Chapter VII: Book XVIII: The Natural History of Grain (1)

CHAP. 1. (1.)—TASTE OF THE ANCIENTS FOR AGRICULTURE.

We now pass on to the Natural History of the various grains, of the garden plants and flowers, and indeed of all the other productions, with the exception of the trees and shrubs, which the Earth, in her bounteousness, affords us—a boundless field for contemplation, if even we regard the herbs alone, when we take into consideration the varieties of them, their numbers, the flowers they produce, their odours, their colours, their juices, and the numerous properties they possess—all of which have been engendered by her with a view to either the preservation or the gratification of the human race.

On entering, however, upon this branch of my subject, it is my wish in the first place to plead the cause of the Earth, and to act as the advocate of her who is the common parent of all, although in the earlier[1] part of this work I have already had occasion to speak in her defence. For my subject matter, as I proceed in the fulfilment of my task, will now lead me to consider her in the light of being the producer of various noxious substances as well; in consequence of which it is that we are in the habit of charging her with our crimes, and imputing to her a guilt that is our own. She has produced poisons, it is true; but who is it but man that has found them out? For the birds of the air and the beasts of the field, it is sufficient to be on their guard against them, and to keep at a distance from them. The elephant, we find, and the urus, know how to sharpen[2] and renovate their teeth against the trunks of trees, and the rhinoceros against rocks; wild boars, again, point their tusks like so many poniards by the aid of both rocks and trees; and all animals, in fact, are aware how to prepare themselves for the infliction of injury upon others; but still, which is there among them all, with the exception of man, that dips his weapons in poison? As for ourselves, we envenom the point of the arrow,[3] and we contrive to add to the destructive powers of iron itself; by the aid of poisons we taint the waters of the stream, and we infect the various elements of Nature; indeed, the very air even, which is the main support of life, we turn into a medium for the destruction of life.

And it is not that we are to suppose that animals are ignorant of these means of defence, for we have already had occasion to point out[4] the preparations which they make against the attacks of the serpent, and the methods they devise for effecting a cure when wounded by it; and yet, among them all, there is not one that fights by the aid of the poison that belongs to another, with the sole exception of man. Let us then candidly confess our guilt, we who are not contented even with the poisons as Nature has produced them; for by far the greater portion of them, in fact, are artificially prepared by the human hand!

And then besides, is it not the fact, that there are many men, the very existence of whom is a baneful poison, as it were? Like that of the serpent, they dart their livid tongue, and the venom of their disposition corrodes every object upon which it concentrates itself. Ever vilifying and maligning, like the ill-omened birds of the night, they disturb the repose of that darkness which is so peculiarly their own, and break in upon the quiet of the night even, by their moans and wailings, the only sounds they are ever heard to emit. Like animals of inauspicious presage, they only cross our path to prevent us from employing our energies or becoming useful to our fellow-men; and the only enjoyment that is sought by their abominable aspirations is centred in their universal hatred of mankind.

Still, however, even in this respect Nature has asserted her majestic sway; for how much more numerous[5] are the good and estimable characters which she has produced! just in the same proportion that we find her giving birth to productions which are at once both salutary and nutritious to man. It is in our high esteem for men such as these, and the commendations they bestow, that we shall be content to leave the others, like so many brakes and brambles, to the devouring flames of their own bad passions, and to persist in promoting the welfare of the human race; and this, with all the more energy and perseverance, from the circumstance that it has been our object throughout, rather to produce a work of lasting utility than to ensure ourselves a widely-spread renown. We have only to speak, it is true, of the fields and of rustic operations; but still, it is upon these that the enjoyment of life so materially depends, and that the ancients conferred the very highest rank in their honours and commendations.

CHAP. 2. (2.)—WHEN THE FIRST WREATHS OF CORN WERE USED AT ROME.

Romulus was the first who established the Arval[6] priesthood at Rome. This order consisted of the eleven sons of Acca Larentia, his nurse,[7] together with Romulus himself, who assumed the appellation of the twelfth of the brotherhood. Upon this priesthood he bestowed, as being the most august distinction that he could confer upon it, a wreath of ears of corn, tied together with a white fillet; and this, in fact, was the first chaplet that was ever used at Rome. This dignity is only ended with life itself, and whether in exile or in captivity, it always attends its owner. In those early days, two jugera of land were considered enough for a citizen of Rome, and to none was a larger portion than this allotted. And yet, at the present day, men who but lately were the slaves of the Emperor Nero have been hardly content with pleasure-gardens that occupied the same space as this; while they must have fishponds, forsooth, of still greater extent, and in some instances I might add, perhaps, kitchens even as well.

