23 · Why does water appear less white when it is in motion, for instance when there is a ripple? Whence Homer says that, when the wind begins to blow,
[15] the sea grows blacker beneath it.9
Are there two reasons? Firstly, because, when the sight is near to it, it can penetrate farther through the water when it is still, but when it is in motion the sight cannot pass directly through it. (And that which is transparent appears white, for that through which the sight cannot pass is what Homer calls black; therefore the air appears black from a distance but white near at hand, and the part of the sea which [20] is near is white, while that which is distant is blue or black.) And, secondly, because, when the sight is at a distance and is subject in any way to disturbance, it is refracted back in a mass towards the light, if the water is still, but cannot be refracted when it is in motion.
[25] 24 · Why is it that the waves do not ripple in the deep, open sea, but only on small expanses? Is it because a small amount of water, as it is carried along, is more divided by the air than a large amount? Hence it beats more and is broken up. Now in deep water the quantity which is set in motion is great, but in shallow water it is small.
[30] 25 · Why are the waters saltier in regions facing the south wind? Do they become mixed because the sea is driven under the earth by the south wind?
26 · Why does the salty element in water come to the surface more in sweet than in dry wine? Is it because sweet wine, like raisin wine, has more earth in it? Or [35] is it because sweet wine is heavier and stickier and so mixes less, and, as it does not mix,10 the salty element comes to the surface?
27 · Why does the salty element, being earthy, float on the surface at all (for [934b1] its natural tendency is to sink)? Is it11 owing to its heat, as happens with salt (for it resembles an efflorescence)? Or is there some other reason? For if it is for no other reason,12 it is not unreasonable that it should be for this reason that it floats specially on the surface of sweet wine; for that is the hottest of wines.
28 · Why do the waves sometimes begin to move before the winds reach [5] them? Is it because they also cease to move later? For the first breath of wind as it were dies down before the wave which has been impelled by it into motion; and it is not the wave which is first set in motion that arrives, but there is a successive impetus given to the adjoining water.
29 · Why is it that the ground where the waves break more violently becomes solid, often to such an extent as to appear to have been artificially levelled, [10] and why is the ground where the waves break solid, whereas further from the sea it is loose? Is it because the fine sand is not cast up from a long way off by the waves, but rather the coarser sand, just as it is not possible to throw a very small object far with the hand? Then, many objects being mingled in confusion, the smallest particles fall together and form into a mass, and the motion of the wave, as it [15] recedes, levels them and no longer disturbs them. Since, then, the smallest particles cannot leap far, a mass is formed of very small objects; and since it is in frequent motion, it becomes continuous, the sand falling in amongst it until it unites it together; it is then levelled by the last waves, and the slight moisture causes it to [20] adhere together. But the ground farther from the sea, being dry, becomes disintegrated, and is formed of larger pebbles and is unlevelled.
30 · Why is it that the upper parts of the sea are saltier and hotter than the depths? So, too, in wells of fresh water the upper water is saltier than that at the bottom; yet salty water, being heavier, ought to stand at a lower level. Is it because [25] the sun and the air always attract the lightest part of liquid? Now the fresher is always lighter, and the sun can more easily attract things from the nearest parts. And so that which is left on the surface both of the sea and of fresh water is saltier [30] (since the sweet element has been extracted) than that from which little or nothing has been withdrawn. For this reason the upper part is also hotter; for salt water is hotter than fresh. Therefore some of the followers of Heraclitus declare that stones [35] and earth are formed from the drying and solidifying of fresh water and that the sun draws up vapours from the sea.
31 · Why are the waters of the sea sweeter which are nearer the land? Is it because they are more continuously in motion? Now salt water becomes sweeter through motion. Or is it because the water is saltier in its depths, and the part of the [935a1] sea near the land is less deep? Hence also water which shelves quickly is salty and less sweet. The reason for this is that the salty element being heavy is carried down more into deep water.
32 · Why is sea water the only kind of water that is combustible, whereas [5] fresh water and river water are not? Is it because it has much earth in it, as is proved by the presence of the salt in it? Or is it because it is of a fatty composition, as is proved by the oil which forms on the surface13 of salt water?
33 · Why does sand not form in lakes, or at any rate less than in the sea and in rivers? Is it because rocks form in the sea and the earth has been to a great extent [10] burnt out of them? Now sand is rock which has been broken up into small and minute particles, and it is broken up by the impetus of the waves. But in lakes pure rocks are not formed to the same extent, nor are they broken to the same extent, [15] because there are not waves to the same extent. But sand is formed more in rivers, because they carry down the earth and break up the rocks with their impetus.
34 · Why is it that, when a lake either falls or dries up, the corn in the adjoining plain is more likely to be frosted? Is it because the moisture in the lake [20] evaporates and warms the air with its vapour, and so makes the frosts slighter and weaker than in hollow and marshy districts? Or is it from the earth, as men say, that the cold begins and penetrates unnoticed? If then the lake becomes dry, owing to [25] the larger space of earth greater cold attacks the crops and freezes them and frosts them to a greater extent; and on such ground the cold comes from below, as indeed seems to be the case. And yet the earth is warm in winter; but the surface heat which is in the earth, owing to the fact that it is moist, becomes cooled, for the [30] moisture is neither so far in as not to be affected by cold, owing to the heat which is present in liquids, nor so slight as to have no force, since the earth is permeated with water. For instance, owing to its becoming cold, one walks and lives upon ice.
35 · Why is the sea salty and bitter? Is it because the juices in the sea are [35] numerous? For saltness and bitterness appear at the same time.
36 · Why do shells and stones which are in the sea become round? Is it because the breaking off of their extremities equally on every side causes them to [935b1] assume a round form? For the outer surface of this shape is the same on all sides, and the sea by moving objects in every direction breaks off their extremities equally.
37 · Why is it that sometimes, if one digs a hole near the sea, the first water which enters is fresh but afterwards it becomes salty? Is it because the water comes [5] from the sea itself which is strained under the earth? The water which first comes is, therefore, naturally sweet; for sweet water is lighter than salt water, and the sea has some sweetness in it, which mingling with the earth tends to come to the surface. But the salt water, owing to its weight and to the fact that it has power to penetrate, is carried downwards. Whether this is so or whether the sweet water flows from the [10] mainland into the sea through the earth’s veins, it would naturally float on the surface of the sea which mingles with it; but, the passages being opened, the salt water, owing to its greater volume, subsequently prevails and makes the whole sea salty. For if the passages are blocked the result is that the inflowing salt water finds [15] another way higher up;14 but when they are opened, it is all carried there, just as happens in the veins in the body.
38 · Why is it that the sea, which is heavier than fresh water, is more transparent? Is it because of its fattier composition? Now oil poured on the surface [20] of water makes it more transparent, and the sea, having fat in it, is naturally more transparent. Or is that which is lighter not always more transparent also? For oil itself is lighter than water but not more transparent. Or is the sea not really more transparent, but only apparently so? For fresh water comes from the earth or from streams, and its source sends forth earth also with the water, so that the streams, not [25] being pure, bring down with them the earth and sediment. This then is the reason why fresh water is less transparent.
39 · Why do the bowels of those who swim in the sea open readily? For if it is because they take violent exercise, those who run also take very violent exercise, yet their bowels do not open. Or does not every form of exertion cause the bowels to [30] open, but only such exercise as does not cause liquefaction? Now staying in the sea seems to make men, generally speaking, hungrier and opens the bowels; for the vapour given off by it is both hot and dry.
40 · Why does the Lake of Paesus,15 of which the water is fresh, wash and also remove the stains from garments? For water which is sweet washes, but that [35] which is bitter removes stains, and water cannot have both these qualities at the same time. Are stains removed not because the water is bitter, but by the quality of stickiness which has this power? Hence animals’ hoofs have this effect, and anything which contains mucous matter; and so also any bitter substances which partake of this character do the same. Now in this lake it so happens that the bitter [936a1] element of the quality of soda has been burnt out, but the fatty and sticky element remains. It is by virtue of this that it removes stains, and it washes because it is fresh.
41 · Why does the part of the sea which is calm appear white, while that [5] which is agitated appears black? Is it because that which is less visible appears blacker, and water which is in motion is less seen than that which is still? Or is it because that which is transparent is white, while that which is not so is black, and that which is in motion is less transparent? [10]
1 · Why is it that, if one is anointed with oil, hot water poured over one seems less hot, in spite of the fact that oil contains heat? Is it because owing to the smoothness caused by the oil the water glides off and sinks in less? [15]
2 · Why is it that in the summer the water in wells becomes warm after midday? Is it because by that hour the heat has mastered the air, whereas before midday the heat is dissolving and putting an end to the cold; but the one does not [20] prevail as soon as the other has ceased, but only after time has elapsed?
3 · Why is it that water, which sometimes becomes hotter than a flame, does not burn wood, whereas the flame does so? Is it because the flame, and the breath which comes from it, consist of small particles, whereas water is made up of large particles and so does not penetrate? Now flame and the heat from coals owing to [25] their rarity can penetrate and destroy.
4 · Why is it that boiling water has not the power to melt, while the stomach possesses this power? Is it because the heat which is in the stomach penetrates owing to its rarity, whereas water cannot penetrate because of its density? Or is it because liquid prevents other things also from melting (for nothing melts in liquid)? [30] In the stomach, however, the liquid flows down into the bladder and so permits the process of melting.
5 · Why is it that the bottom of a vessel containing boiling water does not burn, but one can carry it holding it by the bottom, whereas if the water be removed it burns? Is it because the heat as it is engendered in the bottom of the vessel is [35] extinguished by the water? That is also why substances which can be melted do not melt if any liquid is added to them.1
6 · Why is it that water does not boil over so much in winter as in summer, although heated not only up to the same temperature but even higher, and although [936b1] equally hot or even hotter? Is it because boiling over is due to the rising of bubbles? The water then itself becomes just as hot in winter as in summer,2 but the bubbles cannot rise to the same extent, because the surrounding air is cold, but they rise [5] smaller in size, being compressed by the cold, and soon burst, being broken by the air. They are, therefore, smaller in bulk and fewer in number in the winter, and the contrary in summer. Now boiling over is due to the number and size of the bubbles forming the froth.
[10] 7 · Why does hot water cause wrinkles, but fire, though it is hot, not do so? Is it because fire produces breath and so causes swelling (for it distends the skin), whereas it is the curving of the skin which makes wrinkles?
8 · Why is it that the bottoms of vessels in which water is being heated are hotter while the water is still cold? Is it because, while the water is still cool, the heat [15] is enclosed and driven inwards, being prevented from making its way out, but, when the water in the vessel becomes thoroughly heated, since the fire no longer holds the heat but expends itself and becomes less, the bottom of the vessel becomes cooler, just as a bath does? For a bath is hotter in winter than in summer, because the heat [20] is more enclosed in winter than in summer by the surrounding air which is cold.
9 · Why is it that water when it boils does not form a scum, as do pea-soup and lentil-soup? And yet water is lighter than these, and light substances ought to be able to project themselves more easily to a distance. The same thing happens in the case of silver when it is being purified; for those who clean out the mint make [25] gains by appropriating the remnants, sweeping up the silver which is scattered about. Is it because the heat causes the scum by vaporizing and subjecting to force anything which opposes its own natural impetus? Water, therefore, owing to its [30] lightness and rarity is not subjected to force, and so no great heat is collected in it, but the heat which continually passes into it cuts its way through before it can become massed together. But substances which have body in them, like thick soups and silver, since, owing to their weight, they contain much corporeal matter and offer resistance,3 because they are subjected to violent force as the heat tries to [35] make its way out, form bubbles wherever the heat prevails; for, owing to their density, the heat cannot pass through them, but the density prevails until it is thrown off by the heat which flows into it. The result is a sudden impact, and not a continuous pressure, owing to the heat passing up quickly from below.
10 · Why, if substances are moistened in hot water for a short time, do they [937a1] swell, but, if for a long time, collapse and become wrinkled? Is it because the heat makes a thing liquid instead of solid and produces breath from liquid and rarefies what is dense? At first, therefore, it heats things which are solid and makes them moister, and producing breath from the moisture distends and swells them; but [5] when it heats them still more, it rarefies their outer part,4 so that the vapour is given off, and the drying up of moisture causes their bulk to collapse. Now, as anything collapses, its outer skin shrivels up, and where it shrivels up unevenly, wrinkles are formed. [10]
11 · Why are stones formed by hot water rather than by cold? Is it because a stone is produced from the failure of moisture, and moisture fails more through the operation of heat than of cold, in other words petrifaction is the result of heat—as Empedocles says that both rocks and stones come into being through the action of5 [15] hot waters? Or, while it is true that heat petrifies, can petrifaction also take place through cold, because an extremely hard frost consumes the moisture and causes hardening? That cold, pure and simple, produces this effect is clear from the fact that its excess does so.
12 · Why is it that if one has one’s foot in hot water, if the foot is kept still [20] the water appears to be less hot, but hotter if it is moved? Does the same thing happen as in the body, viz. that, when one runs in the wind, the opposing air becomes increasingly colder, and the farther one goes the more one notices it?
[25] 13 · Why do hot things cool off more in the sun than in the shade? Is it because the lesser heat is destroyed by the greater? Or is it because in the shade the surrounding cold represses the interior heat and does not allow it to make its way out, producing the same effect as the pouring of cold water produces upon those who [30] are fainting6 (for it encloses the heat and prevents it from escaping); and speaking generally the interior parts of anything are warmer in the winter? But in the sun, since there is nothing which intercepts it, the heat is free to move and vanishes more quickly.
14 · Why is it that water heated by the sun is not more wholesome for [35] washing purposes? Is it because, owing to the fact that it is cooling, it causes shivering while it is still upon the body?7 Or, while it has this effect, is it unhealthy if used often for washing? For hot water, generally speaking, produces concoction and has a drying effect, whereas cold water has an astringent effect, and so both do [937b1] good. Therefore cold water and water heated over a fire are both beneficial to those who wash in them; but water heated by the sun owing to the weakness of its heat produces the effect of neither of these, but merely has the effect of moistening—like the light of the moon.
[5] 15 · Why is water which has been heated in the sun not wholesome? Is it because that which is cooling causes shivering?
16 · Why are the hot waters at Magnesia and at Atarneus fresh? Is it because more water pours into the hot water as it flows out, and so its saltness [10] disappears, but its heat remains?
17 · Why is it that in Magnesia the hot waters ceased to be hot but the water remained salty? Is it because more cold water from elsewhere was poured at the same time into the springs and extinguished the heat? Now the earth was salty, but [15] not hot owing to the abundance of water flowing into it. (A similar process occurs in water which is strained through hot ashes; for the water being strained through the hot ashes cools the ashes and itself becomes cold, but is salty and bitter owing to the ashes.) But when the water which was added had become transformed, the heat in [20] the earth for a different reason prevailed over the coldness of the water owing to its small volume, and hot waters flowed again.
18 · Why are waters from hot springs all salty? Is it because they usually percolate through earth which contains alum (as is shown by the smell of the water) and has been burnt? Now the ashes of anything are salty and smell of sulphur. The earth therefore burns the water like a thunderbolt. Many hot springs therefore are [25] due to strokes of thunderbolts.
19 · Why are hot bathing-places sacred? Is it because they are due to two very sacred things, sulphur and the thunderbolt?
1 · Why is it that pain is caused if the limbs are enclosed in inflated skins? Is [30] it due to the pressure of the air? For just as the air does not yield to pressure applied to the skin from outside but repels it, so the air also presses upon the limbs enclosed within. Or is it because the air is held within by force and is compressed, and so, [35] having naturally an outward impetus in every direction, it presses against the body enclosed within?
2 · Why is it that in marshes near rivers the so-called ‘bellowings’ take place, which according to the fable are uttered1 by the sacred bulls of the god? That which is produced is certainly a noise which resembles the roaring of a bull, so much so [938a1] that it has the same effect on cows when they hear it as the bellowing of a bull. Is it due to the fact that this phenomenon always occurs wherever rivers stagnate into marshes,2 or are driven back by the sea, or give forth wind in unusually large quantities? The reason is that hollows in the earth form, and the water making its [5] way in (for there is always a flow of water in marshy ground of this kind) thrusts the air also through a narrow entrance into a wider hollow, just as a noise like roaring is produced if one makes a sound through the aperture into an empty jar; for it is by a similarly shaped organ that a bull’s roaring is produced. Now, if the hollows have [10] irregular forms, a variety of strange noises is produced; for if one takes off the lid of a vessel and rubs it against the bottom, drawing it in and out,3 it makes enough noise to frighten away wild animals when orchard-watchers employ this device. [15]
3 · Why does the air not become moist when it comes into contact with water? For all other things become moist when they touch water. Is it because the extremities of the air and water meet, but the surface of each remains distinct?4 All other things then are heavier, but the air does not sink below the outer extremity of [20] the water. It therefore touches it, because there is nothing between them; but it does not become wet, because it always remains above the water.
4 · Why does calm weather occur most often at midnight and at midday? Is it because calm is immobility of the air, and the air is most at rest when it either has [25] the mastery or is overmastered, and it is in movement when it is struggling? Now it has the mastery most at midnight and is overmastered at midday; for at the former time the sun is farthest away and at the latter nearest at hand. Again, the winds begin to blow either about dawn or about sunset; and the wind which blows at dawn dies down when it is overpowered, and that which blows at sunset dies down when it [30] ceases to have the mastery. Consequently the former dies down at midday, the latter at midnight.
5 · Why is it colder when dawn is breaking and it is already early morning than at night, although the sun is nearer to us? Is it because towards daybreak dew and hoar-frost fall, and both of these are cold? The whole ground then being as it [35] were sprinkled with cold moisture, a process of cooling takes place.
6 · Why is it that in Pontus both intense cold and stifling heat occur? Is it because of the thickness of the air? For in the winter it cannot be thoroughly warmed, and in the summer, when it is heated, it burns because it is thick. It is for [938b1] the same reason also that marshy regions are cold in winter and hot in summer. Or is it because of the course of the sun? For in the winter it is far away, and in the summer near at hand.
