Kitap 11
2
IT was not customary to call a man elegans, or elegant, by way of praise, but up to the time of Marcus Cato that word as a rule was a reproach, not a compliment. And this we may observe both in some other writers, and also in the work of Cato entitled Carmen de Moribus. In this book is the following passage: p. 82, 10, Jordan. They thought that avarice included all the vices; whoever was considered extravagant, ambitious, elegant, vicious or good-fornothing received praise. That is, in comparison with the miser. It is evident from these words that in days of old the elegant man was so called, not because of refinement of character, but because he was excessively particular and extravagant in his attire and mode of life.
2
Later, the elegant man ceased indeed to be reproached, but he was deemed worthy of no commendation, unless his elegance was very moderate. Thus Marcus Tullius commended Lucius Crassus and Quintus Scaevola, not for mere elegance, but for elegance combined with great frugality. Crassus, he says, Brut. 148. was the most frugal of elegant men; Scaevola the most elegant of the frugal.
