1. There is an ancient belief, handed down to us even from mythical times and firmly established by the general agreement of the Roman people and of all nations, that divination of some kind exists among men; this the Greeks call mantikh/—that is, the foresight and knowledge of future events. A really splendid and helpful thing it is—if only such a faculty exists—since by its means men may approach very near to the power of gods. And, just as we Romans have done many other things better than the Greeks, so have we excelled them in giving to this most extraordinary gift a name, which we have derived from divi, a word meaning “gods,” whereas, according to Plato's interpretation, they have derived it from furor, a word meaning “frenzy.”
1. opinio est iam usque ab heroicis ducta temporibus, eaque et populi Romani et omnium gentium firmata consensu, versari quandam inter homines divinationem, quam Graeci μαντικήν appellant, id est praesensionem et scientiam rerum futurarum. quaedam res et salutaris, si modo est ulla, quaque proxime ad deorum vim natura mortalis possit accedere. ut alia nos melius multa quam Graeci, sic huic praestantissimae rei nomen nostri a divis, Graeci, ut Plato interpretatur, a furore duxerunt.
2. Now I am aware of no people, however refined and learned or however savage and ignorant, which does not think that signs are given of future events, and that certain persons can recognize those signs and foretell events before they occur. First of all—to seek authority from the most distant sources—the Assyrians, on account of the vast plains inhabited by them, and because of the open and unobstructed view of the heavens presented to them on every side, took observations of the paths and movements of the stars, and, having made note of them, transmitted to posterity what significance they had for each person. And in that same nation the Chaldeans—a name which they derived not from their art but their race —have, it is thought, by means of long-continued observation of the constellations, perfected a science which enables them to foretell what any man's lot will be and for what fate he was born. The same art is believed to have been acquired also by the Egyptians through a remote past extending over almost countless ages. Moreover, the Cilicians, Pisidians, and their neighbours, the Pamphylians—nations which I once governed—think that the future is declared by the songs and flights of birds, which they regard as most infallible signs.
2. quidem nullam video neque tam humanam atque doctam neque tam immanem atque barbaram, quae non significari futura et a quibusdam intellegi praedicique posse censeat. Assyrii, ut ab ultimis auctoritatem repetam, propter planitiem magnitudinemque regionum, quas incolebant, cum caelum ex omni parte patens atque apertum intuerentur, traiectiones motusque stellarum observitaverunt, quibus notatis, quid cuique significaretur memoriae prodiderunt. in natione Chaldaei, non ex artis sed ex gentis vocabulo nominati, diuturna observatione siderum scientiam putantur effecisse, ut praedici posset quid cuique eventurum et quo quisque fato natus esset. artem etiam Aegyptii longinquitate temporum innumerabilibus paene saeculis consecuti putantur. Cilicum autem et Pisidarum gens et his finitima Pamphylia, quibus nationibus praefuimus ipsi, volatibus avium cantibusque certissimis signis declarari res futuras putant.
3. And, indeed, what colony did Greece ever send into Aeolia, Ionia, Asia, Sicily, or Italy without consulting the Pythian or Dodonian oracle, or that of Jupiter Hammon? Or what war did she ever undertake without first seeking the counsel of the gods? Nor is it only one single mode of divination that has been employed in public and in private. For, to say nothing of other nations, how many our own people have embraced! In the first place, according to tradition, Romulus, the father of this City, not only founded it in obedience to the auspices, but was himself a most skilful augur. Next, the other Roman kings employed augurs; and, again, after the expulsion of the kings, no public business was ever transacted at home or abroad without first taking the auspices. Furthermore, since our fore- fathers believed that the soothsayers' art had great efficacy in seeking for omens and advice, as well as in cases where prodigies were to be interpreted and their effects averted, they gradually introduced that art in its entirety from Etruria, lest it should appear that any kind of divination had been disregarded by them.
3. vero Graecia coloniam misit in Aeoliam, Ioniam, Asiam, Siciliam, Italíam sine Pythio aut Dodonaeo aut Hammonis oraculo? aut quod bellum susceptum ab ea sine consilio deorum est? unum genus est divinationis publice privatimque celebratum., ut omittam ceteros populos, noster quam multa genera complexus est! huius urbis parens Romulus non solum auspicato urbem condidisse, sed ipse etiam optimus augur fuisse traditur. auguribus et reliqui reges usi, et exactis regibus, nihil publice sine auspiciis nec domi nec militiae gerebatur. magna vis videretur esse et inpetriendis consulendisque rebus et monstris interpretandis ac procurandis in haruspicum disciplina, omnem hanc ex Etruria scientiam adhibebant, ne genus esset ullum divinationis, quod neglectum ab eis videretur.
4. And since they thought that the human mind, when in an irrational and unconscious state, and moving by its own free and untrammelled impulse, was inspired in two ways, the one by frenzy and the other by dreams, and since they believed that the divination of frenzy was contained chiefly in the Sibylline verses, they decreed that ten men should be chosen from the State to interpret those verses. In this same category also were the frenzied prophecies of soothsayers and seers, which our ancestors frequently thought worthy of belief—like the prophecies of Cornelius Culleolus, during the Octavian War. Nor, indeed, were the more significant dreams, if they seemed to concern the administration of public affairs, disregarded by our Supreme Council. Why, even within my own memory, Lucius Julius, who was consul with Publius Rutilius, by a vote of the Senate rebuilt the temple of Juno, the Saviour, in accordance with a dream of Caecilia, daughter of Balearicus.
4. cum duobus modis animi sine ratione et scientia motu ipsi suo soluto et libero incitarentur, uno furente, altero somniante, furoris divinationem Sibyllinis maxime versibus contineri arbitrati eorum decem interpretes delectos e civitate esse voluerunt. quo genere saepe hariolorum etiam et vatum furibundas praedictiones, ut Octaviano bello Cornelii Culleoli, audiendas putaverunt. vero somnia graviora, si quae ad rem publicam pertinere visa sunt, a summo consilio neglecta sunt. etiam memoria nostra templum Iunonis Sospitae L. Iulius, qui cum P. Rutilio consul fuit, de senatus sententia refecit ex Caeciliae, Baliarici filiae, somnio.
