videndi, et audiendi, et ambulandi: sed horum omnia officia ex natis extitisse. Vereor ne hujusmodi portenta et ridicula refutare non minus ineptum esse videatur. Sed libet ineptire, quoniam cum inepto agimus, ne se ille nimis argutum putet. Quid ais, Epicure? Non sunt ad videndum oculi nati? Cur igitur vident? Postea, inquit, usus eorum apparuit. Videndi ergo causa nati sunt; siquidem nihil possunt aliud quam videre. Item membra caetera, cujus rei causa nata sunt, ipse usus ostendit: qui utique nullo modo posset existere, nisi essent membra omnia tam ordinate, tam providenter effecta, ut usum possent habere.

Quid enim, si dicas aves non ad volandum esse natas, neque feras ad saeviendum, neque pisces ad natandum, neque homines ad sapiendum; cum appareat ei naturae, officioque servire animantes, ad quod est quaeque generata? Sed videlicet qui summam ipsam veritatis amisit, semper erret necesse est. Si enim non providentia, sed fortuitis atomorum concursionibus nascuntur omnia, cur nunquam fortuito accidit, sic coire illa principia, ut efficerent animal ejusmodi, quod naribus potius audiret, odoraretur oculis, auribus cerneret? Si enim primordia nullum genus positionis inexpertum relinquunt, oportuit ejusmodi quotidie monstra generari, in quibus et membrorum ordo praeposterus, et usus longe diversus existeret. Cum vero universa genera, et universa quoque membra leges suas, et ordines, et usus sibi attributos tueantur, manifestum est nihil fortuito esse factum, quoniam divinae rationis dispositio perpetua servatur. Verum alias refellemus Epicurum; nunc de providentia (ut coepimus) disseramus.

7 Chap. VII.—Of all the parts of the body PL 7, 30

God therefore connected and bound together the parts which strengthen the body, which we call bones, being knotted and joined to one another by sinews, which the mind might make use of, as bands, if it should wish to hasten forward or to lag behind; and, indeed, without any labour or effort, but with a very slight inclination, it might moderate and guide the mass of the whole body. But He covered these with the inward organs, as was befitting to each place, that the parts which were solid might be enclosed and concealed. Also He mixed with the inward organs, veins as streams divided through the whole body, through which the moisture and the blood, running in different directions, might bedew all the limbs with the vital juices; and He fashioned these inward organs after that manner which was befitting to each kind and situation, and covered them with skin drawn over them, which He either adorned with beauty only, or covered with thick hair, or fenced with scales, or adorned with brilliant feathers. But that is a wonderful contrivance of God, that one arrangement and one state exhibits innumerable varieties of animals. For in almost all things which breathe there is the same connection and arrangement of the limbs. For first of all is the head, and annexed to this the neck; also the breast adjoined to the neck, and the shoulders projecting from it, the belly adhering to the breast; also the organs of generation subjoined to the belly; in the last place, the thighs and feet. Nor do the limbs only keep their own course and position in all, but also the parts of the limbs. For in the head itself alone the ears occupy a fixed position, the eyes a fixed position, likewise the nostrils, the mouth also, and in the teeth and tongue. And though all these things are the same in all animals, yet there is an infinite and manifold diversity of the things formed; because those things of which I have spoken, being either more drawn out or more contracted, are comprehended by lineaments differing in various ways. What! is not that divine, that in so great a multitude of living creatures each animal is most excellent in its own class and species?—so that if any part should be taken from one to another, the necessary result would be, that nothing would be more embarrassed for use, nothing more unshapely to look upon; as if you should give a prolonged neck to an elephant, or a short neck to a camel; or if you should attach feet or hair to serpents, in which the length of the body equally stretched out required nothing else, except that being marked as to their backs with spots, and supporting themselves by their smooth scales, with winding courses they should glide into slippery tracts. But in quadrupeds the same designer lengthened out the arrangement of the spine, which is drawn out from the top of the head to a greater length on the outside of the body, and pointed it into a tail, that the parts of the body which are offensive might either be covered on account of their unsightliness, or be protected on account of their tenderness, so that by its motion certain minute and injurious animals might be driven away from the body; and if you should take away this member, the animal would be imperfect and weak. But where there is reason and the hand, that is not so necessary as a covering of hair. To such an extent are all things most befittingly arranged, each in its own class, that nothing can be conceived more unbecoming than a quadruped which is naked, or a man that is covered.

But, however, though nakedness itself on the part of man tends in a wonderful manner to beauty, yet it was not adapted to his head; for what great deformity there would be in this, is evident from baldness. Therefore He clothed the head with hair; and because it was about to be on the top, He added it as an ornament, as it were, to the highest summit of the building. And this ornament is not collected into a circle, or rounded into the figure of a cap, lest it should be unsightly by leaving some parts bare; but it is freely poured forth in some places, and withdrawn in others, according to the comeliness of each place. Therefore, the forehead entrenched by a circumference, and the hair put forth from the temples before the ears, and the uppermost parts of these being surrounded after the manner of a crown, and all the back part of the head covered, display an appearance of wonderful comeliness. Then the nature of the beard contributes in an incredible degree to distinguish the maturity of bodies, or to the distinction of sex, or to the beauty of manliness and strength; so that it appears that the system of the whole work would not have been in agreement, if anything had been made otherwise than it is.

Deus igitur solidamenta corporis, quae ossa dicuntur, nodata et adjuncta invicem nervis alligavit atque constrinxit, quibus mens, si excurrere, aut resistere velit, tanquam retinaculis uteretur; et quidem nullo labore, nulloque conatu: sed vel minimo nutu totius corporis molem temperaret ac flecteret. Haec autem visceribus operuit, ut quemque locum decebat, ut quae solida essent, conclusa tegerentur. Item visceribus ipsis venas admiscuit, quasi rivos per corpus omne divisos, per quas discurrens humor, et sanguis, universa membra succis vitalibus irrigaret; et ea viscera, formata in eum modum, qui unicuique generi ac loco aptus fuit, superjecta pelle contexit, quam vel sola pulchritudine decoravit, vel setis adoperuit, vel squamis munivit, vel plumis insignibus adornavit. Illud vero commentum Dei mirabile, quod una dispositio, et unus habitus, innumerabiles imaginis praeferat varietates. Nam in omnibus fere, quae spirant, eadem series et ordo membrorum est. Primum enim caput, et huic annexa cervix. Item collo pectus adjunctum, et ex eo prominentes armi, adhaerens pectori venter. Item ventri subnexa genitalia. Ultimo loco femina pedesque.

Nec solum membra suum tenorem ac situm in omnibus servant, sed etiam partes membrorum. Nam in uno capite ipso certam sedem possident aures, certam oculi, nares item, os quoque, et in eo dentes, et lingua. Quae omnia cum sint eadem in omnibus animantibus, tamen infinita et multiplex diversitas figuratorum est; quod ea quae dixi, aut productiora, aut contractiora lineamentis varie differentibus comprehensa sunt. Quid, illud nonne divinum, quod in tanta viventium multitudine, unumquodque animal in sui genere et specie pulcherrimum est? ut si quid vicissim de altero in alterum transferatur, nihil impeditius ad utilitatem, nihil deformius ad aspectum videri necesse sit: ut si elephanto cervicem prolixam tribuas, aut camelo brevem; vel si serpentibus pedes, aut pilos addas, in quibus porrecti aequaliter corporis longitudo nihil aliud exhibeat, nisi ut maculis terga distincti, et squammarum laevitate suffulti, in lubricos tractus sinuosis flexibus laberentur. In quadrupedibus autem, idem opifex contextum spinae a summo capite deductum longius extra corpus eduxit, et acuminavit in caudam, ut obscoenae corporis partes, vel propter foeditatem tegerentur, vel propter teneritudinem munirentur, ut animalia quaedam minuta et nocentia motu ejus arcerentur a corpore: quod membrum si detrahas, imperfectum fit animal, ac debile. Ubi autem ratio, et manus est, tam non est id necessarium, quam indumentum pilorum: adeo in suo quaeque genere aptissime congruunt, ut neque nudo quadrupede, neque homine tecto excogitari quidquam turpius possit.

Sed tamen cum ipsa nuditas hominis mire ad pulchritudinem valeat, non tamen etiam capiti congruebat; quanta enim in eo futura deformitas esset, ex calvitio apparet. Texit ergo illud pilo; et quia in summo futurum erat; quasi summum aedificii culmen ornavit: qui ornatus non est in orbem coactus, aut in figuram pilei teres factus, ne quibusdam partibus nudis esset informis, sed alicubi effusus, alicubi retractus pro cujuslibet loci decentia. Frons ergo vallata per circuitum, et a temporibus effusi ante aures capilli, et earum summae partes in coronae modum cinctae, et occipitium omne contectum, speciem miri decoris ostentant. Jam barbae ratio incredibile est quantum conferat, vel ad dignoscendam corporum maturitatem, vel ad differentiam sexus, vel ad decorem virilitatis ac roboris; ut videatur omnino non constatura fuisse totius operis ratio, si quidquam aliter esset effectum.

8 Chap. VIII.—Of the parts of man: the eyes and ears PL 7, 33

Now I will show the plan of the whole man, and will explain the uses and habits of the several members which are exposed to view in the body, or concealed. When, therefore, God had determined of all the animals to make man alone heavenly, and all the rest earthly, He raised him erect to the contemplation of the heaven, and made him a biped, doubtless that he might look to the same quarter from which he derives his origin; but He depressed the others to the earth, that, inasmuch as they have no expectation of immortality, being cast down with their whole body to the ground, they might be subservient to their appetite and food. And thus the right reason and elevated position of man alone, and his countenance, shared with and closely resembling God his Father, bespeak his origin and Maker. His mind, nearly divine, because it has obtained the rule not only over the animals which are on the earth, but even over his own body, being situated in the highest part, the head, as in a lofty citadel, looks out upon and observes all things. He formed this its palace, not drawn out and extended, as in the case of the dumb animals, but like an orb and a globe, because all roundness belongs to a perfect plan and figure. Therefore the mind and that divine fire is covered with it, as with a vault; and when He had covered its highest top with a natural garment, He alike furnished and adorned the front part which is called the face, with the necessary services of the members.

And first, He closed the orbs of the eyes with concave apertures, from which boring Varro thought that the forehead derived its name; and He would have these to be neither less nor more than two, because no number is more perfect as to appearance than that of two: as also He made the ears two, the doubleness of which bears with it an incredible degree of beauty, both because each part is adorned with a resemblance, and that voices coming from both sides may more easily be collected. For the form itself is fashioned after a wonderful manner: because He would not have their apertures to be naked and uncovered, which would have been less becoming and less useful; since the voice might fly beyond the narrow space of simple caverns, and be scattered, did not the apertures themselves confine it, received through hollow windings and kept back from reverberation, like those small vessels, by the application of which narrow-mouthed vessels are accustomed to be filled.

These ears, then, which have their name from the drinking in of voices, from which Virgil says,

“And with these ears I drank in his voice;”

or because the Greeks call the voice itself αὐδήν, from hearing,—the ears (aures) were named as though audes by the change of a letter,—God would not form of soft skins, which, hanging down and flaccid, might take away beauty; nor of hard and solid bones, lest, being stiff and immoveable, they should be inconvenient for use. But He designed that which might be between these, that a softer cartilage might bind them, and that they might have at once a befitting and flexible firmness. In these the office of bearing only is placed, as that of seeing is in the eyes, the acuteness of which is especially inexplicable and wonderful; for He covered their orbs, presenting the similitude of gems in that part with which they had to see, with transparent membranes, that the images of objects placed opposite them, being refracted as in a mirror, might penetrate to the innermost perception. Through these membranes, therefore, that faculty which is called the mind sees those things which are without; lest you should happen to think that we see either by the striking of the images, as the philosophers discuss, since the office of seeing ought to be in that which sees, not in that which is seen; or in the tension of the air together with the eyesight; or in the outpouring of the rays: since, if it were so, we should see the ray towards which we turn with our eyes, until the air, being extended together with the eyesight, or the rays being poured out, should arrive at the object which was to be seen.

