--- title: "City of God · De civitate Dei" author: "Augustine" translator: "Marcus Dods" languages: [la, en] shelf: "Church Fathers" section: 15 of 116 url: https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/15/ cite: "Augustine, tr. Marcus Dods, City of God · De civitate Dei, section 15. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/15/" --- # City of God · De civitate Dei *Augustine, tr. Marcus Dods* “Two loves have made two cities.” Augustine’s Latin, in Hoffmann’s critical text, beside Dods’s English, chapter by chapter. > Latin: Augustine, De civitate Dei, ed. Emanuel Hoffmann, CSEL 40 (Vienna: Tempsky, 1899–1900), as encoded by the Open Greek and Latin project, University of Leipzig (stoa0040.stoa003.opp-lat3, CC BY-SA 4.0); apparatus omitted. > English: Marcus Dods, The City of God (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series, vol. 2, 1887). > Chapters are matched one to one except where the two editions divide them differently; within a chapter the Latin sentences are shared out over the English paragraphs by position. ## 15. Of the Destruction of Ilium by Fimbria, a Lieutenant of Marius. Source: https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/15/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/15/#p-N [¶0] Chapter 7.—Of the Destruction of Ilium by Fimbria, a Lieutenant of Marius. > Latin: Caput VII. De euersione Ilii, quod dux Marii Fimbria excidit. [¶1] And surely we may ask what wrong poor Ilium had done, that, in the first heat of the civil wars of Rome, it should suffer at the hand of Fimbria, the veriest villain among Marius’ partisans, a more fierce and cruel destruction than the Grecian sack. For when the Greeks took it many escaped, and many who did not escape were suffered to live, though in captivity. But Fimbria from the first gave orders that not a life should be spared, and burnt up together the city and all its inhabitants. Thus was Ilium requited, not by the Greeks, whom she had provoked by wrong-doing; but by the Romans, who had been built out of her ruins; while the gods, adored alike of both sides, did simply nothing, or, to speak more correctly, could do nothing. Is it then true, that at this time also, after Troy had repaired the damage done by the Grecian fire, all the gods by whose help the kingdom stood, “forsook each fane, each sacred shrine?” > Latin: Certe enim ciuilibus iam bellis scatentibus quid miserum commiserat Ilium, ut a Fimbria, Marianarum partium homine pessimo, euerteretur, multo ferocius adque crudelius quam olim a Graecis? Nam tunc et multi inde fugerunt et multi captiuati saltem in seruitute uixerunt; porro autem Fimbria prius edictum proposuit, ne cui parceretur, adque urbem totam cunctosque in ea homines incendio concremauit. Hoc meruit Ilium non a Graecis quos sua inritauerat iniquitate, sed a Romanis quos sua calamitate propagauerat, dis illis communibus ad haec repellenda nihil iuuantibus seu, quod uerum est, nihil ualentibus. Numquid et tunc Abscessere omnes adytis arisque relictis Di, quibus illud oppidum steterat post antiquos Graecorum ignes ruinasque reparatum? [¶2] But if so, I ask the reason; for in my judgment, the conduct of the gods was as much to be reprobated as that of the townsmen to be applauded. For these closed their gates against Fimbria, that they might preserve the city for Sylla, and were therefore burnt and consumed by the enraged general. Now, up to this time, Sylla’s cause was the more worthy of the two; for till now he used arms to restore the republic, and as yet his good intentions had met with no reverses. What better thing, then, could the Trojans have done? What more honorable, what more faithful to Rome, or more worthy of her relationship, than to preserve their city for the better part of the Romans, and to shut their gates against a parricide of his country? It is for the defenders of the gods to consider the ruin which this conduct brought on Troy. The gods deserted an adulterous people, and abandoned Troy to the fires of the Greeks, that out of her ashes a chaster Rome might arise. But why did they a second