De molestiis et oneribus coniugiorum secundum
The Burden of Earthly Pleasures
The author introduces the ruinous nature of lust and the necessity of sobriety, contrasting true philosophy with the perceived excesses of Epicureanism.
Jerome and other philosophers; and on the ruinous nature of lust; on the faithfulness of the Ephesian woman and others like her. Just as sobriety is necessary at banquets, so modesty must be present in all things. For from overindulgence comes lust, and from lust comes impurity and manifold ruin. Yet from these things nothing follows but the pain of repentance; and it is well for those who mourn, if their repentance is fruitful. Hence the opinion of the dull-hearted, who claim that pleasure isn't perfect without the satisfaction of lust. It's said that Epicurus held this view. But whatever the swine of that herd may grunt, I don't believe such an unclean and deadly sentiment pleased any of the philosophers, much less Epicurus, who was significant enough to establish his own school among them. There are many excellent things by Seneca scattered among the philosophers, and they have been partly expressed and gathered in the book titled 'On the Traces' or 'On the Dogma of the Philosophers.'
The Nature of the Marriage Bond
Marriage is presented as a necessary covering for human weakness, though it is ultimately more fruitful in hardship than in joy.
The madness of the old, hardened Silenus seems more like a philosopher's opinion than a real one, and it's certainly more brutish than the donkey he was riding, which was the only one his wickedness could have persuaded to carry him. Perhaps the pagan myths hint at this very thing when they tell of the delirious old man, burning with wine, being captured by Lotis while others followed nature and rested their tired bodies in peace. Finally, when he was mocked by everyone, he was brought back to his senses by the braying of his own donkey, since neither age nor shame could hold him back. Every pleasure of lust is shameful, except for that which is excused by the marriage bond; through the benefit of this granted license, it hides whatever shame might otherwise be present. This is why our ancestors taught that the word for marriage (nuptiae) comes from the word for covering (nubendo), because, as Nonius Marcellus says, it covers—that is, it hides—the shameful parts of human weakness through the indulgence of the law. A custom has also grown up where those whom the authority of the Church joins in the commerce of the flesh are covered by the altar cloth or some other covering established by the Church, so that the marriage bed, which is built with Christ as the mediator, might cover the stains of its own fragility in the faith of chastity, so that it might be ignorant of all shame or confusion. Torches, lamps, and lights are also brought out and lit, because the honor of the marriage good illuminates the genuine marriage bed, which is spread openly—not by the urgency of one's own lust, but by the honest will of those consenting. For Hymen loves the light, but the lively boy Cupid, with his quiver, seeks out dark corners and hiding places to light his secret flame. Although the marriage bond is honest and useful, it is more fruitful in hardships than in joys.
The Wisdom of Detachment
Drawing on classical authorities like Socrates and Theophrastus, the author details the practical and spiritual burdens that marriage imposes on the wise man.
It brings forth children in pain, and it produces no fruit that isn't preceded or followed by bitterness. Valerius reports that Socrates—that earthly oracle of human wisdom—was once asked by a young man whether he should take a wife or stay away from marriage entirely, and he replied that whichever he chose, he would regret it. “Here,” he said, “you will be met by loneliness, by childlessness, by the end of your family line, and by a stranger as your heir.” “There, you'll find constant worry, a web of complaints, reproaches about the dowry, the heavy-handed judgment of in-laws, the chatter of a mother-in-law, a rival for your wife's attention, and the uncertain future of your children.” He didn't allow the young man to choose between these harsh realities as if they were pleasant options. The entire chorus of true philosophers agrees on this point, so that if anyone finds the rigor of the Christian life too much, they might at least learn chastity from the pagans. I don't mean to disparage marital chastity, but I don't believe that the hundredfold or sixtyfold fruit—even if they spring from the root of the thirtyfold—should be equated with the thirtyfold itself. Zeno, Epictetus, Aristotle, Critolaus, and many of the Epicureans are said to have passed this opinion down to posterity. Jerome cites Theophrastus’s golden book on marriage, in which he asks whether a wise man should take a wife. After concluding that he might—if she were beautiful, of good character, from a respectable family, and if he himself were healthy and wealthy—he immediately added, "These things, however, rarely all come together in marriage; therefore, a wise man should not take a wife." First, he argues that the study of philosophy is hindered, and that no one can serve both books and a wife equally. A matron's lifestyle requires many things: expensive clothes, gold, jewels, high costs, maids, various furnishings, litters, and gilded rooms. Then, throughout the night, there are nagging complaints: "She goes out in public more elegantly dressed, she is honored by everyone, while I am looked down upon as a nobody among women; why were you looking at the neighbor?" "Why were you talking to the maid?" "Coming from the market, what did you bring back?" We can have no friend, no companion. She suspects the love of another, and her own hatred. Even if the most learned teacher is in town, we can't leave our wives behind, nor can we travel with such baggage. It's hard to support a poor wife, and it's a torment to endure a rich one. On top of that, there's no choosing a wife; you have to take whoever comes your way. Whether she's hot-tempered, foolish, ugly, arrogant, or foul-smelling—whatever her faults—you only find out about them after the wedding. A horse, a donkey, an ox, a dog, even the cheapest slave, as well as clothes, pots, a wooden stool, a cup, or an earthen pitcher—these are all tested before they're bought. A wife is the only thing not put on display, so she doesn't displease you before you marry her. You must always pay attention to her face and praise her beauty, so that if you happen to look at another woman, she doesn't think she's losing your favor. You must call her 'mistress,' celebrate her birthday, swear by her health, and pray that she outlives you. You must honor her nurse, her maid, her servant, her foster-child, her handsome attendant, and her curled-hair steward—and even the eunuch who has been castrated for long and secure lust—all of whom are just names behind which adulterers hide. Whoever she loves, you must love as well, even if they are ungrateful.
