Grice e Chiappelli: l'implicatura conversazionale dell'academici –
Cicerone e il segno di Marte – filosofia italiana – Luigi Speranza (Pistoia).
Filosofo italiano. Grice: “One of my most recent reflections is on the
distinction and striking parallelisms I draw between the Athenian dialectic –
best represented in Raffaello’s “La scuola di Atene” at Rome – and the Oxonian
dialectic – but represented in those reeky meeting at the Philosophy Room at
Merton – or better, my Saturday mornings at St. John’s with Austin! Chiappelli
provides us with a most brilliant hermeneutic of the iconography in Raffaello’s
painting – Strawson tried to emulate him with some caricatures of Austin,
Grice, and the rest of the Play Group – but his doodlings ccouldn’t compare!” Figlio
del fisiologo Francesco Chiappelli, zio del pittore omonimo, si laurea in
lettere e filosofia all'istituto superiore di Firenze ed inizia la carriera
universitaria a Napoli, dove è stato titolare della cattedra di storia della
filosofia e incaricato dell'insegnamento di pedagogia e direttore dell'annesso
museo. Ha inoltre insegnato storia delle chiese a Pisa, Bologna e Firenze. È
stato membro della Società reale di Napoli, delle accademie dei Lincei di Roma,
delle scienze di Torino, pontaniana di Napoli e della Crusca di Firenze.
Consigliere comunale a Firenze è stato incaricato di una missione di ricerche e
studi negli archivi e biblioteche di Firenze sull'arte fiorentina del
Rinascimento e membro della commissione provinciale di Firenze per la
conservazione dei monumenti e delle opere d'arte. Altre opere: “Della
interpretazione panteistica di Platone, Firenze: Succ. Le Monnier); La dottrina
della realtà del mondo esterno nella filosofia moderna prima di Kant” (Firenze,
Tip. dell'arte della stampa); “Studi di antica letteratura cristiana, Torino,
Loescher); “Darwinismo e socialismo, Roma, Forzani e C. Tipografi del Senato);
Saggi e note critiche, Bologna, Ditta Nicola Zanichelli); “Il socialismo e il
pensiero moderno, Firenze, Succ. Le Monnier); “Giacomo Leopardi e la poesia
della natura” (Roma, Società editrice Dante Alighieri); “Leggendo e meditando.
Pagine critiche di arte, letteratura e scienza sociale, Roma, Società editrice
Dante Alighieri); “Nuove pagine sul cristianesimo antico, Firenze: succ. Le
Monnier); “Pagine d'antica arte fiorentina, Firenze, Lumachi); “Dalla critica
al nuovo idealismo, Torino, Bocca); “Pagine di critica letteraria, Firenze, Le
Monnier); “Idee e figure moderne, 2 voll., Ancona, G. Puccini e figli). Dizionario
biografico degli italiani. Crusca. Cicerone
affronta e sviluppa la problematica semiotica in due importanti ambiti della
sua produzione teorica: (i) le opere di argomento retorico; (ii) le opere che
parlano dei se gni divinatori. Se prendiamo in considerazione il primo di
questo ambi to, possiamo osservare che l'interesse per i segni non è
ugualmente centrale in tutti i testi. Infatti, da una parte, ci sono il De
oratore, I'Orator, il Brutus, il De optimo genere oratorum che affrontano una
problematica a carattere so cio-politico, volta a definire la figura
deli'oratore perfetto, il suo ruolo nella società romana, la sua posizione
rispetto alla scuola attica e a quella di Pergamo; in queste opere tut to ciò
che costituisce l'apparato tecnico tradizionale della retorica (e con esso
anche la problematica sui segni e sulle prove indiziarie) appare non tanto
trascurato, quanto dato per scontato: esso si confi:ura come un vasto campo
di 9.2 CICERONE 209 competenza che rimane implicito sullo sfondo e
affiora solo nei termini di un uso personalissimo che ne fa l'autore, in prima
persona o attraverso i personaggi del dialogo. Dall'altra parte ci sono, poi,
il De inventione, le Partitio nes oratoriae e i Topica, opere molto diverse
tra loro, ma accomunate dalla caratteristica di prendere in considerazio ne e
di sistematizzare la gran massa delle nozioni che com pongono l'apparato
tecnico della retorica. Un limite di que ste opere, in generale, è
rintracciabile nella minuziosità del procedimento classificatorio, che
raggiunge talvolta il pa rossismo, come nel De inventione, e che spesso non
trova un'adeguta giustificazione teoretica. Tuttavia è proprio ali'interno di
queste opere che è dato rintracciare gli spunti e i documenti per la
ricostruzione di una teoria ciceroniana del segno. 9.2. 1 Il "De
inventione" Il De inventione è un'opera giovanile di Cicerone e con densa
l'ampia tradizione retorica che da Aristotele giunge fino a Ermagora: è quindi
naturale che al suo interno si tro vino riprodotti alcuni aspetti della
concezione del segno che in quell'ambito si era sedimentata. In particolare è
presente la concezione del segno in forma proposizionale, come an tecedente
che permette di scoprire un conseguente. Viene poi confermata l'attenzione
verso i segni involontari (l'im pallidire, l'arrossire, il balbettare
dell'imputato) come indi zi di colpevolezza. Infine compare la classica
divisione degli indizi secondo la loro relazione temporale con il fatto crimi
noso (anteriorità, contemporaneità, posteriorità). Questi i punti di contatto
con la tradizione. Ma bisogna anche dire che la classificazione dei segni
proposta da Cice rone è in larga misura diversa da quelle precedenti. Essa ap
pare infatti all'interno della teoria della argumentatio (ar gomentazione), cioè
del procedimento attraverso il quale vengono addotte delle prove per confermare
una certa tesi: "L'argomentazione sembra essere qualche cosa che si esco
gita da qualche genere e che rivela un'altra cosa in maniera 210 9.
RETORICA LATINA probabile (probabiliter ostendens) , o la dimostra in . un mo
do necessario (necessarie demonstrans)" (De inv., I, 44). Anche se non
viene usato il normale lessico semiotico, ciò che è in gioco in questa
definizione è proprio il meccanismo del segno: infatti, qualcosa che è stato
trovato (un indizio che viene depositato nel dossier deli'avvocato) rinvia a
qualcos'altro. Compare, a questo punto, la distinzione (già aristotelica) tra
una forza argomentativa debole (probabili ter ostendens) e un'inferenza
necessaria (necessarie demon strans) . 9.2 . 1 . 1 Rinvio necessario e non
necessario I segni necessari sono così definiti: "Viene dimostrato in modo
necessario ciò che non può verificarsi né essere pro vato diversamente da come
viene detto" (ibidem). Ne sono esempi: "Se ha partorito, è stata con
un uomo" (ibidem); "Se respira, è vivo", "Se è giorno, c'è
luce" (De inv. , l, 86). Come Cicerone spiega in un altro passo, in casi
di questo genere l'antecedente e il conseguente sono legati da una re lazione
inscindibile (cum priore necessario posterius cohae rere videtur, De inv., l.
86). Il rapporto di rinvio non necessario viene poi cosi defini to:
"Probabile è poi ciò che suole generalmente accadere, o che è basato sulla
comune opinione, o che ha in sé qualche somiglianza con questa qualità, sia
esso vero o sia falso" (De inv., l, 46). Con questa definizione Cicerone
mette in evidenza due caratteri: (i) quello probabilistico e (ii) quello
doxastico; il primo di questi era da Aristotele attribuito peculiarmente all'eikos
(verisimile). E infatti i primi due esempi sono di un tipo che Aristotele
avrebbe classificato come eikos: "Se è madre, ama suo figlio",
"Se è avido, non fa gran caso del giuramento" (De inv., I, 46). In
essi compare anche il tipico rapporto di generalizzazio ne che per Aristotele
definisce il verosimile (Arist., Rhet., 1357 a). C'è però un terzo esempio,
"Se c'era molta polvere nei calzari, era sicuramente reduce da un
viaggio" (De inv. , 9.2 CICERONE 21 1 I, 47), che non sembra dello
stesso tipo, ma è più vicino al smeion aristotelico. 9.2. 1 .2 L'indizio La
categoria di signum, poi, compare come una sottopar tizione dei segni non
necessari, accanto al credibile (credibi le), ali'iudicatum (giudicato) e al
comparabile (paragonabi le). Se le ultime tre nozioni appaiono distinte in
base a crite ri estrinseci (e scompariranno nelle trattazioni successive), il
signum corrisponde a una categoria di fenomeni abbastan za particolare:
"Segno è ciò che cade sotto qualcuno dei no stri sensi e indica
(significar) un qualcosa che sembra deri vato dal fatto stesso, e che può
essere verificato prima del fatto, durante il fatto, o può averlo seguito, e
tuttavia ha bisogno di una prova e di una conferma più sicura" (De inv. ,
I, 48). Ne sono esempi: "il sangue", "il pallore", "la
fuga", "la poivere". Si tratta, come si vede, degli indizi,
intesi come fenomeni percepibili, scarsamente codificati e generalmente non vo
lontari. Qui sono presentati in una forma non proposizio nale; ma niente vieta
che vengano sviluppati in proposizio ni, come dimostra il caso deli'indizio
"polvere": "Se c'era molta polvere nei calzari, era sicuramente
reduce da un viaggio". Gli indizi, infine, vengono suddivisi secondo la
nota relazione temporale con il fatto criminoso. Possiamo quindi schematizzare
la classificazione propo sta nel De inventione (cfr. p. 212). 9.2.2
"Partitiones oratoriae" Le Partitiones oratoriae sono un'opera della
tarda matu rità di Cicerone, nella quale la classificazione della materia
semiotica presenta alcune differenze e peculiarità rispetto al trattato
giovanile. Innanzitutto la terminologia si sgancia completamente da quella dei
modelli greci e viene completa mente latinizzata. In secondo luogo gli indizi
(qui chiamati RETORICA LATINA argumentatio necessaria probsbilis (·quod
fero solet fiori élut quod in opi nione positum est") es.: ..
