380

385

393

395

400

405

410

415

And I have lost your people all.”

Now when the chief heard him speak thus
He all but hurled him in to burn:

"You whoreson rogue," quoth he, "you wretch,
Your minstrelsy costs me too dear.

A curse on him that brought you in!
By my head, he shall pay for this!"
They made straight for that luckless imp
Who'd brought the minstrel's soul within..
So well they beat and hustled him

That he at last gave them his word
Never again at any time

To bring a minstrel into hell.

Their chief spoke to the minstrel then:
"Fair friend, be off from my abode !
A curse light on your minstrelsy,
Since I have lost my houseful by 't.
Be off from here, I tell you, go!
I have no care for such a servant.
I ne'er will seek a minstrel's soul,
Nor will I lodge one of that breed.
I'll none of them, go they their way,
Let God have them, for he loves joy!
Be off to God, they're not for me."
And he makes off fast as he can;
The devils drive him out of hell.
Towards Paradise he took his way.
And when St. Peter saw him come
He ran to ope for him the gate;

Fine lodgings he allotted him.

Now let the minstrels all make merry,

Be gay and joyous as they please,

For hell's torment is not for them.

There's one has saved them from that fate
Gambling away the souls at dice.

...

THE LIVER AS THE SEAT OF THE SOUL

MORRIS JASTROW, JR.

University of Pennsylvania

I

THE search for the soul has always been one of the favorite pursuits of man's speculative instincts from the remote period of primitive culture down to our own age, which, although so predominatingly scientific, has not-fortunately perhaps succeeded in brushing away all the cobwebs of popular fancy. Hence it can happen that, in our own days, experiments should be undertaken in a serious spirit to weigh the human soul, attempts which rest essentially on the same crudely materialistic conceptions that led simple folk and even philosophers in antiquity to locate the soul somewhere in the human body.

The earliest philosophy of mankind is necessarily materialistic. In man's first endeavors to find a solution for the two most striking mysteries of which he is conscious, the world of phenomena about him and the fact of his own existence, it is natural that he should, on the one hand, trace the origin of the world to some single substance as the starting-point of the evolution of matter, and that on the other, he should be led to localize in himself an element that would appear to him to constitute the essence of his own. life. One might have supposed the blood to be the substance that would most naturally suggest itself as the source of life; and as a matter of fact, among many nations, both primitive and advanced, we find blood closely associated with life. This is the view that underlies the Biblical tale of Cain and Abel. The actual shedding of Abel's blood is dwelt upon as the cause of his death, and hence the ordinary expression for murder in Hebrew is the

'pouring out of blood.' Similarly the word for blood is used synonymously with the term for 'life' or 'soul.' Yet, although the sight of blood flowing from an inflicted wound would suggest in the case of both man and animals that life is to be found in the blood, inasmuch as death ordinarily ensues without violence and without any actual loss of blood, the conclusion would be drawn that there is something else besides the blood which conditions life.

Early thought does not distinguish sharply between conceptions that in a more scientific age would be kept apart, and we must pass down to the period of Greek philosophy before we encounter a differentiation between soul and life. To the primitive mind, and even in popular parlance among the advanced nations of antiquity, soul and life, even when two separate terms exist, are used interchangeably. The problem of life, therefore, as it presented itself to antiquity, was to seek for some locality in the body which might be regarded as the ultimate source of life, and hence as the seat of the soul.

Scholars have hitherto recognized that the heart was widely regarded in antiquity as the seat of life. This was the view currently held in ancient India. In Sanskrit literature the heart is the seat of thought, and since thought is the most significant and most direct manifestation of the soul, the heart is identified with the soul, and, as such, becomes also the source of all emotions and the general symbol of vitality. In the Atharva-Veda we read of "the fluttering mind that has found place in the heart." Agni is pictured as confounding the evil intent of adversaries - "that which is in their heart"- and he is called upon to consume them in their hearts with pangs. Not only is all 'thought' and 'design' placed in the heart, but in the philosophy of India the spirit of man is actually described as dwelling in the heart and pictured as about the size of a thumb, or in another passage as smaller than a seed of corn or rice, and yet, despite its smallness, endowed with infinity of being, and identified with the all-embracing universal soul. Even a particular spot in the heart is assigned as the seat of the 1 Whitney-Lanman, Atharva-Veda, 1. 294 (vi. 18. 3). 2 Ibid., 1. 86 (iii. 2. 3–5).