The Illusion of Security
The author explores the impossibility of guarding a wife's virtue and the futility of seeking heirs, advocating instead for the interior freedom of the wise.
If you hand over the entire management of your house to her, you'll have to serve her; if you keep anything under your own control, she won't believe you trust her, and it will turn into hatred and arguments—and unless you deal with it quickly, she'll prepare poisons. If you allow in old women, goldsmiths, fortune-tellers, or peddlers of gems and silk, your wife's modesty is at risk; if you forbid them, you'll be accused of insulting her with your suspicion. But what good is even diligent guarding, when an unchaste wife cannot be kept, and a chaste one shouldn't need to be? For necessity is an unfaithful guardian of chastity, and she is truly to be called chaste who had the opportunity to sin if she wanted to. A beautiful woman is quickly desired, and an ugly one is coveted all too easily; it's hard to guard what many love, and it's a burden to possess what no one thinks worth having. Yet it is less miserable to have an ugly wife than to guard a beautiful one. Nothing is safe when it is the object of everyone's desire; one person is tempted by beauty, another by wit, another by intelligence, another by charm; whatever is attacked from every side is bound to be conquered in some way. But if wives are taken to manage a household, for comfort in sickness, or to escape loneliness, a faithful servant who obeys his master's authority and follows his instructions manages things much better than a wife who considers herself the mistress if she acts against her husband's will—that is, doing what she likes rather than what she is told. Friends and those bound by favors are better at sitting with the sick than a wife who counts her tears against us, sells her filth in the hope of an inheritance, and by flaunting her anxiety, disturbs the spirit of the suffering person with despair. But if she falls ill, you have to suffer along with her and never leave her bedside. And even if you have a good and sweet wife—which is a rare bird indeed—we groan when she is in labor, and we are tormented when she is in danger. A wise person, however, can never be alone. He has with him all those who are good and all who have ever been good, and he can transport his free spirit wherever he wishes. What he cannot do with his body, he embraces in his thought; and if he finds himself lacking the company of men, he will speak with God. He will never be less alone than when he is by himself. Furthermore, to marry for the sake of children—so that our name might not die out, or so that we might have support in our old age and rely on certain heirs—is the height of foolishness. What does it matter to us, as we withdraw from the world, if no one else is called by our name, when a son doesn't immediately take his father's name, and there are countless people who go by the same name? Or what help are you really keeping at home for your old age, when that person might die before you, turn out to have a twisted character, or, once they reach adulthood, decide you're taking too long to die? Friends and relatives you choose yourself are better and more reliable heirs than those you're forced to have, whether you like it or not. Even if the inheritance is certain, it's better to make good use of your own property while you're alive than to leave what you've earned through your own labor for uncertain uses. Theophrastus is enough to explain these and similar points, which alone are sufficient to show the troubles and calamities of marriage, even with its exquisite sweetness. It's said that P. spoke wisely. Clodius, because he wrongly blames Neptune, having suffered shipwreck a second time. But it would be just as elegant to say that someone who marries a second time wrongly blames Venus for being unkind.
The Folly of the Unchaste
The author critiques those who return to the yoke of marriage and recounts anecdotes of domestic discord to illustrate the instability of such unions.
For who will have sympathy for someone who, once freed from their chains, flies right back to them? Anyone who returns to the yoke of slavery they’ve already shaken off is clearly unworthy of the honor and peace of freedom. It’s monstrous, then, that those who claim the title of philosopher—or even religious—cannot keep themselves from the embraces of women. Often, someone who lived with the utmost restraint before claiming either title—if we can even count religion and philosophy as two separate things, since no one can truly philosophize without religion—will, once they’ve been promoted to some rank and found a bit of peace, use all their sharpest wits to hunt for a wife, or worse, won't even shy away from soliciting and corrupting the marriages of their neighbors. Sometimes the shameless intemperance of women breaks out; for, as Herodotus writes, a woman casts off her modesty along with her clothes. She breaks out, I say, and in front of blushing crowds, she reveals and lays bare the secrets of the marriage bed, complaining about her husband’s coldness and claiming it’s a sufficient and obvious reason for a separation or divorce, arguing that a man who isn't ready for sex is half a man and useless in marriage. My friend Geoffrey of Heroumuilla once elegantly confounded the audacity of one such person in a case like this. For when a lawyer had been assigned to her by the judge who was expected to grant the divorce, and the noble woman was laying out the merits of her case rather too diligently before her friends, supporters, and the lawyer—as is the custom—a prudent man questioned her about whether she had ever had another husband. When she denied this, he asked again whether she was still a virgin, saying that this was absolutely necessary for him to inquire into and know, so that he wouldn't be caught out by some clever judge during the proceedings. She confirmed it, though with some hesitation, because she wasn't entirely trusted. He then asked if she and her husband were accustomed to sleeping together at night, and to kissing and embracing one another. When she admitted all of this, the lawyer said, "Then how do you know, you most modest, prudent, and chaste virgin, that he hasn't been an effective husband to you and fulfilled all the rights of marriage?" Who taught you what intercourse is, that you deny he has had it with you, despite all the kissing and embracing he has engaged in whenever he wanted, with marital license? For it is certain that some living creatures mingle by kissing; others conceive by touching each other lightly; and there are those that are impregnated and give birth by their own generative heat from the temperate air. At this, she finally blushed, saying only that she had nothing to say to such traps. But things go well for those who philosophize—that is, for the clergy—because none of them is cold or stained by such a blemish in judgment. When asked to marry the sister of Hirtius after his divorce from Terentia, Cicero refused outright, saying he couldn't devote himself equally to a wife and to philosophy. When King Philip of Macedon—the target of Demosthenes’ thundering Philippics—went to his bedroom as usual, his angry wife locked him out; once shut out, he stayed quiet and consoled himself for the insult with a line from a tragedy. Gorgias the rhetorician recited a beautiful book on harmony at Olympia while the Greeks were at odds with one another. His enemy, Melantius, said to him, "This man teaches us about harmony, yet he couldn't keep his own wife and maid—just three people in one house—in agreement." His wife was, in fact, jealous of the maid's beauty and harassed her chaste husband with daily arguments. Consequently, to stop the envy and restore peace to marriages, it became the custom among the wealthy not to have anyone in the house who was more beautiful than the wife. When Socrates tried to stop the bickering of his two wives, they finally turned their aggression against him; after beating him and chasing him for a long time, they eventually dumped a chamber pot over him from where they were sitting. Many things are written everywhere by authors about the fickleness of women.
