Chapter VII: Part 7

COMMENTARY. Hippocrates, Rhases, and other of the ancient authors agree, that pulse, in general, are nutritious. All held that they are flatulent, excrementitious, and aphrodisiacal. According to Plutarch it was on account of their aphrodisiacal qualities that the Egyptian priests forbade the use of them. Some assign this as the reason why Pythagoras “ventri indulsit non omne legumen.” Apollonius Dyscolus says that he did so because they are flatulent, difficult to digest, and occasion disturbed dreams. (Hist. Mirab. 46.) This seems the most likely reason; but Plutarch, Iamblichus, and Porphyry think they see more recondite meanings in the Pythagorean interdiction. Actuarius remarks that all kinds of pulse are to be eaten in their green juicy state. In an ancient proverb, preserved by Athenæus, it is said that “figs are to be eaten after fish, and pulse after flesh.”

Galen speaks of lentils in much the same terms as Paulus. He particularly disapproves of the practice, which he says was common in his time, of eating them with sodden wine. Rhases says that they are of a cold, desiccative, and excrementitious nature. Actuarius calls them the worst of the legumina. Athenæus mentions that the Egyptians lived much upon lentils. (iv.) Martial, in like manner, speaks of them as an Egyptian food.

All the commentators are puzzled to determine what the ancient faba was. We are inclined to think, with Dickson, that Theophrastus’s description of it applies best to our small bean. The Egyptian bean, according to Sprengel, was the _nelumbium speciosum_. Galen mentions that beans were much used by the gladiators, for giving them flesh, but adds that it was not firm or compact. Actuarius states that they are nutritious, but dissuades from using them freely, because of their flatulence. According to Celsus, both beans and lentils are stronger food than peas. Seth agrees with Galen, that the flesh formed from them is flabby and soft. Galen directs beans to be fried or boiled with onions, whereby they will be rendered less flatulent. (De Alim. Facult. i.)

It is probable that the faseolus was the kidney-bean, or _phaseolus communis_ L. Harduin calls it _feverole_ in French. Rhases says that fasels are flatulent, and fatten the body. Pliny remarks that they are eaten with their husks. He alludes, we suppose, to the variety of them called Dolichi. Galen says that they are more laxative and nutritious, but not so flatulent as peas. Oribasius says that they hold an intermediate place between those substances which give much and those which afford little nourishment. Actuarius says they are the worst kind of beans, and that being heating and excrementitious they are apt to disorder the bowels. Tares, as Galen and Oribasius mention, were sometimes used for food during a famine.

All the authorities give peas much the same characters as Paulus does. Galen mentions the method of steeping chiches in water, and getting them to germinate before using them for food. Are the _bons vivans_ of the present day acquainted with this method of making peas tender and soft? The ancients were also in the practice of preparing these seeds for sowing in much the same manner. (Geopon. ii, 36.) See also Pliny (xviii, 13.) We are inclined to think that Virgil alludes to this practice (Georg. i, 193); but Dr. Hunter has put a different interpretation on this passage. The species of pea which grows plentifully in Sicily, and is called _pisum ochrys_, is said to hold a middle place as to quality.

Rhases remarks that lupines, being bitter, are not properly articles of food, but medicines. They possess, he adds, little nutriment. Galen says that they are indigestible, and therefore apt to engender crude humours. When eaten, he directs them to be well sweetened.

Galen mentions that some took fenugreek, with fish-sauce, to open the belly. He says it may be eaten with vinegar, wine, fish-sauce, or oil. Some, he adds, use them as a condiment to bread. Rhases gives similar directions for using fenugreek.

Galen likewise makes mention of the lathyrus and aracus, two varieties of the chichling vetch. He says they resemble in properties the fasels. The common vetch was scarcely an article of food.

The sesame, that is to say, the _sesamum orientale_, or oily grain, as Galen remarks, is of an oily nature, and consequently heavy on the stomach.

Galen speaks of linseed as having been used for food by peasants in Asia, but adds, that it is not eaten by more refined persons.

SECT. LXXX.—ON THE SUMMER FRUITS.

The gourd is of a cold and humid nature, loosens the bowels, and gives little nourishment. The pompion is altogether a fruit of bad juices, cold, humid and emetic; and, when not properly digested, it occasions cholera. The seed of it is diuretic, breaks down stones in the kidneys, and is altogether very detergent. The squash has all the properties of the pompion in an inferior degree. The cucumber is of a less cold and humid nature than the pompion, but is more diuretic; it is difficult to digest, and its chyme is bad even when digested. Upon the whole, all this class of fruits are of a cold and humid nature, supply little nourishment, and that of a bad quality.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. Galen explains that the Fructus Horæi are those fruits which grow up about the middle of the dog-days. He says that they all contain unwholesome juices, which, if they spoil in the bowels, are apt to become deleterious poisons. Mnesitheus says that all these fruits supply little nourishment, but that what they give is of a humid nature, and does not disagree with the body. (Athenæus, ii.)

The gourd (κολοκύνθη), according to Galen, is the most innocent of this class of fruits; and yet, when it spoils in the stomach, it engenders bad juices. Diphilus, as quoted by Athenæus, says of it that it supplies little nourishment, is apt to spoil, dilutes the system, is readily discharged, contains good juices, and is more savoury when taken with water and vinegar, but more wholesome when pickled. Apicius gives many receipts for cooking gourds. By one of these we are directed to eat them boiled, with pickle, oil, and wine. Most of the other receipts contain a liberal allowance of spices and aromatics. Simeon Seth calls them digestible and wholesome, but not nutritious.

The pompion (πέπων), according to Galen, is juicy, detergent, diuretic, and laxative. Seth recommends persons of a pituitous habit of body to drink old wine with it, but such as are bilious to eat acid food. He remarks that it is apt to excite nausea. Actuarius says that, when digested, pompions form a thin watery blood. Apicius directs us to eat them and melons with pepper, pennyroyal, honey, or raisin wine, pickle, and vinegar; to which assafœtida may be added. Hippocrates calls them laxative and diuretic, but flatulent.

