Delphi Complete Works of Varro

by Marcus Terentius Varro

  [21] “If that is so,” replied Agrasius, “how can cattle be kept off the land, when manure, which enhances its value very greatly, is supplied by the herds?” “By that method of reasoning,” retorted Agrius, “we may assert that slave-trading is a branch of agriculture, if we decide to keep a gang for that purpose. The error lies in the assumption that, because cattle can be kept on the land and be a source of profit there, they are part of agriculture. It does not follow; for by that reasoning we should have to embrace other things quite foreign to agriculture; as, for instance, you might keep on your farm a number of spinners, weavers, and other artisans.”

  “Very well,” said Scrofa, “let us exclude grazing from agriculture, and whatever else anyone wishes.” [22] “Am I, then,” said I, “to follow the writings of the elder and the younger Saserna, and consider that how to manage clay-pits is more related to agriculture than mining for silver or other mining such as undoubtedly is carried out on some land? [23] But as quarries for stone or sand-pits are not related to agriculture, so too clay-pits. This is not to say that they are not to be worked on land where it is suitable and profitable; as further, for instance, if the farm lies along a road and the site is convenient for travellers, a tavern might be built; however profitable it might be, still it would form no part of agriculture. For it does not follow that whatever profit the owner makes on account of the land, or even on the land, should be credited to the account of agriculture, but only that which, as the result of sowing, is born of the earth for our enjoyment.” [24] “You are jealous of that great writer,” interrupted Stolo, “and you attack his potteries carpingly, while passing over the excellent observations he makes bearing very closely on agriculture, so as not to praise them.” [25] This brought a smile from Scrofa, who knew the books and despised them; and Agrasius, thinking that he alone knew them, asked Stolo to give a quotation. “This is his recipe for killing bugs,” he said: “ ‘Soak a wild cucumber in water, and wherever you sprinkle the water the bugs will not come.’ And again, ‘Grease your bed with ox gall, mixed with vinegar.’ “ [26] “And still it is good advice,” said Fundanius, glancing at Scrofa, “even if he did write it in a book on agriculture.” “Just as good, by Hercules,” he replied, “as this one for the making of a depilatory: ‘Throw a yellow frog into water, boil it down to one-third, and rub the body with it.’ “ “It would be better for you to quote from that book,” said I, “a passage which bears more closely on the trouble from which Fundanius suffers; for his feet are always hurting him and bringing wrinkles to his brow.” [27] “Tell me, pray,” exclaimed Fundanius; “I would rather hear about my feet than how beet-roots ought to be planted.” “I will tell you,” said Stolo, with a smile, “in the very words in which he wrote it (at least I have heard Tarquenna say that when a man’s feet begin to hurt he may be cured if he will think of you): ‘I am thinking of you, cure my feet. The pain go in the ground, and may my feet be sound.’ He bids you chant this thrice nine times, touch the ground, spit on it, and be fasting while you chant.” [28] “You will find many other marvels in the books of the Sasernas,” said I, “which are all just as far away from agriculture and therefore to be disregarded.” “Just as if,” said he, “such things are not found in other writers also. Why, are there not many such items in the book of the renowned Cato, which he published on the subject of agriculture, such as his recipes for placenta, for libum, and for the salting of hams?” “You do not mention that famous one of his composing,” said Agrius: “ ‘If you wish to drink deep at a feast and to have a good appetite, eat some half-dozen leaves of raw cabbage with vinegar before dinner.’”

  III.

  Igitur, inquit Agrasius, quae diiungenda essent a cultura cuius modi sint, quoniam discretum, de iis rebus quae scientia sit in colendo nos docete, ars id an quid aliud, et a quibus carceribus decurrat ad metas. Stolo cum aspexisset Scrofam, Tu, inquit, et aetate et honore et scientia quod praestas, dicere debes. Ille non gravatus, Primum, inquit, non modo est ars, sed etiam necessaria ac magna; eaque est scientia, quae sint in quoque agro serenda ac facienda, quo terra maximos perpetuo reddat fructus.