The Ephesian Matron and the Fragility of Virtue
The famous tale of the Ephesian matron serves as a cautionary narrative about the fickleness of human nature and the ease with which virtue can be discarded.
Perhaps many things are made up, but that doesn't stop someone who's laughing from telling the truth, or from using the kind of fables that philosophy doesn't reject to express what can be harmful to our character. From these examples, it's clear how easily they love, how lightly they hate, and how quickly they forget; forgetful of their own feelings and nature, they sometimes turn against their own children, and sometimes against their own flesh and blood. There are some women of the highest modesty, even if the satirist says that a woman of perfect chastity is a rare bird on earth, much like a black swan, and the tragedian claims there isn't a woman so modest that she isn't driven to madness by a foreign lust. According to Petronius, a certain matron of Ephesus was so well known for her modesty that she drew women from neighboring lands just to see her. So, after she had buried her husband, she wasn't content to follow the common custom of mourning with hair disheveled and wild, or beating her bare chest in front of a crowd; she even followed the dead man into the tomb, and began to guard the body, which had been placed in the Greek-style vault, and to weep for it day and night. Neither parents nor relatives could pull her away as she afflicted herself and sought death through starvation. The magistrates finally gave up and left, and the woman, a singular example of mourning, was already dragging out her fifth day without food. Her most faithful maid sat beside the sick woman, sharing in her tears and comforting her, and whenever the lamp placed in the tomb went out, she would relight it. There was, therefore, only one story in the whole city; people of every rank agreed that this was the only true example of chastity and love that had ever shone forth. Meanwhile, the governor of the province ordered some thieves to be crucified right next to the small tomb where the woman was mourning the recent corpse. The next night, when the soldier guarding the crosses to ensure no one took the bodies down for burial noticed a light shining quite brightly among the tombs and heard the mourner’s groans, he was overcome by the common human weakness of wanting to know who or what was causing it. He went down into the tomb, but upon seeing such a beautiful woman, he was at first startled, as if by some monster or ghostly vision, and stopped in his tracks. Then, when he saw the body lying there, noticed her tears, and saw her face torn by her own fingernails, he realized—as was the case—that the woman could not bear the longing for the deceased. He brought his own small meal into the tomb and began to urge the mourner not to persist in such useless grief or to tear her chest with groans that would accomplish nothing; he told her that everyone faces the same end, the same final home, and other things that usually call troubled minds back to sanity. But she, struck by this unfamiliar consolation, tore at her chest even more violently and laid her pulled-out hair over the chest of the one lying there. The soldier did not give up, however, but kept trying with the same encouragement to get the poor woman to eat, until the maid, corrupted by the smell of the wine (I am certain of this), was the first to reach out her hand, overcome by the kindness of the one inviting her. Then, once she was refreshed by the drink and food, he began to break down the lady’s stubbornness, saying, “What good will it do you if you waste away from fasting, if you bury yourself alive, or if you pour out your life before your time has come?” Do you really think ashes or the spirits of the dead care about being buried? Do you want to bring back the dead when fate is against it? Now that you've cleared away this womanly error, don't you want to enjoy the comforts of life for as long as you're allowed? The very body lying there should remind you that you need to live. No one listens against their will when they're forced to live or to eat. And so, after a few days of dry fasting, the woman finally let her stubbornness break. She ate with as much eagerness as the maid who had given in before her. But you know what usually tempts human satisfaction. Using the same flattery he had used to persuade the woman to live, the soldier now assaulted her modesty. The young man did not seem unattractive or unpersuasive to the chaste woman, as the maid kept winning her over and asking, "Will you fight even against a love that pleases you?" It didn't even cross her mind whose grave she was sitting in; why delay any longer? The woman didn't hold back even this part of her body, and the victorious soldier persuaded her to both. They stayed together not only that night when they were married, but also the next day and the third, with the doors of the tomb closed, of course, so that anyone—acquaintance or stranger—coming to the monument would have thought the most chaste wife had died upon her husband's body. Furthermore, the soldier, delighted by both the woman's beauty and the secrecy, bought whatever good things he could afford and brought them into the monument that very first night. So, when the parents of the man who had been crucified saw that the guard had been relaxed, they took down the hanging body at night and gave it the final rites. But the soldier, having been outwitted while he was away, saw the next day that one cross was empty; fearing punishment, he explained to the woman what had happened. He said he wouldn't wait for the judge's sentence but would instead pass judgment on his own cowardice with his sword, and he urged her to provide a place for the man about to die and to make the fatal tomb a resting place for her family and her husband. A woman no less merciful than chaste: "May the gods not allow that I should witness the two funerals of the two men dearest to me at the same time." I would rather provide for the dead than kill the living. Following this plea, she ordered her husband's body to be taken from the ground and fastened to the cross that was standing empty. The soldier made use of the very prudent woman's ingenuity, and the next day the people wondered by what means the dead man had ended up on the cross. You can call it history or fable, as you please, based on how Petronius tells it; yet Flavian is also an authority that it happened this way at Ephesus, and he reports that the woman paid the penalty for her impiety, her parricidal crime, and her adultery. Petronius is certainly not the only one to ridicule or describe the follies of women. Blessed Jerome writes that all of Euripides' tragedies are curses against women, and that Epicurus—even though his disciple Metrodorus had Leontion as a wife—rarely says that a wise man should enter into marriage, because many inconveniences are mixed into weddings. And just as wealth, honors, bodily health, and other things we call indifferent are neither good nor evil, but, placed in the middle, become either good or evil through use and outcome, so too are wives situated on the border between good and evil.
