---
title: "The Roman Questions · Quaestiones Romanae"
author: "Plutarch"
translator: "Isaac Chauncy, rev. William W. Goodwin"
languages: [grc, en]
shelf: "Philosophy"
section: 2 of 4
url: https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-roman-questions/2/
cite: "Plutarch, tr. Isaac Chauncy, rev. William W. Goodwin, The Roman Questions · Quaestiones Romanae, section 2. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-roman-questions/2/"
---

# The Roman Questions · Quaestiones Romanae

*Plutarch, tr. Isaac Chauncy, rev. William W. Goodwin*

A hundred and thirteen questions about Roman customs: why brides are carried over the threshold, why the priest of Jupiter may not touch a horse.

> Greek: ed. Grēgorios N. Vernardakēs, from the Perseus Digital Library (canonical-greekLit, tlg0007.tlg084a, CC BY-SA 4.0).

> English: Isaac Chauncy, rev. William W. Goodwin, from the Perseus Digital Library (tlg0007.tlg084a.perseus-eng4). Notes are not included.

> Rows follow the references the two texts share (chapters and sections), cut where both reach the end of a sentence.

## 2. Sections 27–54

Source: https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-roman-questions/2/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-roman-questions/2/#p-N

[¶0] 27. Question 27. Why do they repute every wall immaculate and sacred, but the gates not so? Solution. Is it (as Varro hath wrote) that the wall is to be accounted sacred, that they might defend it cheerfully and even lay down their lives for it? Upon this very account it appears that Romulus slew his brother, because he attempted to leap over a sacred and inaccessible place, and to render it transcendible and profane; but it could not possibly be that the gates should be kept sacred, through which they carried many things that necessity required, even dead corpses. When they built a city from the foundation, they marked out with a plough the place on which they intended to build it, yoking a bull and a cow together; but when they did set out the bounds of the walls, measuring the space of the gates, they lifted up the ploughshare and carried the plough over it, believing that all the ploughed part should be sacred and inviolable.

> Greek: 27. διὰ τί πᾶν τεῖχος ἀβέβηλον καὶ ἱερὸν νομίζουσι τὰς δὲ πύλας οὐ νομίζουσιν; ἦ καθάπερ ἔγραψε Βάρρων τὸ μὲν τεῖχος ἱερὸν δεῖ νομίζειν, ὅπως ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ μάχωνται προθύμως καὶ ἀποθνήσκωσιν; οὕτω γὰρ δοκεῖ καὶ Ῥωμύλος ἀποκτεῖναι τὸν ἀδελφὸν ὡς ἄβατον καὶ ἱερὸν τόπον ἐπιχειροῦντα διαπηδᾶν καὶ ποιεῖν ὑπερβατὸν καὶ βέβηλον. τὰς δὲ πύλας οὐχ οἷόν τʼ ἦν ἀφιερῶσαι, διʼ ὧν ἄλλα τε πολλὰ τῶν ἀναγκαίων καὶ τοὺς νεκροὺς ἐκκομίζουσιν. ὅθεν οἱ πόλιν ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς κτίζοντες, ὅταν ἂν μέλλωσι τόπον ἀνοικοδομεῖν ἐπίασιν ἀρότρῳ, βοῦν ἄρρενα καὶ θήλειαν ὑποζεύξαντες· ὅταν δὲ τὰ τείχη περιορίζωσι, τὰς τῶν πυλῶν χώρας διαμετροῦντες τὴν ὕννιν ὑφαιροῦσι, καὶ μεταφέρουσιν οὕτω τὸ ἄροτρον, ὡς τὴν ἀρουμένην πᾶσαν ἱερὰν καὶ ἄσυλον ἐσομένην.

[¶1] 28. Question 28. Why do they prohibit the children to swear by Hercules within doors, but command them to go out of doors to do it? Solution. Is the reason (as some say) that they are of opinion that Hercules was not delighted in a domestic life, but chose rather to live abroad in the fields? Or rather because he was none of their native country Gods, but a foreigner? For neither do they swear by Bacchus within doors, he being a foreigner, if it be he whom the Greeks call Dionysus. Or what if these things are uttered in sport to amuse children; and is this, on the contrary, for a restraint of a frivolous and rash oath, as Favorinus saith? For that which is done, as it were, with preparation causes delay and deliberation. If a man judges as Favorinus doth of the things recorded about Hercules, it would seem that this was not common to other Gods, but peculiar to him; for history tells us that he had such a religious veneration for an oath, that he swore but once only to Phyleus, son of Augeas. Wherefore the Pythia upbraids the Lacedaemonians with such swearing, as though it would be more laudable and better to pay their vows than to swear.

> Greek: 28. διὰ τί τοὺς παῖδας, ὅταν ὀμνύωσι τὸν Ἡρακλέα, κωλύουσιν ὑπὸ στέγῃ τοῦτο ποιεῖν καὶ κελεύουσιν εἰς ὕπαιθρον προϊέναι; πότερον ὡς ἔνιοι λέγουσιν οὐκ οἰκουρίᾳ τὸν Ἡρακλέα χαίρειν ἀλλʼ ὑπαίθρῳ βίῳ καὶ θυραυλίαις νομίζοντες; ἢ μᾶλλον, ὅτι τῶν θεῶν οὐκ ἐπιχώριος οὗτος ἀλλὰ πόρρωθεν καὶ ξένος; οὐδὲ γὰρ τὸν Διόνυσον ὀμνύουσιν ὑπὸ στέγῃ, ξένον ὄντα καὶ αὐτόν, εἴπερ ἐστὶ Διόνυσος. ἢ ταῦτα μὲν λέγεται καὶ παίζεται πρὸς τοὺς παῖδας, ἄλλως δʼ ἐπίσχεσίς ἐστι τῆς πρὸς τὸν ὅρκον εὐχερείας καὶ ταχύτητος τὸ γιγνόμενον, ὡς Φαβωρῖνος ἔλεγε; τὸ γὰρ ὥσπερ ἐκ παρασκευῆς μέλλησιν ἐμποιεῖ καὶ βουλεύσασθαι δίδωσι. συμβάλοιτο δʼ ἄν τις τῷ Φαβωρίνῳ πρὸς τὸ μὴ κοινὸν ἀλλʼ ἴδιον εἶναι τοῦ θεοῦ τούτου τὸ γιγνόμενον ἐκ τῶν περὶ Ἡρακλέους λεγομένων. ἱστορεῖται γὰρ οὕτως εὐλαβὴς γεγονέναι πρὸς ὅρκον, ὥσθʼ ἅπαξ ὀμόσαι καὶ μόνῳ Φυλεῖ τῷ Αὐγέου· διὸ καὶ τὴν Πυθίαν προφέρειν τὰ ὅρκια ταῦτα Λακεδαιμονίοις ὡς ἐμπεδοῦσι λῷον εἴη καὶ ἄμεινον.

[¶2] 29. Question 29. Why do they not permit the new married woman herself to step over the threshold of the house, but the bridemen lift her over? Solution. What if the reason be that they, taking their first wives by force, brought them thus into their houses, when they went not in of their own accord? Or is it that they will have them seem to enter into that place as by force, not willingly, where they are about to lose their virginity? Or is it a significant ceremony to show that she is not to go out or leave her dwelling-place till she is forced, even as she goes in by force? For with us also in Boeotia they burn the axletree of a cart before the doors, intimating that the spouse is bound to remain there, the instrument of carriage being destroyed.

> Greek: 29. διὰ τί τὴν γαμουμένην οὐκ ἐῶσιν αὐτὴν ὑπερβῆναι τὸν οὐδὸν τῆς οἰκίας, ἀλλʼ ὑπεραίρουσιν οἱ προπέμποντες; πότερον ὅτι καὶ τὰς πρώτας γυναῖκας ἁρπάσαντες οὕτως εἰσήνεγκαν, αὐταὶ δʼ οὐκ εἰσῆλθον· ἢ βούλονται δοκεῖν εἰσιέναι βιαζομένας οὐχ ἑκούσας, ὅπου μέλλουσι διαλύειν τὴν παρθενίαν; ἢ σύμβολόν ἐστι τοῦ μηδʼ ἐξιέναι διʼ αὐτῆς μηδὲ καταλιπεῖν τὴν οἰκίαν, εἰ μὴ βιασθείη, καθάπερ καὶ εἰσῆλθε βιασθεῖσα; καὶ γὰρ παρʼ ἡμῖν ἐν Βοιωτίᾳ καίουσι πρὸ τῆς θύρας τὸν ἄξονα τῆς ἁμάξης, ἐμφαίνοντες δεῖν τὴν νύμφην ἐμμένειν ὡς ἀνῃρημένου τοῦ ἀπάξοντος.

[¶3] 30. Question 30. Why do the bridemen that bring in the bride require her to say, “Where thou Caius art, there am I Caia”? Solution. What if the reason be that by mutual agreement she enters presently upon participation of all things, even to share in the government, and that this is the meaning of it, Where thou art lord and master of the family, there am I also dame and mistress of the family; while these common names they use promiscuously, as the lawyers do Caius, Seius, Lucius, Titius, and the philosophers use the names of Dion and Theon? Or is it from Caia Secilia, an honest and good woman, married to one of Tarquinius’s sons, who had her statue of brass erected in the temple of Sancus? On this statue were anciently hanged sandals and spindles, as significant memorials of her housewifery and industry.