Galen says of the melopepon, or squash, that its juices are not so unwholesome, nor so diuretic, nor so laxative, as those of the pompion. He adds that, although far from delicious, it is not so nauseous as the pompion. On the melopepon, see Harduin’s notes on Pliny (H. N. xviii, 5.) Perhaps some of the authorities may have meant the melon by the melopepon.

Galen says that some persons, from idiosyncrasy, readily digest the cucumber (σἴκυος); but he insists that it is impossible that good blood can be formed from it, and therefore he warns against the frequent use of all such fruits. Actuarius says that it forms a crude chyme, and is of a cold, humid, and indigestible nature. Celsus says that its nutritive powers are feeble. Avicenna says that its juices are bad, and prone to putrefaction.

Melons are said by Averrhoes to be of a cold nature, juicy, detergent, and diuretic.

Owing to the lax signification in which the names of the summer fruits are often applied by the Greek and Roman writers, we have felt considerable difficulty in distinguishing the articles treated of in this chapter. This confusion is of very ancient date, for one of the _Deipnosophists_ of Athenæus complains of the difficulty he found in comprehending the proper application of these terms, from their having been differently used by the authors who had treated of them. (ix, 14.) We have been obliged for once to abandon the guidance of Sprengel, but have done so with the greatest hesitation, and not until we had compared the descriptions of all the Greek, Latin, and Arabian authorities. Schneider points out the confusion about the use of these terms, but does not sufficiently clear it up in his Index to Theophrastus. Ludovicus Nonnius may likewise be consulted with advantage. He supposes that the pepones of the ancients were our melons; and he is also inclined to believe that the melopepon was a species of the same. (De Re Cibaria, i, 16.) For want of a better term, we have ventured to translate it the squash, although we are uncertain whether the Greeks were acquainted with this fruit, now so common in the East and in America.

SECT. LXXXI.—ON THE FRUIT OF TREES.

The fig and the grape hold the principal place among the autumnal fruits; for their juices are of a less bad quality, and they are more nutritious than the others.—Of these, the figs have the better juices and the more nutritious; they are laxative, diuretic, and evacuate the kidneys, and particularly the very ripe. In like manner also the dried; but they are flatulent, and form blood which is not good; wherefore, when liberally used, they engender lice. When grapes are not evacuated, neither are they digested, but form a crude chyme; but if evacuated their effects are more moderate. Dried grapes are warmer than the others, more stomachic, and more nutritious, but not so laxative. The mulberry is of a moistening nature, cools moderately, and loosens the belly when taken first, neither does it disagree with the stomach, but is little nutritious.—Of cherries, the sweeter kinds loosen the belly, but are bad for the stomach; those which possess astringency are not so bad for the stomach, but do not evacuate the belly. The same rule will apply to the grape, the mulberry, and many other fruits; for astringents in general, when eaten or drunk at the beginning before any other food, bind the belly; but they who have their bowels constipated from atony, and have taken beforehand some articles of food of a laxative nature, such as pot-herbs, fishes, or the like, will find that astringents taken afterwards will, by strengthening the bowels, evacuate downwards. The fruit of the pine called strobilus has good juices and thick, is nutritious, but not of easy digestion. The juices of the peach are of a bad quality, turn acid, and soon spoil; and, therefore, ought to be taken first, that they may readily pass downwards, and not spoil by remaining in the belly. The fruits called apricots are superior to the peaches, for they neither turn acid nor spoil so soon, and they are sweet. Of apples, the sweet are more heating, and easier assimilated than the others, especially when roasted or boiled; the acid are colder and more calculated to cut the humours in the stomach; the austere strengthen the stomach and bind the belly, more especially quinces. Of pears, the large and ripe are more nutritious than these; but the pomegranates are cooling, and contain little nourishment. The medlars and services are more astringent and fitted for a loose belly. Dates are stomachic, unless very fatty they bind the belly, form thick and viscid chyme, and occasion headachs. Of olives, the over-ripe (_drupæ_) injure the stomach, and form a fatty chyme; those that are pickled and hung (_halmades et colymbades_), when eaten beforehand, whet the appetite, and loosen the belly, more especially if prepared with vinegar, or vinegar and honey. Of nuts, those called royal (walnuts) are less nutritious than the filbert, and more stomachic. The green walnuts are more juicy and laxative; and, if you will strip off the inner membrane of dried ones which have been macerated in water, they will become like the green. Almonds have incisive and attenuating powers, and, therefore, they evacuate the intestines and chest, and more especially such as are bitter; and, in like manner, the pistacs, which are also more calculated for removing obstructions of the liver. Damascenes loosen the belly when eaten before food, either raw or boiled in honied water. The jujubes are of difficult digestion, injurious to the stomach, and give little nourishment. Carobs are of difficult digestion, bind the belly, and produce bad chyme. Sycamores are decidedly of a cooling and a moistening nature. Of the citron, the outer part is acrid and indigestible, but that part which is as it were its flesh, is nutritious, and yet it is hard to digest. The inner part, whether acid or watery, is moderately cooling. Acorns are nutritious, no less so than corn, but of difficult digestion, contain thick juices, and are slowly evacuated. Chesnuts are in every respect superior to them.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. It may be proper, in the first place, to discuss briefly the question respecting the proper time for eating fruit. Galen, Rhases, and Simeon Seth direct to eat fruit at the beginning of a regular meal. It appears, however, to have been customary with the ancients, as it is in Britain at the present day, to eat all manner of fruits at the _mensa secunda_, or dessert, as we learn from many passages of Athenæus and Macrobius. Horace was fond of concluding his banquets with fruit. He speaks of finishing a frugal repast with hung grapes, nuts, and figs (Sat. ii, 2); and in another place he says:

“Ille salubres
Æstates peraget, qui nigris prandia moris
Finiet ante gravem quæ legerit arbore solem.”

