15.1. By such training and schooling in religious matters the city became so tractable, and stood in such awe of Numa’s power, that they accepted his stories, though fabulously strange, and thought nothing incredible or impossible which he wished them to believe or do.
15.1. ἐκ δὲ τῆς τοιαύτης παιδαγωγίας πρὸς τὸ θεῖον οὕτως ἡ πόλις ἐγεγόνει χειροήθης καὶ κατατεθαμβημένη τὴν τοῦ Νομᾶ δύναμιν, ὥστε μύθοις ἐοικότας τὴν ἀτοπίαν λόγους παραδέχεσθαι, καὶ νομίζειν μηδὲν ἄπιστον εἶναι μηδὲ ἀμήχανον ἐκείνου. βουληθέντος.
15.2. At any rate, the story goes that he once invited a large number of the citizens to his table, and set before them mean dishes and a very simple repast; but just as they began to eat, he surprised them by saying that the goddess with whom he consorted was come to visit him, and lo, on a sudden, the room was full of costly beakers and the tables were laden with all sorts of meats and abundant furniture.
15.2. λέγεται γοῦν ποτε καλέσας ἐπὶ τὴν τράπεζαν οὐκ ὀλίγους τῶν πολιτῶν, σκεύη τε φαῦλα καὶ δεῖπνον εὐτελὲς πάνυ προθέσθαι καὶ δημοτικὸν ἀρξαμένων δὲ δειπνεῖν ἐμβαλὼν λόγον ὡς ἡ θεὸς ᾗ σύνεστιν ἥκοι πρὸς αὐτόν, αἰφνίδιον ἐπιδεῖξαι τόν τε οἶκον ἐκπωμάτων πλήρη πολυτελῶν καὶ τὰς τραπέζας ὄψων τε παντοδαπῶν καὶ παρασκευῆς δαψιλοῦς γεμούσας.
15.3. But nothing can be so strange as what is told about his conversation with Jupiter. When the Aventine hill—so runs the tale—was not yet a part of the city nor even inhabited, but abounded in springs and shady dells, two demi-gods, Picus and Faunus, made it their haunt. In other ways these divinities might be likened to Satyrs or Pans, but they are said to have used powerful drugs and practised clever incantations, and to have traversed Italy playing the same tricks as the so-called Idaean Dactyli of the Greeks.
15.3. πᾶσαν δὲ ὑπερβέβληκεν ἀτοπίαν τὸ ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ Διὸς ὁμιλίας ἱστορούμενον. μυθολογοῦσι γάρ εἰς τὸν Ἀβεντῖνον λόφον οὔπω μέρος ὄντα τῆς πόλεως οὐδὲ συνοικούμενον, ἀλλʼ ἔχοντα πηγάς τε δαψιλεῖς ἐν αὑτῷ καὶ νάπας σκιεράς, φοιτᾶν δύο δαίμονάς, Πῖκον καὶ Φαῦνον οὓς τὰ μὲν ἄλλα Σατύρων ἄν τις ἢ Πανῶν γένει προσεικάσειε, δυνάμει δὲ φαρμάκων καὶ δεινότητι τῆς περὶ τὰ θεῖα γοητείας λέγονται ταὐτὰ τοῖς ὑφʼ Ἑλλήνων προσαγορευθεῖσιν Ἰδαίοις Δακτύλοις σοφιζόμενοι περιϊέναι τὴν Ἰταλίαν.
15.4. These demi-gods Numa is said to have caught, by mixing wine and honey with the water of the spring from which they were wont to drink. When captured, they dropped their own forms and assumed many different shapes, presenting hideous and dreadful appearances. But when they perceived that they were fast caught and could not escape, they foretold to Numa many things that would come to pass, and taught him besides the charm against thunder and lightning, which is still practised with onions, hair, and sprats.
15.4. τούτους φασὶ χειρώσασθαι τὸν Νομᾶν, οἴνῳ καὶ μέλιτι κεράσαντα τὴν κρήνην ἀφʼ ἧς ἔπινον συνήθως. ληφθέντας δὲ πολλὰς μὲν ἰδέας τρέπεσθαι καὶ μετεκδύεσθαι τὴν αὑτῶν φύσιν, ἀλλόκοτα φάσματα καὶ φοβερὰ τῆς ὄψεως προβαλλομένους· ἐπεὶ δὲ ἔγνωσαν ἑαλωκότες ἰσχυρὰν καὶ ἄφυκτον ἅλωσιν, ἄλλα τε προθεσπίσαι πολλὰ τῶν μελλόντων καὶ τὸν ἐπὶ τοῖς κεραυνοῖς ἐκδιδάξαι καθαρμόν, ὃς ποιεῖται μέχρι νῦν διὰ κρομμύων καὶ τριχῶν καὶ μαινίδων.
15.5. Some, however, say that it was not the imps themselves who imparted the charm, but that they called Jupiter down from heaven by their magic, and that this deity angrily told Numa that he must charm thunder and lightning with “heads.” “Of onions?” asked Numa, filling out the phrase. “Of men,” said Jupiter. Thereupon Numa, trying once more to avert the horror of the prescription, asked, “with hair?” “Nay,” answered Jupiter, “with living—” “sprats?” added Numa, as he had been taught by Egeria to say.
15.5. ἔνιοι δὲ οὐ τοὺς δαίμονάς φασὶν ὑποθέσθαι τὸν καθαρμόν, ἀλλʼ ἐκείνους μὲν καταγαγεῖν τὸν Δία μαγεύσαντας, τὸν δὲ θεὸν ὀργιζόμενον τῷ Νομᾷ προστάσσειν ὡς χρὴ γενέσθαι τὸν καθαρμὸν κεφαλαῖς· ὑπολαβόντος δὲ τοῦ Νομᾶ, κρομμύων; εἰπεῖν, ἀνθρώπων τὸν δὲ αὖθις ἐκτρέποντα τὸ τοῦ προστάγματος δεινὸν ἐπερέσθαι, θριξίν; ἀποκριναμένου δὲ τοῦ Διός, ἐμψύχοις, ἐπαγαγεῖν τὸν Νομᾶν, μαινίσι; ταῦτα λέγειν ὑπὸ τῆς Ἠγερίας δεδιδαγμένον.
15.6. Then the god returned to heaven in a gracious mood,— “hileos,” as the Greeks say,—and the place was called Ilicium from this circumstance; and that is the way the charm was perfected. These stories, fabulous and ridiculous as they are, show us the attitude which the men of that time, from force of custom, took towards the gods. And Numa himself, as they say, had such implicit confidence in the gods, that once, when a message was brought to him that enemies were coming up against the city, he smiled and said: “But I am sacrificing.”