The Primacy of Modesty
The chapter concludes by exalting modesty as the essential feminine virtue and warning that without it, one descends into the degradation of animalistic vice.
It's a serious matter, then, for a wise man to be in doubt about whether he's about to marry a good woman or a bad one. If, then, there's such trouble in marriage—which is undoubtedly good and was established by the Lord—that a wise man shrinks from it, who but a fool would approve of the pleasure itself, which is illicit and wallows in filth, which men condemn, and which God will undoubtedly condemn? Since these two pleasures—gluttony and lust—are in a way brutish, one seems to have the filth of a pig, the other the stench of a goat. For just as modesty stands out among the virtues, so lewdness is the most wretched of vices; and while the former is becoming to both sexes, it adorns the female sex all the more. Indeed, very learned men say that modesty is the first thing to be preserved, for once it's lost, all virtue collapses. In this lies the primacy of the feminine virtues. It commends the poor, exalts the rich, redeems the deformed, and adorns the beautiful. She deserves well of her ancestors, whose blood she does not stain with illicit offspring; she deserves well of her children, for whom there is no need to be ashamed of their mother or to doubt their father; and she deserves well, above all, of herself, whom she preserves from the disgrace of another's body. There is no greater misery in captivity than being dragged into someone else's lust. Eloquence brings fame to consuls, military glory carries a name into eternity, and triumphs consecrate a new people; there are many things that, in themselves, ennoble brilliant minds, but for women, the virtue that is properly their own is modesty. Jerome is a witness that, before the Christian religion shone in the world, those who lived in celibacy were always held in honor among matrons; it was customary for sacred rites to be performed through them for the sake of feminine fortune; no priest was allowed to have been married twice, no flamen to have had two wives; even the hierophants of the Athenians were long castrated by drinking hemlock, and once they were chosen for the priesthood, they ceased to be men. This page would stretch out to an immense length if I were to touch upon what tragic poets, orators, comic poets, and satirists have produced on this subject—to say nothing of philosophers, ethicists, and theologians. Yet I don't think all of them have been enough—I won't say to destroy or repress this malice, but not even to expose it. If I were to say that many have experienced that a stone which strikes the dark ground is no better than the one carried on the necks of the Syrian slaves, malice will slander this as a statement made in injury to women. For there is nothing better, nothing more useful than a modest woman, and nothing more delightful among those things that can be imagined for those who cannot or will not practice self-control; but it's the mark of a fool to expect praise from these things, which deserve pardon more rightly than glory, if indeed they are tempered by the good of moderation. Otherwise, it won't be pardon but punishment, and not honor but disgrace that will follow the stain of either lust; unless, perhaps, one should be considered noble who is transformed into a goat or a pig.
Read the original Latin
leronimum et alios philosopkos; et de pernicie libidinis; de mulieris Ephesinae et similium fide. Sicut ergo sobrietas in conuiuiis necessaria est, ita rebus omnibus necesse est adesse modestiam. Siquidem de saturitate libido, de libidine immunditia et multiplex pernicies generatur. At ex his nichil nisi dolor penitudinis sequitur; et bene agitur cum moerentibus, si fructuosa sit penitudo. a Vnde hebetati cordis uidetur opinio quae sine expletione libidinis diffinit perfectam non esse uoluptatem. Traditur hoc sensisse Epicurum. Sed quicquid gregis illius grunniant sues, tam immundam et tam funestam uocem nulli philosophorum arbitror placuisse, nedum Epicuro, qui tantus fuit ut inter philosophos propriam fecerit sectam. Sunt eius auctore Seneca egregia multa, quae passim possunt apud philosophos inueniri et pro parte expressa sunt et congesta in libro qui De Vestigiis, siue De Dogmate Philosophorum inscribitur.