But since we see at the same moment of time, and for the most part, while engaged on other business, we nevertheless behold all things which are placed opposite to us, it is more true and evident that it is the mind which, through the eyes, sees those things which are placed opposite to it, as though through windows covered with pellucid crystal or transparent stone; and therefore the mind and inclination are often known from the eyes. For the refutation of which Lucretius employed a very senseless argument. For if the mind, he says, sees through the eye, it would see better if the eyes were torn out and dug up, inasmuch as doors being torn up together with the door-posts let in more light than if they were covered. Truly his eyes, or rather those of Epicurus who taught him, ought to have been dug out, that they might not see, that the torn-out orbs, and the burst fibres of the eyes, and the blood flowing through the veins, and the flesh increasing from wounds, and the scars drawn over at last can admit no light; unless by chance he would have it that eyes are produced resembling ears, so that we should see not so much with eyes as with apertures, than which there can be nothing more unsightly or more useless. For how little should we be able to see, if from the innermost recesses of the head the mind should pay attention through slight fissures of caverns; as, if any one should wish to look through a stalk of hemlock, he would see no more than the capability of the stalk itself admitted! For sight, therefore, it was rather needful that the members should be collected together into an orb, that the sight might be spread in breadth and the parts which adjoined them in the front of the face, that they might freely behold all things. Therefore the unspeakable power of the divine providence made two orbs most resembling each other, and so bound them together that they might be able not only to be altogether turned, but to be moved and directed with moderation. And He willed that the orbs themselves should be full of a pure and clear moisture, in the middle part of which sparks of lights might be kept shut up, which we call the pupils, in which, being pure and delicate, are contained the faculty and method of seeing. The mind therefore directs itself through these orbs that it may see, and the sight of both the eyes is mingled and joined together in a wonderful manner.

Nunc rationem totius hominis ostendam, singulorumque membrorum, quae in corpore aperta, aut operta sunt, utilitates et habitus explicabo. Cum igitur statuisset Deus ex omnibus animalibus solum hominem facere coelestem, caetera universa terrena, hunc ad coeli contemplationem rigidum erexit, bipedemque constituit, scilicet ut eodem spectaret, unde illi origo est; illa vero depressit ad terram, ut quia nulla his immortalitatis expectatio est, toto corpore in humum projecta ventri pabuloque servirent. Hominis itaque solius recta ratio, et sublimis status, et vultus Deo patri communis ac proximus, originem suam, fictoremque testatur. Ejus prope divina mens, quia non tantum animantium, quae sunt in terra, sed etiam sui corporis est sortita dominatum, in summo capite collocata, tanquam in arce sublimis speculatur omnia, et contuetur. Hanc ejus aulam, non obductam porrectamque formavit, ut in mutis animalibus, sed orbi et globo similem; quod omnis rotunditas perfectae rationis est, ac figurae. Eo igitur mens et ignis ille divinus tanquam coelo tegitur: cujus cum summum fastigium naturali veste texisset, priorem partem, quae dicitur facies, necessariis membrorum ministeriis et instruxit pariter et ornavit.

Ac primum, quod oculorum orbes concavis foraminibus conclusit, a quo foratu frontem nominatam Varro existimavit; et eos, neque minus, neque amplius, quam duos esse voluit, quod ad speciem nullus est perfectior numerus, quam duorum: sicut et aures duas, quarum duplicitas incredibile est quantam pulchritudinem praeferat, quod tum pars utraque similitudine ornata est, tum ut venientes altrinsecus voces facilius colligantur; nam et forma ipsa mirandum in modum ficta, quod earum foramina noluit esse nuda et inobsepta, quod et minus decorum et utile minus fuisset, quoniam simplicium cavernarum angustias praetervolare vox posset, nisi exceptam per cavos sinus, et repercussu retentam foramina ipsa cohiberent: illis similia vasculis, quibus impositis solent angusti oris vasa compleri.

Eas igitur aures (quibus est inditum nomen a vocibus hauriendis, unde Virgilius: . . . . . .Vocemque his auribus hausi; aut quia vocem ipsam Graeci αὐδὴν vocant, ab auditu, per immutationem litterae, aures velut audes sunt nominatae) noluit Deus artifex mollibus pelliculis informare, quae pulchritudinem demerent pendulae atque flaccentes, neque duris ac solidis ossibus, ne ad usum inhabiles essent immobiles ac rigentes: sed quod esset horum medium excogitavit, ut eas cartilago mollior alligaret, et haberent aptam simul et flexibilem firmitatem. In his audiendi tantum officium constitutum est, sicut in oculis videndi; quorum praecipue inexplicabilis est ac mira subtilitas, quia eorum orbes gemmarum similitudinem praeferentes, ab ea parte qua videndum fuit, membranis perlucentibus texit, ut imagines rerum contra positarum tanquam in speculo refulgentes, ad sensum intimum penetrarent. Per eas igitur membranas sensus ille, qui dicitur mens, ea quae sunt foris transpicit. Ne forte existimes, aut imaginum incursione nos cernere (ut philosophi dixerunt) quoniam videndi officium in eo debet esse quod videt, non in eo quod videtur: aut intentione aeris, cum acie aut effusione radiorum, quoniam, si ita esset, radium quem oculis advertimus, videremus, donec intentus aer cum acie, aut effusi radii ad id quod videndum esset pervenirent.

Cum autem videamus eodem momento temporis, plerumque vero aliud agentes, nihilominus tamen universa quae contra sunt posita intueamur, verius et manifestius est mentem esse, quae per oculos ea quae sunt opposita, transpiciat, quasi per fenestras lucente vitro, aut speculari lapide obductas. Et idcirco mens, et voluntas ex oculis saepe dignoscitur. Quod quidem ut refelleret Lucretius, ineptissimo usus est argumento. Si enim mens (inquit) per oculos videt, erutis et effossis oculis magis videret; quoniam evulsae cum postibus fores plus inferunt luminis, quam si fuerint obductae. Nimirum ipsi, vel potius Epicuro, qui eum docuit, effossi oculi erant, ne viderent, effossos orbes, et ruptas oculorum fibras, et fluentem per venas sanguinem, et crescentes ex vulneribus carnes, et obductas ad ultimum cicatrices nihil posse lucis admittere, nisi forte auribus oculos similes nasci volebat; ut non tam oculis, quam foraminibus cerneremus: quo nihil ad speciem foedius, ad usum inutilius fieri potest. Quantulum enim videre possemus, si mens ab intimis penetralibus capitis per exiguas cavernarum rimulas attenderet; ut si quis velit transpicere per cicutam, non plus profecto cernat, quam cicutae ipsius capacitas comprehendat. Itaque ad videndum membris potius in orbem conglobatis opus fuit, ut visus in latum spargeretur, et quae in primori facie adhaererent, ut libere possent omnia contueri. Ergo ineffabilis divinae providentiae virtus fecit duos simillimos orbes, eosque ita devinxit, ut non in totum converti, sed moveri tamen ac flecti cum modo possent. Orbes autem ipsos humoris puri ac liquidi plenos esse voluit, in quorum media parte scintillae luminum conclusae tenerentur, quas pupillas nuncupamus, in quibus puris ac subtilibus cernendi sensus ac ratio continetur, Per eos igitur orbes seipsam mens intendit ut videat, miraque ratione in unum miscetur et conjungitur amborum luminum visus.

9 Chap. IX.—Of the senses and their power PL 7, 39

It pleases me in this place to censure the folly of those who, while they wish to show that the senses are false, collect many instances in which the eyes are deceived; and among them this also, that all things appear double to the mad and intoxicated, as though the cause of that error were obscure. For it happens on this account, because there are two eyes. But hear how it happens. The sight of the eyes consists in the exertion of the soul. Therefore, since the mind, as has been above said, uses the eyes as windows, this happens not only to those who are intoxicated or mad, but even to those who are of sound mind, and sober. For if you place any object too near, it will appear double, for there is a certain interval and space in which the sight of the eyes meets together. Likewise, if you call the soul back as if to reflection, and relax the exertion of the mind, then the sight of each eye is drawn asunder, and they each begin to see separately.

If you, again, exert the mind and direct the eyesight, whatever appeared double unites into one. What wonder, therefore, if the mind, impaired by poison and the powerful influence of wine, cannot direct itself to seeing, as the feet cannot to walking when they are weak through the numbness of the sinews, or if the force of madness raging against the brain disunites the agreement of the eyes? Which is so true, that in the case of one-eyed men, if they become either mad or intoxicated, it can by no means happen that they see any object double. Wherefore, if the reason is evident why the eyes are deceived, it is clear that the senses are not false: for they either are not deceived if they are pure and sound; or if they are deceived, yet the mind is not deceived which recognises their error.

Libet hoc loco illorum reprehendere vanitatem, qui dum volunt ostendere sensus falsos esse, multa colligunt, in quibus oculi fallantur; inter quae illud etiam, quod furiosis et ebriis omnia duplicia videantur: quasi vero ejus erroris obscura sit causa. Ideo enim fit, quia duo sunt oculi. Sed quomodo id fiat, accipe. Visus oculorum intentione animi constat. Itaque quoniam mens (ut supra dictum est) oculis tanquam fenestris utitur, non tantum hoc ebriis aut insanis accidit, sed et sanis, ac sobriis. Nam si aliquid nimis propius admoveas, duplex videbitur; certum est enim intervallum, ac spatium, quo acies oculorum coït. Item si retrorsum avoces animum, quasi ad cogitandum, et intentionem mentis relaxes, tum acies oculi utriusque diducitur, tunc singuli videre incipiunt separatim.

Si animum rursus intenderis, aciemque direxeris, coit in unum quidquid duplex videbatur. Quid ergo mirum, si mens veneno, ac potentia vini dissoluta, dirigere se non potest ad videndum, sicut ne pedes quidem ad ambulandum, nervis stupescentibus debiles? aut si vis furoris in cerebrum saeviens concordiam disjungit oculorum? Quod adeo verum est, ut luscis hominibus, si aut insani, aut ebrii fiant, nullo modo possit accidere, ut aliquid duplex videant. Quare si ratio apparet, cur oculi fallantur, manifestum est non esse falsos sensus; qui aut non falluntur, si sunt puri et integri, aut si falluntur, mens tamen non fallitur, quae illorum novit errorem.

10 Chap. X.—Of the outer limbs of man, and their use PL 7, 40

But let us return to the works of God. That the eyes, therefore, might be better protected from injury, He concealed them with the coverings of the eyelashes, from which Varro thinks that the eyes derived their name. For even the eyelids themselves, in which there is the power of rapid motion, and to which throbbing gives their name, being protected by hairs standing in order, afford a most becoming fence to the eyes; the continual motion of which, meeting with incomprehensible rapidity, does not impede the course of the sight, and relieves the eyes. For the pupil—that is, the transparent membrane—which ought not to be drained and to become dry, unless it is cleansed by continual moisture so that it shines clearly, loses its power. Why should I speak of the summits of the eyebrows themselves, furnished with short hair? Do they not, as it were by mounds, both afford protection to the eyes, so that nothing may fall into them from above, and at the same time ornament? And the nose, arising from the confines of these, and stretched out, as it were, with an equal ridge, at once serves to separate and to protect the two eyes. Below also, a not unbecoming swelling of the cheeks, gently rising after the similitude of hills, makes the eyes safer on every side; and it has been provided by the great Artificer, that if there shall happen to be a more violent blow, it may be repelled by the projecting parts. But the upper part of the nose as far as the middle has been made solid; but the lower part has been made with a softened cartilage annexed to it, that it may be pliant to the use of the fingers. Moreover, in this, though a single member, three offices are placed: one, that of drawing the breath; the second, that of smelling; the third, that the secretions of the brain may escape through its caverns. And in how wonderful, how divine a manner did God contrive these also, so that the very cavity of the nose should not deform the beauty of the face: which would certainly have been the case if one single aperture only were open. But He enclosed and divided that, as though by a wall drawn through the middle, and made it most beautiful by the very circumstance of its being double. From which we understand of how much weight the twofold number, made firm by one simple connection, is to the perfection of things.

For though the body is one, yet the whole could not be made up of single members, unless it were that there should be parts on the right hand or on the left. Therefore, as the two feet and also hands not only avail to some utility and practice either of walking or of doing something, but also bestow an admirable character and comeliness; so in the head, which is, as it were, the crown of the divine work, the hearing has been divided by the great Artificer into two ears, and the sight into two eyes, and the smelling into two nostrils, because the brain, in which is contained the system of the sensation, although it is one, yet is divided into two parts by the intervening membrane. But the heart also, which appears to be the abode of wisdom, although it is one, yet has two recesses within, in which are contained the living fountains of blood, divided by an intervening barrier: that as in the world itself the chief control, being twofold from simple matter, or simple from a twofold matter, governs and keeps together the whole; so in the body, all the parts, being constructed of two, might present an inseparable unity. Also how useful and how becoming is the appearance and the opening of the mouth transversely cannot be expressed; the use of which consists in two offices, that of taking food and speaking.