[5] 7 · Why is the sky finer at night than by day? Is the sun the cause of wind and disturbance? For these occur when some movement takes place; the cause therefore is the heat. So, when the heat is not present, everything is at rest, and there is more rest when the sun is rising than when it is sinking. And the saying,
[10] Having no fear of a cloud from the land,
means that, where there is most movement, there must be least permanence and consistency, that which is trying to hold together being irregular and unable to gain the mastery. And this is what happens on the sea in winter and on land in summer.
8 · Why is it that when liquid which fills a jar is poured into skins the jar not [15] only holds the liquid and the skins as well but also has room for more liquid? Is it because there is air present in the liquid? This then, when it is in the jar, cannot be given off owing to the size of the jar; for the larger anything is the more difficult it is to press any moisture or air out of it, as can be seen in sponges. But when it is divided [20] up into small portions, it is pressed out of the skin together with the air already there, so that the space occupied by the air becomes empty; and so the jar can hold the skins and additional liquid as well. This is more especially the case with wine, because there is more air in wine than in water. Similarly the same vessel can hold [25] the same quantities of ashes and water together as it can hold of each poured in separately. For there are apparently many empty spaces in ashes, and so the water, being thinner, sinks in more and saturates the ashes, so that they become dense, because the saturation takes place in one part after another (for a thing always becomes more thoroughly saturated if the process takes place little by little than all [30] at once), and, as this takes place, the ashes gradually sink, at the same time absorbing the liquid because they contain hollows. (But ashes thrown into water while still hot cleave the water and cause it to evaporate.) And the same thing happens if the water is poured in first and the ashes put in afterwards, so that the [35] water also would seem to contain hollows and empty spaces. Or do the ashes take up the water, and not the water the ashes? For it is only natural that that which is composed of smaller particles should be that which finds its way into something else. (Further, this can be illustrated by an experiment; for when ashes are sprinkled water is attracted to any spot where they are sprinkled; whereas the contrary would [939a1] have taken place if it were the water which takes up the ashes.) Or does this process not occur if the water be poured in first and fill the vessel to the brim, but, if anything then be added, does it overflow? But if the water once overflows and the ashes settle down, then it does occur; for it was the ashes which took up the water. [5] There is a parallel to this in the fact that trenches do not hold all the earth which has been dug out of them; for apparently some air occupies the space excavated, and for this reason it does not hold all the earth.
9 · Why is it that, though air is denser than light, it can pass through solids? [10] Is it because light travels in a straight line only, and so the sight cannot see through porous substances like pumice-stone, in which the pores are irregular, whereas they are not so in glass? The air, on the other hand, is not obstructed, because it does not travel in a straight line through anything through which it passes. [15]
10 · Why is it that the air becomes cold by touching water but not moist, even though one blows so hard upon water as to cause waves? That it becomes cold is clear from the change which it undergoes; for the air from water causes cold. Is it because it is the nature of air to be cold or hot, and it changes by touching anything [20] with which it comes into contact; but it does not also become moist, because it is too light and so never penetrates below the level of the water, but always remains in contact only with the surface, even though it be forced downwards, and the water then recedes still lower, so that the air can never penetrate into its depth?
11 · Why is the air from bubbles and the air which comes up from beneath [25] the water never wet? Is it because the moisture is not retained, but the water drops off? The water on the surface of a bubble is also too little to moisten anything.
12 · Why is it that air cannot saturate anything, but water can? For water even when it is transformed into air is moist. Is it for the same reason as that for [30] which stone cannot do so? For everything has not this faculty of saturating other things, but only that which is viscous or liquid.
13 · … Is it because the air in it is carried upwards? For when the skin is empty it sinks; but when it is inflated, it remains on the surface, because the air supports it. But if the air makes it lighter and prevents it from sinking, why does a [35] skin become heavier when it is inflated? And how is it that when it is heavier it floats, and when it is lighter it sinks?
14 · Why is it that the air does not rise upwards? For if the winds are the [939b1] result of air being moved by heat and it is the nature of fire to rise upwards, the wind ought to travel upwards, since that which sets it in motion rushes upwards and that which is set in motion has a natural tendency to travel in the same direction. As a matter of fact, however, the air obviously travels in an oblique direction.
[5] 15 · Why is the hour of dawn colder than the evening? Is it because the former is nearer to midnight and the latter to midday? Now midday is the hottest time, because it is nearest to the sun, and midnight is colder for the opposite reason.
16 · Why is it that in hot weather the nights are more stifling than the days? [10] Is it owing to the absence of wind? For the periodical winds and the ‘forerunners’ blow less at night.
17 · Why is it that substances enclosed in inflated skins and closely covered vessels remain uncorrupted? Is it because things which are in motion become corrupt, and all things that are full are without motion, and such skins and vessels are full?
[15] 18 · Why is it that it is colder when the sky is clear than when it is overcast, though the stars and the heaven are warm? Is it because in clear weather there is nothing to hold the vapour, but it is diffused everywhere, whereas in cloudy weather it is contained? For the same reason it is colder when the wind is in the North than when it is in the South; for the South wind attracts cloud, whereas the North wind [20] dispels it, and more evaporation appears to take place when the wind is in the North than when it is in the South, and in winter than in summer. Or is it because of dissimilarity? Or because vapour is formed when that which is hot cools?
19 · Why is it that a smaller amount of air is warmer than a larger quantity (for confined spaces are always warmer)? Is it because a larger quantity is [25] subjected to more motion, and motion makes a thing cold? This can be seen from the fact that hot things become cold if set in motion.
20 · Why is it that water and earth become corrupt, but air and fire do not? Is it because anything which is corrupted must become very hot, but there is nothing hotter than fire? Or is it because a thing must be chilled before it can be corrupted, [30] but fire is always hot and the air is full of fire? So nothing becomes corrupted when it is hot, but only when it is chilled. Now earth and water5 can become hot and cold.
21 · Why is cloudy weather hotter than clear weather? Is it because, as the men of old said, the stars are cold? Or is this too absurd a doctrine, and is the real reason that in clear weather vaporization takes place? That this is so can be inferred [35] from the fact that, when there is no wind, dew and hoar-frost are formed. When, therefore, the weather is clear, the hot substance, by which the moisture is taken up, is blown about, and so the air becomes cold; for which reason also the moisture which the hot substance lets fall forms dew. But when the weather is cloudy the moisture is contained; and therefore there is no dew or hoar-frost in cloudy weather. [940a1] The heat, therefore, remaining in the neighbourhood of the earth makes the weather warm.
22 · Why is it that in lofty rooms the air constantly ebbs and flows, especially in calm weather? Is it because the air contains much void in its composition? When, therefore, it begins to flow in, the air inside the room gives way [5] and contracts; and when in course of time this air becomes massed together, the air outside becomes more full of voids and contains much vacant space. Into this space then the air from the room rushes, since it is near at hand, and passes into it, because it is suspended and the nature of the void cannot resist. So when this happens in [10] many parts of it, the adjoining air follows it owing to the forward impetus;6 and then, since a large quantity of air rushes out,7 the space within becomes full of voids, while the air outside is denser and so rushes in again from outside. Thus these two currents continually interchange. [15]
1 · Why does the North-East wind (Caecias) alone of the winds attract the clouds to itself? Is it because it blows from higher regions? For the parts towards the East are higher than those towards the West, as is shown by the extent and [20] depth of the sea towards the West. Now Caecias, blowing from above to a contrary direction, describes in its course a line which follows an upward curve in relation to the earth;1 and falling, as has been said, upon the western regions of the earth and massing the clouds together as a result of the form of line which it follows, on its [25] return it thrusts the clouds before it towards itself. It is the only one of all the winds which does this, because for some the opposing regions are higher,2 towards which their course, either starting from a lower level or proceeding in a straight line, as a result travels in a downward curve3 towards the earth, so that there can be no return [30] of the wind to its source because it ends its course round the earth, where, besides, there are no clouds.4 The East wind (Apeliotes) and the other winds which follow a less curving course do not form clouds because they have no moisture. Since, then, it forms no clouds, the effect produced by the East wind (Apeliotes) is less obvious than that produced by Caecias.
[35] 2 · Why do the North winds occur at a fixed period of the year, whereas the South winds do not? Or do South winds occur annually but are they not continuous, because the source of the South wind is far away from us, and we live close to the North wind? Further, the annual North winds blow when the air is still (for they [940b1] blow in summer); whereas the South winds occur in the spring, when the region of the air is less stable. Again, the South wind is moist, and the upper region of the atmosphere is unfavourable to moisture; so any moisture which is formed in it is quickly dissolved. Also moisture is erratic; and so the South wind, because it does [5] not remain in the same place, helps to set up changes in the movement of the air. And since the air does not remain in the same place when it moves, other winds are consequently set up; for a wind is a movement of air.
3 · Why does the South wind blow after a hoar-frost? Is it because hoar-frost occurs when concoction takes place, and after concoction and cleansing a change to [10] the opposite condition takes place? Now the South wind is the opposite of the North wind. For the same reason also the South wind blows after snow. In a word, both snow and hail and rain and all such processes of cleansing are a sign of concoction; [15] therefore after rain and similar storms the winds fall.
4 · Why do the alternating winds blow? Is it for the same reason as causes the change of current in straits? For both sea and air are carried along until they flow; then, when the land-winds encounter opposition and can no longer advance, because the source of their motion and impetus is not strong, they retire in a [20] contrary direction.
5 · Why do the alternating winds come from the sea? Is it because the sea is close at hand? Or is it because the alternating wind is the opposite of the land-wind and as it were the reverse of it? Now the land-wind is the breeze which blows from [25] the land towards the sea, and the alternating wind is the reflux of the land-wind, so that it must necessarily come from the sea. Or is it because the air which has been set in motion collects out at sea? The reason of its not collecting on land and of its being thrown back is the fact that the sea is in a hollow, and air, like water, flows always into the deepest hollow it can find.
[30] 6 · Why do cloud-winds stop sooner when rain falls? Is it because, when it rains, the hollows of the cloud, in which the source of the wind is formed, collapse?
7 · Why are not the same winds everywhere rainy? Is it because the same winds do not everywhere blow against mountains, but different winds are opposed to different mountains? For example, when the winds blow laboriously against [35] steep mountains, the clouds are more likely to form there, since the wind cannot push them farther forward; and when the clouds form and are compressed, they burst.
8 · Why are sunsets, if they are clear, a sign of fine weather; if they are [941a1] disturbed, a sign of stormy weather? Is it because a storm occurs when the air is dense and thick? When, therefore, the sun prevails, it breaks up and clears the air; but, if it is itself overpowered, an overcast sky results. If, therefore, the density is [5] excessive, a storm occurs as soon as the day dawns; whereas if it is weaker but not completely overpowered, the denseness which forms is driven towards the setting sun and remains there, because the air round the earth is thicker than the storm. And the rest of the air quickly densifies, because a beginning of the process has already been made and there is a rallying point to receive and collect anything [10] which comes to it,5 the same thing occurring in the air as happens in a rout, where, if one man makes a stand, the rest also remain firm. Hence the sky sometimes becomes quickly and suddenly overcast. When, therefore, there is a disturbed sunset, it is a strong indication that the sun has not got the mastery over the density, [15] though it has struggled long against it, so that probably further condensation has taken place. This is a less alarming symptom when it occurs after a storm than in calm weather; for in the former circumstances it is probably the remnant of a storm, but in the latter the beginning of condensation.
9 · What is the origin of the saying, [20]
Boreas blows not at night when once the third sun has arisen?
Is it because the breezes which come from the north are weak when they blow at night? A proof that the amount of air which is set in motion is not great is the fact that they blow at a time when there was a small amount of heat; and a small amount of heat was moving a small amount of air. Now all things terminate in multiples of three, and things which are very small terminate at the end of the first triad; and [25] that is what this wind does.
10 · Why does the North wind blow more frequently than the South wind? Is it because the North wind, being near the inhabited portion of the world, attracts our notice in spite of its short duration (for it is with us as soon as it begins to blow), whereas the South wind does not reach us, because it blows from a distance? [30]
11 · Why does the South wind blow as much6 on winter nights as on winter days? Is it because during the night the sun is near the southern region, and the nights there are warmer than are the days in the north? Much air, therefore, is set in [35] motion and not less than by day; but the warmer days prevent the wind from blowing more strongly by drying up the moisture.
12 · Why does the South wind blow at the time of the dog-star, and why does this happen regularly like any other natural phenomenon? Is it because the southern regions are warm, since the sun is not far7 away, and so the evaporation is considerable? The South winds would blow frequently if it were not for the annual [941b1] winds; as it is, these prevent their blowing. Or is it because a sign occurs at the setting and rising of any star, and especially of the dog-star? It is clear that winds blow most of the time of and after its rising, and since it causes stifling heat, it is [5] only natural that the hottest winds should be set in motion when it rises; and the South wind is hot. And since things are most accustomed to pass from contraries into contraries, and the ‘forerunners’, which are northern winds, blow before the rising of the dog-star, the South wind naturally blows after the dog-star appears, [10] since a sign then occurs, and the occurrence of a sign8 at the time when stars rise means a change in the air. Now all winds change either into their contraries or into those on their right; but since the North wind cannot9 change into the winds on its right, the only thing left for it to do would be to change into a South wind. Now on the fifteenth day after the winter solstice the wind is in the south, because the [15] solstice marks as it were a fresh start and the sun sets in motion air which is nearest to it10 and at this solstice it is near the south. Just as, therefore, when it sets the region of the east in motion it stirs up the East winds, so when it sets in motion the southern region it stirs up the South winds. It does not do this immediately after the [20] solstice, because the changes which it sets up extend at first over a very small area, but only on the fifteenth day, because this date corresponds to the first sensible impression made by the change; for the said date is simply the most significant part of a whole.
13 · Why are the days most changeable during the period of Orion, and why [25] is there then such variability in the wind? Is it because during a period of change all things are always most indeterminate, and Orion rises at the beginning of autumn and sets in the winter, so that, since there is not yet one settled season, but one is coming on and the other coming to an end, the winds must therefore necessarily be [30] unsettled, because those of each season are passing into one another? And Orion is said to be dangerous both in his setting and in his rising owing to the uncertainty of the season; for it must be full of confusion and inconsistency.
14 · Why does the North wind which blows at night cease on the third day? [35] Is it because it comes from a small and weak source and the third day marks the crisis? or is it because it expends itself all at once like the cloud-winds, and therefore quickly dies down again?
15 · Why do the North winds blow more than the other winds? Is it owing to the fact that the inhabited portion of the earth is near the region of the north, which is high and outside the tropics and full of snow, which never leaves some of the [942a1] mountains? As, therefore, frozen matter is usually melting there, a wind often arises, and this wind is the North wind which comes from the region of the pole.
16 · Why do the South winds blow during winter and at the beginning of [5] spring and the end of the autumn, and why are they boisterous and whirling in their course and why are they cold to the inhabitants of Libya in like manner as the North winds are to us? Is it because, the sun being near, the winds must necessarily be set in motion? Now during the winter the sun travels towards the south, and at the beginning of the spring and at the end of autumn it is giving forth heat; whereas [10] during the summer the sun travels towards the north and leaves those other regions. The South wind is hot, because it mingles its breath with the air in the region of Libya, which is hot; and so it is boisterous and makes the summer rainy, sweeping down on the sea. [15]
17 · Why does the South wind cause evil odours? Is it because it makes bodies moist and hot, and they are then most liable to corruption? South winds, however, which come from the sea are good for plants—for it falls on them from the sea, as it does on the Thriasian Plain in Attica—and the reason is that it is cooled before it arrives.11 Now mildew is caused by moisture which is hot and comes from [20] without.
18 · Why does wind usually occur before eclipses, at nightfall before midnight eclipses and at midnight before those which occur at dawn? Is it because the heat which comes from the moon becomes faint, because its course is already [25] getting near the earth, and when it is quite near the eclipse will take place? Now when the heat, by which the air is held back and kept still, is set free, the air begins to move again and a wind springs up later in time according as the eclipse is later.
19 · Why is the South wind rainy not when it is beginning but when it is ending? Is it because it collects the air from a distance? For the rain comes when the [30] South wind masses the air together, and it masses the air together only after it begins to blow. Or is it because, when the South wind begins to blow, the air is still hot, because it comes from a hot region, but in course of time it becomes cool, and then tends to become massed into rain?
20 · Why is it that the South wind, when it is less strong, brings clear weather, but, when it is strong, brings clouds and lasts longer? Is it, as some say [35] owing to the source from which it comes? For if it comes from a weaker source it brings clear weather, but if it starts from a stronger source it brings clouds. Or is it because it is weaker when it begins, so that it does not propel much air, but in the [942b1] end it usually becomes strong? Hence comes the proverb,
When the South wind begins and when Boreas ceases his blowing.
21 · Why is it that in the winter the winds come forth from the east, but in the summer also from the west? Is it because, when the sun no longer prevails, the [5] air flows freely? When, therefore, the sun sinks, it leaves clouds behind it, which cause the West winds, and anything which it carries with it to the inhabitants of the southern hemisphere becomes an East wind. And, contrariwise, when it sinks in the southern region of the earth, it will cause West winds for the inhabitants of that [10] region and East winds in our part of the world from the air which accompanies it. For this reason too, if it finds another wind blowing, that wind becomes stronger when the sun rises, because it adds something to it.
22 · Why are hounds least able to find the scent when a West wind is blowing? Is it because it disperses the scent most owing to the fact that of all the [15] winds it blows most continuously and down on to the earth?
23 · Why, when there are shooting stars, is it a sign of wind? Is it because they are carried along by the wind, and the wind occurs where they are, before it reaches us? For this reason also the wind rises in that quarter from which the stars are set in motion.
[20] 24 · Why is it that of all the winds the West wind drives the largest clouds? Is it because it blows from the open sea and over the deep, so that it collects clouds from a large area?