> Greek: 30. διὰ τί τὴν νύμφην εἰσάγοντες λέγειν κελεύουσιν ὅπου σὺ Γάιος, ἐγὼ Γαΐα; πότερον ὥσπερ ἐπὶ ῥητοῖς εὐθὺς εἴσεισι τῷ κοινωνεῖν ἁπάντων καὶ συνάρχειν (καὶ τὸ μὲν δηλούμενόν ἐστιν ὅπου σὺ κύριος καὶ οἰκοδεσπότης, καὶ ἐγὼ κυρία καὶ οἰκοδέσποινα· τοῖς δʼ ὀνόμασι τούτοις ἄλλως κέχρηνται κοινοῖς οὖσιν, ὥσπερ οἱ νομικοὶ Γάιον Σήιον καὶ Λούκιον Τίτιον, καὶ οἱ φιλόσοφοι Δίωνα καὶ Θέωνα παραλαμβάνουσιν)· ἢ διὰ Γαΐαν Καικιλίαν καλὴν καὶ ἀγαθὴν γυναῖκα, τῶν Ταρκυνίου παίδων ἑνὶ συνοικήσασαν, ἧς ἐν τῷ τοῦ Σάγκτου ἱερῷ χαλκοῦς ἀνδριὰς ἕστηκεν; ἔκειτο δὲ πάλαι καὶ σανδάλια καὶ ἄτρακτοι, τὸ μὲν οἰκουρίας αὐτῆς, τὸ δʼ ἐνεργείας σύμβολον.

[¶4] 31. Question 31. Why is that so much celebrated name Thalassius sung at nuptials? Solution. Is it not from wool-spinning? For the Ro mans call the Greek τάλαρος (wool-basket) talasus. Moreover, when they have introduced the bride, they spread a fleece under her; and she, having brought in with her a distaff and a spindle, all behangs her husband’s door with woollen yarn? Or it may be true, as historians report, that there was a certain young man famous in military achievements, and also an honest man, whose name was Thalassius; now when the Romans seized by force on the Sabine daughters coming to see the theatric shows, a comely virgin for beauty was brought to Thalassius by some of the common sort of people and retainers to him, crying out aloud (that they might go the more securely, and that none might stop them or take the wench from them) that she was carried as a wife to Thalassius; upon which the rest of the rabble, greatly honoring Thalassius, followed on and accompanied them with their loud acclamations, praying for and praising Thalassius; that proving a fortunate match, it became a custom to others at nuptials to call over Thalassius, as the Greeks do Hymenaeus.

> Greek: 31. διὰ τί ὁ πολυθρύλητος ᾄδεται Ταλάσιος ἐν τοῖς γάμοις; πότερον ἀπὸ τῆς ταλασίας (καὶ γὰρ τὸν τάλαρον τάλασον ὀνομάζουσι· καὶ τὴν νύμφην εἰσάγοντες νάκος ὑποστρωννύουσιν· αὐτὴ δʼ εἰσφέρει μὲν ἠλακάτην καὶ τὴν ἄτρακτον, ἐρίῳ δὲ τὴν θύραν περιστέφει τοῦ ἀνδρός)· ἢ τὸ λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τῶν ἱστορικῶν ἀληθές, ὅτι νεανίας ἦν τις λαμπρὸς ἐν τοῖς πολεμικοῖς καὶ τἄλλα χρηστὸς ὄνομα Ταλάσιος· ἐπεὶ δʼ ἥρπαζον οἱ Ῥωμαῖοι τὰς τῶν Σαβίνων θυγατέρας ἐλθούσας ἐπὶ θέαν, ἐκομίζετο τῷ Ταλασίῳ παρθένος ἐκπρεπὴς τὴν ὄψιν ὑπὸ δημοτικῶν τινων καὶ πελατῶν τοῦ Ταλασίου, βοώντων ὑπὲρ ἀσφαλείας καὶ τοῦ μηδένα πελάζειν μηδʼ ἀντιλαμβάνεσθαι τῆς παιδός, ὡς Ταλασίῳ γυνὴ φέροιτο. τιμῶντες οὖν οἱ λοιποὶ τὸν Ταλάσιον καὶ συνευχόμενοι καὶ συνευφημοῦντες εἵποντο καὶ παρέπεμπον· ὅθεν, εὐτυχοῦς γάμου γενομένου, καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις εἰθίσθησαν ἐπιφωνεῖν τὸν Ταλάσιον, ὥσπερ Ἕλληνες τὸν Ὑμέναιον.

[¶5] 32. Question 32. Why do they that throw the effigies of men from a wooden bridge into the river, in the month of May, about the full moon, call those images Argives? Solution. Was it that the barbarians that of old inhabited about that place did in this manner destroy the Grecians which they took? Or did their so much admired Hercules reform their practice of killing strangers, and teach them this custom of representing their devilish practice by casting in of images? The ancients have usually called all Grecians Argives. Or else it may be that, since the Arcadians esteemed the Argives open enemies by reason of neighborhood, they that belonged to Evander, flying from Greece and taking up their situation in Italy, kept up that malignity and enmity.

> Greek: 32. διὰ τί τοῦ Μαΐου περὶ τὴν πανσέληνον ἀπὸ τῆς ξυλίνης γεφύρας εἴδωλα ῥιπτοῦντες ἀνθρώπων εἰς τὸν ποταμὸν Ἀργείους τὰ ῥιπτούμενα καλοῦσιν; ἦ τὸ παλαιὸν οἱ περὶ τὸν τόπον οἰκοῦντες βάρβαροι τοὺς ἁλισκομένους Ἕλληνας οὕτως ἀπώλλυσαν· Ἡρακλῆς δὲ θαυμασθεὶς ὑπʼ αὐτῶν ἔπαυσε μὲν τὴν ξενοκτονίαν, ἐδίδαξε δὲ τὸ ἔθος καὶ τὴν δεισιδαιμονίαν ἀπομιμουμένους εἴδωλα ῥιπτεῖν; Ἀργείους δὲ τοὺς Ἕλληνας οἱ παλαιοὶ πάντας ὁμαλῶς προσηγόρευον. εἰ μὴ νὴ Δία τῶν Ἀρκάδων πολεμίους καὶ τοὺς Ἀργείους διὰ τὴν γειτνίασιν ἡγουμένων, οἱ περὶ Εὔανδρον ἐκ τῆς Ἑλλάδος φυγόντες καὶ κατοικήσαντες αὐτόθι τὴν μνησικακίαν καὶ τὴν ἔχθραν διεφύλαττον.

[¶6] 33. Question 33. Why would they not in ancient times sup abroad without their sons, whilst they were in nonage? Solution. Was not this custom brought in by Lycurgus, when he introduced the boys to the public mess, that they might be inured to use of pleasures modestly, not savagely and rudely, having their superiors by them as overseers and observers? Verily it is of no small concernment that parents should carry themselves with all gravity and sobriety in the presence of their children. For when old men are debauched, it will necessarily follow (as Plato saith) that young men will be most debauched.

> Greek: 33. διὰ τί τὸ παλαιὸν οὐκ ἐδείπνουν ἔξω χωρὶς τῶν υἱῶν, ἔτι τὴν παιδικὴν ἡλικίαν ἐχόντων; ἦ τοῦτο μὲν καὶ Λυκοῦργος εἴθισε, τοὺς παῖδας ἐπεισάγων τοῖς φιδιτίοις, ὅπως ἐθίζωνται μὴ θηριωδῶς μηδʼ ἀτάκτως ἀλλὰ μετʼ εὐλαβείας ταῖς ἡδοναῖς προσφέρεσθαι, τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους οἷον ἐπισκόπους καὶ θεατὰς ἔχοντες; οὐκ ἔλαττον δὴ τοῦτο καὶ τοὺς πατέρας αὐτοὺς μᾶλλον αἰδεῖσθαι καὶ σωφρονεῖν τῶν υἱῶν παρόντων· ὅπου γὰρ ἀναισχυντοῦσι γέροντες, ὥς φησιν ὁ Πλάτων, ἐνταῦθʼ ἀνάγκη καὶ νέους ἀναισχυντοτάτους εἶναι.

[¶7] 34. Question 34. What is the reason that, when the other Romans did offer their offerings and libations to the dead in the month of February, Decimus Brutus (as Cicero saith) did it in December? He verily was the first who, entering upon Lusitania, passed from thence with his army over the river Lethe. Solution. May it not be that, as many were wont to perform funeral rites in the latter part of the day and end of the month, it is rational to believe that at the return of the year and end of the month also he would honor the dead? For December is the last month. Or were those adorations paid to the infernal Gods, and was it the season of the year to honor them when all sorts of fruits had attained ripeness? Or is it because they move the earth at the beginning of seed-time, and it is most meet then to remember the ghosts below? Or is it that this month is by the Romans consecrated to Saturn, whom they reckon to be one of the infernal Gods and not of the supernal? Or that whilst the great feast of Saturnals did last, thought to be attended with the greatest feasting and voluptuous enjoyments, it was judged meet to crop off some first-fruits of these for the dead? Or what if it be a mere lie that only Brutus did sacrifice to the dead in this month, since they solemnize funeral rites for Laurentia and offer drink-offerings at her tomb in the month of December?