The tongue enclosed within, which by its motions divides the voice into words, and is the interpreter of the mind, cannot, however, by itself alone fulfil the office of speaking, unless it strikes its edge against the palate, unless aided by striking against the teeth or by the compression of the lips. The teeth, however, contribute more to speaking: for infants do not begin to speak before they have teeth; and old men, when they have lost their teeth, so lisp that they appear to have returned afresh to infancy. But these things relate to man alone, or to birds, in which the tongue, being pointed and vibrating with fixed motions, expresses innumerable inflexions of songs and various kinds of sounds. It has, moreover, another office also, which it exercises in all, and this alone in the dumb animals, that it collects the food when bruised and ground by the teeth, and by its force presses it down when collected into balls, and transmits it to the belly. Accordingly, Varro thinks that the name of tongue was given to it from binding the food. It also assists the beasts in drinking: for with the tongue stretched out and hollowed they draw water; and when they have taken it in the hollow of the tongue, lest by slowness and delay it should flow away, they dash it against the palate with swift rapidity. This, therefore, is covered by the concave part of the palate as by a shell, and God has surrounded it with the enclosure of the teeth as with a wall.

But He has adorned the teeth themselves, which are arranged in order in a wonderful manner, lest, being bare and exposed, they should be a terror rather than an ornament, with soft gums, which are so named from producing teeth, and then with the coverings of the lips; and the hardness of the teeth, as in a millstone, is greater and rougher than in the other bones, that they might be sufficient for bruising the food and pasture. But how befittingly has He divided the lips themselves, which as it were before were united! the upper of which, under the very middle of the nostrils, He has marked with a kind of slight cavity, as with a valley: He has gracefully spread out the lower for the sake of beauty. For, as far as relates to the receiving of flavour, he is deceived, whoever he is, who thinks that this sense resides in the palate; for it is the tongue by which flavours are perceived, and not the whole of it: for the parts of it which are more tender on either side, draw in the flavour with the most delicate perceptions. And though nothing is diminished from that which is eaten or drunk, yet the flavour in an indescribable manner penetrates to the sense, in the same way in which the taking of the smell detracts nothing from any material.

And how beautiful the other parts are can scarcely be expressed. The chin, gently drawn down from the cheeks, and the lower part of it so closed that the lightly imprinted division appears to mark its extreme point: the neck stiff and well rounded: the shoulders let down as though by gentle ridges from the neck: the fore-arms powerful, and braced by sinews for firmness: the great strength of the upper-arms standing out with remarkable muscles: the useful and becoming bending of the elbows. What shall I say of the hands, the ministers of reason and wisdom? Which the most skilful Creator made with a flat and moderately concave bend, that if anything was to be held, it might conveniently rest upon them, and terminated them in the fingers; in which it is difficult to explain whether the appearance or the usefulness is greater. For the perfection and completeness of their number, and the comeliness of their order and gradation, and the flexible bending of the equal joints, and the round form of the nails, comprising and strengthening the tips of the fingers with concave coverings, lest the softness of the flesh should yield in holding any object, afford great adornment. But this is convenient for use, in wonderful ways, that one separated from the rest rises together with the hand itself, and is enlarged in a different direction, which, offering itself as though to meet the others, possesses all the power of holding and doing either alone, or in a special manner, as the guide and director of them all; from which also it received the name of thumb, because it prevails among the others by force and power. It has two joints standing out, not as the others, three; but one is annexed by flesh to the hand for the sake of beauty: for if it had been with three joints, and itself separate, the foul and unbecoming appearance would have deprived the hand of all grace.

Again, the breadth of the breast, being elevated, and exposed to the eyes, displays a wonderful dignity of its condition; of which this is the cause, that God appears to have made man only, as it were, reclining with his face upward: for scarcely any other animal is able to lie upon its back. But He appears to have formed the dumb animals as though lying on one side, and to have pressed them to the earth. For this reason He gave them a narrow breast, and removed from sight, and prostrate towards the earth. But He made that of man open and erect, because, being full of reason given from heaven, it was not befitting that it should be humble or unbecoming. The nipples also gently rising, and crowned with darker and small orbs, add something of beauty; being given to females for the nourishment of their young, to males for grace only, that the breast might not appear misshapen, and, as it were, mutilated. Below this is placed the fiat surface of the belly, about the middle of which the navel distinguishes by a not unbecoming mark, being made for this purpose, that through it the young, while it is in the womb, may be nourished.

Sed nos ad Dei opera revertamur. Ut igitur oculi munitiores essent ab injuria, eos ciliorum tegminibus occuluit; unde oculos dictos esse, Varroni placet. Nam et ipsae palpebrae, quibus mobilitas inest, et palpitatio vocabulum tribuit, pilis in ordine stantibus vallatae, septum oculis decentissimum praebent. Quarum motus assiduus incomprehensibili celeritate concurrens, et videndi tenorem non impedit, et reficit obtutum. Acies enim, id est membrana illa perlucens, quam siccari et obarescere non oportet, nisi humore assiduo tersa pure niteat, obsolescit. Quid ipsa superciliorum fastigia pilis brevibus adornata? nonne, quasi aggeribus, et munimentum oculis, ne quid superne incidat, et speciem simul praestant? Ex quorum confinio nasus exoriens, et veluti aequali porrectus jugo, utramque aciem simul et discernit et munit. Inferius quoque genarum non indecens tumor, in similitudinem collium leniter exurgens, ab omni parte oculos efficit tutiores; provisumque est ab artifice summo, ut si quis forte vehementior ictus extiterit, eminentibus repellatur. Nasi vero pars superior usque ad medium solida formata est, inferior autem cartilagine adhaerente mollita, ut ad usum digitorum possit esse tractabilis. In hoc autem, quamvis simplici membro, tria sunt officia constituta; unum ducendi spiritus; alterum capiendi odoris; tertium ut per ejus cavernas purgamenta cerebri defluant: quas ipsas Deus quam mirabili, quam divina ratione molitus est, ut tamen hiatus ipse nasi oris speciem non deformaret. Quod erat plane futurum, si unum ac simplex foramen pateret. At id velut pariete per medium ducto intersepsit atque divisit, fecitque ipsa duplicitate pulcherrimum. Ex quo intelligimus quantum dualis numerus, una et simplici compage solidatus, ad rerum valeat perfectionem.

Nam cum sit corpus unum, tamen totum ex simplicibus membris constare non poterat, nisi ut essent partes vel dextrae, vel sinistrae. Itaque ut pedes duo, et item manus, non tantum ad utilitatem aliquam usumque, vel gradiendi, vel faciendi valent, sed et habitum, decoremque admirabilem conferunt: sic in capite, quod totius divini operis quasi culmen est, et auditus, in duas aures, et visus in duas acies, et odoratio in duas nares a summo artifice divisa est: quia cerebrum, in quo sentiendi ratio est, quamvis sit unum, tamen in duas partes membrana interveniente discretum est. Sed et cor, quod sapientiae domicilium videtur, licet sit unum, duos tamen intrinsecus sinus habet, quibus fontes vivi sanguinis continentur, septo intercedente divisi; ut sicut in ipso mundo summa rerum vel de simplici duplex, vel de duplici simplex, et gubernat, et continet totum: ita in corpore de duobus universa compacta, indissociabilem praetenderent unitatem. Oris quoque species, et rictus ex transverso patefactus, quam utilis, quam decens sit, enarrari non potest: cujus usus in duobus constat officiis, sumendi victus, et loquendi.

Lingua intus inclusa, quae vocem motibus suis in verba discernit, et est interpres animi; nec tamen sola potest per se loquendi munus implere, nisi acumen suum palato illiserit, nisi juta vel offensione dentium, vel compressione labiorum: dentes tamen plus conferunt ad loquendum; nam et infantes non ante incipiunt fari, quam dentes habuerint, et senes amissis dentibus ita balbutiunt, ut ad infantiam re voluti denuo esse videantur. Sed haec ad hominem solum pertinent, aut ad aves, in quibus acuminata et vibrata certis motibus lingua, innumerabiles cantuum flexiones, et sonorum varios modos exprimit. Habet praeterea et aliud officium, quo in omnibus, sed tamen solo in mutis utitur, quod contritos et commolitos dentibus cibos colligit, et conglobatos vi sua deprimit, et transmittit ad ventrem. Itaque Varro a ligando cibo putat linguae nomen impositum. Bestias etiam potu adjuvat; protenta enim cavataque hauriunt aquam, eamque comprehensam linguae sinu, ne tarditate ac mora effluat, ad palatum celeri mobilitate complodunt. Haec itaque palati concavo tanquam testudine tegitur; eamque dentium septis Deus quasi muro circumvallavit.

Dentes autem ipsos mirabili modo per ordinem fixos, ne nudi ac restricti magis horrori quam ornamento essent, gingivis mollibus, quae a gignendis dentibus nominantur, ac deinde labiorum tegminibus honestavit, quorum durities, sicut in molari lapide, major est et asperior, quam in caeteris ossibus, ut ad conterendos cibos pabulumque sufficerent. Labra ipsa, quae quasi antea cohaerebant, quam decenter intercidit; quorum superius sub ipsa medietate narium lacuna quadam levi, quasi valle signavit, inferius honestatis gratia foras molliter explicavit. Nam quod attinet ad saporem capiendum, fallitur, quisquis hunc sensum palato inesse arbitratur; lingua est enim, qua sapores sentiuntur: nec tamen tota; nam partes ejus, quae sunt ab utroque latere teneriores, saporem subtilissimis sensibus trahunt. Et cum neque ex cibo quidquam, neque ex potione minuatur; tamen inenarrabili modo penetrat ad sensum sapor, eadem ratione, qua nihil de quaque materia odoris capio decerpit.

Caetera quam decora sint, vix exprimi potest. Deductum clementer a genis mentum, et ita inferius conclusum, ut acumen ejus extremum signare videatur leviter impressa divisio; rigidum ac teres collum; scapulae velut mollibus jugis a cervice demissae; valida et substricta nervis ad fortitudinem brachia; insignibus toris extantium lacertorum vigens robur; utilis ac decens flexura cubitorum. Quid dicam de manibus, rationis ac sapientiae ministris? quas solertissimus artifex plano ac modice concavo sinu fictas, ut si quid tenendum sit, apte possit insidere, in digitos terminavit: in quibus difficile est expedire, utrumne species, an utilitas major sit. Nam et numerus perfectus, ac plenus, et ordo ac gradus decentissimus, et articulorum parium curvatura flexibilis, et forma unguium rotunda, concavis tegminibus digitorum fastigia comprehendens atque firmans, ne mollitudo carnis in tenendo cederet, magnum praebet ornatum. Illud vero ad usum miris modis habile, quod unus a caeteris separatus cum ipsa manu oritur, et in diversum maturius funditur: qui se velut obvium caeteris praebens, omnem tenendi faciendique rationem vel solus, vel praecipue possidet, tamquam rector omnium atque moderator; unde etiam pollicis nomen accepit, quod vi et potestate inter caeteros polleat. Duos quidem articulos extantes habet, non ut alii ternos, sed unus ad manum carne connectitur pulchritudinis gratia. Si enim fuisset tribus articulis et ipse discretus, foeda et indecora species ademisset manibus honestatem.

Jam pectoris latitudo sublimis, et exposita oculis, mirabilem prae se fert habitus sui dignitatem. Cujus haec causa est, quod videtur hominem solum Deus veluti supinum formasse (nam fere nullum aliud animal jacere in tergum potest), mutas autem animantes quasi alterno latere jacentes finxisse, atque ad terram compressisse. Idcirco illis angustum pectus, et ab aspectu remotum, et ad terram versus abjectum: homini autem patens et erectum; quia plenum rationis a coelo datae, humile, aut indecens esse non debuit. Papillae quoque leviter eminentes, et fuscioribus ac parvis orbibus coronatae, non nihil addunt venustatis, foeminis ad alendos foetus datae, maribus ad solum decus, ne informe pectus, et quasi mutilum videretur. Huic subdita est planities ventris, quam mediam fere umbilicus non indecenti nota signat, ad hoc factus, ut per eum foetus, dum est in utero, nutriatur.