25 · Why are the winds strongest which are at their ending? Is it because when they expend themselves all at once, what remains is very little?12
[25] 26 · Why is it that, if the South-West wind (Lips) blows about the time of the equinox, rain results? Is it because the sun sets the winds in motion from any part of the universe in which it is? Hence the succession of the winds corresponds to the course of the sun. Now since the equinox is the boundary between winter and [30] summer, when it happens that the sun, according to the equinox as it appears to us, has passed the exact boundary or falls short of it and is rather in the wintry region, the result is that the winds from that region blow, of which the first is the South-West wind, which is naturally moist. Now when the sun is rather in the wintry region of the universe and stirs up the winds there, the result is that the typical conditions of winter result; one of which is wet weather. Again, since the [35] equinox is as it were winter and summer equally balanced, if anything is added to either one of them it causes a distinct inclination in one direction, just as happens in the case of equally balanced scales. But, since the South-West wind is of the wintry [943a1] order and naturally moist, its addition at the equinox causes an inclination towards winter and rainy weather; for rain is the wintry weather most akin to the wind that has begun to blow.
27 · Why are the South wind and the South-East wind (Eurus), which are [5] warmer than their respective contraries, the North wind and the West wind, more rainy, although water is engendered from the air by cold? For it is not true that the clouds form because the North wind thrusts them away from our part of the world; for the West and South-East winds both alike—for they are similarly at the sides of the world—drive away clouds from the quarter from which they blow, as also do all [10] the other winds. Is it because the more the heat exists outside, the more the cold is driven within? Or is it due in some degree to the quarter from which they blow that certain winds bring clear weather? For the South-East wind rises from the dawn (and the region is warm), while the West wind is situated towards the evening.13 But is there not a further reason, namely, that air, like water, cools most quickly and [15] thoroughly when it is previously heated? The air then brought by the South-East wind arrives warm from the rising sun, as does that brought by the South wind from the midday sun; when, therefore, they reach the colder region, they quickly condense and become massed into rain. And the South-East wind has a greater tendency to form rain, because it brings the air more directly from the sun and [20] equally hot; but the South wind is rainy as it ceases to blow, because the first air that is brought comes cold from the sea, whereas the last air, which is very warm, is brought14 from the land. Or is there not a further reason, namely, that the South wind is stronger as it ceases to blow (hence the proverb applied to it, ‘When the South wind begins . . . ’), and stronger winds are colder, and so the South wind [25] masses the clouds together at the end of its duration? Is not this why it is more rainy then than when it first begins to blow?
28 · Why do the winds, though they are cold, cause dryness? Is it because the colder winds cause evaporation? But why should they do so more than the sun? Is it because they carry off the vapour, whereas the sun leaves it where it is and [30] consequently causes more moisture and less dryness?
29 · Why does the North-East wind (Caecias) alone of all the winds attract the clouds towards itself, as the proverb has it, ‘Drawing it to himself, as Caecias draws clouds’? For the other winds simply drive forward the clouds from the quarter from which they blow. Is this phenomenon to be attributed to the fact that [35] the contrary wind blows at the same time? But would not this have been obvious, and is it not more likely that the North-East wind naturally follows a circular course? The other winds therefore blow round the earth, but the North-East wind [943b1] has the concave side of its course towards the heavens and not towards the earth, and so, blowing towards its source, it attracts the clouds to itself.
30 · Why is it that the wind blows cold in the early morning from rivers but [5] not from the sea? Is it because the sea extends over open spaces, but rivers are in narrow places? The breeze, therefore, from the sea is dispersed over a wide area and is consequently weak; whereas the breeze from a river is carried along in a mass and [10] is stronger and therefore naturally appears colder. Or is the reason other than this, namely, that the rivers are cold, but the sea is neither hot nor cold? Now a breeze or exhalation is due to the heating or cooling of liquids; for whichever of these two processes they undergo, evaporation takes place, and, when water evaporates, the resultant air is set in motion, and this is a breeze. That which is produced from cold [15] liquids naturally blows cold, while that which blows from very hot liquids cools and becomes cold. One would therefore find that all the rivers are cold, but the sea is neither very hot nor very cold. That which blows from it therefore is not cold, because the sea is not itself very cold, nor does it cool quickly because the sea is not [20] very hot.
31 · Why is the West wind always considered to bring fair weather and to be the pleasantest of the winds? So, for instance, Homer says that in the Elysian Plains.
Ever the breezes blow of the Zephyr.15
Is it because in the first place it contains a mixture of air? For it is neither hot like [25] the winds from the south and east, nor cold like that from the north, but is16 on the boundary between the cold and the hot winds; and, being near to them both, it partakes of their qualities, and is consequently temperate and breathes most of spring. Furthermore, the winds change either into their contraries or into those on [30] their right; blowing therefore after the North wind (for the west is on the right of the north), it enjoys a good reputation, as being mild as compared with an inclement wind. Also as soon as wintry weather ceases, fine weather usually follows; and the North wind is a wintry wind. [The East wind, though it lies between the warm and the cold winds, partakes less of them; for, when it blows, it sets in motion the winds [35] towards the south (for when it changes it does so in that direction), but though it sets them in motion it does not mingle with them. The West wind is set in motion by the South winds, and when it blows it sets the North winds in motion; for there the [944a1] succession of the winds ceases. Hence the West wind, constituting as it does the end of some winds and the starting-point of others, justly is and is considered to be a pleasant wind.]17
32 · Why does the South wind blow at the time of the dog-star? Is it because a sign occurs at the setting or rising of any star, and especially of the [5] dog-star? It is clear then that the wind blows most at the time of and after its rising. And since it causes stifling heat, it is only natural that the hottest winds should be set in motion when it rises; and the South wind is hot.
33 · Why does the West wind blow towards evening and not in the early [10] morning? Is the sun at its rising and setting usually the cause of breezes? For when it concocts and dissolves the air, which is moist, by thoroughly heating it, it dissolves it into breath; and if the air is full of breath, it becomes still more evaporated by the sun. When, therefore, the sun is in the east, it is far away from the West wind, for [15] the latter blows from the setting sun; but when the sun is already near its setting, the breath is then thoroughly dissolved, and from midday onwards and towards evening the sun is most suitably situated for heating and dissolving the air. It is for this reason also that the East wind begins to blow in the early morning; for since the air above the earth becomes charged with moisture during the night and owing to its [20] weight approaches the earth, the sun from dawn onwards dissolves it and sets in motion first the air which is nearest to itself. Now the East wind gets its name Apeliotes because it is the wind which blows from the rising sun.
34 · Why is it that when the sun rises the winds both rise and fall? Is it [25] because a wind is the movement either of the air or of moisture carried up? Now this movement, when it is only slight, is quickly absorbed by the sun, so that no wind occurs; but when it is greater, the movement is increased when the sun rises, for the sun is a source of movement. [30]
35 · Why does the West wind blow in the evening? Is it because all the winds blow when the sun disperses the moisture? For the moisture being already in a mass, the power of heat, when it approaches it, concocts it.18 Now the West wind blows from the setting sun; it is only natural then that it should rise in the evening, for then the sun reaches the quarter proper to that wind. [35]
The North and the South winds are the most frequent of winds, because, when one contrary is overcome by its direct contrary, it is least able to continue, whereas it is better able to resist a wind blowing against it from an angle. Now the South and [944b1] the North winds blow from regions on either side of the sun’s course, while the other winds blow rather in a straight line with it.
36 · Does the wind come from a source, as water does, and is it unable to rise to a higher level than that source, or is this not so? And does it come from a single [5] point or from a wider area? There are indeed in the wind certain similarities to that which seems to occur in water; for water flows faster when it travels downhill, whereas it stagnates on flat and level ground, and the winds act similarly, for on [10] promontories and high ground the air is always in motion, whereas in hollows it is often at rest and there is a calm. Moreover on exceedingly high mountains there is no wind at all—on Mount Athos, for example, amongst others, as is proved by the fact that offerings which persons sacrificing leave there one year are, so it is said, [15] found there still in the following year. It is clear then that the course of the wind starts as it were from a source of some kind. It cannot, therefore, rise any higher. Hence the above phenomenon occurs on high mountains, to which what happens to water would be a close parallel; for apparently neither a strong flow of water nor a [20] violent wind is found in high mountains.
37 · Why is it that when the South wind blows the sea becomes blue, but when the North wind blows it becomes dark? Is it because the North wind disturbs the sea less, and that which is less disturbed appears to be all black?
[25] 38 · Why do the South winds when they blow gently cause no overclouding, but when they become strong overcloud the sky? Is it because, when they blow gently, they cannot produce many clouds? They therefore cover only a small area with cloud; but, when they blow strongly, they thrust along many clouds, and therefore seem to cause more overclouding.
[30] 39 · Why is the North wind strong when it begins to blow, but weak as it ceases, whereas the South wind is weak when it begins, but strong as it ceases? Is it because the North wind is near to us and the South wind distant? The former then, when it begins, blows immediately in our part of the world, whereas the beginning of the latter becomes dispersed owing to the long time it takes to travel, and little of [35] its first breath reaches us; and we feel the end of the North wind, but that of the South wind not at all. It is, therefore, only natural that the North wind should be weak as it ceases (for the end of all things is weak), while the South wind is not weak at its close, since we do not feel its ending at all.
[945a1] 40 · Why do alternating winds blow where there are bays, but not where there is a wide expanse of open sea? Is it because the wind, when it pours into the bays, is less broken up and travels for the most part in a collected mass, whereas [5] over open expanses of sea the land-winds tend to be broken up as they begin to flow, and when they move the same thing happens to them, because they are free to travel in many directions? For an alternating wind is the reflux of a land-wind.19
41 · What is the origin of the saying,
When the South wind begins and when Boreas ceases his blowing?
Is it because the North wind, owing to the fact that we live near it and our [10] habitation is towards the pole, immediately blows strongly, for it is with us as soon as it begins? Hence, as it ceases, it blows pleasantly; for it then blows weakly. The South wind, on the other hand, because it is far away, reaches us later in greater strength.
42 · Why is it that men feel heavier and weaker when the wind is in the south? Is it because moisture becomes abundant instead of scanty, being melted by the heat, and moisture, which is heavy, takes the place of breath, which is light, and [15] under these conditions men’s strength becomes languid?
43 · Why are men hungrier when the wind is in the north than when it is in the south? It is because the North winds are colder?
44 · Why does the South wind not blow in Egypt itself in the regions towards the sea nor for the distance of a day and a night’s journey inland, while in the [20] regions beyond Memphis and for the distance of a day and a night’s journey it blows freshly; and does not blow to the west for the distance of two days’ and two nights’ journey, while to the east the South-West wind (Lips) blows? Is it because Egypt in its lower regions is hollow, so the South wind passes over above it, but to the south and farther away the regions are loftier? [25]
45 · Why is it that the South wind is weak when it begins to blow, but becomes stronger as it ceases, while with the North wind the contrary is the case, hence the proverb,
Sail when the South wind begins and when Boreas ceases his blowing?
Is it because we dwell rather towards the pole than towards the midday sun, and the North wind blows from the pole, while the South wind blows from the midday sun? [30] It is only natural, therefore, that the North wind, when it begins, immediately attacks with violence the regions nearer to it, and afterwards transfers its violence to the dwellers farther south. The South wind, on the contrary, when it begins, presses upon those who dwell towards the midday sun, and, when it has passed them by, blows freshly upon those who dwell towards the pole. [35]
46 · What is the origin of the saying,
Straightway the winter comes, if the South wind call to the North wind?
Is it because it is the nature of the South wind to collect clouds and much rain? When therefore the North wind blows under these conditions, since there is [945b1] abundant material, the North wind freezes it and brings on the winter. Hence the saying,
When Boreas findeth the mire, soon cometh the season of winter.
Now mud and rain in general are usually, if not invariably, due to the South wind.
[5] 47 · Why does the North wind follow quickly upon the South wind, but not the South wind upon the North wind? Is it because the North wind arrives from near at hand, but the South wind from a distance, since our habitation is towards the north?
48 · Why is it that the winds are cold, although they are due to movement caused by heat? Is movement caused by heat not invariably hot, but only when it [10] occurs in a certain manner? If it comes forth in a mass, it burns with its heat the very thing which emits it; but if it passes out gradually through a narrow space, it is itself hot, but the air which is set in motion by this process completes the movement in accordance with whatever was its original nature. This can be seen in the human [15] body; for there is a saying that from the same organ we breathe both hot and cold, but this is untrue, since all that proceeds from the mouth is hot, as is shown by the fact that it appears hot if the hand is placed close to the mouth. It is the manner in which it comes forth which makes the difference. For if in yawning we emit breath from a wide opening, it appears hot because we can feel it; but if it be emitted [20] through a narrow opening, being more violent, it impels the air in its immediate neighbourhood, which in its turn impels the adjoining air. If the air is cold, its movement is also cold. May not the same thing happen also in the winds, and their first movement be through a narrow channel and then set in motion the adjoining air, and then other air begin to rush onwards? So in the summer the winds are hot, [25] in winter they are cold, because in each case this is the temperature of the air which is already there; for that the air does not follow this course because it is either set in motion by itself or overpowered by the heat, is clear not only from the fact that it heats the winds when there is more heat in it, but also because it was originally [30] being carried upwards. For fire is of this nature; whereas cold naturally travels downwards. The winds move horizontally and for good reason; for since the heat presses upwards and the cold downwards and neither prevails, and the air cannot remain still, it is only natural that its motion should be sideways.
[35] 49 · Why are the South winds cold in Libya as the North winds are with us? Is it primarily because the sources of these winds are respectively nearer to us and to them? For if, as we have already said, the winds pass through a narrow channel, they will be colder to those who are nearer to them owing to the violence of their [946a1] movement; for when their movement proceeds farther, they become dispersed. Hence the North winds are cold in our part of the world, because we are nearer to them and dwell quite near the pole.
50 · Why is it that those South winds which are dry and do not bring rain [5] cause fever? Is it because they engender unnatural moist heat in the body? For they are by nature moist and hot, and this causes fever, which is due to a combined excess of these two things. When, therefore, the South winds blow under the influence of the sun without bringing rain, they engender this condition in us;20 whereas, when they bring rain with them, the rain cools us.
51 · Why do the periodical winds always blow at the season at which they do [10] blow and with the force with which they blow? And why do they cease at close of day and not blow during the night? Is this due to the fact that the melting of snow by the sun ceases towards evening and at night? Now these winds blow in general when the sun begins to prevail and melt the northern ice. When the ice begins to melt, the ‘forerunners’ blow; when it is already melting, the periodic winds blow. [15]
52 · Why is the West wind at once the gentlest of winds and also cold, and why does it blow mainly at two seasons, namely, spring and autumn, and towards evening, and usually in the direction of the land? Is it cold because it blows from the [20] sea and from extended areas? It is less cold indeed than the North wind, because it blows from evaporated water and not from snow; but it is cold, because it blows either after the winter, when the sun is only just beginning to prevail, or in the autumn, when the sun no longer has power. For it does not have to wait for its proper matter,21 as it would if it were a land-wind, but wanders freely, because it has [25] travelled over water. For the same reason it blows evenly; for it does not blow from mountains or from forcibly melted matter, but flowing gently as through a channel. For the regions towards the north and south are mountainous; but towards the west there is neither mountain nor land but the Atlantic Ocean, so that it travels in the direction of the land. Further, it blows towards evening owing to the quarter from [30] which it comes; for the sun then approaches that quarter. It ceases at night because the movement set up by the sun dies down.
53 · Why do all things appear larger when the South-East wind (Eurus) blows? Is it because it makes the air very gloomy?
54 · Why is it that during the winter the winds blow early and from the east, [35] but in summer in the evening and from the setting sun? Is it because what happens in our part of the world during the summer occurs during the winter among those who inhabit the opposite hemisphere of the earth, and with us in the winter the winds blow early and from the east, because the air, which during the night is full of moisture, is dissolved and set in motion by the sun in the early morning, the air [946b1] nearest the sun being the first to be affected? The sun begins to produce this effect even before it rises; therefore the breezes blow just as much before sunrise. Since then the sun attracts the moisture to itself and in the winter before its rising sets in [5] motion in our part of the earth the air which is moist, it is clear that it would also attract the moisture when it is in the southern hemisphere, and it would be evening there when it is early morning with us. The result would be that the air, which the sun attracts to itself before its rising in our part of the world would become a West [10] wind to the dwellers in the south and would blow in the evening. Now what happens during our winter happens to them at dawn, and what happens in the summer to them happens to us in the evening; for when it is summer here, it is winter there, and our evening is their early morning, at which time they have breezes from the east, [15] while we have West winds for the same reasons as are mentioned above. In the summer breezes do not blow from the east, because the sun, when it rises, finds the air in our part of the earth still too dry, owing to the short period of its absence; and West winds do not blow in the evening during the winter, because East winds do not blow in the southern hemisphere either at that time for the aforesaid reasons, in [20] virtue of which the sun attracts the moisture to itself and produces the West wind in our part of the earth.
55 · Why is the West wind always considered to bring fair weather and to be the pleasantest of the winds? Is it because it is on the boundary between the hot and the cold winds, and being near to them both it partakes of their qualities, and is therefore temperate? The East wind, though it also lies between the hot and the cold [25] winds, partakes less of them; for when it blows it sets in motion the winds towards the south (for, when it changes, it does so in that direction), but, though it sets them in motion, it does not mingle with them. The West wind is set in motion by the South winds and, when it blows, it sets the North winds in motion; for there the succession of the winds ceases. Hence the West wind, constituting as it does the end [30] of some winds and the starting-point of others, justly is and is considered to be a pleasant wind.
56 · Why are different winds rainy in different places; for example, Hellespontias (the East wind) in Attica and the islands, the North wind on the Hellespont and in Cyrene, and the South wind round Lesbos? Is it because rain occurs [35] wherever there is a collection of clouds, since density collects wherever it can settle? It is for this reason that there is more rain among the mountains than where the mass of clouds can find a free passage, for that which is confined becomes dense as a necessary consequence; also it rains more in calm weather. In the Hellespont [947a1] the North wind, blowing from its upper end, masses together many clouds, which Hellespontias (the East wind) drives towards Attica and the islands, being thus provided with material; for most clouds come round from the north.