(Sat. ii, 4.)

We may mention, by the way, that Galen, on the other hand, positively forbids to eat mulberries after other food, and that it appears to have been the general rule in ages long after the time of Galen to eat figs and grapes at the beginning of a meal. (Anonym. de Diæta, ed. Ideler, t. ii, 198.) But what Celsus says respecting the proper time for eating fruit is very much to the purpose: “Secunda mensa bono stomacho nihil nocet, in imbecillo coascescit. Si quis itaque hoc parum valet, palmulas pomaque et similia primo cibo assumit.” (i, 2.) Ludovicus Nonnius, a great modern authority in dietetics, recommends us to eat the summer fruits, and cherries, strawberries, plums, peaches, and the like, at the beginning; but apples, pears, nuts, chesnuts, and the like, at the conclusion of a meal; that is to say, at the dessert.

The fig was a great favorite with the ancients. Galen states that it is decidedly nutritious, but that the flesh formed from it is not firm and compact, like that from pork and bread, but soft and spongy, like that from beans. He says that figs increase the urinary and alvine discharges. Averrhoes says that they are of a hot and humid temperament, and that they loosen the belly and strengthen the stomach. See, in particular, Athenæus (Deipnos. iii); Macrobius (Satur. iii, 20); and Haly Abbas. Haly says that the fig is the most digestible, nutritious, and wholesome fruit of this class. Galen speaks doubtfully of dried figs.

Pliny devotes a whole book to the consideration of the grape and its productions. Galen says that, like figs, grapes are nutritious, but that the flesh formed from them is deficient in firmness and durability. He remarks that their stones pass through the bowels wholly unchanged. Simeon Seth states that the grape consists of four different substances, namely, the membrane which surrounds it, the fleshy part, the juice, and the stones. Of these, he says, the outer coat and the stones ought to be rejected, because they are indigestible. Plutarch and Macrobius exert their ingenuity to explain how it happens that must, or the fresh juice of the grape, does not intoxicate like wine. The “pensilis uva,” or hung grape, is mentioned by Horace as an article of the dessert. (ii, 2.)

Galen gives mulberries the same character as our author does. Aëtius says that the proper occasion for them is when the stomach is hot and dry. According to Athenæus, the Siphnian Diphilus said that they possess moderately wholesome juices, and that they afford little nourishment, but are savoury, and of easy evacuation. Haly Abbas recommends them cooled in snow for heat of the stomach.

According to Pliny, cherries were first imported to Italy from Pontus, by the famous Lucullus, and in his (Pliny’s) time they had become naturalized even in Britain. This story, however, is not very probable, as they had been described more than a century before by Theophrastus; and further, Athenæus mentions that they had been noticed long before Lucullus by the Siphnian Diphilus. He speaks favorably of them as an article of food. Servius, the commentator on Virgil, states that there were wild cherries in Italy before the days of Lucullus. Simeon Seth says that they are of a cold and humid nature, and open the bowels. They are useful, he adds, when the stomach and constitution are hot and dry.

Galen states that the fruit of the pine contains thick and wholesome juices, but that they are not easily digested. The Siphnian Diphilus, as quoted by Athenæus, says that the strobili are very nutritious, smooth asperities of the trachea, and purge the breast. Mnesitheus, as quoted by the same author, says that they fatten the body, and do not impair the digestion. (Deipnos. ii.) Celsus holds them to be stomachic.

Our author’s remarks on the persica are taken from Galen. Seth calls them rhodacina, a term which is generally applied to them by the Byzantine writers, and also by Alexander Trallian. Seth says that they are cooling, diluent, and laxative, but difficult to digest. If not the same as the modern peach (which the commentators suspect), the persica was evidently a fruit nearly allied to it.

It is highly probable, but not quite certain, that the præcocia, duracina, and armeniaca, were varieties of the apricot. Galen does not use the second of these terms, and mentions, that many held the first and the last to be exactly the same fruit; and he, himself, in another place, forgets the distinction which he had endeavoured to establish between them. Simeon Seth describes them by the name of βερίκοκκα, which appears to be a corruption of the Latin præcocia. See Geopon. (x, 73, and the note of Needham); Harduin (Notes on Pliny); J. Bruyer (de Re Cibaria, xi, 13); C. Avantius (Notæ in Cœnam); Baptist. (Fier. p. 6); Ludovicus Nonnius; and Sprengel (Dioscor. i, 165.) Seth says that they are fruits which soon spoil, and form bad blood.

Mala was used by the ancients as a generic term, comprehending many species of fruit. See an interesting account of them in Pliny (xxiii, 5); Macrobius (Saturn, iii, 19); and Athenæus (Deipnos. iii), where Diphilus thus states their general characters as articles of food: “Green and unripe apples are unwholesome and unsavoury, swim in the stomach, form bile, and occasion diseases. Of the ripe, such as are sweet are more wholesome and more laxative from having no astringency; the acid are more unwholesome and constipating, but such as have also a certain degree of sweetness become more delicious, and are at the same time stomachic from having some astringency.” The ancients appear to have been well acquainted with the methods of making cider, perry, and the like. See Macrobius (Sat. vii, 6), and Pliny (H. N. xiv, 19.) The Arabian authors in general speak rather unfavorably of apples.

Cornels, or the fruit of the _cornus mascula_, were in little request as articles of food, and yet Pliny mentions that they were sought after in his time.

