The Anatomy of Love

There will not be wanting, I presume, one or other that will much discommend some part of this treatise and object that it is too light for a divine, too comical a subject to speak of love-symptoms, too phantastical, and fit alone for a wanton poet, a feeling young lovesick gallant, an effeminate courtier, or some such idle person. And ’tis true they say: for by the naughtiness of men it is so come to pass as Caussinus observes that the very name of love is odious to chaster ears; and therefore some again, out of an affected gravity, will dislike all for the name’s sake before they read a word, dissembling with him in Petronius, and seem to be angry that their ears are violated with such obscene speeches, that so they may be admired for grave philosophers and staid carriage. They cannot abide to hear talk of love-toys, or amorous discourses; in their outward actions averse, and yet in their cogitations they are all out as bad, if not worse than others.

Lucretia blushed and hid my book—
To read it again when Brutus is not there.

But let these cavillers and counterfeit Catos know that, as the Lord John answered the queen in that Italian Guazzo, an old, a grave, discreet man is fittest to discourse of love matters, because he hath likely more experiences, observed more, hath a more staid judgement, can better discern, resolve, discuss, advise, give better cautions and more solid precepts, better inform his auditors in such a subject, and by reason of his riper years sooner divert. Besides there is nothing here to be excepted at; love is a species of melancholy, and a necessary part of this my treatise, which I may not omit; I must and will perform my task. And that short excuse of Mercerus for his edition of Aristaenetus shall be mine: If I have spent my time ill to write, let not them be so idle as to read. But I am persuaded it is not so ill spent, I ought not to excuse or repent myself of this subject, on which many grave and worthy men have written whole volumes.…

A company of stern readers dislike the second of the Aeneids, and tax Virgil’s gravity, for inserting such amorous passions in an heroi- cal subject; but his commentator justly vindicates the poet’s worth, wisdom, and discretion in doing as he did. Castalio [Castiglione] would not have young men read the Canticles, because to his think- ing it was too light and amorous a tract, a Ballad of Ballads, as our old English translation hath it. He might as well forbid the reading of Genesis, because of the loves of Jacob and Rachel, the stories of Shechem and Dinah, Judah and Tamar; reject the Book of Numbers for the fornications of the people of Israel with the Moabites; that of Judges for Samson and Delilah’s embracings; that of the Kings, for David and Bathsheba’s adulteries, the incest of Amnon and Tamar, Solomon’s concubines, etc., the stories of Esther, Judith, Susanna, and many such. Dicaearchus, and some other, carp at Plato’s majesty, that he would vouchsafe to indite such love-toys: among the rest, for that dalliance with Agatho.

For my part, saith Maximus Tyrius, a great Platonist himself, I do not only admire, but stand amazed to read that Plato and Socrates both should expel Homer from their city because he writ of such light and wanton subjects as Vulcan’s net, Mars’ and Venus’ fopperies before all the gods; because Apollo fled when he was per- secuted by Achilles, the gods were wounded and ran whining away, as Mars that roared louder than Stentor, and covered nine acres of ground with his fall; Vulcan was a summer’s day falling down from heaven, and in Lemnos Isle brake his leg, etc., with such ridiculous passages: whenas both Socrates and Plato, by his testimony, writ lighter themselves.

What can be more absurd than for grave philosophers to treat of such fooleries, to admire Autolycus, Alcibiades, for their beauties as they did, to run after, to gaze, to dote on fair Phaedrus, delicate Agatho, young Lysis, fine Charmides? Doth this become grave philosophers? Thus peradventure Callias, Thrasymachus, Polus, Aristophanes, or some of his adversaries and emulators might object; but neither they nor Anytus and Meletus, his bitter enemies, that condemned him for teaching Critias to tyrannize, his impiety for swearing by dogs and plane-trees, for his juggling sophistry, etc., never so much as upbraided him with impure love, writing or speaking of that subject; and therefore without question, as he concludes, both Socrates and Plato in this are justly to be excused. But suppose they had been a little overseen, should divine Plato be defamed? No; rather, as he said of Cato’s drunkenness, if Cato were drunk, it should be no vice at all to be drunk. They reprove Plato then, but without cause (as Ficinus pleads); for all love is honest and good, and they are worthy to be loved that speak well of love.