> Greek: 34. διὰ τί, τῶν ἄλλων Ῥωμαίων ἐν τῷ Φεβρουαρίῳ μηνὶ ποιουμένων χοὰς καὶ ἐναγισμοὺς τοῖς τεθνηκόσι, Δέκιμος Βροῦτος, ὡς Κικέρων ἱστόρηκεν, ἐν τῷ Δεκεμβρίῳ τοῦτʼ ἔπραττεν (ἦν δʼ οὗτος ὁ Λυσιτάνειαν ἐπελθὼν καὶ πρῶτος ἐπέκεινα στρατῷ διαβὰς τὸν τῆς Λήθης ποταμόν); πότερον, ὥσπερ ἡμέρας ληγούσης καὶ μηνὸς φθίνοντος εἰώθασιν ἐναγίζειν οἱ πολλοί, λόγον ἔχει καὶ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ καταστρέφοντος ἐν τῷ τελευταίῳ μηνὶ τιμᾶν τοὺς τεθνηκότας (ἔστι δὲ τῶν μηνῶν τελευταῖος ὁ Δεκέμβριος)· ἢ χθονίων μὲν αἱ τιμαὶ θεῶν, τιμᾶν δὲ τοὺς χθονίους ὡραῖόν ἐστι, τῶν καρπῶν ἁπάντων εἰληφότων συντέλειαν; ἢ ὅτε κινοῦσι τὴν γῆν ἀρχόμενοι σπόρου, μεμνῆσθαι μάλιστα τῶν κάτω προσήκει; ἢ Κρόνῳ μὲν οὗτος ὁ μὴν ὑπὸ Ῥωμαίων καθιέρωται, Κρόνον δὲ τῶν κάτω θεῶν οὐ τῶν ἄνω νομίζουσιν; ἢ μεγίστης αὐτοῖς ἑορτῆς τῶν Κρονίων καθεστώσης καὶ συνουσίας τε πλείστας καὶ ἀπολαύσεις ἔχειν δοκούσης, ἔδοξε καὶ ταύτης ἀπονέμειν τινὰς ἀπαρχὰς τοῖς τεθνηκόσιν; ἢ τοῦτο, μόνον Βροῦτον ἐναγίζειν ἐν τῷ μηνὶ τούτῳ, καθόλου ψεῦδός ἐστι; καὶ γὰρ τῇ Λαρεντίᾳ ποιοῦσι τὸν ἐναγισμὸν καὶ χοὰς ἐπιφέρουσιν ἐπὶ τὸν τάφον τοῦ Δεκεμβρίου μηνός διὰ τί δὲ τὴν Λαρεντίαν, ἑταίραν γεγενημένην, οὕτω τιμῶσιν;

[¶8] 35. Question 35. Why do they adore Laurentia so much, seeing she was a strumpet? Solution. They say that Acca Laurentia, the nurse of Romulus, was diverse from this, and her they ascribe honor to in the month of April. But this other Laurentia, they say, was surnamed Fabula, and she became noted on this occasion. A certain sexton that belonged to Hercules, as it seems, leading an idle life, used to spend most of his days at draughts and dice; and on a certain time, when it happened that none of those that were wont to play with him and partake of his sport were present, being very uneasy in himself, he challenged the God to play a game at dice with him for this wager, that if he got the game he should receive some boon from the God, if he lost it he would provide a supper for the God and a pretty wench for him to lie with. Whereupon choosing two dice, one for himself and the other for the God, and throwing them, he lost the game; upon which, abiding by his challenge, he prepared a very splendid table for the God, and picking up Laurentia, a notorious harlot, he set her down to the good cheer; and when he had made a bed for her in the temple, he departed and shut the doors after him. The report went that Hercules came, but had not to do with her after the usual manner of men, and commanded her to go forth early in the morning into the market-place, and whomsoever she first happened to meet with, him she should especially set her heart upon and procure him to be her copemate. Laurentia accordingly arising and going forth happened to meet with a certain rich man, a stale bachelor, whose name was Taruntius. He lying with her made her whilst he lived the governess of his house, and his heiress when he died; some time after, she died and left her estate to the city, and therefore they have her in so great a reputation.

> Greek: 35. ἄλλην γὰρ εἶναι Λαρεντίαν Ἄκκαν ἱστοροῦσι τὴν Ῥωμύλου τροφόν, ἣν τῷ Ἀπριλλίῳ μηνὶ τιμῶσι. τῇ δʼ ἑταίρᾳ Λαρεντίᾳ Φαβόλαν ἐπίκλησιν εἶναι λέγουσιν, ἐγνωρίσθη δὲ διὰ τοιαύτην αἰτίαν. ζάκορός τις Ἡρακλέους ὡς ἔοικεν ἀπολαύων σχολῆς, ἔθος εἶχεν ἐν πεττοῖς καὶ κύβοις τὰ πολλὰ διημερεύειν· καί ποτε, τῶν εἰωθότων παίζειν σὺν αὐτῷ καὶ μετέχειν τῆς τοιαύτης διατριβῆς κατὰ τύχην μηδενὸς παρόντος, ἀδημονῶν τὸν θεὸν προυκαλεῖτο διαβαλέσθαι τοῖς κύβοις πρὸς αὐτὸν ὥσπερ ἐπὶ ῥητοῖς· καὶ νικήσας μὲν εὑρέσθαι τι παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ χρηστόν· ἂν δὲ λειφθῇ, δεῖπνον αὐτὸς τῷ θεῷ παρασχεῖν καὶ μείρακα καλὴν συναναπαυσομένην. ἐκ τούτου δὲ τοὺς κύβους προθέμενος, τὸν μὲν ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ, τὸν δʼ ὑπὲρ τοῦ θεοῦ βαλὼν ἐλείφθη. ταῖς οὖν προκλήσεσιν ἐμμένων τράπεζάν τε λαμπροτέραν παρεσκεύασε τῷ θεῷ, καὶ τὴν Λαρεντίαν παραλαβὼν ἐμφανῶς ἑταιροῦσαν εἱστίασε καὶ κατέκλινεν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ καὶ τὰς θύρας ἀπιὼν ἔκλεισε. λέγεται δὲ νύκτωρ ἐντυχεῖν αὐτῇ τὸν θεὸν οὐκ ἀνθρωπίνως καὶ κελεῦσαι βαδίζειν ἕωθεν εἰς ἀγοράν, ᾧ δʼ ἂν ἐντύχῃ πρώτῳ, προσέχειν μάλιστα καὶ ποιεῖσθαι φίλον. ἀναστᾶσαν οὖν τὴν Λαρεντίαν βαδίζειν, καὶ συντυχεῖν τινι τῶν πλουσίων, ἀγάμων δὲ καὶ παρηκμακότων, ὄνομα Ταρρουτίῳ· γνωρισθεῖσαν δὲ τούτῳ καὶ ζῶντος ἄρχειν τοῦ οἴκου καὶ κληρονομῆσαι τελευτήσαντος· ὕστερον δὲ χρόνοις αὐτὴν τελευτῶσαν τῇ πόλει τὴν οὐσίαν ἀπολιπεῖν· διὸ τὰς τιμὰς ἔχειν ταύτας.

[¶9] 36. Question 36. Why do they call one gate at Rome the Window, just by which is the bed-chamber of Fortune, so called? Solution. Was it because Servius, who became the most successful king, was believed to have conversed with Fortune, who came in to him at a window? Or may this be but a fable; and was it that Tarquinius Priscus the king dying, his wife Tanaquil, being a discreet and royal woman, putting her head out at a window, propounded Servius to the citizens, and persuaded them to proclaim him king; and that this place had the name of it?

> Greek: 36. διὰ τί πύλην μίαν θυρίδα καλοῦσι τὴν γὰρ φαινέστραν τοῦτο σημαίνειν, καὶ παρʼ αὐτὴν ὁ καλούμενος Τύχης θάλαμός ἐστι; πότερον ὅτι Σέρβιος ὁ βασιλεὺς εὐτυχέστατος γενόμενος δόξαν ἔσχε τῇ Τύχῃ συνεῖναι φοιτώσῃ διὰ θυρίδος πρὸς αὐτόν ἢ τοῦτο μὲν μῦθός ἐστιν, ἐπεὶ δὲ Ταρκυνίου Πρίσκου τοῦ βασιλέως ἀποθανόντος ἡ γυνὴ Τανακυλλὶς ἔμφρων οὖσα καὶ βασιλικὴ διὰ θυρίδος προκύψασα τοῖς πολίταις ἐνέτυχε καὶ συνέπεισεν ἀποδεῖξαι βασιλέα τὸν Σέρβιον, ἔσχε ταύτην ὁ τόπος τὴν ἐπωνυμίαν;

[¶10] 37. Question 37. Why is it that, of the things dedicated to the Gods, the law permits only the spoils taken in war to be neglected and by time to fall into decay, and permits them not to have any veneration nor reparation? Solution. Is this the reason, that men may be of opinion that the renown of ancestors fades away, and may always be seeking after some fresh monument of fortitude? Or rather because time wears out the marks of contention with our enemies, and to restore and renew them were invidious and malicious? Neither among the Greeks are those men renowned who were the first erectors of stone or brass trophies.