Round Lesbos the South-East (Eurus) and South winds bring much cloud [5] from the open sea and drive it against the land. Similar instances might be quoted for the other winds.
57 · What is the origin of the saying,
Have no fear of a cloud from the land in the season of winter,
But if it come from over the deep have a care; and in summer
Ever distrust the cloud that sweeps from the gloom of the mainland?
Is it because in the winter the sea is warmer, so that, if any cloud has formed, it must [10] have done so from some powerful cause, otherwise it would have been dissolved, because the region in which it forms is warm? Now in the summer the sea is cold, as also are the sea breezes, but the land is hot, so that if any cloud comes from the land, it must have been formed from some considerable cause; for it would have been dissolved if it had been weak.
58 · Why is it that in Arcadia, which is high, the winds are no colder than [15] elsewhere, but when there is no wind and it is cloudy, it is cold, just as it is in flat, marshy districts? Is it because Arcadia resembles a marshy district, since it has no outlet for its waters to the sea, for which reason also there are many chasms there? When, therefore, there is a wind, it winnows away the exhalations from the earth, [20] which are cold, but the winds themselves are not cold, because they arrive from the sea; but when there is no wind the vapour which rises from the stagnant water causes the cold.
59 · Why is it that the wind lasts a long time when it begins to blow at dawn? [25] Is it because, when the sun rises, the impetus given to the wind is very violent and can therefore maintain its character? That this is so is shown by the fact that it forms a strong mass.
60 · Why is it that the North wind is keen during the day but falls at night? Is it because it is generated from frozen rain when this is evaporated by the sun? It [30] falls at night, because the process does not go on as before, but is reversed; for at night the North wind expends itself, but it is less apt to do so during the day.
61 · Why is it that when many spiders’ webs are borne through the air, they are a sign of wind? Is it because the spider works in fine weather, but the webs are [35] set in motion because the air, as it cools, collects on the ground, and this cooling process is the beginning of winter, so that the movement of the webs is a sign? Or is it because after rain and storms the spiders22 are borne through the air in large numbers, since they work in fine weather (for they do not appear at all in the winter, the spider being unable to support the cold), and as they are borne along by the wind [947b1] they unwind a quantity of web? Now after rain winds usually blow.
62 · Why is it that the strong North winds in winter cause clouds in the cold regions, but outside them bring a clear sky? Is it because they are at the same time [5] cold and strong, and in the regions near the north they are colder and so congeal the clouds before they can drive them along, and the clouds, when they are congealed, remain where they are owing to their weight? Elsewhere, however, it is their strength rather than their coldness which takes effect.
[10] 1 · Why do those who are afraid tremble? Is it due to the process of chilling? For the heat fails and contracts; that is also why the bowels usually are loosened.
[15] 2 · Why do men become thirsty under certain conditions, those, for example, who are about to be punished? For this ought not to be so, since they are chilled. Is it because the chilling and heating do not occur in the same region, but the former takes place on the surface of the body, from which the heat departs, but the heating takes place in the interior, so that it warms it, as is proved by the fact that the bowels become loosened? For thirst occurs when the sovereign region of the body becomes [20] dry. The same thing seems to happen as occurs in those suffering from ague, who are thirsty and cold at the same time; for in their case too the same part of the body is not hot and cold.
3 · Why is it that under the influence of anger men become heated and bold (the heat collecting in the interior of the body), whereas in a state of fear they are in [25] a contrary condition? Is it because they are not affected in the same region, but in those who are angry the heat collects in the region of the heart—hence they become courageous and red in the face and full of breath—the course of the heat being upwards, whereas in those who are afraid the blood and heat both retreat in a downward direction—hence the bowels become loosened. For the beating of the [30] heart is different, since in those who are frightened it is frequent and strongly punctuated, as would naturally occur from the failure of heat, while in those who are angry it has the character which one would expect when a greater quantity of heat collects. Hence the expressions about anger ‘boiling up’ and ‘rising’ and ‘being stirred up’ and the like are apt and fitting. Is the thirst also due to this cause, since [35] dry-spitting and the parching of the tongue and the like are due to the simultaneous upward rush of breath and heat? Thirst, moreover, is clearly due to the body becoming heated. How then can the same region, namely, that in which we feel thirst, become dried up both in one who is afraid and in one who is angry? That fear [948a1] tends to produce thirst is clearly shown in the case of routed soldiers; for under no other condition is such thirst experienced. The same is true of those suffering from great anxiety; therefore they wash out their mouths and swallow liquid, as did Parmenon the actor. Or is it in such cases not thirst but dryness due to the flight of [5] blood (whence also they become pale)? This is indicated by the fact that they do not drink much but simply take a gulp; routed soldiers on the other hand are undergoing violent exertion. So those who are about to be punished feel thirst, and in this there is nothing strange. In war some brave men even, when they are drawn up in battle array, actually tremble when they are not distraught but confident; and they often [10] beat their bodies with a flat cane or, failing that, with the hand, in order that they may be warmed.1 It seems probable that owing to the violence and impetus of the heat a disturbing inequality of the temperature is set up in the body.
4 · Why are brave men generally fond of wine? Is it because the brave are full of heat, and the heat is in the region of the chest? (For it is there also that fear shows itself, acting as a process of cooling; with the result that less2 heat remains in [15] the region of the heart, and in some men the heart beats violently as it is cooled.) Those then who have an abundance of blood in their lungs have hot lungs, as though they were drunk, and so the presentiment of danger does not chill them. Such men are fond of drinking; for the desire for drink is due to the heat of this region, as has [20] been stated elsewhere, and the desire is for that which has power to stop the heat. Now wine is naturally hot and satisfies the thirst better than water, particularly in those whom we are now considering;3 the reason for this has been stated elsewhere. Hence those who are suffering from inflammation of the lungs and those who are mad both desire wine, though the lungs of the former are hot owing to the fever, and [25] those of the latter owing to their state of disturbance. Since, then, the same people are usually of a thirsty and of a brave kind, and those who are thirsty desire wine and are therefore fond of drinking, it necessarily follows that the two characteristics of bravery and fondness for wine usually go together. Hence those who are drunk are braver than those who are not. [30]
5 · Why do states honour courage more than anything else, though it is not the highest of the excellences? Is it because they are continually either making war or having war made against them, and courage is most useful in both these circumstances? They, therefore, honour not that which is best, but that which is best for themselves.
6 · Why do those who are afraid tremble most in the voice, the hands, and [35] the lower lip? Is it because this affection is due to the departure of heat from the upper parts of the body? If so, their pallor is due to the same cause. The voice, then, trembles owing to the departure of heat from the chest, the region in which the voice is set in motion thus becoming cooled. So too with the hands; for they are attached to the chest. The lower lip trembles, and not the upper, because the upper lip hangs [948b1] downwards4 in the direction of its natural tendency; but the upward direction of the lower lip is contrary to nature and it is held steady in that position by the heat. When, therefore, the heat is withdrawn as the process of cooling takes place, it trembles. For the same reason the lip hangs down when a man is angry, as can be seen clearly in children; for the heat rushes together into the heart. [5]
7 · Why do those who are afraid tremble, especially in the voice, the hands, and the lower lip? Is it because the heat fails in the region of the body in which the voice is situated, while the trembling of the lip and hands is due to the fact that they are very easily set in motion and contain very little blood? Those who are afraid also [10] emit bile and their sexual organs contract, the emission of bile being due to the heat which descends and causes liquefaction, while the contraction of the sexual organs is due to the fact that fear comes from outside, and therefore the rush of heat is in the contrary direction.
8 · Why do those who are afraid feel both thirst and cold, these being contrary affections? Do they feel cold because they are chilled, and thirst because [15] they are heated, since under the influence of fear the heat and the moisture leave the upper parts of the body? That this happens is shown by the change of colour and by the effect on the bowels; for the face becomes pale and the bowels are sometimes loosened. The cold, therefore, is caused by the departure of the heat, and the thirst by the departure of the moisture, from the upper parts of the body.
[20] 9 · Why is it that, although both fear and pain are a kind of grief, those who are in pain cry out, but those who are afraid keep silence? Is it because those who are in pain hold their breath (and so it is emitted all at once and comes forth with a loud cry), whereas the body of those who are afraid is chilled and the heat is carried [25] downwards and creates breath? It creates breath in the particular region to which it is carried; hence those who are frightened fart. Now the voice is a rush of breath upwards in a particular manner and through certain channels; and the reason why those who are in pain hold the breath is that when we suffer anything (just as the other animals use their horns or teeth or claws in self-defence) we invariably make [30] use straightway and without thought of the resources which we have in ourselves by nature, and against all or most forms of pain heat is helpful. This is what occurs when a man holds his breath; for he applies heat and concoction to the pain by collecting heat within him by means of the breath.
[35] 10 · Why is it that in those who are afraid the bowels are loosened and they desire to pass urine? Is it because the heat in us is as it were alive? It therefore flees whenever it is afraid of anything. Since, then, the fears due to nervousness and the like come from without and pass from the upper to the lower parts of the body and [949a1] from the surface to the interior, the regions round the bowels and bladder becoming heated are loosened and make these organs ready to function. For anise and wormwood and all substances which promote the flow of urine have heating properties. Similarly the drugs which affect the bowels are those which cause heat in the lower parts of the body, and some of those which are applied merely5 have a [5] loosening effect, while others set up a further process of liquefaction, like garlic, which passes into the urine. Now heat coming from the surfaces of the body and meeting in these regions has the same effect as such drugs.
11 · Why do the sexual organs contract in those who are afraid? For one would expect the contrary to happen, namely, that they should become relaxed, [10] since the heat collects in this region in those who are afraid. Is it because those who are afraid are almost always as it were chilled? Their sexual organs therefore contract, because the heat has left the surface of the body; hence also those who are greatly frightened have internal rumblings. The surface of the body and the skin of those who are cold seems to contract, because the heat is driven out; and it is for this reason too that they shiver. Now the scrotum too contracts upwards and the testicles [15] also are lifted up with it as it is drawn in. This is more readily seen in the effect on the sexual organs; for fear causes excretion, and an emission of semen often occurs6 in those who are nervous or greatly alarmed. [20]
1 · Why is it that some men become ill when, after having been accustomed to live intemperately, they adopt a temperate mode of life? For example, Dionysius [25] the tyrant, when during the siege he ceased drinking for a short time, immediately became consumptive, until he changed his manner of life and began to drink again. Is it because in every one habit is a matter of importance, since it soon becomes nature? Just, then, as a fish would fare ill if it continued long in the air or a man if he continued long in the water, so those who alter their manner of life suffer from [30] the change, and a resumption of their accustomed mode of life is just as much their salvation as if they were returning to a natural condition. Furthermore, men waste away if they have been accustomed to large quantities of a particular diet; for if they do not receive their usual food, they are reduced to the condition in which they would be if they had no nourishment at all. Moreover, the excretions, when mixed [35] with a large quantity of food, disappear, but by themselves they rise to the surface and are carried to the eyes or lungs; whereas, if one takes nourishment, they mix with it and become diluted and harmless. But in those who live an intemperate life [949b1] the excretions become superabundant up to a certain point, when they cease from their accustomed mode of life, owing to the fact that much undigested matter is still present in them from their former manner of living; and, when this is melted, like a mass of snow, by the natural heat, the result is that violent fluxes take place. [5]
2 · Why is it that we speak of men as incontinent in connexion with two only of the senses, namely, touch and taste? Is it because of the pleasures that result from these in us and in the other animals? Being then shared by the animals, they are held in least honour and so are regarded as the only pleasures deserving of reproach, [10] or at any rate more so than any others. So we blame a man who is a slave to them and call him incontinent and intemperate, because he is a slave to the worst pleasures.
3 · Why are men called incontinent in respect only of their desires, although incontinence is possible also in anger? Is it because an incontinent man is one who acts in some way contrary to reason, and incontinence is a mode of life which is [15] contrary to reason, and the desires are, generally speaking, contrary to reason? Feelings of anger, on the other hand, are in consonance with reason, not in the sense that reason prompts them, but in the sense that reason informs us of the insult or of the charge made against us.
[20] 4 · Why is it that we approve most of continence and temperance in the young and wealthy, and of justice in the poor? Is it because we feel most admiration if a man abstains from what he most needs, rather than from the contrary? Now a [25] poor man needs resources, while a rich young man needs enjoyment.
5 · Why can men tolerate thirst less easily than hunger? Is it because thirst is more painful? A proof that it is so is the fact that there is more pleasure in drinking when one is thirsty than in eating when one is hungry. Now the contrary of what is pleasant is more painful. Or is it because the heat whereby we live requires moisture [30] more?1 Or is it because thirst is a desire for two things, namely, drink and food, but hunger is a desire for only one, namely, food?
6 · Why can we endure thirst less than hunger? Is it because the former causes us more pain? A proof of the pain it causes is the fact that the pleasure it gives is more intense. Further, he who is thirsty needs two things, nourishment and [35] cooling, and drink provides both of these; but he who is hungry needs one of them only.
7 · Why are men called incontinent if they indulge to excess in the pleasures connected with touch and taste? (For those who are intemperate in sexual [950a1] intercourse and the enjoyments of eating and drinking are called incontinent; and in the joys of eating and drinking the pleasure is partly in the tongue and partly in the throat; hence Philoxenus longed for the throat of a crane.) And why is the term incontinent never extended to the pleasures of sight and hearing? Is it because the [5] pleasures of touch and taste are common to us and the other animals? Being, then, shared by the animals they are held in least honour and so are regarded as the only pleasures deserving of reproach, or at any rate more so than any others. So we blame a man who is a slave to them and call him incontinent and intemperate, because he is a slave to the worst pleasures. Now the senses being five in number, [10] the other animals find pleasure only in the two already mentioned; in the others they find no pleasure, or, if they do, it is only incidentally. For the lion2 rejoices when he sees or scents his prey, because he is going to enjoy it;3 and when he has satisfied his hunger, such things do not please him, just as the smell of dried fish gives us no [15] pleasure when we have eaten our fill of it, though, when we wanted to partake of it, it was pleasant.4 The scent of the rose, on the other hand, is always pleasant.
8 · Why are men less able to restrain their laughter in the presence of friends? Is it because, when anything is especially elated, it is easily set in motion? Now benevolence causes elation,5 so that laughter more readily moves us. [20]
1 · Why is it that, although injustice is greater according as the good which is injured is greater, and honour is a greater good, yet injustice in the matter of money seems to be more serious and those who are unjust as regards money are considered more unjust? Is it because men prefer money to honour, and money is [25] common to all, whereas honour comes only to a few and its enjoyment is a rare occurrence?
2 · Why is it a more terrible thing to rob a man of a deposit than of a loan? Is it because it is disgraceful to wrong a friend? Now he who robs another of a deposit does wrong to a friend; for no one places a deposit with another unless he trusts him. [30] A creditor, on the other hand, is not a friend; for, if a man is a friend, he gives and does not lend. Or is it because the injustice is greater, since, in addition to the loss inflicted, he also violates his good faith, for the sake of which, if for no other reason, he ought to abstain from doing the wrong? Further, it is base not to requite like with like; for the one party in making the deposit regarded the other as his friend, but the [35] latter in robbing him treated him as an enemy; but a lender does not lend in the spirit of friendship. Again, a deposit is handed over to be guarded and returned, whereas the lender lends for his own advantage as well. Now we are less angry at losing if we are in pursuit of gain, like fishermen when they lose their bait; for the [950b1] risk is obvious. Again, those who make deposits are generally the victims of plots or misfortune, but it is the rich who lend money; and it is more terrible to wrong the unfortunate than the fortunate.
3 · Why is it that in some law courts the jury give their verdict in accordance [5] with the birth of the litigants rather than the provisions of the will? Is it because about birth it is impossible to lie, but the truth must be declared, whereas before now many wills have been proved to be forged?
4 · Why is it that poverty is more commonly found amongst the good than [10] amongst the bad? Is it because, being universally hated and despised, she takes refuge with the good, thinking that with them she is most likely to find safety and a place of habitation; whereas she thinks that if she goes to the wicked, they would never remain content with the same condition but would steal or plunder, in which [15] case she could no longer remain with them? Or is it because she thinks that the good will treat her better than any one else and that she is least likely to be insulted by them? So, just as we place deposits of money with good men, so she of her own accord ranges herself with them. Or is it because, being of the female sex, she is [20] more helpless, so that she needs the assistance of the good? Or is it because, being herself an evil, she will not betake herself to that which is evil, since if she were to choose the evil, her position would be quite irremediable?
5 · Why is it that wrongs in other matters are not so liable to be committed on a large scale as those in respect of money?1 For example, a man who has spoken a light word would not therefore necessarily divulge a secret, nor2 would one who has [25] betrayed an individual also betray a city, as a man who has stolen an obol would steal a talent also. Is it because, though there are forms of unjust disposition which are worse, the acts resulting from them are less serious owing to lack of power?
6 · Why is it more disgraceful3 to rob a man of a small deposit than of a large loan? Is it because he who robs another of a deposit is deceiving a man who thought [30] him to be honest? Or is it because he who commits the one crime would commit the other also?
7 · Why is it that man, who of all animals has the advantage of most education, is yet the most unjust of all? Is it because he possesses the power of reasoning to the greatest degree, and has therefore most carefully estimated the [35] pleasures and happiness, and these are impossible of attainment without injustice?
8 · Why is it that wealth is more often found in the hands of the wicked than in those of the good? Is it because, being blind, it cannot read men’s hearts and choose the best?
[951a1] 9 · Why is it considered more just to defend the dead than the living? Is it because those who are alive can look after themselves, but a dead man can no longer do so?
