# Fib and Let Tri

It’s a simple sequence with hidden depths:

1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597, 2584, 4181, 6765, 10946, 17711, 28657, 46368, 75025, 121393, 196418, 317811, 514229, 832040, 1346269, 2178309, 3524578, 5702887, 9227465, 14930352, 24157817, 39088169, 63245986, 102334155... — A000045 at OEIS

That’s the Fibonacci sequence, probably the most famous of all integer sequences after the integers themselves (1, 2, 3, 4, 5…) and the primes (2, 3, 5, 7, 11…). It has a very simple definition: if fib(fi) is the fi-th number in the Fibonacci sequence, then fib(fi) = fib(fi-1) + fib(fi-2). By definition, fib(1) = fib(2) = 1. After that, it’s easy to generate new numbers:

2 = fib(3) = fib(1) + fib(2) = 1 + 1
3 = fib(4) = fib(2) + fib(3) = 1 + 2
5 = fib(5) = fib(3) + fib(4) = 2 + 3
8 = fib(6) = fib(4) + fib(5) = 3 + 5
13 = fib(7) = fib(5) + fib(6) = 5 + 8
21 = fib(8) = fib(6) + fib(7) = 8 + 13
34 = fib(9) = fib(7) + fib(8) = 13 + 21
55 = fib(10) = fib(8) + fib(9) = 21 + 34
89 = fib(11) = fib(9) + fib(10) = 34 + 55
144 = fib(12) = fib(10) + fib(11) = 55 + 89
233 = fib(13) = fib(11) + fib(12) = 89 + 144
377 = fib(14) = fib(12) + fib(13) = 144 + 233
610 = fib(15) = fib(13) + fib(14) = 233 + 377
987 = fib(16) = fib(14) + fib(15) = 377 + 610
[...]

How to create the Fibonacci sequence is obvious. But it’s not obvious that fib(fi) / fib(fi-1) gives you ever-better approximations to a fascinating constant called φ, the golden ratio, which is 1.618033988749894…:

1/1 = 1
2/1 = 2
3/2 = 1.5
5/3 = 1.66666...
8/5 = 1.6
13/8 = 1.625
21/13 = 1.615384...
34/21 = 1.619047...
55/34 = 1.6176470588235294117647058823...
89/55 = 1.618181818...
144/89 = 1.617977528089887640...
233/144 = 1.6180555555...
377/233 = 1.618025751072961...
610/377 = 1.618037135278514...
987/610 = 1.618032786885245...
[...]

And that’s just the start of the hidden depths in the Fibonacci sequence. I stumbled across another interesting pattern for myself a few days ago. I was looking at the sequence and one of the numbers caught my eye:

1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597...

55 is a palindrome, reading the same forward and backwards. I wondered whether there were any other palindromes in the sequence (apart from the trivial single-digit palindromes 1, 1, 2, 3…). I couldn’t find any more. Nor can anyone else, apparently. But that’s in base 10. Other bases are more productive. For example, in bases 2, 3 and 4, you get this:

11 in b2 = 3
101 in b2 = 5
10101 in b2 = 21

22 in b3 = 8
111 in b3 = 13
22122 in b3 = 233

11 in b4 = 5
111 in b4 = 21
202 in b4 = 34
313 in b4 = 55

I decided to concentrate on tripals, or palindromes with three digits. I started looking at bases that set records for the greatest number of tripals. And there are some interesting patterns in the digits of the tripals in these bases (when a digit > 9, the digit is represented inside square brackets — see base-29 and higher). See how quickly you can spot the patterns:

Palindromic Fibonacci numbers in base-4

111 in b4 (fib=21, fi=8)
202 in b4 (fib=34, fi=9)
313 in b4 (fib=55, fi=10)

4 = 2^2 (pal=3)

Palindromic Fibonacci numbers in base-11

121 in b11 (fib=144, fi=12)
313 in b11 (fib=377, fi=14)
505 in b11 (fib=610, fi=15)
818 in b11 (fib=987, fi=16)

11 is prime (pal=4)

Palindromic Fibonacci numbers in base-29

151 in b29 (fib=987, fi=16)
323 in b29 (fib=2584, fi=18)
818 in b29 (fib=6765, fi=20)
[13]0[13] in b29 (fib=10946, fi=21)
[21]1[21] in b29 (fib=17711, fi=22)

29 is prime (pal=5)