5. Now my opinion is that, in sanctioning such usages, the ancients were influenced more by actual results than convinced by reason. However certain very subtle arguments to prove the trustworthiness of divination have been gathered by philosophers. Of these—to mention the most ancient—Xenophanes of Colophon, while asserting the existence of gods, was the only one who repudiated divination in its entirety; but all the others, with the exception of Epicurus, who babbled about the nature of the gods, approved of divination, though not in the same degree. For example, Socrates and all of the Socratic School, and Zeno and his followers, continued in the faith of the ancient philosophers and in agreement with the Old Academy and with the Peripatetics. Their predecessor, Pythagoras, who even wished to be considered an augur himself, gave the weight of his great name to the same practice; and that eminent author, Democritus, in many passages, strongly affirmed his belief in a presentiment of things to come. Moreover, Dicaearchus, the Peripatetic, though he accepted divination by dreams and frenzy, cast away all other kinds; and my intimate friend, Cratippus, whom I consider the peer of the greatest of the Peripatetics, also gave credence to the same kinds of divination but rejected the rest.
5. haec, ut ego arbitror, veteres rerum magis eventis moniti quam ratione docti probaverunt. vero exquisita quaedam argumenta, cur esset vera divinatio, collecta sunt. E quibus, ut de antiquissimis loquar, Colophonius Xenophanes unus, qui deos esse diceret, divinationem funditus sustulit; reliqui vero omnes praeter Epicurum balbutientem de natura deorum divinationem probaverunt, sed non uno modo. cum Socrates omnesque Socratici Zenoque et ei qui ab eo essent profecti manerent in antiquorum philosophorum sententia vetere Academia et Peripateticis consentientibus; cumque huic rei magnam auctoritatem Pythagoras iam ante tribuisset, qui etiam ipse augur vellet esse, plurimisque locis gravis auctor Democritus praesensionem rerum futurarum comprobaret, Dicaearchus Peripateticus cetera divinationis genera sustulit, somniorum et furoris reliquit; Cratippus quoque familiaris noster, quem ego parem summis Peripateticis iudico, eisdem rebus fidem tribuit, reliqua divinationis genera reiecit.
6. The Stoics, on the other hand (for Zeno in his writings had, as it were, scattered certain seed which Cleanthes had fertilized somewhat), defended nearly every sort of divination. Then came Chrysippus, a man of the keenest intellect, who exhaustively discussed the whole theory of divination in two books, and, besides, wrote one book on oracles and another on dreams. And following him, his pupil, Diogenes of Babylon, published one book, Antipater two, and my friend, Posidonius, five. But Panaetius, the teacher of Posidonius, a pupil, too, of Antipater, and, even a pillar of the Stoic school, wandered off from the Stoics, and, though he dared not say that there was no efficacy in divination, yet he did say that he was in doubt. Then, since the Stoics—much against their will I grant you—permitted this famous Stoic to doubt on one point will they not grant to us Academicians the right to do the same on all other points, especially since that about which Panaetius is not clear is clearer than the light of day to the other members of the Stoic school?
6. cum Stoici omnia fere illa defenderent, quod et Zeno in suis commentariis quasi semina quaedam sparsisset et ea Cleanthes paulo uberiora fecisset, accessit acerrimo vir ingenio, Chrysippus, qui totam de divinatione duobus libris explicavit sententiam, uno praeterea de oraculis, uno de somniis; quem subsequens unum librum Babylonius Diogenes edidit, eius auditor, duo Antipater, quinque noster Posidonius. a Stoicis vel princeps eius disciplinae, Posidonii doctor, discipulus Antipatri, degeneravit Panaetius; nec tamen ausus est negare vim esse divinandi, sed dubitare se dixit. illi in aliqua re invitissimis Stoicis Stoico facere licuit, id nos ut in reliquis rebus faciamus, a Stoicis non concedetur, praesertim cum id, de quo Panaetio non liquet, reliquis eiusdem disciplinae solis luce videatur clarius?
7. At any rate, this praiseworthy tendency of the Academy to doubt has been approved by the solemn judgement of a most eminent philosopher. Accordingly, since I, too, am in doubt as to the proper judgement to be rendered in regard to divination because of the many pointed and exhaustive arguments urged by Carneades against the Stoic view, and since I am afraid of giving a too hasty assent to a proposition which may turn out either false or insufficiently established, I have determined carefully and persistently to compare argument with argument just as I did in my three books On the Nature of the Gods. For a hasty acceptance of an erroneous opinion is discreditable in any case, and especially so in an inquiry as to how much weight should be given to auspices, to sacred rites, and to religious observances; for we run the risk of committing a crime against the gods if we disregard them, or of becoming involved in old women's superstition if we approve them.
7. haec quidem laus Academiae praestantissimi philosophi iudicio et testimonio comprobata est. nobismet ipsis quaerentibus quid sit de divinatione iudicandum, quod a Carneade multa acute et copiose contra Stoicos disputata sint, verentibusque ne temere vel falsae rei vel non satis cognitae assentiamur, faciendum videtur ut diligenter etiam atque etiam argumenta cum argumentis comparemus, ut fecimus in eis tribus libris quos de natura deorum scripsimus. cum omnibus in rebus temeritas in assentiendo errorque turpis est, tum in eo loco maxime in quo iudicandum est quantum auspiciis rebusque divinis religionique tribuamus; est enim periculum, ne aut neglectis iis impia fraude aut susceptis anili superstitione obligemur.
8. This subject has been discussed by me frequently on other occasions, but with somewhat more than ordinary care when my brother Quintus and I were together recently at my Tusculan villa. For the sake of a stroll we had gone to the Lyceum, which is the name of my upper gymnasium, when Quintus remarked: “I have just finished a careful reading of the third book of your treatise, On the Nature of the Gods, containing Cotta's discussion, which, though it has shaken my views of religion, has not overthrown them entirely.” “Very good,” said I; “for Cotta's argument is intended rather to refute the arguments of the Stoics than to destroy man's faith in religion.” Quintus then replied: “Cotta says the very same thing, and says it repeatedly, in order, as I think, not to appear to violate the commonly accepted canons of belief; yet it seems to me that, in his zeal to confute the Stoics, he utterly demolishes the gods.