15.6. καὶ τὸν μὲν θεὸν ἀπελθεῖν ἵλεω γενόμενον, τὸν δὲ τόπον Ἰλίκιον ἀπʼ ἐκείνου προσαγορευθῆναι καὶ τὸν καθαρμὸν οὕτω συντελεῖσθαι. ταῦτα μὲν οὖν τὰ μυθώδη καὶ γελοῖα τὴν τῶν τότε ἀνθρώπων ἐπιδείκνυται διάθεσιν πρὸς τὸ θεῖον, ἣν ὁ ἐθισμὸς αὐτοῖς ἐνεποίησεν. αὐτὸν δὲ τὸν Νομᾶν οὕτω φασὶν εἰς τὸ θεῖον ἀνηρτῆσθαι ταῖς ἐλπίσιν, ὥστε καὶ προσαγγελίας αὐτῷ ποτε γενομένης ὡς ἐπέρχονται πολέμιοι, μειδιᾶσαι καὶ εἰπεῖν· ἐγὼ δὲ θύω.
16.1. He was also the first, they say, to build temples to Faith and Terminus; and he taught the Romans their most solemn oath by Faith, which they still continue to use. Terminus signifies boundary, and to this god they make public and private sacrifices where their fields are set off by boundaries; of living victims nowadays, but anciently the sacrifice was a bloodless one, since Numa reasoned that the god of boundaries was a guardian of peace and a witness of just dealing, and should therefore be clear from slaughter.
16.1. πρῶτον δέ φασι καὶ Πίστεως καὶ Τέρμονος ἱερὸν ἱδρύσασθαι. καὶ τὴν μὲν Πίστιν ὅρκον ἀποδεῖξαι Ῥωμαίοις μέγιστον, ᾧ χρώμενοι μέχρι νῦν διατελοῦσιν· ὁ δὲ Τέρμων ὅρος ἄν τις εἴη, καὶ θύουσιν αὐτῷ δημοσίᾳ καὶ ἰδίᾳ κατὰ τοὺς τῶν ἀγρῶν περιορισμούς, νῦν μὲν ἔμψυχα, τὸ παλαιὸν δὲ ἀναίμακτος ἦν ἡ θυσία, Νομᾶ φιλοσοφήσαντος ὡς χρὴ τὸν ὅριον θεὸν εἰρήνης φύλακα καὶ δικαιοσύνης μάρτυν ὄντα φόνου καθαρὸν εἶναι.
16.2. And it is quite apparent that it was this king who set bounds to the territory of the city, for Romulus was unwilling to acknowledge, by measuring off his own, how much he had taken away from others. He knew that a boundary, if observed, fetters lawless power; and if not observed, convicts of injustice. And indeed the city’s territory was not extensive at first, but Romulus acquired most of it later with the spear.
16.2. δοκεῖ δὲ καὶ ὅλως οὗτος ὁρίσαι τὴν χώραν ὁ βασιλεύς, Ῥωμύλου μὴ βουληθέντος ἐξομολογήσασθαι τῷ μέτρῳ τοῦ οἰκείου τὴν ἀφαίρεσιν τοῦ ἀλλοτρίου· δεσμὸν γάρ εἶναι τῆς δυνάμεως τὸν ὅρον, ἂν φυλάττηται, μὴ φυλαττόμενον δὲ τῆς ἀδικίας ἔλεγχον. οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ ἦν δαψιλὴς χώρᾳ τῇ πόλει κατʼ ἀρχάς, ἀλλὰ τὴν πολλὴν αἰχμῇ προσεκτήσατο Ῥωμύλος·
16.3. All this was distributed by Numa among the indigent citizens. He wished to remove the destitution which drives men to wrongdoing, and to turn the people to agriculture, that they might be subdued and softened along with the soil they tilled. For there is no other occupation which produces so keen and quick a relish for peace as that of a farmer’s life, where so much of the warrior’s daring as prompts a man to fight for his own, is always preserved, while the warrior’s licence to indulge in rapacity and injustice is extirpated.
16.3. καὶ ταύτην πᾶσαν ὁ Νομᾶς διένειμε τοῖς ἀπόροις τῶν πολιτῶν, ὡς ἀνάγκην τῆς ἀδικίας ἀφαιρῶν τὴν ἀπορίαν, καὶ τρέπων ἐπὶ γεωργίαν τὸν δῆμον ἅμα τῇ χώρᾳ συνεξημερούμενον. οὐδὲν γάρ ἄλλο τῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων οὕτως ἔρωτα δριμὺν εἰρήνης ἐργάζεται καὶ ταχὺν ὡς ὁ ἀπὸ γῆς βίος, ἐν ᾧ καὶ τῆς πολεμικῆς εὐτολμίας τὸ μὲν ὑπερμαχητικὸν τοῦ οἰκείου διαμένει καὶ πάρεστι, τὸ δὲ εἰς ἀδικίαν καὶ πλεονεξίαν ἀνειμένον ἐκκέκοπται.
16.4. Numa, therefore, administering agriculture to his citizens as a sort of peace-potion, and well pleased with the art as fostering character rather than wealth, divided the city’s territory into districts, to which he gave the name of pagi, and in each of them he set overseers and patrols. But sometimes he would inspect them in person, and judging of the characters of the citizens from the condition of their farms, would advance some to positions of honour and trust; while others, who were indolent and careless, he would chide and reproach, and so try to make them sensible.
16.4. διὸ καὶ τὴν γεωργίαν ὁ Νομᾶς οἷον εἰρήνης φίλτρον ἐμμίξας τοῖς πολίταις καὶ μᾶλλον ὡς ἠθοποιὸν ἢ πλουτοποιὸν ἀγαπήσας τέχνην, εἰς μέρη τὴν χώραν διεῖλεν, ἃ πάγους προσηγόρευσε, καὶ καθʼ ἕκαστον ἐπισκόπους ἔταξε καὶ περιπόλους, ἔστι δ’ ὅτε καὶ αὐτὸς ἐφορῶν καὶ τεκμαιρόμενος ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων τοὺς τρόπους τῶν πολιτῶν τοὺς μὲν εἰς τιμὰς καὶ πίστεις ἀνῆγε, τοὺς δὲ ῥᾳθύμους καὶ ἀμελεῖς ψέγων καὶ κακίζων ἐσωφρόνιζε.
17.1. But of all his measures, the one most admired was his distribution of the people into groups according to their trades or arts. For the city was supposed to consist of two tribes, as has been said, although it had no consistency, but was rather divided into two tribes, and utterly refused to become united, or to blot out its diversities and differences. On the contrary, it was filled with ceaseless collisions and contentions between its component parts. Numa, therefore, aware that hard substances which will not readily mingle may be crushed and pulverized, and then more easily mix and mingle with each other-owing to the smallness of their particles, determined to divide the entire body of the people into a greater number of divisions, and so, by merging it in other distinctions, to obliterate the original and great distinction, which would be lost among the lesser ones.
