Chaps. 53-56.

Chap. 53. (52.)—Persons Who Have Come to Life Again After Being Laid Out for Burial.

Aviola, [We have an account of the death of Aviola, in Valerius Maximus, B. i. c. 8. This name occurs in the Consular Fasti, A.U.C. 806; but it could not be that of the person referred to by Valerius Maximus, as his work was published under the reign of Tiberius, who died A.U.C. 789. We have also an account of the death of Lamia in Valerius Maximus, as occurring under the same circumstances with that of Aviola.—B.] a man of consular rank, came to life again when on the funeral pile; but, by reason of the violence of the flames, no assistance could be rendered him, in consequence of which he was burnt alive. The same thing is said to have happened to L. Lamia, a man of prætorian rank. Messala, Rufus, [Poinsinet, vol. iii. pp. 251, 252, supposes, that Messala and Rufus are the names of two writers, and not, as usually supposed, of one only. The conjecture appears not improbable.—B.] and many other authors, inform us, that C. Ælius Tubero, who had filled the office of prætor, was also rescued from the funeral pile. Such then is the condition of us mortals: to these and the like vicissitudes of fortune are we born; so much so, that we cannot be sure of any thing, no, not even that a person is dead. With reference to the soul of man, we find, among other instances, that the soul of Hermotinus of Clazomenæ was in the habit of leaving his body, and wandering into distant countries, whence it brought back numerous accounts of various things, which could not have been obtained by any one but a person who was present. The body, in the meantime, was left apparently lifeless. [Plutarch, “De Deo Socratis,” gives us the same account of Hermotinus. Ajasson has remarked, not inaptly, that this story is very similar to the modern statements as to the effect of animal magnetism, Lemaire, iii. 207.—B. Apuleius, in his “Defence,” has a passage which is remarkable as clearly bearing reference to the doctrines inculcated by the mesmerists of modern times; be says, “Quin et illud mecum reputo, posse animum humanum, præsertim puerilem et simplicem seu carminum avocamento, sine odorum delenimento, soporari et ad oblivionem præsentium externari; et paulisper remotâ corporis memoriâ, redigi et redire ad naturam suam quæ est immortalis scilicet et divina; atque ita veluti quodam sopore futura rerum præsagire.”] At last, however, his enemies, the Cantharidæ, [We have no notice of any people, under this appellation, in Greece; Cantharus, however, occurs as the name of an individual, and possibly these may have been his descendants, or the members of his family.—B.] as they were called, burned the body, so that the soul, on its return, was deprived of its sheath, as it were. It is stated also, that in Proconnesus, [See B. v. c. 44.] the soul of Aristeas was seen to fly out of his mouth, under the form of a raven; [We have an account of Aristeas in Herodotus, iv. 13, but somewhat different from that here given; Aristeas is also mentioned by Apollonius in his Hist. Mirab., and A. Gellius, B. ix. c. 4.—B. He was an epic poet, who flourished in the time of Crœsus and Cyrus. Herodotus mentions a story that he reappeared at Metapontum, in Italy, 340 years after his death. He is generally represented as a magician, whose soul could leave, and re-enter his body at pleasure.] a most fabulous story, however, which may be well ranked with the one that follows. It is told of Epimenides [A poet and prophet of Crete. The story was, that being sent by his father to fetch a sheep, he went into a cave, and fell into a sleep, from which he did not awake for fifty-seven years. On awaking, he sought for the sheep, and was astonished on finding everything altered. On returning home, he found that his young brother had in the meantime become an aged man. His story is only equalled by the famous one of the Seven Sleepers of Damascus, who fell asleep in the time of the Decian persecution of the Christians, and slept in a cave till the thirtieth year of the reign of the Emperor Theodosius, 196 years. It is not improbable that it is to this story about Epimenides, that we are indebted for the amusing story of Rip Van Winkle, by Washington Irving.] of Cnossus, that when he was a boy, being fatigued by heat and walking, he fell asleep in a cave, where he slept for fifty-seven years; and that when he awoke, as though it had been on the following day, he was much astonished at the changes which he saw in the appearance of every thing around him: after this, old age, it is said, came upon him in an equal number of days with the years he had slept, but his life was prolonged to his hundred and fifty-seventh year. [We have the life of Epimenides by Diogenes Laertius, who gives an account of this long-continued sleep. It is also mentioned by other writers, but there is some difference in their statements as to its length.—B.] The female sex appear more especially disposed to this morbid state, [According to the interpretation of Dalechamps, “spiritus et animæ interceptioni ac privationi,” “the interception and privation of the breath and faculties;” Lemaire, vol. iii. p. 208.—B.] on account of the misplacement of the womb; [He probably alludes to what are known among us as hysteria, or hysterical affections.] when this is once corrected, they immediately come to themselves again. The volume of Heraclides [We have an account of Heraclides in Diogenes Laertius; he was a native of Pontus, and a pupil of Aristotle.—B.] on this subject, which is highly esteemed among the Greeks, contains the account of a female, who was restored to life, after having appeared to be dead for seven days.