"pallore'", ..polvere" vestigiafactl) non compaiono più come
sottopartizione di un'altra categoria, ma assumono un ruolo autonomo. (·ea quae
alitar ac discuntur nec fieri nec probari pos sunt"l es . : ·se ha
partorito, è stata con un uomo'" (.,quod sub sensum aliquem cadit, et
quiddam sig nificat , quod ex ipso profectum est'") es.: ·sangue",
·ruga"', Sa è madre, ama suo fi\]lio
-- signum erodibile indicBtLm comparabile / -- -- Infine viene accettata
la distinzione aristotelica tra "luo ghi estrinseci" (corrispondenti
alle "prove extratecniche", titechnol) e "luoghi intrinseci''
(corrispondenti alle "prove tecniche", éntechno1), che veniva
criticata nel De inventione (Il, 47) e che invece sarà sviluppata nei Topica. È
curioso notare come tra i luoghi estrinseci (sine arte) trovino posto, accanto
alle testirnonianze umane, anche quelle "divine": gli oracoli, gli
auspici, i vaticini, i responsi sacri (di sacerdoti, aruspici, interpreti
onirici) (Part. or. , 6). Tutto ciò è sicuramente un residuo di una concezione
orda lica e antichissima deli'amministrazione della giustizia; tut tavia è
anche un indizio di un continuo riaffiorare del para digma divinatorio
all'interno dei fatti semiolici, anche quando ormai i segni si sono
completamente laicizzati. CICERONE Né questo è un caso isolato in ambito
giuridico. Per quel che riguarda la cultura greca, si ricorderà L ,orazione per
/,uccisione di Erode, in cui Antifonte così si esprimeva: "Tutto quel che
era provabile con indizi e testimonianze umane l'avete udito, ma in questo caso
dovete votare dopo aver trattato indizi anche dai segni che vengono dagli
dei" (V, 81; Lanza Il verisimile e il segno caratteristico I segni umani
sono invece trattati tra gli argomenti intrin seci, in particolare tra quelli
che riguardano lo stato di cau sa congetturale. Infatti la congettura può
essere tratta da due tipi di segni: i verisimilia (verisimili) e le
notaepropriae rerum (segni caratteristici delle cose). Il verisimile, come dice
Cicerone, è "ciò che accade per lo più" (Part. or., 34), come a
esempio "la gioventù è incline al piacere in modo particolare".
Questo tipo di segno corri sponde ali'eik6s aristotelico, di cui ha il
carattere probabili stico e generalizzante. La nnta propria rei viene definita
come "una prova che non si verifica mai direttamente e indica una cosa
certa, co me il fumo indica il fuoco" (Part. or., 34). Si tratta, evi
dentemente, del segno necessario, come è dimostrato anche dall'esempio e
dall'uso dell'aggettivo proprius, che riman da alla nozione di fdion semeion
(segno proprio). Per Ari stotele il segno proprio era la caratteristica
specifica di un certo genere, come, ad esempio, il fatto che i leoni avessero
grandi estremità, segno del coraggio (An. Pr., 70 b, 11-38). Per le scuole
postaristoteliche il segno proprio aveva carat tere di necessità e si definiva
come quel segno che non può esistere se non esiste la cosa a cui rimanda
(Philod., De si gnis, l, 12-16). 9.2.2.2 Gli indizi di fatto Ci sono, poi, i
vestigia facti (indizi di fatto), dei quali RETORICA LATINA vengono dati
questi esempi: "un'arma, macchie di sangue, grida, lamenti, imbarazzo,
alterazione del colorito, discor so contraddittorio, tremore [...], gli indizi
materiali della premeditazione, le confidenze sulle intenzioni delittuose, le
risultanze visive, uditive, rivelate" (Pari. or., 39). Cicerone non
definisce QUf)tO tipo di segni, se non dicendo che si tratta di ''fenomeni
avvertibili con i sensi" (ibidem), caratte ristica condivisa anche dai
signa del De inventione (l, 48), in cui ricorrono esempi analoghi, e dagli
argumenta di Cor nificio (Rhet. adHer., II, 8). I commentatori si sono chiesti
se i vestigiafacti siano più in relazione con i segni necessari (notae propriae
rerum) o con i verisimili (verisimile) (Crapis 1986: 61-62). In realtà questa
sembra una categoria abbastanza autonoma non avendo la necessità dei primi, ma
nemmeno le caratteristi che degli ultimi. È plausibile che essa corrisponda
alla cate goria dei semefa aristotelici, diversi tanto dai tekmoria quanto
dagli eik6ta. Da un altro passo delle Partitiones oratoriae (1 14), dove
ricorrono esempi analoghi, i vestigiafacti (chiamati lì anche signa) vengono
definiti come consequentia, cioè inferenze che si traggono dal conseguente,
caratteristica che definiva appunto, per Aristotele, i segni non necessari. Ma
mentre Aristotele condannava i semefa da un punto di vista episte mologico per
la loro insicurezza, Cicerone è pronto a rico noscerne l'efficacia qualora si
presentino in gran numero (coacervata proficiunt, 40). Possiamo quindi
schematizzare la classificazione cicero niana nelle Partitiones oratoriae
(cfr. p. 215). 9.2.3 Le opere sulla divinazione Molte cose collegano la
retorica giudiziaria alla divina zione. Innanzitutto il fatto che entrambe si
avvalgano dei segni per arrivare alla conoscenza di fatti non direttamente
accessibili alla percezione. In secondo luogo, in entrambe viene operata una
distinzione tra aspetti che sono eminente mente congetturali e altri aspetti
che sono invece naturali o trt•) (·sensu percipi potest•) es .sangue - uccisione·
es.: •adolescenza inclinazione alla libidine ·CICERONE 215 coniecturs verisimilie (•quod plerumque rta notse
proprise rerum (•quod numquam alrter frt certumque declarat•) es.:
'"fumo-fuoco· vestigia fecti o signa dati: alla dicotomia retorica tra
prove tecniche (o congettu rali) e prove extratecniche corrisponde la
distinzione tra di vinazione artificiale (basata sull'interpretazione e sulla
con gettura) e divinazione naturale. Infine, come Cicerone pole micamente
rileva (De div. , II, 55), i segni della divinazione sono talvolta interpretati
in maniera diametralmente oppo sta, proprio come avviene nel processo, in cui
l'accusa e la difesa propongono dello stesso fatto due interpretazioni di
verse ed entrambe plausibili. Ma Cicerone apprezza i metodi deli'indagine
giudiziaria, mentre nutre una diffidenza enorme nei confronti della di
vinazione. In linea, infatti, con un vasto gruppo di intellet tuali della sua
epoca, educati ai metodi di indagine della fi losofia greca, a fondamento
razionalistico, e contempora neamente impegnato in politica, sente l'esigenza
di operare una distinzione netta tra religione e superstizione, di cui la
divinazione fa, per lui, parte. La religione appartiene alla più antica
tradizione romana e, posta come è ai fondamenti dello stato, deve essere
conservata, pena la disgregazione dello stato stessso; la superstizione,
invece, costituita dal coacervo degli elementi spuri che inquinano e rendono
poco credibile la religione stessa, dev'essere respinta, anche per ché non
venga limitata la libertà del cittadino romano nel suo impegno di gestione
della repubblica. RETORICA LATINA Cicerone affronta questi argomenti nel
De natura deo rum, nel De fato e, soprattutto, nel De divinatione. Que
st'ultima opera è scritta in forma di dialogo tra l'autore e il fratello
Quinto, il quale difende l'arte divinatoria basandosi sulle teorie storiche che
legavano la divinazione all'esistenza degli dei. Le osservazioni di Cicerone
contro la teoria soste nuta da Quinto sono particolarmente interessanti perché
costituiscono una vera e propria critica a un meccanismo semiotico settoriale e
contribuiscono, in negativo, a una concezione generale del segno. 9.2.3. 1 La
divinazione "artificiale" Secondo la teoria di Quinto, gli dei si
pongono come fon te dell'informazione e come emittenti nei processi di comu
nicazione divinatoria, dei quali gli uomini sono i destinata ri. Ma, a seconda
dei due specifici tipi di divinazione, il pro cesso comunicativo si struttura
in modo differente. Il primo tipo è costituito dalla divinatio artificialis, in
cui l'interpretazione dei segni è legata a un'ars, ovvero a una tecnica
professionale di decriptazione, demandata a specia listi, ciascuno esperto in
un settore: extispices (esaminatori delle viscere), interpretes monstrorum et
fu/gurum (inter preti dei fatti prodigiosi e dei fulmini), augures (interpreti
del volo degli uccelli), astrologi (interpreti delle stelle), in terpretes
sortium (interpreti delle combinazioni di tavolette mescolate in un'urna ed
estratte a caso). In tale divinazione l'informazione proveniente dalla divinità
si materializza prima di tutto in una sostanza espressiva percepibile, a cui
l'ars permetterà di abbinare un contenuto semantico. I presupposti su cui si
basano le interpretazioni di questo tipo sono dati dalla teoria, di origine
stoica, secondo cui tutti i fenomeni sono legati tra di loro in una catena di
cau se ed effetti, senza soluzione di continuità. Questa catena che ha come
fondamento primo il /6gos divino e costituisce il fato (heimarméne), non è
conoscibile per intero da parte degli uomini, dato che l'onniscienza è
prerogativa della sola divinità (De div., I, CICERONE 217 Tuttavia viene
prevista l'esistenza di un tempo ciclico che "può essere paragonato con lo
srotolarsi di una gomena, in quanto non dà mai luogo a fatti nuovi, ma ripete
sempre quantoprimaèaccaduto"(Dediv.,l, 127).Questofasìche gli uomini,
attraverso l'osservazione attenta, colgano il mo do in cui gli eventi si
ripetono e, pur non potendo conoscere direttamente le cause, possono però
arrivare a coglierne gli indizi caratteristici (signa tamc.z causarum et notas
cernunt) (ibidem). Dato poi che è possibile tramandare memoria dalle con
nessioni passate, si crea un vero e proprio codice basato sul la iteratività.
Si può schematizzare così il processo: emittente divino-segni di cause-eventi
futuri codice basato sulla iterattività La divinazione "naturale" Il
secondo tipo di divinazione è quello definito naturalis, in quanto indipendente
da qualunque tecnica professionale, ma derivante piuttosto da una diretta
ispirazione divina, senza passare attraverso la mediazione di un segno esterno.