Silleni senis inueterati uidetur amentia potius quam sententia philosophi, et est certe asello cui insidebat brutior cui hoc nequitia potuit suadere. Id ipsum forte innuunt figmenta gentilium quae delirum senem uino estuantem, aliis naturae obtemperantibus et quiete fessa recreantibus corpora, Lotide prae ceteris captum referunt et tandem cum omnium irrisione quem nec etas nec uerecundia refrenabat, asini sui ruditu reuocatum. Omnis ergo uoluptas libidinis turpis est, ea exeepta quae excusatur federe coniugali, et indultae licentiae beneficio quicquid enibescentiae poterat inesse abscondit. Vnde et nuptiae a nubendo dici maiores tradiderunt, quia pudenda humanae infirmitatis nubit, id est abscondit, ut ait Nonius Marcellus, indulgentia legis. Inoleuit etiam consuetudo ut quos in commercium camis Ecclesiae iungit auctoritas pallio uelentur altaris aut alio ab Ecclesia constituto, ut thorus, qui Christo conciliante construitur, sifc in fide castitatis, fragilitatis suae maculas contegat, ut totius sit probri aut confusionis ignarus. Praeferuntur et faces, lampades et luminaria accenduntur, quia genuinum thorum, qui palam et non sua urgente libidine sed honesta consentientium uoluntate stemitur, decus boni coniugalis illustrat. Nam et Ymeneus lucem amat et alacer faretra puer Cupido, furtiuam succendens flammam, latebras et angulos quaerit. Licet autem honesta sit et utilis copula maritalis, angustiae quam letitiae fecundior est.
Parit enim in dolore uel filios, nec aliquem producit fructum quem non amaritudo praecedat aut sequatur. Vnde referente Valerio Socrates, humanae sapientiae quasi quoddam terrestre oraculum, ab adolescentulo quodam consultus utrum uxorem duceret an se omni matrimonio abstineret, respondit eum, utrum eomm fecisset, acturum penitentiam. Hic te, inquit, solitudo, hic orbitas, hic generis interitus, hic heres alienus excipiet. Illic perpetua sollicitudo, contextus querelamm, dotis exprobratio, affinium graue supercilium, garrula socrus lingua, subsessor alieni matrimoni, incertus liberorum euentus. Non passus est iuuenem in eontextu rerum asperarum quasi letae materiae facere delectum. Concinit in hunc modum totus recte philosophantium chorus, ut, si qui Christianae religionis abhorrent rigorem, discant uel ab ethnicis castitatem. Non tamen quod coniugali detraham castitati, sed centesimum aut sexagesimum fructum, licet de radice tricesimi oriantur, a minime arbitror tricesimo componendum. Zeno, Epitectus, Aristotiles, Critolaus, et Epicureorum quam plurimi traduntur posteris hanc publicasse sententiam.
Fertur auctore leronimo aureolus Theophrasti liber de nuptiis in quo quaerit an uir sapiens ducat uxorem; et cum diflSnisset, si pulchra esset, si bene morata, si honestis parentibus, si ipse sanus et diues, sic sapientem aliquando inire matrimonium, statim intulit: Haec autem raro in nuptiis uniuersa concordant; non est igitur uxor ducenda sapienti. Primum enira impediri studia philosophiae, nec posse quemquam libris et uxori pariter inseruire. Multa esse quae matronarum usibus necessaria sint; pretiosae uestes, aurum, gemmae, sumptus, ancillae, supellex uaria, lecticae et exedra deaurata. Deinde per totas noctea garrulae conquestiones: Illa omatior procedit in publicum, haec honoratur ab omnibus, ego in conuentu feminarum misella despicior; cur aspiciebas uicinam? quid cum anciUula loquebaris? de foro ueniens quid attulisti? Non amicum haberepossumus,non sodalem. Alteriusamorem,suumodium suspicatur.
Si doctissimus praeceptor in qualibet urbium fuerit, nec uxorem relinquere nec cum sarcina ire possumus. Pauperem alere difficile est; diuitem ferre tormentum. Adde quod nulla est uxoris electio, sed qualiscuraque obuenerit habenda; si iracunda, si fatua, si deformis, si superba, si fetida, quodcumque uitii est, post nuptias discimus. Equus, asinus, bos, canis et uilissima mancipia, uestes quoque et lebetes, sedile ligneum, calix et urceolus fictilis probantur prius et sic emuntur. Sola uxor non ostenditur ne ante displiceat quam ducatur. Attendenda est semper eius facies et pulcritudo laudanda, ne, si alteram aspexeris, se estimet displicere. Vocanda domina, celebrandus natalis eius, iurandum per salutem illius, ut sit superstes optandum, honoranda nutrix eius et gerula, seruus patemus et alumpnus et formosus assecla et procurator calamistratus et in longam securamque libidinem exsectus spado, sub quibus nominibus adulteri delitescunt. Quoscumque illa dilexerit, ingrati etiam amandi.
Si totam ei domum regendam commiseris, seruiendum est; si aliquid tuo arbitrio reseruaueris, fidem sibi haberi non putabit et in odium uertetur ac iurgia et, nisi cito consulueris, parabit uenena. Anus et aurifices et ariolos et institores gemmarum sericarumque uestium si intromiseris, periculum pudicitiae est; si prohibueris, suspicionis iniuria. Verum quid prodest etiam diligens custodia, cum uxor seruari impudica non possit, pudica non debeat? Infida enim custos est castitatis necessitas, et illa uere pudica dicenda est, cui licuit peccare si uoluit. Pulcra cito adamatur, feda facillime concupiscit; difficile custoditur quod plures amant, molestum est possidere quod nemo habere dignetur. Minore tamen miseria deformis habetur quam formosa seruatur. Nichil tutum a est in quo totius populi uota suspirant; alius forma, alius fascetiis, alius ingenio, alius libers Jitate sollicitat; aliquo modo expugnatur quod undique incessitur. Quod si propter dispensationem domus et languoris solatia et fugam solitudinis ducuntur uxores, multo melius dispensat seruus fidelis, obediens auctoritati domini et dispensationi eius obtemperans, quam uxor, quae in eo se estimat dominam si aduersus uiri fecerit uoluntatem, id est quod placet, non quod iubetur.