Varro informs us, [This circumstance is not mentioned in either of the two works of Varro which have come down to us, “De Re Rusticâ,” and “De Linguâ Latinâ.”—B.] that when he was one of the “vigintiviri,” or twenty commissioners, [They were a body of commissioners appointed for the distribution of lands in Campania; Julius Cæsar, when consul, having caused a law to be passed, dividing that territory among such of the Roman citizens as should have three or more children.] appointed to superintend the division of the lands at Capua, a man who had been carried to the funeral pile, returned on foot from the Forum to his own house, and that the very same thing happened also at Aquinum. He states also, that Corfidius, who had married his maternal aunt, came to life again, after the funeral had been all arranged, and that he afterwards attended the funeral of the person who had so arranged his own. He gives in addition some other marvellous relations, the whole of which it may be as well to set forth; he says that there were two brothers, members of the equestrian order, and named Corfidius: [We are not informed, whether these persons of the name of Corfidius, were in any way connected, nor, indeed, do we appear to have any certain knowledge of their history.—B. L. Corfidius, a Roman eques, is mentioned by Cicero, in his oration for Ligarius, B.C. 46, as one of the distinguished men who were then interceding with Cæsar on behalf of Ligarius; but after the oration was published, Cicero was informed that he had made a mistake in mentioning the name of Corfidius, as he had died before the speech was delivered. It does not appear certain that he was one of the parties here mentioned: but it is not improbable that he was the brother whose sudden death is mentioned below.] it so happened that the elder of these was seen to breathe his last to all appearance, and on opening his will, it was found that he had named his brother his heir, who accordingly ordered his funeral. In the meanwhile, however, he who had been thought to be dead, clapping his hands, [Among the ancients, servants used to be summoned by clapping the hands, as they are, in modern times, by ringing of bells.—B. The same practice still prevails in the east.] summoned the servants, and told them that he was just come from his brother’s house, who had placed his daughter in his charge; in addition to which, he had mentioned to him the place where he had secretly buried some gold, and had requested that the funeral preparations which had been made, might be employed for himself. While he was stating to this effect, the servants of his brother came in the greatest haste, and informed them that he was dead: the gold too, was found in the place just as he had stated. But throughout the whole of our lives we are perpetually hearing of such predictions as these; they are not, however, worth collecting, seeing that they are almost always false, as we shall illustrate by the following remarkable instance.

In the Sicilian war, Gabienus, the bravest of all Cæsar’s naval commanders, was taken prisoner by Sextus Pompeius, who ordered his throat to be cut; after which, his head almost severed from his body, he lay the whole of the day upon the sea-shore. Towards evening, with groans and entreaties, he begged the crowds of people who had assembled, that they would prevail upon Pompeius to come to him, or else send one of his most confidential friends, as he had just returned from the shades below, and had some important news to communicate. Pompeius accordingly sent several of his friends, to whom Gabienus stated that the good cause and virtuous partisans of Pompeius were well pleasing to the infernal deities, and that the event would shortly prove such as he wished: that he had been ordered to announce to this effect, and that, as a proof of its truthfulness, he himself should expire the very moment he had fulfilled his commission; and his death actually did take place.

We have instances also of men who have been seen after their burial; but, for the present, we are treating of the operations of nature, and not of miracles.

Chap. 54. (53.)—Instances of Sudden Death.