Fanno parte di questo tipo le forme di preveggenza derivan ti da invasamento
profetico, cioè le vaticinationes e quelle derivanti dai sogni. Il palinsesto
filosofico ·a cui è legato questo secondo tipo di divinazione è quello delle
teorie peri patetiche (Dicearco e Cratippo vengono esplicitamente no minati,
De div. , II, 100), secondo le quali l'anima, per il suo legame naturale con la
divinità, una volta che sia spinta da una divina follia o sciolta, nel sonno,
dai vincoli che la legano al corpo, partecipa direttamente della conoscenza del
dio. Il ruolo del codice è in questo caso ridotto, se non addirittura
sostituito da una parziale identificazione tra emittente e ricevente, secondo
lo schema: RETORICA LATINA emittente divino - segno interno - evento
futuro .... ricevente umano 9.2.3 .3 Critiche "semiologiche" contro i
segni divinatori Le obiezioni che Cicerone muove ai sostenitori della divi
nazione si basano su argomenti specificamente semiotici. La tesi generale,
mediante la quale Cicerone nega valore alla divinazione, è che essa non abbia
veramente carattere semiotico, e cioè che i fenomeni che essa interpreta come
se gni non siano veramente tali, ovvero che non si comportino veramente come
degli antecedenti rispetto a dei conse guenti. Per distinguere i segni veri
rispetto a quelli presunti della divinazione, Cicerone istituisce un paragone
tra le tecniche scientifiche (come la medicina, la meteorologia, la nautica, la
tecnica previsionale del contadino e deli'astronomo) e la divinazione. In
entrambi i casi è in gioco la predizione del futuro a partire da certi indizi;
ma, mentre le pratiche pro fessionali adottano una vera e propria metodologia
che comporta "scienza (ars), ragionamento (ratio), esperienza (usus) e
congettura (coniectura)" (De div. , II, 14), le prati che divinatorie si
basano sul "capriccio della sorte, tanto che nemmeno la divinità sembra
che possa avere, fra le sue prerogative, quella di sapere quali fatti il caso
farà accade re" (De div., II, 18). Questa opposizione tra ciò che, in
definitiva, è il codice (anche se 1si tratta di legami naturali basati sulla
frequenza statistica) e il caso è del resto la stessa con cui i medici ip
pocratici tendevano a distinguere la propria scienza profes sionale dalla
divinazione e dalla medicina magica (Antica medicina, cap. XII). Cicerone poi
si sbarazza in termini razionalistici della teoria secondo cui anche nel caso
della divinazione tecnica si farebbe appello ali'osservazione iterata delle
coincidenze, ritenendola ridicola e insostenibile (De div., II, 28). Ma ci sono
altri gravi difetti che la divinazione presenta dal punto di vista semiotico:
(i) le interpretazioni di uno stesso segno sono spesso diametralmente opposte
(De div. , Il, 83); (ii) si verificano frequentemente fenomeni di falsa
identificazione dell'antecedente, per cui un certo evento non è connesso a
quello individuato come segno prodigio so, ma a ben diverse cause naturali (De
div., II, 62); (iii) l'interpretazione avviene a posteriori e così toglie ogni
ne cessità di rapporto tra antecedente e conseguente (De div.); (iv) in certi
casi l'interpretazione è motivata da ra gioni di faziosità politica e quindi è
priva di oggettività (De div.).Cicero composed this treatise immediately after that on the
Nature of
the Gods; the two subjects being indeed very closely connected.
In the first book all kinds of divination are represented as maintained by his brother Quintus, on the principles of the Porch. It
is an old opinion, derived as far back asfrom the heroic times, and confirmed by the unanimous agreement of the rather
superstitious Roman people, and indeed of other nations, too,
that there
is a species of divination in existence among men, which the Greeks call “xarrt/c^,”
that is to say, a presentiment, and foreknowledge
of future events. A truly splendid and serviceable gift, if it only exists in reality; and one by which our mortal nature makes its nearest
approach to the power of the gods. Therefore, as
we have done many other
things better than the Greeks, so, most especially have we excelled them in giving a name to this most admirable
endowment, since our nation derives the name which it gives to it, “divination,”
from the gods (“divis”),
while the Greeks derive the title which
they give it, namely, “juavn/cr/,” from
madness (juai'ia). For that is Plato's
interpretation of the word. Now, as
far as I know, there is no
nation whatever, how ever polished and
learned, or however barbarous and un
civilized, which does not believe it
possible that future events may be
indicated, and understood, and predicted by
certain persons. In the first place
the Assyrians, that I may trace back
the authority for this belief to the
most remote ages and countries, as a
natural consequence of the champaign
country in which they lived, and of
the vast extent of their territories,
which led them to observe the heavens
which lay open to their view in
every direction, began to take notice
also of the paths and motions of
the stars; and having taken these
observations for some time, they handed
down to their posterity informa tion
as to what was indicated by their
various positions and revolutions. And
among the Assyrians, the Chaldaeans, a
tribe who had this name not from
any art which they professe, but from
the district which they inhabited, by
a very long course of observation of
the stars are considered to have
established a complete science, so that
it became possible to predict what would
happen to each individual, and with
what destiny each separate person was
born. The Egyptians also are
believed tohave acquired the knowledge of
the same art by a continued practice
of it extending through countless ages.
But the nature of the Cilicians and
Pisidians, and the Pamphylians, who border
on them, nations which we ourselves
have had under our government,1 think that
future events are pointed out by the
flight and voices of birds as the
surest of all indications. And when
was there ever an instance of Greece
sending any colony into yEolia, Ionia,
Asia, Sicily or Italy, without consulting
the Pythian or Dodonrean oracle, or
that of Jupiter Hammon? or when did
that nation ever undertake a war
without first asking counsel of the
Gods 1 Nor is there only one
kind of divination celebrated both in
public and private. For, (to say
nothing of the practice of other
nations.) how many different kinds have
been adopted by our own people. In
the first place, the founder of this
city, Romulus, is said not only to
have founded the city in obedience to
the
auspices; but also to have been himself an augur of the highest reputation. After him the other kings also had recourse to soothsayers;
and after the kings were driven out,
no public business was ever transacted,
either at home or in war, without
reference to the auspices. And as
there appeared to be great power and
usefulness in the system of the
soothsayers (haruspices),2 in reference to
the people's succeeding in their objects,
and consulting the Gods, and arriving
at an understanding of the meaning of
prodigies and averting evil omens, they
introduced the whole of their
science from Etruria, to prevent the appearance [Cicero had
been proconsul of Cilicia, and had
gained a very high reputation by the integrity
andenergy which he displayed in that
government. Aruspex is derived from the
Greek word Ifptiv, and specio, to behold,
because the Aruspex prophesied from the
omens which he drew from an
inspection of the entrails
of the victims. Augur, from avis, and garrio, to chatter;
because the omens were drawn from the
noise made by the birds in their
flight of allowing any kind of
divination to be neglected. And as
men's minds were often seen to be
excited in two manners, without any
rules of reason or science, by their
own mere uncontrolled and free motion,
being sometimes under the influence of
frenzy, and at others under that of
dreams, our ancestors, thinking that the
divination which proceeded from frenzy was
contained chiefly in verses of the
Sibyl, ordained that there should be
ten citizens chosen as interpreters of these compositions.
And in the same spirit they have
also, at times, thought the frantic
predictions of conjurors
and prophets worth, attending to; as they did in the Octavianl
war in the case of Cornelius
Culleolus. Nor indeed have men of the
greatest wisdom thought it beneath them
to attend to the warnings of
important dreams, if at any time any
such appeared to have reference to
the interests of the republic. Moreover,
even in our own time, Lucius Junius,
who was consul, as colleague of Publius
Rutilius, was ordered by a vote of
the senate to erect a temple to
Juno Sospita, in compliance with a
dream seen by Csecilia, the daughter
of Balearicus.2 III. And, as I
apprehend, our ancestors were induced to
establish this custom more because they
had been warned, by the events which
they saw, to do so, than from
any previous conclusion of reason. But
some exquisite arguments of philo sophers
have been collected to prove why
divination may well be a true
science. Now of these philosophers, to
go back to the most ancient ones,
Xenophanes the Colophonian appears to have
been the only one who admitted the
existence of Gods, and yet utterly
denied the efficacy of divination. But
every other philosopher except Epicurus,
who talks so childishly about the
nature of the Gods, has sanctioned a
belief in divination; though they have
not all spoken in the same manner.
For, though Socrates, and all his
followers, and Zeno, and all those of
his school, adhered to the opinion of
the ancient philosophers, and the Old
Academy and the 1 This was the
civil war in the consulship of Cinna
and Octavius, which ended in Octavius
being put to death by the orders
of Cinna and Mariu?. 2 This was
Quintus Caecilius Metellua (the eldest son
of Metellus Macedonians), who was consul with
T. Quinctius Flamininus: in which
consulship he cleared the Balearic Isles
of pirates, and founded several cities
in the islands. Peripatetics agreed
with them; and though Pythagoras, who
lived some time before these men; had
added a great weight of authority to
this belief — and indeed he himself wished
to acquire the skill of an augur, —
and though that most im portant
authority, Democritus, had in very many
passages of his writings sanctioned a
belief in the foreknowledge of future
events; yet Dicsearchus the Peripatetic, on
the other hand, denied all other
kinds of divination, and left none
except those which proceed from frenzy
or from dreams. And my own friend
Cratippus, whom I consider equal to the
most ancient among the Peripatetics,
confined his belief to the same
matters, and denied the correctness of
any other kind of divination. But
as the Stoics defended nearly every kind,
because Zeno in his Commentaries had
scattered some seeds of such a
belief, and Cleanthes had amplified and
extended his predecessor's observations;
Chrysippus succeeded them, a man of
the most acute and vivid genius; who
discussed the whole belief in, and
question about divination in two books
on that subject, and a third on
oracles, and a fourth on dreams. And
he was followed by Diogenes the
Babylonian, a pupil of his OATH, who
published one treatise on the same
subject; by Antipater, who wrote two
books, and our friend Posidonius, who
wrote five. But Pantetius, the tutor
of Posidonius and pupil of Antipater,
has degenerated in some degree from
the Stoics, or at least from the
most eminent men of that school; and
yet he did not dare absolutelyto deny
that there was a power of divina
tion, but said that he had doubts
on the subject. Now if he, aStoic,
was allowed to express a doubt on
a matter very much against the
inclination of the rest of that
school, shall we not obtain leave
from the Stoics to behave in a
similar manner with respect to other
subjects'? especially when that very
question which is a matter of doubt
to Paneetius, is generally considered a
thing as clear as day to the
other philosophers of that sect. However,
this praise of the Academy has been
confirmed by the testimony and deliberate
judgment of a most admirable philosopher.