> Greek: 37. διὰ τί τῶν τοῖς θεοῖς ἀνατιθεμένων μόνα τὰ σκῦλα νενόμισται περιορᾶν ἀφανιζόμενα τῷ χρόνῳ, καὶ μήτε προσκυνεῖν μήτʼ ἐπισκευάζειν; πότερον ἵνα τὴν δόξαν οἰόμενοι τοῖς πρώτοις συνεκλιπεῖν ἀεί τι πρόσφατον ὑπόμνημα τῆς ἀρετῆς ζητῶσι κομίζειν, ἢ μᾶλλον ὅτι τοῦ χρόνου τὰ σημεῖα τῆς πρὸς τοὺς πολεμίους διαφορᾶς ἀμαυροῦντος, αὐτοὺς ἀναλαμβάνειν καὶ καινοποιεῖν ἐπίφθονόν ἐστι καὶ φιλαπέχθημον; οὐδὲ γὰρ παρʼ Ἕλλησιν οἱ πρῶτοι λίθινον καὶ χαλκοῦν στήσαντες τρόπαιον εὐδοκιμοῦσι.

[¶11] 38. Question 38. Why did Q. Metellus, being a high priest and otherwise reputed a wise man and a statesman, prohibit the use of divination from birds after the Sextile month, now called August? Solution. Is it not that—as we make such observations about noon or early in the day, and also in the beginning or middle of the month (when the moon is new or increasing), but beware of the times of the days or month’s decline as unlucky—so he also was of opinion that the time of year after eight months was, as it were, the evening of the year, when it declined and hastened towards an end? Or is it because they must use thriving and full-grown birds? For such are in summer; but towards autumn some are moulting and sickly, others chickens and unfledged, others altogether vanished and fled out of the country by reason of the season of the year.

> Greek: 38. διὰ τί Κόιντος Μέτελλος ἀρχιερεὺς γενόμενος καὶ τἄλλα δοκῶν φρόνιμος εἶναι καὶ πολιτικὸς ἀνὴρ ἐκώλυεν οἰωνίζεσθαι μετὰ τὸν Σεξτίλιον μῆνα τὸν νῦν Αὔγουστον προσαγορευόμενον; πότερον ὅτι καθάπερ ἡμέρας ἀκμαζούσης ἢ ἀρχομένης πράττομεν τὰ τοιαῦτα καὶ μηνὸς ἱσταμένου καὶ αὐξομένου, τὰς δʼ ἀποκλίτους ὡς ἀχρηματίστους φυλαττόμεθα· παραπλησίως τὸν μετὰ μῆνας ὀκτὼ χρόνον ὥσπερ ἑσπέραν τινὰ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ καὶ δείλην ἀποκλίνοντος ἤδη καὶ φθίνοντος νομίζειν· ἢ καὶ τοῖς ὄρνισι χρηστέον ἀκμαίοις καὶ τελείοις; εἰσὶ δὲ πρὸ τοῦ θέρους τοιοῦτοι· περὶ δὲ τὸ φθινόπωρον οἱ μὲν ἀσθενεῖς καὶ νοσώδεις, οἱ δὲ νεοσσοὶ καὶ ἀτελεῖς, οἱ δὲ παντάπασι φροῦδοι διὰ τὴν ὥραν ἐκτοπίζοντες.

[¶12] 39. Question 39. Why is it unlawful for such as are not mustered (although they be otherwise conversant in the army) to slay an enemy or wound him? Solution. This thing Cato Senior hath made clear in a certain epistle, writing to his son and commanding him, if he be discharged of the army having fulfilled his time there, to return; but if he stay, to take commission from the general to march forth in order to wounding and slaying the enemy. Is it the reason, that necessity alone can give warrant for the killing of a man, while he that doth this illegally and without commission is a murderer? Therefore Cyrus commended Chrysantas that, when he was about to slay an enemy and had lifted up his scimitar to take his blow, hearing a retreat sounded, he let the man alone and smote him not, as being prohibited. Or is it that, if a man conflicts and fights with his enemies and falls under a consternation, he ought to be liable to answer for it, and not escape punishment? For verily he doth not advantage his side so much by smiting and wounding him, as he doth mischief by turning his back and flying. Therefore he that is disbanded is freed from martial laws; but when he doth petition to perform the office of a soldier, he doth again subject himself to military discipline and put himself under the command of his general.

> Greek: 39. διὰ τί τοῖς μὴ στρατευομένοις μὲν ἐν στρατοπέδῳ δʼ ἄλλως ἀναστρεφομένοις οὐκ ἐξῆν ἄνδρα βαλεῖν πολέμιον οὐδὲ τρῶσαι; καὶ τοῦτο Κάτων ὁ πρεσβύτης ἐν ἐπιστολῇ τινι δεδήλωκε, γράφων πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν καὶ κελεύων, εἰ παρεθείη τῆς στρατείας ἀποπληρώσας τὸν χρόνον, ὑποστρέφειν· ἢ προσμένοντα λαβεῖν παρὰ τοῦ στρατηγοῦ τὸ ἐξεῖναι τρῶσαι καὶ ἀνελεῖν πολέμιον. πότερον ὅτι τὴν ἀνάγκην μόνην ἐξουσίαν εἶναι δεῖ τοῦ ἀνελεῖν ἄνθρωπον, ὁ δʼ ἄνευ νόμου καὶ προστάγματος τοῦτο ποιῶν ἀνδροφόνος ἐστὶ (διὸ καὶ Χρυσάνταν ἐπῄνεσεν ὁ Κῦρος, ὅτι μέλλων ἀναιρεῖν πολέμιον καὶ τὴν κοπίδα διηρμένος, ἀκούσας τὸ ἀνακλητικὸν ἀφῆκε τὸν ἄνδρα καὶ οὐκ ἔπαισεν ὡς κεκωλυμένος)· ἢ δεῖ τὸν συνιστάμενον πολεμίοις καὶ μαχόμενον, ἂν ἀποδειλιάσῃ, μὴ ἀνυπεύθυνον εἶναι μηδʼ ἀθῷον; οὐ γὰρ οὕτω βαλών τινα καὶ τρώσας ὠφέλησεν, ὡς φυγὼν καὶ ἀναχωρήσας ἔβλαψεν. ὁ μὲν οὖν ἀφειμένος στρατείας ἀπήλλακται τῶν στρατιωτικῶν νόμων· ὁ δʼ αἰτησάμενος τὸ πράττειν τὰ τῶν στρατευομένων πάλιν ἑαυτὸν ὑπεύθυνον τῷ νόμῳ καὶ τῷ στρατηγῷ δέδωκεν.

[¶13] 40. Question 40. Wherefore was it unlawful for a priest of Jupiter to be anointed abroad in the air? Solution. Was it not because it was neither honest nor decent to strip the sons naked whilst the father looked on, nor the son-in-law whilst the father-in-law looked on? Neither in ancient times did they wash together. Verily Jupiter is the father, and that which is abroad in the open air may be especially said to be as it were in the sight of Jupiter. Or is it thus? As it is a profane thing for him to strip himself naked in the temple or holy place, so did they reverence the open air and firmament, as being full of Gods and Daemons? Wherefore we do many necessary things within doors, hiding and covering ourselves in our houses from the sight of the Gods. Or is it that some things are enjoined to the priest only, other things to all by a law delivered by the priest? With us (in Boeotia) to wear a crown, to wear long hair, to carry iron arms, and not to enter the Phocian borders are peculiar, proper pieces of the magistrate’s service; but not to taste autumnal fruits before the autumnal equinox, and not to cut a vine before the spring equinox, are things required of all by the magistrate. For each of these has its season. After the same manner (as it appears) among the Romans it is peculiar to the priest neither to make use of a horse, nor to be absent from home in a journey more than three nights, nor to put off his cap, on which account he is called Flamen. Many other things are enjoined to all sorts of men by the priest; of which one is not to be anointed abroad in the open air. For the Romans have a great prejudice against dry unction; and they are of opinion that nothing hath been so great a cause to the Grecians of slavery and effeminacy as their fencing and wrestling schools, insinuating so much debauchery and idleness into the citizens, yea, vicious sloth and buggery; yea, that they destroyed the very bodies of youths with sleeping, perambulations, dancing, and delicious feeding, whereby they insensibly fell from the use of arms, and instead of being good soldiers and horsemen, loved to be called nimble, good wrestlers, and pretty men. It is hard for them to avoid these mischiefs who are unclothed in the open air; but they that are anointed within doors and cure themselves at home do commit none of these vices.

