Part 42

The mollusca, such as polypi, sepiæ, and loligines, are hard and indigestible, and particularly the polypi. Their juices are saltish, but when digested they furnish considerable nourishment to the body.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. Galen remarks that the mollusca, or mollia, have no scales, nor any rough testaceous skin, but a soft one, like that of men. Their flesh, he says, is hard, indigestible, and contains a small proportion of saltish juices; but, if digested, it affords no little nourishment to the body. The sepia, or cuttle-fish, was anciently, and is at present, much used in Rome as an article of food. Pliny states that it is laxative. He adds that it is taken in food, boiled with oil, salt, and barley-meal. Simeon Seth says of it, that it is difficult to digest, but that, if digested, it affords considerable nourishment to the body, and engenders crude humours; on which account, it ought to be taken with acrid condiments, and an old thin wine drunk afterwards. Mnesitheus, as quoted by Athenæus, says that the flesh of the mollusca is indigestible and aphrodisiacal.

Apicius directs us to dress them in much the same way as recommended by Seth; that is to say, he recommends us to add to them spices, hot aromatics, wine, vinegar, and the like.

The sepia of the ancients was indisputably the sepia officinalis L. or cuttle-fish; the loligo probably the loligo parva of Rondelet, Angl. calamary. The term polypus is vaguely applied, and may comprehend several species of hydra.

SECT. XCIII.—ON THE CARTILAGINOUS FISHES.

Of the cartilaginous fishes, the torpedo and pastinaca have soft and sweet flesh, which passes readily downwards, is easily digested, and proves nutritive. The flairs (raiæ), skates (leviraiæ), monk fish (squatina), and the like, are harder and difficult to digest, and more nutritious. In general, those animals which have hard flesh are difficult to digest, and contain much nourishment. When properly digested, they furnish much and substantial nourishment.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. For an account of the σελάχη, or cartilaginea, see Aristotle (H. A. v); Pliny (H. N. ix, 40); Oppian (Halieut, i); Ælian (N. A. xi, 37.)

Galen says that they are called σελάχη from σέλας ἔχειν, because their flesh had a shining appearance at night. He states that they are moderately nutritious. He remarks, that the parts about the tail of such fishes are more fleshy than the middle.

According to Athenæus, the cartilaginous fishes in general are flatulent, fleshy, of difficult digestion, and, if eaten in great quantity, blunt the sight. (Deipnos. viii.)

Dr. Coray says that the French call the Ῥίνη ange or angelot, the Βάτος raie bouclée or cavellade, the Λειόβατος raie miralet, the Νάρκη torpille or raie torpille, and the Τρυγὼν pastinaque. Harduin gives them nearly the same French names. We are inclined to refer the ῥίνη to the squalus squatina L. monk or angel-fish: the βατὶς and λειόβατὶς to the raia batis and raia varia, two species of skate; the νάρκη to the raia torpedo or cramp-fish; and the τρυγὼν to the raia pastinaca L. or fire-flair.

SECT. XCIV.—ON THE CETACEA, OR LARGE FISHES.

The cetacea, such as the whales, seals, balance-fish, dolphin, and great tunnies, have hard and indigestible flesh, containing thick juices. When pickled, they are more moderately so. And of the other fishes, those which are most humid and excrementitious are most fitted for pickling; but there is the same difference in pickles as in the fishes from which they are formed.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. Under the class cetacea (κῆτος), the ancient naturalists ranked all the large fishes, such as the whale, the dolphin, the shark, &c. Aristotle was aware that the class called plagiuri by Artedi, comprehending the whale, the dolphin, &c. are viviparous, and have lungs like quadrupeds, instead of gills like fishes. The balæna of the Greeks was a species of physeter, or cachelot.

Galen states that the flesh of all the cetacea in its recent state is excrementitious, but when pickled becomes more attenuate, and easier converted into blood. He gives them, in short, the same characters as our author does.

For a full account of the pickled fishes of the ancients, we refer to the Fragment of Xenocrates, and the third book of Athenæus. We shall give the general character of them as delivered by the latter, upon the authority of the Siphnian Diphilus. He says that the pickles prepared from sea, lake, and river fishes afford little nourishment, contain few juices, are of a heating nature, are good for the belly, and whet the appetite. The old, he adds, are better and more acrid. Of all the pickled fishes, the most celebrated was the one brought from the Pontus, called saperda. According to Athenæus, it was prepared from the umber (sciæna umbra L.) See also Galen (de Alim. Facult. iii, 41.) Hippocrates says they are desiccant, attenuant, and for the most part laxative. (De Diæta.) Diphilus says they are whetters and laxatives; and hence Galen directs them to be taken at the commencement of a meal, and particularly recommends them for old men. Rhases speaks more unfavorably of them.

It may be proper in this place to give some account of the isitia, or isicia of the ancients. With regard to the etymology of the word, then, it is derived by Macrobius ab insectione. They consisted of minced meat, either flesh or fish, boiled or roasted, and seasoned with pepper, cumin, lovage, and the like. Apicius gives receipts for preparing several dishes of this kind, from the loligo, sepia, locusta, and swine’s liver. The last mentioned was inclosed in the omentum, or cowl, and must therefore have resembled the dish now called a haggis. Lampridius says that the emperor Heliogabalus was the first who prepared isicia from fishes, oysters, lobsters, squillæ, and the like. If this statement be true, the works of Apicius which we possess cannot be genuine. Isicia from shell-fish, the sepia, loligo, &c. are very favorably spoken of by Alexander Trallian (xi.) On the Isicia, see further Ludovicus Nonnius (de Piscium Esu, xxxviii), and Lambecius (ad Apic.)