IV. Indeed, since we are ourselves
inquiring what we are to think of
divination, because Carneades maintained a
very long argument against the Stoics
with great acuteness and variety of
resource, and as we wish to be
on our guard against admitting rashly
any assertion which is incorrect, or
the truth of which is riot
sufficiently ascertained, it appears neces
sary for us to compare over and
over again the arguments on one side
with those on the other, as we
have done in the three books which
we have written on the Nature of
the Gods. For, as in every
discussion, rashness in assenting to
propositions of others, and error in
asserting such ourselves, is very
discreditable, so above all is it in
a discussion where the question for
our decision is how much weight we
are to attribute to auspices, and to
divine ceremonies, and to religion. For
there is danger lest, if we neglect
these things, we may become involved
in the guilt of blasphemous impiety,
or if we embrace them, we may
become liable to the reproach of old
women's superstition. V. Now these
topics I have often discussed, and I
did so lately with more than usual
minuteness, when I was with my brother
Quintus, in my villa at Tusculum. For
when, for the purpose of taking
walking exercise, we had come into
the Lyceum, (for that is the name
of the upper Gymnasium) — I read,
said he, a little while ago your
third book on the Nature of the
Gods; in which, although the arguments
of Cotta have not wholly changed my
previous opinions, they have undoubtedly a
good deal shaken them. You are very
right to say so, I replied; for,
indeed, Cotta himself ai'gues rather with
a view to confute the arguments of
the Stoics, than to eradicate religion
from men's minds. Then, said Quintus,
that is what Cotta himself says, and
indeed he repeats it very often; I
imagine, because he does not wish to
seem to depart from the ordinary
opinions; but still the zeal with
which he argues against the Stoics
seems to cany him on to the
extent of wholly denying the existence
of the Gods. I do not indeed
think it necessary to reply to all
he says, for religion has been
sufficiently defended in your second book
by Lucilius; whose arguments, as you
say at the end of the third
book, appear to you yourself to be
much nearer to the truth. But with
reference to the point which has been
passed over in those books, because,
I presume, you con sidered that the
inquiry into it could be carried on,
and an argument held upon it with
more convenience if it were taken
separately, I mean Divination — which is a
foreknowledge and A foretelling of those
events which arc usually considered fortuitous, —
I should like very much at this
moment, if you please, to examine
what power that science really has,
and what its character is. For my
own opinion is this; that if those
kinds of divination which we have
been in the habit of hearing of
and respecting, are real, then there
are Gods; and on the other hand
that, if there really are Gods, then
there certainly are men who are
possessed of the art of divination. You
are defending, I reply, the very
citadel of the Stoics, O Quintus, by
asserting the reciprocal dependence of
these two conditions on one another;
so that if there be such an art
as divination, then there are Gods,
and if there be such beings as
Gods, then there is such an art
as divination. But neither of these
points is admitted as easily as you
imagine. For future events may possibly
be indicated by nature without the
intervention of any God; and, even although
there may be such beings as Gods,
still it is pos sible that no
such art as divination may be given
by them to the human race. He
replied, — But to me it is quite
proof enough, both that there are
Gods and that they have a regard
for the welfare of mankind, that I
perceive that there are manifest and undeni
able kinds of divination. With respect
to which, I will, if you please,
recount to you my own sentiments,
provided at least that you have
leisure and inclination to hear me,
and have nothing which you would like
in preference to this discussion. But
I, said I, my dear Quintus, have
always leisure for philosophical discussion;
but at this moment, when I have
actually nothing whatever which I wish
to do, I shall be all the more
glad to hear your sentiments on
divination. You will hear, said he,
nothing new from me, nor do I
entertain any ideas on the subject
different from the rest of the world.
For the opinion which I follow is
not only the most ancient, but that
which has been sanctioned by the
unanimous consent of all nations and
countries. For there are two methods
of divining; one dependent on art,
the other on nature. Be.!; what
nation is there, or what state, which
is not influenced by the omens
derived from the entrails of victims,
or by the predictions of those who
interpret pro digies, or strange lights,
or of augurs, or astrologers, or by
those who expound lots (for these are
about what come under the head of
art); or, again, by the prophecies
derived from dreams, or soothsayers (for
these two are considered natural kinds
of divination) ? And I think it
more desirable to examine into the
results of these things than into the
causes. For there is a certain power
and nature, which, by means of
indications which have been observed a
long time, and also by some instinct
and divine inspiration, pronounces a judg
ment on future events. So that
Carneades may well give up pressing
what Pansetius used also to insist
upon, when he asked whether it was
Jupiter who had ordained the crow to
croak on the right- hand, or the
raven on the left. For these
occurrences have been observed for an
immense series of time, and have been
remarked and noted from the signification
given to them by subsequent events.
But there is nothing which a
great length of time may not effect
and establish by the use of memory
retaining the different events, and handing
them down in durable monuments.
We may wonder at the way in
which the different kinds of herbs
and roots have been observed by
physicians as good for the bites of
beasts, for complaints of the eyes, and
for wounds, the power and nature of
which reason has never explained, but
yet both the art and inventor of
these medicines have gained iiniversal
approval from their utility. Let us
also look at those things which,
though of another kind, still have a
resemblance to divination. And often,
too, the agitated sea Gives certain
tokens of impending storms, When
through the deep with sudden rage it
swells, And the fierce rocks, white
with the briny foam, Vie with
hoarse Neptune in their sullen roar,
While the sad whistlins o'er the
mountain's brow Adds horror to the
crash of the iron coast. And all
your prognostics are full of presentiments
derived from occurrences of this sort.
Who, then, can trace back the
causes of these presentiments 1 Though,
indeed, I am aware that Boethus the
Stoic has endeavoured to do so. And
indeed he has done some good to this
extent, that he has explained the
principle of those occurrences which take
place iu the sea, or in the
heaven. But still, who has ever
explained, with any appearance of
probability, why they take place at
all 1 And the white gull, uprising
from the waves, With horrid scream
foretells th' impending storm, Straining
its trembling throat in ceaseless cry.
Oft, too, the woodlark from his chest
pours forth Notes of unusual sadness,
wnking up The morn with grievous fear
and endless plaint. When first Aurora
routs the nightly dew, Sometimes the
dusky crow runs o'er the shore,
Dipping its head beneath the rising
surf.1 IX. And we see that
these signs of the weather scarcely
ever deceive us, though we certainly
do not understand why they are so
correct. You too perceive the signs
of future times, Children of sweetest
waters; and prepare To utter warnings
loud and salutary, Rousing the
springs and marshes with your cries.
Yet who could ever have suspected
frogs of having such per ception 1
However, there is in rivulets,
and in frogs too, a certain nature
indicating something which is clear enough
by itself, but more obscure to the
knowledge of men. And cloven-footed oxen gazing
up To heaven's expense, have often
inhaled the air Laden with moisture
I do not inquire
why all this takes place,
since I am acquainted with
the fact that it does take place —
The mastic, ever green and ever laden
With its rich fruit, which thrice in
every year Doth swell to ripeness, by
its triple crop Points out three
times when men should till the earth.
Here too, again, I do not ask
why this one tree should bloom three
times a year, or why it should
adapt the proper season for ploughing
the land to the token given by
its bloom. I am content with this,
that, even if I do not know how
everything is done, I nevertheless do
know what is done. And so
in respect of every kind of
divination I will answer as I have
done in the cases which I have
already mentioned. X. Now I know
what effect the root of the scamniony
has as a purgative, and what the
efficacy of the aristolochia is in
the case of bites of serpents, (and
this herb has derived its name from
its discoverer, who discovered it in
consequence o a dream.) and that
knowledge is quite emnigh.
I do not know why these herbs
are so efficacious; and in the same
way I do not know on what
principle the omens which we draw
from the signs furnished to us by
the winds and storms proceed; but I
do know, and arn certain of, and
thankful for their power, and the
results which flow from it.
Again, in 1 All these
predictions are translated by Cicero from
Aratus. the same way I know what
is indicated by a fissure in the
entrails of a victim, or by the
appearance of the fibres; but what
the cause is that these appearances
have this meaning I know not. And
life is full of such things ; for
nearly every one has recourse to the
entrails of animals. Need I say more
1 Is it possible for any one to
doubt about the power of thunder-storms
? Is not this too one of the
most marvel lous of marvellous things
? When Summanus,1 which was a figure
made of clay, standing on the top
of the temple of the all-powerful and
all-good Jupiter, was struck by lightning,
and the head of the statue could
not be found anywhere, the soothsayers
said that it had been thrown down
into the Tiber, and it was found
in that very place which had been
pointed out by the soothsayer.But who
is there to whom I may more
fitly appeal as an authority and as
a witness than you yourself? For I
have learnt the verses, and that with
great pleasure, which the muse Urania
pronounces in the second book of your
" Con sulship " — See how
almighty Jnve, inflamed and bright,
With heavenly fire fills the spacious
world, And lights up heaven and
earth with wondrous rays Of his
divine intelligence and mind ; Which
pierces all the inmost sense of men,
And vivifies their souls, hold fast
within The boundless caverns of
eternal air. And would you know
the high sublimest paths And ever
revolving orbits of the stars, And
in what constellations they abide, —
Stars which the Greeks erratic
falsely call, For certain order and
fixed laws direct Their onward course
; then shall you learn that all
Is by divinest wisdom fitly ruled.
For when you ruled the state, a
consul wise, You noted, and with
victims due approach'd, Propitiating the
rapid stars, and strange Concurrence
of the fiery constellations. Then,
when you purified the Alban mount, And celebrated
the great Latin feast, Bringing pure
milk, meet offering for the gods,
You saw fierce comets bright and
quivering With light unheard of.
In the sky you saw 1 This
is usually understood to have been a
statue of Pluto. The new
consuls used to celebrate the
Ferioe Latinaj on the Albanus
Mons. Fierce wars and dread
nocturnal massacre That Latin feast on
mournful days did fall, When the pale
moon with di m and muffled
light Conceal'd her head, and fled,
and in the midst Of starry night
became invisible. Why should I say
how Phoebus' fiery beam, Sure herald
of sad war, in mid-day set, Hastening
at undue season to its rest, Or
how a citizen struck with th' awful
bolt, Hurl'd by high Jove from out
a cloudless sky, Left the glad light
of life; or how the earth Quaked with
affright and shook in every part ?
Then dreadful forms, strange visions stalk
d abroad, Scarce shrouded by the
darkness of the night,And wam'd the
nations and the land of war. Then
many an oracle and augury, Pregnant
with evil fate, the soothsayers Pour'd
from their agitated breasts. And
e'en The Father of the Gods fill'd
heaven and earth With signs, and
tokens, and presages sure Of all the
things which have befallen us since.
XII. So now the year when you
are at the helm, Collects upon itself
each omen dire, Which when Torquatus,
with his colleague Gotta, Sat in the
curule chairs, the Lydian seer Of
Tuscan blood breathed to affrighted Borne.