8. de rebus et alias saepe et paulo accuratius nuper, cum essem cum Q. fratre in Tusculano, disputatum est. cum ambulandi causa in Lyceum venissemus (id enim superiori gymnasio nomen est), “,” inquit, “tuum paulo ante tertium de Natura Deorum, in quo disputatio Cottae, quamquam labefactavit sententiam meam, non funditus tamen sustulit.” “vero,” inquam; “etenim ipse Cotta sic disputat ut Stoicorum magis argumenta confutet quam hominum deleat religionem.” Quintus: “quidem istuc,” inquit, “a Cotta, et vero saepius, credo, ne communia iura migrare videatur; sed studio contra Stoicos disserendi deos mihi videtur funditus tollere.”
9. However, I am really at no loss for a reply to his reasoning; for in the second book Lucilius has made an adequate defence of religion and his argument, as you yourself state at the end of the third book, seemed to you nearer to the truth than Cotta's. But there is a question which you passed over in those books because, no doubt, you thought it more expedient to inquire into it in a separate discussion: I refer to divination, which is the foreseeing and foretelling of events considered as happening by chance. Now let us see, if you will, what efficacy it has and what its nature is. My own opinion is that, if the kinds of divination which we have inherited from our forefathers and now practise are trustworthy, then there are gods and, conversely, if there are gods then there are men who have the power of divination.”
9. rationi non sane desidero quid respondeam; satis enim defensa religio est in secundo libro a Lucilio, cuius disputatio tibi ipsi, ut in extremo tertio scribis, ad veritatem est visa propensior., quod praetermissum est in illis libris (credo, quia commodius arbitratus es separatim id quaeri deque eo disseri), id est de divinatione, quae est earum rerum, quae fortuitae putantur, praedictio atque praesensio., si placet, videamus quam habeat vim et quale sit. enim sic existimo, si sint ea genera divinandi vera, de quibus accepimus quaeque colimus, esse deos, vicissimque, si di sint, esse qui divinent.
10. “Why, my dear Quintus,” said I, “you are defending the very citadel of the Stoics in asserting the interdependence of these two propositions: 'if there is divination there are gods,' and,' if there are gods there is divination.' But neither is granted as readily as you think. For it is possible that nature gives signs of future events without the intervention of a god, and it may be that there are gods without their having conferred any power of divination upon men.” To this he replied: “I, at any rate, find sufficient proof to satisfy me of the existence of gods and of their concern in human affairs in my conviction that there are some kinds of divination which are clear and manifest. With your permission I will set forth my views on this subject, provided you are at leisure and have nothing else which you think should be preferred to such a discussion.”
10. “tu quidem Stoicorum,” inquam, “Quinte, defendis, siquidem ista sic reciprocantur, ut et, si divinatio sit, di sint et, si di sint, sit divinatio. Quorum neutrum tam facile quam tu arbitraris conceditur. et natura significari futura sine deo possunt, et ut sint di potest fieri ut nulla ab eis divinatio generi humano tributa sit.” ille: “vero,” inquit, “satis est argumenti et esse deos et eos consulere rebus humanis, quod esse clara et perspicua divinationis genera iudico. De quibus quid ipse sentiam, si placet, exponam, ita tamen, si vacas animo neque habes aliquid, quod huic sermoni praevertendum putes.”
11. “Really, my dear Quintus,” said I, “I always have time for philosophy. Moreover, since there is nothing else at this time that I can do with pleasure, I am all the more eager to hear what you think about divination.” “There is, I assure you,” said he, "nothing new or original in my views; for those which I adopt are not only very old, but they are endorsed by the consent of all peoples and nations. There are two kinds of divination: the first is dependent on art, the other on nature.
11. “vero,” inquam, “philosophiae, Quinte, semper vaco; hoc autem tempore, cum sit nihil aliud quod libenter agere possim, multo magis aveo audire de divinatione quid sentias.” “,” inquit, “equidem novi, nec quod praeter ceteros ipse sentiam; nam cum antiquissimam sententiam, tum omnium populorum et gentium consensu comprobatam sequor. sunt enim divinandi genera, quorum alterum artis est, alterum naturae.”
12. Now—to mention those almost entirely dependent on art—what nation or what state disregards the prophecies of soothsayers, or of interpreters of prodigies and lightnings, or of augurs, or of astrologers, or of oracles, or—to mention the two kinds which are classed as natural means of divination—the forewarnings of dreams, or of frenzy? Of these methods of divining it behoves us, I think, to examine the results rather than the causes. For there is a certain natural power, which now, through long-continued observation of signs and now, through some divine excitement and inspiration, makes prophetic announcement of the future. "Therefore let Carneades cease to press the question, which Panaetius also used to urge, whether Jove had ordered the crow to croak on the left side and the raven on the right. Such signs as these have been observed for an unlimited time, and the results have been checked and recorded. Moreover, there is nothing which length of time cannot accomplish and attain when aided by memory to receive and records to preserve.
12. “est autem gens aut quae civitas quae non aut extispicum aut monstra aut fulgora interpretantium, aut augurum, aut astrologorum, aut sortium (ea enim fere artis sunt), aut somniorum aut vaticinationum (haec enim duo naturalia putantur), praedictione moveatur? quidem rerum eventa magis arbitror quam causas quaeri oportere. Est enim vis et natura quaedam, quae tum observatis longo tempore significationibus, tum aliquo instinctu inflatuque divino futura praenuntiat.” “Quare omittat urguere Carneades, quod faciebat etiam Panaetius requirens, Iuppiterne cornicem a laeva, corvum ab dextera, canere iussisset. sunt haec tempore immenso et eventis animadversa et notata. est autem quod non longinquitas temporum excipiente memoria prodendisque monumentis efficere atque assequi possit.”
13. We may wonder at the variety of herbs that have been observed by physicians, of roots that are good for the bites of wild beasts, for eye affections, and for wounds, and though reason has never explained their force and nature, yet through their usefulness they have won approval for the medical art and for their discoverer. "But come, let us consider instances, which although outside the category of divination, yet resemble it very closelyThe heaving sea oft warns of coming storms,When suddenly its depths begin to swell;And hoary rocks, o'erspread with snowy brine,To the sea, in boding tones, attempt reply;Or when from lofty mountain-peak upspringsA shrilly whistling wind, which stronger growsWith each repulse by hedge of circling cliffs. "Your book, Prognostics, is full of such warning signs, but who can fathom their causes? And yet I see that the Stoic Boëthus has attempted to do so and has succeeded to the extent of explaining the phenomena of sea and sky.
