In his book of a Commonweal he says, that his citizens will neither act nor prepare any thing for the sake of
pleasure, and praises Euripides for having uttered this
sentence:
What need have men of more than these two things,
The fruits of Ceres, and thirst-quenching springs?
And yet a little after this, going on, he commends Diogenes,
who forced his nature to pass from himself in public, and
said to those that were present: I wish I could in the
same manner drive hunger also out of my belly. What
reason then is there to praise in the same books him who
rejects all pleasure, and withal, him who for the sake of
pleasure does such things, and proceeds to such a degree
of filthiness? Moreover, having in his book of Nature
written, that Nature has produced many creatures for the
sake of beauty, delighting in pulchritude and pleasing herself with variety, and having added a most absurd expression, that the peacock was made for the sake of his tail
and for the beauty of it; he has, in his treatise of a Commonweal, sharply reprehended those who bred peacocks
and nightingales, as if he were making laws contrary to
the lawgiver of the world, and deriding Nature for pleasing herself in the beauty of animals to which a wise man
would not give a place in his city. For how can it but be
[p. 451]
absurd to blame those who nourish these creatures, if he
commends Providence which created them? In his Fifth
Book of Nature, having said, that bugs profitably awaken
us out of our sleep, that mice make us cautious not to lay
up every thing negligently, and that it is probable that
Nature, rejoicing in variety, takes delight in the production
of fair creatures, he adds these words: ‘The evidence
of this is chiefly shown in the peacock's tail; for here she
manifests that this animal was made for the sake of his
tail, and not the contrary; so, the male being made, the
female follows.’ In his book of a Commonweal, having
said that we are ready to paint even dunghills, a little after
he adds, that some beautify their cornfields with vines
climbing up trees, and myrtles set in rows, and keep peacocks, doves, and partridges, that they may hear them
cackle and coo, and nightingales. Now I would gladly
ask him, what he thinks of bees and honey? For it was
of consequence, that he who said bugs were created profitably should also say that bees were created unprofitably.
But if he allows these a place in his city, why does he
drive away his citizens from things that are pleasing and
delight the ear? To be brief,—as he would be very absurd who should blame the guests for eating sweetmeats
and other delicacies and drinking of wine, and at the same
time commend him who invited them and prepared such
things for them; so he that praises Providence, which has
afforded fishes, birds, honey, and wine, and at the same
time finds fault with those who reject not these things, nor
content themselves with
The fruits of Ceres and thirst-quenching springs,
which are present and sufficient to nourish us, seems to
make no scruple of speaking things contradictory to himself.