11 Chap. XI.—Of the intestines in man, and their use PL 7, 47

It necessarily follows that I should begin to speak of the inward parts also, to which has been assigned not beauty, because they are concealed from view, but incredible utility, since it was necessary that this earthly body should be nourished with some moisture from food and drink, as the earth itself is by showers and frosts. The most provident Artificer placed in the middle of it a receptacle for articles of food, by means of which, when digested and liquefied, it might distribute the vital juices to all the members. But since man is composed of body and soul, that receptacle of which I have spoken above affords nourishment only to the body; to the soul, in truth, He has given another abode. For He has made a kind of intestines soft and thin, which we call the lungs, into which the breath might pass by an alternate interchange; and He did not form this after the fashion of the uterus, lest the breath should all at once be poured forth, or at once inflate it. And on this account He did not make it a full intestine, but capable of being inflated, and admitting the air, so that it might gradually receive the breath; while the vital air is spread through that thinness, and might again gradually give it back, while it spreads itself forth from it: for the very alternation of blowing and breathing, and the process of respiration, support life in the body.

Since, therefore, there are in man two receptacles,—one of the air which nourishes the soul, the other of the food which nourishes the body,—there must be two tubes through the neck for food, and for breath, the upper of which leads from the mouth to the belly, the lower from the nostrils to the lungs. And the plan and nature of these are different: for the passage which is from the mouth has been made soft, and which when closed always adheres to itself, as the month itself; since drink and food, being corporeal, make for themselves a space for passage, by moving aside and opening the gullet. The breath, on the other hand, which is incorporeal and thin, because it was unable to make for itself a space, has received an open way, which is called the windpipe. This is composed of flexible and soft bones, as though of rings fitted together after the manner of a hemlock stalk, and adhering together; and this passage is always open. For the breath can have no cessation in passing; because it, which is always passing to and fro, is checked as by a kind of obstacle through means of a portion of a member usefully sent down from the brain, and which is called the uvula, lest, drawn by pestilential air, it should come with impetuosity and spoil the slightness of its abode, or bring the whole violence of the injury upon the inner receptacles. And on this account also the nostrils are slightly open, which are therefore so named, because either smell or breath does not cease to flow through these, which are, as it were, the doors of this tube. Yet this breathing-tube lies open not only to the nostrils, but also to the mouth in the extreme regions of the palate, where the risings of the jaws, looking towards the uvula, begin to raise themselves into a swelling. And the reason of this arrangement is not obscure: for we should not have the power of speaking if the windpipe were open to the nostrils only, as the path of the gullet is to the mouth only; nor could the breath proceeding from it cause the voice, without the service of the tongue.

Therefore the divine skill opened a way for the voice from that breathing-tube, so that the tongue might be able to discharge its office, and by its strokes divide into words the even course of the voice itself. And this passage, if by any means it is intercepted, must necessarily cause dumbness. For he is assuredly mistaken, whoever thinks that there is any other cause why men are dumb. For they are not tongue-tied, as is commonly believed; but they pour forth that vocal breath through the nostrils, as though bellowing, because there is either no passage at all for the voice to the mouth, or it is not so open as to be able to send forth the full voice. And this generally comes to pass by nature; sometimes also it happens by accident that this entrance is blocked up and does not transmit the voice to the tongue, and thus makes those who can speak dumb. And when this happens, the hearing also must necessarily be blocked up; so that because it cannot emit the voice, it is also incapable of admitting it. Therefore this passage has been opened for the purpose of speaking. It also affords this advantage, that in frequenting the bath, because the nostrils are not able to endure the heat, the hot air is taken in by the mouth; also, if phlegm contracted by cold shall have happened to stop up the breathing pores of the nostrils, we may be able to draw the air through the mouth, lest, if the passage should be obstructed, the breath should be stifled. But the food being received into the stomach, and mixed with the moisture of the drink, when it has now been digested by the heat, its juice, being in an indescribable manner diffused through the limbs, bedews and invigorates the whole body.

The manifold coils also of the intestines, and their length rolled together on themselves, and yet fastened with one band, are a wonderful work of God. For when the stomach has sent forth from itself the food softened, it is gradually thrust forth through those windings of the intestines, so that whatever of the moisture by which the body is nourished is in them, is divided to all the members. And yet, lest in any place it should happen to adhere and remain fixed, which might have taken place on account of the turnings of the coils, which often turn back to themselves, and which could not have happened without injury, He has spread over these from within a thicker juice, that the secretions of the belly might more easily work their way through the slippery substance to their outlets. It is also a most skilful arrangement, that the bladder, which birds do not use, though it is separated from the intestines, and has no tube by which it may draw the urine from them, is nevertheless filled and distended with moisture. And it is not difficult to see how this comes to pass. For the parts of the intestines which receive the food and drink from the belly are more open than the other coils, and much more delicate. These entwine themselves around and encompass the bladder; and when the meat and the drink have arrived at these parts in a mixed state, the excrement becomes more solid, and passes through, but all the moisture is strained through those tender parts, and the bladder, the membrane of which is equally fine and delicate, absorbs and collects it, so as to send it forth where nature has opened an outlet.

Sequitur necessario, ut de internis quoque visceribus dicere incipiam: quibus non pulchritudo, quia sunt abdita, sed utilitas incredibilis attributa est, quoniam opus fuerat, ut terrenum hoc corpus succo aliquo de cibis ac potibus aleretur, sicut terra ipsa imbribus ac pruinis. Providentissimus artifex in medio ejus receptaculum cibis fecit, quibus concoctis et liquefactis, vitales succos membris omnibus dispertiret. Sed cum homo constet ex corpore atque anima, illud quod supra dixi receptaculum, soli corpori praestat alimentum: animae vero aliam sedem dedit. Fecit enim genus quoddam viscerum molle atque rarum, quod pulmonem vocamus, in quod spiritus reciproca vicissitudine commearet; eumque non in uteri modum finxit, ne effunderetur simul spiritus, aut inflaret simul. Ideoque ne plenum quidem viscus effecit, sed inflabile, atque aeris capax; ut paulatim spiritum reciperet, dum vitalis ventus per illam spargitur raritatem, et eumdem rursus paulatim redderet, dum se ex illo explicat. Ipsa enim vicissitudo flandi et spirandi, respirandique tractus, vitam sustentat in corpore.

Quoniam ergo duo sunt in homine receptacula, unum aeris, quod alit animam, alterum ciborum, quod alit corpus, ut flecti cervix, ac moveri facile possit, duas esse per collum fistulas necesse est, cibalem, ac spiritalem, quarum superior ab ore ad ventrem ferat, inferior a naribus ad pulmonem. Quarum ratio, et natura diversa est. Ille enim qui est ab ore transitus, mollis effectus est, et qui semper clausus cohaereat sibi, sicut os ipsum; quoniam potus, et cibus, dimota et patefacta gula, quia corporales sunt, spatium sibi transmeandi faciunt. Spiritus contra, qui est incorporalis, ac tenuis, quia spatium sibi facere non poterat, accepit viam patentem, quae vocatur gurgulio. Is constat ex ossibus flexuosis ac mollibus, quasi ex annulis in cicutae modum invicem compactis et cohaerentibus; patetque semper hic transitus. Nullam enim requiem meandi habere spiritus potest, quia is, qui semper commeat, demissa utiliter de cerebro membri portione, cui uva nomen est, velut occursu quodam refraenatur, ne aut teneritudinem domicilii cum impetu veniens attracta pestilenti aura corrumpat, aut totam nocendi violentiam internis receptaculis perferat. Ideoque etiam nares breviter sunt apertae, quae idcirco sic nominantur, quia per eas vel odor, vel spiritus nare non desinit, quae sunt hujus fistulae quasi ostia. Tamen haec fistula spiritalis non tantum ad nares, verum ad os quoque interpatet in extremis palati regionibus, ubi se colles faucium spectantes uvam tollere incipiunt in tumorem. Cujus rei causa et ratio non obscura est; loquendi enim facultatem non haberemus, si, ut gulae iter ad os tantum, ita gurgulio ad nares tantum pateret, nec procedens ex eo spiritus efficere vocem sine linguae ministerio posset.

Aperuit igitur viam voci divina solertia ex illa fistula spiritali, ut posset lingua ministerio suo fungi, et vocis ipsius inoffensum tenorem pulsibus suis in verba concidere. Qui meatus, si aliquo modo interceptus sit, mutum faciat necesse est. Errat enim profecto quisquis aliam causam putat, cur homines muti sint. Non enim (ut vulgo creditur) vinctam gerunt linguam: sed ii vocalem illum spiritum per nares quasi mugientes profundunt, quod voci transitus ad os aut nullus omnino est, aut non sic patens ut plenam vocem possit emittere. Quod plerumque natura fit; aliquando etiam casu accidit, ut morbo aliquo hic aditus obseptus vocem non transmittat ad linguam, faciatque de loquentibus mutos. Quod cum acciderit, auditum quoque obstrui necesse est; ut quia vocem emittere non potest, ne admittere quidem possit. Loquendi ergo causa patefactus est hic meatus. Illud quoque praestat, ut in lavacris celebrandis, quia nares calorem ferre non possunt, aer fervens ore ducatur; item, si forte spiramenta narium frigoris pituita praecluserit, per os auram trahere possimus, ne obstructa meandi facultate, spiritus stranguletur. Cibi vero in alvum recepti, et cum potus humore permixti, cum jam calore percocti fuerint, eorum succus inenarrabili modo per membra diffusus, irrigat universum corpus, et vegetat.

Intestinorum quoque multiplices spirae, ac longitudo in se convoluta, et uno tamen substricta vinculo, quam mirificum Dei opus est? Nam ubi maceratos ex se cibos alvus emiserit, paulatim per illos internorum anfractus extruduntur, ut quidquid ipsis inest succi, quo corpus alitur, membris omnibus dividatur. Et tamen necubi forte obhaereant, ac resistant, quod fieri poterat, propter ipsorum voluminum flexiones in se saepe redeuntes, et fieri sine pernicie non poterat, oblevit ea intrinsecus crassiore succo, ut purgamenta illa ventris ad exitus suos facilius per lubricum niterentur. Illa quoque ratio subtilissima est, quod vesica, cujus usum volucres non habent, cum sit ab intestinis separata, nec ullam habeat fistulam, qua ex illis urinam trahat, completur tamen, et humore distenditur. Id quomodo fiat, non est difficile pervidere, intestinorum enim partes, quae ab alvo cibum potumque suspiciunt, patentiores sunt quam caeterae spirae, et multo tenuiores. Hae vesicam circumplectuntur, et continent: ad quas partes cum potus et cibus mixta pervenerint, fimum quidem crassius fit, et transmeat, humor autem omnis per illam teneritudinem percolatur, eumque vesica, cujus aeque tenuis subtilisque membrana est, absorbet, et colligit, ut foras, qua natura exitum patefecit, emittat.

12 Chap. XII.—De utero, et conceptione atque sexibus PL 7, 52

De utero quoque et conceptione, quoniam de internis loquimur, dici necesse est, ne quid præ terisse videamur; quæ quamquam in operto latent, sensum tamen atque intelligentiam latere non possunt. Vena in maribus, quæ seminium continet, duplex est, paulo interior, quam illud humoris obscœni receptaculum. Sicut enim renes duo sunt, itemque testes, ita et venæ seminales duæ, in una tamen compage cohæ rentes; quod videmus in corporibus animalium, cum interfecta patefiunt. Sed illa dexterior masculinum continet semen, sinisterior fœmininum; et omnino in toto corpore pars dextra masculina est, sinistra veto fœminina. Ipsum semen quidam putant ex medullis tantum, quidam ex omni corpore ad venam genitalem confluere, ibique concrescere. Sed hoc, humana mens, quomodo fiat, non potest comprehendere. Item in fœminis uterus in duas se dividit partes, quæ in diversum diffussæ ac reflexæ, circumplicantur, sicut arietis cornua. Quæ pars in dextram retorquetur, masculina est; quæ in sinistram, fœminina.

Conceptum igitur Varro et Aristoteles sic fieri arbitrantur. Aiunt non tantum maribus inesse semen, verum etiam fœminis, et inde plerumque matribus similes procreari; sed earum semensanguinem esse purgatum, quod si recte cum virili mixture sit, utraque concreta et simul co-agulata informari: et primum quidem cor hominis effingi, quod in eo sit et vita omnis et sapientia; denique totum opus quadragesimo die consummari. Ex abortionibus hæ c fortasse collecta sunt. In avium tamen fœtibus primurn oculos fingi dubium non est, quod in ovis sæ pe deprehendimus. Unde fieri non posse arbitror quin fictio a capite sumat exordium.