  [3.1] “Well, then,” said Agrasius, “since we have decided the nature of the subjects which are to be excluded from agriculture, tell us whether the knowledge of those things used in agriculture is an art or not, and trace its course from starting-point to goal.” Glancing at Scrofa, Stolo said: “You are our superior in age, in position, and in knowledge, so you ought to speak.” And he, nothing loath, began: “In the first place, it is not only an art but an important and noble art. It is, as well, a science, which teaches what crops are to be planted in each kind of soil, and what operations are to be carried on, in order that the land may regularly produce the largest crops.

  IV.

  Eius principia sunt eadem, quae mundi esse Ennius scribit, aqua, terra, anima et sol. Haec enim cognoscenda, priusquam iacias semina, quod initium fructuum oritur. Hinc profecti agricolae ad duas metas dirigere debent, ad utilitatem et voluptatem. Utilitas quaerit fructum, voluptas delectationem: priores partes agit quod utile est, quam quod delectat. Nec non ea, quae faciunt cultura honestiorem agrum, pleraque non solum fructuosiorem eadem faciunt, ut cum in ordinem sunt consita arbusta atque oliveta, sed etiam vendibiliorem atque adiciunt ad fundi pretium. Nemo enim eadem utilitati non formosius quod est emere mavult pluris, quam si est fructuosus turpis. Utilissimus autem is ager qui salubrior est quam alii, quod ibi fructus certus; contra [quod] in pestilenti calamitas, quamvis in feraci agro, colonum ad fructus pervenire non patitur. Etenim ubi ratio cum orco habetur, ibi non modo fructus est incertus, sed etiam colentium vita. Quare ubi salubritas non est, cultura non aliud est atque alea domini vitae ac rei familiaris. Nec haec non deminuitur scientia. Ita enim salubritas, quae ducitur e caelo ac terra, non est in nostra potestate, sed in naturae, ut tamen multum sit in nobis, quo graviora quae sunt ea diligentia leviora facere possimus. Etenim si propter terram aut aquam odore, quem aliquo loco eructat, pestilentior est fundus, aut propter caeli regionem ager calidior sit, aut ventus non bonus flet, haec vitia emendari solent domini scientia ac sumptu, quod permagni interest, ube sint positae villae, quantae sint, quo spectent porticibus, ostiis ac fenestris. An non ille Hippocrates medicus in magna pestilentia non unum agrum, sed multa oppida scientia servavit? Sed quid ego illum voco ad testimonium? Non hic Varro noster, cum Corcyrae esset exercitus ac classis et omnes domus repletae essent aegrotis ac funeribus, immisso fenestris novis aquilone et obstructis pestilentibus ianuaque permutata ceteraque eius generis diligentia suos comites ac familiam incolumes reduxit?

  [4.1] “Its elements are the same as those which Ennius says are the elements of the universe — water, earth, air, and fire. You should have some knowledge of these before you cast your seed, which is the first step in all production. Equipped with this knowledge, the farmer should aim at two goals, profit and pleasure; the object of the first is material return, and of the second enjoyment. The profitable plays a more important rôle than the pleasurable; [2] and yet for the most part the methods of cultivation which improve the aspect of the land, such as the planting of fruit and olive trees in rows, make it not only more profitable but also more saleable, and add to the value of the estate. For any man would rather pay more for a piece of land which is attractive than for one of the same value which, though profitable, is unsightly. [3] Further, land which is more wholesome is more valuable, because on it the profit is certain; while, on the other hand, on land that is unwholesome, however rich it may be, misfortune does not permit the farmer to reap a profit. For where the reckoning is with death, not only is the profit uncertain, but also the life of the farmers; so that, lacking wholesomeness, agriculture becomes nothing else than a game of chance, in which the life and the property of the owner are at stake. [4] And yet this risk can be lessened by science; for, granting that healthfulness, being a product of climate and soil, is not in our power but in that of nature, still it depends greatly on us, because we can, by care, lessen the evil effe
cts. For if the farm is unwholesome on account of the nature of the land or the water, from the miasma which is exhaled in some spots; or if, on account of the climate, the land is too hot or the wind is not salubrious, these faults can be alleviated by the science and the outlay of the owner. The situation of the buildings, their size, the exposure of the galleries, the doors, and the windows, are matters of the highest importance. [5] Did not that famous physician, Hippocrates, during a great pestilence save not one farm but many cities by his skill? But why do I cite him? Did not our friend Varro here, when the army and fleet were at Corcyra, and all the houses were crowded with the sick and the dead, by cutting new windows to admit the north wind, and shutting out the infected winds, by changing the position of doors, and other precautions of the same kind, bring back his comrades and his servants in good health?

