indeed, contained in his work on agriculture, show that his medical knowledge did not exceed that which usually exists among a semi-barbarous race, and only extended to the most ordinary simples which nature affords. Cato hated the compound drugs introduced by the Greek physicians—considering these foreign professors of medicine as the opponents of his own system. Such, indeed, was his antipathy, that he believed, or pretended to believe, that they had entered into a league to poison all the barbarians, among whom they classed the Romans.—“Jurarunt inter se,” says he, in a passage preserved by Pliny, “barbaros necare omnes medicina: Et hoc ipsum mercede faciunt, ut fides iis sit, et facile disperdant(39).” Cato, finding that the patients lived notwithstanding this detestable conspiracy, began to regard the Greek practitioners as impious sorcerers, who counteracted the course of nature, and restored dying men to life, by means of unholy charms; and he therefore advised his countrymen to remain stedfast, not only by their ancient Roman principles and manners, but also by the venerable unguents and salubrious balsams which had come down to them from the wisdom of their grandmothers. Such as they were, Cato’s old medical saws continued long in repute at Rome. It is evident that they were still esteemed in the time of Pliny, who expresses the same fears as the Censor, lest hot baths and potions should render his countrymen effeminate, and corrupt their manners(40). Every one knows what was the consequence of Cato’s dislike to the Greek philosophers, who were expelled from the city by a decree of the senate. But it does not seem certain what became of Archagatus and his followers. The author of the _Diogene Moderne_, as cited by Tiraboschi, says that Archagatus was stoned to death(41), but the literary historian who quotes him doubts of his having any sufficient authority for the assertion. Whether the physicians were comprehended in the general sentence of banishment pronounced on the learned Greeks, or were excepted from it, has been the subject of a great literary controversy in modern Italy and in France(42). Aulus Gellius(43) mentions Cato’s _Libri quæstionum Epistolicarum_, and Cicero his _Apophthegmata_(44), which was probably the first example of that class of works which, under the appellation of _Ana_, became so fashionable and prevalent in France. The only other work of Cato which I shall mention, is the _Carmen de Moribus_. This, however, was not written in verse, as might be supposed from the title. Precepts, imprecations, and prayers, or any set _formulæ_ whatever, were called _Carmina_. I do not know what maxims were inculcated in this _carmen_, but they probably were not of very rigid morality, at least if we may judge from the “Sententia Dia Catonis,” mentioned by Horace: “Quidam notus homo cùm exiret fornice, Macte Virtute esto, inquit sententia dia Catonis(45).”