Similitudines autem in corporibus filiorum sic fieri putant. Cum semina inter se permixta coalescunt, si virile superaverit, patri similem provenire, seu marem, seu fœminam; si muliebre præ valuerit, progeniem cujusque sexus ad imaginem respondere maternam. Id autem præ valet e duobus, quod fuerit uberius; alterum enim quodammodo amplectitur et includit: hinc plerumque fled, ut unius tantum lineamenta præ tendat. Si vero æqua fuerit ex pari semente permixtio, figuras quoque misceri, ut soboles illa communis aut neutrum referre videatur, quia totum ex altero non habet; aut utrumque, quia partem de singulis mutuata est. Nam in cor-poribus animalium videmus aut confundi parentum colores, ac fieri tertium neutri generantium simile; aut utriusque sic exprimi, ut discoloribus membris per omne corpus concors mixtura varietur. Dispares quoque naturæ hoc modo fieri putantur. Cum forte in læ vam uteri partem masculinæ stirpis semen inciderit, marem quidem gigni opinatio est; sed quia sit in fœminina parte conceptus, aliquid in se habere fœmineum, supra quam decus virile patiatur; vel formam insignem, vel nimium candorem, vel corporis levitatem, vel artus delicatos, vel staturam brevem, vel vocem gracilem, vel animum imbecillum, vel ex his plura. Item, si partem in dextram semen fœminini sexus influxerit, fœminam quidem procreari; sed quoniam in masculina parte concepta sit, habere in se aliquid virilita-tis, ultra quam sexus; ratio permittat; aut valida membra, aut immoderatam Iongitudinem, aut fuscum colorem, aut hispidam faciem, aut vulture indecorum, aut vocem robustam, aut animum audacem, aut ex his plura.

Si vero masculinum in dexteram, fœmininum in sinistram pervenerit, utrosque fœtus recte provenire; ut et fœminis per omnia naturæ suæ decus constet, et maribus tam mente, quam corpore robur virile servetur. Istud vero ipsum quam mirabile institutum Dei, quod ad conservationem generum singulorum, duos sexus maris ac fœminæ machinatus est; quibus inter se per voluptatis illecebras copulatis, successiva soboles pareretur, ne omne genus viventium conditio mortalitatis extingueret. Sed plus roboris maribus attributum est, quo facilius ad patientiam jugi maritalis fœminæ cogerentur. Vir itaque nominatus est, quod major in eo vis est, quire in fœmina; et hinc virtus nomen accepit. Item mulier (ut Varro interpretatur) a mollitie, immutata et detracta littera, velut mollier; cui suscepto fœtu, cum partus appropinquare jam cœpit, turgescentes mammæ dulcibus succis distenduntur, et ad nutrimenta nascentis fontibus lacteis fœcundum pectus exuberat. Nec enim decebat aliud quam ut sapiens animal a corde alimoniam duceret. Idque ipsum solertissime comparatum est, ut candens ac pinguis humor teneritudinem novi corporis irrigaret, donec ad capiendos fortiores cibos, et dentibus instruatur, et viribus roboretur. Sed redeamus ad propositum, ut cæ tera, quæ supersunt, breviter explicemus.

De utero quoque et conceptione, quoniam de internis loquimur, dici necesse est, ne quid praeterisse videamur: quae quanquam in operto latent, sensum tamen atque intelligentiam latere non possunt. Vena in maribus, quae seminium continet, duplex est, paulo interior quam illud humoris obscoeni receptaculum. Sicut enim renes duo sunt, ita testes, ita et venae seminales duae, in una tamen compage cohaerentes; quod videmus in corporibus animalium, cum interfecta patefiunt: sed illa dexterior masculinum continet semen, sinisterior foemininum; et omnino in toto corpore pars dextra masculina est, sinistra vero foeminina. Ipsum semen quidam putant ex medullis tantum, quidam ex omni corpore ad venam genitalem confluere, ibique concrescere. Sed hoc, humana mens, quomodo fiat, non potest comprehendere. Item in foeminis uterus in duas se dividit partes, quae in diversum diffusae ac reflexae, circumplicantur, sicut arietis cornua. Quae pars in dextram retorquetur, masculina est; quae in sinistram foeminina.

Conceptum igitur Varro et Aristoteles sic fieri arbitrantur. Aiunt non tantum maribus inesse semen, verum etiam foeminis, et inde plerumque matribus similes procreari: sed earum semen sanguinem esse purgatum, quod si recte cum virili mixtum sit, utraque concreta et simul coagulata informari: et primum quidem cor hominis effingi, quod in eo sit et vita omnis et sapientia; denique totum opus quadragesimo die consummari. Ex abortionibus haec fortasse collecta sunt. In avium tamen foetibus primum oculos fingi dubium non est, quod in ovis saepe deprehendimus. Unde fieri non posse arbitror, quin fictio a capite sumat exordium.

Similitudines autem in corporibus filiorum sic fieri putant. Cum semina inter se permixta coalescunt, si virile superaverit, patri similem provenire, seu marem, seu foeminam; si muliebre praevaluerit, progeniem cujusque sexus ad imaginem respondere maternam. Id autem praevalet e duobus, quod fuerit uberius; alterum enim quodammodo amplectitur et includit: hinc plerumque fieri, ut unius tantum lineamenta praetendat. Si vero aequa fuerit ex pari semente permixtio, figuras quoque misceri; ut soboles illa communis, aut neutrum referre videatur, quia totum ex altero non habet, aut utrumque, quia partem de singulis mutuata est. Nam in corporibus animalium videmus, aut confundi parentum colores, ac fieri tertium neutri generantium simile; aut utriusque sic exprimi, ut discoloribus membris per omne corpus concors mixtura varietur. Dispares quoque naturae hoc modo fieri putantur. Cum forte in laevam uteri partem masculinae stirpis semen inciderit, marem quidem gigni opinatio est; sed quia sit in foeminina parte conceptus, aliquid in se habere foemineum, supra quam decus virile patiatur; vel formam insignem, vel nimium candorem, vel corporis levitatem, vel artus delicatos, vel staturam brevem, vel vocem gracilem, vel animum imbecillum, vel ex his plura. Item, si partem in dextram semen foeminini sexus influxerit, foeminam quidem procreari: sed quoniam in masculina parte concepta sit, habere in se aliquid virilitatis, ultra quam sexus ratio permittat; aut valida membra, aut immoderatam longitudinem, aut fuscum colorem, aut hispidam faciem, aut vultum indecorum, aut vocem robustam, aut animum audacem, aut ex his plura.

Si vero masculinum in dexteram, foemininum in sinistram pervenerit, utrosque foetus recte provenire; ut et foeminis per omnia naturae suae decus constet, et maribus tam mente, quam corpore robur virile servetur. Istud vero ipsum quam mirabile institutum Dei, quod ad conservationem generum singulorum, duos sexus maris ac foeminae machinatus est; quibus inter se per voluptatis illecebras copulatis, successiva soboles pareretur, ne omne genus viventium conditio mortalitatis extingueret. Sed plus roboris maribus attributum est, quo facilius ad patientiam jugi maritalis foeminae cogerentur. Vir itaque nominatus est, quod major in eo vis est, quam in foemina; et hinc virtus nomen accepit. Item mulier (ut Varro interpretatur) a mollitie, immutata et detracta littera, velut mollier; cui suscepto foetu, cum partus appropinquare jam coepit, turgescentes mammae dulcibus succis distenduntur, et ad nutrimenta nascentis fontibus lacteis foecundum pectus exuberat. Nec enim decebat aliud quam ut sapiens animal a corde alimoniam duceret. Idque ipsum solertissime comparatum est, ut candens ac pingui humor teneritudinem novi corporis irrigaret, donec ac capiendos fortiores cibos, et dentibus instruatur, et viribus roboretur. Sed redeamus ad propositum, ut caetera, quae supersunt breviter explicemus.

13 Chap. XIII.—Of the lower members PL 7, 58

Poteram nunc ego ipsorum quoque genitalium membrorum mirificam rationem tibi exponere, nisi me pudor ab hujusmodi sermone revocaret: itaque a nobis indumento verecundiæ, quæ sunt pudenda velentur. Quod ad hanc rem attinet, queri satis est, homines impios ac profanos summum nefas admittere, qui divinum et admirabile Dei opus, ad propagandam successionem inexcogitabili ratione provisum et effectum, vel ad turpissimos quæ stus, vel ad obscœnæ libidinis pudenda opera convertunt, ut jam nihil aliud ex re sanctissima petant, quam inanem et sterilem voluptatem.

How is it with respect to the other parts of the body? Are they without order and beauty? The flesh rounded off into the nates, how adapted to the office of sitting! and this also more firm than in the other limbs, lest by the pressure of the bulk of the body it should give way to the bones. Also the length of the thighs drawn out, and strengthened by broader muscles, in order that it might more easily sustain the weight of the body; and as this is gradually contracted, it is bounded by the knees, the comely joints of which supply a bend which is most adapted for walking and sitting. Also the legs not drawn out in an equal manner, lest an unbecoming figure should deform the feet; but they are at once strengthened and adorned by well-turned calves gently standing out and gradually diminishing.

But in the soles of the feet there is the same plan as in the hands, but yet very different: for since these are, as it were, the foundations of the whole body, the admirable Artificer has not made them of a round appearance, lest man should be unable to stand, or should need other feet for standing, as is the case with quadrupeds; but He has formed them of a longer and more extended shape, that they might make the body firm by their flatness, from which circumstance their name was given to them. The toes are of the same number with the fingers, for the sake of appearance rather than utility; and on this account they are both joined together, and short, and put together by gradations; and that which is the greatest of these, since it was not befitting that it should be separated from the others, as in the hand, has been so arranged in order, that it appears to differ from the others in magnitude and the small space which intervenes. This beautiful union of them strengthens the pressure of the feet with no slight aid; for we cannot be excited to running, unless, our toes being pressed against the ground, and resting upon the soil, we take an impetus and a spring. I appear to have explained all things of which the plan is capable of being understood. I now come to those things which are either doubtful or obscure.

Poteram nunc ego ipsorum quoque genitalium membrorum mirificam rationem tibi exponere, nisi me pudor ab hujusmodi sermone revocaret: itaque a nobis indumento verecundiae, quae sunt pudenda velentur. Quod ad hanc rem attinet, queri satis est homines impios, ac profanos, summum nefas admittere, qui divinum et admirabile Dei opus, ad propagandam successionem inexcogitabili ratione provisum et effectum, vel ad turpissimos quaestus, vel ad obscoenae libidinis pudenda opera convertunt; ut jam nihil aliud ex re sanctissima petant, quam inanem et sterilem voluptatem. Quid reliquae corporis partes, num carent ratione, ac pulchitudine? Conglobata in nates caro, quam sedendi officio apta! et eadem firmior, quam in caeteris membris, ne premente corporis mole ossibus cederet. Item foeminum deducta, et latioribus toris valida longitudo, quo facilius onus corporis sustineret: quam paulatim deficientem in angustum genua determinant, quorum decentes nodi flexuram pedibus, ad gradiendum sedendumque aptissimam, praebent. Item crura non aequali modo ducta, ne indecens habitudo deformaret pedes, sed teretibus suris clementer extantibus, sensimque tenuatis, et firmata sunt et ornata.

In plantis vero eadem quidem, sed tamen longe dispar, quam in manibus ratio est: quae quoniam totius corporis quasi fundamenta sunt, mirificus eas artifex non rotunda specie, ne homo stare non posset, aut aliis ad standum pedibus indigeret, sicut quadrupedes, sed porrectiores, longioresque formavit, ut stabile corpus efficerent planitie sua; unde illis inditum nomen est. Digiti aeque totidem, quot in manibus, speciem magis, quam usum majorem praeferentes, ideoque et juncti, et breves, et gradatim compositi: quorum qui est maximus, quoniam illum sicut in manu discerni a caeteris opus non erat, ita in ordinem redactus est, ut tamen ab aliis magnitudine, ac modico intervallo distare videatur. Haec eorum speciosa germanitas, non levi adjumanto nisum pedum firmat; concitari enim ad cursum non possumus nisi, digitis in humum pressis soloque nitentibus, impetum saltumque capiamus. Explicasse videor omnia, quorum ratio intelligi potest. Nunc ad ea venio, quae vel dubia vel obscura sunt.

14 Chap. XIV.—Of the unknown purpose of some of the intestines PL 7, 60

It is evident that there are many things in the body, the force and purpose of which no one can perceive but He who made them. Can any one suppose that he is able to relate what is the advantage, and what the effect, of that slight transparent membrane by which the stomach is netted over and covered? What the twofold resemblance of the kidneys? which Varro says are so named because streams of foul moisture arise from these; which is far from being the case, because, rising on either side of the spine, they are united, and are separated from the intestines. What is the use of the spleen? What of the liver? Organs which appear as it were to be made up of disordered blood. What of the very bitter moisture of the gall? What of the heart? unless we shall happen to think that they ought to be believed, who think that the affection of anger is placed in the gall, that of fear in the heart, of joy in the spleen. But they will have it that the office of the liver is, by its embrace and heat, to digest the food in the stomach; some think that the desires of the amorous passions are contained in the liver.