Palindromic Fibonacci numbers in base-76

1[13]1 in b76 (fib=6765, fi=20)
353 in b76 (fib=17711, fi=22)
828 in b76 (fib=46368, fi=24)
[21]1[21] in b76 (fib=121393, fi=26)
[34]0[34] in b76 (fib=196418, fi=27)
[55]1[55] in b76 (fib=317811, fi=28)

76 = 2^2 * 19 (pal=6)

Palindromic Fibonacci numbers in base-199

1[34]1 in b199 (fib=46368, fi=24)
3[13]3 in b199 (fib=121393, fi=26)
858 in b199 (fib=317811, fi=28)
[21]2[21] in b199 (fib=832040, fi=30)
[55]1[55] in b199 (fib=2178309, fi=32)
[89]0[89] in b199 (fib=3524578, fi=33)
[144]1[144] in b199 (fib=5702887, fi=34)

199 is prime (pal=7)

Palindromic Fibonacci numbers in base-521

1[89]1 in b521 (fib=317811, fi=28)
3[34]3 in b521 (fib=832040, fi=30)
8[13]8 in b521 (fib=2178309, fi=32)
[21]5[21] in b521 (fib=5702887, fi=34)
[55]2[55] in b521 (fib=14930352, fi=36)
[144]1[144] in b521 (fib=39088169, fi=38)
[233]0[233] in b521 (fib=63245986, fi=39)
[377]1[377] in b521 (fib=102334155, fi=40)

521 is prime (pal=8)

Palindromic Fibonacci numbers in base-1364

1[233]1 in b1364 (fib=2178309, fi=32)
3[89]3 in b1364 (fib=5702887, fi=34)
8[34]8 in b1364 (fib=14930352, fi=36)
[21][13][21] in b1364 (fib=39088169, fi=38)
[55]5[55] in b1364 (fib=102334155, fi=40)
[144]2[144] in b1364 (fib=267914296, fi=42)
[377]1[377] in b1364 (fib=701408733, fi=44)
[610]0[610] in b1364 (fib=1134903170, fi=45)
[987]1[987] in b1364 (fib=1836311903, fi=46)

1364 = 2^2 * 11 * 31 (pal=9)

Two patterns are quickly obvious. Every digit in the tripals is a Fibonacci number. And the middle digit of one Fibonacci tripal, fib(fi), becomes fib(fi-2) in the next tripal, while fib(fi), the first and last digits (which are identical), becomes fib(fi+2) in the next tripal.

But what about the bases? If you’re an expert in the Fibonacci sequence, you’ll spot the pattern at work straight away. I’m not an expert, but I spotted it in the end. Here are the first few bases setting records for the numbers of Fibonacci tripals:

4, 11, 29, 76, 199, 521, 1364, 3571, 9349, 24476, 64079, 167761, 439204, 1149851, 3010349, 7881196...

These numbers come from the Lucas sequence, which is closely related to the Fibonacci sequence. But where fib(1) = fib(2) = 1, luc(1) = 1 and luc(2) = 3. After that, luc(li) = luc(li-2) + luc(li-1):

1, 3, 4, 7, 11, 18, 29, 47, 76, 123, 199, 322, 521, 843, 1364, 2207, 3571, 5778, 9349, 15127, 24476, 39603, 64079, 103682, 167761, 271443, 439204, 710647, 1149851, 1860498, 3010349, 4870847, 7881196... — A000204 at OEIS

It seems that every second number from 4 in the Lucas sequence supplies a base in which 1) the number of Fibonacci tripals sets a new record; 2) every digit of the Fibonacci tripals is itself a Fibonacci number.

But can I prove that this is always true? No. And do I understand why these patterns exist? No. My simple search for palindromes in the Fibonacci sequence soon took me far out of my mathematical depth. But it’s been fun to find huge bases like this in which every digit of every Fibonacci tripal is itself a Fibonacci number:

