The familiar epistles of M.T. Cicero Englished and conferred with the: French Italian and other translations

Cicero to Papirius Paeto. Epist. 22.

I Loue the modestie; but rather the li∣bertie of speech. And Zeno was of this opinion, a very ingenious man questi∣onlesse; but greatly opposite to our Academians: But as I say, the Stoicks are of opinion, that euery thing should bee called by it owne name: affirming, that in it, is neither obscenitie, nor inciuili∣tie: and they proue it by this argument. If there be any obscenitie in speech, it must needs be either in the thing signi∣fied; or the word signifying; it can be no where else. In the thing signified it is not; And therefore we see, that not onely in Comedies, the act is plainely expressed, as it is: whereupon Lucilius in his Demiurgus, brings in one vttering these words: which peraduenture you haue heard vpon the stage, & you may call to mind Roscius, when he recited them. He left me lately naked in such fas••i∣on: where the speech in respect of the words, is altogether modest; as for the matter, a little inmodest. But in Tra∣gedies

also: what thinke you of that verse;

What woman's that, that I seelie with him?

And of that other;

Who with another did desire to lie?

And of this;

How could this man, be so presumptuous: As to enioy great King Phereus wife?

Or of these other:

Though I vnwilling, once in maids estate, Wit••stood him; yet, he did me violate.

In stead of violate, he might haue v∣sed ano••her word, signifying the same thing: but it would haue sounded too immodest. You see therefore, that a thing is not dishonest that is vttered with honest words: and yet the words alter not the signification: which is a signe, that euery thing is honest by na∣ture. And therefore, if there be no di∣shonesty in things, much lesse in words. So that, if the ••hing signified be not di∣shonest, the word that signifies, cannot be dishonest. You doe not say anus, but you ••erme it by the nam•• of some other thing. Why? if the thing signified bee dishonest; expresse it wi••h what words you will, the matter shall euer be disho∣nest: if it be not? Why doe you not terme it by it owne proper name? Aun∣cien••ly cauda was called penis, from whence the word peniculus proceedeth; because it hath some similitude of ••hat

Cauda, or taile: but at this day, the word Penis, is accoūted among strude words, or dishonest: & Piso Frugi in the book••s of his Histories complaines, that young men are dedicated to [that] Penis. That which in your Epistle, you terme by it proper name, hee couertly cals penis. Which word being growne common to so many; is now accounted as disho∣nest, as that you vsed. Now, what shall we thinke? Whereas vulgarly men say: Cu•• noste volumus conuenire. Appeares it not obscene to say, Cum nos? I remem∣ber that a wise Consular, speaking in the Senate, vttered these words: Hanc culpam maiorem, an illam dicam? Could he haue fallen into greater obscenitie? You will say it was no obscenitie: b••∣cause hee vttered it not in that sense: words therefore are not they which make obsceniti••: and, that things make it not, it is manifest by that which I haue before deliuered. We must there∣fore conclude, that the same not being in words, nor in things, is no where. To endeuour to get children, is so honest∣ly spoken, that Fathers themselues are wont to put their children in minde thereof: but the proper ••erme of such endeuour, they dare not vtter. Socrate•• learn'd the Art of playing vpon an In∣strument, of an excellent Musitian, whose name was Connus: take you this to be an obscene word? When we say,

Terni, we speake not vnmannerly; but when Bini, it is immodest. To the Graecians, you'le say. There's therefore no dishonestie in the word: For I vn∣derstand Greeke also: and yet I say vn∣to you bini: and you performe it, as if I had spoken it in Greeke, and not in L••∣tine•• Ruta, and Menta be honest words: but if I would terme the little Menta, after the same manner as we say Rutu∣la, it would not doe well. You say, bell•• tectoriola: giue me therefore the dimi∣nutiue of pauimenta, 'twill sound ill. Now you see, al these are but fooleries: & that there is no obscenitie in words; much lesse in things; from whence it followes, that it's no where. Therefore let vs couch dishonest things vnder mo∣dest words. For I would know; is not Diuisio a modest word? but some im∣modest sence is included in it: and Di∣uisio belongs to the agen••; intercapedo to the patiēt. Are such words vpō this oc∣casion, dishonest? And we cockscombs, if we say, This man strangled his Father, we put not in before, Sir reuerence: but if we would nomina••e Aurelia, or Lollia being Harlots, before we name them, we must say, with reuerence. And cer∣tainely, words modest, are vsed some∣times for immodest. T•• say, Batuit, it seemes vnciuilly spoken: Depsit, more vnciuillie: and yet nor the one, nor the other is dishonest. The world is full of

fooles. Test••s, in place of iudgement, is a very honest word; in another place it is not so: you may also honestly say, Colei Lanuvini: but Cli••e••ini cannot bee so modestly spoken. And not onely words, but things also, are sometimes honest, sometimes dishonest. To say, suppedit, is an obscene speech: but let a man speake it of one, that is naked in a Bathe, and 'tis not obscene. You haue heard the Stoickes reasons. If you bee wise, you'le speake ciuillie. I haue made a long tale, vpon one word onely of your Epistle: I am glad, that you take leaue to speake with me, without re∣spect. I like, and euer will like to follow the modestie of speech: as Plato accu∣stometh. Whereupon I haue treated of this argument, with shrouded words, which the Stoickes handle very openly: but these men affirme also, that farting should be as free, as belching. I haue therefore vsed ••his respect, in reuerence of the time present. Vouchsafe to loue me, and be carefull of your health. The first of March. Farewell.