time abandon this same town, allied now to Rome, and not making war upon her noble daughter, but preserving a most steadfast and pious fidelity to Rome’s most justifiable faction? Why did they give her up to be destroyed, not by the Greek heroes, but by the basest of the Romans? Or, if the gods did not favor Sylla’s cause, for which the unhappy Trojans maintained their city, why did they themselves predict and promise Sylla such successes? Must we call them flatterers of the fortunate, rather than helpers of the wretched? Troy was not destroyed, then, because the gods deserted it. For the demons, always watchful to deceive, did what they could. For, when all the statues were overthrown and burnt together with the town, Livy tells us that only the image of Minerva is said to have been found standing uninjured amidst the ruins of her temple; not that it might be said in their praise, “The gods who made this realm divine,” but that it might not be said in their defence, They are “gone from each fane, each sacred shrine:” for that marvel was permitted to them, not that they might be proved to be powerful, but that they might be convicted of being present. > Latin: Si autem abscesserant, causam requiro, et oppidanorum quidem quanto inuenio meliorem, tanto deteriorem deorum. Illi enim contra Fimbriam portas clauserant, ut Syllae seruarent integram ciuitatem; hinc eos iratus incendit uel potius penitus extinxit. Adhuc autem meliorum partium ciuilium Sylla dux fuit, adhuc armis rem publicam recuperare moliebatur; horum bonorum initiorum nondum malos euentus habuit. Quid ergo melius ciues urbis illius facere potuerunt, quid honestius, quid fidelius, quid Romana parentela dignius quam meliori causae Romanorum ciuitatem seruare et contra parricidam Romanae rei publicae portas claudere? At hoc eis in quantum exitium uerterit, adtendant defensores deorum. Deseruerint di adulteros Iliumque flammis Graecorum reliquerint, ut ex eius cineribus Roma castior nasceretur: quur et postea deseruerunt eandem ciuitatem Romanis cognatam, non rebellantem aduersus Romam nobilem filiam, sed iustioribus eius partibus fidem constantissimam piissimamque seruantem, eamque delendam reliquerunt non Graecorum uiris fortibus, sed uiro spurcissimo Romanorum? Aut si displicebat dis causa partium Syllanarum, cui seruantes urbem miseri portas clauserant: quur eidem Syllae tanta bona promittebant et praenuntiabant? An et hic agnoscuntur adulatores felicium potius quam infelicium defensores? Non ergo Ilium etiam tunc, ab eis cum desereretur, euersum est. Nam daemones ad decipiendum semper uigilantissimi, quod potuerunt, fecerunt. Euersis quippe et incensis omnibus cum oppido simulacris solum Mineruae sub tanta ruina templi illius, ut scribit Liuius, integrum stetisse perhibetur, non ut [diceretur] Di patrii, quorum semper sub numine Troia est, ad eorum laudem, sed ne diceretur: Excessere omnes adytis arisque relictis Di, ad eorum defensionem. Illud enim posse permissi sunt, non unde probarentur potentes, sed unde praesentes conuincerentur. ### Whether Rome Ought to Have Been Entrusted to the Trojan Gods. [¶4] Chapter 8.—Whether Rome Ought to Have Been Entrusted to the Trojan Gods. > Latin: Caput VIII. An debuerit dis Iliacis Roma committi. [¶5] Where, then, was the wisdom of entrusting Rome to the Trojan gods, who had demonstrated their weakness in the loss of Troy? Will some one say that, when Fimbria stormed Troy, the gods were already resident in Rome? How, then, did the image of Minerva remain standing? Besides, if they were at Rome when Fimbria destroyed Troy, perhaps they were at Troy when Rome itself was taken and set on fire by the Gauls. But as they are very acute in hearing, and very swift in their movements, they came quickly at the cackling of the goose to defend at least the Capitol, though to defend the rest of the city they were too long in being warned. > Latin: ,Dis itaque Iliacis post Troiae ipsius documentum qua tandem prudentia Roma custodienda commissa est? Dixerit quispiam iam eos Romae habitare solitos, quando expugnante Fimbria cecidit Ilium. Unde ergo stetit Mineruae simulacrum? Deinde, si aput Romam erant, quando Fimbria deleuit ilium, fortasse aput Ilium erant,. quando a Gallis ipsa Roma capta et incensa est; sed ut sunt auditu acutissimi motuque celerrimi, ad uocem anseris cito redierunt, ut saltem Capitolinum collem, qui remanserat, tuerentur; ceterum ad alia defendenda serius sunt redire commoniti. ### Whether It is Credible that the Peace During the Reign of Numa Was Brought About by the Gods. [¶7] Chapter 9.