10 · Why is it that a man who associates with one who is healthy does not himself become any healthier, nor does association with the strong or beautiful [5] improve a man’s condition, whereas association with the just and temperate and good does have this effect? Is it because some qualities can, and others cannot, be imitated by the soul, goodness being a quality of the soul and health of the body? A man can, therefore, accustom himself to feel pleasure and pain under the proper circumstances; but his association with the healthy does not produce this result, for health does not consist in taking pleasure or not in certain things, since none of these [10] things can produce health.
11 · Why is it more terrible to kill a woman than a man, although the male is naturally superior to the female? Is it because she is weaker and so he commits a greater4 injustice? Or is it because it is not a manly act to use one’s strength against that which is greatly inferior?
12 · Why is the defendant given the position on the right hand in a law [15] court? Is it from a desire to equalize matters? Since, then, the plaintiff possesses other advantages, the defendant is given the advantage of position. Further, as a rule defendants are under guard; and, if the defendant has the right-hand position, the guard is on his right.
13 · Why is it that, when the votes for the plaintiff and for the defendant are [20] shown to be equal, the defendant wins the case? Is it because the defendant has heard only during the course of the trial itself5 the charges against which he has to make his defence and produce the witnesses to refute the accusations,6 if any advantage is to be obtained from them? Now it is not easy for a man to foresee of what he ought to provide witnesses or some other kind of evidence to prove his [25] innocence. The plaintiff, on the other hand, can act as he pleases, and can begin to take action before having the summons issued; and even after he has summoned his opponent he can invent and bring against him any plausible accusation he likes. The lawgiver, then, recognizing that the defendant has the disadvantage in all these [30] respects, has given him any advantage which may accrue from the disagreement of the jury. And, indeed, that defendants are at a disadvantage is shown by the fact that when men are in a state of alarm they omit much of what they ought to have said or done, and defendants are, generally speaking, always in greater danger; and so, if they omit necessary parts of their defence, when they are put on a level with [35] their opponents in respect of their claims, they would clearly have been victorious if they had not omitted anything.
Further, any one of us would prefer to pass a sentence acquitting a wrong-doer rather than condemn as guilty one who is innocent, in the case, for example, of a [951b1] man being accused of enslavement or murder. For we should prefer to acquit either of such persons, though the charges brought against them by their accuser were [5] true, rather than condemn them if they were untrue; for, when any doubt is entertained, the less grave error ought to be preferred; it is a serious matter to decide that a slave is free; yet it is much more serious to convict a freeman of being a slave.
Further, if one man brings a charge and another disputes his claim to any piece [10] of property, we do not consider that we ought to award the disputed property immediately to the plaintiff, but that the man in possession ought to enjoy it until the matter is decided. Similarly, when a number of persons are involved in a case and the numbers of those who declare that a wrong has been committed and of those who deny it are equal—just as in the case cited above when one man brought an accusation, while another denied the truth of it—we consider that the lawgiver is [15] right in not handing over the disputed property to the accuser but allowing the defendant to remain in possession until the plaintiff7 has established some superiority. Similarly, when the votes of the jury are equal and so neither side has the superiority, the lawgiver has allowed matters to be left as they are.
Again, in serious crimes the punishments are also heavy, so that, if the jury [20] pass an unjust sentence and then change their mind,8 it is impossible to take the opportunity of remedying the mistake; if, on the other hand, they acquit the accused when they ought not to do so, if he lives so circumspectly as never to commit any crime again, how can the jury have made a serious mistake in failing to condemn such a man to death? If, however, he subsequently commits a crime, the law would [25] consider that he ought to be punished for both crimes.
Or is it because it is the mark of a more unjust man to commit acts of injustice for which one is less likely to be unjustly accused.9 For wrong-doing may be due to anger or fear or desire and to many other causes, and not only to intent, but an [30] unjust accusation is generally due to intent. So when the votes have proved equal, indicating both10 that the accuser has brought an unjust charge and that the defendant is in the wrong, the unjust accuser being judged the offender, the lawgiver has awarded the legal victory to the defendant.
Again, we ourselves adopt the attitude towards our servants that, when we [35] suspect that they have committed a crime and have no certain knowledge, but nevertheless think that they have done the deed, we do not immediately proceed to punish them; and when we cannot pursue our inquiries any further, we acquit them [952a1] of blame.
Further, he who from intent commits a crime does a greater wrong than he who does not act from intent. Now the man who brings a vexatious charge against another always does wrong from intent, whereas he who commits any other crime may happen to do so either under compulsion or through ignorance or by some other [5] chance. But when the votes are equal, the prosecutor has been judged by half the jury to be committing a wrong from intent, while the defendant is considered by the remainder to be in the wrong, but not from intent; and so, since the prosecutor is judged guilty of a more serious wrong than the defendant, the lawgiver has rightly decided that he who has committed the less serious wrong wins the case.
Further, a man is always more unjust who does not expect to escape the [10] observation of the man whom he wrongs and nevertheless commits the wrong, than he who expects to remain undiscovered. Now he who brings a vexatious charge against another does not expect to escape the observation of the man whom he falsely accuses, whereas those who commit any other crime usually try to commit an injustice with the expectation of doing so without the knowledge of their victims, so that plaintiffs ought to be regarded as more unjust than defendants. [15]
14 · Why is it that, if a man steals from the baths or the wrestling-school or the market or any similar place, he is punished with death, whereas if he steals from a house he merely pays back double the value of what he has stolen? Is it because in houses it is possible in some way or other to safeguard one’s property? For the wall [20] is strong and there is a key, and it is the business of all the slaves in the house to see that the contents of the house are kept safe. At the baths, however, and in places which are similarly public, it is easy for any one who wishes to commit a crime; for those who place their property there have no sure means of guarding it except their [25] own eyes, so that, if one takes one’s eye off it for a moment, it is immediately placed at the mercy of the thief. Hence the lawgiver, considering that bathers are not able to guard their property, has set the law to guard against thieves by threatening that they shall lose their lives if they appropriate the possessions of others.
Further, the owner of a house is responsible for admitting into it whom he [30] wishes and for introducing into it any one whom he does not trust; but the man who deposits any property in a bath cannot prevent any one from coming in, nor can he prevent him, when he has entered, from placing his garments next to his own when he has stripped himself; but, contrary to his wishes, the clothing of the thief and of [35] the man who is about to be robbed lie together in a confused heap. Therefore the lawgiver has prescribed not very heavy penalties to help the man who of his own free will and by his own mistake has admitted the thief to his house, but has clearly fixed [952b1] heavy penalties for theft to aid those who are obliged to share with others the right of entrance and the promiscuity of the baths.
Further, it is obvious that all those who commit theft in places the entrance to which is open to any one who wishes to come are bad men,11 and so, if they are [5] allowed to live, do not desire to have the semblance of honest men even for the future advantage which they can gain from it, regarding it as useless to pretend to be honest in the eyes of those who know their real character; they therefore continue henceforward to be openly wicked. Those, on the other hand, whose wickedness is known to one person only, try to persuade that person by bribery not to make known [10] their real character to the rest of the world; they are not likely therefore to be completely wicked for ever, and so the penalty which the lawgiver has fixed for them is less severe.
Further, of all crimes those which are committed in the most crowded [15] meetings and assemblies bring most disgrace upon the city, just as public orderliness brings the greatest credit; for it is at public gatherings that the citizens are most conspicuous to each other and the rest of the world. The result, therefore, of such thefts is that not only is the man who loses his property personally injured, but also abuse is heaped upon the city. This is why the lawgiver has fixed heavier [20] penalties for such thieves than for those who abstract property from a private house.
Again, the man who loses anything from a private house is in a place where it is easy for him to bear his misfortune, since he is in his own home and neither suffers anything nor is jeered at by others. But the man who is robbed at the baths finds it [25] difficult to leave without his clothing, and, in addition, is usually jeered at by others; and this is harder to bear than the actual loss. Therefore the lawgiver has prescribed heavier penalties to assist such persons.
Again, many legislative parallels can be found for these penalties. For example, if any one speaks evil of a magistrate the punishment is severe, but there is no penalty for speaking evil of an ordinary individual; and rightly so, for the [30] legislator considers that the slanderer not only commits an offence against the magistrate but also insults the city. Similarly, a man who commits a theft at the harbour is considered not only to harm the individual whom he robs, but also to bring disgrace upon the city. And the same is true of any crime committed in a place [35] of public meeting.
15 · Why is it that in law courts, if equal votes are given for the two adversaries, the defendant wins the case? Is it because the defendant has remained [953a1] unaffected by the action of the plaintiff, and in a position of equality with him he would probably have won?
16 · Why is it that for theft the punishment is death, whereas for assault, which is a more serious crime, the penalty or fine is assessable in court? Is it because [5] to commit an assault is an act of human weakness, of which all more or less partake, whereas there is no force which compels us to theft? A further reason is the fact that a man who tries to commit theft would think nothing of committing assault also.
[10] 1 · Why is it that all those who have become eminent in philosophy or politics or poetry or the arts are clearly of an atrabilious temperament, and some of them to such an extent as to be affected by diseases caused by black bile, as is said to have happened to Heracles among the heroes? For he appears to have been of this nature, and that is why epileptic afflictions were called by the ancients ‘the sacred [15] disease’ after him. That his temperament was atrabilious is shown by the fury which he displayed towards his children and the eruption of sores which took place before his disappearance on Mount Oeta; for this often occurs as the result of black bile. Lysander the Lacedaemonian also suffered from similar sores before his death. [20] There are also the stories of Ajax and Bellerophon, of whom the former became insane, while the latter sought out habitations in desert places; that is why Homer writes,
And since of all the gods he was hated,
Verily o’er the Aleïan plain alone he would wander,
Eating his own heart out, avoiding the pathway of mortals.1 [25]
And many others of the heroes seem to have been similarly afflicted, and among men of recent times Empedocles, Plato, and Socrates, and numerous other well-known men, and also most of the poets. For many such persons have bodily afflictions as the result of this kind of temperament, while some of them obviously [30] possess a natural inclination to affections of this kind; in a word, they all, as has been said, are naturally atrabilious. The cause of this may be understood if we first take an example from the effect of wine, which if taken in large quantities appears to produce such qualities as we attribute to the atrabilious, inducing, as it is drunk, [35] many different characteristics, making men for instance irritable, benevolent, compassionate, or reckless; whereas no such results are produced by honey or milk or water or anything similar. One can easily see that wine has a variety of effects by observing how it gradually changes those who drink it; for, finding them chilled and taciturn as the result of abstinence, a small quantity makes them more talkative, [953b1] while a larger quantity makes them eloquent and bold, and, when they proceed to action, reckless, and a still larger quantity makes them insolent and afterwards frenzied, while outrageous excess enfeebles them and makes them stupid like those [5] who have been epileptic from childhood, and very similar to those who are exceedingly atrabilious. As, therefore, an individual as he drinks and takes wine in different quantities changes his character, so there are men who embody each character. For the temporary condition of one man when he is drunk is the permanent character of another, and one man is loquacious, another emotional, [10] another easily moved to tears; for wine has this effect also on some people and therefore Homer writes,
He says that I swim in tears, like a man that is heavy with drinking.2
Others become compassionate or savage or taciturn; for some maintain a complete silence, especially those atrabilious subjects who are out of their minds. Wine also makes men amorous; as is shown by the fact that a man who is drinking is induced [15] to kiss those whom, owing to their appearance or age, no sober person would kiss. Wine then gives a man extraordinary characteristics, but for a short time only, while nature gives them permanently for the period of a lifetime; for some men are [20] bold, others taciturn, others compassionate, and others cowardly by nature. It is therefore clear that each characteristic is produced by wine and by nature by the same means; for the whole body functions under the control of heat. Now both the juice and the atrabilious temperament are full of wind; and that is why the [25] physicians say that flatulence and disorders of the stomach are due to black bile. Now wine has the quality of containing air; so wine and the atrabilious temperament are similar in nature. The froth which forms on wine shows that it contains air; for oil does not produce froth, although it is hot, but wine produces it in large [30] quantities and red wine more than white because it contains more heat and substance. It is for this reason that wine excites sexual desire, and Dionysus and Aphrodite are rightly coupled together, and atrabilious persons are generally lustful. For sexual desire is due to the presence of breath, as is shown by the fact [35] that the penis quickly increases from a small to a large size by inflation; also boys before they are capable of emitting semen find a certain pleasure in rubbing their sexual organs through lust when they are approaching the age of puberty, and the swelling of the organ becomes manifest because breath passes through the passages through which the semen subsequently passes; also the effusion and impetus of the [954a1] semen in sexual intercourse is clearly due to propulsion by the breath. So those foods and liquids which fill the region of the sexual organs with breath are rightly regarded as aphrodisiac. Thus red wine more than anything else produces the [5] condition found in atrabilious persons.3 This condition is obvious in some individuals; for most atrabilious persons are thin and their veins stand out, the reason being the abundance not of blood but of breath. The reason why all atrabilious persons are [10] not thin4 or dark, but only those who contain particularly unhealthy humours, is stated elsewhere.
But to return to our previous subject of discussion, this humour, namely, the atrabilious, is originally mingled in the bodily nature, for it is a mixture of heat and cold, of which two things the bodily nature consists. Black bile, therefore, becomes [15] both very hot and very cold, for the same thing naturally admits both heat and cold, like water, which, though cold, yet when it is sufficiently heated (for example, when it boils) is hotter than the actual flame which heats it, and similarly a stone or a piece of iron when thoroughly heated becomes hotter than charcoal, though they [20] are naturally cold. (This subject has been dealt with more clearly in the treatise on fire.) Now black bile, which is naturally cold and not on the surface, being in the condition mentioned above, if it abounds in the body, produces apoplexy or torpor or despondency or fear; but when it is overheated, it produces cheerfulness accompanied [25] by song, and frenzy, and the breaking forth of sores, and the like. In most people then black bile engendered from their daily nutriment does not change their character, but merely produces an atrabilious disease. But those who naturally possess an atrabilious temperament immediately develop diverse characters in [30] accordance with their various temperaments; for example, those who are originally full of cold black bile become dull and stupid, whereas those who possess a large quantity of hot black bile become frenzied or clever or erotic or easily moved to anger and desire, while some become more loquacious. Many too, if this heat approaches the region of the intellect, are affected by diseases of frenzy and [35] possession; and this is the origin of Sibyls and soothsayers and all inspired persons, when they are affected not by disease but by natural temperament. Maracus, the Syracusan, was actually a better poet when he was out of his mind. Those in whom the excessive heat dies down5 to a mean temperature are atrabilious, but they have [954b1] more practical wisdom and are less eccentric and in many respects superior to others either in education or in the arts or in public life. In respect too of facing dangers an atrabilious state causes great variation, in that many of those who are in this condition are inconsistent under the influence of6 fears; for they vary from time [5] to time according to the state in which their bodies happen to be in respect of their atrabilious temperament. Now this temperament is itself also inconsistent, just as it produces inconsistency in those suffering from the diseases which it causes; for, like water, it is sometimes cold and sometimes hot. And so the announcement of [10] something alarming, if it occurs at a time when the temperament is rather cold, makes a man cowardly; for it has already prepared a way for the entrance of fear, and fear has a chilling effect (as is shown by the fact that those who are greatly alarmed tremble). If, however, the temperament is inclined to be hot, fear reduces it to a moderate temperature and causes a man to be in his senses and unexcited. So [15] too with the despondency which occurs in everyday life (for we are often in the condition of feeling grief without being able to ascribe any cause for it, while at other times we feel cheerful without knowing why), such feelings and those usually called superficial7 feelings occur to a slight degree in every one, for something of the force which produces them is mingled in everyone; but those who are thoroughly [20] penetrated by them acquire them as a permanent part of their nature. For as men differ in appearance not because they possess faces but because they possess certain kinds of faces, some handsome, others ugly, others with nothing remarkable about them (those, that is, who are naturally ordinary); so those who possess an atrabilious temperament in a slight degree are ordinary, but those who have much [25] of it are quite unlike the majority of people. For, if their condition is quite complete, they are very atrabilious; but, if they possess a mixed temperament, they are men of genius. If they neglect their health, they have a tendency towards the atrabilious diseases, the part of the body affected varying in different people; in some persons epileptic symptoms declare themselves, in others apoplectic, in others violent [30] despondency or terrors, in others over-confidence, as happened to Archelaus, King of Macedonia. The force which gives rise to such a condition is the temperament according as it contains heat or cold. If it is cold beyond due measure, it produces groundless despondency; hence suicide by hanging occurs most frequently among [35] the young, but sometimes also among older men. Many men too put an end to themselves after drunkenness, and some atrabilious persons continue in a state of despondency after drinking; for the heat of the wine quenches their natural heat. [955a1] Heat in the region in which we think and form hopes makes us cheerful; and for this reason all men are eager to drink until they become intoxicated, for abundance of wine makes all men hopeful, just as their youth makes children sanguine; for old age [5] is despairing but youth is full of hope. There are a few who are seized with despondency while they are drinking, for the same reason as makes others despondent after drinking. Those then who become despondent as the heat in them dies down tend to hang themselves. Hence the young are more likely than the old to hang themselves; for old age makes the heat die down, and so, in the young, does [10] their condition, which is itself natural.8 When the heat is extinguished suddenly, most men make away with themselves to the general astonishment of all, since they have given no previous sign of any such intention. When the temperament caused by the admixture of black bile is colder, it gives rise, as has been already remarked, to [15] despondency of various kinds, but when it is hotter to cheerfulness. Hence the young are more cheerful, the old more despondent, the former being hot and the latter cold; for old age is a process of cooling. Extinction takes place suddenly from external causes, just as objects which have been heated in the fire are cooled by [20] unnatural processes, as for example when water is poured over hot coals. Hence men sometimes commit suicide after drunkenness; for the heat of the wine is introduced from outside, and when it is extinguished the condition which leads to suicide is set up. Also after sexual intercourse most people tend to be despondent; [25] those, however, who emit a considerable amount of excrement with the semen become more cheerful, for they are relieved of an excess of excrement and breath and heat. But those who indulge in sexual intercourse are often more despondent, for by so doing they become cooled, because they lose something which is valuable, as is shown by the fact that the amount of semen which is emitted is not great.