Numa first established the custom of offering corn to the gods, and of propitiating them with the salted[8] cake; he was the first, too, as we learn from Hemina, to parch spelt, from the fact that, when in this state, it is more wholesome as an aliment.[9] This method, however, he could only establish one way: by making an enactment, to the effect that spelt is not in a pure state for offering, except when parched. He it was, too, who instituted the Fornacalia,[10] festivals appropriated for the parching of corn, and others,[11] observed with equal solemnity, for the erection and preservation of the “termini,” or boundaries of the fields: for these termini, in those days, they particularly regarded as gods; while to other divinities they gave the names of Seia,[12] from “sero,” “to sow,” and of Segesta, from the “segetes,” or “crops of standing corn,” the statues of which goddesses we still see erected in the Circus. A third divinity it is forbidden by the rules of our religion to name even[13] beneath a roof. In former days, too, they would not so much as taste the corn when newly cut, nor yet wine when just made, before the priests had made a libation of the first-fruits.

CHAP. 3. (3.)—THE JUGERUM OF LAND.

That portion of land used to be known as a “jugerum,” which was capable of being ploughed by a single “jugum,” or yoke of oxen, in one day; an “actus”[14] being as much as the oxen could plough at a single spell, fairly estimated, without stopping. This last was one hundred and twenty feet in length; and two in length made a jugerum. The most considerable recompense that could be bestowed upon generals and valiant citizens, was the utmost extent of land around which a person could trace a furrow with the plough in a single day. The whole population, too, used to contribute a quarter[15] of a sextarius of spelt, or else half a one, per head.

From agriculture the earliest surnames were derived. Thus, for instance, the name of Pilumnus was given to him who invented the “pilum,” or pestle of the bake-house, for pounding corn; that of Piso was derived from “piso,” to grind corn; and those of Fabius, Lentulus, and Cicero, from the several varieties[16] of leguminous plants in the cultivation of which respectively these individuals excelled. One individual of the family of the Junii received the name of “Bubulcus,”[17] from the skill he displayed in breeding oxen. Among the sacred ceremonials, too, there was nothing that was held more holy than the marriage by confarreation,[18] and the woman just married used to present a cake made of spelt.[19] Careless cultivation of the land was in those times an offence that came under the cognizance of the censors; and, as we learn from Cato,[20] when it was said that such and such a man was a good agriculturist or a good husbandman, it was looked upon as the very highest compliment that could be paid him. A man came to be called “locuples,” or “rich,” from being “loci plenus,” or “full of earth.” Money, too, received its name of “pecunia,”[21] from “pecus,” “cattle.” At the present day, even, in the registers of the censors, we find set down under the head of “pascua,” or “pasture lands,” everything from which the public revenues are derived, from the fact that for a long period of time pasture lands were the only sources of the public revenue. Fines, too, were only imposed in the shape of paying so many sheep or so many oxen; and the benevolent spirit of the ancient laws deserves remark, which most considerately enjoined that the magistrate, when he indicted a penalty, should never impose a fine of an ox before having first condemned the same party to the payment of a sheep.

Those who celebrated the public games in honour of the ox received the name of Bubetii.[22] King Servius was the first who impressed upon our copper coin[23] the figures of sheep and oxen. To depasture cattle secretly by night upon the unripe crops on plough lands, or to cut them in that state, was made by the Twelve Tables[24] a capital offence in the case of an adult; and it was enacted that the person guilty of it should be hanged, in order to make due reparation to the goddess Ceres, a punishment more severe, even, than that inflicted for murder. If, on the other hand, the offender was not an adult, he was beaten at the discretion of the prætor; a penalty double the amount of the damage was also exacted.

The various ranks, too, and distinctions in the state had no other origin than the pursuits of agriculture. The rural tribes held the foremost rank, and were composed of those who possessed lands; while those of the city, a place to which it was looked upon as ignominious to be transferred, had the discredit thrown upon them of being an indolent race. Hence it was that these last were only four in number, and received their names from the several parts of the City which they respectively inhabited; being the Suburran, the Palatine, Colline, and Exquiline tribes. Every ninth day[25] the rural tribes used to visit the city for the purpose of marketing, and it was for this reason that it was made illegal to hold the comitia upon the Nundinæ; the object being that the country people might not be called away thereby from the transaction of their business. In those days repose and sleep were enjoyed upon straw. Even to glory itself, in compliment to corn, the name was given of “adorea.”[26]

For my own part, I greatly admire[27] the modes of expression employed in our ancient language: thus, for instance, we read in the Commentaries of the Priesthood to the following effect:—“For deriving an augury from the sacrifice of a bitch,[28] a day should be set apart before the ear of corn appears from out of the sheath,[29] and then again before it enters the sheath.”

CHAP. 4.—HOW OFTEN AND ON WHAT OCCASIONS CORN HAS SOLD AT A REMARKABLY LOW PRICE.