—Whether It is Credible that the Peace During the Reign of Numa Was Brought About by the Gods. > Latin: Caput IX. An illam pacem, quae sub Numae regno fuit, deos praestitisse credendum sit. [¶8] It is also believed that it was by the help of the gods that the successor of Romulus, Numa Pompilius, enjoyed peace during his entire reign, and shut the gates of Janus, which are customarily kept open during war. And it is supposed he was thus requited for appointing many religious observances among the Romans. Certainly that king would have commanded our congratulations for so rare a leisure, had he been wise enough to spend it on wholesome pursuits, and, subduing a pernicious curiosity, had sought out the true God with true piety. But as it was, the gods were not the authors of his leisure; but possibly they would have deceived him less had they found him busier. For the more disengaged they found him, the more they themselves occupied his attention. Varro informs us of all his efforts, and of the arts he employed to associate these gods with himself and the city; and in its own place, if God will, I shall discuss these matters. Meanwhile, as we are speaking of the benefits conferred by the gods, I readily admit that peace is a great benefit; but it is a benefit of the true God, which, like the sun, the rain, and other supports of life, is frequently conferred on the ungrateful and wicked. But if this great boon was conferred on Rome and Pompilius by their gods, why did they never afterwards grant it to the Roman empire during even more meritorious periods? Were the sacred rites more efficient at their first institution than during their subsequent celebration? But they had no existence in Numa’s time, until he added them to the ritual; whereas afterwards they had already been celebrated and preserved, that benefit might arise from them. How, then, is it that those forty-three, or as others prefer it, thirty-nine years of Numa’s reign, were passed in unbroken peace, and yet that afterwards, when the worship was established, and the gods themselves, who were invoked by it, were the recognized guardians and pa trons of the city, we can with difficulty find during the whole period, from the building of the city to the reign of Augustus, one year—that, viz., which followed the close of the first Punic war—in which, for a marvel, the Romans were able to shut the gates of war? > Latin: Hi etiam Numam Pompilium successorem Romuli adiuuisse creduntur, ut toto regni sui tempore pacem haberet et Iani portas, quae bellis patere adsolent, clauderet, eo merito scilicet, quia Romanis multa sacra constituit. Illi uero homini pro tanto otio gratulandum fuit, si modo id rebus salubribus scisset inpendere et perniciosissima curiositate neglecta Deum uerum uera pietate perquirere. Nunc autem non ei di contulerunt illud otium, sed eum minus fortasse decepissent, si otiosum minime repperissent. Quanto enim minus eum occupatum inuenerunt, tanto magis ipsi occupauerunt. Nam quid ille molitus sit et quibus artibus deos tales sibi uel illi ciuitati consociare potuerit, Varro prodit, quod, si Domino placuerit, suo diligentius disseretur loco. Modo autem quia de beneficiis eorum quaestio est: magnum beneficium est pax, sed Dei ueri beneficium est, plerumque etiam sicut sol, sicut pluuia uitaeque alia subsidia super ingratos et nequam. Sed si hoc tam magnum bonum di illi Romae uel Pompilio contulerunt, quur imperio Romano per ipsa tempora laudabilia id numquam postea praestiterunt? An utiliora erant sacra, cum instituerentur, quam cum instituta celebrarentur? Atqui tunc nondum erant, sed ut essent addebantur; postea uero iam