17.1. τῶν δὲ ἄλλων αὐτοῦ πολιτευμάτων ἡ κατὰ τέχνας διανομὴ τοῦ πλήθους μάλιστα θαυμάζεται, τῆς γάρ πόλεως ἐκ δυεῖν γενῶν, ὥσπερ εἴρηται, συνεστάναι δοκούσης, διεστώσης δὲ μᾶλλον καὶ μηδενὶ τρόπῳ μιᾶς γενέσθαι βουλομένης μηδὲ οἷον ἐξαλεῖψαι τὴν ἑτερότητα καὶ διαφοράν, ἀλλὰ συγκρούσεις ἀπαύστους καὶ φιλονεικίας τῶν μερῶν ἐχούσης, διανοηθεὶς ὅτι καὶ τῶν σωμάτων τὰ φύσει δύσμικτα καὶ σκληρὰ καταθραύοντες καὶ διαιροῦντες ἀναμιγνύουσιν, ὑπὸ μικρότητος ἀλλήλοις συμβαίνοντα μᾶλλον, ἔγνω κατατεμεῖν τομὰς πλείονας τὸ σύμπαν πλῆθος ἐκ δὲ τούτων εἰς ἑτέρας ἐμβαλὼν διαφορὰς τὴν πρώτην ἐκείνην καὶ μεγάλην ἀφανίσαι ταῖς ἐλάττοσιν ἐνδιασπαρεῖσαν.
17.2. He distributed them, accordingly, by arts and trades, into musicians, goldsmiths, carpenters, dyers, leatherworkers, curriers, braziers, and potters. The remaining trades he grouped together, and made one body out of all who belonged to them.
17.2. ἦν δὲ ἡ διανομὴ κατὰ τὰς τέχνας, αὐλητῶν, χρυσοχόων, τεκτόνων, βαφέων, σκυτοτόμων, σκυτοδεψῶν, χαλκέων, κεραμέων, τὰς δὲ λοιπὰς τέχνας εἰς ταὐτὸ συναγαγὼν ἓν αὐτῶν ἐκ πασῶν ἀπέδειξε σύστημα.
17.3. He also appointed social gatherings and public assemblies and rites of worship befitting each body. And thus, at last, he banished from the city the practice of speaking and thinking of some citizens as Sabines, and of others as Romans; or of some as subjects of Tatius, and others of Romulus, so that his division resulted in a harmonious blending of them all together.
17.3. κοινωνίας δὲ καὶ συνόδους καὶ θεῶν τιμὰς ἀποδοὺς ἑκάστῳ γένει πρεπούσας, τότε πρῶτον ἐκ τῆς πόλεως ἀνεῖλε τὸ λέγεσθαι καὶ νομίζεσθαι τοὺς μὲν Σαβίνους, τοὺς δὲ Ῥωμαίους, καὶ τοὺς μὲν Τατίου, τοὺς δὲ Ῥωμύλου πολίτας, ὥστε τὴν διαίρεσιν εὐαρμοστίαν καὶ ἀνάμιξιν πάντων γενέσθαι πρὸς πάντας.
17.4. Praise is also given to that measure of his whereby the law permitting fathers to sell their sons was amended. He made an exception of married sons, provided they had married with the consent and approval of their fathers. For he thought it a hard thing that a woman who had married a man whom she thought free, should find herself living with a slave.
17.4. ἐπαινεῖται δὲ τῶν πολιτικῶν αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ περὶ τὸν νόμον διόρθωμα τὸν διδόντα τοῖς πατράσι τοὺς παῖδας πιπράσκειν, ὑπεξελομένου τοὺς γεγαμηκότας, εἰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐπαινοῦντος καὶ κελεύοντος ὁ γάμος γένοιτο, δεινὸν γὰρ ἡγεῖτο τὴν ὡς ἐλευθέρῳ γεγαμημένην γυναῖκα δούλῳ συνοικεῖν.
18.1. He applied himself, also, to the adjustment of the calendar, not with exactness, and yet not altogether without careful observation. For during the reign of Romulus, they had been irrational and irregular in their fixing of the months, reckoning some at less than twenty days, some at thirty-five, and some at more; they had no idea of the inequality in the annual motions of the sun and moon, but held to this principle only, that the year should consist of three hundred and sixty days.
18.1. ἥψατο δὲ καὶ τῆς περὶ τὸν οὐρανὸν πραγματείας οὔτε ἀκριβῶς οὔτε παντάπασιν ἀθεωρήτως. Ῥωμύλου γὰρ βασιλεύοντος ἀλόγως ἐχρῶντο τοῖς μησὶ καὶ ἀτάκτως, τοὺς μὲν οὐδὲ εἴκοσιν ἡμερῶν, τοὺς δὲ πέντε καὶ τριάκοντα, τοὺς δὲ πλειόνων λογιζόμενοι, τῆς δὲ γινομένης ἀνωμαλίας περὶ τὴν σελήνην καὶ τὸν ἥλιον ἔννοιαν οὐκ ἔχοντες, ἀλλʼ ἓν φυλάττοντες μόνον, ὅπως ἑξήκοντα καὶ τριακοσίων ἡμερῶν ὁ ἐνιαυτὸς ἔσται.
18.2. But Numa, estimating the extent of the inequality at eleven days, since the lunar year had three hundred and fifty-four days, but the solar year three hundred and sixty-five, doubled these eleven days, and every other year inserted after the month of February the intercalary month called Mercedinus by the Romans, which consisted of twenty-two days.
18.2. Νομᾶς δὲ τὸ παράλλαγμα τῆς ἀνωμαλίας ἡμερῶν ἕνδεκα γίνεσθαι λογιζόμενος, ὡς τοῦ μὲν σεληνιακοῦ τριακοσίας πεντήκοντα τέσσαρας ἔχοντος ἡμέρας, τοῦ δὲ ἡλιακοῦ τριακοσίας ἑξήκοντα πέντε, τὰς ἕνδεκα ταύτας ἡμέρας διπλασιάζων ἐπήγαγε παρʼ ἐνιαυτὸν ἐπὶ τῷ Φεβρουαρίῳ μηνὶ τὸν ἐμβόλιμον, ὑπὸ Ῥωμαίων Μερκηδῖνον καλούμενον, εἴκοσι καὶ δυοῖν ἡμερῶν ὄντα.