13. “licet quae sint animadversa a medicis herbarum genera, quae radicum ad morsus bestiarum, ad oculorum morbos, ad vulnera, quorum vim atque naturam ratio numquam explicavit, utilitate et ars est et inventor probatus.” “Age ea, quae quamquam ex alio genere sunt, tamen divinationi sunt similiora, videamus:atque etiam ventos praemonstrat saepe futurosinflatum mare, cum subito penitusque tumescit,saxaque cana salis niveo spumata liquoretristificas certant Neptuno reddere voces,aut densus stridor cum celso e vertice montisortus adaugescit scopulorum saepe repulsus.” “Atque his rerum praesensionibus Prognostica tua referta sunt. igitur elicere causas praesensionum potest? video Boëthum Stoicum esse conatum, qui hactenus aliquid egit, ut earum rationem rerum explicaret, quae in mari caelove fierent.”
14. But who can give a satisfactory reason why the following things occur?Blue-grey herons, in fleeing the raging abyss of the ocean,Utter their warnings, discordant and wild, from tremulous gullets,Shrilly proclaiming that storms are impending and laden with terrors.Often at dawn, when Aurora releases the frost in the dew-drops,Does the nightingale pour from its breast predictions of evil;Then does it threaten and hurl from its throat its incessant complaining.Often the dark-hued crow, while restlessly roaming the seashore,Plunges its crest in the flood, as its neck encounters the billows.
14. “vero cur eveniant, quis probabiliter dixerit?”rava fulix itidem fugiens e gurgite pontinuntiat horribilis clamans instare procellashaud modicos tremulo fundens e gutture cantus.saepe etiam pertriste canit de pectore carmenet matutinis acredula vocibus instat,vocibus instat et assiduas iacit ore querellas,cum primum gelidos rores aurora remittit.fuscaque non numquam cursans per litora cornixdemersit caput et fluctum cervice recepit.
15. "Hardly ever do we see such signs deceive us and yet we do not see why it is so.Ye, too, distinguish the signs, ye dwellers in waters delightful,When, with a clamour, you utter your cries that are empty of meaning,Stirring the fountains and ponds with absurd and ridiculous croaking.Who could suppose that frogs had this foresight? And yet they do have by nature some faculty of premonition, clear enough of itself, but too dark for human comprehension.Slow, clumsy oxen, their glances upturned to the light of the heavens,Sniff at the air with their nostrils and know it is freighted with moisture.I do not ask why, since I know what happens.Now 'tis a fact that the evergreen mastic, e'er burdened with leafage,Thrice is expanding and budding and thrice producing its berries;Triple its signs for the purpose of showing three seasons for ploughing.
15. “Videmus haec signa numquam fere mentientia nec tamen cur ita fiat videmus.vos quoque signa videtis, aquai dulcis alumnae,cum clamore paratis inanis fundere vocesabsurdoque sono fontis et stagna cietis.est qui ranunculos hoc videre suspicari possit? inest in ranunculis vis et natura quaedam significans aliquid per se ipsa satis certa, cognitioni autem hominum obscurior.mollipedesque boves spectantes lumina caelinaribus umiferum duxere ex aëre sucum.quaero cur, quoniam quid eveniat intellego.iam vero semper viridis semperque gravatalentiscus triplici solita grandescere fetuter fruges fundens tria tempora monstrat arandi.”
16. Nor do I ever inquire why this tree alone blooms three times, or why it makes the appearance of its blossoms accord with the proper time for ploughing. I am content with my knowledge that it does, although I may not know why. Therefore, as regards all kinds of divination I will give the same answer that I gave in the cases just mentioned. "I see the purgative effect of the scammony root and I see an antidote for snake-bite in the aristolochia plant —which, by the way, derives its name from its discoverer who learned of it in a dream —I see their power and that is enough; why they have it I do not know. Thus as to the cause of those premonitory signs of winds and rains already mentioned I am not quite clear, but their force and effect I recognize, understand, and vouch for. Likewise as to the cleft or thread in the entrails: I accept their meaning; I do not know their cause. And life is full of individuals in just the same situation that I am in, for nearly everybody employs entrails in divining. Again: is it possible for us to doubt the prophetic value of lightning? Have we not many instances of its marvels? and is not the following one especially remarkable? When the statue of Summanus which stood on the top of the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus—his statue was then made of clay—was struck by a thunderbolt and its head could not be found anywhere, the soothsayers declared that it had been hurled into the Tiber; and it was discovered in the very spot which they had pointed out.
16. “hoc quidem quaero, cur haec arbor una ter floreat aut cur arandi maturitatem ad signum floris accommodet; hoc sum contentus, quod, etiamsi, cur quidque fiat, ignorem, quid fiat, intellego. omni igitur divinatione idem, quod pro rebus eis, quas commemoravi, respondebo.” “Quid scammoneae radix ad purgandum, quid aristolochia ad morsus serpentium possit—quae nomen ex inventore repperit, rem ipsam inventor ex somnio—video, quod satis est; cur possit, nescio. Sic ventorum et imbrium signa, quae dixi, rationem quam habeant, non satis perspicio; vim et eventum agnosco, scio, approbo., quid fissum in extis, quid fibra valeat, accipio; quae causa sit, nescio. horum quidem plena vita est; extis enim omnes fere utuntur. Quid? de fulgurum vi dubitare num possumus? cum multa alia mirabilia, tum illud in primis? Summanus in fastigio Iovis optimi maximi, qui tum erat fictilis, e caelo ictus esset nec usquam eius simulacri caput inveniretur, haruspices in Tiberim id depulsum esse dixerunt; idque inventum est eo loco qui est ab haruspicibus demonstratus.”
17. “But what authority or what witness can I better employ than yourself? I have even learned by heart and with great pleasure the following lines uttered by the Muse, Urania, in the second book of your poem entitled, My Consulship:First of all, Jupiter, glowing with fire from regions celestial,Turns, and the whole of creation is filled with the light of his glory;And, though the vaults of aether eternal begird and confine him,Yet he, with spirit divine, ever searching the earth and the heavens,Sounds to their innermost depths the thoughts and the actions of mortals.When one has learned the motions and variant paths of the planets,Stars that abide in the seat of the signs, in the Zodiac's girdle,(Spoken of falsely as vagrants or rovers in Greek nomenclature,Whereas in truth their distance is fixed and their speed is determined,)Then will he know that all are controlled by an Infinite Wisdom.