First of all, the acuteness of the human sense is unable to perceive these things, because their offices lie concealed; nor, when laid open, do they show their uses. For, if it were so, perhaps the more gentle animals would either have no gall at all, or less than the wild beasts; the more timid ones would have more heart, the more lustful would have more liver, the more playful more spleen. As, therefore, we perceive that we hear with our ears, that we see with our eyes, that we smell with our nostrils; so assuredly we should perceive that we are angry with the gall, that we desire with the liver, that we rejoice with the spleen. Since, therefore, we do not at all perceive from what part those affections come, it is possible that they may come from another source, and that those organs may have a different effect to that which we suppose. We cannot prove, however, that they who discuss these things speak falsely. But I think that all things which relate to the motions of the mind and soul, are of so obscure and profound a nature, that it is beyond the power of man to see through them clearly. This, however, ought to be sure and undoubted, that so many objects and so many organs have one and the same office—to retain the soul in the body. But what office is particularly assigned to each, who can know, except the Designer, to whom alone His own work is known?

Multa esse constat in corpore, quorum vim, rationemque perspicere nemo, nisi qui fecit, potest. An aliquis enarrare se putat posse quid utilitatis, quid effectus habeat tenuis membrana illa perlucens, qua circumretitur alvus, ac tegitur? Quid renum gemina similitudo? quos ait Varro ita dictos, quod rivi ab his obscoeni humoris oriantur: quod est longe secus, quia spinae altrinsecus supini cohaerent, et sunt ab intestinis separati. Quid splen? quid jecur? quae viscera quasi ex conturbato sanguine videntur esse concreta: quid fellis amarissimus liquor? quid globus cordis? Nisi forte illis credendum putabimus, qui affectum iracundiae in felle constitutum putant, pavoris in corde, in splene laetitiae. Ipsius autem jecoris officium volunt esse, ut cibos in alvo concoquat amplexu et calefactu suo: quidam libidines rerum venerearum in jecore contineri arbitrantur.

Primum ista perspicere acumen humani sensus non potest, quia horum officia in operto latent, nec usus suos patefacta demonstrant. Nam si ita esset, fortasse placidiora quaeque animalia, vel nihil fellis omnino, vel minus haberent, quam ferae; timidiora plus cordis, salaciora plus jecoris, lasciviora plus splenis habuissent. Sicuti igitur nos sentimus audire auribus, oculis cernere, naribus odorare: ita profecto sentiremus, nos felle irasci, jecore cupere, splene gaudere. Cum autem, unde affectus isti veniant, minime sentiamus, fieri potest, et aliunde veniant, et aliud viscera illa, quam suspicamur, efficiant. Nec tamen convincere possumus, falsa illos, qui haec disputant, dicere. Sed omnia, quae ad motus animi animaeque pertineant, tam obscurae altaeque rationis esse arbitror, ut supra hominem sit, ea liquido pervidere. Id tamen certum et indubitatum esse debet, tot res, tot viscerum genera, unum et idem habere officium, ut animam contineant in corpore. Sed quid proprie muneris singulis sit injunctum, quis scire, nisi artifex, potest, cui soli opus suum notum est?

15 Chap. XV.—Of the voice PL 7, 62

But what account can we give of the voice? Grammarians, indeed, and philosophers, define the voice to be air struck by the breath; from which words derive their name: which is plainly false. For the voice is not produced outside of the mouth, but within, and therefore that opinion is more probable, that the breath, being compressed, when it has struck against the obstacle presented by the throat, forces out the sound of the voice: as when we send down the breath into an open hemlock stalk, having applied it to the lips, and the breath, reverberating from the hollow of the stalk, and rolled back from the bottom, while it returns to that descending through meeting with itself, striving for an outlet, produces a sound; and the wind, rebounding by itself, is animated into vocal breath. Now, whether this is true, God, who is the designer, may see. For the voice appears to arise not from the mouth, but from the innermost breast. In fine, even when the mouth is closed, a sound such as is possible is emitted from the nostrils. Moreover, also, the voice is not affected by that greatest breath with which we gasp, but with a light and not compressed breath, as often as we wish. It has not therefore been comprehended in what manner it takes place, or what it is altogether. And do not imagine that I am now falling into the opinion of the Academy, for all things are not incomprehensible. For as it must be confessed that many things are unknown, since God has willed that they should exceed the understanding of man; so, however, it must be acknowledged that there are many which may both be perceived by the senses and comprehended by the reason. But we shall devote an entire treatise to the refutation of the philosophers. Let us therefore finish the course over which we are now running.

De voce autem quam rationem reddere possumus? Grammatici quidem ac philosophi vocem esse definiunt, aerem spiritu verberatum: unde verba sunt nuncupata, quod perspicue falsum est. Non enim vox extra os gignitur, sed intra; et ideo verisimilior est illa sententia, stipatum spiritum, cum obstantia faucium fuerit illisus, sonum vocis exprimere: veluti cum in patentem cicutam, labroque subjectam demittimus spiritum, et is cicutae concavo repercussus ac revolutus a fundo, dum ad descendentem occursu suo redit, ad exitum nitens, sonum gignit, et in vocalem spiritum resiliens per se ventus animatur. Quod quidem an verum sit, Deus artifex viderit. Videtur enim non ab ore, sed ab intimo pectore vox oriri. Denique et ore clauso, ex naribus emittitur sonus qualis potest. Praeterea et maximo spiritu, quo anhelamus, vox non efficitur, et levi, et non coarctato spiritu, quoties volumus, efficitur. Non est igitur comprehensum, quemodo fiat, aut quid sit omnino. Nec me nunc in Academiae sententiam delabi putes, quia non omnia sunt incomprehensibilia. Ut enim fatendum est multa nesciri, quae voluit Deus intelligentiam hominis excedere: sic tamen multa esse, quae possint et sensibus percipi, et ratione comprehendi. Sed erit, nobis contra philosophos integra disputatio. Conficiamus igitur spatium, quod nunc decurrimus.

16 Chap. XVI.—Of the mind and its seat PL 7, 63

That the nature of the mind is also incomprehensible, who can be ignorant, but he who is altogether destitute of mind, since it is not known in what place the mind is situated, or of what nature it is? Therefore various things have been discussed by philosophers concerning its nature and place. But I will not conceal what my own sentiments are: not that I should affirm that it is so—for in a doubtful matter it is the part of a foolish person to do this; but that when I have set forth the difficulty of the matter, you may understand how great is the magnitude off the divine works. Some would have it, that the seat of the mind is in the breast. But if this is so, how wonderful is it, that a faculty which is situated in an obscure and dark habitation should be employed in so great a light of reason and intelligence; then that the senses from every part of the body come together to it, so that it appears to be present in any quarter of the limbs! Others have said that its seat is in the brain and, indeed, they have used probable arguments, saying that it was doubtless befitting that that which had the government of the whole body should especially have its abode in the highest place, as though in the citadel of the body; and that nothing should be in a more elevated position than that which governs the whole by reason, just as the Lord Himself, and Ruler of the universe, is in the highest place. Then they say, that the organs which are the ministers of each sense, that is, of hearing, and seeing, and smelling, are situated in the head, and that the channels of all these lead not to the breast, but to the brain: otherwise we must be more slow in the exercise of our senses, until the power of sensation by a long course should descend through the neck even to the breast. These, in truth, do not greatly err, or perchance not at all. For the mind, which exercises control over the body, appears to be placed in the highest part, the head, as God is in heaven; but when it is engaged in any reflection, it appears to pass to the breast, and, as it were, to withdraw to some secret recess, that it may elicit and draw forth counsel, as it were, from a hidden treasury. And therefore, when we are intent upon reflection, and when the mind, being occupied, has withdrawn itself to the inner depth, we are accustomed neither to hear the things which sound about us, nor to see the things which stand in our way. But whether this is the case, it is assuredly a matter of admiration how this takes place, since there is no passage from the brain to the breast. But if it is not so, nevertheless it is no less a matter of admiration that, by some divine plan or other, it is caused that it appears to be so. Can any fail to admire that that living and heavenly faculty which is called the mind or the soul, is of such volubility that it does not rest even then when it is asleep; of such rapidity, that it surveys the whole heaven at one moment of time; and, if it wills, flies over seas, traverses lands and cities,—in short, places in its own sight all things which it pleases, however far and widely they are removed?

And does any one wonder if the divine mind of God, being extended through all parts of the universe, runs to and fro, and rules all things, governs all things, being everywhere present, everywhere diffused; when the strength and power of the human mind, though enclosed within a mortal body, is so great, that it can in no way be restrained even by the barriers of this heavy and slothful body, to which it is bound, from bestowing upon itself, in its impatience of rest, the power of wandering without restraint? Whether, therefore, the mind has its dwelling in the head or in the breast, can any one comprehend what power of reason effects, that that incomprehensible faculty either remains fixed in the marrow of the brain, or in that blood divided into two parts which is enclosed in the heart; and not infer from this very circumstance how great is the power of God, because the soul does not see itself, or of what nature or where it is; and if it did see, yet it would not be able to perceive in what manner an incorporeal substance is united with one which is corporeal? Or if the mind has no fixed locality, but runs here and there scattered through the whole body,—which is possible, and was asserted by Xenocrates, the disciple of Plato,—then, inasmuch as intelligence is present in every part of the body, it cannot be understood what that mind is, or what its qualities are, since its nature is so subtle and refined, that, though infused into solid organs by a living and, as it were, ardent perception, it is mingled with all the members.

But take care that you never think it probable, as Aristoxenus said, that the mind has no existence, but that the power of perception exists from the constitution of the body and the construction of the organs, as harmony does in the case of the lyre. For musicians call the stretching and sounding of the strings to entire strains, without any striking of notes in agreement with them, harmony. They will have it, therefore, that the soul in man exists in a manner like that by which harmonious modulation exists on the lyre; namely, that the firm uniting of the separate parts of the body and the vigour of all the limbs agreeing together, makes that perceptible motion, and adjusts the mind, as well-stretched things produce harmonious sound. And as, in the lyre, when anything has been interrupted or relaxed, the whole method of the strain is disturbed and destroyed; so in the body, when any part of the limbs receives an injury, the whole are weakened, and all being corrupted and thrown into confusion, the power of perception is destroyed: and this is called death. But he, if he had possessed any mind, would never have transferred harmony from the lyre to man. For the lyre cannot of its own accord send forth a sound, so that there can be in this any comparison and resemblance to a living person; but the soul both reflects and is moved of its own accord. But if there were in us anything resembling harmony, it would be moved by a blow from without, as the strings of the lyre are by the hands; whereas without the handling of the artificer, and the stroke of the fingers, they lie mute and motionless. But doubtless he ought to have beaten by the hand, that he might at length observe; for his mind, badly compacted from his members, was in a state of torpor.

Mentis quoque rationem incomprehensibilem esse quis nesciat, nisi qui omnino illam non habet, cum ipsa mens quo loco sit, aut cujusmodi, nesciatur? Varia ergo a philosophis de natura ejus ac loco disputata sunt. At ego non dissimulabo, quid ipse sentiam; non quia sic esse affirmem (quod est insipientis in re dubia facere), sed ut exposita rei difficultate, intelligas, quanta sit divinorum operum magnitudo. Quidam sedem mentis in pectore esse voluerunt. Quod si ita est, quanto tandem miraculo dignum est, rem in obscuro ac tenebroso habitaculo sitam, in tanta rationis atque intelligentiae luce versari? tum quod ad eam sensus ex omni corporis parte conveniunt, ut in qualibet regione membrorum praesens esse videatur. Alii sedem ejus in cerebro esse dixerunt. Et sane argumentis probabilibus usi sunt: oportuisse scilicet, quod totius corporis regimen haberet potius in summo, tamquam in arce habitare; nec quidquam esse sublimius, quam id, quod universum ratione moderetur, sicut ipse mundi dominus et rector in summo est. Deinde quod sensus omnis, id est audiendi, et videndi, et odorandi ministra membra in capite sint locata, quorum omnium viae non ad pectus, sed ad cerebrum ferant: alioqui necesse nos esset tardius sentire, donec sentiendi facultas longo itinere per collum ad pectus usque descenderet. Ii vero aut non multum, aut fortasse non errant.