Among the things that are looked upon as more especially singular, though of frequent occurrence, is sudden death, a thing that, in fact, is the greatest happiness of life, and, as we will shew, only a natural occurrence. Verrius has given many instances of it; we will limit ourselves by only making a selection. Besides Chilo, who has been already mentioned, [In the twenty-third Chapter of the present Book.—B.] Sophocles, [Val. Maximus, B. ix. c. 12, and Diodorus Siculus, B. xiii. c. 14, gives the same account. It has been said, that, when he heard the news, he called for a draught of wine, and was choked with a grape-stone; this incident forms the subject of an epigram by Simonides, quoted by Hardouin, Lemaire, vol. iii. p. 210.—B.] and Dionysius, [There is reason to believe, that the prize was given rather to the rank, than to the poetry of Dionysius; see the remarks of Ajasson, Lemaire, vol. iii. pp. 210, 211.—B.] the tyrant of Sicily, both of them, died of joy, on learning that they had obtained the prize for tragedy. After the defeat at Cannæ, a mother died of joy, on seeing that her son had returned in safety, she having heard a false report of his death. [This anecdote is related by Livy, B. xxii. c. 7; by Valerius Maximus, B. ix. c. 12; and by Aulus Gellius, B. iii. c. 15; the two former, however, state, that it occurred after the battle of Thrasymenus.—B.] Diodorus, the professor of logic, [Cicero, De Fato, sec. 6, styles Diodorus, “valens dialecticus.”—B.] died of mortification, because he could not immediately answer some question which had been put to him by Stilpo, by way of joke.

Two of the Cæsars, [According to Hardouin, these were Lucius, the prætor, and Caius, the father of the dictator; they were brothers, and the sons of C. Cæsar.—B.] one of whom was at the time prætor, and the other had previously discharged that office, and was the father of the Dictator Cæsar, died without any apparent cause, in the morning, while putting on their shoes; the former at Pisæ, the latter at Rome. Quintus Fabius Maximus died during his consulship, on the day before the calends of January, [Thirty-first of December; consequently his tenure of office was for a few hours only. Cicero indulged in several jokes upon his consulship, remarking that no one had died during it; and that the consul was extremely vigilant, for that he had never slept during his term of office.] and in his place C. Rebilus got himself elected consul for only a few hours. [This took place A.U.C. 708; Macrobius, in his Saturnalia, gives us an account of the jests passed by Cicero and others on the brief duration of his office.—B.] The same thing happened also to the senator, C. Volcatius Gurges; these were all of them so well, and in such perfect health, that they were actually preparing to go from home. Q. Æmilius Lepidus, [He is supposed to have been the same person who was consul A.U.C. 732.—B.] just as he was leaving his house, struck his great toe against the threshold of his chamber door. C. Aufustius, having gone from home, was proceeding to the senate-house, when he stumbled in the Comitium, [The Comitium was a place in the forum at Rome, where the “comitia curiata” were held, and certain offences tried and punished. It was here also that the tribunal, or “suggestum,” was situate.] and expired. Their ambassador, who had just been pleading the cause of the Rhodians in the senate, to the admiration of every one, suddenly expired at the door of the senate-house, just as he was about to retire. Cn. Bæbius Tamphilus, [We are informed by Hardouin, that he held the office of Prætor A.U.C. 660.—B.] who had been prætor also, expired while he was enquiring of a boy [“A puero;” not necessarily a slave, as Littrè seems to think.] what time it was: Aulus Pompeius [On Hardouin’s authority, we learn that A. Pompeius was surnamed Bithynicus, and was prætor A.U.C. 680.—B.] died just after saluting the gods in the Capitol; and M. Juventius Thalna, [The death of Thalna is given somewhat more in detail by Valerius Maximus, B. ix. c. 12; it took place A.U.C. 590.—B.] the consul, while he was sacrificing. C. Servilius Pansa expired at the second hour of the day, [The ancients reckoned the hours from sun-rise; in summer, the second hour of the day would be six o’clock A.M., and in the winter, a quarter past eight.—B.] while he was standing in the Forum, near a shop there, [Bankers, and usurers more especially, had their shops in the Roman Forum.] and leaning on the arm of his brother, Publius Pansa: the judge Bæbius, while he was giving an order for an enlargement of bail: [“Cum vadimonium differri jubet.”—B.] M. Terentius Corax, while he was making an entry in his note-book in the Forum: only last year too, a member of the equestrian order at Rome, while whispering in the ear of a man of consular rank, before the ivory Apollo, in the Forum [Augustus built a third Forum, because the old one and that of Julius Cæsar, were not found sufficient for the great increase of business. He adorned it with a temple of Mars, and the statues of the most distinguished Romans.] of Augustus; [According to Hardouin, this ivory statue was in the eighth region of the city.—B.] and, what is more singular than all, C. Julius, the physician, while he was applying, with his probe, [“Specillum;” this instrument is mentioned by Celsus, B. vi. c. 6, 25, et alibi. There has been a considerable discussion among the commentators respecting the “specillum;” see Lemaire, vol. iii. pp. 213, 214. From the uses to which it was applied by Celsus, we can have little doubt upon the subject. Poinsinet and Ajasson employ the equivalent French term “eprouvette.”—B.] some ointment to the eye of a patient. Aulus Manlius Torquatus, a man of consular rank, died in the act of reaching a cake at dinner; L. Tuscius Valla, the physician, while he was taking a draught of honeyed wine; [“Mulsum” was the most universally esteemed of all the beverages used among the Romans. It seems to have been of two kinds: in the one case honey was mixed with wine, in the other with must. Massic or Falernian wine was preferred for the purpose, and new Attic honey. The proportions were four measures of wine to one of honey; and various perfumes and spices were added. See B. xxii, c. 4. It was especially valued as the most appropriate draught on an empty stomach.] Ap. Saufeius, while, on his return from the bath, after drinking some honeyed wine and water, he was swallowing an egg: P. Quinctius Scapula, while he was dining with Aquilius Gallus: Decimus Saufeius, the scribe, while he was breakfasting at his house. Corn. Gallus, [The Cornelius Gallus here mentioned could not have been the poet of the same name, because, as we are informed, he died by his own hand. The death of the poet Gallus is alluded to by Ovid, Amores, B. iii. El. 9, l. 64.—B. A similar fate is said, by Tertullian, to have overtaken Speusippus, the Platonic philosopher. The same was also said by some of the poet Pindar.] who had filled the office of prætor, and Titus Haterius, [Val. Maximus, B. ix. c. 12, gives the same account of the death of Gallus and Haterius.—B.] a man of equestrian rank, died in the venereal act; and, a thing that was especially remarked by those of our day, two members of the equestrian order expired in the embraces of the same actor of pantomimes, Mysticus by name, who was remarkable for his singular beauty.