[30] To sum the matter up, owing to the fact that the effect of black bile is variable, atrabilious persons also show variation; for the black bile becomes very hot and very cold. And because it has an effect upon the character (for heat and cold have such an effect to a greater extent than anything else in us), like wine mingling in a stronger or weaker form in the body, it gives us our own special characters. Now [35] both wine and black bile are full of breath. And since it is possible for a variable state to be well tempered and in a sense a favourable condition, and since it is possible for the condition to be hotter and then again cold, when it should be so, or to change to the contrary owing to excess, the result is that all atrabilious persons have remarkable gifts, not owing to disease but from natural causes.
[955b1] 2 · Why do we say that we acquire a disposition as the result of pursuing some sciences but not others? Are we said to acquire a disposition only by such sciences as enable us to make discoveries, since discovery is the result of a habit?
3 · Why is it that of all the animals man has most practical wisdom? Is it because he has the smallest head in proportion to his body? Or is it because he is [5] abnormally small in certain parts? For that is why his head is small, and among men those who have smaller heads have more practical wisdom than those who have larger heads.
4 · Why is it that a journey seems longer when we traverse it without knowing its length than when we know it, all other conditions being equal? Is it [10] because to know its length is to be able to connect a number with it? For that which cannot be numbered is the same as the infinite, and the infinite is always more than the determinate. Just as, therefore, if one knows that a journey is a certain length it must necessarily be finite, so if one does not know its length one as it were converts [15] the proposition and the mind draws a false conclusion, and this journey appears infinite. Furthermore,9 a quantity is determinate, and that which is determinate is a quantity; therefore when a thing does not appear determinate it will appear to be as it were infinite, because that which is of a nature to be determined, if it is not so, is infinite, and that which appears not to be determined necessarily appears in a sense [20] unlimited.
5 · Why is it that, whereas we become more intelligent as we grow older, yet the younger we are the more easily we can learn? Is it because God has given us two instruments within ourselves, which enable us to use external instruments, providing the body with the hand and the soul with intelligence? For intelligence is among [25] the things implanted in us by nature, being as it were an instrument; and, whereas the sciences and arts are among the things created by us, intelligence is one of the gifts of nature. So just as we cannot use the hand to the best advantage immediately after birth, but only when nature has perfected it (for the hand can perform its [30] particular function best as age progresses), in like manner of our natural endowments reason is of most assistance to us not in early life but as we get old, and is then at its highest perfection, unless it becomes incapacitated by anything, as may happen also to the other natural endowments. Intelligence comes to us later than the faculty of using the hands, because the instruments used by the intelligence are [35] posterior to those used by the hands. For science is an instrument of the intelligence (for it is useful to the intelligence just as flutes are useful to the flute-player), and many things in nature are instruments of the hands, but nature itself and its creations are prior to science. Now it is natural that where the instruments are prior, the faculties should also come into being in us first (for it is by using the instruments that we acquire a disposition); and the instrument of each faculty is [956a1] related similarly to that faculty, and conversely, as the instruments are to one another, so are the faculties of which10 they are the instruments to one another. Intelligence then for this reason comes to us when we are older; but we learn more quickly when we are young because we do not yet know anything, and when we [5] know more we are no longer so well able to acquire knowledge,11 just as we remember best what we come upon early in the day, and then, as the day goes on, are less able to remember what happens, because we have come into contact with a [10] number of incidents.
6 · Why should man be obeyed more than any other animal? Is it because, as Plato answered Neocles, he alone of all the animals can count? Or is it because he is the only animal that believes in gods? Or is it because he is the most imitative (for it is for this reason that he can learn)?
[15] 7 · Why is it that we feel no pleasure in the contemplation or anticipation of the fact that the interior angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles, and similar geometrical truths—except in so far as we enjoy the speculation, and the pleasure of this is always the same and would be equally great if these angles were equal to three or more right angles—but we rejoice at the recollection of an [20] Olympic victory or the sea-battle at Salamis, and at the anticipation of such events, but not in their opposites? Is it because12 we rejoice in such events as having taken place or taking place, but as regards what happens in the course of nature the contemplation of the real state of affairs alone causes us pleasure, whereas actions [25] give rise to the pleasure caused by their results? Since, then, actions are various, their results too are sometimes painful and sometimes pleasant; and we avoid and pursue anything in accordance with pleasure and pain.
8 · Why do doctors continue their treatment only until health is restored? For the doctor reduces the patient, and next dries his body, then creates a healthy [30] condition and at that point stops. Is it because it is impossible for any other condition to be produced from health? Or, if it is possible, is it the task of another science, and will what is produced from health be something different? Now, if health is produced from conditions which are its opposite or are intermediate between health and sickness, it is obvious that the patient is sick because he is too moist or too dry or something else. The doctor, then, from a state of cold creates a [35] less extreme condition and, finally, a condition of a certain heat or dryness or moisture by change from the opposite or intermediate condition, until he achieves a state which is such as to constitute a condition of health; and from this no condition can be produced except one which is intermediate between health and sickness. The possessor of the art can, then, create some new condition; for, when he has reached a certain point, he can retrace his steps and undo his work; but the doctor’s art has nothing to do with such a course, for its aim is always to create a better condition. So neither the doctor’s art nor any other art will create anything else out of health; for [956b1] either nothing would be being produced, or else the opposite of health, if the same science were being employed (so too out of a house nothing could make its contrary): nor is there any other art13 which can make anything out of health, except as making a whole out of a part, as, for example, when the cobbler’s art makes a shoe out of the front part of a shoe; for these two things can be produced out of one another by two processes, one of composition and the other of destruction. [5]
9 · Why is it generally considered that the philosopher is superior to the orator? Is it because the philosopher spends his time in studying the actual forms of things, while the orator deals with what participates in them—the former considering what injustice and tyranny are, the latter urging that a certain individual is unjust or dealing with the character of a tyrant? [10]
10 · Why are theatrical artists generally persons of bad character? Is it because they partake but little of reason and wisdom,14 because most of their life is spent in the pursuit of the arts which provide their daily needs, and because the greater part of their life is passed in incontinence and often in want, and both these things prepare the way to villainy? [15]
11 · Why did the men of old institute prizes for physical contests but none for wisdom? Is it because in all fairness the judges should in the intellectual sphere be either the superiors or at any rate not the inferiors of the competitors? Now if those who were pre-eminent in wisdom had to compete and a prize had been offered, [20] they would have no one to act as judges. In athletic contests, however, anyone can judge by merely using his eyes. Further, the original institutor of the games did not wish to propose to the Greeks such a contest15 as would be likely to produce violent disputes and enmity; for when one is rejected or accepted in a contest of bodily [25] strength, men do not altogether harbour any grievance nor feel sentiments of enmity towards the judges, but they feel great wrath and indignation against those who decide their relative wisdom or worthlessness; and this is a quarrelsome and bad state of affairs. Furthermore, the prize ought to be better than the contest; for [30] in athletic games the prize is more desirable than, and superior to, the contest. But what prize could be found superior to wisdom?
12 · Why is it that man in particular thinks one thing and does another? Is it because the same science deals with contraries? Or is it because the intelligence has many objects, desire one? Now man usually lives by the intelligence, the animals by [35] appetite, passion, and desire.
13 · Why is it that some prudent men spend their time acquiring rather than using? Is it because they are following the habit of doing so? Or is it due to the pleasure of anticipation?
14 · Why do those who sleep deeply and most pleasantly see no visions? Is it because sensation and thought function because the mind is at rest? And this seems [957a1] to be knowledge because knowledge brings the soul to rest; for when it is in motion and being carried along it can neither have sensation nor think. Hence it is that children and those who are drunk and the insane are senseless; for, owing to the abundance of heat present in them, they are in a state of considerable and very [5] violent movement, but when this ceases they become more sensible; for, when the thought is undisturbed, they can control it better. Those who have visions during their sleep dream because thought is checked, and in proportion as it is at rest. For the mind is greatly moved during sleep, since, when heat collects in the interior from [10] the rest of the body, there is very considerable and violent movement; and it is not true, as most people suppose, that it is most at rest and by itself, and especially so when no vision is seen. The contrary is really true; for because it is in considerable movement and never rests for a moment, it cannot think. And it is naturally in most [15] movement when it sleeps most pleasantly, because it is then in particular that the greatest amount of heat collects in the interior of the body. That, when it is in motion, the mind cannot think, not only in its waking hours but also in sleep, is proved by the fact that one is least likely to see visions during the sleep which [20] follows the taking of food; now this is the time when the mind is most disturbed owing to the nourishment which has been introduced into the body. A vision occurs when sleep comes over us while we are thinking or letting things pass before our eyes. Hence we usually see things which we are doing or intend or wish to do; for it is [25] on these things that our thoughts and fancies most often dwell. And the better men are, the better are their dreams, because they think of better things in their waking hours, while those who are less well disposed in mind or body have worse dreams. For there is a close correspondence between the disposition of the body and the [30] images of our dreams; for, when a man is ill, the ideas proposed by his thoughts are bad, and furthermore, owing to the disturbance which reigns in his body, his mind cannot rest. It is for this reason that atrabilious persons start in their sleep, because, owing to the excess of heat, the mind is in a state of too much movement, and, when [35] the movement is too violent, they cannot sleep.
1 · Why does rubbing the eye stop sneezing? Is it because by this means evaporation is given to the moisture? For the eye sheds tears after friction, and [957b1] sneezing is due to an abundance of moisture. Or is it because the lesser heat is destroyed by the greater? Now the eye when it is rubbed acquires more heat than is contained in the nose; and for this reason even if we rub the nose itself the sneezing stops.
2 · Why can one see more accurately with one eye than with both eyes? Is it [5] because more movements are set up by the two eyes, as certainly happens in those who squint? The movement of the two eyes, therefore, is not one, but that of a single eye is one; therefore one sees less accurately with both eyes.
3 · Why do the eyes tend to become very red in those who are angry, and the ears in those who are ashamed? Is it because the eyes are chilled in those who are [10] ashamed (for ‘shame dwells in the eyes’), so that1 they cannot look straight in front of them? (Cowardice also involves a cooling in the same region.) Now the heat2 travels in a direction away from the forepart of the head, and the ears are situated in the opposite part of the head, and therefore they redden most under the emotion of shame. But under the influence of provocation assistance is sent to the more [15] sensitive and easily affected part, as though it were suffering violence; for in those who are frightened it fails altogether there.
4 · Why is it that, if one eye is held down, the other has a more intent gaze? Is it because the origins of sight in the two eyes are connected at one source? So when one eye moves, the common source of sight is also set in motion; and when this [20] moves, the other eye moves also. When one eye therefore is held down, all the movement will be concentrated on the other eye, which consequently will be able to gaze more intently.
5 · Why is it that those who are blind from birth do not become bald? Is it because the eye is injured by the presence of a large quantity of moisture in the region of the head? This is why they cauterize the veins round the temples of those [25] who suffer from running at the eyes (thus closing the ducts through which the humours flow), and scrape the head, cutting into the skin upon it. Since, therefore, it is the excretion gathering in the head which injures the eyes, this same excretion by collecting in too great quantities in the head might prevent the eyes from originally coming into being at all. And since the hair grows from excretions, and [30] the excretion in the head of those who are blind from birth is abundant, it is only natural that they are not bald.
6 · Why are those whose eyes protrude affected more than others by smoke? Is it because smoke reaches the projecting parts most quickly?
7 · Why is it that we can turn the gaze of both eyes simultaneously towards [35] the right and the left and in the direction of the nose, and that of one eye to the left or to the right, but cannot direct them simultaneously one to the right and the other to the left? Similarly, we can direct them downwards and upwards; for we can turn them simultaneously in the same direction, but not separately. Is it because the eyes, though two, are connected at one point, and under such conditions, when one [958a1] extremity moves, the other must follow in the same direction, for one extremity becomes the source of movement to the other extremity? Since, therefore, it is impossible for one thing to move simultaneously in contrary directions, it is impossible also for the eyes to do so; for the extremities would move in opposite [5] directions if one moved up and the other down, and the source of the movement of both of them would have to make corresponding movements, which is impossible. The squinting of the eyes is due to the fact that the eyeballs possess a moving principle and turn, to a certain extent,3 upwards and downwards and sideways. When, therefore, being so placed that they are in a similar position to one another [10] and midway between an upward and a downward and an oblique movement, the two eyeballs catch the visual ray on corresponding points of themselves, they do not have a squint and their gaze is perfectly steady (though when they catch the visual rays on corresponding points of themselves, although the vision does not squint they [15] differ.) Yet, if you turn up the whites of the eyes, part of the pupil is obscured, as for example in those who are about to sneeze; others have oblique vision, madmen for example; in others the gaze is turned towards the nose, as in tragic masks and in those who are nervous, for their glance denotes concentrated thought. But those who keep their gaze fixed on one point without having their eyeballs similarly situated, or who have them similarly situated but do not keep them fixed on the [20] same point, both these have squints; they therefore scowl and screw up the eyes, for they try to fix one eyeball in the same position as the other; so they leave one eye alone and try to bring the other into position. If the vision of both eyes does not rest on the same point,4 they must squint; for the same thing happens as in those to [25] whom, when they press under the eye, a single object appears double, for in these too the source of vision is disturbed. If, therefore, the eye is moved upwards, the terminus of the vision is lowered; if downwards, it is raised. And if the position of [30] one eye is changed, the object of the vision therefore seems to move up or down, because the vision also does so, but it does not appear double unless the vision of both eyes is in use. A similar squint5 occurs also in one whose eyes do not correspond, causing him to see double; but this is due to the position of the vision, because it is not in the middle of the eye.
[35] 8 · Why do those who are short-sighted write in small characters? For it is strange that those who have not acute vision should do what requires such vision. Is it because small things appear large when they are near at hand, and the short-sighted hold what they are writing close to their eyes? Or is it because they screw up their eyes when they write? For owing to the feebleness of their sight, if [958b1] they write with their eyes wide open, the vision, being dispersed, can only see dimly; but when the eyes are screwed up, it all falls on one point, and, since it forms a small angle, it necessarily causes the writing of small characters.
9 · Why can some people see more clearly after suffering from ophthalmia? Is it because their eyes are thus purged? For often the external thickening blocks [5] the vision, but is dissolved when the eye discharges. Hence also it is beneficial that the eyes should be made to smart, with onion for example; but a substance of the opposite kind, such as marjoram, has an adverse effect.
10 · Why are those who see with only one eye less liable to disturbance of the vision? Is it because their mind is less affected, and so the disturbance of the vision [10] is less felt?
11 · Why do objects appear double to those whose eyes are distorted? Is it because the movement does not reach the same point on each of the eyes? So the mind thinks that it sees two objects when it really sees one twice. A similar phenomenon occurs if one crosses the fingers; for a single object appears to be two to a single person touching it twice. [15]
12 · Why is it that the senses on the right side of the body are not superior to those on the left side, but in all other respects the right side of the body is superior? Is it a question of habit, namely, that we accustom ourselves immediately to perceive equally well with the senses on both sides of the body? And it seems that the superiority of the right-hand parts of the body is due to habit, for we can accustom ourselves to be ambidextrous. Or is it because to feel sensation is to be [20] passive, and the right parts of the body are superior in that they are more active and less passive than the left?
13 · Why is it that in all other respects the right side of the body is superior, but in sensation the two sides are alike? Is it because we habitually practise the equal use of sensation on both sides? Moreover, to feel sensation is to be passive, and [25] the superiority of the right side of the body is shown in activity, not in passivity.
14 · Why is physical exercise detrimental to acuteness of vision? Is it because it makes the eye dry, as it does the rest of the body? Now dryness hardens [30] every kind of skin; so it has that effect also on the skin covering the pupil. This is also the reason why the aged have not acute vision; for their eyes have a hard and wrinkled surface, and so the vision is obscured.
15 · Why do the short-sighted, though they have not acute vision, write in small characters? Yet it is characteristic of acute vision to see what is small. Is it [35] because, having weak sight, they screw up their eyes? For when the sight proceeds forth in a concentrated glance it sees better, but when the eye is wide open its vision is dispersed. So owing to the feebleness of their sight they bring their eyelids close together, and, because their vision proceeds from a small area, they see magnitude [959a1] on a small scale, and the characters which they write are on the same scale as their vision.
16 · Why do the short-sighted bring their eyelids close together when they look at anything? Is it due to the weakness of their sight, so that, just as a man in [5] looking at a distant object puts his hand up to his eyes, they close the eyelids to look at objects near at hand? They do so in order that the vision may proceed forth in a more concentrated form, since it passes through a narrower opening, and that it may not be immediately dispersed by passing out through a wide aperture. A wider vision, however, covers a larger field.
17 · Why is it that if the eye be moved sideways a single object does not [10] appear double? Is it because the source of sight is still in the same line? It can only appear double when the line is altered upwards or downwards; and it makes no difference if it is altered sideways, unless it is also at the same time altered upwards. Why, then, is it possible in sight for a single object to appear double if the eyes are in a certain position in relation to one another, but impossible in the other senses? Is it [15] not the case also in touch that one thing becomes two if the fingers are crossed? But with the other senses this does not happen, because they do not perceive objects which extend to a distance away from them, nor are they duplicated like the eyes. It takes place for the same reason as it does with the fingers; for then the touch is imitating the sight.
[20] 18 · Why is it that, though in the rest of the body the left side is weaker than the right, this is not true of the eyes, but the sight of both eyes is equally acute? Is it because the parts of the body on the right side are superior in activity but not in passivity, and the sight is passive?