The consequence was, that when the Roman manners were such as these, the corn that Italy produced was sufficient for its wants, and it had to be indebted to no province for its food; and not only this, but the price of provisions was incredibly cheap. Manius Marcius, the ædile[30] of the people, was the first who gave corn to the people at the price of one as for the modius. L. Minutius Augurinus,[31] the same who detected, when eleventh tribune of the people, the projects of Spurius Mælius, reduced the price of corn on three market days,[32] to one as per modius; for which reason a statue was erected in honour of him, by public subscription, without the Trigeminian Gate.[33] T. Seius distributed corn to the people, in his ædileship,[34] at one as per modius, in remembrance of which statues were erected in honour of him also in the Capitol and the Palatium: on the day of his funeral he was borne to the pile on the shoulders of the Roman people. In the year,[35] too, in which the Mother of the Gods was brought to Rome, the harvest of that summer, it is said, was more abundant than it had been for ten years before. M. Varro informs us, that in the year[36] in which L. Metellus exhibited so many elephants in his triumphal procession, a modius of spelt was sold for one as, which was the standard price also of a congius of wine, thirty pounds’ weight of dried figs, ten pounds of olive oil, and twelve pounds of flesh meat. Nor did this cheapness originate in the wide-spread domains of individuals encroaching continually upon their neighbours, for by a law proposed by Licinius Stolo, the landed property of each individual was limited to five hundred jugera; and he himself was convicted under his own law of being the owner of more than that amount, having as a disguise prevailed upon his son to lend him his name. Such were the prices of commodities at a time when the fortunes of the republic were rapidly on the increase. The words, too, that were uttered by Manius Curius[37] after his triumphs and the addition of an immense extent of territory to the Roman sway, are well known: “The man must be looked upon,” said he, “as a dangerous citizen, for whom seven jugera of land are not enough;” such being the amount of land that had been allotted to the people after the expulsion of the kings.

What, then, was the cause of a fertility so remarkable as this? The fact, we have every reason to believe, that in those days the lands were tilled by the hands of generals even, the soil exulting beneath a plough-share crowned with wreaths of laurel, and guided by a husbandman graced with triumphs: whether it is that they tended the seed with the same care that they had displayed in the conduct of wars, and manifested the same diligent attention in the management of their fields that they had done in the arrangement of the camp, or whether it is that under the hands of honest men everything prospers all the better, from being attended to with a scrupulous exactness. The honours awarded to Serranus[38] found him engaged in sowing his fields, a circumstance to which he owes his surname.[39] Cincinnatus was ploughing his four jugera of land upon the Vaticanian Hill—the same that are still known as the “Quintian Meadows,”[40] when the messenger brought him the dictatorship—finding him, the tradition says, stripped to the work, and his very face begrimed with dust. “Put on your clothes,” said he, “that I may deliver to you the mandates of the senate and people of Rome.” In those days these messengers bore the name of “viator,” or “wayfarer,” from the circumstance that their usual employment was to fetch the senators and generals from their fields.

But at the present day these same lands are tilled by slaves whose legs are in chains, by the hands of malefactors and men with a branded face! And yet the Earth is not deaf to our adjurations, when we address her by the name of “parent,” and say that she receives our homage[41] in being tilled by hands such as these; as though, forsooth, we ought not to believe that she is reluctant and indignant at being tended in such a manner as this! Indeed, ought we to feel any surprise were the recompense she gives us when worked by chastised slaves,[42] not the same that she used to bestow upon the labours of warriors?

CHAP. 5.—ILLUSTRIOUS MEN WHO HAVE WRITTEN UPON AGRICULTURE.

Hence it was that to give precepts upon agriculture became one of the principal occupations among men of the highest rank, and that in foreign nations even. For among those who have written on this subject we find the names of kings even, Hiero, for instance, Attalus Philometor, and Archelaüs, as well as of generals, Xenophon, for example, and Mago the Carthaginian. Indeed, to this last writer did the Roman senate award such high honours, that, after the capture of Carthage, when it bestowed the libraries of that city upon the petty kings of Africa, it gave orders, in his case only, that his thirty-two Books should be translated into the Latin language, and this, although M. Cato had already compiled his Book of Precepts; it took every care also to entrust the execution of this task to men who were well versed in the Carthaginian tongue, among whom was pre-eminent D. Silanus, a member of one of the most illustrious families of Rome. I have already indicated,[43] at the commencement of this work, the numerous learned authors and writers in verse, together with other illustrious men, whose authority it is my intention to follow; but among the number I may here more particularly distinguish M. Varro, who, at the advanced age of eighty-eight years, thought it his duty to publish a treatise upon this subject.

(4.) Among the Romans the cultivation of the vine was introduced at a comparatively recent period, and at first, as indeed they were obliged to do, they paid their sole attention to the culture of the fields. The various methods of cultivating the land will now be our subject; and they shall be treated of by us in no ordinary or superficial manner, but in the same spirit in which we have hitherto written; enquiry shall be made with every care first into the usages of ancient days, and then into the discoveries of more recent times, our attention being devoted alike to the primary causes of these operations, and the reasons upon which they are respectively based. We shall make mention,[44] too, of the various constellations, and of the several indications which, beyond all doubt, they afford to the earth; and the more so, from the fact that those writers who have hitherto treated of them with any degree of exactness, seem to have written their works for the use of any class of men but the agriculturist.

CHAP. 6.—POINTS TO BE OBSERVED IN BUYING LAND.