Palindromic Fibonacci numbers in base-817138163596

1[139583862445]1 in b817138163596 (fib=781774079430987230203437, fi=116)
3[53316291173]3 in b817138163596 (fib=2046711111473984623691759, fi=118)
8[20365011074]8 in b817138163596 (fib=5358359254990966640871840, fi=120)
[21][7778742049][21] in b817138163596 (fib=14028366653498915298923761, fi=122)
[55][2971215073][55] in b817138163596 (fib=36726740705505779255899443, fi=124)
[144][1134903170][144] in b817138163596 (fib=96151855463018422468774568, fi=126)
[377][433494437][377] in b817138163596 (fib=251728825683549488150424261, fi=128)
[987][165580141][987] in b817138163596 (fib=659034621587630041982498215, fi=130)
[2584][63245986][2584] in b817138163596 (fib=1725375039079340637797070384, fi=132)
[6765][24157817][6765] in b817138163596 (fib=4517090495650391871408712937, fi=134)
[17711][9227465][17711] in b817138163596 (fib=11825896447871834976429068427, fi=136)
[46368][3524578][46368] in b817138163596 (fib=30960598847965113057878492344, fi=138)
[121393][1346269][121393] in b817138163596 (fib=81055900096023504197206408605, fi=140)
[317811][514229][317811] in b817138163596 (fib=212207101440105399533740733471, fi=142)
[832040][196418][832040] in b817138163596 (fib=555565404224292694404015791808, fi=144)
[2178309][75025][2178309] in b817138163596 (fib=1454489111232772683678306641953, fi=146)
[5702887][28657][5702887] in b817138163596 (fib=3807901929474025356630904134051, fi=148)
[14930352][10946][14930352] in b817138163596 (fib=9969216677189303386214405760200, fi=150)
[39088169][4181][39088169] in b817138163596 (fib=26099748102093884802012313146549, fi=152)
[102334155][1597][102334155] in b817138163596 (fib=68330027629092351019822533679447, fi=154)
[267914296][610][267914296] in b817138163596 (fib=178890334785183168257455287891792, fi=156)
[701408733][233][701408733] in b817138163596 (fib=468340976726457153752543329995929, fi=158)
[1836311903][89][1836311903] in b817138163596 (fib=1226132595394188293000174702095995, fi=160)
[4807526976][34][4807526976] in b817138163596 (fib=3210056809456107725247980776292056, fi=162)
[12586269025][13][12586269025] in b817138163596 (fib=8404037832974134882743767626780173, fi=164)
[32951280099]5[32951280099] in b817138163596 (fib=22002056689466296922983322104048463, fi=166)
[86267571272]2[86267571272] in b817138163596 (fib=57602132235424755886206198685365216, fi=168)
[225851433717]1[225851433717] in b817138163596 (fib=150804340016807970735635273952047185, fi=170)
[365435296162]0[365435296162] in b817138163596 (fib=244006547798191185585064349218729154, fi=171)
[591286729879]1[591286729879] in b817138163596 (fib=394810887814999156320699623170776339, fi=172)

817138163596 = 2^2 * 229 * 9349 * 95419 (pal=30)

# Performativizing the Polygonic #3

Pre-previously in my passionate portrayal of polygonic performativity, I showed how a single point jumping randomly (or quasi-randomly) towards the vertices of a polygon can create elaborate fractals. For example, if the point jumps 1/φth (= 0.6180339887…) of the way towards the vertices of a pentagon, it creates this fractal:

Point jumping 1/φth of the way to a randomly (or quasi-randomly) chosen vertex of a pentagon

But as you might expect, there are different routes to the same fractal. Suppose you take a pentagon and select a single vertex. Now, measure the distance to each vertex, v(1,i=1..5), of the original pentagon (including the selected vertex) and reduce it by 1/φ to find the position of a new vertex, v(2,i=1..5). If you do this for each vertex of the original pentagon, then to each vertex of the new pentagons, and so on, in the end you create the same fractal as the jumping point does:

Shrink pentagons by 1/φ, stage #1

Stage #2

Stage #3

Stage #4

Stage #5

Stage #6

Shrink by 1/φ (animated) (click for larger if blurred)

And here is the route to a centre-filled variant of the fractal:

Central pentagon, stage #1

Stage #2

Stage #3

Stage #4

Stage #5

Stage #6

Central pentagon (animated) (click for larger if blurred)

Using this shrink-the-polygon method, you can reach the same fractals by a third route. This time, use vertex v(1,i) of the original polygon as the centre of the new polygon with its vertices v(2,i=1..5). Creation of the fractal looks like this:

Pentagons over vertices, shrink by 1/φ, stage #1 (no pentagons over vertices)

Stage #2

Stage #3

Stage #4

Stage #4

Stage #5

Stage #7

Pentagons over vertices (animated) (click for larger if blurred)

And here is a third way of creating the centre-filled pentagonal fractal:

Pentagons over vertices and central pentagon, stage #1

Stage #2

Stage #3

Stage #4

Stage #5

Stage #6

Stage #7

Pentagons over vertices with central pentagon (animated) (click for larger if blurred)