erant, quae ut prodessent custodiebantur. Quid ergo est, quod illi quadraginta tres uel, ut alii uolunt, triginta et nouem anni in tam longa pace transacti sunt regnante Numa, et postea sacris institutis disque ipsis, qui eisdem sacris fuerant inuitati, iam praesidibus adque tutoribus uix post tam multos annos ab Urbe condita usque ad Augustum pro magno miraculo unus commemoratur annus post primum bellum Punicum, quo belli portas Romani claudere potuerunt? ### Whether It Was Desirable that The Roman Empire Should Be Increased by Such a Furious Succession of Wars, When It Might Have Been Quiet and Safe by Following in the Peaceful Ways of Numa. [¶10] Chapter 10.—Whether It Was Desirable that The Roman Empire Should Be Increased by Such a Furious Succession of Wars, When It Might Have Been Quiet and Safe by Following in the Peaceful Ways of Numa. > Latin: Caput X. An optandum fuerit, ut tanta bellorum rabie Romanum augeretur imperium, cum eo studio, quo sub Numa actum est, et quietum esse potuisset et tutum. [¶11] Do they reply that the Roman empire could never have been so widely extended, nor so glorious, save by constant and unintermitting wars? A fit argument, truly! Why must a kingdom be distracted in order to be great? In this little world of man’s body, is it not better to have a moderate stature, and health with it, than to attain the huge dimensions of a giant by unnatural torments, and when you attain it to find no rest, but to be pained the more in proportion to the size of your members? What evil would have resulted, or rather what good would not have resulted, had those times continued which Sallust sketched, when he says, “At first the kings (for that was the first title of empire in the world) were divided in their sentiments: part cultivated the mind, others the body: at that time the life of men was led without coveteousness; every one was sufficiently satisfied with his own!” Was it requisite, then, for Rome’s prosperity, that the state of things which Virgil reprobates should succeed: > Latin: An respondent, quod nisi adsiduis sibique continuo succedentibus bellis Romanum imperium tam longe lateque non posset augeri et tam grandi gloria diffamari? Idonea uero causa! Ut magnum esset imperium, quur esse deberet inquietum? Nonne in corporibus hominum satius est modicam staturam cum sanitate habere quam ad molem aliquam giganteam perpetuis adflictionibus peruenire, nec cum perueneris requiescere, sed quanto grandioribus membris, tanto maioribus agitari malis? Quid autem mali esset, ac non potius plurimum boni, si ea tempora perdurarent, quae perstrinxit Sallustius, ubi ait: ‘Igitur initio reges (nam in terris nomen imperii id primum fuit) diuersi pars ingenium, alii corpus exercebant; etiamtum uita hominum sine cupiditate agitabatur, sua cuique satis placebant’. [¶12] “At length stole on a baser age [¶13] And war’s indomitable rage, > Latin: An ut tam multum augeretur imperium, debuit fieri quod Vergilius detestatur, dicens: Deterior donec paulatim et decolor aetas Et belli rabies et amor successit habendi? [¶14] And greedy lust of gain?” [¶15] But obviously the Romans have a plausible defence for undertaking and carrying on such disastrous wars,—to wit, that the pressure of their enemies forced them to resist, so that they were compelled to fight, not by any greed of human applause, but by the necessity of protecting life and liberty. Well, let that pass. Here is Sallust’s account of the matter: “For when their state, enriched with laws, institutions, territory, seemed abundantly prosperous and sufficiently powerful, according to the ordinary law of human nature, opulence gave birth to envy. Accordingly, the neighboring kings and states took arms and assaulted them. A few allies lent assistance; the rest, struck with fear, kept aloof from dangers. But the Romans, watchful at home and in war, were active, made preparations, encouraged one another, marched to meet their enemies,—protected by arms their liberty, country, parents. Afterwards, when they had repelled the dangers by their bravery, they carried help to their allies and