For the great Father of the Gods,
whose home Is on Olympus' height,
with glowing hand Himself attack'd his
sacred shrines and temples, And hurl'd
his darts against the Capitol. Then
fell the brazen statue, honour'd long,
Of noble Natta ; then fell down the
laws Graved on the sacred tablets ;
while the bolts Spared not the images
of the immortal gods. Here was that
noble nurse o' the Roman name, The
Wolf of Mars, who from her kindly
breast Fed the immortal children of
her god With the life-giving dew of
sweetest milk. E'en her the lightning
spared not; down she fell. Bearing
the royal babes in her descent,
Leaving her footmarks on the pedestal.1
1 Great interest is attached to
this passage by antiquaries, from the
fact of there being a bronze statue
still at Home of a wolf suckling
two children, with manifest marks of
lightning on it, which is believed to
be the very statue here mentioned by
Cicero, and also in his third Oration
asrainst Catiline, c. viii. ; it is
described by Virgil too : — Fecerat
et viridi foetam Mavorf is in antro
Procubuisse lupam; geminos huic ubcra circum
[Ludere And who,
unfolding records of old time, Has
found no words of sad prediction In
the dark pages of Etruscan books ] —
All men, all writings, all events
combined, To warn the citizens of
freeborn race Ludere pendentes pueros,
et lambere matrem Impavidos; ilhun
tereti cervice reflexam Mulcere alternos
et corpora fingere linguiL — jEn. The cave
of Mars was dress'd with mossy greens
; There by the wolf were laid
the martial twins; Intrepid, on her
swelling dugs they hung, The
foster-dam loll'd out her fawning tongue ;
They suck'd secure, while bending
back her head, She lick'd their
tender limbs, and form'd them as they
fed. Dryden, ^En. The statue in
its present state is beautifully described
by Byron :And thou the thunder-stricken
nurse of Rome, She-wolf ! whose
brazen imaged dugs impart The milk of
conquest yet within the dome, Where,
as a monument of antique art, Thou
standest, mother of the mighty heart,
Which the great founder suck'd from
thy wild teat, Scorch'd by the Roman
Jove's ethereal dart, And thy limbs
black with lightning, — dost thou yet Guard
thy immortal cubs, nor thy fond
charge forget] Thou dost— but all thy
foster-babes are dead, The men of iron
; and the world hath rear'd Cities
from out their sepulchres. —Childe Harold,
book iv. It may not be out of
place here, to set before the reader
the beautiful description, in the
first Georgic, of the prodigies which
happened at Rome on the death
of Cresar : — Denique quid vesper
serus vehat. unde serenas Ventus agat
nubes, quid cogitet humidus Auster,
Sol tibi signa dabit : Solem quis
dicere falsum Audeat? ille etiam
csecos instare tumultus Saspe monet,
fraudemque, et aperta tumescere bella ;
Ille etiam extincto miseratus Caesare
Romam Cum caput obscurS, nitidum
ferrugine texit Impiaque rcternam timuerunt
sajcula noctem, Tempore quanquam illo
tellus quoque et aequora ponti, Obsccenique
canes, importunaeque volucres Signa dabant
: quoties Cyclopum effervere in auras
Vidimus undantem rnptis fornacibus Etnam,
Flammarumque globos liquef'actaque volvere
saxa. Armorum sonitus toto Germania
coe'.o Audiit; insolitis tremuerunt motibus
Alpes. [Vox To dread impending
wars of civil strife, And wicked bloodshed
; when the laws should fall In
one dark rain, trampled and o'erthrown:
Then men were warn'd to save their
holy shrines, The statues of the
irods, their city and lands, Vox
quoque per lucos vulgo exaudita
recentes Ingens, ei simulacra rnodis
pallentia miris Visa sub obscurum noctis
; pecudesque locutae, Infandum !
sistunt amnes terrseque dehiscunt Et
moestum illacryinat templis ebur, oeraque
sudant: Proluit insano contorquens vertice
sylvas Pluviorum Rex Eridanus ;
camposque per omnes Cum stabulis
armenta trahit ; nee tempore eodcm
Tristibus aut extis fibrae apparere
minaces Aut puteis manare cruor
cessavit, et alte Per noctcm resonare
lupis ululautibus urbe? ; Non alias
coilo cecidcruut plura sereno Fulgura,
nee diri toties arsere cometae ;
Ergo, etc. — Virgil, Georg. i. 488.
Which is translated by Dryden : —The
Sun reveals the secrets of the sky,
And who dares give the source of
light the lie? The change of empires
he oft declares, Fierce tumults, hidden
treasons, open wars; He first the
fate of Caesar did foretell, And
pitied Rome when Rome in Caesar fell
: In iron clouds conceal'd the public
light, And impious mortals fear'd eternal
night. Nor was the fact foretold by
him alone, Nature her-elf stood forth
and seconded the Sun. Earth, air, and
seas with prodigies were sign'd, And
birds obscene and howlin g dogs
divin'd. What rocks did ^Etna's bellowing
mouth expire From her torn entrails,
and what floods of fire ! What
clanks were heard in German skies
afar, Of arms and armies rushing to
the war ! Dire earthquakes rent the
solid Alps below, And from their
summits shook th' eternal snow; Pale
spectres in the close of night were
seen, And voices heard of more than
mortal men. In silent groves dumb
sheep and oxen spoke ; And streams
ran backward, and their beds forsook
; The yawning earth disclosed th'
abyss of hell, The weeping statues
did the wars foretell, And holy sweat
from brazen idols fell. Then rising
in his might the king of floods
Uush'd through the forests, tore the
lofty woods; And rolling onward with
a sweepy sway, Bore houses, herds,
and labouring hinds away. Blood
From slaughter and destruction, and
preserve Their ancient customs unimpair'd
and free. And this kind hint of
safety was subjoin'd, That when a
splendid statue of great Jove,1 In
godlike beauty, on its base was
raised, With eyes directed to Sol's
eastern gate ; Then both the senate
and the people's bands, Duly forewarn'd,
should see the secret plots Of wicked
men, and disappoint their spite. This
statue, slowly form'd and long delay 'd,
At length by you, when consul, has
been placed Upon its holy pedestal ; — 'tis
now That the great sceptred Jupiter
has graced His column, on a
well-appointed hour : And at the
self-same moment faction's crimes Blood
sprang from wells; wolves howl'd in
towns by night; And boding victims
did the priests affright. Such peals
of thunder never pour'd from high, Nor
forky lightnings flash'd from such a
sullen sky : Red meteors ran across
the ethereal space ; Stars disappear'd,
and comets took their place. Which
Shakspeare has imitated with reference to
the same event : Cal. Caesar, I never
stood on ceremonies, Yet now they
fright me: there is one within,
Besides the things that we have
heard and seen, Recounts most horrid
sights seen by the watch: A
lioness hath whelped in the streets,
And graves have yawn'd and yielded
up their dead. Fierce, fiery warriors
fight upon the clouds, In ranks
and squadrons and right form of war,
Which drizzled blood upon the
Capitol: The noise of battle hurtled
in the air; Horses did neigh,
and dying men did groan; And
ghosts did shriek and squeak t the
streets. O Caesar, these things are
beyond all use, And I do fear
them When beggars die there are
no comets seen ; The heavens
themselves blaze forth the death of
princes. Cats. What say the augurers?
Serv. They would not have you
to stir forth to-day. Plucking the
entrails of an offering forth, They
could not find a heart within the
beast. 1 This refers to the
column meant to serve as a pedestal
for the statue of Jupiter, mentioned
in the second book of this treatise,
and also in the second oration
against Catiline, as having been ordered
in the consulship of Torquatus and
Cotta, but not completed till the
year of Cicero's consulship. Were by
the loyal Gauls reveal'd and shown To
the astonish'd multitude and senate. XIII.
Well then did ancient men, whose
monuments You keep among you,—they who
will maintain Virtue and moderation ; by
these arts Ruling the lands an<l
people subject to them: Well, too,
your holy sires, whose spotless faith,
And piety, and deep sagacity Have far
surpass'd the men of other lands,
Worshipp'd in every age the mighty
Gods. They with sagacious care these
things foresaw, Spending in virtuous
studies all their leisure, And in the
shady Academic groves, And fair Lyceum :
where they well pour'd forth The
treasures of their pure and learned
hearts. And, like them, you have been
by virtue placed, To save your
country, in the imminent, breach ; Still
with philosophy you soothe your cares,
With prudent care dividing all your
hours Between the Muses and your
country's claims. Will you then be
able to persuade your mind to speak
against the arguments which I adduce
on the subject of divination, you
being a man who have performed such
exploits as you have done, and who
have so admirably com posed those
verses which I have just recited 1
What — do you ask me, Carneades, why
these things take place in this
manner, or by what art it is
possible for them to be brought about
? I confess that I do not know
; but that they do happen, I
assert that you yourself are a
witness. Yes, they happen by chance,
you say. Is it so 1 Can
anything be done by chance which has
in itself all the features of reality
? Four dice when thrown may by
chance come up sixes. Do you think
that if you were to throw four
hundred dice it would be possible for
them all to come up sixes by
any chance in the world 1 Paints
scattered at random on a canvass
may by chance represent the features
of a human face ; but do you
think that you could by any chance
scat tering of colours represent the
beauty of the Coan Venus'?1 Suppose a
pig by burrowing in the ground with
his snout were to make the letter
A, would you on that account think
it possible that the animal should by
chance write out the Andromache of
Ennius 1 Carneades used to tell a
story that 1 This refers to the
celebrated picture of Venus Anadyomene,
painted by Apelles, who was a native
of Cos. in cutting stones
in the stone- quarries at Chios, there
was once discovered a natural head of
a Pan. I dare say there may
have been a figure not wholly unlike
such a head, but still certainly it
was not such that you could fancy
it wrought by Scopns.1 For this is
the nature of things, that chance can
never imitate reality to perfection. But,
you will say, things which have been
predicted sometimes fail to happen. What
act is not liable to this observation
1 I mean of those acts which
proceed on con jecture, and are
founded on opinion. Is not medicine
to be considered a real art ?
And yet how often is it deceived
! Need I say more 1 Are not
pilots of ships often deceived? Did
not the army of the Greeks, and
the captains of all that numerous
fleet, depart from Troy, as Pacuvius says
— So glad at their departure,
that they gazed In idle mirth upon
the wanton fish, And never ceased
from laughing at their gambols ;
Meanwhile at sunset the vast sea
grows rough, The darkness lowers, black night
and clouds surround them. Did, however,
the shipwreck of so many illustrious
generals and sovereigns prove that there
was no such art as naviga tion
? Or is the science of
generals good for nothing because a
most illustrious general was lately put
to flight, after the total loss of
his army 1 Or are we to say
that there is no room for the
display of sound principles of politics,
or wis dom in the administration of
affairs of state, because Cnseus Ponipeius
was often .deceived, and even Cato
and you your self have been deceived
in more instances than one?