18.3. This correction of the inequality which he made was destined to require other and greater corrections in the future. He also changed the order of the months. March, which had been first, he made the third month, and January, which had been the eleventh under Romulus, he made the first month; February, which had been twelfth and last, thus became the second month, as now. But there are many who say that these months of January and February were added to the calendar by Numa, and that at the outset the Romans had only ten months in their year, as some Barbarians have three, and as, among the Greeks, the Arcadians have four, and the Acarnanians six; the Aegyptian year had at first only a single month in it, afterwards four, as we are told.
18.3. καὶ τοῦτο μὲν αὐτῷ τὸ ἴαμα τῆς ἀνωμαλίας μειζόνων ἔμελλεν ἰαμάτων δεήσεσθαι. μετεκίνησε δὲ καὶ τὴν τάξιν τῶν μηνῶν τὸν γάρ Μάρτιον πρῶτον ὄντα τρίτον ἔταξε, πρῶτον δὲ τὸν Ἰανουάριον, ὃς ἦν ἑνδέκατος ἐπὶ Ῥωμύλου, δωδέκατος δὲ καὶ τελευταῖος ὁ Φεβρουάριος, ᾧ νῦν δευτέρῳ χρῶνται. πολλοὶ δέ εἰσιν οἳ καὶ προστεθῆναι τούτους ὑπὸ Νομᾶ τοὺς μῆνας λέγουσι, τόν τε Ἰανουάριον καὶ τὸν Φεβρουάριον, ἐξ ἀρχῆς δὲ χρῆσθαι δέκα μόνον εἰς τὸν ἐνιαυτόν, ὡς ἔνιοι τῶν βαρβάρων τρισί, καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων Ἀρκάδες μὲν τέσσαρσιν, ἓξ δὲ Ἀκαρνᾶνες, Αἰγυπτίοις δὲ μηνιαῖος ἦν ὁ ἐνιαυτός, εἶτα τετράμηνος, ὥς φασι.
18.4. And therefore, though they inhabit a very recent country, they have the credit of being a very ancient people, and load their genealogies with a prodigious number of years, since they really count their months as so many years.
18.4. διὸ καὶ νεωτάτην χώραν οἰκοῦντες ἀρχαιότατοι δοκοῦσιν εἶναι καὶ πλῆθος ἀμήχανον ἐτῶν ἐπὶ ταῖς γενεαλογίαις καταφέρουσιν, ἅτε δὴ τοὺς μῆνας εἰς ἐτῶν ἀριθμὸν τιθέμενοι.
19.1. That the Romans had at first only ten months in their year, and not twelve, is proved by the name of their last month; for they still call it December, or the tenth month. And that March used to be their first month, is proved by the sequence of months after it; for the fifth month after it used to be called Quintilis, the sixth Sextilis, and so on with the rest. Therefore, when they placed January and February before March, they were guilty of naming the above-mentioned month Quintilis, or fifth, but counting it seventh.
19.1. Ῥωμαῖοι δὲ ὅτι μὲν δέκα μῆνας εἰς τὸν ἐνιαυτὸν ἔταττον, οὐ δώδεκα, τεκμήριον ἡ τοῦ τελευταίου προσηγορία· δέκατον γάρ αὐτὸν ἄχρι νῦν καλοῦσιν ὅτι δὲ τὸν Μάρτιον πρῶτον, ἡ τάξις· τὸν γάρ ἀπʼ ἐκείνου πέμπτον ἐκάλουν πέμπτον ἕκτον δὲ τὸν ἕκτον καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἑξῆς ὁμοίως ἕκαστον, ἐπεὶ τὸν Ἰανουάριον καὶ τὸν Φεβρουάριον πρὸ τοῦ Μαρτίου τιθεμένοις συνέβαινεν αὐτοῖς τὸν εἰρημένον μῆνα πέμπτον μὲν ὀνομάζειν, ἕβδομον δὲ ἀριθμεῖν.
19.2. And besides, it was reasonable that March, which is consecrate to Mars, should be put in the first place by Romulus, and April in the second place, since this month is named after Aphrodite. In it they sacrificed to this goddess, and on its first day the women bathe with myrtle garlands on their heads. Some, however, say that April, with its smooth p, cannot be derived from Aphrodite, with its rough ph, but that this month of high spring time is called April because it opens and discloses the buds and shoots in vegetation, this being the meaning of the word aperio.
19.2. ἄλλως δὲ καὶ λόγον εἶχε τὸν Μάρτιον Ἄρει καθιερωμένον ὑπὸ τοῦ Ῥωμύλου πρῶτον ὀνομάζεσθαι· δεύτερον δὲ τὸν Ἀπρίλλιον, ἐπώνυμον ὄντα τῆς Ἀφροδίτης, ἐν ᾧ θύουσί τε τῇ θεῷ καὶ ταῖς καλάνδαις αἱ γυναῖκες ἐστεφανωμέναι μυρσίνῃ λούονται, τινὲς δὲ οὐ διὰ τὴν Ἀφροδίτην τὸν Ἀπρίλλιὸν φασιν, ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ ἔχει τοὔνομα ψιλόν, Ἀπρίλλιον κεκλῆσθαι τὸν μῆνα τῆς ἐαρινῆς ὥρας ἀκμαζούσης ἀνοίγοντα καὶ ἀνακαλύπτοντα τοὺς βλαστοὺς τῶν φυτῶν τοῦτο γὰρ ἡ γλῶττα σημαίνει.
19.3. The next month in order is called May, from Maia, the mother of Mercury, to whom it is sacred; and June is so named from Juno. There are some, however, who say that these months get their name from an age, older and younger; for majores is their name for the elder, juniores for the younger men. Each of the remaining months they named from its arithmetical position in the list, the fifth Quintilis, the sixth Sextilis, and so on with September, October, November, and December.
19.3. τῶν δ’ ἐφεξῆς τὸν μὲν Μάϊον καλοῦσιν ἀπὸ Μαίας· Ἑρμῇ γὰρ ἀνιέρωται τὸν δὲ Ἰούνιον ἀπὸ τῆς Ἥρας. εἰσὶ δέ τινες οἱ τούτους ἡλικίας ἐπωνύμους εἶναι λέγοντες πρεσβυτέρας καὶ νεωτέρας· μαϊώρεις γὰρ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι παρʼ αὐτοῖς, ἰουνιώρεις δὲ οἱ νεώτεροι καλοῦνται, τῶν δὲ λοιπῶν ἕκαστον ἀπὸ τῆς τάξεως, ὥσπερ ἀριθμοῦντες, ὠνόμαζον πέμπτον, ἕκτον, ἕβδομον, ὄγδοον, ἔνατον, δέκατον·
19.4. Afterwards the fifth month was named Julius, from Julius Caesar, the conqueror of Pompey; and the sixth month Augustus, from the second Caesar, who was given that title. The seventh and eighth months bore for a short time the names Germanicus and Domitianus, which the emperor Domitian gave them; but when he was slain, they resumed their old names of September and October. Only the last two months, November and December, preserved the names derived from their position in the list just as they were at the outset.