But the most perfect state, to all appearance, of security from death, was that of which we have an account given by the ancients, in the case of M. Ofilius Hilarus. He was an actor, and after having been very greatly applauded by the people, was giving, on his birthday, an entertainment. During dinner he called for a cup of warm drink; at the same time, looking at the masque which he had worn during the day, he placed upon it the chaplet, [Which was usually worn by the Romans at their entertainments.] which he had taken from his own head; and in that position he remained rigidly fixed, without moving, no one being aware of what had taken place, until the person who was reclining next to him reminded him that the drink was getting cold; upon which he was found to be dead.

These are instances of persons dying a happy death; [Considering some of the above cases, Pliny must have had a curious notion of a happy death. Ovid would have agreed with him in one respect; for in his amatory poems, he expresses a wish that he may die of a surfeit of sensual enjoyment.] but, on the other hand, there are innumerable cases also of unfortunate ends. L. Domitius, [The great-grandfather of the Emperor Nero. We have a reference to his death by Seneca, De Benef. B. iii. c. 24, and a more full account of it by Suetonius, Life of Nero, c. 2.—B.] a member of a most illustrious family, having been conquered at Massilia by Cæsar, and taken prisoner by him at Corfinium, being weary of life, took poison; but, immediately after, he used every possible exertion to prolong his life. We find it stated in our Annals, that Felix, a charioteer of the red party, [The charioteers at Rome were divided into four companies, or “factiones,” each distinguished by a colour, representing the season of the year. These colours were green for the spring, red for the summer, azure for autumn, and white for the winter. Domitian afterwards increased them to six, adding the golden and the purple. The most ardent party spirit prevailed among them, and the interest in their success extended to all classes and both sexes.] being placed on the funeral pile, some one of the number of his admirers threw himself upon the pile; a most silly piece of conduct. Lest, however, this circumstance might be attributed to the great excellence of the dead man in his art, and so redound to his glory, the other parties all declared that he had been overpowered by the strength of the perfumes. Not long ago, M. Lepidus, a man of very noble birth, who died, as I have stated above, [In the thirty-sixth Chapter of this Book.—B.] of chagrin caused by his divorce, was hurled from the funeral pile by the violence of the flames, and in consequence of the heat, could not be replaced upon it; in consequence of which, his naked body was burnt with some other pieces of brushwood, in the vicinity of the pile.