SECT. XCV.—ON THE PROPERTIES OF WINE.

He who has taken the subject of health into consideration ought also to be acquainted with the powers of wine. Wine in general is nutritious, but that which is red and thick is more particularly so; but its juices are not good. The sweet also is nutritious, but not stomachic. The astringent is stomachic, but is distributed with difficulty to the parts of the body, and nourishes less. The white nourishes less still. Wine of a yellow colour is the best of all. That which is old is more heating and desiccant than the new. Such, in the main, are the properties of wine. But wine in general resuscitates the natural heat within us, and therefore it improves digestion, and forms good blood. And being of a penetrating nature, it diffuses the nourishment all over the body, and therefore it recruits those who are emaciated by disease, for it gives them an appetite for food. It attenuates phlegm, clears away the bile by urine, and imparts a good colour. To the soul also it communicates gladness and pleasure, and improves the strength. Such are the good effects of the moderate use of wine. But its immoderate use produces just the reverse; wherefore, those who are drunk become changed, are delirious, and disposed to heavy sleep. On that account, such an immoderate use of wine ought to be avoided; but at greater intervals it may be drank liberally, for it promotes the discharges by urine and perspiration. But it is better in such cases to vomit, by taking, beforehand, of honied water, so that one may not be injured by it. When one has drunk largely, it is not proper to take much of any other food; but while drinking, one should eat boiled cabbage, and taste some sweetmeat, particularly almonds. These things relieve headach, and are not difficult to vomit. It is also very proper to take the infusion of wormwood before drinking, for of all things it is the best preservative from surfeit. If one experience any painful effects from wine, one should drink cold water, and the next day again the infusion of wormwood; and by using exercise, friction, the bath, and restricted food, in this way get restored to health.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. The opinions of the ancients on this interesting subject may be best learned by consulting Hippocrates (de Diæta, ii, 22, et alibi); Celsus (ii); Pliny (H. N. xiv and xxxiii, 22, 26); Dioscorides (v); Galen (de Sanit. tuend. v, 5, and de Alim. Facult. iii); Oribasius (Med. Col. v, and Euporist. i, 12); Aëtius (i); Athenæus (Deipnos. i); Macrobius (Saturnal.); Actuarius (de Diæta, 8); Simeon Seth (de Alimentis); Serapion (de Simplicibus, &c.); Haly Abbas (Theor. 30, and Pract. i, 8); Avicenna (i, 3, 2); Rhases (ad Mansor. iii, 5, and Continen. xxxvii); Alsaharavius (Theor. xiii, 2.) Stobæus gives an interesting collection of the opinions of the philosophers and poets. (Sermo xviii.)

For an ample account of the ancient and modern wines, the reader is particularly referred to the late ingenious and classical publication of Dr. Henderson. See also Barry (on Ancient Wines), and Canonherius (de Admirandis Vini Virtutibus.)

From the works of Moses and Homer, we learn that the art of converting the innocent juice of the grape into wine must have been a very early invention. Eustathius informs us that, in very ancient times, the wines were all of a dark colour; and hence Homer applies to the sea the epithet of wine-coloured, ὄινοπα πόντον. (Comment, in Iliad. I.) Achilles Tatius makes the same remark regarding the ancient wine, (ii, 67, ed. Salmasius.) However, in the time of Hippocrates, they had wines of all colours, as well as characters. He thus describes their general properties: Black and austere wines are of a drying nature, and are not laxative, nor diuretic, nor sialogogue. It is their heat that renders them desiccative, by consuming the humidity of the body. The soft dark wines are of a more moistening nature, and are more flatulent and laxative. The sweet dark wines are of a more moistening nature, but they are heating and flatulent by imparting humidity. The white austere wines are heating, but are rather diuretic than laxative. The new are more laxative than the old, as being a nearer approach to the fresh juice of the grape, and they are nutritious; and the fragrant wines than those of the same age which have no bouquet, because they are better concocted; and the thick than the thin. But thin sweet wines are more diuretic, laxative, and moistening, and form weak blood.

Celsus ranks the “vinum dulce vel lene” among the “res boni succi.” Sharp austere wine he places among the things which are most suitable for the stomach.

Dioscorides delivers very judiciously the different characters of wines. He concludes with remarking that, although habitual intoxication be prejudicial to the health, a moderate indulgence in wine for some days, especially after drinking water, is beneficial, by proving an alterative to the system, purging the secretions, and promoting the insensible perspiration.

From Pliny’s excellent statement of the medicinal and dietetical properties of wine, we select the following remarks: “Vino aluntur vires, sanguis, colorque hominum. Vino modico nervi juvantur, copiosiore læduntur, sic et oculi. Stomachus recreatur; appetentia ciborum invitatur; tristitia et cura hebetatur; urina et algor expellitur; somnus conciliatur. Præterea vomitiones sistit. Vetus coposiore aqua miscetur, magisque urinam expellit; minus siti resistit. Dulce minus inebriat sed stomacho innatat; austerum facilius concoquitur. Stomacho minus utile est pingue, nigrum, sed corpora magis alit. Tenue et austerum minus alit, magis stomachum nutrit.”