First of all, then, I shall proceed in a great measure according to the dicta of the oracles of agriculture; for there is no branch of practical life in which we find them more numerous or more unerring. And why should we not view in the light of oracles those precepts which have been tested by the infallibility of time and the truthfulness of experience?

(5.) To make a beginning, then, with Cato[45]—“The agricultural population,” says he, “produces the bravest men, the most valiant soldiers,[46] and a class of citizens the least given of all to evil designs.—Do not be too eager in buying a farm.—In rural operations never be sparing of your trouble, and, above all, when you are purchasing land.—A bad bargain is always a ground for repentance.—Those who are about to purchase land, should always have an eye more particularly to the water there, the roads, and the neighbourhood.” Each of these points is susceptible of a very extended explanation, and replete with undoubted truths. Cato[47] recommends, too, that an eye should be given to the people in the neighbourhood, to see how they look: “For where the land is good,” says he, “the people will look well-conditioned and healthy.”

Atilius Regulus, the same who was twice consul in the Punic War, used to say[48] that a person should neither buy an unhealthy piece of land in the most fertile locality, nor yet the very healthiest spot if in a barren country. The salubrity of land, however, is not always to be judged of from the looks of the inhabitants, for those who are well-seasoned are able to withstand the effects of living in pestilent localities even. And then, besides, there are some localities that are healthy during certain periods of the year only; though, in reality, there is no soil that can be looked upon as really valuable that is not healthy all the year through. “That[49] is sure to be bad land against which its owner has a continual struggle.” Cato recommends us before everything, to see that the land which we are about to purchase not only excels in the advantages of locality, as already stated, but is really good of itself. We should see, too, he says, that there is an abundance of manual labour in the neighbourhood, as well as a thriving town; that there are either rivers or roads, to facilitate the carriage of the produce; that the buildings upon the land are substantially erected, and that the land itself bears every mark of having been carefully tilled—a point upon which I find that many persons are greatly mistaken, as they are apt to imagine that the negligence of the previous owner is greatly to the purchaser’s advantage; while the fact is, that there is nothing more expensive than the cultivation of a neglected soil.

For this reason it is that Cato[50] says that it is best to buy land of a careful proprietor, and that the methods adopted by others ought not to be hastily rejected—that it is the same with land as with mankind—however great the proceeds, if at the same time it is lavish and extravagant, there will be no great profits left. Cato looks upon a vineyard as the most[51] profitable investment; and he is far from wrong in that opinion, seeing that he takes such particular care to retrench all superfluous expenses. In the second rank he places gardens that have a good supply of water, and with good reason, too, supposing always that they are near a town. The ancients gave to meadow lands the name of “parata,” or lands “always ready.”[52]

Cato being asked, on one occasion, what was the most certain source of profit, “Good pasture land,” was his answer; upon which, enquiry was made what was the next best. “Pretty good[53] pasture lands,” said he—the amount of all which is, that he looked upon that as the most certain source of income which stands in need of the smallest outlay. This, however, will naturally vary in degree, according to the nature of the respective localities; and the same is the case with the maxim[54] to which he gives utterance, that a good agriculturist must be fond of selling. The same, too, with his remark, that in his youth a landowner should begin to plant without delay, but that he ought not to build until the land is fully brought into cultivation, and then only a little at a time: and that the best plan is, as the common proverb has it, “To profit by the folly of others;”[55] taking due care, however, that the keeping up of a farm-house does not entail too much expense. Still, however, those persons are guilty of no falsehood who are in the habit of saying that a proprietor who is well housed comes all the oftener to his fields, and that “the master’s forehead is of more use than his back.”[56]

CHAP. 7. (6.)—THE PROPER ARRANGEMENTS FOR A FARM-HOUSE.

The proper plan to be pursued is this:[57] the farm-house must not be unsuitable for the farm, nor the farm for the house; and we must be on our guard against following the examples of L. Lucullus and Q. Scævola, who, though living in the same age, fell into the two opposite extremes; for whereas the farm-house of Scævola was not large enough for the produce of his farm, the farm of Lucullus was not sufficiently large for the house he built upon it; an error which gave occasion to the reproof of the censors, that on his farm there was less of ground for ploughing than of floor for sweeping. The proper arrangements for a farm-house are not to be made without a certain degree of skill. C. Marius, who was seven times consul, was the last person who had one built at Misenum;[58] but he erected it with such a degree of that artistic skill which he had displayed in castrametation, that Sylla Felix[59] even made the remark, that in comparison with Marius, all the others had been no better than blind.[60]

It is generally agreed, that a farm-house ought neither to be built near a marsh, nor with a river in front of it; for, as Homer[61] has remarked, with the greatest correctness, unwholesome vapours are always exhaled from rivers before the rising of the sun. In hot localities, a farm-house should have a northern aspect, but where it is cold, it should look towards the south; where, on the other hand, the site is temperate, the house should look due east. Although, when speaking[62] of the best kinds of soil, I may seem to have sufficiently discussed the characteristics by which it may be known, I shall take the present opportunity of adding a few more indications, employing the words of Cato[63] more particularly for the purpose. “The dwarf-elder,” says he, “the wild plum,[64] the bramble the small bulb,[65] trefoil, meadow grass,[66] the quercus, and the wild pear and wild apple, are all of them indicative of a corn land. The same is the case, too, where the land is black, or of an ashy colour. All chalky soils are scorching, unless they are very thin; the same, too, with sand, unless it is remarkably fine. These remarks, however, are more applicable to champaign localities than declivities.”