Assidere autem egrotanti magis possunt amici et uemulae beneficiis obligati quam illa quae nobis imputet lacrimas suas et hereditatis spe uendat illuuiem et soUicitudinem iactans languentis animum desperatione conturbet. Quod si languerit, coegrotandum est et numquam ab eius lectulo recedendum. Aut, si bona fuerit et suauis uxor, quae tamen rara auis est, cum parturiente gemimus, cum periclitante torquemur. Sapiens autem numquam solus esse potest. Habet secum omnes qui sunt quique umquam fuerunt boni, et animum liberum quocumque uult transfert. Quod corpore non potest, cogitatione complectitur; et, si hominum inopia fuerit, loquetur cum Deo. Numquam minus solus erit quam cum solus fuerit. Porro liberorum causa uxorem ducere, ut uel nomen nostrum non intereat uel habeamus praesidia senectutis et certis utamur heredibus, stolidissimum est.
Quid enim ad nos pertinet recedentes e mundo si nomine nostro alius non uocetur, cum et filius non statim patris Cuocabulum referat et innumerabiles sint qui appellentur eodem nomine? Aut quae senectutis auxilia nutrire domi qui aut prior te forte moriatur aut peruersissimis moribus sit aut certe, cum ad maturam etatem uenerit, tarde ei uidearis mori? Heredes autem meliores et certiores sunt amici et propinqui, quos iudicio eligas, quam quos uelis nolis habere cogaris. Licet certa hereditas sit, dum aduiuis, bene uti substantia tua quam tuo labore quaesita in incertos isus relinquere. Haec et huiusmodi Theophrastus quae uel sola matrimoniorum angustias et calamitates exquisitae dulcedinis sufficiunt explanare. Scite fertur dixisse P. Clodius quia improbe Neptunum accusat qui iterum naufragium fecit. At non illud inelegantius diceretur, quia improbe Venerem causatur aduersam qui secundam ducit uxorem.
Quis enim ei compatietur qui, semel solutus a uinculis, reuolat ad cathenas? Plane indignus est libertatis honore et quiete qui ad excussum seruitutis recurrit iugum. Vnde monstris simile est quod hii qui non modo philosophiae sed et religionis sibi uendicant nomen arceri nequeunt ab amplexibus mulierum. Saepe etenim qui antequam nomen profiteretur alterutrum, si tamen haec, religio scilicet et philosophia, numerum faciunt, cum sine religione nemo recte ualeat philosophari, continentissime uixit, cum in aliquem gradum promotus est nactusque quietem, primae et summae deliberationis a acumen exercet in eligenda uxore uel ducenda aut, quod nequius est, uicinorum matrimonia sollicitare et corrumpere non ueretur. Erumpit interdum inuerecunda intemperies mulierum; quia, ut scribit Herodotus, muher cum ueste deponit et uerecundiam. Erumpit, inquam, impudens et in facie erubescentium populorum genialis thori reuelat et denudat archana et de mariti frigiditate conqueritur, allegans hanc sufficientem et euidentem repudii uel diuortii causam, quod semiuir est et inutilis matrimonio qui non est promptus ad coitum. Eleganter quidem Gaufridus de Heroumuilla, familiaris meus, unius talium in causa huiusmodi confudit audaciam. Cum enim ei patronus datus esset a iudice celebraturo, ut putabatur, diuortium, et mulier generosa, audientibus amicis et suffragatoribus, aduocato, ut fit, diligentius merita causae suae exponeret, scrutatus est ab ea uir prudens an alium maritum quandoque habuerit.
Quod cum illa negasset, quaesiuit iterum an adhuc uirgo esset, dicens hoc sibi inquisitu et scitu pemecessarium, ne a discreto iudice caperetur occasione aliqua in sermone. IUa uero hoc, uerecunde tamen, eo quod sibi non bene credebatur, asseruit. Et ille an simul de noctu dormire consueuerint et se inuicem osculari et amplexari maritus et ipsa, inquisiuit. Quae omnia cum illa fateretur: Vnde ergo, inquit patronus, nosti, uirgo pudicissima prudentissima et pudoratissima, quod efficacem tecum non impleuerit uirum et totius matrimonii iura persoluerit? Quis te docuit quid sit coitus, ut eum tecum coiisse neges inter tot oscula, tot amplexus, qui quotiens uoluit pertractauit licentia maritali? Nam et quaedam animantia certum est se inuicem osculando misceri; alia se tenuiter tangendo concipiunt; et sunt quae suo grauidante calore ab aere temperato impraegnantur et pariunt. Hic illa tandem erubuit, hoc solum dicens, se quid ad huiusmodi captiones hisceret non habere. Sed bene cum philosophantibus, id est cum clericis, agitur, quod nemo eorum frigidus est aut in iudicio perfusus huiusmodi macula.