The cydonia or quinces were in great repute, not only as articles of food, but as medicines. When unripe they are very astringent and contain much acid, and hence they were used in such cases as those in which the mineral acids are now generally administered. (Pliny, H. N. xxxiii, 6.) They appear to be the “cana mala” of Virgil. Columella and Pliny describe three varieties, namely, the chrysomala, struthea, and mustea. These have not been satisfactorily determined. Some modern commentators have taken “the golden apples” of Theocritus and Virgil for oranges, but it is much more probable that they were a species of quince. No ancient author has noticed the orange.

Pears, according to Simeon Seth, are of a cold and desiccative nature. They are compounded, he says, of astringency, sweetness, and sometimes of acidity; and some have a moderate degree of heating and desiccative properties. Averrhoes gives exactly the same account of them. Of pomegranates, he says, that some are sweet and some are acid; that all of them moisten, but that the sweet are of a more hot and humid nature. Homer enumerates the pomegranate among the fruits which were suspended over the head of Tantalus to tempt his appetite. (Odyss. xi, 588.) We may suppose, therefore, that the poet held it to be a most delicious fruit. Dioscorides says that the sweet pomegranates are stomachic; but that they are prejudicial when there is fever.

Galen, who gives medlars and services much the same characters as our author, recommends them only in very small quantities. Aëtius and Seth say that ripe medlars are somewhat heating, but that the unripe are cold, astringent, and constipating. Actuarius calls them excellent astringent medicines, but bad articles of food. Dioscorides describes two species of medlars, the aronia, and setanium. The first species is called azarollo by the Italians, and the other is the common species of medlar.

See an interesting account of dates, or the fruit of the palm-tree, in the ‘Hierobotanicon’ of Olaus Celsius. The date, according to Galen, is a fruit possessing a variety of characters, but having always a certain degree of sweetness and astringency. He says, it is indigestible and apt to occasion headachs. Simeon Seth says that dates form an impure blood; and Ruffus, as quoted by him, affirms that they prove injurious to the bladder. Serapion, Rhases, and Mesue agree that the date is a cold, astringent fruit. Herodotus, Xenophon, and Athenæus make mention of a wine prepared from dates. Erotian says that a species of bread is made from dates, flour, and water. (Lexicon Hippocratis.)

The olive, as Pliny remarks, consists of four parts, the kernel, the oil, the flesh, and the lees. The drupæ, mentioned by our author, were the olives quite ripe and ready to fall from the tree. The colymbades and halmades were olives pickled with salt, &c. See Harduin (ad Plin. H. N. xv, 3.) The Siphnian Diphilus, as quoted by Athenæus, says of them that they supply little nourishment, occasion headachs; that the black injure the stomach, and bring on heaviness of the head; and that the pickled prove more stomachic and astringent of the belly, Galen mentions that olives were often eaten with bread before dinner in order to open the belly. Simeon Seth says that ripe olives are moderately hot, but that the unripe are cold, desiccative, and astringent. Serapion, in like manner, says that unripe olives are astringent. Plutarch mentions a pickled olive as a whetter of the appetite. (Sym. vi.) The ancients marked strongly their estimation of the olive when they set it down as being the emblem of peace, and sacred to the Goddess of Wisdom.

The Siphnian Diphilus, as quoted by Athenæus, states that walnuts occasion headach, and swim on the stomach; but such as are tender and white contain better juices, and are more wholesome; and that such as have been toasted in a furnace afford little nourishment. (Deipnos. ii.) It appears, from Macrobius, whose account of them is very interesting, that they were eaten at the dessert. He states decidedly that the royal nut of the Greeks was the juglans or walnut. (Sat. iii, 18.) Simeon Seth says that, when taken before other food, they are apt to prove laxative or emetic. Averrhoes says the like of them. He adds that filberts are not so apt to produce this effect. According to Rhases, they are apt to prove injurious to the stomach and liver.

The Siphnian Diphilus says that almonds are attenuant, diuretic, purgative, and afford little nourishment; that the green contain bad juices, and are possessed of stronger medicinal properties; but that the dried are more flatulent, and apter to swim on the stomach. He adds that such as are tender, full, and are whitened, contain milky juices which are more wholesome. Simeon Seth says that bitter almonds are hotter, more attenuant, and more incisive than the ripe. He adds that filberts are the most nutritious of the nuts but difficult to digest.

The pistachio nut has been long very celebrated in the East and in Sicily. See Celsus (Hierobotanicon), and Brydone (Tour through Sicily.) Galen says that it possesses a certain degree of bitterness and astringency, and that it proves useful in obstructions of the liver, but that it affords little nourishment. He adds that it is neither beneficial nor injurious to the stomach. Simeon Seth remarks that the moderns looked upon pistacs as stomachic. Averrhoes speaks highly of them. Rhases says they are of a hotter nature than almonds. Avicenna also says of them that they are of a heating nature. Theophrastus describes the pistachio tree as a species of turpentine, and it is now acknowledged as such.

Galen states that the best damascenes are such as are large, spongy, and astringent. He adds that taken with sweet wine they tend to open the bowels. Oribasius says that they afford little nourishment, but may be useful for moistening and cooling the stomach. Martial calls them laxative. It appears certain from Isidorus, that the coccymela and myxæ were the same as the pruna or plums. The principal variety is the _prunus insiticia_, or bullace plum.

Galen says of jujubes, that they suit best with the intemperaments of women and children; but that they give little nourishment. Haly Abbas states that they are cold and humid, of slow digestion, and apt to form phlegm. They are the _serica_ of Galen, who, however, also applies the other term (_zizypha_) to them. (De Alim. ii, 38.)

Abu’l-fadli, as quoted by Olaus Celsius, says of the siliquæ or carobs, that they are sweet astringent fruit. Horace speaks of them as being an inferior kind of fruit. “Vivit siliquis et pane secundo.” (Ep. ii, 1.) And so, also, Juvenal (Sat. xi, 59), and Persius (iii, 55.) Galen says of them that they are woody and consequently indigestible. Aëtius says that they are of a dry and very desiccative nature, but possess some sweetness. Pliny mentions that a sort of wine was prepared from carobs.