The same rule applies to the
answers of soothsayers, and to all
divination which rests on opinion : for
it depends wholly on conjecture, and
has no means of advancing further.
And that perhaps sometimes deceives
us, but still it more fre quently
directs us to the truth. For
it is traced back to all eternity.
And as in the infinite duration of
time, things have happened in an
almost countless number of ways with
the self-same indications preceding each
occurrence, an art has 1 Scopas
was a Parian, nourishing. He was one
of the greatest architects and sculptors
of antiquity, and is mentioned as
such by Horace, who says: — Divite me
scilicet artium Quas aut Parrhasius
protulit aut Scopas, Hie saxo, liquidis
ille colorilius Solera nunc hominem nonere
mmr. TV « been concocted and reduced
to rules from a frequent obser vation
and notice of the same circumstances. But
your auspices, how clear — how sure they
are ! which at this time are known
nothing of by the Roman augurs,
(excuse me for saying this so
plainly,) though they are main tained
by the Cilicians, Pamphylians, Pisidians,
and Lycians. For why should I mention
that man connected with us in ties
of hospitality, that most illustrious and
excellent ^man, king Deiotarus 1 He never
does anything whatever without taking the
auspices. And it happened once that
he had started on a journey which
he had arranged and determined some
time before; but, being warned by the
flight of an eagle, he returned back
again, and the very next night the
house in which he would have been
lodging if he had per sisted in
his journey, fell to the ground. And
he was so moved by this occurrence,
that, as he himself used to tell
me, he often turned back in the
same way in a journey, even when
he had advanced many days on it.
And what is most remarkable in
his conduct is, that after he had
been deprived by Csesar of his
tetrarchy, his kingdom, and his property,
he still asserted that he did not
repent of obeying those auspices which
had promised success to him when he
was setting out to join Pompey: for
he considered that the authority of
the senate, and the liberty of the
Roman people, and the dignity of the empire
had been upheld by his arms; and
that those birds had taken good care
of his honour and real interests,
inasmuch as they had been his
counsellors in adhering to the claims
of good faith and duty ; for that
character was a thing dearer to him
than his possessions. . And in saying
this he seems to me to form a
very just estimate. For our magis trates
at times use compulsion. For it is
quite impossible, if a cake is thrown
down before a chicken, but what some
crumbs must fall out of his mouth
when he feeds. And as you have
it set down in your books that
a tripudium takes place if any of
the food falls on the ground, so
you also call this compulsory augury
which I have spoken of tripudium
solistimum.1 And so, as that wise
Cato complains, owing to i
"Tripudium, from terripavium (Cic Div.),
a stamping on the ground In
divination, tripudium, or tripudium solistimum,
when- the birds (pulli) ate so
greedily that the food fell from
their mouths, and so rebounded on the
ground, which was regarded as a good
omen." — Riddle and Arnold, Lat. Diet.
the negligence of the college, many
auguries and many auspices have been
wholly lost and abandoned. Formerly there
was, I may almost say, no ariair
of importance, not even if it only
related to private business, which was
transacted \vithout taking the auspices.
And this is proved even now by
the Auspices Nuptiarum, who, though the
custom has fallen into disuse, still
preserve the name. For just as we
now consult the entrails of victims,
though even that very practice is
observed less now than it used to
be, so in ancient times, before all
transactions of importance, men used to
consult birds; and, therefore, from want
of paying proper regard to ill omens,
we often run into alarming and
destructive dangers : — as Publius Claudius,
the son of Appius Csecus, and his
colleague Lucius Junius, lost a fine
fleet, because they had put to sea
in defiance of the omens. And,
indeed, something of the same kind
befel Agamemnon; for he, when the
Grecians had begun To murmur loudly,
and with open scorn T' asperse the
skill of th' holy soothsayers, Bade
the crew bend the sails and put
to sea, Choosing the people's voice
before the omens. But why need
we look for old examples of this
1 We have ourselves seen what
happened to Marcus Crassus, because he
neglected the notice which was given
to him that the omens were
unfavourable. On which occasion, Appius,
your col league, a good augur, as
I have often heard you say, branded,
when he was censor, an excellent man
and a most illustrious citizen, Caius
Ateius, without sufficient consideration, because
he had cooperated in falsifying the
auspices. However, let that pass. It
may have been the duty of the
censor to do so, if he thought
that the auspices were falsified. But
it certainly was not the duty of
an augur to set down in the
books that this was the cause of
a fearful calamity befalling the Roman
people. For even if that was the
cause of the calamity, still the
fault was not in the man who
announced the state of the auspices,
but in him who disregarded the
announcement. For that the announcement
wTas a correct one, as the same augur
and censor bears witness, was proved
by the event; for if the announcement
had been false, it could not possibly
have caused any calamity at all. In
truth, prognostics of calamity, like other
auspices, and omens, and tokens, do
not produce causes why anything should
happen, but merely give notice of
what will happen unless you pro vide
against it. It was not, therefore,
the announcement of unfavourable omens,
made by Ateius, which was the cause
of calamity; all that he did was,
by declaring to him what signs had
been seen, to warn him what would
happen if he did not take precautions
against it. Accordingly, either that
announcement had no effect at all, or
else if, as Appius thinks, it had
an effect, the effect was this, that
guilt was attached, not to the man
who gave the warning, but to him
who did not attend to it. What
shall I say more 1 From whence
have you received that staff (lituus)
of yours, which is the most cele
brated ensign of your augurship ?
That is the staff with which Komulus
parted out the several districts, when
he founded the city. And that staff
of Romulus, (that is to say, a
stick curved and slightly bent forward
at the top, which has derived its
name from its resemblance to the
trumpet (lituus) used in sounding signals,)
having been laid up in the
meeting-house of the Salii, which was
in the Pala tine-hill, when that
house was burnt to the ground, was
found unhurt. What more need I say
1 Who of the ancient authors is
there who does not relate what an
arrangement of the districts of the city
was made, many years after the time
of Romulus, in the reign of Tarqninius
Priscus, by Attius Xavius, who employed
his staff in this manner ? And
it is said that he, when a boy,
was forced through poverty to act as
a swineherd; and one day, having lost
one of his pigs, he made a vow
that if he recovered it, he would
give the god the finest grape which
there was in the whole vineyard.
Accordingly, when he had found the
pig, he placed himself in the middle
of the vineyard, with his eyes directed
towards the south; and after he had
divided the vineyard into four divisions,
and had been directed by the birds
to disregard three of the portions,
in the fourth division, which remained,
he found a grape of most wonderful
size, as we find recorded in our
books. And when this fact became
known, all the neighbours used to
consult him on all their affairs,
until he. gained a great name and
reputation ; in consequence of which kin<r
Priscus sent for him. And when he
had come to the king, he, wishing
to make proof of his skill in
augury, told him that he was thinking
of something, and asked him whether
it could possibly be done. He, having
taken an auguiy, answered that it
could. But Tarquin said that he had
been thinking that it was possible
that a whetstone might be cut through
by a razor. On this Attius bade
him try ; and accordingly a whetstone
was brought into the assembly, and,
in the sight of king and people,
cut through with a razor. And in
consequence of this, it happened that
Tarquinius always consulted Attius Navius
as an augur, and that the people
also were used to refer their private
affairs to him. And we are told
that that whetstone and that razor
were buried in the comitium, and that
the puteal was built over it.
Let us deny everything; let us
burn our annals; let us say that
all these statements are false ; let
us, in short, confess everything rather
than that the Gods regard the affairs
of mankind. What 1 do not even
your writings about Tiberius Gracchus
sanction the theories df augurs ami
haruspices 1 For when he had
unintentionally erected a tent to take
the auspices informally, because he had
crossed the pomcerium without taking the
auspices, he held there the comitia
for the election of the consuls. (The
matter is one of notoriety, and
committed to writing by you yourself.)
However, Tiberius Gracchus, who was himself
an augur, ratified the authority of
the auspices by a confession of his
error, and added great authority to
the sj'steui of the harus pices ;
who, having at the recent comitia
been introduced into the senate, asserted
that the person who proposed the
candi dates to the comitia had no
right to do so. I therefore agree
with those authors who have asserted
that there are two kinds of
divination; one par taking of art,
and the other wholly devoid of it.
For art is visible in those persons
who pursue anything new by conjec
ture, and have learnt to judge of
what is old by observation. But those
men, on the other hand, are devoid
of art, who give way to presentiments
of future events, not proceeding by
reason or conjecture, nor on the
observation and considera tion of
particular signs, but yielding to some
excitement of mind, or to some
unknown influence subject to no precise
rules or restraint, (as is often the
case with men who dream, and
sometimes with those who deliver predictions
in n frenzied manner,) as Bacis' of
Boeotia, Epimenides2 the Cretan, and the
Erythrean Sib}'!. And under this head
we ought also to rank oracles; not
those which are drawn by lot, but
those which are uttered under the
influence of some divine instinct and
inspiration. Although even lots are not
to be despised where they are
sanctioned by the authority of antiquity,
like those which we are told used
to rise out of the earth ;
which, however, are drawn in such a
manner as to be apposite to the
subject under consideration, which, indeed, is
a thing that I conceive to be
very possible by divine management. The
interpreters of all of which appear
to me to come very near to the
divining power of those whose interpreters
they are (just as those grammarians
do who are the interpreters of
poets). What proof of sagacity is it,
then, to wish to disparage things
sanctioned by antiquity, by vile calumnies
? I admit that I cannot discover
the cause. Perhaps it lies hid, involved
in the obscurity of nature. For God
has not int nded me to understand
these matters, but only to use them.
I will use them, then ; nor will
I be persuaded to think, either that
all Etruria is mad on the subject
of the entrails of victims, or that
the same nation is all wrong about
lightnings, or that it interprets prodigies
fallaciously, when it has often happened
that sub terranean noises and crashes,
often that earthquakes, have predicted,
with terrible truth, many of the
evils which have befallen our own
republic and other states. Why should
I say more ? The fact of a
mule having brought forth is much ridiculed
by some people; but because this
parturition did take place in the
case of an animal of natural
barrenness, was there not an incredible
crop of evils predicted by the
soothsayers 1 Need I go further 1
Did not Tiberius Gracchus, the. son of
Publius Gracchus, who had been twice
consul and censor, and who was also
an augur of the 1 Bacis was
believed to have lived and prophesied
at Heleon, in Bceotia, being inspired
by the nymphs of the Corycian cave.