17. “Sed quo potius utar aut auctore aut teste quam te? cuius edidici etiam versus, et lubenter quidem, quos in secundo de Urania Musa pronuntiat:principio aetherio flammatus Iuppiter ignivertitur et totum conlustrat lumine mundum,menteque divina caelum terrasque petessit,quae penitus sensus hominum vitasque retentataetheris aeterni saepta atque inclusa cavernis., si stellarum motus cursusque vagantisnosse velis, quae sint signorum in sede locatae(quae verbo et falsis Graiorum vocibus errant,re vera certo lapsu spatioque feruntur),omnia iam cernes divina mente notata.”
18. You, being consul, at once did observe the swift constellations,Noting the glare of luminous stars in direful conjunction;Then you beheld the tremulous sheen of the Northern aurora,When, on ascending the mountainous heights of snowy Albanus,You offered joyful libations of milk at the Feast of the Latins;Ominous surely the time wherein fell that Feast of the Latins:Many a warning was given, it seemed, of slaughter nocturnal;Then, of a sudden, the moon at her full was blotted from heaven—Hidden her features resplendent, though night was bejewelled with planets;Then did that dolorous herald of War, the torch of Apollo,Mount all aflame to the dome of the sky, to the zenith of heaven,Seeking a place on the westerly slopes, where the sun has its setting;Then did a Roman depart from these radiant abodes of the living,Stricken by terrible lightning from heavens serene and unclouded.Then through the fruit-laden body of earth ran the shock of an earthquake;Spectres at night were observed, appalling and changeful of figure,Giving their warning that war was at hand, and internal commotion;Over all lands there outpoured, from the frenzied bosoms of prophets,Dreadful predictions, gloomy forecasts of impending disaster.
18. “primum astrorum volucris te consule motusconcursusque gravis stellarum ardore micantistu quoque, cum tumulos Albano in monte nivalislustrasti et laeto mactasti lacte Latinas,vidisti et claro tremulos ardore cometas,multaque misceri nocturna strage putasti,quod ferme dirum in tempus cecidere Latinae,eum claram speciem concreto lumine lunaabdidit et subito stellanti nocte perempta est.quid vero Phoebi fax, tristis nuntia belli,quae magnum ad columen flammato ardore volabat,praecipitis caeli partis obitusque petessens?aut cum terribili perculsus fulmine civisluce serenanti vitalia lumina liquit?aut cum se gravido tremefecit corpore tellus?iam vero variae nocturno tempore visaeterribiles formae bellum motusque monebant,multaque per terras vates oracla furentipectore fundebant tristis minitantia casus,” “atque ea, quae lapsu tandem cecidere vetusto,haec fore perpetuis signis clarisque frequentansipse deum genitor caelo terrisque canebat.
19. And the misfortunes which happened at last and were long in their passing—These were foretold by the Father of Gods, in earth and in heaven,Through unmistakable signs that he gave and often repeated.Now, of those prophecies made when Torquatus and Cottawere consuls,—Made by a Lydian diviner, by one of Etruscan extraction—All, in the round of your crowded twelve months, were brought to fulfilment.For high-thundering Jove, as he stood on starry Olympus,Hurled forth his blows at the temples and monuments raised in his honour,And on the Capitol's site he unloosed the bolts of his lightning.Then fell the brazen image of Natta, ancient and honoured:Vanished the tablets of laws long ago divinely enacted;Wholly destroyed were the statues of gods by the heat of the lightning.
19. ea, Torquato quae quondam et consule Cottaediderat Tyrrhenae gentis haruspex,omnia fixa tuus glomerans determinat annus.nam pater altitonans stellanti nixus Olympoipse suos quondam tumulos ac templa petivitet Capitolinis iniecit sedibus ignis.tum species ex aere vetus venerataque Nattaeconcidit, elapsaeque vetusto numine leges,et divom simulacra peremit fulminis ardor.”
20. Here was the Martian beast, the nurse of Roman dominionSuckling with life-giving dew, that issued from udders distended,Children divinely begotten, who sprang from the loins of the War God;Stricken by lightning she toppled to earth, bearing with her the children;Torn from her station, she left the prints of her feet in descending.Then what diviner, in turning the records and tomes of the augurs,Failed to relate the mournful forecasts the Etruscans had written?Seers all advised to beware the monstrous destruction and slaughter,Plotted by Romans who traced their descent from a noble ancestry;Or they proclaimed the law's overthrow with voices insistent,Bidding us rescue the city from flames, and the deities' temples;Fearful they bade us become of horrible chaos and carnage;These, by a rigorous Fate, would be certainly fixed and determined,Were not a sacred statue of Jove, one comely of figure,High on a column erected beforehand, with eyes to the eastward;Then would the people and venerable senate be able to fathomHidden designs, when that statue—its face to the sun at its rising—Should behold from its station the seats of the people and Senate.
20. “silvestris erat Romani nominis altrix,, quae parvos Mavortis semine natosuberibus gravidis vitali rore rigabat;quae tum cum pueris flammato fulminis ictuconcidit atque avolsa pedum vestigia liquit.quis non artis scripta ac monumenta volutansvoces tristificas chartis promebat Etruscis?omnes civili generosa stirpe profectamvitare ingentem cladem pestemque monebant,vel legum exitium constanti voce ferebant,templa deumque adeo flammis urbemque iubebanteripere et stragem horribilem caedemque vereri;atque haec fixa gravi fato ac fundata teneri,ni prius excelsum ad columen formata decoresancta Iovis species claros spectaret in ortus;tum fore ut occultos populus sanctusque senatuscernere conatus posset, si solis ad ortumconversa inde patrum sedes populique videret.”