Cicero, rogatus ut post repudium Terentiae sororem Hirtii duceret, omnino facere supersedit, dicens se non posse et uxori et philosophiae pariter operam dare. Philippum regem Mefcedonum, contra quem Demostenis Philippicae tonant, introeuntem ex more cubiculum uxor exclusit irata; qui exclusus tacuit et iniuriam suam uersu tragico consolatus est. Gorgias rethor librum pulcherrimum de concordia Grecis tunc inter se dissidentibus recitauit Olimpiae. Cui Melantius inimicus eius: Hic nobis, inquit, de concordia praecipit qui se uxorem et ancillulam, tres in una domo, concordare non potuit. Emulabatur quippe uxor eius ancillulae pulcritudini et castissimum uirum cotidianis iurgiis exagitabat. Vnde, ut cesset inuidia et quies matrimoniis reformetur, ditioribus in consuetudinem a uersum est ne quam in domo habeant pulcriorem. Socrates cum duarum uxorum iurgia uellet reprimere, in eum nouissime uerterunt impetum et male multatum fugientemque diu persecutae sunt et a solio, in quo morabantur, postmodum lotio perfuderunt. In muliebrem leuitatem ab auctoribus passim multa scribuntur.
Fortasse falso interdum finguntur plurima; nichil tamen impedit ridentem dicere uerum et fabulosis narrationibus, quas philosophia non reicit, exprimere quid obesse possit in moribus. Ex iis enim liquet quam facile ament, quanta oderint leuitate, quam cito obliuiscantur; affectuum et naturae immemores interdum in filios armantur, interdum in uiscera sua. Sunt aliquae pudicissimae, licet satiricus dicat quoniam rara auis in terris nigroque simillima cigno mulier exactae castitatis, et tragicus nullam esse feminam tam pudicam quae non peregrina libidine usque ad furorem incendatur. Matrona quaedam referente Petronio Eflesi tam notae erat pudicitiae ut uicinarum quoque gentium feminas ad spectaculum sui euocaret. Haec ergo, cum uirum extulisset, non contenta uulgari more fimus prosequi crinibus sparsis et turbatis aut nudatum pectus in conspectu frequentiae plangere, in conditorium etiam prosecuta est defunctum positumque in hipogato Greco more corpus custodire ac flere totis noctibus diebusque coepit. Sic afflictantem se ac mortem inedia persequentem non parentes potuerunt abducere, non propinqui. Magistratus ultimo repulsi abierunt, complorataque singularis exempli femina ab omnibus quintum iam diem sine alimento trahebat. Assidebat egrae fidissima ancilla, simulque et lacrimas commendabat lugenti, et quotienscumque defecerat positum in monumento lumen renouabat.
Vna igitur in tota ciuitate fabula erat; solum illud affulsisse uerum pudicitiae amorisque exemplum omnis ordinis homines confitebantur. Cum interim imperator prouinciae latrones crucibus iussit affigi secundum illam casulam in qua recens cadauer matrona deflebat. Proxima ergo nocte, cum miles, qui cruces seruabat, ne quis ad sepulturam corpus detraheret, notasset sibi et lumen inter monumenta clarius fulgens et gemitum lugentis audisset, uitio gentis humanae concupiit scire quis aut quid faceret. Descendit itaque in conditorium, uisaque pulcherrima muliere primo quasi quodam monstro infemisque imaginibus turbatus substitit. Deinde, ubi et corpus iacentis aspexit et lacrimas considerauit faciemque unguibus sectam, ratus scilicet, id quod erat, desiderium extincti feminam pati non posse, attulit in monumentum cenulam suam coepitque hortari lugentem ne perseueraret in dolore superuacuo ac nichil profuturo gemitu pectus diduceret; omnium eadem esse, scilicet idem domicilium, a et cetera quibus exulceratae mentes ad sanitatem reuocantur. At illa ignota consolatione percussa lacerauit uehementius pectus raptosque crines super pectus iacentis imposuit. Non recessit tamen miles sed eadem exortatione temptauit dare mnlierculae cibum donec ancilla uini (certum habeo) odore corrupta primum ipsa porrexit ad humanitatem inuitantis uictam manum. Deinde refecta potione et cibo expugnare dominae pertinaciam coepit et: Quid proderit, inquit, hoc tibi, si soluta inedia fueris, si te uiuam sepelieris, si antequam fata poscant indempnatum effuderis spiritum?
Id cinerem aut manes credis curare sepultos? Vis tu reuiuiscere reluctantibus fatis extinctum? Vis discusso muliebri errore quamdiu licuerit lucis commodis frui? Ipsum te iacentis corpus admonere debet ut uiuas. Nemo inuitus audit, cum uiuere cogitur aut sumere cibum. Itaque mulier, aliquot dierum abstinentia sicca, passa est frangi pertinaciam suam. Nec minus auide repleuit se cibo quam ancilla quae prior uicta est. Ceterum scitis quid plerumque temptare soleat humanam satietatem.