19 · Why is it that when we keep our gaze fixed on objects of other colours [25] our vision deteriorates, whereas it improves if we gaze intently on yellow and green objects, such as herbs and the like? Is it because we are least able to gaze intently on white and black (for they both mar the vision), and the above-mentioned colours come midway between these, so that, the conditions of vision being of the nature of a [30] mean, our sight is not weakened thereby but improved? Perhaps, just as we take harm from over-violent physical exertion but moderate exercise is beneficial, so too is it with the sight; for we over-exert the sight if we gaze intently on solid objects, but we do not strain it in looking at objects which contain moisture, since there is nothing in them to resist the vision. Now green things are only moderately solid and [35] contain a considerable amount of moisture; they therefore do not harm the sight at all, but compel it to rest upon them, because the admixture of their colouring is suited to the vision.
20 · Why is it that we see other things better with both eyes, but we can judge of the straightness of lines of writing better with one eye, putting it close to the letters? Do both eyes falling on the same point cause confusion, as the writers on [959b1] optics say, whereas, when we look with one eye, straightness is more apparent to the straight vision, just as it is when a measuring rod is used?
21 · Why does smoke make the eyes smart more than any other part of the [5] body? Is it because they alone are very weak, since the inner parts of the body are always the weakest? (This is shown by the fact that vinegar and anything pungent causes not the outer but the inner flesh to smart, because the latter is the rarest flesh in the body and contains most pores.) For the vision finds its exit through certain pores, and so what causes most stinging within is drawn away from the outer flesh. [10] The onion too has a similar effect and anything else which causes the eye to smart, and of liquids olive-oil more than any other, because it is composed of very small particles and so sinks in through the pores. Vinegar is used as a medicament for the rest of the flesh.
22 · Why is it that the eye, although it is very weak, is the only part of the [15] body which does not feel the cold? Is it because the eye is of a fatty consistency and does not partake of the nature of flesh, and such substances are unaffected by the cold? For if the eye is really a fire, this is not the reason why it does not feel cold, for its fire is not at any rate of such a character as to engender heat.
23 · Why are tears warm when we let them fall in weeping, but cold when [20] we shed them owing to an affection of the eyes? Is it because that which is unconcocted is cold, while that which is concocted is hot? Now every malady certainly proceeds from lack of concoction, and the tears of those whose eyes are affected are unconcocted and therefore cold. It is for this reason that physicians [25] regard cold sweating as a sign of serious illness, while on the contrary they consider that hot sweating tends to get rid of disease. For if the excretion is abundant, the internal heat cannot concoct it, so that it must necessarily be cold; but when it is scanty, the internal heat prevails over it. Now all diseases are caused by excretions. [30]
24 · Why is it that, though the parts of the body on the right side are more easily moved, the left eye can be closed more easily than the right? Is it because the parts of the body on the left always contain more moisture, and things that are moist [35] naturally close up more easily?6
25 · Why is it that though both a short-sighted and an old man are affected by weakness of the eyes, the former places an object, if he wishes to see it, near the eye, while the latter holds it at a distance? Is it because they are afflicted with different forms of weakness? For the old man cannot see the object; he therefore [960a1] removes the object at which he is looking to the point at which the vision of his two eyes meets, expecting them to be able to see it best in this position; and this point is at a distance. The short-sighted man, on the other hand, can see the object but cannot proceed to distinguish which parts of the thing at which he is looking are [5] concave and which convex, but he is deceived on these points. Now concavity and convexity are distinguished by means of the light which they reflect; so at a distance the short-sighted man cannot discern how the light7 falls on the object seen; but near at hand the incidence of light can be more easily perceived.
26 · Why is man alone, or at any rate more than the other animals, liable to [10] squinting? Is it because he alone, or more than the other animals, suffers from epilepsy in his youth, at which time squinting always begins?
27 · Why are men alone among the animals liable to squinting? Is it because they have the smallest distance between their eyes and their eyes are in a straight [15] line, so that any distortion is very obvious? Or is it because the eyes of the other animals tend to be of one colour only, and if the eyes were of uniform colour there could be no squinting? Or is it because man alone in the animal world is liable to epilepsy, and epilepsy, whenever it occurs, causes squinting as in the other parts of the body? Squinting, however, sometimes occurs quite late in life, namely, in those [20] to whom the illness comes late.
28 · Why is it that we can see better against the light of a lamp or the sun, if we place the hand in front of the light? Is it because the light of the sun or of the lamp falling on our vision makes it weaker by its excess of brightness, since by this [25] excess it destroys those very things which are akin to it? But if the light is shaded by the hand, it does not hurt the sight, and the object seen is equally in the light; so the sight sees8 better and the object seen is just as visible.
29 · Why is there a difference between the left and the right hand and foot, [30] while this is not so with the eyes and ears? Is it because the elements, when they are pure, show no variation, but variations occur where the elements are compounded? Now these senses consist of pure elements—the sight of fire and the hearing of air.
[35] 1 · Why is it that, though the ears are the most bloodless part of the face, they are most affected by blushing in those who feel shame? Is it because extraneous moisture naturally makes its way most easily into a void, and so, when the moisture is dissolved by the heat engendered in those who feel shame, it collects [960b1] in the ears? Or is it because the ears are near the temples, where the moisture most collects? Now under the emotion of shame the moisture flows into the face and causes blushing. But the ears have less depth than any other part of the face and are naturally very warm and fresh coloured, unless they have been long numbed by the cold; they are then the most fresh coloured of all the parts of the face, and so the [5] heat, when it is dispersed, being nearest the surface in the ears, makes them red.
2 · Why is it that the ear-drums of divers burst in the sea? Is it because the ear, as it fills with water, is subject to violent pressure, because it retains the breath? Surely, if this is the reason, the same thing ought to happen in the air. Or is it [10] because a thing breaks more easily if it does not yield, and more readily under pressure from what is hard than from what is soft? Now that which is inflated is less yielding, and the ears, as has been said, are inflated because the breath is retained in them; and so the water, which is harder than the air, when it presses upon them bursts them.
3 · Why do divers tie sponges round their ears? Is it in order that the sea may [15] not rush violently in and burst the ear-drums? For thus the ears do not become full, as they do when the sponges are removed.
4 · Why is the wax in the ears bitter? Is it because sweat is corrupt? It is, therefore, a salty, corrupt substance; and that which is corrupt and salty is bitter. [20]
5 · Why do sponge-divers slit their ears and nostrils? Is it in order that the breath may pass more freely? For it is by this way that the breath seems to pass out;1 for it is said that they suffer more from difficulty of breathing by being unable to expel the breath, and they are relieved when they can as it were vomit the breath [25] forth. It is strange, then, that they cannot achieve respiration for the sake of its cooling effect; this appears to be a greater necessity. Is it not quite natural that the strain should be greater when the breath is held, since then they are swollen and distended? But there appears to be a spontaneous passage of the breath outwards; and we must next consider whether breathing inwards is so also. Apparently it is; [30] for they enable the divers to respire equally well by letting down a cauldron; for this does not fill with water, but retains the air, for it is forced down straight into the water; since, if it inclines at all from an upright position, the water flows in.
6 · Why do some people cough when they scrape their ears? Is it because the [35] hearing is connected with the same duct as the lungs and the wind-pipe? This is shown by the fact that, if these parts are filled up, a man becomes deaf. When, therefore, heat is set up by friction, moisture is caused by melting and flows downwards from the duct2 into the wind-pipe and causes coughing.
7 · Why is it that, if a hole is pierced in the left ear, it generally closes up [961a1] more quickly than in the right ear? It is for this reason that women call the right ear the ‘male’ and the left the ‘female’. Is it because the left parts of the body are moister and hotter, and such things close up very quickly? This is why green plants [5] grow together again; and why wounds close up more readily in the young than in the old. This is a sign that the parts on the left side of the body are moister and, generally speaking, partake rather of feminine characteristics.
8 · Why is it that in those who feel shame the extremities of the ears turn red, but in those who are angry it is the eyes that do so? Is it because shame is a cooling [10] in the eyes accompanied by fear, so that the heat naturally leaves the eyes? So, when it withdraws thence, it travels to the region best adapted to receive it, and this is the extremity of the ears; for the region of the face is otherwise bony. In those who are angry the heat travels in the other direction and makes itself most manifest in [15] the eyes owing to their white colour.
9 · Why is it that buzzing in the ears ceases if one makes a sound? Is it because the greater sound drives out the less?
10 · Why is it that, if water has flowed into the ear, one pours olive oil in, though the moisture in the ear cannot pass out through another liquid? Is it because [20] the oil floats on the surface of the water and, owing to the adhesive nature of the oil, the water clings to it when it comes out, the object being to make the water come out with the oil? Or is it in order that the ear may be lubricated and the water therefore come out? For oil being smooth acts as a lubricant.
11 · Why is it that the ear-drums of divers are less liable to burst if they pour [25] olive-oil beforehand into them? Does the reason for their bursting already mentioned still hold good, but the oil poured into the ears cause the sea-water, which subsequently enters the ear, to glide smoothly over its surface, just as happens on the exterior parts of the bodies of those who anoint themselves? The sea-water gliding smoothly along does not make a violent impact upon the inside of [30] the ear, and so does not break the drum.
12 · Why is it that, although the ears are the most bloodless part of the face, they turn red in those who feel shame? Is everything carried to that part which is most devoid of it? Now in a man who feels shame the blood seems to be carried upwards in a heated condition; it therefore passes into the part which is most devoid of it and causes it to become red. The same thing happens also in the cheeks. A [35] further reason is that the skin of the ears, which is tightly stretched, is very thin and therefore very transparent.
13 · Why is it that no one scrapes out his ears while yawning? Is it because, when one yawns, the drum of the ear, by means of which he hears, is inflated? That this is so is shown by the fact that one hears least well while yawning; for the breath, as happens also in the mouth, finds its way into the interior of the ears and thrusts the membrane outwards and prevents the sound from entering. If, therefore, one [961b1] touches the seat of hearing when in this condition in such a way as to scrape it, one might cause considerable damage to it; for the impact would be against a resisting and unyielding surface inflated by the breath, and it is obvious that the skin and the membrane are far from being solid; and so great pain is caused and a wound might [5] result.
1 · Why is it that sneezing stops hiccuping but does not stop belching? Is it because they are not affections of the same region, but belching is a cooling and lack [10] of concoction in the stomach, while hiccuping is a similar affection of breath and moisture in the region of the lungs? Now the regions about the head (the ears,1 for example) are closely connected with the lungs. This is proved by the facts that deafness and dumbness are found together, and that the diseases of the ears become diverted into affections of the lungs; also in some persons coughing results when the [15] ears are scratched. That there is a connection between the region of the nose, in which the sneeze takes place, and the lungs is shown by the fact that both share in respiration; and so, while the nose sneezes when that region becomes hot, the lower region, where hiccuping takes place, also sneezes in sympathy. Now heat causes concoction; hence vinegar stops hiccups, as also does holding the breath if the [20] hiccup is only slight, for it heats the breath which is constricted. So too in sneezing the counter-constriction of the breath has this effect and exhalation takes place properly and from the upper region; for it is impossible to sneeze without exhaling. The impetus then dispels the enclosed breath which is the cause of the hiccup. [25]
2 · Why is it that if, when one is about to sneeze, one rubs the eye, one sneezes less? Is it because what causes the sneeze is a kind of heat, and friction produces heat, which, owing to the close proximity to the eyes of the region in which [30] the sneeze occurs, destroys the other heat, just as the lesser fire fades away before the greater?
3 · Why is it that one generally sneezes twice, and not once or many times? Is it because there are two nostrils? The channel, therefore, through which the breath passes is divided between the two. [35]
4 · Why is it that one sneezes more after one has looked at the sun? Is it because the sun engenders heat and so causes movement, just as does tickling the nose with a feather? For both have the same effect; by setting up movement they cause heat and create breath more quickly from the moisture; and it is the escape of this breath which causes sneezing.
[962a1] 5 · Why do sneezing and holding the breath and vinegar stop hiccups? Does sneezing, since it is a displacement of the lower breath, act in the same sort of way as medicines which, though applied in the upper part of the body, affect the lower part of the stomach? Holding the breath stops weak hiccups, because the slight [5] impetus of the breath which comes forth represses and stifles and completely dispels the hiccup, just as happens in coughing, which2 ceases if you hold it back. Vinegar stops hiccuping because by its heat it vaporizes the surrounding moisture, which prevents belching; for belching takes place when the moisture in the upper part of [10] the stomach is vaporized and concocted, whereas hiccuping occurs when by the action of moisture breath is retained in an excessive quantity in the region of the lungs; for this, gaining impetus and being unable to break through, causes a spasm, and this spasm is called a hiccup. Hence hiccuping seizes those who are cold, because the cold causes the moisture to acquire consistency3 from the breath, and [15] the rest of the breath, being still enclosed, gives a leap, and its movement is hiccuping.
6 · Why do we sometimes pour cold water over a person’s face when his nose is bleeding? Is it because the heat is thus driven inwards? If, therefore, the blood is [20] near the surface, it tends to liquefy it.
7 · Why do we regard sneezing as divine, but not coughing or running at the nose? Is it because it comes from the most divine part of us, namely, the head, which is the seat of reasoning? Or is it because the other affections are the results of disease, but sneezing is not?
[25] 8 · Why does rubbing the eye stop sneezing? Is it because by this means evaporation is given to the moisture? For the eye sheds tears after friction, and sneezing is due to an abundance of moisture. Or is it because the lesser heat is destroyed by the greater? Now the eye when rubbed acquires more heat than is [30] contained in the nose; and for this reason, even if we rub the nose itself, the sneezing stops.
9 · Why is it that the emission of other kinds of breath, e.g. farting and belching, are not regarded as sacred, but that of a sneeze is so regarded? Is it because of the three regions of the body—the head, the thorax, and the lower [35] stomach—the head is the most divine? Now farting is breath from the lower stomach and belching is from the upper stomach, but sneezing is from the head; because, therefore, this region is most sacred, the breath also from it is revered as sacred. Or is it because all discharges of breath show that the above-mentioned parts are in a better state generally (for without any discharge of excrement the breath in its passage out lightens the body), and so too sneezing shows that the [962b1] region of the head is in a healthy condition and capable of concoction? For when the heat in the head overcomes the moisture, the breath turns into a sneeze. This is why men test the dying by applying something which will cause sneezing, with the idea that, if this does not affect them, their case is indeed desperate. Thus sneezing is [5] revered as sacred as being a sign of health in the best and most sacred region of the body, and is regarded as a good omen.
10 · Why does man sneeze most of all animals? Is it because in him the ducts are wide through which the breath and scent4 pass in? For it is with these when they are full of breath that he sneezes. That these ducts are wide is shown by [10] the fact that man has a weaker sense of smell than any other animal, and those who have narrow ducts have a keener sense of smell. If, therefore, the moisture, the evaporation of which causes sneezing, enters in larger quantities and more often into wide ducts, and man more than any other animal has such ducts, he might naturally be expected to sneeze more often. Or is it because5 his nostrils are [15] particularly short, and so the heated moisture can quickly become breath and be expelled, whereas in other animals owing to the length of their nostrils it cools before it can evaporate?
11 · Why is sneezing between midnight and midday regarded as a bad thing, but between midday and midnight as a good thing? Is it because sneezing [20] seems rather to check those who are commencing anything and are at the beginning? And so, if it occurs when we are intending or beginning something, we are deterred from action.6 Now early morning and the period after midnight are as it were a new beginning; therefore we carefully avoid sneezing so as not to hinder the action which has been begun. But towards evening and up to midnight there is [25] as it were an ending and the contrary of the earlier period, so that the same thing that was undesirable becomes, under contrary conditions, desirable.
12 · Why do the old sneeze with difficulty? Is it because the ducts through which the breath passes have become partially closed? Or is it because they are no longer able to raise the breath up with ease, and, when they have done so, they expel [30] it downwards with a violent effort?
13 · Why is it that, if one holds the breath, hiccuping ceases? Is it because hiccuping is the result of cooling (hence those who are frightened and those who are chilled hiccup), whereas the breath when it is held back warms the interior region?
[35] 14 · Why do the deaf usually talk through their noses? Is it because they suffer from lung trouble, since deafness is simply a congestion in the region of the lungs? The voice therefore does not easily find a passage; but, just as the breath of those who are panting or gasping accumulates owing to their inability to exhale it, so it is with the voice of the deaf. It therefore forces its way even through the [963a1] nostrils, and, as it does so, owing to the friction, causes the echoing sound. For talking through the nose takes place when the upper part of the nose, where the openings to the roof of the mouth are situated, becomes hollow in form; it then resounds like a bell, its lower part being narrow.
[5] 15 · Why is sneezing the only phenomenon which does not occur when we are asleep, but takes place practically always while we are awake? Is it because sneezing is the result of heat of some kind causing motion in the region from which the sneeze proceeds (and this is why we look up at the sun when we want to sneeze)? [10] Or is it because when we are asleep the heat is driven inwards? This is why the lower parts become warm in those who are asleep, and the large quantity of breath which collects there is the cause of the emission of semen during sleep. It is only natural, therefore, that we do not sneeze; for when the heat (which naturally sets in motion the moisture in the head, the evaporation7 of which causes the sneeze) is withdrawn [15] from the head, it is only natural that the phenomenon which it causes does not take place. Men fart and belch rather than sneeze when they are asleep rather than awake, because, as the region about the stomach becomes hot during sleep, the moisture there becomes vaporized and, as it does so, is carried into the nearest parts; [20] for it is thrust together there by the breath engendered during sleep. For a man who is asleep is better able to hold than to expel the breath; therefore he collects the heat within him. Now when a man holds his breath he forces it downwards; for a downward course is unnatural to the breath, and that is why it is difficult to hold the [25] breath. The same thing is the cause of sleep also; for since waking is movement and this movement occurs to a great extent in the organs of sensation while we are awake, it is plain that we should go to sleep when our organs of sense are at rest.8 And since it is fire which creates movement in our parts, and this during sleep is [30] driven inwards and leaves the region of the head, where the seat of sensation is situated, our organs of sense would then be most at rest, and this must be the cause of sleep.
16 · Why do people shiver after sneezing and passing urine? Is it because by both actions the veins are emptied of the warm air which was previously in them, [35] and, when they are empty, other air enters from without, colder than that which was previously in the veins; and such air entering in causes shivering?