Videtur enim mens, quae dominatum corporis tenet, in summo capite constituta, tamquam in coelo Deus: sed cum in aliqua sit cogitatione, commeare ad pectus, et quasi ad secretum aliquod penetrale secedere, ut consilium, tamquam ex thesauro recondito, eliciat ac proferat; ideoque cum intenti ad cogitandum sumus, et cum mens occupata in altum se abdiderit, neque audire quae circumsonant, neque videre, quae obstant, solemus. Id vero sive ita est, admirandum profecto est, quomodo id fiat, cum ad pectus ex cerebro nullum iter pateat. Sin autem non est ita, tamen nihilominus admirandum est, quod divina nescio qua ratione fiat, ut ita esse videatur. An potest aliquis non admirari, quod sensus ille vivus atque coelestis, qui mens, vel animus nuncupatur, tantae mobilitatis est, ut ne tum quidem, cum sopitus est, conquiescat; tantae celeritatis, ut uno temporis puncto coelum omne collustret, et si velit, maria pervolet, terras, ac urbes peragret, omnia denique, quae libuerit, quamvis longe lateque summota sint, in conspectu sibi ipse constituat.

Et miratur aliquis, si divina mens Dei per universas mundi partes intenta discurrit, et omnia regit, omnia moderatur, ubique praesens, ubique diffusa; cum tanta sit vis ac potestas mentis humanae intra mortale corpus inclusae ut ne septis quidem gravis hujus ac pigri corporis, cui alligata est, coerceri ullo pacto possit, quominus sibi liberam vagandi facultatem, quietis impatiens, largiatur? Sive igitur in capite mens habitat, sive in pectore, potestne aliquis comprehendere, quae vis rationis efficiat, ut sensus ille incomprehensibilis aut in medulla cerebri haereat, aut in illo sanguine bipartito, qui est inclusus in corde? ac non ex eo ipso colligat, quanta sit Dei potestas, quod animus se ipsum non videt, aut qualis, aut ubi sit; nec si videat, tamen perspicere possit, quo pacto rei corporali res incorporalis adjuncta sit? Sive etiam mentis locus nullus est, sed per totum corpus sparsa discurrit, quod et fieri potest, et a Xenocrate Platonis discipulo disputatum est, siquidem sensus in qualibet parte corporis praesto est, nec quid sit mens ista, nec qualis, intelligi potest, cum sit natura ejus tam subtilis ac tenuis, ut solidis visceribus infusa, vivo, et quasi ardenti sensu, membris omnibus misceatur.

Illud autem cave, ne unquam simile veri putaveris, quod Aristoxenus dixit: Mentem omnino nullam esse, sed quasi harmoniam in fidibus, ex constructione corporis, et compagibus viscerum vim sentiendi existere. Musici enim intentionem concentumque nervorum in integros modos, sine ulla offensione consonantium, harmoniam vocant. Volunt igitur animum simili ratione constare in homine, qua et concors modulatio constat in fidibus; scilicet, ut singularum corporis partium firma conjunctio, membrorumque omnium consentiens in unum vigor, motum illum sensibilem faciat, animumque concinnet, sicut sunt nervi bene intenti ad conspirantem sonum. Et sicut in fidibus, cum aliquid aut interruptum, aut relaxatum est, omnis canendi ratio turbatur, et solvitur: ita in corpore, cum pars aliqua membrorum duxerit vitium, destrui universa, corruptisque omnibus atque turbatis, occidere sensum, eamque mortem vocari. Verum ille, si quidquam mentis habuisset, non harmoniam de fidibus ad hominem transtulisset. Non enim canere sua sponte fides possunt, ut sit ulla in his comparatio ac similitudo viventis. Animus autem sua sponte et cogitat, et movetur. Quod si quid in nobis harmoniae simile esset, ictu moveretur externo, sicut nervi manibus, qui sine tactu artificis pulsuque digitorum, muti atque inertes jacent. Sed nimirum pulsandus ille manu fuit, ut aliquando sentiret; quia mens ejus ex membris male compacta torpebat.

17 Chap. XVII.—Of the soul, and the opinion of philosophers concerning it PL 7, 67

It remains to speak of the soul, although its system and nature cannot be perceived. Nor, therefore, do we fail to understand that the soul is immortal, since whatever is vigorous and is in motion by itself at all times, and cannot be seen or touched, must he eternal. But what the soul is, is not yet agreed upon by philosophers, and perhaps will never be agreed upon. For some have said that it is blood, others that it is fire, others wind, from which it has received its name of anima, or animus, because in Greek the wind is called anemos and yet none of these appears to have spoken anything. For if the soul appears to be extinguished when the blood is poured forth through a wound, or is exhausted by the heat of fevers, it does not therefore follow that the system of the soul is to be placed in the material of the blood; as though a question should arise as to the nature of the light which we make use of, and the answer should be given that it is oil, for when that is consumed the light is extinguished: since they are plainly different, but the one is the nourishment of the other. Therefore the soul appears to be like light, since it is not itself blood, but is nourished by the moisture of the blood, as light is by oil.

But they who have supposed it to be fire made use of this argument, that when the soul is present the body is warm, but on its departure the body grows cold. But fire is both without perception and is seen, and burns when touched. But the soul is both endowed with perception and cannot be seen, and does not burn. From which it is evident that the soul is something like God. But they who suppose that it is wind are deceived by this, because we appear to live by drawing breath from the air. Varro gives this definition: “The soul is air conceived in the mouth, warmed in the lungs, heated in the heart, diffused into the body.” These things are most plainly false. For I say that the nature of things of this kind is not so obscure, that we do not even understand what cannot be true. If any one should say to me that the heaven is of brass, or crystal, or, as Empedocles says, that it is frozen air, must I at once assent because I do not know of what material the heaven is? For as I know not this, I know that. Therefore the soul is not air conceived in the mouth, because the soul is produced much before air can be conceived in the mouth. For it is not introduced into the body after birth, as it appears to some philosophers, but immediately after conception, when the divine necessity has formed the offspring in the womb; for it so lives within the bowels of its mother, that it is increased in growth, and delights to bound with repeated beatings. In short, there must be a miscarriage if the living young within shall die. The other parts of the definition have reference to this, that during those nine months in which we were in the womb we appear to have been dead. None, therefore, of these three opinions is true. We cannot, however, say that they who held these sentiments were false to such an extent that they said nothing at all; for we live at once by the blood, and heat, and breath. But since the soul exists in the body by the union of all these, they did not express what it was in its own proper sense; for as it cannot be seen, so it cannot be expressed.

Superest de anima dicere; quamquam percipi ratio ejus et natura non possit. Nec ideo tamen immortalem esse animam non intelligimus; quoniam quidquid viget, moveturque per se semper, nec videri, aut tangi potest, aeternum sit necesse est. Quid autem sit anima, nondum inter philosophos convenit, nec unquam fortasse conveniet. Etenim alii sanguinem esse dixerunt, alii ignem, alii ventum; unde anima, vel animus nomen accepit, quod Graece ventus ἄνεμος dicitur; nec illorum tamen quisquam dixisse aliquid videtur. Non enim, si anima sanguine aut per vulnus effuso, aut febrium calore consumpto, videtur extingui, continuo in materia sanguinis animae ratio ponenda est: veluti si veniat in quaestionem, lumen quo utimur, quid sit, et respondeatur oleum esse, quoniam consumpto illo, lumen extinguitur; cum sint utique diversa, sed alterum sit alterius alimentum. Videtur ergo anima similis esse lumini, quae non ipsa sit sanguis, sed humore sanguinis alatur, ut lumen oleo.

Qui autem ignem putaverunt, hoc usi sunt argumento, quod praesente anima corpus caleat, recedente frigescat. Sed ignis et sensu indiget, et videtur, et tactu comburit. Anima vero et sensu aucta est, et videri non potest, et non adurit. Unde apparet, animam nescio quid esse Deo simile. At illi, qui ventum putant, hoc falluntur, quod ex aere spiritum ducentes, vivere videamur. Varro ita definit: « Anima est aer conceptus ore, tepefactus in pulmone, fervefactus in corde, diffusus in corpus. » Haec apertissime falsa sunt. Neque enim tam obscuram nobis hujusmodi dico esse rationem, ut ne hoc quidem intelligamus, quid verum esse non possit. An si mihi quis dixerit, aeneum esse coelum, aut vitreum, aut, ut Empedocles ait, aerem glaciatum, statimne assentiar, quia coelum ex qua materia sit ignorem? sicut enim hoc nescio, ita illud scio. Anima ergo non est aer ore conceptus, quia multo prius gignitur anima, quam concipi aer ore possit. Non enim post partum insinuatur in corpus, ut quibusdam philosophis videtur, sed post conceptum protinus, cum foetum in utero necessitas divina formavit; quia adeo vivit intra viscera genitricis, ut et incremento augeatur, et crebris pulsibus gestiat emicare. Denique abortum fieri necesse est, si fuerit animal intus extinctum. Caeterae definitionis partes eo spectant, ut illis novem mensibus, quibus in utero fuimus, mortui fuisse videamur. Nulla ergo ex his tribus vera sententia est. Nec tamen in tantum falsos esse dicendum est, qui haec senserunt, ut omnino nihil dixerint; nam et sanguine simul, et calore, et spiritu vivimus. Sed cum constet anima in corpore his omnibus adunatis, non expresserunt proprie quid esset, quia tam non potest exprimi, quam videri.

18 Chap. XVIII.—Of the soul and the mind, and their affections PL 7, 70

There follows another, and in itself an inexplicable inquiry: Whether the soul and the mind are the same, or there be one faculty by which we live, and another by which we perceive and have discernment. There are not wanting arguments on either side. For they who say that they are one faculty make use of this argument, that we cannot live without perception, nor perceive without life, and therefore that that which is incapable of separation cannot be different; but that whatever it is, it has the office of living and the method of perception. On which account two Epicurean poets speak of the mind and the soul indifferently. But they who say that they are different argue in this way: That the mind is one thing, and the soul another, may be understood from this, that the mind may be extinguished while the soul is uninjured, which is accustomed to happen in the case of the insane; also, that the soul is put to rest by death, the mind by sleep, and indeed in such a manner that it is not only ignorant of what is taking place, or where it is, but it is even deceived by the contemplation of false objects. And how this takes place cannot accurately be perceived; why it takes place can be perceived. For we can by no means rest unless the mind is kept occupied by the similitudes of visions. But the mind lies hid, oppressed with sleep, as fire buried by ashes drawn over it; but if you stir it a little it again blazes, and, as it were, wakes up. Therefore it is called away by images, until the limbs, bedewed with sleep, are invigorated; for the body while the perception is awake, although it lies motionless, yet is not at rest, because the perception burns in it, and vibrates as a flame, and keeps all the limbs bound to itself.

But when the mind is transferred from its application to the contemplation of images, then at length the whole body is resolved into rest. But the mind is transferred from dark thought, when, under the influence of darkness, it has begun to be alone with itself. While it is intent upon those things concerning which it is reflecting, sleep suddenly creeps on, and the thought itself imperceptibly turns aside to the nearest appearances: thus it begins also to see those things which it had placed before its eyes. Then it proceeds further, and finds diversions for itself, that it may not interrupt the most healthy repose of the body. For as the mind is diverted in the day by true sights, so that it does not sleep; so is it diverted in the night by false sights, so that it is not aroused. For if it perceives no images, it will follow of necessity either that it is awake, or that it is asleep in perpetual death. Therefore the system of dreaming has been given by God for the sake of sleeping; and, indeed, it has been given to all animals in common; but this especially to man, that when God gave this system on account of rest, He left to Himself the power of teaching man future events by means of the dream. For narratives often testify that there have been dreams which have had an immediate and a remarkable accomplishment, and the answers of our prophets have been after the character of a dream. On which account they are not always true, nor always false, as Virgil testified, who supposed that there were two gates for the passage of dreams. But those which are false are seen for the sake of sleeping; those which are true are sent by God, that by this revelation we may learn impending goods or evils.