Galen says that the sycamores hold an intermediate place between mulberries and figs. He says, further, that they are sweetish, and of a diluent and cooling nature. Dioscorides and Serapion speak unfavorably of them as being articles of food which are only used in times of famine.

The citron, or “felix malum” of Virgil (Georg. ii, 126), was greatly esteemed by the ancients. Galen calls it fragrant, aromatic, and pleasant to the taste as well as the smell. From Theophrastus downwards, it is much celebrated as an antidote to poisons. See some curious information respecting it in Athenæus (Deipnos. iii), and Macrobius (Sat. iii, 19.) Simeon Seth says that if taken in moderation it is beneficial to the stomach, but that in large quantity it proves indigestible. Serapion recommends after eating citrons to take of anise, mastich, and wine. No Greek or Latin author has noticed the lemon. Avicenna, we believe, is the first author who mentions it.

Galen says, in general, of the wild kinds of fruit, that they supply little nourishment, and that they are injurious to the stomach. The acorns, he says further, are the best of this class, being no less nutritious than the cerealia; he adds, that in ancient times men lived upon acorns; and that the Arcadians continued this practice after the cerealia were used in all the other parts of Greece. Simeon Seth says that, although nutritious, they are difficult to digest and form crude humours: and hence he recommends to abstain from them. It is well ascertained that it was the acorns of the _quercus ilex_ which the ancients used for food.

Galen’s opinion of chesnuts agrees with the account given by our author of them. Simeon Seth says that they are very nutritious, but are hard to digest and evacuate from the body; and that they are flatulent and astringent. Haly Abbas describes them as a proper article of food. At the present day, whole nations of mankind live upon chesnuts. The opinion of Mnisitheus regarding them, as quoted by Athenæus, appears to be very judicious; he says they are difficult to digest and flatulent, but sufficiently nutritious if digested.

The strawberries, or fraga, are mentioned by Virgil (Ec. iii), and Ovid (Metam. i); but they are wholly unnoticed by the Greek writers.

We consider ourselves here called upon not to pass over unnoticed the fruit of the lotus tree, which is so celebrated in ancient poetry, and is also mentioned by the historians and writers on science. It is now well ascertained that the lotus-bread is produced by various trees in the country surrounding the great desert of Africa. The most celebrated of these trees, or rather shrubs, is the _celtis australis_. Rennel and Park agree that its fruit is very wholesome. On the lotus, see further, Eustathius (in Odyss. p. 337, ed. Rom.); Dionys. (Geograph.); Schweigh (ad Athen. Deipnos. xiv, 65.)

SECT. LXXXII.—ON ANIMALS; AND, FIRST, OF FOWLS.

The nourishment derived from fowls is less than that from beasts, and more especially swine, but they are of easier digestion, particularly the partridge, godwit, pigeon, hen, and pheasant. That from thrushes, blackbirds, and small sparrows (among which are those called _pyrgitæ_) is harder; and still more so the turtle, wood-pigeon, and duck. But the peacock is still more indigestible, harder, and more stringy. The flesh of geese and ostriches is excrementitious, and more indigestible than any of the afore-mentioned; except their wings, which are not less wholesome than the same parts in other animals. The flesh of the crane is stringy and hard. In general, the young are more juicy, digestible, and nutritious than the aged, and are more readily evacuated by the belly. The boiled are superior to the roasted and fricasseed; and those that live on dry and mountainous places are more digestible and less excrementitious than those which live in marshy places.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. Hippocrates states that fowls in general are drier than quadrupeds. The driest, he adds, are, first, the wood-pigeon, then the common pigeon, and, thirdly, the partridge, cock, and turtle. The most humid or juicy, he says, are geese. Those which live on seeds are drier than the others. The flesh of ducks, and of all fowls which live in marshes, or in water, is of a more humid nature. (De Diæta, ii, 17.) In another place, he calls the flesh of fowls one of the lightest kinds of food. (De Affect. 46.)

Their general characters are thus stated by Celsus: “Ex iis avibus, quæ in media specie sunt, valentiores eæ, quæ pedibus, quam quæ volatu magis nituntur: et ex iis, quæ volatu fidunt, firmiores quæ grandiores aves, quam quæ minutæ sunt; ut ficedula et turdus. Atque eæ quoque quæ in aqua degunt _leviorem_ cibum præstant, quam quæ natandi scientiam non habent.” The character here given of water fowls has drawn upon the author the animadversions of Dr. Cullen. But rather than suspect Celsus of such a mistake, we are inclined to believe that the text must be corrupt, and that we ought to read _leniorem_ instead of _leviorem_. We are confirmed in this conjecture from all the other authorities, as for example, Hippocrates, Galen, Aëtius, Rhases, and Haly Abbas, having stated that the flesh of water fowls is more excrementitious than that of land fowls.

Our author takes his account of fowls from Galen, or perhaps direct from Oribasius. Actuarius states that fowls are much lighter, but not so nutritious as quadrupeds; that they are drier, more fibrous, and form thinner blood; and that water fowls are the more juicy and fleshy.

Having thus stated the general characters of fowls as articles of food, we shall now briefly notice a few of those which were in most esteem with the _bons vivans_ of antiquity.

The partridge was accounted a rare delicacy at the tables of luxurious Romans. See Martial (xiii, 65.) Simeon Seth says that it is easily digested, but ought not to be eaten the day it is killed. According to Rhases, it contains thick juices, is astringent, but very nutritious. Psellus calls it savoury, nutritious, and digestible. Apicius directs it to be dressed with pepper, lovage, mint, the seed of rue, pickle, wine, and oil. As at the present day it was eaten at the dessert. (Deip. xiv, 73.) Athenæus describes distinctly two species of the partridge, which seem clearly referrible to the _tetrao perdix_ and _tetrao rufus_. The latter, or red-legged partridge, is still the common species in Italy.