The ancients were of opinion, that before everything, moderation should be observed in the extent of a farm; for it was a favourite maxim of theirs, that we ought to sow the less, and plough the more: such too, I find, was the opinion entertained by Virgil,[67] and indeed, if we must confess the truth, it is the wide-spread domains that have been the ruin[68] of Italy, and soon will be that of the provinces as well. Six proprietors were in possession of one half of Africa,[69] at the period when the Emperor Nero had them put to death. With that greatness of mind which was so peculiarly his own, and of which he ought not to lose the credit, Cneius Pompeius would never purchase the lands that belonged to a neighbour. Mago has stated it as his opinion, that a person, on buying a farm, ought at once to sell his town house;[70] an opinion, however, which savours of too great rigidity, and is by no means conformable to the public good. It is with these words, indeed, that he begins his precepts; a good proof, at all events, that he looks upon the personal inspection of the owner as of primary importance.

The next point which requires our care is to employ a farm-steward[71] of experience, and upon this, too, Cato[72] has given many useful precepts. Still, however, it must suffice for me to say that the steward ought to be a man nearly as clever as his master, though without appearing to know it. It is the very worst plan of all, to have land tilled by slaves let loose from the houses of correction, as, indeed, is the case with all work entrusted to men who live without hope. I may possibly appear guilty of some degree of rashness in making mention of a maxim of the ancients, which will very probably be looked upon as quite incredible—“That nothing is so disadvantageous as to cultivate land in the highest style of perfection.” L. Tarius Rufus, a man who, born in the very lowest ranks of life, by his military talents finally attained the consulship,[73] and who in other respects adhered to the old-fashioned notions of thriftiness, made away with about one hundred millions of sesterces, which, by the liberality of the late Emperor Augustus, he had contrived to amass, in buying up lands in Picenum, and cultivating them in the highest style, his object being to gain a name thereby; the consequence of which was, that his heir renounced[74] the inheritance. Are we of opinion, then, that ruin and starvation must be the necessary consequence of such a course as this? Yes, by Hercules! and the very best plan of all is to let moderation guide our judgment in all things. To cultivate land well is absolutely necessary, but to cultivate it in the very highest style is mere extravagance, unless, indeed, the work is done by the hands of a man’s own family, his tenants, or those whom he is obliged to keep at any rate. But besides this, even when the owner tills the land itself, there are some crops which it is really not worth the while to gather, if we only take into account the manual labour expended upon them. The olive, too, should never be too highly[75] cultivated, nor must certain soils, it is said, be too carefully tilled, those of Sicily,[76] for instance; hence it is, that new comers there so often find themselves deceived.[77]

CHAP. 8.—MAXIMS OF THE ANCIENTS ON AGRICULTURE.

In what way, then, can land be most profitably cultivated? Why, in the words of our agricultural oracles, “by making good out of bad.” But here it is only right that we should say a word in justification of our forefathers, who in their precepts on this subject had nothing else in view but the benefit of mankind: for when they use the term “bad” here, they only mean to say that which costs the smallest amount of money. The principal object with them was in all cases to cut down expenses to the lowest possible sum; and it was in this spirit that they made the enactments which pronounced it criminal for a person who had enjoyed a triumph, to be in possession, among his other furniture, of ten pounds’ weight of silver plate: which permitted a man, upon the death of his farm-steward, to abandon all his victories, and return to the cultivation of his lands—such being the men the culture of whose farms the state used to take upon itself; and thus, while they led our armies, did the senate act as their steward.

It was in the same spirit, too, that those oracles of ours have given utterance to these other precepts, to the effect that he is a bad agriculturist who has to buy what his farm might have supplied him with; that the man is a bad manager who does in the day-time what he might have done in the night, except, indeed, when the state of the weather does not allow it; that he is a worse manager still, who does on a work-day what he might have done on a feast-day;[78] but that he is the very worst of all, who works under cover in fine weather, instead of labouring in the fields.