Quibus blanditiis impetrauerat miles ut matrona uiuere uellet, eisdem etiam pudicitiam eius aggressus est. Nec deformis aut infacundus iuuenis castae uidebatur, ancilla gratiam conciliante ac subinde dicente: Placitone etiam pugnabis amori? nec uenit in mentem quorum consederis aruisl Quid diutius moror? Ne hanc quidem partem corporis mulier abstinuit, uictorque miles utrumque persuasit. lacuerunt ergo una non tantum illa nocte, qua nuptias fecerunt, sed postero etiam ac tertia die, praeclusis uidelicet conditorii foribus, ut quisque ex notis ignotisque ad monumentum ueniens putasset expirasse super corpus uiri pudicissimam uxorem. Ceterum delectatus miles et forma mulieris et secreto, quiequid boni per facultates poterat, coemebat et prima statim nocte ferebat in monumentum. Itaque unius cruciati parentes, ut uiderunt laxatam custodiam, detraxerunt nocte pendentem et supremo mandad uerunt officio. At miles circumscriptus dum desidet, ut postero die uidit unam sine cadauere crucem, ueritus supplicium, mulieri quid accidisset exponit, nec se expectaturum sententiam iudicis sed gladio ius dicturum ignauiae suae, commendans modo perituro locum prouideret et fatale conditorium familiari ac uiro faceret.
Mulier non minus misericors quam pudica: Nec istud dii sinant, ut eodem tempore duorum michi carissimorum hominum duo funera spectem. Malo mortuum impendere quam uiuum occidere. Secundum hanc orationem iubet ex area corpus mariti sui toUi atque illi quae uacabat cruci affigi. Vsus est miles ingenio prudentissimae feminae; posteroque die populus miratus est qua ratione mortuus isset in crucem. Tu historiam aut fabulam quod iis uerbis refert Petronius pro libitu appellabis; ita tamen ex facto accidisse Effesi et Flauianus auctor est, mulieremque tradit impietatis suae et sceleris parricidalis et adulterii luisse penas. Non quidem solus est in mulierum ineptiis ridendis aut exprimendis Petronius. Scribit beatus leronimus quia totae Euripidis tragoediae in mulieres maledicta sunt, et quod Epicurus, quamquam Metodorus discipulus eius Leontion habuerit uxorem, raro dicit sapienti ineunda coniugia, quia multa incommoda admixta sunt nuptiis. Et, quomodo diuitiae et honores et corporum sanitates et cetera quae indifferentia nominamiis nec bona nec mala sunt sed, nelud in medituUio posita, usu et euentu uel bona uel mala fiunt, ita et uxores sitas in bonorum malorumue confinio.
Graue ergo esse uiro sapienti uenire in dubium utrum bonam an malam ducturus sit. Si ergo tanta est molestia nuptiarum, quae proculdubio bonae sunt et a Domino institutae, ut eas sapiens reformidet, quis nisi demens ipsam approbet uoluptatem quae illicita est et tota uersatur in sordibus, quam homines culpant et Deus proculdubio condempnabit? Nam cum haelduae uoluptates scilicet gulae et Veneris quodammodo brutonim sint, altera porci immunditiam altera et hirci uidetur habere fetorem. Vt enim pudicitia inter uirtutes eminet, sic petulantia in uitiis abiectissima est; et cum illa utrumque deceat sexum, muliebrem tamen magis exomat. Siquidem doctissimi uiri uox est pudicitiam imprimis esse retinendam, qua amissa omnis uirtus ruit. In hac muliebrium uirtutum principatus est. Haec pauperem commendat, diuitem extollit, deformem redimit, exomat pulchram. Bene meretur de maioribus quorum sanguinem sobole furtiua non uitiat; bene de liberis quibus nec de matre erabescendum nec de patre dubitandum est; bene imprimis de se quam a contumelia alieni corporis uendicat.
Captiuitatis nulla maior calamitas est quam ad alienam libidinem trahi. Viros consulatos illustrat eloquentia, in nomen etemum transfert gloria militaris triumphosque nouae gentis consecrat; multa sunt quae per se clara ingenia nobilitent; muliemm proprie uirtus pudicitia est. leronimus testis est quod, antequam reKgio Christiana fulgeret in mundo, unicubas semper habuisse inter matronas decus; per illas Fortunae muliebri sacra fieri solitum; nullum sacerdotem digamum, nuUum flaminem bimaritum; ierophantias quoque Atheniensium diutissime cicutae sorbitione castrari et, postquam in pontificatum fuerint allecti uiros esse desinere. In immensum pagina protendetur, si ea perstrinxero quae in hac parte tragici, oratores, comici, satirici, poetae (ut de philosophis, ethicis, et theologis taceam) prodiderunt. Sed tamen nec omnes istos arbitror suffecisse ad hanc non dico malitiam delendam aut reprimendam sed nec ad exponendam. Si dixero quod multi sunt experti quia a nec melior pedibus silicem quae concutit atrum quam quae seruorum uehittir ceruice Sirorum, hoc in iniuriam mulierum dictum malitia calumpniabitur. Nichil enim melius, nichil utilius muliere pudica, nichil eorum quae possunt excogitari iocundius his qui continere non possunt aut nolunt; sed desipientis est ab his laudem sperare, quae ueniam rectius merentur quam gloriam, si tamen moderationis bono fuerint temperata. Alioquin non uenia sed pena, sed ignominia utriusque libidinis maculam prosequetur; nisi forte decorus habendus sit qui in hircum transf ormetur aut suem.
Policraticus companion
Study the argument weekly; pray the tradition daily
Pair the outline with the Chosen Portion app, which serves short daily portions from the same royal devotional tradition — free on iOS.
John of Salisbury argued that rulers must keep the law of God before their eyes daily; Chosen Portion gives modern readers that same daily discipline in five minutes a morning.
- 8 weeks, one book per week, with the 3-4 key chapters flagged in each
- Discussion questions usable for a reading group from week one
- A daily 5-minute companion portion in the app alongside your weekly study