Galen ranks the pigeon next to the partridge in excellence. The Arabians, however, and, in imitation of them, Simeon Seth, calls the flesh of the pigeon heating and excrementitious.

The attagen Ionicus has been celebrated by the muses of Horace and Martial. Porphyron, one of the ancient commentators on Horace, calls it “avis Asiatica inter noblissimas habita.” Harduin, who is deservedly reckoned a high authority in these matters, supposes it to have been the _gelinotte du bois_, or wood-hen. Altogether we incline to the opinion that it was the _scolopax ægocephala_, or godwit, a water-bird still much esteemed by the epicures of the East. We further think that the _scolopax rasticula_, or woodcock, is the _scolopax_ of the ancients. It is well described by the poet Nemesitanius. Athenæus quotes Aristophanes as calling the attagen a most delicious bird. Galen, Aëtius, and Oribasius speak of it in the same terms as Paulus. Apicius directs us to dress it like the partridge.

Galen says of the starling that its flesh is allied to that of the attagen. (Diæta. iv.) It is also mentioned as an article of food by Athenæus. (ii, 24.)

Persius speaks of the thrush as being a much-esteemed delicacy. (Sat. vi.) Horace also says that there is nothing better than a fat thrush. (Epist. i, 15.) See Aristoph. (Nubes); Athenæus (Deipn. ii.) It is worthy of remark that, although the thrush be by no means a delicate morsel in the north of Europe, it is very delicious in Italy and Spain. It feeds on juniper berries, grapes, and the like. The receipts of Apicius for dressing thrushes, and other small birds, contain spices, aromatics, honey, wine, pickle, and oil. Averrhoes says that their flesh is drier, more aromatic, but grosser than that of pigeons. The Romans bestowed great pains upon feeding thrushes, as we can learn from Varro and Columella. The species commonly used by them for food was the fieldfare, or _turdus pilaris_. They also ate blackbirds. Galen speaks favorably of sparrows. Other small birds, as the lark and the siskin (_spinus_), are noticed by Athenæus as being sometimes eaten. Galen recommends the lark in colic affections. In general, however, the small birds were reckoned indigestible. It is related of the gourmand Clodius Æsopus that, wishing to make a great display of prodigality at a feast, he caused song birds to be served up at it in place of beccafichi. See Valerius Maximus (ix, s), and Pliny (H. N. x, 71.) Even the nightingale was sacrificed to this monstrous taste. (Horat. Sat. ii, 3, 245.)

Martial intimates that when he could get a fat turtle to dine upon he was indifferent about other delicacies. According to Averrhoes, it is of a hot nature, and has a wonderful effect in sharpening the understanding. Apicius directs us to dress it like the partridge. Galen states that the turtle, partridge, and all fowls which are of a dry nature, should be suspended for a day before they are eaten.

Galen mentions that the flesh of pheasants resembles that of domestic hens, but is more nutritious and savoury. Simeon Seth says that it is wholesome, easily digested, and forms good blood. Averrhoes prefers it to all other fowls. The tetrao, which is mentioned by Pliny and Athenæus, is generally supposed to be the bustard; but Bellonius and Ludovicus Nonnius take it for the _fasiano negro_ of the Italians, or the wood pheasant.

Galen and our author have omitted to take notice of quails. Simeon Seth says that their flesh is heating, coarse, indigestible, and unwholesome. Rhases, however, says of the quail, that in lightness it is second only to the starling; that it is not very excrementitious, nor accounted very heating. Averrhoes says that it is of a moderate temperament, but somewhat heating; that it is delicate, forms good chyme, and is excellent food for persons in good health, and for convalescents. Lucretius and Galen mention that the quail can live upon hellebore.

Q. Hortensius is “damned to everlasting fame,” for having first presented the peacock at his table. (Varro, de Agricult. iii; Macrobius, Satur. iii, 13; Pliny, H. N. x, 20; Ælianus, H. A. v, 25; Tertulianus, de Pallio.) It came afterwards to be thought an exquisite delicacy, although Horace had declared of it that, were it not for its price, it would not be thought superior to the common domestic fowl. (Sat. ii, 2.) Simeon Seth, like Galen and our author, says that its flesh is indigestible and excrementitious. Apicius directs us to dress it like the thrush. The poet Juvenal asserts that sudden deaths are occasioned by the indigestion arising from eating peacocks, (Sat. i.) It appears, from Varro and Pliny, that the Romans reared them in great numbers for the table.

The ostrich is often mentioned by the ancient authors as an article of food, although, as Galen says, it be excrementitious and indigestible; and hence, most probably, it is proscribed in Scripture. Agatharcides makes mention of a savage race of people, who were called Ostrich-eaters, (Ap. Photium.) The “afra avis,” mentioned by Horace, is said by his commentator, Acron, to have been the ostrich. Porphyrion, however, rather supposes it to be the gallina numidica, or _guinea-hen_. It was the same as the meleagris, which Schneider (ad Ælian. N. A. iv, 42), and Schweighäuser (ad Athen. xiv, 20), agree in referring to the pintada, or _guinea-hen_. Apicius directs us to dress it with pepper, lovage, thyme or savory, honey, mustard, vinegar, pickle, and oil. Rhases says that its flesh is very coarse.

The otis was the _otis tarda_, or bustard. Xenophon, who gives a graphic description of the mode of hunting it in Persia, says that its flesh is most delicious. Galen and Simeon Seth say that its flesh is intermediate between the goose and the crane. Apicius gives very complicated receipts for dressing it. It is the tetrax of Nemesianus.

