This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

they are considered such most of all, because the Academics in a sense "comprehend" that the very thing itself—that nothing can be comprehended—and they "decide" that nothing can be decided, whereas the Pyrrhonians do not even say that this is true in any way, because it appears that nothing is true.
In ancient writings, neither do Roman women swear by Hercules, nor do men by Castor. It is not obscure why the former did not swear by Hercules, for they abstain from the Herculanean sacrifice. However, why men did not invoke Castor when swearing is not easy to say. Therefore, it is nowhere to be found in reputable writers that a woman says "by Hercules" (mehercle) or a man says "by Castor" (mecastor); but "by Pollux" (edepol), which is an oath by Pollux, is common to both man and woman. But M. Varro asserts that the most ancient men were not accustomed to swear by Castor or Pollux, but that this oath was only for women, received from the Eleusinian rites original: "ex initiis Eleusinis"; yet gradually, through ignorance of antiquity, men began to say "by Pollux," and thus the custom of speaking in this way was established, but that "by Castor" was said by a man is not found in any ancient writer.
It seems to be an equal fault to use words that are either too obsolete and worn out, or unusual and of a harsh and unpolished novelty. But I believe it is more annoying and more blameworthy