And here is a fractal created when there are three pentagons to a side and the pentagons are shrunk by 1/φ^2 = 0.3819660112…:

Pentagon at vertex + pentagon at mid-point of side, shrink by 1/φ^2

Final stage

Pentagon at vertex + pentagon at mid-point of side (animated) (click for larger if blurred)

Pentagon at vertex + pentagon at mid-point of side + central pentagon, shrink by 1/φ^2 and c. 0.5, stage #1

Stage #2

Stage #3

Stage #4

Stage #5

Pentagon at vertex + mid-point + center (animated) (click for larger if blurred)

Previously pre-posted:

# Performativizing Papyrocentricity #16

Papyrocentric Performativity Presents:

Brit GritGranite and Grit: A Walker’s Guide to the Geology of British Mountains, Ronald Turnbull (Francis Lincoln 2011)

Singh Summing SimpsonsThe Simpsons and Their Mathematical Secrets, Simon Singh (Bloomsbury 2013)

Go with the QuoStatus Quo: Still Doin’ It – The Official Updated Edition, compiled by Bob Young, edited by Francis Rossi and Rick Parfitt (Omnibus Press 2013)

Breeding BunniesThe Golden Ratio: The Story of Phi, the Extraordinary Number of Nature, Art and Beauty, Mario Livio (Headline Review 2003) (posted @ Overlord of the Über-Feral)

Brit Bot BookReader’s Digest Field Guide to the Wild Flowers of Britain, J.R. Press et al, illustrated Leonora Box et al (1981) (@ O.o.t.Ü.-F.)

Or Read a Review at Random: RaRaR

# Breeding Bunnies

The Golden Ratio: The Story of Phi, the Extraordinary Number of Nature, Art and Beauty, Mario Livio (Headline Review 2003)

A good short popular guide to perhaps the most interesting, and certainly the most irrational, of all numbers: the golden ratio or phi (φ), which is approximately equal to 1·6180339887498948482… Prominent in mathematics since at least the ancient Greeks and Euclid, phi is found in many places in nature too, from pineapples and sunflowers to the flight of hawks. Livio catalogues its appearances in both maths and nature, looking closely at the Fibonacci sequence and rabbit-breeding, before going on to debunk mistaken claims that phi also appears a lot in art, music and poetry. Dalí certainly used it, but da Vinci, Debussy and Virgil almost certainly didn’t. Nor, almost certainly, did the builders of the Parthenon and pyramids. Finally, he examines what has famously been called (by the physicist Eugene Wiegner) the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics: why is this human invention so good at describing the behaviour of the Universe? Livio quotes one of the best short answers I’ve seen:

Human logic was forced on us by the physical world and is therefore consistent with it. Mathematics derives from logic. That is why mathematics is consistent with the physical world. (ch. 9, “Is God a mathematician?”, pg. 252)

It’s not hard to recommend a book that quotes everyone from Johannes Kepler and William Blake to Lewis Carroll, Christopher Marlowe and Jef Raskin, “the creator of the Macintosh computer”, whose answer is given above. Recreational mathematicians should also find lots of ideas for further investigation, from fractal strings to the fascinating number patterns governed by Benford’s law. It isn’t just human beings who look after number one: as a leading figure, 1 turns up much more often in data from the real world, and in mathematical constructs like the Fibonacci sequence, than intuition would lead you to expect. If you’d like to learn more about that and about many other aspects of mathematics, hunt down a copy of this book.

Elsewhere other-posted:

Roses Are Golden – φ and floral homicide

# Roses Are Golden

Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema’s painting The Roses of Heliogabalus (1888) is based on an apocryphal episode in the sybaritic life of the Roman Emperor Elagabalus (204-222 A.D.), who is said to have suffocated guests with flowers at one of his feasts. The painting is in a private collection, but I saw it for real in an Alma-Tadema exhibition at the Walker Art Gallery in Liverpool sometime during the late 1990s. I wasn’t disappointed: it was a memorable meeting with a painting I’d been interested in for years. Roses is impressively large and impressively skilful. Close-up, the brush-strokes are obvious, obtrusive and hard to interpret as people and objects. It isn’t till you step back, far beyond the distance at which Alma-Tadema was painting, that the almost photographic realism becomes apparent. But you get more of the many details at close range, like the Latin inscription on a bowl below and slightly to the right of that scowling water-mask. Alas, I forgot to take a note of what the inscription was, though perhaps the memory is still locked away somewhere in my subconscious.