friends, and procured alliances more by conferring than by receiving favors.” This was to build up Rome’s greatness by honorable means. But, in Numa’s reign, I would know whether the long peace was maintained in spite of the incursions of wicked neighbors, or if these incursions were discontinued that the peace might be maintained? For if even then Rome was harassed by wars, and yet did not meet force with force, the same means she then used to quiet her enemies without conquering them in war, or terrifying them with the onset of battle, she might have used always, and have reigned in peace with the gates of Janus shut. And if this was not in her power, then Rome enjoyed peace not at the will of her gods, but at the will of her neighbors round about, and only so long as they cared to provoke her with no war, unless perhaps these pitiful gods will dare to sell to one man as their favor what lies not in their power to bestow, but in the will of another man. These demons, indeed, in so far as they are permitted, can terrify or incite the minds of wicked men by their own peculiar wickedness. But if they always had this power, and if no action were taken against their efforts by a more secret and higher power, they would be supreme to give peace or the victories of war, which almost always fall out through some human emotion, and frequently in opposition to the will of the gods, as is proved not only by lying legends, which scarcely hint or signify any grain of truth, but even by Roman history itself. > Latin: Sed plane pro tantis bellis susceptis et gestis iusta defensio Romanorum est, quod inruentibus sibi inportune inimicis resistere cogebat non auiditas adipiscendae laudis humanae, sed necessitas tuendae salutis et libertatis. Ita sit plane. Nam postquam res eorum, sicut scribit ipse Sallustius, legibus moribus agris aucta satis prospera satisque pollens uidebatur, sicut pleraque mortalium habentur, inuidia ex opulentia orta est. Igitur reges populique finitimi bello tentare; pauci ex amicis auxilio esse, nam ceteri metu perculsi a periculis aberant. At Romani domi militiaeque intenti festinare parare, alius alium hortari, hostibus obuiam ire, libertatem patriam parentesque armis tegere. Post ubi pericula uirtute propulerant, sociis adque amicis auxilia portabant magisque dandis quam accipiendis beneficiis amicitias parabant). Decenter his artibus Roma creuit. Sed regnante Numa, ut tam longa pax esset, utrum inruebant inprobi belloque tentabant, an nihil eorum fiebat, ut posset pax illa persistere? Si enim bellis etiam tum Roma lacessebatur nec armis arma obuia ferebantur: quibus modis agebatur, ut nulla pugna superati, nullo Martio impetu territi sedarentur inimici, his modis semper ageretur et semper Roma clausis Iani portis pacata regnaret. Quod si in potestate non fuit, non ergo Roma pacem habuit, quamdiu di eorum, sed quamdiu homines finitimi circumquaque uoluerunt, qui eam nullo bello prouocauerunt; nisi forte di tales etiam id homini uendere audebunt, quod alius homo uoluit siue noluit. Interest quidem iam uitio proprio, malas mentes quatenus sinantur isti daemones uel terrere uel excitare; sed I si semper hoc possent nec aliud secretiore ac superiore potestate contra eorum conatum saepe aliter ageretur, semper in potestate haberent paces bellicasque uictorias, quae semper fere per humanorum animorum motus accidunt; quas tamen plerumque contra eorum fieri uoluntatem non solae fabulae multa mentientes et uix ueri aliquid uel indicantes uel significantes, sed etiam ipsa Romana confitetur historia. ### Of the Statue of Apollo at Cumæ, Whose Tears are Supposed to Have Portended Disaster to the Greeks, Whom the God Was Unable to Succor. [¶17] Chapter 11.