19.4. εἶτα ὁ πέμπτος ἀπὸ Καίσαρος τοῦ καταγωνισαμένου Πομπήϊον Ἰούλιος· ὁ δὲ ἕκτος Αὔγουστος ἀπὸ τοῦ δευτέρου μὲν ἄρξαντος, Σεβαστοῦ δὲ ἐπικληθέντος, ὠνομάσθη. τοὺς δὲ ἐφεξῆς Δομετιανὸς εἰσεποίησε ταῖς αὑτοῦ προσωνυμίαις οὐ πολὺν χρόνον, ἀλλὰ τὰς αὑτῶν ἀναλαβόντες πάλιν ἐκείνου σφαγέντος ὁ μὲν ἕβδομος, ὁ δὲ ὄγδοος καλοῦνται, μόνοι δ’ οἱ τελευταῖοι δύο τὴν ἀπὸ τῆς τάξεως κλῆσιν, ὥσπερ ἔσχον ἐξ ἀρχῆς, διεφύλαξαν.
19.5. Of the months which were added or transposed by Numa, February must have something to do with purification for this is nearest to the meaning of the word, and in this month they make offerings to the dead and celebrate the festival of the Lupercalia, which, in most of its features, resembles a purification. The first month, January, is so named from Janus. And I think that March, which is named from Mars, was moved by Numa from its place at the head of the months because he wished in every case that martial influences should yield precedence to civil and political.
19.5. τῶν δὲ ὑπὸ Νομᾶ προστεθέντων ἢ μετατεθέντων ὁ μὲν Φεβρουάριος οἷον καθάρσιος ἄν τις εἴη· καὶ γάρ ἡ λέξις ἔγγιστα τοῦτο σημαίνει, καὶ τοῖς φθιτοῖς ἐναγίζουσι τότε καὶ τὴν τῶν Λουπερκαλίων ἑορτὴν εἰς τὰ πολλὰ καθαρμῷ προσεοικυῖαν τελοῦσιν ὁ δὲ πρῶτος Ἰανουάριος ἀπὸ τοῦ Ἰανοῦ, δοκεῖ δέ μοι τὸν Μάρτιον ὁ Νομᾶς ἐπώνυμον ὄντα τοῦ Ἄρεως ἐκ τῆς προεδρίας μεταστῆσαι, βουλόμενος ἐν παντὶ τῆς πολεμικῆς δυνάμεως προτιμᾶσθαι τὴν πολιτικήν.
19.6. For this Janus, in remote antiquity, whether he was a demi-god or a king, was a patron of civil and social order, and is said to have lifted human life out of its bestial and savage state. For this reason he is represented with two faces, implying that he brought men’s lives out of one sort and condition into another.
19.6. ὁ γὰρ Ἰανὸς ἐν τοῖς πάνυ παλαιοῖς εἴτε δαίμων εἴτε βασιλεὺς γενόμενος πολιτικὸς καὶ κοινωνικὸς ἐκ τοῦ θηριώδους καὶ ἀγρίου λέγεται μεταβαλεῖν τὴν δίαιταν. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πλάττουσιν αὐτὸν ἀμφιπρόσωπον, ὡς ἑτέραν ἐξ ἑτέρας τῷ βίῳ περιποιήσαντα τὴν μορφὴν καὶ διάθεσιν.
20.1. He also has a temple at Rome with double doors, which they call the gates of war; for the temple always stands open in time of war, but is closed when peace has come. The latter was a difficult matter, and it rarely happened, since the realm was always engaged in some war, as its increasing size brought it into collision with the barbarous nations which encompassed it round about.
20.1. ἔστι δὲ αὐτοῦ καὶ νεὼς ἐν Ῥώμῃ δίθυρος, ὃν πολέμου πύλην καλοῦσι. νομίζεται γάρ ἀνεῷχθαι μὲν αὐτὸν ὅταν ᾖ πόλεμος, κεκλεῖσθαι δὲ εἰρήνης γενομένης, ὃ δὴ χαλεπὸν ἦν καὶ σπανίως γινόμενον, ἀεί τινι συνηρτημένης πολέμῳ τῆς ἡγεμονίας, διὰ μέγεθος τοῖς κύκλῳ περικεχυμένοις γένεσι βαρβάροις ἀντερειδούσης.
20.2. But in the time of Augustus Caesar it was closed, after he had overthrown Antony; and before that, when Marcus Atilius and Titus Manlius were consuls, it was closed a short time; then war broke out again at once, and it was opened. During the reign of Numa, however, it was not seen open for a single day, but remained shut for the space of forty-three years together, so complete and universal was the cessation of war.
20.2. πλὴν ἐπί γε τοῦ Σεβαστοῦ Καίσαρος ἐκλείσθη καθελόντος Ἀντώνιον καὶ πρότερον ὑπατευόντων Μάρκου Ἀτιλίου καὶ Τίτου Μαλλίου χρόνον οὐ πολὺν εἶτα εὐθὺς ἀνεῴχθη πολέμου συρραγέντος. ἀλλʼ ἐπί γε τῆς Νομᾶ βασιλείας οὐδεμίαν ἡμέραν ἀνεῳγμένος ὤφθη, τρία δὲ καὶ τετταράκοντα ἔτη συνεχῶς ἔμεινε κεκλεισμένος· οὕτως ἐξῄρητο παντελῶς τὰ τοῦ πολέμου καὶ πανταχόθεν.
20.3. For not only was the Roman people softened and charmed by the righteousness and mildness of their king, but also the cities round about, as if some cooling breeze or salubrious wind were wafted upon them from Rome, began to experience a change of temper, and all of them were filled with longing desire to have good government, to be at peace, to till the earth, to rear their children in quiet, and to worship the gods.
20.3. οὐ γάρ μόνον ὁ Ῥωμαίων ἡμέρωτο καὶ κατεκεκήλητο τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ πρᾳότητι τοῦ βασιλέως δῆμος, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς κύκλῳ πόλεις, ὥσπερ αὔρας τινὸς ἐκεῖθεν ἢ πνεύματος ὑγιεινοῦ φέροντος, ἀρχὴ μεταβολῆς ἔλαβε καὶ πόθος εἰσερρύη πάντας εὐνομίας καὶ εἰρήνης καὶ γῆν φυτεύειν καὶ τέκνα τρέφειν ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ καὶ σέβεσθαι θεούς.