> Greek: 40. διὰ τί τῷ ἱερεῖ τοῦ Διὸς οὐκ ἔξεστιν ἐν ὑπαίθρῳ ἀλείφεσθαι; πότερον ὅτι καὶ παῖδας γυμνοῦσθαι πατρὸς ὁρῶντος καὶ πενθεροῦ γαμβρὸν οὐχ ὅσιον ἦν οὐδὲ καλόν, οὐδὲ συνελούοντο τὸ παλαιὸν ἀλλήλοις· πατὴρ δʼ ὁ Ζεὺς καὶ τὸ ἐν ὑπαίθρῳ μάλιστά πως εἶναι δοκεῖ τοῦ Διὸς ἐνώπιον· ἤ, καθάπερ ἐν ναῷ καὶ ἱερῷ γυμνοῦν ἑαυτὸν ἀθέμιτόν ἐστιν, οὕτω τὸν ὕπαιθρον ἀέρα καὶ τὸν ὑπουράνιον, ὄντα καὶ θεῶν καὶ δαιμόνων μεστόν, ἐξευλαβοῦντο; διὸ καὶ τὰ πολλὰ τῶν ἀναγκαίων ὑπὸ στέγῃ δρῶμεν ἐπικρυπτόμενοι καὶ ἐπικαλυπτόμενοι ταῖς οἰκίαις πρὸς τὸ θεῖον. ἢ τὰ μὲν μόνῳ τῷ ἱερεῖ, τὰ δὲ πᾶσιν ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου προστέτακται διὰ τοῦ ἱερέως; διὸ καὶ παρʼ ἡμῖν τὸ μὲν στεφανηφορεῖν καὶ κομᾶν καὶ μὴ σιδηροφορεῖν μηδὲ τοῖς Φωκέων ὅροις ἐμβαίνειν ἴδια λειτουργήματα τοῦ ἄρχοντός ἐστι· τὸ δʼ ὀπώρας μὴ γεύεσθαι πρὸ ἰσημερίας μετοπωρινῆς μηδʼ ἄμπελον τέμνειν πρὸ ἰσημερίας ἐαρινῆς ὁμοῦ τι πᾶσι δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ ἄρχοντος· ἑκατέρου γὰρ ὁ καιρὸς ἐκεῖνός ἐστι. τὸν αὐτὸν οὖν τρόπον ὡς ἔοικε καὶ τοῦ παρὰ Ῥωμαίοις ἱερέως ἴδιόν ἐστι τὸ μήθʼ ἵππῳ χρῆσθαι μήτε πλείονας νύκτας ἀποδημεῖν τριῶν μήτʼ ἀποτίθεσθαι τὸν πῖλον, ἀφʼ οὗ καὶ φλᾶμεν κέκληται. πολλὰ δʼ ἄλλα δηλοῦται πᾶσι διὰ τοῦ ἱερέως· ὧν ἕν ἐστι καὶ τὸ ἐν ὑπαίθρῳ μὴ ἀλείφεσθαι. τὸ γὰρ ξηραλοιφεῖν ὑφεωρῶντο Ῥωμαῖοι σφόδρα, καὶ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν οἴονται μηδὲν οὕτως αἴτιον δουλείας γεγονέναι καὶ μαλακίας, ὡς τὰ γυμνάσια καὶ τὰς παλαίστρας, πολὺν ἄλυν καὶ σχολὴν ἐντικτούσας ταῖς πόλεσι καὶ κακοσχολίαν καὶ τὸ παιδεραστεῖν καὶ τὸ διαφθείρειν τὰ σώματα τῶν νέων ὕπνοις καὶ περιπάτοις καὶ κινήσεσιν εὐρύθμοις καὶ διαίταις ἀκριβέσιν, ὑφʼ ὧν ἔλαθον ἐκρυέντες τῶν ὅπλων καὶ ἀγαπήσαντες ἀνθʼ ὁπλιτῶν καὶ ἱππέων ἀγαθῶν εὐτράπελοι καὶ παλαιστρῖται καλοὶ λέγεσθαι. ταῦτα γοῦν ἔργον ἐστὶν ἀποφυγεῖν εἰς ὕπαιθρον ἀποδυομένους· οἱ δὲ κατʼ οἰκίαν ἀλειφόμενοι καὶ θεραπεύοντες ἑαυτοὺς οὐδὲν ἁμαρτάνουσι.

[¶14] 41. Question 41. Why had the ancient coin on one side the image of double-faced Janus stamped, and on the other side the stern or stem of a ship? Solution. What if it be (as they commonly say) in honor of Saturn, that sailed over into Italy in a ship? Or, if this be no more than what may be said of many others besides (for Janus, Evander, and Aeneas all came by sea into Italy), a man may take this to be more probable: whereas some things serve for the beauty of a city, some things for necessary accommodation, the greatest part of the things that beautify a city is a good constitution of government, and the greatest part for necessary accommodation is good trading; whereas now Janus had erected a good frame of government among them, reducing them to a sober manner of life, and the river being navigable afforded plenty of all necessary commodities, bringing them in partly from the sea and partly from the out-borders of the country, their coin had a significant stamp, on one side the double-faced head of the legislator (as hath been said) by reason of the change made by him in their affairs, and on the other a small ship because of the river. They used also another sort of coin, having engraven on it an ox, a sheep, and a sow, to show that they traded most in such cattle, and got their riches from these; hence were many of the names among the ancients derived, as Suillii, Bubulci, and Porcii, as Fenestella tells us.

> Greek: 41. διὰ τί τὸ παλαιὸν νόμισμα πῆ μὲν εἶχεν Ἰανοῦ διπρόσωπον εἰκόνα, πῆ δὲ πλοίου πρύμναν ἢ πρῷραν ἐγκεχαραγμένην; πότερον ὡς οἱ πολλοὶ λέγουσιν ἐπὶ τιμῇ τοῦ Κρόνου πλοίῳ διαπεράσαντος εἰς Ἰταλίαν, ἢ τοῦτο μὲν ἔστιν ἐπὶ πολλῶν λέγειν (καὶ γὰρ Ἰανὸς καὶ Εὔανδρος καὶ Αἰνείας ἐκ θαλάττης προσεκομίσθησαν), ἐκεῖνο δʼ ἄν τις μᾶλλον εἰκάσειεν, ὅτι τὰ μὲν καλὰ ταῖς πόλεσίν ἐστι τὰ δʼ ἀναγκαῖα· καὶ μέγιστον τῶν μὲν καλῶν ἡ εὐνομία, τῶν δʼ ἀναγκαίων ἡ εὐπορία; ἐπεὶ τοίνυν εὐκοσμίαν μὲν Ἰανὸς κατέστησεν αὐτοῖς ἐξημερώσας τὸν βίον, ἀφθονίαν δὲ παρέχει τῶν ἀναγκαίων ὁ ποταμὸς πλόιμος ὢν καὶ τὰ μὲν ἐκ θαλάττης τὰ δʼ ἀπὸ τῆς χώρας κατακομίζων, σύμβολον ἔσχε τὸ νόμισμα τοῦ μὲν νομοθέτου τὸ δίμορφον ὡς εἴρηται διὰ τὴν μεταβολήν, τοῦ δὲ ποταμοῦ τὸ πορθμεῖον. ἑτέρῳ δʼ ἐχρήσαντο νομίσματι βοῦν ἔχοντι καὶ πρόβατον καὶ ὗν παράσημον, εὐποροῦντες ἀπὸ τῶν θρεμμάτων μάλιστα καὶ τὴν περιουσίαν ἀπὸ τούτων ἔχοντες διὸ καὶ τῶν ὀνομάτων πολλὰ τοῖς παλαιοῖς, Συέλλιοι καὶ Βουβολκοὶ καὶ Πόρκιοι ἦσαν, ὡς Φενεστέλλας εἴρηκεν.

[¶15] 42. Question 42. Why do they use the temple of Saturn for a chamber of public treasury, as also an office of record for contracts? Solution. Is not this the reason, because this saying hath obtained credit, that there was no avarice or injustice among men while Saturn ruled, but faith and righteousness? Or was it that this God presided over the fruits of the field and husbandry? For the sickle signified as much, and not, as Antimachus was persuaded and wrote with Hesiod,—
With crooked falk Saturn ’gainst heavens fought,
off his father’s privities, foul bout. Money is produced from plenty of fruit and the vent of them, therefore they make Saturn the author and preserver of their felicity. That which confirms this is that the conventions assembled every ninth day in the marketplace (which they call Nundinae) they reckon sacred to Saturn, because the abundance of fruit gave the first occasion of buying and selling. Or are these things farfetched, and was the first that contrived this Saturnine chamber of bank Valerius Publicola, upon the suppression of the kings, being persuaded it was a strong place, conspicuous, and not easily undermined by treachery?