21. Long was the statue delayed and much was it hindered in making.Finally, you being consul, it stood in its lofty position.Just at the moment of time, which the gods had set and predicted,When on column exalted the sceptre of Jove was illumined,Did Allobrogian voices proclaim to Senate and peopleWhat destruction by dagger and torch was prepared for our country.Rightly, therefore, the ancients whose monuments you have in keeping,Romans whose rule over peoples and cities was just and courageous,Rightly your kindred, foremost in honour and pious devotion,Far surpassing the rest of their fellows in shrewdness and wisdom,Held it a duty supreme to honour the Infinite Godhead.Such were the truths they beheld who painfully searching for wisdomGladly devoted their leisure to study of all that was noble, Who, in Academy's shade and Lyceum's dazzling effulgence,Uttered the brilliant reflections of minds abounding in culture.
21. “tardata diu species multumque morata,consule te, tandem celsa est in sede locata,atque una fixi ac signati temporis horaIuppiter excelsa clarabat sceptra columna,et clades patriae flamma ferroque paratavocibus Allobrogum patribus populoque patebat.igitur veteres, quorum monumenta tenetis,qui populos urbisque modo ac virtute regebant.rite etiam vestri, quorum pietasque fidesquepraestitit et longe vicit sapientia cunctos,praecipue coluere vigenti numine divos.adeo penitus cura videre sagaci,otia qui studiis lacti tenuere decoris,” “inque Academia umbrifera nitidoque Lyceofuderunt claras fecundi pectoris artis.
22. Torn from these studies, in youth's early dawn, your country recalled you,Giving you place in the thick of the struggle for public preferment;Yet, in seeking surcease from the worries and cares that oppress you,Time, that the State leaves free, you devote to us and to learning. "In view, therefore, of your acts, and in view too of your own verses which I have quoted and which were composed with the utmost care, could you be persuaded to controvert the position which I maintain in regard to divination?
22. e quibus ereptum primo iam a flore iuventaete patria in media virtutum mole locavit.tu tamen anxiferas curas requiete relaxas,quod patriae vacat, id studiis nobisque sacrasti.” “Tu igitur animum poteris inducere contra ea, quae a me disputantur de divinatione, dicere, qui et gesseris ea, quae gessisti, et ea, quae pronuntiavi, accuratissime scripseris?”
23. "But what? You ask, Carneades, do you, why these things so happen, or by what rules they may be understood? I confess that I do not know, but that they do so fall out I assert that you yourself see. ' Mere accidents,' you say. Now, really, is that so? Can anything be an 'accident' which bears upon itself every mark of truth? Four dice are cast and a Venus throw results—that is chance; but do you think it would be chance, too, if in one hundred casts you made one hundred Venus throws? It is possible for paints flung at random on a canvas to form the outlines of a face; but do you imagine that an accidental scattering of pigments could produce the beautiful portrait of Venus of Cos? Suppose that a hog should form the letter' A' on the ground with its snout; is that a reason for believing that it could write out Ennius's poem The Andromache? "Carneades used to have a story that once in the Chian quarries when a stone was split open there appeared the head of the infant god Pan; I grant that the figure may have borne some resemblance to the god, but assuredly the resemblance was not such that you could ascribe the work to a Scopas. For it is undeniably true that no perfect imitation of a thing was ever made by chance.
23. “Quid? quaeris, Carneades, cur haec ita fiant aut qua arte perspici possint? me fateor, evenire autem te ipsum dico videre. ‘Casu,’ inquis. vero? quicquam potest casu esse factum, quod omnes habet in se numeros veritatis? tali iacti casu Venerium efficiunt; num etiam centum Venerios, si quadringentos talos ieceris, casu futuros putas? temere pigmenta in tabula oris liniamenta efficere possunt; num etiam Veneris Coae pulchritudinem effici posse aspersione fortuita putas? rostro si humi A litteram impresserit, num propterea suspicari poteris Andromacham Ennii ab ea posse describi? Carneades in Chiorum lapicidinis saxo diffisso caput extitisse Panisci; credo, aliquam non dissimilem figuram, sed certe non talem ut eam factam a Scopa diceres. Sic enim se profecto res habet, ut numquam perfecte veritatem casus imitetur.”
24. "'But,' it is objected, 'sometimes predictions are made which do not come true.' And pray what art—and by art I mean the kind that is dependent on conjecture and deduction—what art, I say, does not have the same fault? Surely the practice of medicine is an art, yet how many mistakes it makes! And pilots—do they not make mistakes at times? For example, when the armies of the Greeks and the captains of their mighty fleet set sail from Troy, they, as Pacuvius says,Glad at leaving Troy behind them, gazed upon the fish at play,Nor could get their fill of gazing—thus they whiled the time away.Meantime, as the sun was setting, high uprose the angry main;Thick and thicker fell the shadows; night grew black with blinding rain.Then, did the fact that so many illustrious captains and kings suffered shipwreck deprive navigation of its right to be called an art? And is military science of no effect because a general of the highest renown recently lost his army and took to flight? Again, is statecraft devoid of method or skill because political mistakes were made many times by Gnaeus Pompey, occasionally by Marcus Cato, and once or twice even by yourself? So it is with the responses of soothsayers, and, indeed, with every sort of divination whose deductions are merely probable; for divination of that kind depends on inference and beyond inference it cannot go.
24. “‘At non numquam ea, quae praedicta sunt minus eveniunt.’ Quae tandem id ars non habet? earum dico artium, quae coniectura continentur et sunt opinabiles. An medicine ars non putanda est? quam tamen multa fallunt.? gubernatores nonne falluntur? An Achivorum exercitus et tot navium rectores non ita profecti sunt ab Ilio, ut ‘profectione laeti piscium lasciviam intuerentur,’ ut ait Pacuvius, ‘nec tuendi satietas capere posset?’interea prope iam óccidente sóle inhorrescít mare,ténebrae conduplicántur noctisque ét nimbum occaecát nigror.Num igitur tot clarissimorum ducum regumque naufragium sustulit artem gubernandi? aut num imperatorum scientia nihil est, quia summus imperator nuper fugit amisso exercitu? aut num propterea nulla est rei publicae gerendae ratio atque prudentia, quia multa Cn. Pompeium, quaedam M. Catonem, non nulla etiam te ipsum fefellerunt? est haruspicum responsio omnisque opinabilis divinatio; coniectura enim nititur, ultra quam progredi non potest.” “fallit fortasse non numquam, sed tamen ad veritatem saepissime derigit; est enim ab omni aeternitate repetita, in qua cum paene innumerabiliter res eodem modo evenirent isdem signis antegressis, ars est effecta eadem saepe animadvertendo ac notando.” “Auspicia vero vestra quam constant! quae quidem nunc a Romanis auguribus ignorantur (bona hoc tua venia dixerim), a Cilicibus, Pamphyliis, Pisidis, Lyciis tenentur.”