20.4. Festivals and feasts, hospitalities and friendly converse between people who visited one another promiscuously and without fear,—these prevailed throughout Italy, while honour and justice flowed into all hearts from the wisdom of Numa, as from a fountain, and the calm serenity of his spirit diffused itself abroad. Thus even the hyperboles of the poets fall short of picturing the state of man in those days:
20.4. ἑορταὶ δὲ καὶ θαλίαι καὶ παρʼ ἀλλήλους ἀδεῶς ἰόντων καὶ ἀναμιγνυμένων ὑποδοχαὶ καὶ φιλοφροσύναι τὴν Ἰταλίαν κατεῖχον, οἷον ἐκ πηγῆς τῆς Νομᾶ σοφίας τῶν καλῶν καὶ δικαίων ἐπεισρεόντων εἰς ἅπαντας καὶ διαχεομένης τῆς περὶ ἐκεῖνον γαλήνης· ὥστε καὶ τὰς ποιητικὰς ὑπερβολὰς ἐνδεῖν πρὸς τὴν τότε κατάστασιν λέγουσιν·
20.5. “And on the iron-bound shield-handles lie the tawney spiders’ webs”; and, “rust now subdues the sharp-pointed spears and two-edged swords; no longer is the blast of brazen trumpets heard, nor are the eyelids robbed of delicious sleep.” For there is no record either of war, or faction, or political revolution while Numa was king. Nay more, no hatred or jealousy was felt towards his person, nor did ambition lead men to plot and conspire against his throne. On the contrary, either fear of the gods, who seemed to have him in their especial care, or reverence for his virtue, or a marvellous felicity, which in his days kept life free from the taint of every vice, and pure, made him a manifest illustration and confirmation of the saying which Plato, many generations later, ventured to utter regarding government, namely, that human ills would only then cease and disappear when, by some divine felicity, the power of a king should be united in one person with the insight of a philosopher, thereby establishing virtue in control and mastery over vice.
20.5. ἐν δὲ σιδαροδέτοις πόρπαξιν αἰθᾶν ἀραχνᾶν ἔργα· καί, εὐρὼς δάμναται ἔγχεά τε λογχωτὰ ξίφεὰ τʼ ἀμφήκεα, χαλκεᾶν δὲ οὐκέτι σαλπίγγων κτύπος, οὐδὲ συλᾶται μελίφρων ὕπνος ἀπὸ βλεφάρων. οὔτε γάρ πόλεμος οὔτε στάσις οὔτε νεωτερισμὸς περὶ πολιτείαν ἱστόρηται Νομᾶ βασιλεύοντος· οὐ μὴν οὐδʼ ἐπʼ αὐτὸν ἐκεῖνον ἔχθρα τις ἢ φθόνος ἢ διʼ ἔρωτα βασιλείας ἐπιβουλὴ καὶ σύστασις ἀνδρῶν, ἀλλʼ εἴτε φόβος θεῶν προκήδεσθαι δοκούντων τοῦ ἀνδρὸς εἴτε τῆς ἀρετῆς αἰδὼς εἴτε δαιμόνιος τύχη, πάσης κακίας ἄθικτον ἐπʼ ἐκείνου καὶ καθαρὸν διαφυλάττουσα τὸν βίον, ἐναργὲς ἐξήνεγκε παράδειγμα καὶ τεκμήριον τῆς Πλατωνικῆς φωνῆς, ἣν ὕστερον ἐκεῖνος οὐκ ὀλίγοις χρόνοις γενόμενος ἐτόλμησεν ἀφεῖναι περὶ πολιτείας,
20.7. “Blessed,” indeed, is such a wise man “in himself, and blessed, too, are those who hear the words of wisdom issuing from his lips.” For possibly there is no need of any compulsion or menace in dealing with the multitude, but when they see with their own eyes a conspicuous and shining example of virtue in the life of their ruler, they will of their own accord walk in wisdom’s ways, and unite with him in conforming themselves to a blameless and blessed life of friendship and mutual concord, attended by righteousness and temperance. Such a life is the noblest end of all government, and he is most a king who can inculcate such a life and such a disposition in his subjects. This, then, as it appears, Numa was preeminent in discerning.
20.7. ὡς μία κακῶν παῦλα καὶ λύσις ἀνθρώποις ἐστίν, ἔκ τινος τύχης θείας εἰς ταὐτὸ διανοίᾳ φιλοσόφῳ βασιλικὴν συμπεσοῦσαν δύναμιν ἐγκρατῆ καὶ ὑπερδέξιον τῆς κακίας τὴν ἀρετὴν καταστῆσαι. μακάριος μὲν γὰρ αὐτός ὁ σώφρων ὡς ἀληθῶς, μακάριοι δὲ οἱ συνήκοοι τῶν ἔκ τοῦ σωφρονοῦντος στόματος ἰόντων λόγων. τάχα γὰρ οὐδὲ ἀνάγκης τινὸς δεῖ πρὸς τοὺς πολλοὺς οὐδὲ ἀπειλῆς, αὐτοὶ δὲ τὴν ἀρετὴν ἐν εὐδήλῳ παραδείγματι καὶ λαμπρῷ τῷ βίῳ τοῦ ἄρχοντος ὁρῶντες, ἑκουσίως σωφρονοῦσι καὶ συμμετασχηματίζονται πρὸς τὸν ἐν φιλίᾳ καὶ ὁμονοίᾳ τῇ πρὸς αὐτοὺς μετὰ δικαιοσύνης καὶ μετριότητος ἀμύμονα καὶ μακάριον βίον, ἐν ᾧ τὸ κάλλιστον ἁπάσης πολιτείας τέλος ἐστί, καὶ βασιλικώτατος ἁπάντων ὁ τοῦτον τὸν βίον καὶ ταύτην τὴν διάθεσιν τοῖς ὑπηκόοις ἐνεργάσασθαι δυνάμενος. ταῦτα μὲν οὖν Νομᾶς παντὸς μᾶλλον φαίνεται συνεωρακώς.
21.1. As regards his marriages and offspring, historians are at variance. Some say that he had no other wife than Tatia, and no other child than one daughter, Pompilia. Others ascribe to him four sons besides, Pompon, Pinus, Calpus, and Mamercus, each one of whom was the founder of an honourable family.
21.1. περὶ δὲ παίδων αὐτοῦ καὶ γάμων ἀντιλογίαι γεγόνασι τοῖς ἱστορικοῖς. οἱ μὲν γὰρ οὔτε γάμον ἄλλον ἢ τὸν Τατίας λαβεῖν αὐτὸν οὔτε παιδὸς ἑτέρου γενέσθαι πατέρα πλὴν μιᾶς θυγατρὸς Πομπιλίας λέγουσιν· οἱ δὲ πρὸς ταύτῃ τέσσαρας υἱοὺς ἀναγράφουσιν αὐτοῦ, Πόμπωνα, Πῖνον, Κάλπον, Μάμερκον, ὧν ἕκαστον οἴκου διαδοχὴν καὶ γένους ἐντίμου καταλιπεῖν.