Being to speak of this admirable affection of love (saith Valleriola), there lies open a vast and philosophical field to my discourse, by which many lovers become mad: let me leave my more serious meditations, wander in these philosophical fields, and look into those pleasant groves of the Muses, where with unspeakable variety of flowers we may make garlands to ourselves, not to adorn us only, but with their pleasant smell and juice to nourish our souls, and fill our minds desirous of knowledge, etc. After a harsh and unpleasing discourse of melancholy, which hath hitherto molested your patience and tired the author, give him leave to recreate himself in this kind after his laborious studies, since so many grave divines and worthy men have without offence to manners, to help themselves and others, voluntarily written of it. Heliodorus, a bishop, penned a love story of Theagenes and Chariclea, and when some Catos of his time reprehended him for it, chose rather, saith Nicephorus, to leave his bishopric than his book. Aeneas Sylvius, an ancient divine, and past forty years of age, as he confesseth himself, indited that wanton history of Euryalus and Lucretia. And how many superintendents of learning could I reckon up, that have written of light phantastical subjects!

Give me leave then to refresh my Muse a little, and my weary readers, to expatiate in this delightsome field, to season a surly dis- course with a more pleasing aspersion of love matters. ’Tis good to sweeten our life with some pleasing toys to relish it, and, as Pliny tells us, most of our students love such pleasant subjects. Though Macrobius teach us otherwise, that those old sages banished all such light tracts from their studies to nurses’ cradles, to please only the ear; yet out of Apuleius I will oppose as honourable patrons, Solon, Plato, Xenophon, Hadrian, etc., that as highly approve of these treatises. On the other side methinks they are not to be disliked, they are not so unfit. I will not peremptorily say, as one did, I will tell you such pretty stories, that foul befall him that is not pleased with them. I will not press you with my pamphlets, or beg attention, but if you like them you may. Pliny holds it expedient, and most fit, to season our works with some pleasant discourse; and there be those, without question, that are more willing to read such toys than I am to write. ‘Let me not live,’ saith Aretine’s Antonia, ‘if I had not rather hear thy discourse than see a play!’ No doubt but there be more of her mind, ever have been, ever will be, as Jerome bears me witness: A far greater part had rather read Apuleius than Plato. Tully himself confesseth he could not understand Plato’s Timaeus, and therefore cared less for it; but every schoolboy hath that famous testament of Grunnius Corocotta Porcellus at his fingers’ ends. The comical poet made this his only care and sole study, to please the people, tickle the ear, and to delight; but mine earnest intent is as much to profit as to please; and these my writings, I hope, shall take like gilded pills, which are so composed as well to tempt the appetite and deceive the palate as to help and medicinally work upon the whole body; my lines shall not only recreate but rectify the mind.

I think I have said enough; if not, let him that is otherwise minded remember that of Apuleius Madaurensis; he was in his life a philosopher (as Ausonius apologizeth for him), in his epigrams a lover, in his precepts most severe; in his epistle to Caerellia a wanton. Annianus, Sulpicious, Evenus, Menander, and many old poets besides, did write Fescennines, Atellanes, and lascivious songs, yet were they chaste, severe, and upright livers.…

But I presume I need not, as Socrates in Plato, cover his face when he spake of love, or blush and hide mine eyes, as Pallas did in her hood, when she was consulted by Jupiter about Mercury’s mar- riage. It is no such lascivious, obscene, or wanton discourse; I have not offended your chaster ears with anything that is here written, as many French and Italian authors in their modern language of late have done. ’Tis not scurrile this, but chaste, honest, most part serious, and even of religion itself.…

Thus much I have thought good to say by way of preface, lest any man should blame in me lightness, wantonness, rashness, in speaking of love’s causes, enticements, symptoms, remedies, lawful and unlawful loves, and lust itself. I speak it only to tax and deter others from it, not to teach, but to show the vanities and fopperies of this heroical or Herculean love, and to apply remedies unto it. I will treat of this with like liberty as of the rest. Condemn me not, good reader, then, or censure me hardly, if some part of this treatise to thy thinking as yet be too light; but consider better of it. To the pure all things are pure, a naked man to a modest woman is no otherwise than a picture, as Augusta Livia truly said, honi soit qui mal y pense. If in thy censure it be too light I advise thee as Lipsius did his reader for some places of Plautus, if they like thee not, let them pass; or oppose that which is good to that which is bad, and reject not therefore all. For to invert that verse of Martial, and with Hierom Wolfius to apply it to my present purpose, some is good, some bad, some is indifferent. I say farther with him yet, I have inserted some things more homely, light, or comical, which I would request every man to interpret to the best, and, as Julius Caesar Scaliger besought Cardan, I beseech thee, good reader, not to mistake me, or misconstrue what is here written. ’Tis a comical subject; in sober sadness I crave pardon of what is amiss, and desire thee to suspend thy judgement, wink at small faults, or to be silent at least; but if thou likest, speak well of it, and wish me good success.


I am resolved, howsoever, boldly to show myself in this common stage, and in this tragi-comedy of love to act several parts, some satiri- cally, some comically, some in a mixed tone, as the subject I have in hand gives occasion, and present scene shall require or offer itself.