> Greek: 42. διὰ τί τῷ τοῦ Κρόνου ναῷ χρῶνται ταμιείῳ τῶν δημοσίων χρημάτων, ἅμα δὲ καὶ φυλακτηρίῳ τῶν συμβολαίων; πότερον ὅτι δόξα κατεῖχε καὶ λόγος οὐκ εἶναι πλεονεξίαν ἐν ἀνθρώποις οὐδʼ ἀδικίαν Κρόνου βασιλεύοντος, ἀλλὰ πίστιν καὶ δικαιοσύνην· ἢ ὅτι καρπῶν ἀρετῆς ἢ γεωργίας ἡγεμὼν ὁ θεός; ἡ γὰρ ἅρπη τοῦτο σημαίνει καὶ οὐχ ὡς γέγραφεν Ἀντίμαχος Ἡσιόδῳ πειθόμενος
λέχρις δὲ δρεπάνῳ τέμνων ἀπὸ μήδεα πατρὸς
οὐρανοῦ Ἀκμονίδεω λάσιος Κρόνος ἀντιτέτυκτο.
καρπῶν δʼ ἀφθονία καὶ διάθεσις γένεσίς ἐστι νομίσματος· διὸ τὸν αἴτιον καὶ φύλακα ποιοῦνται τῆς εὐδαιμονίας. μαρτυρεῖ δὲ τούτῳ τὸ τὰς ἀγομένας διʼ ἐννέα ἡμερῶν ἐπʼ ἀγορὰν συνόδους, νουνδίνας δὲ καλουμένας, ἱερὰς τοῦ Κρόνου νομίζεσθαι· πράσεως γὰρ καὶ ὠνῆς περιουσία καρπῶν ἀρχὴν παρέσχεν. ἢ ταῦτα μέν ἐστι παλαιά, πρῶτος δὲ ταμιεῖον ἀπέδειξε τὸ Κρόνιον, τῶν βασιλέων καταλυθέντων, Οὐαλέριος Ποπλικόλας πειθόμενος εὐερκῆ καὶ καταφανῆ καὶ δυσεπιβούλευτον εἶναι τὸν τόπον;

[¶16] 43. Question 43. Wherefore did ambassadors, from whencesoever they came to Rome, go to Saturn’s temple, and there have their names recorded before the treasurers? Solution. Was this the cause, that Saturn was a foreigner, and therefore much rejoiced in strangers? Or is this better resolved by history? Anciently (as it seems) the quaestors sent entertainment to the ambassadors (they called the present lautia), they took care also of the sick, and buried their dead out of their public stock; but now of late, because of the multitude of ambassadors that come, that expense is left off; yet it remains still in use to bring the ambassadors unto the treasurers, that their names may be recorded.

> Greek: 43. διὰ τί δʼ οἱ πρεσβεύοντες εἰς Ῥώμην ὁποθενοῦν ἐπὶ τὸν τοῦ Κρόνου ναὸν βαδίζοντες ἀπογράφονται πρὸς τοὺς ἐπάρχους τοῦ ταμιείου; πότερον ὡς ξένου τοῦ Κρόνου γενομένου καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τοῖς ξένοις χαίροντος, ἢ καὶ τοῦτο λύεται τῇ ἱστορίᾳ; τὸ γὰρ παλαιὸν ὡς ἔοικεν οἱ ταμίαι ξένια τοῖς πρεσβεύουσιν ἔπεμπον (ἐκαλεῖτο δὲ λαύτια τὰ πεμπόμενα), καὶ νοσούντων ἐπεμέλοντο καὶ τελευτήσαντας ἔθαπτον ἐκ δημοσίου νῦν δʼ ὑπὸ πλήθους τῶν ἀφικνουμένων πρέσβεων ἐκλέλειπται τὸ τῆς δαπάνης, μένει δʼ ἔτι τὸ τοῖς ἐπάρχοις τοῦ ταμιείου προεντυγχάνειν διὰ τῆς ἀπογραφῆς.

[¶17] 44. Question 44. Why is it not lawful for Jupiter’s priests to swear? Solution. Is it not the reason, that an oath is a kind of test imposed on a free people, but the body and mind of a priest ought to be free from imposition? Or is it not unlikely that he will be disbelieved in smaller matters, who is entrusted with divine and greater? Or is it that every oath concludes with an execration of perjury? And an execration is a fearful and a grievous thing. Hence neither is it thought fit that priests should curse others. Wherefore the priestess at Athens was commended for refusing to curse Alcibiades, when the people required her to do it; for she said, I am a praying not a cursing priestess. Or is it that the danger of perjury is of a public nature, if a perjured and impious person presides in offering up prayers and sacrifices on the behalf of the city?

> Greek: 44. διὰ τί τῷ ἱερεῖ τοῦ Διὸς οὐκ ἔξεστιν ὀμόσαι; πότερον ὅτι βάσανός τις ἐλευθέρων ὁ ὅρκος ἐστί, δεῖ δʼ ἀβασάνιστον εἶναι καὶ τὸ σῶμα καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ ἱερέως· ἢ ὅτι περὶ μικρῶν ἀπιστεῖσθαι τὸν τὰ θεῖα καὶ μέγιστα πεπιστευμένον οὐκ εἰκὸς ἐστιν; ἢ ὅτι πᾶς ὅρκος εἰς κατάραν τελευτᾷ τῆς ἐπιορκίας, κατάρα δὲ δύσφημον καὶ σκυθρωπόν; ὅθεν οὐδʼ ἄλλοις ἐπαρᾶσθαι νομίζεται τοὺς ἱερεῖς. ἐπῃνέθη γοῦν Ἀθήνησιν ἡ ἱέρεια μὴ θελήσασα καταράσασθαι τῷ Ἀλκιβιάδῃ τοῦ δήμου κελεύοντος· ἔφη γὰρ εὐχῆς οὐ κατάρας ἱέρεια γεγονέναι. ἢ κοινὸς ὁ τῆς ἐπιορκίας κίνδυνος, ἂν ἀνὴρ ἀσεβὴς καὶ ἐπίορκος εὐχῶν κατάρχηται καὶ ἱερῶν ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως;

[¶18] 45. Question 45. Why is it that in the solemn feast called Veneralia they let wine run so freely out of the temple of Venus? Solution. Is this the reason (as some say), that Mezentius the Etrurian general sent to make a league with Aeneas, upon the condition that he might have a yearly tribute of wine; Aeneas refusing, Mezentius engaged to the Etrurians that he would take the wine by force of arms and give it to them; Aeneas, hearing of his promise, devoted his wine to the Gods, and after the victory he gathered in the vintage, and poured it forth before the temple of Venus? Or is this a teaching ceremony, that we should feast with sobriety and not excess, as if the Gods were better pleased with the spillers of wine than with the drinkers of it?

> Greek: 45. διὰ τί τῶν Οὐενεραλίων τῇ ἑορτῇ πολὺν οἶνον ἐκχέουσιν ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ τῆς Ἀφροδίτης; πότερον, ὡς οἱ πλεῖστοι λέγουσι, Μεζέντιος ὁ Τυρρηνῶν στρατηγὸς ἔπεμψε πρὸς Αἰνείαν σπενδόμενος ἐπὶ τῷ λαβεῖν τὸν ἐπέτειον οἶνον· ἀρνησαμένου δʼ ἐκείνου, τοῖς Τυρρηνοῖς ὑπέσχετο κρατήσας μάχῃ δώσειν τὸν οἶνον· Αἰνείας δὲ τὴν ὑπόσχεσιν αὐτοῦ πυθόμενος τοῖς θεοῖς τὸν οἶνον καθιέρωσε, καὶ μετὰ τὸ νικῆσαι συναγαγὼν τὸ καρπευθὲν ἐξέχεε πρὸ τοῦ ἱεροῦ τῆς Ἀφροδίτης· ἢ καὶ τοῦτο σύμβολόν ἐστι τοῦ χρῆναι νήφοντας ἑορτάζειν ἀλλὰ μὴ μεθύοντας, ὡς τῶν θεῶν μᾶλλον τοῖς ἐκχέουσι χαιρόντων τὸν πολὺν ἄκρατον ἢ τοῖς πίνουσι;

[¶19] 46. Question 46. Wherefore would the ancients have the temple of Horta to stand always open? Solution. Is this the reason (as Antistius Labeo hath told us), that hortari signifies to quicken one to an action, that Horta is such a Goddess as exhorts and excites to good things, and that they suppose therefore that she ought always to be in business, never procrastinate, therefore not to be shut up or locked? Or is it rather that Hora, as now they call her (the first syllable pronounced long), being a kind of an active and busy Goddess, very circumspect and careful, they were of opinion that she was never lazy nor neglectful of human affairs? Or is it that this is a Greek name, as many others of them are, and signifies a Goddess that always oversees and inspects affairs; and that therefore she has her temple always open, as one that never slumbers nor sleeps? But if Labeo deduceth Hora aright from hortari, consider whether orator may not rather be said to be derived from thence,—since the orator, being an exhorting and exciting person, is a counsellor or leader of the people,—and not from imprecation and prayer (orando), as some say.