Some of hjs prophecies are
given us by Herodotus (See also
Aristophanes, Eq.; Pax) Epimenides was a
poet and prophet of Crete. He was
sent for by the Athenians to purify
Athens when it was visited by a
plague, in consequence of the sacrilege
of Cylon. He is said to have
lived to a great age.highest skill
and reputation, and a wise man, and
a most virtuous citizen, — did not he
(as Caius Gracchus, his son, has left
recorded in his writings), when two
snakes were caught in his house,
convoke the soothsayers ? And the
answer which they gave him was, that
if he let the male escape, his
wife would die in a short time ;
but if he let the female escape,
he would die himself: on which he
thought it more becoming to encounter
an early death himself, than to
expose the youthful daughter of Publius
Africanus to it. Accordingly, he released
the female snake, and died himself a
few days afterwards. Let us, after
this, laugh at the soothsayers; let
us call them useless and triflers,
and despise those men whose principles
the wisest men, and subsequent events
and occur rences, have often proved.
Let us despise also the Baby lonians,
and those who on mount Caucasus
observe the stars of heaven, and
follow all their revolutions in regular
number and motion. Let us, say I,
condemn all those people for folly,
or vanity, or impudence, who, as they
themselves assert, have exact records for
four hundred and seventy thousand years
carefully noted down, and let us
decide that they are telling lies,
and have no regard as to what
the judgment of future ages concerning
them will be. Come, then, you vain
and deceitful barbarians, has the history
of the Greeks likewise spoken falsely?
Who is ignorant of the answer (that I
may speak at present of natural
divination) which the Pythian Apollo gave
to Croesus, to the Athenians, the
Lacedaemonians, the Tegeans, the Argives,
and the Corinthians? Chrysippus has
collected a countless list of oracles — not
one without a witness and authority
of sufficient weight; but as they are
known to you, I will pass them
over. This one I will mention and
defend. Would that oracle at Delphi
have ever been so celebrated and
illustrious, and so loaded with such
splendid gifts from all nations and
kings, if all ages had not had
experience of the truth of its predic
tions 1 At present, you will say,
it has no such reputation. Granted,
then, that it has a lower reputation
now, because the truth of oracles is
less notorious; still I affirm that
it would not have had such a
reputation then, if it had not been
distinguished for extraordinary accuracy. But
it is possible that that power in
the earth, which excited the mind of
the Pythian priestess by divine
inspiration, may have disappeared through
old age, just as we know that
some rivers have dried up, or become
changed and diverted into another channel.
However, let it be owing to whatever
you please; for it is a great
question: only let this fact remain
—which cannot be denied, unless we
will overthrow all his tory—that that oracle
told the truth for many ages. However,
let us pass over the oracles; let
us come to dreams. And Chrysippus
discussing them, after collecting many
minute instances, does the same that
Antipater does when he investigates this
subject, and those dreams which were
explained according to the interpretation
of Antipho, which indeed prove the
acuteness of the interpreter, but still
are not examples of such importance
as to have been worthy of being
brought forward. The mother of Dionysius—
of that Dionysius, I mean, who was
the tyrant of Syracuse, as it is
recorded by Philistus, a man of
learning and diligence, and who was a
contem porary of the tyrant— when she
was pregnant with this very Dionysius,
dreamt that she had become the mother
of a little Satyr. The interpreters
of prodigies, who at that time were
in Sicily called Galeotse, gave her
for answer when she con sulted them
about it, (according to the story
told by Philistus,) that the child
whom she was about to bring forth
would be the most illustrious man of
Greece, with very lasting good fortune.
Am I recalling you to the fables
of the Greek poets and those of
our country? For the Vestal Virgin,
in Ennius, says — The agitated dame
with trembling limbs Brings in a
lamp, and with unbridled tears,
Starting from broken sleep, pours
forth these words :• 0 daughter
of the fair Eurydice, You whom
rny father loved, see strength and
life Desert my limbs, and leave me
helpless all. 1 thought I saw a
man of handsome form Seize me,
and bear me through the willow
groves, Along the river banks and
places yet unknown. And then alone, — T
tell you true, my sister, — I seem'd
to wander, and with tardy steps To
seek to trace you, but my efforts
fail'd; While no clear path did guide
my doubtful feet. And then, I
thought, my father thus address'd me,
With evil-boding voice : — Alas ! my
daughter, What numerous woes by you
must be endured ; Though fortune
shall in after times arise From
out of the waters of this river
here. Thus, sister, spake my father,
and then vanish'd • 2STor, though
much wish'd for, did he once return!
In vain, with many tears, I raised
my hands Up to the azure vault
of the highest heaven, And with
caressing voice invoked his name, Or
seem'd to do so. And 'twas
long ere sleep, Freighted with such
sad dreams, did quit my breast. Now
these accounts, though they perhaps may
be the mere inventions of the poets,
still are not inconsistent with the
general character of dreams. We
may grant that that is a fictitious
one by which Priam is represented to
have been disturbed : — Queen Hecuba
dream'd — an ominous dream of fate- That
she did bear no human child of
flesh, But a fierce blazing torch.
Priam, alarm'd, Ponder'd with anxious
fear the fatal dream ; And sought
the gods with smoking sacrifice. Then
the diviner's aid he did entreat,
With many a prayer to the prophetic
god, If haply he might learn the
dream's intent. Thus spake Apollo with
all-knowing mind :— " The queen
shall have a son, who, if he
grow To man's estate, shall set ajl
Troy in flames— The ruin of his
city and his land." Let us
grant, then, that these dreams are,
as I have said, merely poetic
fictions, and let us add the dream
of ^Eneas, which Numerius Fabius Pictor
relates in his Annals, as one of
the same kind; in which ^Eneas is
represented as foreseeing, in his trance,
all his future exploits and adventures.
But let us come nearer home. What
kind of dream was that of Tarquin
the Proud, which the poet Accius, m
his Tragedy of Brutus, puts into the
mouth of Tarquin himself? — Sleep
closed my weary eyelids, when a
shepherd Brought me two rams.
The one 1 sacrificed; The other
rushing at me with wild force Hurl'd
me upon the ground. Prostrate
I gazed Upon the heavens, when a new
prodigy Dazzled my eyes. The
flashing orb of day Took a new
course, diverging to the right, With
all his kindling beams strangely
transversed. Of this dream the
diviners gave the following interpretation
Dreams are in general reflex images Of
things that men in waking hours have
known; But sometimes dreams of loftier
character Rise in the tranced soul,
inspired by Jove, Prophetic of the
future. Then beware Of him, whom
thou dost think as stupid as
The ram thou dreamest of.
For in his breast Dwells
manliest wisdom. He may yet
expel Thee from thy kingdom.
Mark the prophecy : That change
in the sun's course thou didst
behold, Betoken'd revolution in the
state, And as the sun did turn
from left to right, we predict
So shall that revolution meet
success. Let us again return to
foreign events. Heraclides of Pontus, an
intelligent man, who was one of
Plato's disciples and followers, writes
that the mother of Phalaris fancied
that she saw in a drearn the
statues of the gods whom Phalaris had
consecrated in his house. Among them
it appeared to her that Mercury held
a cup in his right hand, from
which he poured blood, which as soon
as it touched the earth gushed forth
like a fresh fountain, and filled the
house with streaming gore. The dream
of the mother was too fatally realized
by the cruelty of the son. Why
need I also relate, out of the
history of Persia by Dinon, the
interpretations which the Magi gave to
the cele brated prince, Cyrus? For he
dreamed that beholding the sun at his
feet, he thrice endeavoured to grasp
it in his hands, but the sun
rolled away and departed, and escaped
from him. The Magi (who were accounted
sages and teachers in Persia) thus
interpreted the dream, saying, that the
three attempts of Cyrus to catch the
sun in his hands, signified that he
would reign thirty years ; and what
they predicted really came to pass ;
for he was forty years old when
he began to reign, and he reached
the age of seventy. Among all
barbarous nations, indeed, we meet with
proof that they likewise possess the
gift of divination and presentiment. The
Indian Calanus, when led to execution,
said, while ascending the funeral pile,
" 0 what a glorious departure
from life ! when, as happened to
Hercules , after niy body has been
consumed by fire, my soul shall
depart to a world of light." And
when Alexander asked him if he had
anything to say to him ; "
Yes," replied he, ".we shall soon
meet again ;" and this prophecy
was soon fulfilled, for a few days
afterwards Alexander died in Babylon.'
I will quit the subject of
dreams for awhile, and return to them
presently. On the very night that
Olympias was delivered of Alexander, the
temple of Diana of the Ephesiaus was
burned ; and when the morning dawned,
the Magi declared that the ruin and
destroyer of Asia had been born that
night. So much for the Magi and
the Indians. Now let us return to
dreams. Ccelius
relates that Hannibal, wishing to remove
a golden column from the temple of
Juno Lacinia, and not knowing whether
it was solid gold or merely gilt,
bored a hole in it ; and as he
had found it solid, he determined to
take it away. But the following night
Juno appeai-ed to him in a dream,
and warned him against doing so, and
threatened him that if he did, she
would take care that he should lose
an eye with which he could see
well. He was too prudent a man
to neglect this threat ; and therefore,
of the gold which had been abstracted
from the column in boring it, he
made a little heifer, which he fixed
on the capital. And the same
story is told in the Grecian history
of Silenus, whom Ccelius follows. And
he was an author who was particularly
diligent in relating the exploits of Hannibal.
He says that when Hannibal had taken
Saguntum, he dreamed in his sleep
that he was summoned to a council
of the gods, and that when he
arrived at it, Jupiter commanded him
to carry the war into Italy, and
one of the deities in council was
appointed to be his conductor in the
enterprise. He therefore began his march
under the direction of this divine
protector, who enjoined him not to
look behind him . Hannibal, however,
could not long keep in his obedience,
but yielded to a great desire to
look back, when he immediately beheld
a huge and terrible monster, surrounded
with ser pents, which, wherever it
advanced, destroyed all the trees, and
shrubs, and buildings. He then, marvelling
at this, inquired of the god what
this monster might mean ; and the
god replied, that it signified the
desolation of Italy ; and com manded
him to advance without delay, and not
to concern himself with the evils
that lay behind him and in his
rear. In the history of Agathocles
it is said, that Hamilcar the
Carthaginian, when he was besieging
Syracuse, dreamed that he heard a
voice announcing to him, that he -should
sup on the succeeding day in
Syracuse. When the morning dawned a
great sedition arose in his camp
between the Carthaginian and Sicilian
soldiers. And when the Syracusans found
this out, they made a vigorous sally
and attacked the camp un expectedly,
and succeeded in making Hamilcar prisoner
while alive, and thus his dream was
verified. All history is full of
similar accounts; and the experience of
real life is equally rich in them.