26. It sometimes misleads perhaps, but none the less in most cases it guides us to the truth. For this same conjectural divination is the product of boundless eternity and within that period it has grown into an art through the repeated observation and recording of almost countless instances in which the same results have been preceded by the same signs. "Indeed how trustworthy were the auspices taken when you were augur! At the present time—pray pardon me for saying so—Roman augurs neglect auspices, although the Cilicians, Pamphylians, Pisidians, and Lycians hold them in high esteem. I need not remind you of that most famous and worthy man, our guest-friend, King Deiotarus, who never undertook any enterprise without first taking the auspices. On one occasion after he had set out on a journey for which he had made careful plans beforehand, he returned home because of the warning given him by the flight of an eagle. The room in which he would have been staying, had he continued on his road, collapsed the very next night. This is why, as he told me himself, he had time and again abandoned a journey even though he might have been travelling for many days. By the way, that was a very noble utterance of his which he made after Caesar had deprived him of his tetrarchy and kingdom, and had forced him to pay an indemnity too. 'Notwithstanding what has happened,' said he,' I do not regret that the auspices favoured my joining Pompey. By so doing I enlisted my military power in defence of senatorial authority, Roman liberty, and the supremacy of the empire. The birds, at whose instance I followed the course of duty and of honour, counselled well, for I value my good name more than riches.' His conception of augury, it seems to me, is the correct one. "For with us magistrates make use of auspices, but they are 'forced auspices,' since the sacred chickens in eating the dough pellets thrown must let some fall from their beaks.
26. “quid ego hospitem nostrum, clarissimum atque optimum virum, Deiotarum regem, commemorem, qui nihil umquam nisi auspicato gerit? cum ex itinere quodam proposito et constituto revertisset aquilae admonitus volatu, conclave illud, ubi erat mansurus, si ire perrexisset, proxima nocte corruit.” “, ut ex ipso audiebam, persaepe revertit ex itinere, cum iam progressus esset multorum dierum viam. quidem hoc praeclarissimum est, quod, posteaquam a Caesare tetrarchia et regno pecuniaque multatus est, negat se tamen eorum auspiciorum, quae sibi ad Pompeium proficiscenti secunda evenerint, paenitere; senatus enim auctoritatem et populi Romani libertatem atque imperii dignitatem suis armis esse defensam, sibique eas aves, quibus auctoribus officium et fidem secutus esset, bene consuluisse; antiquiorem enim sibi fuisse possessionibus suis gloriam. mihi videtur igitur vere augurari.” “Nam nostri quidem magistratus auspiciis utuntur coactis; necesse est enim offa obiecta cadere frustum ex pulli ore cum pascitur.”
28. But, according to the writings of you augurs, a tripudium results if any of the food should fall to the ground, and what I spoke of as a 'forced augury' your fraternity calls a tripudium solistimum. And so through the indifference of the college, as Cato the Wise laments, many auguries and auspices have been entirely abandoned and lost. "In ancient times scarcely any matter out of the ordinary was undertaken, even in private life, without first consulting the auspices, clear proof of which is given even at the present time by our custom of having ' nuptial auspices,' though they have lost their former religious significance and only preserve the name. For just as to-day on important occasions we make use of entrails in divining— though even they are employed to a less extent than formerly—so in the past resort was usually had to divination by means of birds. And thus it is that by failing to seek out the unpropitious signs we run into awful disasters.
28. “autem scriptum habetis hinc tripudium fieri, si ex ea quid in solum ceciderit, hoc quoque, quod dixi, coactum tripudium solistimum dicitis. multa auguria, multa auspicia, quod Cato ille sapiens queritur, neglegentia collegi amissa plane et deserta sunt.” “Nihil fere quondam maioris rei nisi auspicato ne privatim quidem gerebatur, quod etiam nunc nuptiarum auspices declarant, qui, re omissa, nomen tantum tenent. ut nunc extis (quamquam id ipsum aliquanto minus quam olim), sic tum avibus magnae res inpetriri solebant., sinistra dum non exquirimus, in dira et in vitiosa incurrimus.”
29. For example, Publius Claudius, son of Appius Caecus, and his colleague Lucius Junius, lost very large fleets by going to sea when the auguries were adverse. The same fate befell Agamemnon; for, after the Greeks had begun toRaise aloft their frequent clamours, showing scorn of augur's art,Noise prevailed and not the omen: he then bade the ships depart. "But why cite such ancient instances? We see what happened to Marcus Crassus when he ignored the announcement of unfavourable omens. It was on the charge of having on this occasion falsified the auspices that Gaius Ateius, an honourable man and a distinguished citizen, was, on insufficient evidence, stigmatized by the then censor Appius, who was your associate in the augural college, and an able one too, as I have often heard you say. I grant you that in pursuing the course he did Appius was within his rights as a censor, if, in his judgement, Ateius had announced a fraudulent augury. But he showed no capacity whatever as an augur in holding Ateius responsible for that awful disaster which befell the Roman people. Had this been the cause then the fault would not have been in Ateius, who made the announcement that the augury was unfavourable, but in Crassus, who disobeyed it; for the issue proved that the announce- ment was true, as this same augur and censor admits. But even if the augury had been false it could not have been the cause of the disaster; for unfavourable auguries—and the same may be said of auspices, omens, and all other signs—are not the causes of what follows: they merely foretell what will occur unless precautions are taken.