> Greek: 46. διὰ τί τὸν τῆς Ὅρτας ναὸν ἀνεῳγμένον εἶχον οἱ παλαιοὶ διὰ παντός; πότερον, ὡς Ἀντίστιος Λαβεὼν ἱστόρηκε, τοῦ παρορμᾶν ὁρτάρι λεγομένου, τὴν οἷον ἐγκελευομένην πρὸς τὰ καλὰ καὶ παρορμῶσαν θεὸν Ὅρταν λεγομένην ᾤοντο δεῖν ὡς ἐνεργὸν ἀεὶ μηδέποτε μέλλειν μηδʼ ἀποκεκλεῖσθαι μηδʼ ἐλινύειν· ἢ μᾶλλον ὡς νῦν ὀνομάζουσιν αὐτὴν Ὥραν μηκυνομένης τῆς προτέρας συλλαβῆς, ἐπιστρεφῆ τινα καὶ πολυωρητικὴν θεόν, ἣν διαφυλακτικὴν καὶ φροντιστικὴν οὖσαν οὐδέποτε ῥάθυμον οὐδʼ ὀλίγωρον εἶναι τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ἐνόμιζον; ἤ, καθάπερ ἄλλα πολλά, καὶ τοῦτο τῶν Ἑλληνικῶν ὀνομάτων ἐστὶ καὶ δηλοῖ θεὸν ἐπισκοποῦσαν καὶ ἐφορῶσαν; ὅθεν ὡς ἀκοιμήτου καὶ ἀύπνου διὰ παντὸς ἀνεῳγμένον ἦν τὸ ἱερὸν αὐτῆς. εἰ μέντοι τὴν ὥραν ὀρθῶς ὁ Λαβεὼν ἀπὸ τοῦ παρορμᾶν ὠνομάσθαι δέδεκται, σκόπει μὴ τὸν ὡράτορα προτρεπτικόν τινα καὶ παρορμητικὸν ὄντα σύμβουλον ἢ δημαγωγὸν οὕτως ὠνομάσθαι φατέον, οὐκ ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρᾶς καὶ εὐχῆς ὡς ἔνιοι λέγουσι.

[¶20] 47. Question 47. Why did Romulus build the temple of Vulcan without the city? Solution. What if it were by reason of that fabled grudge which Vulcan had against Mars for the sake of Venus, that Romulus, being reputed the son of Mars, would not make Vulcan a cohabitant of the same house or city with him? Or may this be a silly reason; and was that temple at first built by Romulus for a senate house and a privy council, for him to consult on state affairs together with Tatius, where they might be retired with the senators, and sit in consultation about matters quietly without interruption from the multitude? Or was it that Rome was formerly in danger of being burnt from heaven; and he thought good to adore that God, but to place his habitation without the city?

> Greek: 47. διὰ τί τὸ τοῦ Ἡφαίστου ἱερὸν ἔξω πόλεως ὁ Ῥωμύλος ἱδρύσατο; πότερον διὰ τὴν μυθολογουμένην πρὸς Ἄρη ζηλοτυπίαν τοῦ Ἡφαίστου διʼ Ἀφροδίτην υἱὸς εἶναι δοκῶν Ἄρεος οὐκ ἐποιήσατο σύνοικον οὐδʼ ὁμόπολιν αὐτόν· ἢ τοῦτο μὲν ἀβέλτερον, ᾠκοδομήθη δʼ ὁ ναὸς ἐξ ἀρχῆς συνέδριον καὶ βουλευτήριον ἀπόρρητον αὐτῷ μετὰ Τατίου τοῦ συμβασιλεύσαντος, ὅπως συνιόντες ἐνταῦθα μετὰ τῶν γερόντων ἄνευ τοῦ παρενοχλεῖσθαι καθʼ ἡσυχίαν βουλεύοιντο περὶ τῶν πραγμάτων; ἢ πρὸς ἐμπρησμὸν ἄνωθεν ἐπισφαλῶς τῆς Ῥώμης ἐχούσης, ἔδοξε τιμᾶν μὲν ἐξοικίσαι δὲ τῆς πόλεως τὸν θεόν;

[¶21] 48. Question 48. Wherefore did they, in the feasts called Consualia, put garlands on the horses and asses, and take these beasts off from all work? Solution. Was it not because they celebrated that feast to Neptune the cavalier, who was called Consus, and the ass takes part and share with the horse in his rest from labor? Or was it that, after navigation came in and traffic by sea, there succeeded a kind of ease and leisure to the cattle in some kind or other?

> Greek: 48. διὰ τί τῇ τῶν Κωνσυαλίων ἑορτῇ καὶ τοὺς ἵππους καὶ τοὺς ὄνους στεφανοῦσι καὶ σχολάζειν ἐῶσι; πότερον ὅτι Ποσειδῶνι μὲν ἄγουσιν Ἱππείῳ τὴν ἑορτὴν, ὁ δʼ ὄνος τῷ ἵππῳ συναπολαύει καὶ συμμετέχει τῆς ἀδείας· ἢ ὅτι, ναυτιλίας φανείσης καὶ κομιδῆς κατὰ θάλατταν, ὑπῆρξέ τις ἀμωσγέπως ῥᾳστώνη καὶ ἀνάπαυσις τοῖς ὑποζυγίοις;

[¶22] 49. Question 49. Wherefore was it a custom among the candidates for magistracy to present themselves in their togas without tunics, as Cato tells us? Solution. Was it not that they should not carry money in their bosoms to buy votes with? Or is it that they preferred no man as fit for the magistracy for the sake of his birth, riches, or honors, but for his wounds and scars; and that these might be visible to them that came about them, they came without tunics to the elections? Or, as by courteous behavior, supplication, and submission, so by humbling themselves in nakedness did they gain on the affections of the common people?

> Greek: 49. διὰ τί τοὺς παραγγέλλοντας ἀρχὴν ἔθος ἦν ἐν ἱματίῳ τοῦτο ποιεῖν ἀχίτωνας, ὡς Κάτων ἱστόρηκε; πότερον ἵνα μὴ δεκάζωσιν ἀργύριον ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ κομίζοντες, ἢ μᾶλλον ὅτι τοὺς ἀξίους ἄρχειν οὐ γένεσιν οὐδὲ χρήμασιν οὐδὲ δόξαις ἀλλὰ τραύμασι καὶ ὠτειλαῖς ἔκρινον; ὅπως οὖν ταῦτα καθορῷτο τοῖς ἐντυγχάνουσιν, ἀχίτωνες ἐπὶ τὰς παραγγελίας κατῄεσαν; ἢ καθάπερ τῷ δεξιοῦσθαι καὶ παρακαλεῖν καὶ ὑποπίπτειν, οὕτω τῇ γυμνότητι ταπεινοῦντες ἑαυτοὺς ἐδημαγώγουν;

[¶23] 50. Question 50. Why did the Flamen Dialis (Jupiter’s priest), when his wife died, lay down his priestly dignity, as Ateius tells us? Solution. Is it not for this reason, because he that marries a wife and loses her after marriage is more unfortunate than he that never took a wife; for the family of a married man is completed, but the family of him that is married and loseth his wife is not only incomplete but mutilated? Or is it because his wife joins with the husband in consecration (as there are many sacred rites that ought not to be performed unless the wife be present), but to marry another immediately after he hath lost the former wife is not perhaps easy to do, and besides is not convenient? Hence it was not lawful formerly to put away a wife, nor is it at this present lawful; except that Domitian in our remembrance, being petitioned, granted it. The priests were present at this dissolution of marriage, doing many terrible, strange, and uncouth actions. But thou wilt wonder less, if thou art informed by history that, when one of the censors died, his partner was required to lay down his place. When Livius Drusus died, Aemilius Scaurus his colleague would not abandon his government before one of the tribunes of the people committed him to prison.

> Greek: 50. διὰ τί ὁ ἱερεὺς τοῦ Διός, ἀποθανούσης αὐτῷ τῆς γυναικός, ἀπετίθετο τὴν ἀρχήν, ὡς Ἀτήιος ἱστόρηκε; πότερον ὅτι τοῦ μὴ λαβόντος ὁ λαβὼν εἶτʼ ἀποβαλὼν γυναῖκα γαμετὴν ἀτυχέστερος ὁ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ γεγαμηκότος οἶκος τέλειος, ὁ δὲ τοῦ γήμαντος εἶτʼ ἀποβαλόντος οὐκ ἀτελὴς μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ πεπηρωμένος· ἢ συνιερᾶται μὲν ἡ γυνὴ τῷ ἀνδρὶ (ὡς καὶ πολλὰ τῶν ἱερῶν οὐκ ἔστι δρᾶσαι μὴ γαμετῆς συμπαρούσης), τὸ δὲ γαμεῖν εὐθὺς ἑτέραν ἀποβαλόντα τὴν προτέραν οὔτʼ ἴσως δυνατὸν οὔτʼ ἄλλως ἐπιεικές; ὅθεν οὐδʼ ἀποπέμψασθαι πρότερον ἐξῆν, οὐδὲ νῦν ὡς ἔοικεν ἔξεστιν, ἀλλʼ ἐφʼ ἡμῶν ἐπέτρεψεν ἐντευχθεὶς Δομετιανός. οἱ δʼ ἱερεῖς παρεγένοντο τῇ τοῦ γάμου διαλύσει, πολλὰ φρικώδη καὶ ἀλλόκοτα καὶ σκυθρωπὰ δρῶντες. ἧττον δʼ ἄν τις τοῦτο θαυμάσειε προσιστορήσας, ὅτι καὶ τῶν τιμητῶν θατέρου τελευτήσαντος ἔδει καὶ τὸν ἕτερον πεπαῦσθαι τῆς ἀρχῆς· ἀποθανόντος δὲ τιμητοῦ Λιβίου Δρούσου, Σκαῦρος Αἰμίλιος συνάρχων οὐκ ἐβούλετο τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀπείπασθαι, μέχρι οὗ τῶν δημάρχων τινὲς αὐτὸν ἐκέλευον εἰς τὸ δεσμωτήριον ἀπάγεσθαι.