The Roses of Heliogabalus (1888)

Whatever it is, I feel sure it is significant, because Roses is rich with meaning. That’s a large part of why I’m interested in it. Yes, I like it a lot as art, but the women would have to be more attractive for it to be higher in the list of my favourite paintings. As it is, I think there are only four reasonably good-looking people in it: the man with the beard on the right; the flautist striding past the marble pillar on the left; the red-headed girl with a crown of white flowers; and Heliogabalus himself, crowned in roses and clutching a handful of grapes beside the overweight man who’s wearing a wreath and sardonically saluting one of the rose-pelted guests in the foreground. When I first wrote about Roses in a pub-zine whose name escapes me, I misidentified the overweight man as Heliogabalus himself, even though I noted that he seemed many years old than Heliogabalus, toppled as a teen tyrant, should have been. It was a bad mistake, but one that, with less knowledge and more excuse, many people must make when they look at Roses, because the overweight man and his sardonic salute are a natural focus for the eye. Once your eye has settled on and noted him, you naturally follow the direction of his gaze down to the man in the foreground, who’s gazing right back.

Something Like the Sun

And by following that gaze, you’ve performed a little ratio-ritual, just as Alma-Tadema intended you to do. Yes, Roses is full of meaning and much of that meaning is mathematical. I think the angle of the gaze is one of many references in Roses to the golden ratio, or φ (phi), a number that is supposed to have special aesthetic importance and has certainly been used by many artists and musicians to guide their work. A rectangle with sides in the proportions 8:13, for example, approximates the golden ratio pretty closely, but φ itself is impossible to represent physically, because it’s an irrational number with infinitely many decimal digits, like π or √2, the square root of two. π represents the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter and √2 the ratio of a square’s diagonal to its side, but no earthly circle and no earthly square can ever capture these numbers with infinite precision. Similarly, no earthly rectangle can capture φ, but the rectangle of Roses is a good attempt, because it measures 52″ x 84 1/8". That extra eighth of an inch was my first clue to the painting’s mathematical meaningfulness. And sure enough, 52/84·125 = 416/673 = 0·61812…, which is a good approximation to φ’s never-ending 0·6180339887498948482045868343656…*

That deliberate choice of dimensions for the canvas led me to look for more instances of φ in the painting, though one of the most important and obvious might be called a meta-presence. The Roses of Heliogabalus is dated 1888, or 1666 years after the death of Heliogabalus in 222 AD. A radius at 222º divides a circle in the golden ratio, because 222/360 = 0·616… It’s very hard to believe Alma-Tadema didn’t intend this reference and I also think there’s something significant in 1888 itself, which equals 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 59 = 25 x 59. Recall that 416 is the expanded short side of Roses. This equals 25 x 13, while 673, the expanded long side, is the first prime number after 666. As one of the most technically skilled painters who ever lived, Alma-Tadema was certainly an exceptional implicit mathematician. But he clearly had explicit mathematical knowledge too and this painting is a phi-pie cooked by a master matho-chef. In short, when Roses is read, Roses turns out to be golden.

*φ is more usually represented as 1·6180339887498948482045868343656…, but it has the pecularity that 1/φ = φ-1, so the decimal digits don’t change and 0·6180339887498948482045868343656… is also legitimate.

Appendix I

I’ve looked at more of Alma-Tadema’s paintings to see if their dimensions approximate φ, √2, √3 or π, or their reciprocals. These were the results (ε = error, i.e. the difference between the constant and the ratio of the dimensions).