—Of the Statue of Apollo at Cumæ, Whose Tears are Supposed to Have Portended Disaster to the Greeks, Whom the God Was Unable to Succor. > Latin: Caput XI. De simulacro Cumani Apollinis, cuius fletus crecreditus est cladem Graecorum, quibus opitulari non poterat, indicasse. [¶18] And it is still this weakness of the gods which is confessed in the story of the Cuman Apollo, who is said to have wept for four days during the war with the Achæans and King Aristonicus. And when the augurs were alarmed at the portent, and had determined to cast the statue into the sea, the old men of Cumæ interposed, and related that a similar prodigy had occurred to the same image during the wars against Antiochus and against Perseus, and that by a decree of the senate, gifts had been presented to Apollo, because the event had proved favorable to the Romans. Then soothsayers were summoned who were supposed to have greater professional skill, and they pronounced that the weeping of Apollo’s image was propitious to the Romans, because Cumæ was a Greek colony, and that Apollo was bewailing (and thereby presaging) the grief and calamity that was about to light upon his own land of Greece, from which he had been brought. Shortly afterwards it was reported that King Aristonicus was defeated and made prisoner,—a defeat certainly opposed to the will of Apollo; and this he indicated by even shedding tears from his marble image. And this shows us that, though the verses of the poets are mythical, they are not altogether devoid of truth, but describe the manners of the demons in a sufficiently fit style. For in Virgil, Diana mourned for Camilla, and Hercules wept for Pallas doomed to die. This is perhaps the reason why Numa Pompilius, too, when, enjoying prolonged peace, but without knowing or inquiring from whom he received it, he began in his leisure to consider to what gods he should entrust the safe keeping and conduct of Rome, and not dreaming that the true, almighty, and most high God cares for earthly affairs, but recollecting only that the Trojan gods which Æneas had brought to Italy had been able to preserve neither the Trojan nor Lavinian kingdom rounded by Æneas himself, concluded that he must provide other gods as guardians of fugitives and helpers of the weak, and add them to those earlier divinities who had either come over to Rome with Romulus, or when Alba was destroyed. > Latin: Neque enim aliunde Apollo ille Cumanus, cum aduersus Achiuos regemque Aristonicum bellaretur, quatriduo fleuisse nuntiatus est; quo prodigio haruspices territi cum id simulacrum in mare putauissent esse proiciendum, Cumani senes intercesserunt adque rettulerunt tale prodigium et Antiochi et Persis bello in eodem apparuisse figmento, et quia Romanis feliciter prouenisset, ex senatus consulto eidem Apollini suo dona missa esse testati sunt. Tunc uelut peritiores acciti haruspices responderunt simulacri Apollinis fletum ideo prosperum esse Romanis, quoniam Cumana colonia Graeca esset, suisque terris, unde accitus esset, id est ipsi Graeciae, luctum et cladem Apollinem significasse plorantem. Deinde mox regem Aristonicum uictum et captum esse nuntiatum est, quem uinci utique Apollo nolebat et dolebat et hoc sui lapidis etiam lacrimis indicabat. Unde non usquequaque incongrue quamuis fabulosis, tamen ueritati similibus mores daemonum describuntur carminibus poetarum. Nam Camillam Diana doluit aput Vergilium et Pallantem moriturum Hercules fleuit. Hinc fortassis et Numa Pompilius pace abundans, sed quo donante nesciens nec requirens, cum cogitaret otiosus, quibusnam dis tuendam Romanam salutem regnumque committeret, nec uerum illum adque omnipotentem summum Deum curare opinaretur ista terrena, adque recoleret Troianos deos, quos Aeneas aduexerat, neque Troianum neque Lauiniense ab ipso Aenea conditum regnum diu conseruare potuisse: alios prouidendos existimauit, quos illis prioribus, qui siue cum Romulo iam Romam transierant, siue quandoque Alba euersa fuerant transituri, uel tamquam fugitiuis custodes adhiberet uel tamquam inualidis adiutores. ### That the Romans Added a Vast Number of Gods to Those Introduced by Numa, and that Their Numbers Helped Them Not at All. [¶20] Chapter 12.