21.2. From Pompon the Pomponii are descended, from Pinus the Pinarii, from Calpus the Calpurnii, and from Mamercus the Mamercii, who for this reason had also the surname of Reges, or Kings. But there is a third class of writers who accuse the former of paying court to these great families by forging for them lines of descent from Numa, and they say that Pompilia was not the daughter of Tatia, but of Lucretia, another wife whom Numa married after he became king.
21.2. εἶναι γάρ ἀπὸ μὲν τοῦ Πόμπωνος τοὺς Πομπωνίους, ἀπὸ δὲ Πίνου τοὺς Πιναρίους, ἀπὸ δὲ Κάλπου τοὺς Καλπουρνίους, ἀπὸ δὲ Μαμέρκου τοὺς Μαμερκίους, οἷς διὰ τοῦτο καὶ Ῥῆγας γενέσθαι παρωνύμιον, ὅπερ ἐστὶ βασιλέας, τρίτοι δέ εἰσιν οἱ τούτων μὲν κατηγοροῦντες ὡς χαριζομένων τοῖς γένεσι καὶ προστιθέντων οὐκ ἀληθῆ στέμματα τῆς ἀπὸ Νομᾶ διαδοχῆς, τὴν δὲ Πομπιλίαν οὐκ ἐκ Τατίας γεγονέναι λέγοντες, ἀλλʼ ἐξ ἑτέρας γυναικός, ἣν ἤδη βασιλεύων ἔγημε, Λουκρητίας·
21.3. However, all are agreed that Pompilia was married to Marcius. Now this Marcius was a son of the Marcius who induced Numa to accept the throne. That Marcius accompanied Numa to Rome, and there was honoured with membership in the Senate. After Numa’s death, he competed for the throne with Hostilius, and being defeated, starved himself to death. But his son Marcius, the husband of Pompilia, remained at Rome, and begat Ancus Marcius, who succeeded Tullus Hostilius in the kingdom.
21.3. πάντες δ’ οὖν ὁμολογοῦσι τὴν Πομπιλίαν Μαρκίῳ γαμηθῆναι. παῖς δὲ ἦν ὁ Μάρκιος ἐκείνου Μαρκίου τοῦ Νομᾶν παρορμήσαντος ἐπὶ τὴν βασιλείαν καὶ γὰρ συμμετῴκησεν εἰς Ῥώμην αὐτῷ καὶ τῆς συγκλήτου μετέσχε τιμώμενος, καὶ μετὰ τὴν Νομᾶ τελευτὴν Ὁστιλίῳ περὶ τῆς βασιλείας εἰς ἀγῶνα καταστὰς καὶ ἡττηθεὶς ἀπεκαρτέρησεν. ὁ δὲ υἱὸς αὐτοῦ Μάρκιος ἔχων τὴν Πομπιλίαν κατέμεινεν ἐν Ῥώμῃ καὶ Μάρκιον Ἄγκον ἐγέννησεν, ὃς μετὰ Τύλλον Ὁστίλιον ἐβασίλευσε.
21.4. This Ancus Marcius is said to have been only five years old when Numa died, not a speedy nor a sudden death, but wasting away gradually from old age and a mild disorder, as Piso writes. He was something over eighty years old when he died.
21.4. τοῦτον, ὡς λέγεται, πενταετῆ καταλιπὼν ὁ Νομᾶς ἐτελεύτησεν, οὐ ταχείας οὐδʼ αἰφνιδίου γενομένης αὐτῷ τῆς τελευτῆς, ἀλλὰ κατὰ μικρὸν ὑπὸ γήρως καὶ νόσου μαλακῆς ἀπομαραινόμενος, ὡς ἱστόρηκε Πείσων. ἐτελεύτησε δὲ χρόνον οὐ πολὺν τοῖς ὀγδοήκοντα προσβιώσας.
22.1. His obsequies were as much to be envied as his life. The peoples which were in alliance and friendship with Rome assembled at the rites with public offerings and crowns; the senators carried his bier, the priests of the gods served as its escort, and the rest of the people, including women and children, followed with groans and lamentations, not as though they were attending the funeral of an aged king, but as though each one of them was burying some dearest relation taken away in the flower of life.
22.1. ζηλωτὸν δὲ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῷ τάφῳ τὸν βίον ἐποίησαν οἵ τε σύμμαχοι καὶ φίλοι δῆμοι, συνελθόντες ἐπὶ τὰς ταφὰς ἅμα δημοσίαις ἐπιφοραῖς καὶ στεφάνοις, οἵ τε πατρίκιοι τὸ λέχος ἀράμενοι, καὶ συμπαρόντες οἱ τῶν θεῶν ἱερεῖς καὶ παραπέμποντες, ὁ δ’ ἄλλος ὅμιλος ἀναμεμιγμένων καὶ γυναικῶν καὶ παίδων οὐχ ὡς βασιλέως ταφαῖς γηραιοῦ παρόντες, ἀλλʼ ὥς τινα τῶν φιλτάτων ἕκαστος ἐν ἀκμῇ βίου ποθούμενον θάπτων, μετʼ οἰμωγῆς καὶ κλαυθμῶν ἑπόμενοι.
22.2. They did not burn his body, because, as it is said, he forbade it; but they made two stone coffins and buried them under the Janiculum. One of these held his body, and the other the sacred books which he had written out with his own hand, as the Greek lawgivers their tablets. But since, while he was still living, he had taught the priests the written contents of the books, and had inculcated in their hearts the scope and meaning of them all, he commanded that they should be buried with his body, convinced that such mysteries ought not to be entrusted to the care of lifeless documents.
22.2. πυρὶ μὲν οὖν οὐκ ἔδοσαν τὸν νεκρὸν αὐτοῦ κωλύσαντος, ὡς λέγεται, δύο δὲ ποιησάμενοι λιθίνας σοροὺς ὑπὸ τὸ Ἰάνοκλον ἔθηκαν, τὴν μὲν ἑτέραν ἔχουσαν τὸ σῶμα, τὴν δὲ ἑτέραν τὰς ἱερὰς βίβλους ἃς ἐγράψατο μὲν αὐτός, ὥσπερ οἱ τῶν Ἑλλήνων νομοθέται τοὺς κύρβεις, ἐκδιδάξας δὲ τοὺς ἱερεῖς ἔτι ζῶν τὰ γεγραμμένα καὶ πάντων ἕξιν τε καὶ γνώμην ἐνεργασάμενος αὐτοῖς, ἐκέλευσε συνταφῆναι μετὰ τοῦ σώματος, ὡς οὐ καλῶς ἐν ἀψύχοις γράμμασι φρουρουμένων τῶν ἀπορρήτων.