The flesh of the domestic fowls, says Simeon Seth, is of easy digestion, and contains good juices, especially the flesh of those which are beginning to lay eggs. Chickens, he adds, are of easy digestion, and form blood of moderate consistence, neither very thin nor too thick: they are excellent food for persons who do not take strong exercise. It appears from Martial that the Romans were fond of capons. (xiii.) Both Aristotle and Pliny mention that cocks were converted into capons by means of a heated iron.

The ficedula, called συκαλὶς by Aristotle, was much sought after by the Romans. It was the _beccafigo_ of the modern Italians, who are still very fond of it. Its flesh being fat, it was dressed with much pepper, as we learn from Martial and Petronius Arbiter.

Galen and Simeon Seth agree that the flesh of geese is indigestible and excrementitious, and nearly allied to the ostrich. It would appear, from Odyss. xix, 536, that tame geese were reared for food in the heroic ages.

According to Martial, the breast and neck are the only parts of the duck which are fit to be eaten. (Xenia.)

Athenæus mentions that the swan was sometimes brought to the table. (Deipnos. ix.) Its flesh is very hard.

The crane and the stork were not regular articles of food, but Horace mentions that the latter had been used as such for the first time in his days (Sat. ii, 2, 49); and Athenæus enumerates the former among the viands at a banquet. Psellua calls the crane nutritious, but difficult of digestion.

The tongue of the flamingo (_Phœnicopterus ruber_) was reckoned an exquisite delicacy by the Roman epicures. See Martial (xiii, 71); Juvenal (Sat. ii); Philostratus (in vit. Apoll.) The favorite delicacy of Heliogabalus was the tongue of the flamingo. (Aug. Hist.)

The present is as good an occasion as we shall most probably find, of saying something regarding the use of the locust, or _gryllus migratorius_, as an article of food. Every person will think of John the Baptist, who lived on locusts and wild honey, in the desert of Arabia. Agatharcides gives a very curious account of the _Acridophagi_ or locust-eaters. He describes them as being of a very slender make, and extremely swarthy. He says they did not live beyond forty, being cut off by a sort of tick (_ricinus_) which formed in their bodies. (Apud Photium.)

SECT. LXXXIII.—ON EGGS.

The eggs of hens and pheasants are the best of all; those of geese and ostriches not good: of all animals, fresh eggs are superior to the old. Those that are moderately boiled are most nutritive; those that are slightly boiled pass downwards most easily, and smooth asperities in the throat. All the other kinds are difficult to digest and evacuate, and contain thick juices, except those that are said to be suffocated. These are prepared by beating up raw eggs, sauce, wine, and oil, and coagulating to a middling consistence in a double vessel. In this state they are of easy digestion, and supply good juices. But of all others the fried are the worst.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. Our author, Oribasius, and Aëtius copy their account of eggs from Galen.

Hippocrates says that they are nutritious, strengthening, and flatulent. See also Celsus (ii, 18.)

See a curious account of the medicinal properties of eggs in Pliny. (H. N. xxix. 3.)

Rhases recommends to eat eggs in a soft state, with pepper and marjoram. (Cont. xxxiii.) He says that the best eggs are those of the hen and partridge, and next to them those of the duck. Those of geese, he says, should not be eaten. (Ad Mansor. iii, 13.)

The ancients preserved their eggs in the flour of beans, chaff, or bran. (Pliny, H. N. x, 61; Columella, viii, 6; Varro, De Re Rustica, iii, 9.) Pliny mentions that, if an egg be macerated in vinegar, it will become so soft that it may be drawn through a ring without breaking. Harduin says that he had verified the truth of this fact by experiment.

Horace affirms that eggs of an oblong shape are the best:

“Longa quibus facies ovis erit, illa memento
Ut succi melioris et ut magis alma rotundis
Ponere.”

(Sat. ii, 4.)

We have here adopted the emendation of Bentley. The commentator Acron, however, read _alba_, but took it in the same sense as _alma_.

The ancients used to begin their banquets with eggs, and hence the expression “ab ovo ad malum;” that is to say, from beginning to end of a banquet.

Galen and Simeon Seth agree that eggs which are boiled hard, or which have been roasted in ashes until they are hard, become indigestible, and supply heavy nourishment to the body; but such as have been fried they more especially condemn. When boiled to such a consistence as that the white was just beginning to coagulate, they were called tremula. When so soft that the albumen was not all coagulated, they were called sorbilia. In both these states they are much approved of by Galen, Seth, and all the authorities. Galen especially commends the eggs of the hen and of the pheasant. Those of the goose and ostrich, he says, are inferior.

SECT. LXXXIV.—ON BEASTS.

Among quadrupeds, swine’s flesh is more nourishing than any other food, because it is most nearly allied to the human in taste and smell, as some have declared who have tasted human flesh by mistake. But the nourishment derived from it is viscid and imperspirable. That from sheep is excrementitious, and supplies bad juices. That from goats is acrid, and has bad juices. But the worst of all is the flesh of the buck-goat as to the quality of its juices and to digestion. That of oxen forms melancholic humours; that of hares has thick juices, but less so than that of sheep and oxen. That of roes is hard and of difficult digestion. In general, the flesh of young beasts is more humid, more tender, and more digestible than that of the aged; of gelded animals than of those having testicles; and of the well-fed than of the lean.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. Athenæus remarks that the flesh of beasts, especially oxen, formed the principal part of men’s food in the heroic ages, as appears from Homer. From one passage in the Iliad (xxiv, 263), and another in the Odyssey (ix, 220), it may be reasonably conjectured that they also lived upon lambs and kids. (Deipn. i, 19.) We may add, that Sophocles represents Philoctetes as living, while in Lemnos, upon the birds which he killed with his fatal bow. It is generally supposed that Pythagoras interdicted his disciples entirely from the flesh of animals; but the truth of the matter seems to be, that he recommended a spare use of it, and allowed to eat such animals only as were used for sacrifices. See Iamblichus and Porphyrius (De Vitâ Pythagoræ.) Plutarch, in two treatises, discusses the propriety of eating flesh.