Sequitur alia, et ipsa inextricabilis quaestio: idemne sit anima, et animus; an vero aliud sit illud, quo vivimus, aliud autem, quo sentimus et sapimus. Non desunt argumenta in utramque partem. Qui enim unum esse dicunt, hanc rationem sequuntur, quod neque vivi sine sensu possit, neque sentiri sine vita; ideoque non posse esse diversum id, quod non potest separari, sed quidquid est illud, et vivendi officium, et sentiendi habere rationem. Idcirco animum et animam indifferenter appellant duo Epicurei poetae. Qui autem dicunt esse diversa, sic argumentantur: ex eo posse intelligi, aliud esse mentem, aliud animam, quia incolumi anima mens possit extingui, quod accidere soleat insanis; item, quod anima morte sopiatur, animus somno, et quidem sic, ut non tantum, quid fiat, aut ubi sit, ignoret, sed etiam rerum falsarum contemplatione fallatur. Quod ipsum quomodo fiat, non potest pervideri; cur fiat, potest. Nam requiescere nullo pacto possumus, nisi mens visionum imaginibus occupata teneatur. Latet autem mens oppressa somno, tamquam ignis obducto cinere sopitus, quem si paululum commoveris, rursus ardescit, et quasi evigilat. Avocatur ergo simulacris, donec membra sopore irrigata vegetentur; corpus enim, vigilante sensu, licet jaceat immobile, tamen non est quietum, quia flagrat in eo sensus, et vibrat, ut flamma, et artus omnes ad se adstrictos tenet.

Sed postquam mens ad contemplandas imagines ab intentione traducta est, tunc demum corpus omne resolvitur in quietem. Traducitur autem mens cogitatione caeca, cum cogentibus tenebris secum tantummodo esse coeperit: dum intenta est in ea, de quibus cogitat, repente somnus obrepit, et in species proximas sensim ipsa cogitatio declinat: sic ea, quae sibi ante oculos posuerat, videre quoque incipit. Deinde procedit ulterius, et sibi avocamenta invenit, ne saluberrimam quietem corporis interrumpat. Nam ut mens per diem veris visionibus avocatur, ne obdormiat, ita falsis nocte, ne excitetur. Nam si nullas imagines cernat, aut vigilare illam necesse erit, aut perpetua morte sopiri. Dormiendi ergo causa tributa est a Deo ratio somniandi; et quidem in commune universis animantibus: sed illud homini praecipue, quod cum eam rationem Deus quietis causa daret, facultatem sibi reliquit docendi hominem futura per somnium. Nam et historiae saepe testantur extitisse somnia, quorum praesens et admirabilis fuerit eventus; et responsa vatum nostrorum ex parte somnii constiterunt. Quare neque semper vera sunt, neque semper falsa, Virgilio teste, qui duas portas voluit esse somniorum. Sed quae falsa sunt, dormiendi causa videntur; quae vera, immittuntur a Deo, ut imminens bonum aut malum hac revelatione discamus.

19 Chap. XIX.—Of the soul, and it given by God PL 7, 72

A question also may arise respecting this, whether the soul is produced from the father, or rather from the mother, or indeed from both. But I think that this judgment is to be formed as though in a doubtful matter. For nothing is true of these three opinions, because souls are produced neither from both nor from either. For a body may be produced from a body, since something is contributed from both; but a soul cannot be produced from souls, because nothing can depart from a slight and incomprehensible subject. Therefore the manner of the production of souls belongs entirely to God alone.

“In fine, we are all sprung from a heavenly seed, all have that same Father.”

as Lucretius says. For nothing but what is mortal can be generated from mortals. Nor ought he to be deemed a father who in no way perceives that he has transmitted or breathed a soul from his own; nor, if he perceives it, comprehends in his mind when or in what manner that effect is produced.

From this it is evident that souls are not given by parents, but by one and the same God and Father of all, who alone has the law and method of their birth, since He alone produces them. For the part of the earthly parent is nothing more than with a sense of pleasure to emit the moisture of the body, in which is the material of birth, or to receive it; and to this work man’s power is limited, nor has he any further power. Therefore men wish for the birth of sons, because they do not themselves bring it about. Everything beyond this is the work of God,—namely, the conception itself, and the moulding of the body, and the breathing in of life, and the bringing forth in safety, and whatever afterwards contributes to the preservation of man: it is His gift that we breathe, that we live, and are vigorous. For, besides that we owe it to His bounty that we are safe in body, and that He supplies us with nourishment from various sources, He also gives to man wisdom, which no earthly father can by any means give; and therefore it often happens that foolish sons are born from wise parents, and wise sons from foolish parents, which some persons attribute to fate and the stars. But this is not now the time to discuss the subject of fate. It is sufficient to say this, that even if the stars hold together the efficacy of all things, it is nevertheless certain that all things are done by God, who both made and set in order the stars themselves. They are therefore senseless who detract this power from God, and assign it to His work.

He would have it, therefore, to be in our own power, whether we use or do not use this divine and excellent gift of God. For, having granted this, He bound man himself by the mystery of virtue, by which he might be able to gain life. For great is the power, great the reason, great the mysterious purpose of man; and if any one shall not abandon this, nor betray his fidelity and devotedness, he must be happy: he, in short, to sum up the matter in few words, must of necessity resemble God. For he is in error whosoever judges of man by his flesh. For this worthless body with which we are clothed is the receptacle of man. For man himself, can neither be touched, nor looked upon, nor grasped, because he lies hidden within this body, which is seen. And if he shall be more luxurious and delicate in this life than its nature demands, if he shall despise virtue, and give himself to the pursuit of fleshly lusts, he will fall and be pressed down to the earth; but if (as his duty is) he shall readily and constantly maintain his position, which is right for him, and he has rightly obtained,—if he shall not be enslaved to the earth, which he ought to trample upon and overcome, he will gain eternal life.

Illud quoque venire in quaestionem potest, utrumne anima ex patre, an potius ex matre, an vero ex utroque generetur. Sed ego id in eo jure ab ancipiti vendico. Nihil enim ex his tribus verum est, quia neque ex utroque, neque ex alterutro seruntur animae. Corpus enim ex corporibus nasci potest, quoniam confertur aliquid ex utroque; de animis anima non potest, quia ex re tenui et incomprehensibili nihil potest decedere. Itaque serendarum animarum ratio uni ac soli Deo subjacet. Denique, coelesti sumus omnes semine oriundi: Omnibus ille idem pater est, ut ait Lucretius. Nam de mortalibus non potest quidquam nisi mortale generari. Nec putari pater debet, qui transfudisse, aut inspirasse animam de suo nullo modo sentit; nec, si sentiat, quando tamen, aut quomodo id fiat, habet animo comprehensum.

Ex quo apparet, non a parentibus dari animas, sed ab uno eodemque omnium Deo patre, qui legem rationemque nascendi tenet solus, siquidem solus efficit. Nam terreni parentis nihil est, nisi ut humorem corporis, in quo est materia nascendi, cum sensu voluptatis emittat, vel recipiat; et citra hoc opus homo resistit, nec amplius quidquam potest: et ideo nasci sibi filios optant, quia non ipsi faciunt. Caetera jam Dei sunt omnia, scilicet conceptus ipse, et corporis informatio, et inspiratio animae, et partus incolumis, et quaecumque deinceps ad hominem conservandum valent; illius munus est, quod spiramus, quod vivimus, quod vigemus. Nam praeterquam quod ipsius beneficio incolumes sumus corpore, et quod victum nobis ex variis rebus subministrat, sapientiam quoque homini tribuit, quam terrenus pater dare nullo modo potest. Ideoque et de sapientibus stulti, et de stultis sapientes saepe nascuntur; quod quidam fato, ac sideribus assignant. Sed non est nunc locus de fato disserendi. Hoc dicere satis est, quod etiamsi astra efficientiam rerum continent, nihilominus a Deo omnia fieri certum est, qui astra ipsa et fecit, et ordinavit. Inepti ergo, qui hanc potestatem Deo detrahunt, et operi ejus attribuunt.

Hoc igitur Dei munere coelesti atque praeclaro, an utamur, an non utamur, in nostra esse voluit potestate. Hoc enim concesso, ipsum hominem virtutis sacramento religavit, quo vitam posset adipisci. Magna est enim vis hominis, magna ratio, magnum sacramentum: a quo si quis non defecerit, nec fidem suam devotionemque prodiderit; hic beatus, hic denique (ut breviter finiam) similis Deo sit necesse est. Errat enim quisquis hominem carne metitur. Nam corpusculum hoc, quo induti sumus, hominis receptaculum est. Nam ipse homo neque tangi, neque aspici, neque comprehendi potest, quia latet intra hoc quod videtur. Qui si delicatus magis ac tener in hac vita fuerit, quam ratio ejus exposcit, si virtute contempta, desideriis se carnis addixerit, cadet, et premetur in terram. Sin autem (ut debet) statum suum, quem rectum recte sortitus est, prompte constanterque defenderit, si terrae, quam calcare ac vincere debet, non servierit, vitam merebitur sempiternam.

20 Chap. XX.—Of himself and the truth PL 7, 76

These things I have written to you, Demetrianus, for the present in few words, and perhaps with more obscurity than was befitting, in accordance with the necessity of circumstances and the time, with which you ought to be content, since you are about to receive more and better things if God shall favour us. Then, accordingly, I will exhort you with greater clearness and truth to the learning of true philosophy. For I have determined to commit to writing as many things as I shall be able, which have reference to the condition of a happy life; and that indeed against the philosophers, since they are pernicious and weighty for the disturbing of the truth. For the force of their eloquence is incredible, and their subtlety in argument and disputation may easily deceive any one; and these we will refute partly by our own weapons, but partly by weapons borrowed from their mutual wrangling, so that it may be evident that they rather introduced error than removed it.

Perhaps you may wonder that I venture to undertake so great a deed. Shall we then suffer the truth to be extinguished or crushed? I, in truth, would more willingly fail even under this burthen. For if Marcus Tullius, the unparalleled example of eloquence itself, was often vanquished by men void of learning and eloquence,—who, however, were striving for that which was true,—why should we despair that the truth itself will by its own peculiar force and clearness avail against deceitful and captious eloquence? They indeed are wont to profess themselves advocates of the truth; but who can defend that which he has not learned, or make clear to others that which he himself does not know? I seem to promise a great thing; but there is need of the favour of Heaven, that ability and time may be given us for following our purpose. But if life is to be wished for by a wise man, assuredly I should wish to live for no other reason than that I may effect something which may be worthy of life, and which may be useful to my readers, if not for eloquence, because there is in me but a slight stream of eloquence, at any rate for living, which is especially needful. And when I have accomplished this, I shall think that I have lived enough, and that I have discharged the duty of a man, if my labour shall have freed some men from errors, and have directed them to the path which leads to heaven.

Haec ad te, Demetriane, interim paucis, et obscurius fortasse quam decuit, pro rerum ac temporis necessitate peroravi; quibus contentus esse debebis, plura, et meliora laturus, si nobis indulgentia coelitus venerit. Tunc ergo te ad verae philosophiae doctrinam, et planius, et verius cohortabor. Statui enim, quam multa potero, litteris tradere, quae ad vitae beatae statum spectent; et quidem contra philosophos, quoniam sunt ad perturbandam veritatem perniciosi et graves. Incredibilis enim vis eloquentiae, et argumentandi disserendique subtilitas, quemvis facile deceperit: quos partim nostris armis, partim vero ex ipsorum inter se concertatione sumptis revincemus; ut appareat, eos induxisse potius errorem, quam sustulisse.

Fortasse mireris, quod tantum facinus audeam. Patiemurne igitur extingui, aut opprimi veritatem? Ego vero libentius vel sub hoc onere defecerim. Nam si Marcus Tullius, eloquentiae ipsius unicum exemplar, ab indoctis et ineloquentibus, qui tamen pro vero nitebantur, saepe superatus est, cur desperemus veritatem ipsam contra fallacem captiosamque facundiam sua propria vi et claritate valituram? Illi quidem sese patronos veritatis profiteri solent: sed quis potest eam rem defendere, quam non didicit, aut illustrare apud alios, quod ipse non novit? Magnum videor polliceri: sed coelesti opus est munere, ut nobis facultas ac tempus ad proposita persequenda tribuatur. Quod si vita est optanda sapienti, profecto nullam aliam ob causam vivere optaverim, quam ut aliquid efficiam quod vita dignum sit, et quod utilitatem legentibus, etsi non ad eloquentiam, quia tenuis in nobis facundiae rivus est ad vivendum tamen afferat: quod est maxime necessarium. Quo perfecto, satis me vixisse arbitrabor, et officium hominis implesse, si labor meus aliquos homines ab erroribus liberatos ad iter coeleste direxerit.

Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, A. Cleveland Coxe (eds.), Buffalo: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885-1896. Public domain: English translation first published 1885-1900 (Ante-Nicene Fathers). Latin: Migne, Patrologia Latina (1844-1855), public domain; transcription from Corpus Corporum (University of Zurich).

Save for later

Enter your email and we will send you a sign-in link. No password. What you save (articles, verses, chapters, documents) follows you to any device.