22.3. This is the reason, we are told, why the Pythagoreans also do not entrust their precepts to writing, but implant the memory and practice of them in living disciples worthy to receive them. And when their treatment of the abstruse and mysterious processes of geometry had been divulged to a certain unworthy person, they said the gods threatened to punish such lawlessness and impiety with some signal and wide-spread calamity.
22.3. ᾧ λογισμῷ φασι μηδὲ τοὺς Πυθαγορικοὺς εἰς γραφὴν κατατίθεσθαι τὰ συντάγματα, μνήμην δὲ καὶ παίδευσιν αὐτῶν ἄγραφον ἐμποιεῖν τοῖς ἀξίοις. καὶ τῆς γε περὶ τὰς ἀπόρους καὶ ἀρρήτους λεγομένας ἐν γεωμετρίᾳ μεθόδους πραγματείας πρός τινα τῶν ἀναξίων ἐκδοθείσης, ἔφασαν ἐπισημαίνειν τὸ δαιμόνιον μεγάλῳ τινὶ καὶ κοινῷ κακῷ τὴν γεγενημένην παρανομίαν καὶ ἀσέβειαν ἐπεξερχόμενον.
22.4. Therefore we may well be indulgent with those who are eager to prove, on the basis of so many resemblances between them, that Numa was acquainted with Pythagoras. Antias, however, writes that it was twelve pontifical books, and twelve others of Greek philosophy, which were placed in the coffin. And about four hundred years afterwards, when Publius Cornelius and Marcus Baebius were consuls, heavy rains fell, and the torrent of water tore away the earth and dislodged the coffins.
22.4. ὥστε συγγνώμην ἔχειν πολλὴν τοῖς εἰς τὸ αὐτὸ Πυθαγόρᾳ Νομᾶν φιλοτιμουμένοις συνάγειν ἐπὶ τοσαύταις ὁμοιότησιν. οἱ δὲ περὶ Ἀντίαν ἱστοροῦσι δώδεκα μὲν εἶναι βίβλους ἱεροφαντικάς, δώδεκα δὲ ἄλλας Ἑλληνικὰς φιλοσόφους τὰς εἰς τὴν σορὸν συντεθείσας. τετρακοσίων δέ που διαγενομένων ἐτῶν ὕπατοι μὲν ἦσαν Πόπλιος Κορνήλιος καὶ Μάρκος Βαίβιος· ὄμβρων δὲ μεγάλων ἐπιπεσόντων καὶ χώματος περιρραγέντος ἐξέωσε σε τὰς σοροὺς τὸ ῥεῦμα·
22.5. When their lids had fallen off, one coffin was seen to be entirely empty, without any trace whatever of the body, but in the other the writings were found. These Petilius, who was then praetor, is said to have read, and then brought to the senate, declaring that, in his opinion, it was not lawful or proper that the writings should be published abroad. The books were therefore carried to the comitium and burned.
22.5. καὶ τῶν ἐπιθημάτων ἀποπεσόντων ἡ μὲν ἑτέρᾳ κενὴ παντάπασιν ὤφθη καὶ μέρος οὐδὲν οὐδὲ λείψανον ἔχουσα τοῦ σώματος, ἐν δὲ τῇ ἑτέρᾳ τῶν γραμμάτων εὑρεθέντων ἀναγνῶναι μὲν αὐτὰ λέγεται Πετίλιος στρατηγῶν τότε, πρὸς δὲ τὴν σύγκλητον κομίσαι, μὴ δοκεῖν αὐτῷ θεμιτὸν εἶναι λέγων μηδὲ ὅσιον ἔκπυστα πολλοῖς τὰ γεγραμμένα γενέσθαι· διὸ καὶ κομισθείσας εἰς τὸ Κομίτιον τὰς βίβλους κατακαῆναι.
22.6. It is true, indeed, of all just and good men, that they are praised more after they have left the world than before, since envy does not long survive them, and some even see it die before them; but in Numa’s case the misfortunes of the kings who followed him made his fame shine all the brighter. For of the five who came after him, the last was dethroned and grew old in exile, and of the other four, not one died a natural death. Three of them were conspired against and slain; and Tullus Hostilius, who reigned next after Numa, and who mocked and derided most of his virtues, and above all his devotion to religion, declaring that it made men idle and effeminate, turned the minds of the citizens to war. He himself; however, did not abide by his presumptuous folly, but was converted by a grievous and complicated disease, and gave himself over to a superstition which was far removed from the piety of Numa. His subjects, too, were even more affected with superstition, as we are told, when he died by a stroke of lightning.
22.6. πᾶσι μὲν οὖν ἕπεται τοῖς δικαίοις καὶ ἀγαθοῖς ἀνδράσι μείζων ὁ κατόπιν καὶ μετὰ τὴν τελευτὴν ἔπαινος, τοῦ φθόνου πολὺν χρόνον οὐκ ἐπιζῶντος, ἐν ίων δὲ καὶ προαποθνήσκοντος· οὐ μὴν ἀλλʼ ἐκείνου γε τὴν δόξαν αἱ τῶν ὕστερον βασιλέων τύχαι λαμπροτέραν ἐποίησαν, πέντε γάρ γενομένων μετʼ αὐτὸν ὁ μὲν ἔσχατος ἐκπεσὼν τῆς ἀρχῆς ἐν φυγῇ κατεγήρασε, τῶν δὲ τεσσάρων οὐδεὶς κατὰ φύσιν ἐτελεύτησεν, ἀλλʼ οἱ μὲν τρεῖς ἐπιβουλευθέντες ἐσφάγησαν, Ὁστίλιος δὲ Τύλλος, ὃς μετὰ Νομᾶν ἐβασίλευσε, καὶ τὰ πλεῖστα τῶν ἐκείνου καλῶν, ἐν δὲ πρώτοις καὶ μάλιστα τὴν περὶ τὸ θεῖον εὐλάβειαν, ἐπιχλευάσας καὶ καθυβρίσας ὡς ἀργοποιὸν καὶ γυναικώδη, πρὸς πόλεμον ν ἔτρεψε τοὺς πολίτας, οὐδʼ αὐτὸς ἐνέμεινε τοῖς νεανιεύμασι τούτοις, ἀλλʼ ὑπὸ νόσου χαλεπῆς καὶ πολυτρόπου τὴν γνώμην ἀλλασσόμενος εἰς δεισιδαιμονίαν ἐνέδωκεν οὐδέν τι τῇ κατὰ Νομᾶν εὐσεβείᾳ προσήκουσαν, ἔτι δὲ μᾶλλον ἐνεποίησε τοῖς ἄλλοις τὸ τοιοῦτον πάθος, ὡς λέγεται, καταφλεχθεὶς ὑπὸ κεραυνῶν.