  V.

  Sed quoniam agri culturae quod esset initium et finis dixi, relinquitur quot partes ea disciplina habeat ut sit videndum. Equidem innumerabiles mihi videntur, inquit Agrius, cum lego libros Theophrasti complures, qui inscribuntur phuton istorias et alteri phutikon aition. Stolo, Isti, inquit, libri non tam idonei iis qui agrum colere volunt, quam qui scholas philosophorum; neque eo dico, quo non habeant et utilia et communia quaedam. Quapropter tu potius agri culturae partes nobis expone. Scrofa, Agri culturae, inquit, quattuor sunt partes summae: e quis prima cognitio fundi, solum partesque eius quales sint; secunda, quae in eo fundo opus sint ac debeant esse culturae causa; tertia, quae in eo praedio colendi causa sint facienda; quarta, quo quicque tempore in eo fundo fieri conveniat. De his quattuor generalibus partibus singulae minimum in binas dividuntur species, quod habet prima ea quae ad solum pertinent terrae et iterum quae ad villas et stabula. Secunda pars, quae moventur atque in fundo debent esse culturae causa, est item bipertita, de hominibus, per quos colendum, et de reliquo instrumento. Tertia pars quae de rebus dividitur, quae ad quamque rem sint praeparanda et ubi quaeque facienda. Quarta pars de temporibus, quae ad solis circumitum annuum sint referenda et quae ad lunae menstruum cursum. De primis quattuor partibus prius dicam, deinde subtilius de octo secundis.

  [5.1] “But as I have stated the origin and the limits of the science, it remains to determine the number of its divisions.” “Really,” said Agrius, “it seems to me that they are endless, when I read the many books of Theophrastus, those which are entitled ‘The History of Plants’ and ‘The Causes of Vegetation.’ “ [2] “His books,” replied Stolo, “are not so well adapted to those who wish to tend land as to those who wish to attend the schools of the philosophers; which is not to say that they do not contain matter which is both profitable and of general interest. [3] So, then, do you rather explain to us the divisions of the subject.” “The chief divisions of agriculture are four in number,” resumed Scrofa: “First, a knowledge of the farm, comprising the nature of the soil and its constituents; second, the equipment needed for the operation of the farm in question; third, the operations to be carried out on the place in the way of tilling; and fourth, the proper season for each of these operations. [4] Each of these four general divisions is divided into at least two subdivisions the first comprises questions with regard to the soil as such, and those which pertain to housing and stabling. The second division, comprising the movable equipment which is needed for the cultivation of the farm, is also subdivided into two: the persons who are to do the farming, and the other equipment. The third, which covers operations, is subdivided: the plans to be made for each operation, and where each is to be carried on. The fourth, covering the seasons, is subdivided: those which are determined by the annual revolution of the sun, and those determined by the monthly revolution of the moon. I shall discuss first the four chief divisions, and then the eight subdivisions in more detail.

  VI.

