Infanticide Is Illegal in Thebes

From Book II of Aelian’s Varia Historia, a remarkable and unusual custom of the Thebans:

CHAP. VII. That the Thebans expose not Children.

This is a Theban Law most just and humane; That no Theban might expose his Child or leave it in a Wilderness, upon pain of death. But if the Father were extremely poor, whether it were male or female, the Law requires that as soon as it is born it be brought in the swadling-clouts to the Magistrate, who receiving it, delivers it to some other for some small reward, conditioning with him that he shall bring up the Child, and when it is grown up take it into his service, man or maid, and have the benefit of its labour in requital for its education. 

Obviously it is not worth recording unless Thebes is the only place Aelian can recall that has such a law. Instead of killing their unwanted children, the Thebans make slaves of them, which is far more just and humane than most other people are willing to be.

Aelian lived around the year 200, when the illegal Christian cult was growing rapidly. His remarks on this unusual Theban custom illustrate Rodney Stark’s hypothesis that the Christians’ rejection of infanticide was one of the reasons the cult grew so steadily: not only did Christians not kill their own children, but they took in children “exposed” by their neighbors.

From Pittsburgh to Harmony in the Early 1800s

John Melish, a traveler in the United States, wrote a detailed and enthusiastic description of the Harmonist settlement at Harmony in Pennsylvania. It is certainly worth reading. What interests us here, however, is the trip to Harmony from Pittsburgh. Today it would be a short drive out into the suburbs. In the early 1800s, it was an all-day ordeal, made possible only by stopping for beer or whiskey at least three times. The route taken by our travelers is probably close to the route of the Perry Highway (U.S. 19) today.

I shall now introduce by name a fellow-traveller, Dr. Isaac Cleaver, of Philadelphia. This gentleman travelled in the stage with me from Bedford; we lodged together at Pittsburg, and we now agreed to travel together to visit the Harmonist Society. With this view we procured a couple of hacks, very sorry ones indeed, and set out from Pittsburg on Monday the 19th August, at six o’clock in the morning. We crossed the Allegany by a boat: it is here about 400 yards broad, and the deepest part of it seven feet; the current is gentle, and the water remarkably pure. On the opposite side of the river there is a narrow bottom of very rich land; after passing which, we ascended pretty steep hills, and by a rough road reached a tavern eight miles from the river. The day was now very hot; but we could only stop a few minutes, and moved on six miles to Dixon’s tavern, where we found the landlord completely drunk. The day continuing uncommonly hot, we rested here about half an hour; and after travelling about a mile, we reached the Plains, so called from being a sort of meadow and destitute of trees. Here we were entirely without shade, and the force of the sun nearly overpowered us. I never recollect to have suffered so much from the heat; and we got no relief till after travelling four miles, when we reached another tavern at the further end of the Plains, where we found a sober industrious family busily employed in domestic manufactures. The whole country from Pittsburg to this place is rather rough and uncultivated; and land sells at from two to three dollars per acre. Beyond this as we continued our journey we found the country to improve; and approaching the precincts of the Harmonist Society, we passed some of their well-cultivated farms. Here the road passes over a considerable hill; and on reaching the top we saw at a little distance the town of Harmony, elegantly situated amid flourishing and well-cultivated fields. We reached the town at three o’clock, and proceeded to the tavern, an excellent stone building, where we found good accommodations.

——John Melish, “Account of a Society at Harmony, (Twenty-five miles from Pittsburg) Pennsylvania, United States of America.” Taken from Travels in the United States of America, in the Years 1806 and 1807, 1809, 1810, and 1811. From The Philanthropist, No. XX.

The War on Christmas

Every year, Fox News commentators go on the warpath against the War on Christmas, epitomized in those horrible people who say “happy holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas,” and especially the ones who write “Xmas” instead of “Christmas.” That never happened in the good old days.

Which brings us to a handwritten letter in the Internet Archive, where you can find anything as long as you’re not looking for it, from Nathaniel Parker Willis (who died in 1867) to his publisher.

Xmas day
New York


My dear sir

Will you be kind enough to send me six copies of “Prose Works” & two of “poems,” by Express, as soon as possible, directed to me at

19 Ludlow Place
Corner of Houston &
McDougal St’s.

I suppose you will put these to me low, will you not?

Happy holidays to you, & believe me

Yours very truly
N. P. Willis

Smile for the Camera.

This article originally appeared in Dr. Boli’s Celebrated Magazine.