The Roman Wine Tasters (1861), 50" x 69 2/3": 150/209 = 0·717… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·02)
A Roman Scribe (1865), 21 1/2" x 15 1/2": 43/31 = 1·387… ≈ √2 (ε=0·027)
A Picture Gallery (1866), 16 1/8" x 23": 129/184 = 0·701… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·012)
A Roman Dance (1866), 16 1/8" x 22 1/8": 43/59 = 0·728… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·042)
In the Peristyle (1866), 23" x 16": 23/16 = 1·437… ≈ √2 (ε=0·023)
Proclaiming Emperor Claudius (1867), 18 1/2" x 26 1/3": 111/158 = 0·702… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·009)
Phidias and the Frieze of the Parthenon Athens (1868), 29 2/3" x 42 1/3": 89/127 = 0·7… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·012)
The Education of Children of Clovis (1868), 50" x 69 2/3": 150/209 = 0·717… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·02)
An Egyptian Juggler (1870), 31" x 19 1/4": 124/77 = 1·61… ≈ φ (ε=0·007)
A Roman Art Lover (1870), 29" x 40": 29/40 = 0·725… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·034)
Good Friends (1873), 4 1/2" x 7 1/4": 18/29 = 0·62… ≈ φ (ε=0·006)
Pleading (1876), 8 1/2" x 12 3/8": 68/99 = 0·686… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·041)
An Oleander (1882), 36 1/2" x 25 1/2": 73/51 = 1·431… ≈ √2 (ε=0·017)
Dolce Far Niente (1882), 9 1/4" x 6 1/2": 37/26 = 1·423… ≈ √2 (ε=0·008)
Anthony and Cleopatra (1884), 25 3/4" x 36 1/3": 309/436 = 0·708… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·003)
Rose of All Roses (1885), 15 1/4" x 9 1/4": 61/37 = 1·648… ≈ φ (ε=0·03)
The Roses of Heliogabalus (1888), 52" x 84 1/8": 416/673 = 0·618… ≈ φ (ε<0.001)
The Kiss (1891), 18" x 24 3/4": 8/11 = 0·727… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·039)
Unconscious Rivals (1893), 17 3/4" x 24 3/4": 71/99 = 0·717… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·019)
A Coign of Vantage (1895), 25 1/4" x 17 1/2": 101/70 = 1·442… ≈ √2 (ε=0·028)
A Difference of Opinion (1896), 15" x 9": 5/3 = 1·666… ≈ φ (ε=0·048)
Whispering Noon (1896), 22" x 15 1/2": 44/31 = 1·419… ≈ √2 (ε=0·005)
Her Eyes Are With Her Thoughts And Her Thoughts Are Far Away (1897), 9" x 15": 3/5 = 0·6… ≈ φ (ε=0·048)
The Baths of Caracalla (1899), 60" x 37 1/2": 8/5 = 1·6… ≈ φ (ε=0·018)
The Year’s at the Spring, All’s Right with the World (1902), 13 1/2" x 9 1/2": 27/19 = 1·421… ≈ √2 (ε=0·006)
Ask Me No More (1906), 31 1/2" x 45 1/2": 9/13 = 0·692… ≈ 1/√2 (ε=0·03)

Appendix II

The Roses of Heliogabalus is based on this section from Aelius Lampridius’ pseudonymous and largely apocryphal Vita Heliogabali, or Life of Heliogabalus, in the Historia Augusta (late fourth century):

XXI. 1 Canes iecineribus anserum pavit. Habuit leones et leopardos exarmatos in deliciis, quos edoctos per mansuetarios subito ad secundam et tertiam mensam iubebat accumbere ignorantibus cunctis, quod exarmati essent, ad pavorem ridiculum excitandum. 2 Misit et uvas Apamenas in praesepia equis suis et psittacis atque fasianis leones pavit et alia animalia. 3 Exhibuit et sumina apruna per dies decem tricena cottidie cum suis vulvis, pisum cum aureis, lentem cum cerauniis, fabam cum electris, orizam cum albis exhibens. 4 Albas praeterea in vicem piperis piscibus et tuberibus conspersit. 5 Oppressit in tricliniis versatilibus parasitos suos violis et floribus, sic ut animam aliqui efflaverint, cum erepere ad summum non possent. 6 Condito piscinas et solia temperavit et rosato atque absentato…

Historia Augusta: Vita Heliogabali

XXI. 1 He fed his dogs on goose-livers. He had pet lions and leopards, which had been rendered harmless and trained by tamers, and these he would suddenly order during the dessert and the after-dessert to get on the couches, thereby causing laughter and panic, for none knew that they were harmless. 2 He sent grapes from Apamea to his stables for the horses, and he fed parrots and pheasants to his lions and other beasts. 3 For ten days in a row, moreover, he served wild sows’ udders with the matrices, at a rate of thirty a day, serving, besides, peas with gold-pieces, lentils with onyx, beans with amber, and rice with pearls; 4 and he also sprinkled pearls on fish and used truffles instead of pepper. 5 In a banqueting-room with a reversible ceiling he once buried his parasites in violets and other flowers, so that some were actually smothered to death, being unable to crawl out to the top. 6 He flavoured his swimming-pools and bath-tubs with essence of spices or of roses or wormwood…

Augustan History: Life of Heliogabalus