I cannot refrain from taking the present opportunity of quoting one illustration afforded us by ancient times, from which it will be found that it was the usage in those days to bring before the people even questions connected with the various methods employed in agriculture, and will be seen in what way men were accustomed to speak out in their own defence. C. Furius Chresimus, a freedman, having found himself able, from a very small piece of land, to raise far more abundant harvests than his neighbours could from the largest farms, became the object of very considerable jealousy among them, and was accordingly accused of enticing away the crops of others by the practice of sorcery. Upon this, a day was named by Spurius Calvinus, the curule ædile, for his appearance. Apprehensive of being condemned, when the question came to be put to the vote among the tribes, he had all his implements of husbandry brought into the Forum, together with his farm servants, robust, well-conditioned, and well-clad people, Piso says. The iron tools were of first-rate quality, the mattocks were stout and strong, the plough-shares ponderous and substantial, and the oxen sleek and in prime condition. When all this had been done, “Here, Roman citizens,” said he, “are my implements of magic; but it is impossible for me to exhibit to your view, or to bring into this Forum, those midnight toils of mine, those early watchings, those sweats, and those fatigues.” Upon this, by the unanimous voice of the people, he was immediately acquitted. Agriculture, in fact, depends upon the expenditure of labour and exertion; and hence it is that the ancients were in the habit of saying, that it is the eye of the master that does more towards fertilizing a field than anything else.

We shall give the rest of these precepts in their appropriate places, according as we find them adapted to each variety of cultivation; but in the meantime we must not omit some of a general nature, which here recur to our recollection, and more particularly that maxim of Cato, as profitable as it is humane: “Always act in such a way as to secure the love of your neighbours.” He then proceeds to state his reasons for giving this advice, but it appears to me that no one surely can entertain the slightest doubt upon the subject. One of the very first recommendations that he gives is to take every care that the farm servants are kept in good condition.[79] It is a maxim universally agreed upon in agriculture, that nothing must be done too late; and again, that everything must be done at its proper season; while there is a third precept, which reminds us that opportunities lost can never be regained. The malediction uttered by Cato against rotten ground has been treated of at some length already;[80] but there is another precept which he is never tired of repeating, “Whatever can be done by the help of the ass, will cost the least money.”

Fern will be sure to die at the end of a couple of years, if you prevent it from putting forth leaves; the most efficient method of ensuring this is to beat the branches with a stick while they are in bud; for then the juices that drop from it will kill the roots.[81] It is said, too, that fern will not spring up again if it is pulled up by the roots about the turn of the summer solstice, or if the stalks are cut with the edge of a reed, or if it is turned up with a plough-share with a reed placed[82] upon it. In the same way, too, we are told that reeds may be effectually ploughed up, if care is taken to place a stalk of fern upon the share. A field infested with rushes should be turned up with the spade, or, if the locality is stony, with a two-pronged mattock: overgrown shrubs are best removed by fire. Where ground is too moist, it is an advantageous plan to cut trenches in it and so drain it; where the soil is cretaceous, these trenches should he left open; and where it is loose, they should be strengthened with a hedge to prevent them from falling in. When these drains are made on a declivity, they should have a layer of gutter tiles at the bottom, or else house tiles with the face upwards: in some cases, too, they should be covered[83] with earth, and made to run into others of a larger size and wider; the bottom, also, should, if possible, have a coating of stones or of gravel. The openings, too, should be strengthened with two stones placed on either side, and another laid upon the top. Democritus has described a method of rooting up a forest, by first macerating the flower of the lupine[84] for one day in the juice of hemlock, and then watering the roots of the trees with it.

CHAP. 9. (7.)—THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF GRAIN.

As the field is now prepared, we shall proceed to speak of the nature of the various kinds of grain; we must premise, however, that there are two principal classes of grain, the cereals,[85] comprising wheat and barley, and the legumina, such as the bean and the chick-pea, for instance. The difference between these two classes is too well known to require any further description.

CHAP. 10.—THE HISTORY OF THE VARIOUS KINDS OF GRAIN.

The cereals are divided again into the same number of varieties, according to the time of the year at which they are sown. The winter grains are those which are put in the ground about the setting of the Vergiliæ,[86] and there receive their nutriment throughout the winter, for instance, wheat,[87] spelt,[88] and barley.[89] The summer grains are those which are sown in summer, before the rising of the Vergiliæ,[90] such as millet,[91] panic,[92] sesame,[93] horminum,[94] and irio,[95] in accordance, however, with the usage of Italy only; for in Greece and Asia all the grains are sown just after the setting of the Vergiliæ. There are some, again, that are sown at either season in Italy, and others at a third period, or, in other words, in the spring. Some authors give the name of spring-grain to millet, panic, lentils,[96] chick-peas,[97] and alica,[98] while they call wheat, barley, beans, turnips, and rape, sementive or early sowing seeds. Certain species of wheat are only sown to make fodder for cattle, and are known by the name of “farrago,”[99] or mixed grain; the same, too, with the leguminous plants, the vetch, for instance. The lupine,[100] however, is grown in common as food for both cattle and men.

All the leguminous[101] plants, with the exception of the bean, have a single root, hard and tough, like wood, and destitute of numerous ramifications; the chick-pea has the deepest root of all. Corn has numerous fibrous roots, but no ramifications. Barley makes its appearance[102] above ground the seventh day after sowing; the leguminous plants on the fourth, or at the very latest, the seventh; the bean from the fifteenth day to the twentieth: though in Egypt the leguminous plants appear as early as the third day after they are sown. In barley, one extremity of the grain throws out the root, and the other the blade; this last flowers, too, before the other grain. In the cereals in general it is the thicker end of the seed that throws out the root, the thinner end the blossom; while in the other seeds both root and blossom issue from the same part.