17 · Why does sneezing stop hiccuping? Is it because hiccuping (unlike belching, which comes from the stomach when it receives food) comes from the lungs9 and generally results from cooling as an effect of chill or pain or medicine [963b1] entering from above? For the region of the lungs, being naturally hot, when it is cooled does not emit all the breath but forms as it were bubbles. This is why hiccuping stops if the breath is held (for the region then becomes warm); and the application of vinegar, which is heating, has the same effect. Heat then collecting [5] from the heat of the brain also (for the upper regions are connected by passages with the lungs) and the lungs being warm, the holding of the breath which precedes the sneeze, and the downward impetus from above, dissolve the hiccuping.
18 · Why is it that those who have crisp hair and whose hair curls are [10] usually rather snub-nosed? Is it because crispness resides in fatness, and fatness is accompanied by hardness, and the blood being hard is hot, and heat does not produce excrement, and boniness is formed from excrement, and the cartilage of the nose is bony—therefore a scantiness of this part is a natural result? This theory is supported by the fact that young children are always snub-nosed. [15]
1 · Why is it that those who have widely-spaced teeth are not long-lived? Is it because the long-lived have more teeth, for instance males have more than females, men than women, and rams than ewes? Those men who have widely-spaced teeth [20] apparently resemble those who have fewer teeth.
2 · Why is it that, though the teeth are stronger than the flesh, yet they are more sensitive to cold? Is it because they are closely connected with the pores, in which the heat, because it is small, is quickly overcome by the cold and causes [25] pain?
3 · Why are the teeth more sensitive to cold than to heat, while the contrary is true of the flesh? Is it because the flesh partakes of the mean and is well tempered, but the teeth are cold and therefore more sensitive to cold?1 Or is it because the teeth consist of narrow pores in which the heat is scanty, so that they are quickly affected by the opposite of heat? Now the flesh is warm, so that it is [30] unaffected by the cold, but is quickly sensitive to heat; for it is a case of ‘fire added to fire’.
4 · Why is it that the tongue is indicative of many things? For in acute diseases it indicates fever by the presence of blisters upon it; also the tongues of [35] sheep are particoloured if the sheep are so. Is it because the tongue is capable of taking up moisture and is situated near the lungs, which are the seat of fevers? Now all things which are particoloured are so because their humours are particoloured, and that part first takes on colour through which the humour first passes; and this is what happens to the tongue. Now blisters collect on the tongue because it is spongy; for a blister is as it were an eruption which has not been concocted within.
[964a1] 5 · Why is it that the tongue becomes bitter and salty and acid but never sweet? Is it because these qualities are corruptions and so the tongue cannot perceive its own real nature?
6 · Why is it that the coloration of the tongue corresponds with that of the [5] skin? Is it because it is really an external part of the body, though it is enclosed in the mouth, and is it because the skin on it is thin that even a slight variegation of colour makes itself visible? Or is it because it is liquid that causes change of colour, and the tongue is most affected by what is drunk?
[10] 7 · Why is it that one can emit both hot and cold breath from the mouth? For one can puff out cold breath and huff out warm breath. That the breath is warm can be demonstrated by placing the hand near the mouth. Or is the air which is set in motion warm2 in both cases, but does he who puffs out breath not set the air in motion all at once but blow through a partly closed mouth, so that, though he emits [15] but little breath, he sets up motion over a large area of the outer air, in which the warmth from his mouth is not apparent owing to its scantiness? But one who huffs emits it all at once, and therefore it is warm. For it is characteristic of puffing out breath to3 pack the air into a particularly small place; whereas huffing is emitting it all at once.
8 · Why is it that, if one exhales violently and with all the breath at once, it is [20] impossible to exhale again? So too with violent inhalation, which cannot be repeated again immediately. Is it because exhalation is a local dilatation, and inhalation a local contraction, both of which can be carried out within certain limits? Clearly, therefore, the two processes must be carried out one after another, but neither can be performed twice consecutively.
[25] 9 · Why is it that, though there is one passage through which meat and drink pass and another through which we breathe, if we swallow too large a morsel we choke? In this there is nothing strange; for not only do we choke if something penetrates into this passage, but we choke still more if it be blocked. Now the [30] passages through which we take food and through which we breathe are parallel to one another; when, therefore, too large a morsel is swallowed, the respiration is also blocked, so that there is no way out for the breath.
10 · Why is it that men are very long-lived who have a line right across the palm? Is it because those animals which are badly articulated are short-lived and weak? As an instance of weakness we may take young animals, and of shortness of [35] life the aquatic creatures. Clearly then those who are well articulated must be the opposite, namely, those in whom even those parts are best articulated which are by nature badly articulated. Now the inside of the hand is the least well articulated part of the body.
11 · Why is it that, in deep breathing, when we draw in the breath the stomach contracts, but when we exhale it fills out? Now the contrary of this might [964b1] be expected to occur. Is it because in breathing the stomach is compressed downwards by the flanks and then appears to expand again, like bellows?
12 · Why do we respire? Does the breath dissolve into fire, just as the [5] moisture dissolves into breath? The heat, then, of nature, when the greater part of the breath produces fire, causes pain and pressure upon the ducts; and that is why we emit the fire with the breath. Now when the breath and fire go forth,4 the ducts contract and are cooled, and pain results; we therefore draw the breath in again. [10] Then when we have opened the ducts of the body and given them relief, fire is again engendered and we again feel discomfort, and therefore expel it and continue to do so indefinitely; just as we continually blink as the part round the eye cools and becomes dry. Also we walk without5 giving attention to the manner of our walking, [15] the intellect by itself6 guiding us. In like manner, therefore, we carry out the process of breathing; for we do so by contriving to draw in air, and then continue to draw it in.
1 · Why do we shudder more when some one else touches us than when we [20] touch ourselves? Is it because the touch of a part of some one else has more power to produce sensation than that of a part of oneself, since that which is connected by growth with the sense-organ is imperceptible? Also anything which occurs unawares and suddenly is more frightening, and fright is a process of cooling; and both these qualities are possessed by the touch of another as contrasted with one’s [25] own touch. And, speaking generally, passive sensation is produced either solely by some one else or at any rate in a greater degree than by oneself; as happens for example in tickling.
2 · Why do we feel tickling in the armpits and on the soles of the feet? Is it [30] owing to the thinness of the skin? And do we feel it most where we are unaccustomed to being touched, as in these parts and the ears?
3 · Why is it that every one does not shudder at the same things? Is it because, just as we do not all feel pleasure or pain at the same things, so we do not shudder at the same things? For the same sort of cooling process takes place. So [35] some people shudder when a garment is torn, others when a saw is being sharpened or drawn through wood, others when pumice-stone is being cut, others when the millstone is grinding on stone.
4 · Why is it that, though the summer is warm and the winter cold, bodies [965a1] are colder to the touch in summer than in winter? Is it because perspiration and the act of perspiring cool the body, and this takes place in summer but not in winter? Or [5] is it because cold and heat are driven inwards inversely to the seasons, and in the summer the cold takes refuge within and therefore causes perspiration to be given off, whereas in winter the cold keeps the perspiration in and the body vaporizes it, as does the earth?
5 · Why do the hairs bristle upon the skin? Is it because they naturally stand erect when the skin is contracted, and this contraction occurs owing to cold and [10] certain other conditions?
6 · Why is it that no one can tickle himself? Is it because one also feels tickling by another person less if one knows beforehand that it is going to take place, and more if one does not foresee it? A man will therefore feel tickling least when he is causing it and knows that he is doing so. Now laughter is a kind of derangement [15] and deception (and so men laugh when they are struck in the midriff; for it is not just any part of the body with which one laughs). Now that which comes unawares tends to deceive, and it is this also which causes the laughter, whereas one does not make oneself laugh.
7 · Why is it that we feel tickling in particular on the lips? Is it because the part which feels tickling must be situated not far from the seat of sensation? Now [20] the lips are essentially in this position, and so of all parts of the head the most sensitive to tickling are the lips, which are fleshy, and therefore very easily set in motion.
8 · Why is it that a man bursts out laughing if one scratches the region of his armpits, though he does not do so when any other part is tickled? And why does a [25] man sneeze if he tickles his nostrils with a feather? Is it because these parts are regions where the small veins are situated, and when these are cooled or undergo the opposite process they become moist or dissolve into breath as the result of the moisture? (Similarly, if one compresses the veins in the neck of one who is asleep, an extraordinarily pleasant sensation is caused.1) And when the breath is engendered in greater abundance, we emit it in a single mass. Similarly also in sneezing, when [30] we warm the moisture in the nostrils and scratch them with a feather, we dissolve it into breath; and when the breath becomes superabundant we expel it.
9 · Why is it that we often shudder after taking solid food? Is it because when food which is cold enters the body it prevails at first over the natural heat rather than vice versa? [35]
10 · Why is it that an object which is held between two crossed fingers appears to be two? Is it because we touch it with two sense-organs? For when we hold the hand in its natural position we cannot touch2 an object with the outer3 sides of the two fingers.
1 · Why is the face chosen for representation in portraits? Is it because the [965b1] face shows best what the character of a person is? Or is it because it is most easily recognized?
2 · Why is it that one perspires most freely on the face, though it is far from being fleshy? Is it because parts which are rather moist and rare perspire freely, and [5] the head has these characteristics? For it contains an abundance of natural moisture; this is shown by the veins which extend from it and the discharges which it produces, and the fluidity of the brain and the numerous pores. That there are numerous pores extending outwards is shown by the presence of the hair. The perspiration then comes not from the lower parts of the body but from the head; and [10] so one perspires most readily and freely on the forehead, for it is highest in position and moisture flows down and not up.
3 · Why do eruptions occur more frequently on the face than elsewhere? Is it because this part contains rarities and moisture? That this is so is shown by the [15] growth of hair on it and by its power of sensation; and an eruption is as it were an efflorescence of unconcocted moisture.
[20] 1 · Why is it that, though the body is in a state of continual flux, and effluvia are given off from the excrements, the body is only lightened if it perspires? Is it because the excretion in the form of effluvia is too little (for when liquid is transformed into air, much air is formed out of little liquid)? For what is excreted is [25] more, which accounts for excretion taking longer to begin.
2 · And what is the reason for this? Is it because its exit takes place through smaller pores? For the viscous and the adhesive matter is expelled with the moisture because it mingles with it, but it cannot be expelled with the breath; and it is this [30] thick matter in particular which causes pain. Therefore also vomiting lightens the body more than sweating, because that which is vomited, being thicker and more substantial, carries away this viscous matter with it. Or is there a further reason, namely, that the region in which the viscous and the adhesive matter is, is situated at a distance in relation to the flesh (and so it is difficult to make it change its position), but near to the stomach? For it is engendered either in or close to it; and [35] therefore it is difficult to get rid of it in any other way.
3 · Why is it that friction produces flesh? Is it because heat has great power to increase what is in the body? For the bulk of what already exists in it becomes greater if the body is in continual motion and if our internal humours are carried [966a1] upwards and vaporized, and this occurs as a result of friction; whereas in the absence of this, the body wastes away and decreases. Or is it because the flesh increases in bulk by nutriment1 as the result of heat (for anything which is hot has the power to attract moisture, and the nutriment distributed in the flesh is moist and [5] the flesh takes up nutriment better by being rare, for the rarer a thing is the more it can absorb, like a sponge), whereas friction makes the flesh well ventilated and rare and prevents congestion in the body? Now if there is no congestion, there can be no [10] wasting either; for atrophy and wasting are the result of conglomeration. But the better ventilated and the rarer and the more homogeneous the parts of the body are, the more likely they are to acquire bulk, for they are better able to take up nutriment and to get rid of excrements, since the flesh must be rarefied and not condensed in order to promote health. For just as a city or locality is healthy which [15] is open to the breezes (and that is why the sea too is healthy), so the body is healthier if the air can circulate in it than when it is in the contrary condition. For either there ought to be no excrement in the body, or else the body ought to be able to get rid of it as soon as possible and be in such a condition that it can reject the excrement as soon as it receives it and be always in a state of motion and never at [20] rest. For that which remains stationary putrefies (standing water, for example), and that which putrefies creates disease; but that which is rejected passes away before it becomes corrupt. This then does not occur if the flesh is dense (the ducts being as it were blocked up), but it does happen if the flesh is rare. One ought not therefore to walk naked in the sun; for the flesh thereby solidifies and acquires an absolutely [25] fleshy consistency; for the internal moisture remains, but the surface moisture is expelled in the form of a vapour, just as in roast meat in the inner portions are moister than in boiled meat. Nor ought one to walk in the sun with the chest bare, [30] for then the sun draws out the moisture from the best constructed parts of the body, which2 least require to be deprived of it; but it is rather the inner parts which need to be dried, for, because they are remote, it is impossible to produce perspiration except by a violent effort; but it is easy to exhaust the moisture in the chest, because it is near the surface.
4 · Why is it that, when we are chilled, the same heat causes more burning [35] and pain? Is it because owing to its density the flesh holds the heat which comes into contact with it? This is the reason why lead becomes hotter than wool. Or is the passage of the heat violent because the body is congealed by cold?
5 · Why does dry friction render the flesh solid? Is it because heat is [966b1] engendered by the friction and the moisture is used up? Furthermore, the flesh when rubbed becomes dense, and everything becomes denser and solider the more it is rubbed. This can be seen in many examples; dough, for instance, and clay and [5] similar substances, if you pour water into them and spread them out, remain moist and fluid, but, if you apply more friction, they quickly become dense, solid and viscous.
6 · Why does friction produce more flesh than running? Is it because [10] running cools the flesh and makes it less absorbent of nutriment, but part of the nutriment is shaken downwards, while the part on the surface,3 owing to the exhaustion of the natural heat, becomes quite thin and is expelled in the form of breath? But the hand by friction makes the flesh rare and able to take up nutriment. [15] Moreover, the external contact, opposing by its pressure the natural impetus of the flesh, makes it compact and drives it back upon itself.
1 · Why is it that the sun bleaches wax and olive oil, but darkens the flesh? Is [20] it because it bleaches the former by extracting the water from them (for that which is moist is naturally black owing to the admixture of the earthy element), whereas it scorches the flesh?
[25] 2 · Why have fishermen reddish hair, and divers for murex, and in short all who work on the sea? Is it because the sea is hot and full of dryness because it is salty? Now that which is of this nature, like lye and orpiment, makes the hair reddish. Or is it because they are warmer in their outer parts, but their inner parts [30] are chilled, because, owing to their getting wet, the surrounding parts are always being dried by the sun? And as they undergo this process, the hair being dried becomes fine and reddish. Furthermore all those who live towards the north have fine, reddish hair.
3 · Why is it that running in clothing and anointing the body under the [35] clothing with oil makes men pale skinned, whereas running naked makes them ruddy? Is it because ventilation produces a ruddy colour, while suffocation has the opposite effect and causes pallor, because the moisture on the surface is heated up and does not cool? Now perspiring in clothes and anointing the body under the [967a1] clothing both have the same effect, namely, that the heat is enclosed. But running naked makes the flesh ruddy for the opposite reason, because the air cools the excrements which form and ventilates the body. Further, the oil, which is moist and thin, being smeared over the body under the clothing and blocking up the pores, [5] does not allow either the moisture and breath from the body to escape or the external air to penetrate inwards. Therefore the moist excrements being choked in the body decay and produce pallor.
4 · Why is it that the ventilation of the flesh makes it ruddy? Is it because pallor is as it were a corruption of the flesh? When, therefore, the surface is moist [10] and hot, it becomes yellow unless it is cooled and gives off the heat in the form of breath.
5 · Why is it that those who perspire are ruddy as a result of their exercises, whereas athletes are pale? Is it because as the result of moderate exertion the heat is [15] burnt up and comes to the surface, whereas by constant exertion it is drained off with the perspiration and breath, the body being rarefied by exertion? When, therefore, the heat comes to the surface, a man becomes ruddy, just as he does when he is hot or ashamed; but when the heat fails, he is pallid. Now ordinary persons indulge in moderate exercise, whereas athletes are constantly training.
[20] 6 · Why are men more sunburnt who sit still in the sun than those who take exercise? Is it because those who are in motion are as it were fanned by the breath owing to the movement of the air which they set up, whereas those who are sitting still do not undergo this process?
7 · Why does the sun scorch, while fire does not? Is it because the heat of the [25] sun is finer and can penetrate farther into the flesh? Fire, on the other hand, if it does scorch, only raises the surface of the flesh by creating what we call blisters, and does not penetrate within.
8 · Why is it that fire does not make men black, whereas the sun does so, and [967b1] why does fire blacken earthenware, while the sun does not? Or do they produce their effects by dissimilar means, the sun blackening the flesh by scorching it and the fire permeating the earthenware with the soot which it sends up? (Now soot consists of fine coal-dust, formed by the simultaneous breaking-up and burning of [5] the charcoal.) The sun, then, makes men black, while the fire does not do so, because the heat of the sun is gentle and owing to the smallness of its parts it can scorch the flesh itself; and so, because it does not set the flesh on fire, it does not cause pain, but it blackens it because it scorches it. Fire, on the other hand, either does not kindle at all or else penetrates within; for what is burnt by fire also becomes [10] black, but it does not burn merely that part of the body in which the colour is situated.
9 · Why do men become darker complexioned as they become older? Is it because anything which decays becomes blacker, except mildew? And old age and decay are the same thing. Further, since the blood when it dries up becomes blacker, [15] it is only likely that older men are darker; for it is the blood which naturally gives colour to our bodies.
10 · Why is it that, of persons engaged in the preparation of cereals, those who handle barley become pale and are subject to catarrh, while those who handle [20] wheat are healthy? Is it because wheat is more easily concocted than barley, and therefore its emanations are also more easily concocted?
11 · Why is it that sun bleaches olive oil but darkens the flesh? Is it because it extracts the earthy element from the olive oil, and this, like the earthy element in wine, is the black part of it? Now it darkens the flesh because it burns it; for that [25] which is earthy always becomes black when burnt.