Hippocrates states the particular characters of the different kinds of flesh very correctly. He remarks that the flesh of wild animals is lighter than that of domesticated.

According to Aristotle, the flesh of beasts which have been reared upon marsh pasture is less wholesome than that of beasts brought up on higher grounds. (Hist. An. viii, 12.)

The general remarks of Celsus may best be given in his own words: “Quadrupes omne animal, si lactens est, minus alimenti præstat. Omne etiam ferum animal domestico levius; et quodcunque humido cœlo, quam quod sicco natum est. Deinde eadem omnia pinguia, quam macra; recentia quam salsa; nova quam vetusta, plus alimenti habent. Tum res eadem magis alit jurulenta, quam assa; magis assa, quam elixa.”

Galen remarks that the fleshy parts of quadrupeds form the best blood. When boiled, he says, it supplies the body with more juicy, and when roasted, with drier food. The temperament of domesticated animals, he adds, is more humid or juicy than that of wild, owing to the dampness of the atmosphere in which they live, and their inactivity. For wild animals among the mountains being exposed to privations and fatigue, their flesh is drier, contains no fat, and is less disposed to putrefaction than the flesh of domesticated animals. He states that of all animals, whether fowls or beasts, the flesh of such as are growing is better than those which are past their utmost growth; that such as are at their growth hold an intermediate character; but that the flesh of such as are very young or old is bad, because, in the latter case, it is hard, dry, and fibrous, whence it is difficult to digest, and not nutritious; while, on the other hand, the bodies of very young animals, being mucous (gelatinous?), watery, and therefore excrementitious, readily pass through the bowels undigested.

Actuarius states that animals which lead an indolent life are more humid and excrementitious; whereas such as are much exercised are drier and lighter. Upon the whole, he adds, the more the colour of flesh declines from white, the farther is it removed from wholesomeness; it is also to be known that wild animals are hotter and drier than domesticated.

Haly Abbas says that the flesh of all animals is heating and humid, forms much blood, and is nutritious. Avicenna remarks that flesh strengthens the body, and is readily converted into blood. According to Rhases, flesh is the most nutritious of all aliments, and disposes most to plethora; hence, those who live much upon it require frequent venesection, especially if at the same time given to drinking wine.

Of all kinds of animal food, pork was almost universally esteemed by the ancients as the best. Hippocrates repeatedly speaks of it as being most wholesome and nutritious, and Galen says the same of it in the strongest language. He states that the athletæ, if for one day presented with the same bulk of any other article of food, immediately experienced a diminution of strength; and if the change of diet was persisted in for several successive days, that they fell off in flesh. He adds that he had been credibly informed by persons who had been compelled, under extraordinary circumstances, to taste human flesh, that pork bears a near resemblance to it. Celsus praises it for its lightness: “Inter domesticas vero quadrupedes, levissima suilla est.” Aëtius, Oribasius, and, in a word, all the Greek authorities subsequent to Galen, deliver exactly the same character of it as he. See, in particular, Simeon Seth. He says, that the flesh of swine a year old is the best, and that very young pigs are not to be eaten, as being too humid and excrementitious. He adds that the flesh of wild boars furnish the best food, being neither so excrementitious nor so viscid as that of tame swine. Martial declares his fondness for young pigs fed upon milk. The Arabian authors display (as might be expected) their religious prejudices against the flesh of swine. Avicenna merely remarks of it that the Christians, and those who imitate them, say that the flesh of the wild boar is the best of all. Averrhoes refers to the opinion of Avicenna. Rhases, who has treated of Dietetics in three distinct works, has nowhere, so far as we can discover, recommended pork as an article of food. Haly Abbas, however, speaks favorably of it; he, it would appear, being a Magian. Various receipts for dressing pork are given by Apicius. As a sauce for the flesh of the wild boar, he recommends a composition of honey, pickle, sodden wine, and raisin wine. The wild boar is mentioned as a favorite delicacy of the Roman epicures by Juvenal and other writers of that age. Cato, the Censor, gives very sensible directions for the preparation of ham. (De Re Rusticâ, 162.) It will be perceived that our author states that pork is imperspirable. Sanctorius confirms the truth of this statement. Both Cicero and Porphyry quote the saying of Chrysippus, that a soul or living principle was given to swine, as a sort of salt, to preserve their flesh from putrefaction for the use of man.

Mutton was no great favorite with the ancients. Galen, Aëtius, Oribasius, and Simeon Seth agree with our author, that it is inferior to pork, as being more excrementitious, and containing worse juices. Averrhoes, however, accuses Galen of being prejudiced against the flesh of wethers and lambs, which, he affirms, are inferior only to kids in excellence; he even speaks favorably of the flesh of rams. (Collect. v, 32.) Rhases ranks mutton as second only to kid. Seth says that the best mutton is that of a sheep a year old. Apicius gives full directions for cooking mutton and lamb. (viii.)

All the ancient authorities speak of goats’ flesh in much the same terms as our author; namely, as being acrid, and containing unwholesome juices. Hippocrates says it has all the bad qualities of beef. That of buck-goats is said by Galen to be particularly bad; and, next to it, those of rams and of bulls. Of kid, he speaks favorably, as being next in excellence to pork; then he ranks veal. But lamb, he says, is humid, gelatinous, and mucous. Rhases and Averrhoes rank kid first, and then lamb. The poet Hesiod recommends kid as a delicious article of food during the heat of summer. (Op. et Dies, i, 590.) According to Athenæus, kid imparts more firm and substantial nourishment to the body than any other kind of flesh, not even excepting pork and lamb. (ix, 66.)

The Arabians mention the gazelle (_antelope dorcas_) as being nearly allied but superior to the goat. Simeon Seth says that the flesh of the dorcas is better than that of any other wild animal, and that it is allied to the human body.