During the winter, corn is in the blade; but in the spring winter corn throws out a tall stem. As for millet and panic, they grow with a jointed and grooved[103] stalk, while sesame has a stem resembling that of fennel-giant. The fruit of all these seeds is either contained in an ear, as in wheat and barley, for instance, and protected from the attacks of birds and small animals by a prickly beard bristling like so many palisades; or else it is enclosed in pods, as in the leguminous plants, or in capsules, as in sesame and the poppy. Millet and panic can only be said to belong to the grower and the small birds in common, as they have nothing but a thin membrane to cover them, without the slightest protection. Panic receives that name from the panicule[104] or down that is to be seen upon it; the head of it droops languidly, and the stalk tapers gradually in thickness, being of almost the toughness and consistency of wood: the head is loaded with grain closely packed, there being a tuft upon the top, nearly a foot in length. In millet the husks which embrace the grain bend downward with a wavy tuft upon the edge. There are several varieties of panic, the mammose, for instance, the ears of which are in clusters with small edgings of down, the head of the plant being double; it is distinguished also according to the colour, the white, for instance, the black, the red, and the purple even. Several kinds of bread are made from millet, but very little from panic: there is no grain known that weighs heavier than millet, and which swells more in baking. A modius of millet will yield sixty pounds’ weight of bread; and three sextarii steeped in water will make one modius of fermenty.[105] A kind of millet[106] has been introduced from India into Italy within the last ten years, of a swarthy colour, large grain, and a stalk like that of the reed. This stalk springs up to the height of seven feet, and has tufts of a remarkable size, known by the name of “phobæ.”[107] This is the most prolific of all the cereals, for from a single grain no less than three sextarii[108] are produced: it requires, however, to be sown in a humid soil.

Some kinds of corn begin to form the ear at the third joint, and others at the fourth, though at its first formation the ear remains still concealed. Wheat, however, has four[109] articulations, spelt[110] six, and barley eight. In the case of these last, the ear does not begin to form before the number of joints, as above mentioned, is complete. Within four or five days, at the very latest, after the ear has given signs of forming, the plant begins to flower, and in the course of as many days or a little more, sheds its blossom: barley blossoms at the end of seven days at the very latest. Varro says that the grains are perfectly formed at the end of four times[111] nine days from their flowering, and are ready for cutting at the ninth month.

The bean, again, first appears in leaf, and then throws out a stalk, which has no articulations[112] upon it. The other leguminous plants have a tough, ligneous stalk, and some of them throw out branches, the chick-pea, the fitch, and the lentil, for instance. In some of the leguminous plants, the pea, for example, the stem creeps along the ground, if care is not taken to support it by sticks: if this precaution is omitted, the quality is deteriorated. The bean and the lupine are the only ones among the leguminous plants that have a single stem: in all the others the stem throws out branches, being of a ligneous nature, very thin, and in all cases hollow. Some of these plants throw out the leaves from the root, others at the top.[113] Wheat, barley, and the vetch, all the plants, in fact, which produce straw, have a single leaf only at the summit: in barley, however, this leaf is rough, while in the others it is smooth. * * * In the bean, again, the chick-pea, and the pea, the leaves are numerous and divided. In corn the leaf is similar to that of the reed, while in the bean it is round, as also in a great proportion of the leguminous plants. In the ervilia[114] and the pea the leaf is long,[115] in the kidney-bean veined, and in sesame[116] and irio the colour of blood. The lupine and the poppy are the only ones among these plants that lose[117] their leaves.

The leguminous plants remain a longer time in flower, the fitch and the chick-pea more particularly; but the bean is in blossom the longest of them all, for the flower remains on it forty days; not, indeed, that each stalk retains its blossom for all that length of time, but, as the flower goes off in one, it comes on in another. In the bean, too, the crop is not ripe all at once, as is the case with corn; for the pods make their appearance at different times, at the lowest parts first, the blossom mounting upwards by degrees.

When the blossom is off in corn, the stalk gradually thickens, and it ripens within forty days at the most. The same is the case, too, with the bean, but the chick-pea takes a much shorter time to ripen; indeed, it is fit for gathering within forty days from the time that it is sown. Millet, panic, sesame, and all the summer grains are ripe within forty days after blossoming, with considerable variations, of course, in reference to soil and weather. Thus, in Egypt, we find barley cut at the end of six months, and wheat at the end of seven, from the time of sowing. In Hellas, again, barley is cut in the seventh month, and in Peloponnesus in the eighth; the wheat being got in at a still later period.