—That the Romans Added a Vast Number of Gods to Those Introduced by Numa, and that Their Numbers Helped Them Not at All. > Latin: Caput XII. Quantos sibi deos Romani praeter constitutionem Numae adiecerint, quorum eos numerositas nihil iuuerit. [¶21] But though Pompilius introduced so ample a ritual, yet did not Rome see fit to be content with it. For as yet Jupiter himself had not his chief temple,—it being King Tarquin who built the Capitol. And Æsculapius left Epidaurus for Rome, that in this foremost city he might have a finer field for the exercise of his great medical skill. The mother of the gods, too, came I know not whence from Pessinuns; it being unseemly that, while her son presided on the Capitoline hill, she herself should lie hid in obscurity. But if she is the mother of all the gods, she not only followed some of her children to Rome, but left others to follow her. I wonder, indeed, if she were the mother of Cynocephalus, who a long while afterwards came from Egypt. Whether also the goddess Fever was her offspring, is a matter for her grandson Æsculapius to decide. But of whatever breed she be, the foreign gods will not presume, I trust, to call a goddess base-born who is a Roman citizen. Who can number the deities to whom the guardianship of Rome was entrusted? Indigenous and imported, both of heaven, earth, hell, seas, fountains, rivers; and, as Varro says, gods certain and uncertain, male and female: for, as among animals, so among all kinds of gods are there these distinctions. Rome, then, enjoying the protection of such a cloud of deities, might surely have been preserved from some of those great and horrible calamities, of which I can mention but a few. For by the great smoke of her altars she summoned to her protection, as by a beacon-fire, a host of gods, for whom she appointed and maintained temples, altars, sacrifices, priests, and thus offended the true and most high God, to whom alone all this ceremonial is lawfully due. And, indeed, she was more prosperous when she had fewer gods; but the greater she became, the more gods she thought she should have, as the larger ship needs to be manned by a larger crew. I suppose she despaired of the smaller number, under whose protection she had spent comparatively happy days, being able to defend her greatness. For even under the kings (with the exception of Numa Pompilius, of whom I have already spoken), how wicked a contentiousness must have existed to occasion the death of Romulus’ brother! > Latin: Nec his sacris tamen Roma dignata est esse contenta, quae tam multa illic Pompilius constituerat. Nam ipsius summum templum nondum habebat Iouis; rex quippe Tarquinius ibi Capitolium fabricauit; Aesculapius autem ab Epidauro ambiuit ad Romam, ut peritissimus medicus in urbe nobilissima artem gloriosius exerceret; Mater etiam deum nescio unde a Pessinunte. Indignum enim erat, ut, cum eius filius iam colli Capitolino praesideret, adhuc ipsa in loco ignobili latitaret. Quae tamen si omnium deorum mater est, non solum secuta est Romam quosdam filios suos, uerum et alios praecessit etiam secuturos. Miror sane, si ipsa peperit Cynocephalum, qui longe postea uenit ex Aegypto. Utrum etiam dea Febris ex illa nata sit, uiderit Aesculapius pronepos eius; sed undecumque nata sit, non, opinor, audebunt eam dicere ignobilem di peregrini deam ciuem Romanam. Sub hoc tot deorum praesidio (quos numerare quis potest, indigenas et alienigenas, caelites terrestres infernos, marinos fontanos fluuiales, et, ut Varro dicit, certos adque incertos, in omnibusque generibus deorum, sicut in animalibus, mares et feminas?) — sub hoc ergo tot deorum praesidio constituta Roma non tam magnis et horrendis cladibus, quales ex multis paucas commemorabo, agitari adfligique debuit. Nimis enim multos deos grandi fumo suo tamquam signo dato ad tuitionem congregauerat, quibus templa altaria, sacrificia sacerdotes instituendo adque praebendo summum uerum Deum, cui uni haec rite gesta debentur, offenderet. Et felicior quidem cum paucioribus uixit, sed quanto maior facta est, sicut nauis nautas, tanto plures adhibendos putauit; credo, desperans pauciores illos, sub quibus in conparationem peioris uitae melius uixerat, non sufficere ad opitulandum granditati suae. Primo enim sub ipsis regibus, excepto Numa Pompilio, de quo iam supra locutus sum, quantum malum discordiosi certaminis fuit, quod fratrem Romuli coegit occidi!