[¶24] 51. Question 51. Why is a dog set before the Lares, whom they properly call Praestites, while the Lares themselves are covered with dogs’ skins? Solution. Is it that Praestites are they that preside, and it is fit that presidents should be keepers, and should be frightful to strangers (as dogs are) but mild and gentle to those of the family? Or is it rather what some Romans assert, that—as some philosophers who follow Chrysippus are of the opinion that evil spirits wander up and down, which the Gods do use as public executioners of unholy and wicked men—so the Lares are a certain sort of furious and revengeful daemons, that are observers of men’s lives and families, and are here clothed with dogs’ skins and have a dog sitting by them, as being sagacious to hunt upon the foot and to prosecute wicked men?

> Greek: 51. διὰ τί τῶν Λαρητῶν, οὓς ἰδίως πραιστίτεις καλοῦσι, τούτοις κύων παρέστηκεν, αὐτοὶ δὲ κυνῶν διφθέραις ἀμπέχονται; ἦ πραιστίτεις μὲν οἱ προεστῶτές εἰσι, τοὺς δὲ προεστῶτας οἴκου φυλακτικοὺς εἶναι προσήκει, καὶ φοβεροὺς μὲν τοῖς ἀλλοτρίοις, ὥσπερ ὁ κύων ἐστίν, ἠπίους δὲ καὶ πράους τοῖς συνοικοῦσιν; ἢ μᾶλλον, ὃ λέγουσιν ἔνιοι Ῥωμαίων, ἀληθές ἐστι καί, καθάπερ οἱ περὶ Χρύσιππον οἴονται φιλόσοφοι φαῦλα δαιμόνια περινοστεῖν, οἷς οἱ θεοὶ δημίοις χρῶνται καὶ κολασταῖς ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀνοσίους καὶ ἀδίκους ἀνθρώπους, οὕτως οἱ Λάρητες ἐρινυώδεις τινές εἰσι καὶ ποίνιμοι δαίμονες, ἐπίσκοποι βίων καὶ οἴκων· διὸ καὶ κυνῶν δέρμασιν ἀμπέχονται, καὶ κύων πάρεδρός ἐστιν, ὡς δεινοῖς οὖσιν ἐξιχνεῦσαι καὶ μετελθεῖν τοὺς πονηρούς;

[¶25] 52. Question 52. Why do they sacrifice a dog to Mana Geneta, and pray that no home-born should become good? Solution. Is the reason that Geneta is a deity that is employed about the generation and purgation of corruptible things? For this word signifies a certain flux (i.e. Mana from manare) and generation, or a flowing generation; for as the Greeks do sacrifice a dog to Hecate, so do the Romans to Geneta on the behalf of the natives of the house. Moreover, Socrates saith that the Argives do sacrifice a dog to Eilioneia (Lucina) to procure a facility of delivery. But what if the prayer be not made for men, but for dogs puppied at home, that none of them should be good; for dogs ought to be currish and fierce? Or is it that they that are deceased are pleasantly called good; and hence, speaking mystically in their prayer, they signify their desire that no home-born should die? Neither ought this to seem strange; for Aristotle says that it is written in the treaty of the Arcadians with the Lacedaemonians that none of the Tegeates should be “made good” on account of aid rendered to the party of the Lacedaemonians, i.e. that none should be slain.

> Greek: 52. διὰ τί τῇ καλουμένῃ Γενείτῃ Μάνῃ κύνα θύουσι καὶ κατεύχονται μηδένα χρηστὸν ἀποβῆναι τῶν οἰκογενῶν; ἦ ὅτι δαίμων ἐστὶν ἡ Γενείτα περὶ τὰς γενέσεις καὶ τὰς λοχείας τῶν φθαρτῶν; ῥύσιν γάρ τινα σημαίνει τοὔνομα καὶ γένεσιν ἢ ῥέουσαν γένεσιν. ὥσπερ οὖν οἱ Ἕλληνες τῇ Ἑκάτῃ, καὶ τῇ Γενείτῃ κύνα Ῥωμαῖοι θύουσιν ὑπὲρ τῶν οἰκογενῶν. Ἀργείους δὲ Σωκράτης φησὶ τῇ Εἰλιονείᾳ κύνα θύειν διὰ τὴν ῥᾳστώνην τῆς λοχείας. τὸ δὲ τῆς εὐχῆς πότερον οὐκ ἐπʼ ἀνθρώπων ἐστὶν οἰκογενῶν, μηδένα χρηστὸν γενέσθαι, ἀλλὰ κυνῶν· χαλεποὺς γὰρ εἶναι δεῖ καὶ φοβεροὺς τοὺς κύνας· ἢ διὰ τὸ χρηστοὺς κομψῶς λέγεσθαι τοὺς τελευτῶντας αἰνιττόμενοι, διὰ τῆς εὐχῆς αἰτοῦνται μηδένα τῶν συνοίκων ἀποθανεῖν; οὐ δεῖ δὲ τοῦτο θαυμάζειν καὶ γὰρ Ἀριστοτέλης ἐν ταῖς Ἀρκάδων πρὸς Λακεδαιμονίους συνθήκαις γεγράφθαι φησὶ μηδένα χρηστὸν ποιεῖν βοηθείας χάριν τοῖς λακωνίζουσι τῶν Τεγεατῶν, ὅπερ εἶναι μηδένα ἀποκτιννύναι.

[¶26] 53. Question 53. Why is it that to this very day, while they hold the games at the Capitol, they set Sardians to sale by a crier, and a certain old man goes before in way of derision, carrying a child’s bauble about his neck, which they call bulla? Solution. Was it because a people of the Tuscans called Veientes maintained a fight a long time with Romulus, and he took this city last of all, and exposed them and their king to sale by an outcry, upbraiding him with his madness and folly? And since the Tuscans were Lydians at first, and Sardis was the metropolis of the Lydians, so they set the Veientes to sale under the name of Sardians, and to this day they keep up the custom in a way of pastime.

> Greek: 53. διὰ τί τοῖς Καπιτωλίοις θέας ἄγοντες ἔτι νῦν κηρύττουσι Σαρδιανοὺς ὠνίους, καὶ γέρων τις ἐπὶ χλευασμῷ προάγεται παιδικὸν ἐναψάμενος περιδέραιον, ὃ καλοῦσι βοῦλλαν; ἦ ὅτι Ῥωμύλῳ πολὺν χρόνον ἐπολέμησαν οἱ λεγόμενοι Οὐήιοι Τυρρηνῶν, καὶ ταύτην πόλιν ἐσχάτην εἷλε, καὶ πολλοὺς αἰχμαλώτους ἀπεκήρυξε μετὰ τοῦ βασιλέως ἐπισκώπτων αὐτοῦ τὴν ἠλιθιότητα καὶ τὴν ἀβελτερίαν; ἐπεὶ δὲ Λυδοὶ μὲν ἦσαν οἱ Τυρρηνοὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς, Λυδῶν δὲ μητρόπολις αἱ Σάρδεις, οὕτω τοὺς Οὐηίους ἀπεκήρυττον καὶ μέχρι νῦν ἐν παιδιᾷ τὸ ἔθος διαφυλάττουσι.

[¶27] 54. Question 54. Why do they call the flesh-market Macellum? Solution. Was it not by corrupting the word μάγειρος, a cook, as with many other words, that the custom hath prevailed? For c and g are nigh akin to one another, and g came more lately into use, being inserted among the other letters by Sp. Carbilius; and now by lispers and stammerers l is pronounced instead of r. Or this matter may be made clear by a story. It is reported, that at Rome there was a stout man, a robber, who had robbed many, and being taken with much difficulty, was brought to condign punishment: his name was Macellus, out of whose riches a public meat-market was built, which bare his name.

> Greek: 54. διὰ τί τὰ κρεοπώλια μάκελλα καὶ μακέλλας καλοῦσι; πότερον ἀπὸ τῶν μαγείρων τοὔνομα διαφθαρέν, ὥσπερ ἄλλα πολλά, τῇ συνηθείᾳ κεκράτηκε (καὶ γὰρ τὸ κάππα πρὸς τὸ γάμμα συγγένειαν ἔχει παρʼ αὐτοῖς· ὀψὲ γὰρ ἐχρήσαντο τῷ γάμμα Καρβιλίου Σπορίου προσεξευρόντος· καὶ τὸ λάμβδα πάλιν τοῖς ἀπολισθαίνουσι τοῦ ρ διʼ ἀμβλύτητα τῆς γλώττης ὑπόκειται τραυλιζόμενον)· ἢ καὶ τοῦτο λυτέον τῇ ἱστορίᾳ; λέγεται γὰρ ἐν Ῥώμῃ βίαιον ἄνδρα καὶ λῃστρικὸν γενόμενον καὶ περικόψαντα πολλούς, Μάκελλον τοὔνομα, μόγις ἁλῶναι καὶ κολασθῆναι· ἐκ δὲ τῶν χρημάτων αὐτοῦ δημόσιον οἰκοδομηθῆναι κρεοπώλιον ἀπʼ ἐκείνου κτησάμενον τὴν προσηγορίαν.