  Igitur primum de solo fundi videndum haec quattuor, quae sit forma, quo in genere terrae, quantus, quam per se tutus. Formae cum duo genera sint, una quam natura dat, altera quam sationes imponunt, prior, quod alius ager bene natus, alius male, posterior, quod alius fundus bene consitus est, alius male, dicam prius de naturali. Igitur cum tria genera sint a specie simplicia agrorum, campestre, collinum, montanum, et ex iis tribus quartum, ut in eo fundo haec duo aut tria sint, ut multis locis licet videre, e quibus tribus fastigiis simplicibus sine dubio infimis alia cultura aptior quam summis, quod haec calidiora quam summa, sic collinis, quod ea tepidiora quam infima aut summa: haec apparent magis ita esse in latioribus regionibus, simplicia cum sunt. Itaque ubi lati campi, ibi magis aestus, et eo in Apulia loca calidiora ac graviora, et ubi montana, ut in Vesuvio, quod leviora et ideo salubriora: qui colunt deorsum, magis aestate laborant, qui susum, magis hieme. Verno tempore in campestribus maturius eadem illa seruntur quae in superioribus et celerius hic quam illic coguntur. Nec non susum quam deorsum tardius seruntur ac metuntur. Quaedam in montanis prolixiora nascuntur ac firmiora propter frigus, ut abietes ac sappini, hic, quod tepidiora, populi ac salices: susum fertiliora, ut arbutus ac quercus, deosum, ut nuces graecae ac mariscae fici. In collibus humilibus societas maior cum campestri fructu quam cum montano, in altis contra. Propter haec tria fastigia formae discrimina quaedam fiunt sationum, quod segetes meliores existimantur esse campestres, vineae collinae, silvae montanae. Plerumque hiberna iis esse meliora, qui colunt campestria, quod tunc prata ibi herbosa, putatio arborum tolerabilior: contra aestiva montanis locis commodiora, quod ibi tum et pabulum multum, quod in campis aret, ac cultura arborum aptior, quod tum hic frigidior aer. Campester locus is melior, qui totus aequabiliter in unam partem verget, quam is qui est ad libellam aequos, quod is, cum aquae non habet delapsum, fieri solet uliginosus: eo magis, siquis est inaequabilis, eo deterior, quod fit propter lacunas aquosus. Haec atque huiusce modi tria fastigia agri ad colendum disperiliter habent momentum.

  [6.1] “First, then, with respect to the soil of the farm, four points must be considered: the conformation of the land, the quality of the soil, its extent, and in what way it is naturally protected. As there are two kinds of conformation, the natural and that which is added by cultivation, in the former case one piece of land being naturally good, another naturally bad, and in the latter case one being well tilled, another badly, I shall discuss first the natural conformation. [2] There are, then, with respect to the topography, three simple types of land — plain, hill, and mountain; though there is a fourth type consisting of a combination of these, as, for instance, on a farm which may contain two or three of those named, as may be seen in many places. Of these three simple types, undoubtedly a different system is applicable to the lowlands than to the mountains, because the former are hotter than the latter; and the same is true of hillsides, because they are more temperate than either the plains or the mountains. [3] These qualities are more apparent in broad stretches, when they are uniform; thus the heat is greater where there are broad plains, and hence in Apulia the climate is hotter and more humid, while in mountain regions, as on Vesuvius, the air is lighter and therefore more wholesome. Those who live in the lowlands suffer more in summer; those who live in the uplands suffer more in winter; the same crops are planted earlier in the spring in the lowlands than in the uplands, and are harvested earlier, while both sowing and reaping come later in the uplands. [4] Certain trees, such as the fir and the pine, flourish best and are sturdiest in the mountains on account of the cold climate, while the poplar and the willow thrive here where the climate is warmer; the arbute and the oak do better in the upland, the almond and the mariscan fig in the lowlands. On the foothills the growth is nearer akin to that of the plains than to that of the mountains; on the higher hills the opposite is true. [5] Owing to these three types of configuration different crops are planted, grain being considered best adapted to the plains, vines to the hills, and forests to the mountains. Usually the winter is better for those who live in the plains, because at that season the pastures are fresh, and pruning can be carried on in more comfort. On the other hand, the summer is better in the mountains, because there is abundant forage at that time, whereas
it is dry in the plains, and the cultivation of the trees is more convenient because of the cooler air. [6] A lowland farm that everywhere slopes regularly in one direction is better than one that is perfectly level, because the latter, having no outlet for the water, tends to become marshy. Even more unfavourable is one that is irregular, because pools are liable to form in the depressions. These points and the like have their differing importance for the cultivation of the three types of configuration.”