Those grains which grow on a stalk of straw are enclosed in an envelope protected by a prickly beard; while in the bean and the leguminous plants in general they are enclosed in pods upon branches which shoot alternately from either side. The cereals are the best able to withstand the winter, but the leguminous plants afford the most substantial food. In wheat, the grain has several coats, but in barley,[118] more particularly, it is naked and exposed; the same, too, with arinca,[119] but most of all, the oat. The stem is taller in wheat than it is in barley, but the ear is more bearded[120] in the last. Wheat, barley, and winter-wheat[121] are threshed out; they are cleaned, too, for sowing just as they are prepared for the mill, there being no necessity for parching[122] them. Spelt, on the other hand, millet, and panic, cannot be cleaned without parching them; hence it is that they are always sown raw and with the chaff on. Spelt is preserved in the husk, too, for sowing, and, of course, is not in such case parched by the action of fire.

CHAP. 11.—SPELT.

Of all these grains barley is the lightest,[123] its weight rarely exceeding fifteen pounds to the modius, while that of the bean is twenty-two. Spelt is much heavier than barley, and wheat heavier than spelt. In Egypt they make a meal[124] of olyra,[125] a third variety of corn that grows there. The Gauls have also a kind of spelt peculiar to that country: they give it the name of “brace,”[126] while to us it is known as “sandala:” it has a grain of remarkable whiteness. Another difference, again, is the fact that it yields nearly four pounds more of bread to the modius than any other kind of spelt. Verrius states that for three hundred years the Romans made use of no other meal than that of corn.

CHAP. 12.—WHEAT.

There are numerous kinds of wheat which have received their names from the countries where they were first produced. For my part, however, I can compare no kind of wheat to that of Italy either for whiteness or weight, qualities for which it is more particularly distinguished: indeed it is only with the produce of the more mountainous parts of Italy that the foreign wheats can be put in comparison. Among these the wheat of Bœotia[127] occupies the first rank, that of Sicily the second, and that of Africa the third. The wheats of Thrace, Syria, and, more recently, of Egypt, used to hold the third rank for weight, these facts having been ascertained through the medium of the athletes; whose powers of consumption, equal to those of beasts of burden, have established the gradations in weight, as already stated. Greece, too, held the Pontic[128] wheat in high esteem; but this has not reached Italy as yet. Of all the varieties of grain, however, the Greeks gave the preference to the kinds called dracontion, strangia, and Selinusium, the chief characteristic of which is a stem of remarkable thickness: it was this, in the opinion of the Greeks, that marked them as the peculiar growth of a rich soil. On the other hand, they recommended for sowing in humid soils an extremely light and diminutive species of grain, with a remarkably thin stalk, known to them as speudias, and standing in need of an abundance of nutriment. Such, at all events, were the opinions generally entertained in the reign of Alexander the Great, at a time when Greece was at the height of her glory, and the most powerful country in the world. Still, however, nearly one hundred and forty-four years before the death of that prince we find the poet Sophocles, in his Tragedy of “Triptolemus,” praising the corn of Italy before all others. The passage, translated word for word, is to the following effect:—

“And favour’d Italy grows white with hoary wheat.”

And it is this whiteness that is still one of the peculiar merits of the Italian wheat; a circumstance which makes me the more surprised to find that none of the Greek writers of a later period have made any reference to it.

Of the various kinds of wheat which are imported at the present day into Rome, the lightest in weight are those which come from Gaul and Chersonnesus; for, upon weighing them, it will be found that they do not yield more than twenty pounds to the modius. The grain of Sardinia weighs half a pound more, and that of Alexandria one-third of a pound more than that of Sardinia; the Sicilian wheat is the same in weight as the Alexandrian. The Bœotian wheat, again, weighs a whole pound more than these last, and that of Africa a pound and three quarters. In Italy beyond the Padus, the spelt, to my knowledge, weighs twenty-five pounds to the modius, and, in the vicinity of Clusium, six-and-twenty. We find it a rule, universally established by Nature, that in every kind of commissariat bread[129] that is made, the bread exceeds the weight of the grain by one-third; and in the same way it is generally considered that that is the best kind of wheat, which, in kneading, will absorb one congius of water.[130] There are some kinds of wheat which give, when used by themselves, an additional weight equal to this: the Balearic wheat, for instance, which to a modius of grain yields thirty-five pounds weight of bread. Others, again, will only give this additional weight by being mixed with other kinds, the Cyprian wheat and the Alexandrian, for example; which, if used by themselves, will yield no more than twenty pounds to the modius. The wheat of Cyprus is swarthy, and produces a dark bread; for which reason it is generally mixed with the white wheat of Alexandria; the mixture yielding twenty-five pounds of bread to the modius of grain. The wheat of Thebais, in Egypt, when made into bread, yields twenty-six pounds to the modius. To knead the meal with sea-water, as is mostly done in the maritime districts, for the purpose of saving the salt, is extremely pernicious; there is nothing, in fact, that will more readily predispose the human body to disease. In Gaul and Spain, where they make a drink[131] by steeping corn in the way that has been already described—they employ the foam[132] which thickens upon the surface as a leaven: hence it is that the bread in those countries is lighter than that made elsewhere.