Chap. 55. (54.)—Burial.

The burning of the body after death, among the Romans, is not a very ancient usage; for formerly, they interred it. [It would appear, from Dalechamps and Hardouin, that this statement, respecting the period when the custom of burning the body after death was first adopted by the Romans, is incorrect, Lemaire, vol. iii. p. 219. There is much uncertainty as to its origin, and the source from which they borrowed it. We learn from Macrobius, that the practice was discontinued in his time, i. e. in the fourth century after Christ.—B.] After it had been ascertained, however, in the foreign wars, that bodies which had been buried were sometimes disinterred, the custom of burning them was adopted. Many families, however, still observed the ancient rites, as, for example, the Cornelian family, no member of which had his body burnt before Sylla, the Dictator; who directed this to be done, because, having previously disinterred the dead body of Caius Marius, he was afraid that others might retaliate on his own. [We have the same remarks, respecting the antiquity of the custom of interring the body, the continued adoption of it by the Cornelian family, and the supposed notion of Sylla, in ordering his own body to be burnt, in Cicero, De Leg. B. ii. c. 22, from whom it is probable Pliny may have borrowed them.—B.] The term “sepultus” [We have no English term that will preserve the distinction which Pliny makes between the two modes of disposing of the body after death.—B.] applies to any mode whatever of disposing of the dead body; while, on the other hand, the word “humatus” is applicable solely when it is deposited in the earth.

Chap. 56. (55.)—The Manes, or Departed Spirits of the Soul.

After burial come the different quiddities as to the existence of the Manes. All men, after their last day, [He views the state after death in the same light as Democritus and Epicurus, utterly denying the immortality of the soul; though it cannot be said that he looks upon life in the same cheerful, laissez-faire manner in which it was regarded by the latter of these philosophers.] return to what they were before the first; and after death there is no more sensation left in the body or in the soul than there was before birth. But this same vanity of ours extends even to the future, and lyingly fashions to itself an existence even in the very moments which belong to death itself: at one time it has conferred upon us the immortality of the soul; at another transmigration; and at another it has given sensation to the shades below, and paid divine honours to the departed spirit, thus making a kind of deity of him who has but just ceased to be a man. As if, indeed, the mode of breathing with man was in any way different from that of other animals, and as if there were not many other animals to be found whose life is longer than that of man, and yet for whom no one ever presaged anything of a like immortality. For what is the actual substance of the soul, when taken by itself? Of what material does it consist? Where is the seat of its thoughts? How is it to see, or hear, or how to touch? And then, of what use is it, or what can it avail, if it has not these faculties? Where, too, is its residence, and what vast multitudes of these souls and spirits [Hardouin remarks, that the ancients made a distinction between the souls of the dead, and their spirits or shades, “umbræ.” The former were supposed to remain on the earth, while the latter were removed either to Elysium or to Tartarus, according to the character or actions of the deceased.—B.] must there be after the lapse of so many ages? But all these are the mere figments of childish ravings, and of that mortality which is so anxious never to cease to exist. It is a similar piece of vanity, too, to preserve the dead bodies of men; just like the promise that he shall come to life again, which was made by Democritus; [According to Varro, Democritus directs, that the body shall not be burnt after death, but preserved in honey; on which Varro remarks, how greatly such a practice would tend to raise the price of that article.—B.] who, however, never has come to life again himself. Out upon it! What downright madness is it to suppose that life is to recommence after death! or indeed, what repose are we ever to enjoy when we have been once born, if the soul is to retain its consciousness in heaven, and the shades of the dead in the infernal regions? This pleasing delusion, and this credulity, quite cancel that chief good of human nature, death, and, as it were, double the misery of him who is about to die, by anxiety as to what is to happen to him after it. And, indeed, if life really is a good, to whom can it be so to have once lived?

How much more easy, then, and how much more devoid of all doubts, is it for each of us to put his trust in himself, and guided by our knowledge of what our state has been before birth, to assume that that after death will be the same.