One of Dr. Boli’s frequent complaints about portraits today is that the subjects feel compelled to grin like imbeciles as soon as a camera is trained on them. “Smile for the camera” somehow became more than a tradition: it became a dogma. In fact younger readers may be surprised to learn that the phrase “Smile for the camera” was unknown before the middle of the twentieth century. It simply does not appear in literature. It was assumed that a portrait should show the subject in a dignified manner.

It is comforting, however, to realize that artificial expressions—and even the occasional feigned smile—have been the bane of portraitists for a long time. In 1623, John Webster’s play The Devil’s Law-Case was published, and Webster puts this speech into the mouth of one of his female characters. There is a layer of irony here, of course (as there often is in an English play of the classic period): the character who speaks these lines is herself vain and artificial. It should be noted that “is drawing” means “is being drawn”: in Webster’s time, the progressive form of the verb was not used in the passive.

With what a compell’d face a woman sits
While she is drawing! I have noted divers
Either to feign smiles, or suck in the lips
To have a little mouth; ruffle the cheeks
To have the dimples seen; and so disorder
The face with affectation, at next sitting
It has not been the same: I have known others
Have lost the entire fashion of their face,
In half-an-hour’s sitting.

——John Webster, The Devil’s Law-Case, Act I.

The Craft of Pointing

This article first appeared in Dr. Boli’s Celebrated Magazine, but since it fits well with the miscellaneous mission of this site, it will be indexed and archived here.

The craft of pointing, for those who are not familiar with the old and dusty but not quite archaic use of the term, is the business of punctuating your writing. From a work on Latin grammar printed at some time in the early 1500s comes some very useful advice on how to punctuate, in English as well as in Latin. It is useful because it will open up the interpretation of other better known books from the early days of printing. This text comes from the famous collection of Typographical Antiquities by Ames and Herbert as revised by Thomas Frognall Dibdin, which is one of those scholarly names Dr. Boli wishes he had made up.

The original, which is printed without a date or printer’s mark, is written with what strikes a modern reader as eccentric spelling. Dibdin or Herbert or Ames remarks on it: “I suspect that this little volume was printed abroad; there being so foreign an air throughout the whole orthography.” Now, Dr. Boli was a callow youth of less than 30 when this volume of the Dibdin edition was printed in 1812, but even then he could have set Mr. Dibdin right on that score. The dialect is clearly Northern; the marks are obvious—“tway” for “two,” plurals made with “-is” or “-ys” rather than “-s” or “-es,” “theton” and “thetother” for “the one” and “the other.”

For your edification, and your use when interpreting older printed books, Dr. Boli has transcribed the passage in mostly modern spelling, but leaving the punctuation exactly as it was in the original. Note the most important differences from modern punctuation:

  1. The virgule or slash is used for a comma.
  2. The colon is called “comma” (or “come” in the original).
  3. There is no semicolon.

The passage may be found in the original spelling (but with commas instead of virgules) in the second volume of Typographical Antiquities.

Of the craft of pointing.

There be five manner points/ and divisions most used with cunning men: the which/ if they be well used/ make the sentence very light/ and easy to understand both to the reader/ and the hearer/ and they be these: virgule/ comma/ parenthesis/ plain point/ and interrogative.

A virgule is a slender strike: leaning forward thiswise/ betokening a little/ short rest without any perfectness yet of sentence: as between the five points afore rehearsed.

A comma is with tway tittles thiswise: betokening a longer rest: and the sentence yet either is unperfect/ or else/ if it be perfect: there cometh more after/ longing to it: the which more commonly cannot be perfect by itself without at least somewhat of it: that goeth afore.

A parenthesis is with tway crooked virgules: as an old moon/ and a new belly to belly: the which be set the one afore the beginning/ and the other after the later end of a clause: coming within another clause: that may be perfect: though the clause/ so coming between: were away and therefore it is sounded commonly a note lower/ than the outer clause. If the sentence cannot be perfect without the inner clause/ then instead of the first crooked virgule a straight virgule will do very well: and instead of the latter must needs be a comma.

A plain point is with one tittle thiswise. And it cometh after the end of all the whole sentence betokening a long rest.

An interrogative is with tway tittles: the upper rising thiswise? And it cometh after the end of a whole reason: wherein there is some question axed/ the which end of the reason/ trying as it were for an answer: riseth upward.

We have made these rules in English: because they be as profitable/ and necessary to be kept in every mother tongue/ as in Latin. Since we (as we would to God: every preacher would do) have kept our rules both in our English/ and Latin: what need we/ since our own be sufficient enough: to put any other examples.