29. “P. Claudius, Appii Caeci filius, eiusque collega L. Iunius classis maximas perdiderunt, cum vitio navigassent. eodem modo evenit Agamemnoni; qui, cum Achivi coepissentinter se strépere aperteque ártem obterere extíspicum,sólvere imperát secundo rúmore adversáque avi.” “Sed quid vetera? M. Crasso quid acciderit, videmus, dirarum obnuntiatione neglecta. quo Appius, collega tuus, bonus augur, ut ex te audire soleo, non satis scienter virum bonum et civem egregium censor C. Ateium notavit, quod ementitum auspicia subscriberet.; fuerit hoc censoris, si iudicabat ementitum; at illud minime auguris, quod adscripsit ob eam causam populum Romanum calamitatem maximam cepisse. enim ea causa calamitatis fuit, non est in eo culpa, qui obnuntiavit, sed in eo, qui non paruit. enim fuisse obnuntiationem, ut ait idem augur et censor, exitus approbavit; quae si falsa fuisset, nullam afferre potuisset causam calamitatis. dirae, sicut cetera auspicia, ut omina, ut signa, non causas afferunt, cur quid eveniat, sed nuntiant eventura, nisi provideris.”
30. Therefore Ateius, by his announcement, did not create the cause of the disaster; but having observed the sign he simply advised Crassus what the result would be if the warning was ignored. It follows, then, that the announcement by Ateius of the unfavourable augury had no effect; or if it did, as Appius thinks, then the sin is not in him who gave the warning, but in him who disregarded it. "And whence, pray, did you augurs derive that staff, which is the most conspicuous mark of your priestly office? It is the very one, indeed, with which Romulus marked out the quarter for taking observations when he founded the city. Now this staff is a crooked wand, slightly curved at the top, and, because of its resemblance to a trumpet, derives its name from the Latin word meaning 'the trumpet with which the battle-charge is sounded.' It was placed in the temple of the Salii on the Palatine hill and, though the temple was burned, the staff was found uninjured.
30. “igitur obnuntiatio Atei causam finxit calamitatis, sed signo obiecto monuit Crassum, quid eventurum esset, nisi cavisset. aut illa obnuntiatio nihil valuit, aut si, ut Appius iudicat, valuit, id valuit ut peccatum haereat non in eo qui monuerit, sed in eo qui non obtemperarit.” “Quid? lituus iste vester quod clarissimum est insigne auguratus, unde vobis est traditus? eo Romulus regiones direxit tum cum urbem condidit. quidem Romuli lituus, id est incurvum et leviter a summo inflexum bacillum, quod ab eius litui quo canitur similitudine nomen invenit, cum situs esset in curia Saliorum, quae est in Palatio, eaque deflagravisset, inventus est integer.”
31. What ancient chronicler fails to mention the fact that in the reign of Tarquinius Priscus, long after the time of Romulus, a quartering of the heavens was made with this staff by Attus Navius? Because of poverty Attus was a swineherd in his youth. As the story goes, he, having lost one of his hogs, made a vow that if he recovered it he would make an offering to the god of the largest bunch of grapes in his vineyard Accordingly, after he had found the hog, he took his stand, we are told, in the middle of the vineyard, with his face to the south and divided the vineyard into four parts. When the birds had shown three of these parts to be unfavourable, he subdivided the fourth and last part and then found, as we see it recorded, a bunch of grapes of marvellous size. "This occurrence having been noised abroad, all his neighbours began to consult him about their own affairs and thus greatly enhanced his name and fame.
31. “? multis annis post Romulum Prisco regnante Tarquinio quis veterum scriptorum non loquitur, quae sit ab Atto Navio per lituum regionum facta discriptio? cum propter paupertatem sues puer pasceret, una ex iis amissa vovisse dicitur, si recuperasset, uvam se deo daturum, quae maxima esset in vinea; itaque sue inventa ad meridiem spectans in vinea media dicitur constitisse, cumque in quattuor partis vineam divisisset trisque partis aves abdixissent, quarta parte, quae erat reliqua, in regiones distributa, mirabili magnitudine uvam, ut scriptum videmus, invenit.” “Qua re celebrata cum vicini omnes ad eum de rebus suis referrent, erat in magno nomine et gloria.”
32. The consequence was that King Priscus summoned him to his presence. The king, wishing to make trial of his skill as an augur, said to him: 'I am thinking of something; tell me whether it can be done or not.' Attus, having taken the auspices, replied that it could be done. Thereupon Tarquin said that what he had been thinking of was the possibility of cutting a whetstone in two with a razor, and ordered the trial to be made. So the stone was brought into the comitium, and, while the king and his people looked on, it was cut in two with a razor. The result was that Tarquin employed him as his augur, and the people consulted him about their private concerns.
32. “quo factum est, ut eum ad se rex Priscus arcesseret. cum temptaret scientiam auguratus, dixit ei cogitare se quiddam; id possetne fieri consuluit., augurio acto, posse respondit. Tarquinius autem dixit se cogitasse cotem novacula posse praecidi. Attum iussisse experiri. cotem in comitium allatam, inspectante et rege et populo, novacula esse discissam. eo evenit ut et Tarquinius augure Atto Navio uteretur et populus de suis rebus ad eum referret.”
33. Moreover, according to tradition, the whetstone and razor were buried in the comitium and a stone curbing placed over them. "Let us declare this story wholly false; let us burn the chronicles that contain it; let us call it a myth and admit almost anything you please rather than the fact that the gods have any concern in human affairs. But look at this: does not the story about Tiberius Gracchus found in your own writings acknowledge that augury and soothsaying are arts? He, having placed his tabernaculum, unwittingly violated augural law by crossing the pomerium before completing the auspices; nevertheless he held the consular election. The fact is well known to you since you have recorded it. Besides, Tiberius Gracchus, who was himself an augur, confirmed the authority of auspices by confessing his error; and the soothsayers, too, greatly enhanced the reputation of their calling, when brought into the Senate immediately after the election, by declaring that the election supervisor had acted without authority.
33. “autem illam et novaculam defossam in comitio supraque impositum puteal accepimus.” “Negemus omnia, comburamus annales, ficta haec esse dicamus, quidvis denique potius quam deos res humanas curare fateamur.? quod scriptum apud te est de Ti. Graccho, nonne et augurum et haruspicum comprobat disciplinam? qui cum tabernaculum vitio cepisset imprudens, quod inauspicato pomerium transgressus esset, comitia consulibus rogandis habuit. res est et a te ipso mandata monumentis. et ipse augur Ti. Gracchus auspiciorum auctoritatem confessione errati sui comprobavit; et haruspicum disciplinae magna accessit auctoritas, qui recentibus comitiis in senatum introducti negaverunt iustum comitiorum rogatorem fuisse.”