Ibid., 2. 651-653 (xi. 9. 1 and 13).

soul, and in sleep the soul is supposed to transfer its seat to the heart bag.

Among the Greeks and Romans we find practically the same view both in popular beliefs and among the early philosophers, as well as among the physicians down to a certain period. In Homer, all the intellectual and emotional faculties, including love and courage, are placed in the heart, which thus becomes equivalent to being the seat of soulactivity. And despite the fact that under the influence of anatomical knowledge, which established the important function of the brain- even before the days of Plato, it would seem the view arose which gave to the head the distinction of containing the soul, in popular usage as well as in some scientific circles the older notion survived. Anacreon advised perfuming the breast, beneath which is the heart, in the belief that the perfume would bring calm to one's spirit; and Athenæus, who reports this of Anacreon, expressly adds that this was done, because according to Praxagoras and Philotimus - both physicians the soul was located in the heart.

--

-

The more advanced view, which placed the soul in the brain, is attributed to Pythagoras and Democritus, but finds a more definite expression in Hippocrates (ca. 460–377 B.C.), who not only distinguishes between the intellectual and the emotional faculties, but within the latter recognizes two divisions: the higher emotions, like courage, and the lower, among which are the passions and appetites. The higher are located in the heart, the lower in the region of the liver. Practically the same view is taken by Plato, although, as we shall see," he also attempts a compromise between older and later views; but the greatest of Greek philosophers, Aristotle, still clings to the view that the seat of the intellectual functions is in the heart. While differentiating between soul and intellect, he makes the nous a part of the psyche."

'Seymour, Homeric Age, p. 489.

'Athenæus, Deipnosophiste, Book xv, § 36.

See below, p. 166.

7 De Anima, iii. 4. Aristotle specifies that the voûs, 'spirit,' is that wherewith the soul (vx) thinks and grasps. See Jastrow, Aspects of Religious Belief and Practice in Babylonia and Assyria, p. 153, note 1.

The argument of Aristotle in favor of the heart as the seat of the soul is curious, coming from one who is usually swayed by purely scientific considerations, but also interesting as illustrative of the tenacious hold of traditional conceptions even on men of science. Aristotle argues that the soul must be located in the noblest organ of the body, and that is the heart. The highest expression of man's being must come from the noblest part.

8

The Stoics may also be cited as examples among Greek philosophers who clung to the older view. Plutarch has an interesting passage which shows that the change from heart to brain was only gradually brought about, and that after considerable discussion as to a number of places in the head where the intellect was supposed to be located. While Plato and Democritus placed it in the head in general, Strato, he says, fixed the seat of the intellect between the eyebrows, Erasistratos underneath the scalp, Herophilos at the bottom of the head. Parmenides and Epicurus were among those who clung to the view which placed the intellect — and the soul in the breast, the Stoics placed it in the heart, while Diogenes specified the ventricles of the heart, and Empedocles the blood of the heart—an interesting compromise between blood and heart as coextensive with life. Others, he adds, placed the soul in the arteries of the heart, some in the pericardium, and again others in the diaphragm, -a compromise between liver and heart. The eclectic disposition reaches its limit in the views of those who, like Pythagoras, made the soul extend from the head to the heart or even to the diaphragm. Among the arguments

used by the Stoics in support of their preference for the heart as against the head, Galen (ca. 130-200 A.D.) furnishes the one offered by Zeno, which is curious enough to be added.10 Zeno reasoned as follows: The voice comes through the throat. If it came from the head, it would not pass through the throat; whence the voice comes must also

De Placitis Philosophorum, iv. 5.

In judging of these strange and erratic opinions, it is well to bear in mind that as late as the Middle Ages the belief was quite general, even among physiologists, that the soul was located in a particular spot at the base of the brain.

10 Œuvres de Galen, 2. 244 f. (edited by Daremberg).