That illustrious man, Publius Decius,
the son of Quintus Decius, the first
of the Decii who was a consul,
being a military tribune in the
consulship of Marcus Valerius and Aulus
Cornelius, when our army was sorely
pressed by the Samnites, and being
accustomed to expose himself to great
personal danger in battle, was warned to
take greater care of himself; on
which he replied (as our annals
report), that he had had a dream,
which informed him that he should die
with the greatest glory, while engaged
in the midst of the enemy. For
that time he succeeded in happily
rescuing our army from the perils
that surrounded it. But three years
after, when he was consul, he devoted
himself to death for his country, and
threw himself armed among the ranks of
the Latins; by
which gallant action the Latins were defeated and destroyed: and his death was so glorious that his son desired a similar fate.But let us now come, if you please, to the dreams of philosophers. We read
in Plato that Socrates, when he was
in the public prison at Athens, said
to his friend Crito that he should
die in three day, for that he
had seen in a dream a woman of
extreme beauty who called him by his
name, and quoted in his presence this
verse of HomerOn the third day you'll
reach the fruitful Phthia." 1 And
it is said that it happened just
as it had been foretold. Again,
what a man, and how great a
man, is Xenophon the pupil of
Socrates! He, too, in his account of
that war in which he accompanied the
younger Cyrus, relates the dreams which
he sawthe accomplishment of which was
marvellous. Shall we then say that
Xenophon was a liar or dotard ?
What shall we say, too, of Aristotle,
a man of singular and almost divine
genius? Was he deceived himself, or
does he wish others to be deceived,
when he informs us that Eudemus of
Cyprus, his own intimate friend, on
his way to Macedonia, came to Pherae,
a celebrated city of Thessaly, 1
Horn. :"Hfjari
Kfv rpirdrca $0ii)v tpi$ta\ov IKO(U.TIV.
which was then under the cruel
sway of the tyrant Alexander. In that
town he was seized with a severe
illness, so that he was given over
by all the physicians, when he beheld
in a dream a young man of
extreme beauty, who informed him that
in a short time he should recover,
and also the tyrant Alexander would
die in a few days; and that
Eudemus himself would, after five years'
absence, at length return home. Aristotle
relates that the first two predictions
of this dream were immediately
accomplished; for Eudemus speedily recovered,
and the tyrant perished at the hands
of his wife's brother ; and that
towards the end of the fifth year,
when, in consequence of that dream,
there was a hope that he would
return into Cyprus from Sicily, they
heard that he had been slain in
a battle near Syracuse ; from which
it appeared that his dream was
susceptible of being interpreted as
meaning, that when the soul of
Eudemus had quitted his body, it
would then appear to have signified
the return home. To the philosophers
we may add the testimony of Scpho-
cles, a most learned man, and as
a poet quite divine, who, when a
golden goblet of great weight had been
stolen from the temple of Hercules,
saw in a dream the god himself
appearing to him, and declaring who
was the robber. Sopho cles paid no
attention to this vision, though it
was repeated more than once. When it
had presented itself to him several
times, he proceeded up to the court
of Areopagus, and laid the matter
before them. On this, the judges
issued an order for the arrest of
the offender nominated by Sophocles. On
the application of the torture the
criminal confessed his guilt, and
restored the goblet; from which event this temple of Hercules was afterwards called the temple of Hercules the Indicate. But why do I continue to cite the Greeks? when, somehow or other, I feel more interest in the examples of my ellowcountrymen. All our historians,the
Fabii, the Gellii, and, more recently,
Ccelius, bear witness to similar facts.
In the Latin war, when they first
celebrated the votive games in honour of
the gods, the city was suddenly
roused to arms, and the games being
thus interrupted, it was necessary to
appoint new ones Before their commencemen,however,
just as the people had taken their
places in the circus, a slave who
had been beaten with rods was led
through the circus, bearing a gibbet.
After this event, a certain Roman
rustic had a dream, in which an
apparition informed him that he had
been displeased with the president of
the games, and the rustic was ordered
to apprise the senate of that fact.
He, however, did not dare to do so;
on which the apparition appeared a
second time, and warned him not to
provoke him to exert his power. Even
then he could not summon courage to
obey, and presently his son died.
After this, the same
admonition was repeated in his dreams for the third time. Then the peasant himself became extremely ill, and related the cause of his trouble to his friends, by whose advice he was carried on a litter to the senatehouse;
and as soon as he had related
his dreams to the senate, he
recovered his health and strength, and
returned home on foot perfectly cured.
Thereupon, the truth of his dreams
being admitted by the senate, it is
related that these games were repeated
a second time. It is recorded
in the history of the same Crelius,
that Caius Gracchus informed many persons
that during the time that he was
soliciting the qusestorship, his brother
Tiberius Gracchus appeared to him in
a dream, and said to him, that
he might delay as much as he
pleased, but that nevertheless he was
fated to die by the same death which
e himself had suffered. Coclius asserts
that he heard this fact, and related
it to many persons, before Caius
Gracchus had become tribune of the
people. And what can be more certain
than such a dream as this 1 Who,
again, can despise those two dreams,
which are so frequently dwelt upon by
the Stoics?one concerning Simonides, who,
having found the dead body of a
man who was a stranger to him
lying in the road, buried it. Having
performed this office, he was about
to embark in a ship, when the
man whom he had buried appeared to
him in a dream at night, and
warned him not to undertake the
voyage, for that if he did he would perish by shipwreck. Therefore, he returned home
again, but all the other people who
sailed in that vessel were lost. The other dream, which is a very celebrated one, is related in the following manner:Two
Arcadians, who were in timate friends,
were travelling together, and arriving at
Megara, one of them took up his
quarters at an inn, the other at
a friend's house. After supper, when
they had both gone to bed, the
Arcadian, who was staying at his
friend's house, saw an apparition of
his fellowtraveller at the inn, who
prayed him to come to his assistance
immediately, as the innkeeper was going
to murder him. Alarmed at this
intimation, he started from his sleep;
but on recollection, thinking it nothing
but an idle dream, he lay down
again. Presently, the apparition appeared
to him again in his sleep, and
entreated him, though he would not
come to his as sistance while yet
alive, at least not to leave his
death unavenged. He told him further,
that the innkeeper had first murdered
him, and then cast him into a
dungcart, where he lay covered with
filth; and begged him to go early
to the gate of the town, before
any cart could leave the town. Much
excited by this second vision, he went
early next morning to the gate of
the town, and met with the driver
of the cart, and asked him what
he had in his waggon. The driver,
upon this question, ran away in a
fright. The dead body was then
discovered, and the innkeeper, the evidence
being clear against him, was brought
to punishment. What can be more akin
to divination than such a dream as this
? But why do I relate any
more ancient instances of similar things,
when such dreams have occurred to
ourselves? for I have often told you
mine, and I have as often heard
you talk of yours. When I was
proconsul in Asia, it appeared to me
as I slept, that I saw you
riding on horseback till you reached
the banks of a great river, and
that you were suddenly thrown off and
precipitated into the waters, and so
disappeared. At this I trembled
exceedingly, being overcome with fear and
apprehension. But suddenly you reappeared
before me with a joyful countenance,
and, with the same horse, ascended
the opposite bank, and then we embraced
each other. It is easy to conjecture
the signification of such a dream as
this; and hence the learned inten
<reters of Asia predicted to me
that those events would take place
which afterwards did come to pass.
I now come to your own dream,
which I have sometimes heard from
yourself, but more often from our
friend Sallust. He used to say, that
in that flight and exile of yours,
which was so glorious for you, so calamitous
for our country, you stayed awhile in
a certain villa of the territory of
Atina, when, having sat up a great
part of the night, you fell into
a deep and heavy slumber towards the
morning. And from this slumber your
attendants would not awake you, as
you had given orders that you were
not to be disturbed, though your journey was sufficiently urgent. When at length you awoke about the second hour of the day, you related to Sallust the following dream:That
it had seemed to you that, as
you were wandering sorrowfully through some
solitary district, Caius Marius appeared to
you with his fasces covered with
laurel, and that he asked you why
you were afflicted. And when you
informed him that you had been driven
from your country by the violence of
the disaffected, he seized your right
hand, and urged you to be of
good cheer, and ordered the lictor
nearest to him to lead you to
his monument, saying, that there you
should find security. Sallust told me,
that upon hearing this dream, he
himself exclaimed at once that your
return would be speedy and glorious;
and that you also appeared to be
de lighted with your dream. A short
time afterwards I was informed, as
you well know, that it was in
the monument of Marius that, on the
instance of that excellent and famous
consul Lentulus, that most honourable
decree of the senate was passed for
your recal, which was applauded with
shouts of incredible exultation in a
very full assembly; so that, as you
yourself observed, no dream could have
a higher character of divination than
this which occurred to you at Atina. But
you will say that there are likewise
many false dreams. No doubt there are
some which are perhaps obscure to us;
but, even allow that there are some
which are actually false, what argument is that against those which are true ?of
which, indeed, there would be a great
many more if we went to bed in
perfect health; but as it is, from
our being over charged with wine and
luxuries, all our perceptions become
troubled and confused. Consider what
Socrates, in the Republic of Plato,
says on this subject. "
When," says he, " that part
of the soul which is capable of
intelligence and reason is subdued and reduced
to
languor, then that part in which there is a species
of ferocity and uncivilized savageness being
excited by immoderate eating and drinking,
exults in our sleep and wantons about
unre strainedly; and therefore all kinds
of visions present them selves to it,
such as are destitute of all sense
or reason, in which we appear to
be giving ourselves up to incest and
all kinds of bestiality, or to be
committing bloody murders, and massacres,
and all kinds of execrable deeds,
with a triumphant defiance of all
prudence and decency. But in the case
of a man who is accustomed to a
sober and regular life, when he
commits himself to sleep, then that
part of his soul which is the
seat of intellect and reason is still
active and awake, being replenished with
a banquet of virtuous thoughts; and
that portion which is nourished by
pleasure, is neither destroyed by
exhaustion nor swollen by satiety, either
of which is accustomed to impair the
vigour of the soul, whether nature is
deficient in anything, or super abundant
or overstocked; and that third division
also, ill which the vehemence of
anger is situated, is lulled and
restrained; so, consequently, it happens,
that owing to the due regulation of
the two more violent portions of the
soul, the third, or intellectual part,
shines forth conspicuously, and is fresh
and active for the admission of
dreams; and therefore the visions of
sleep which present themselves before it
are tranquil and true." Such are
the very words of Plato. Shall we,
then, prefer listening to the doctrine
of Epicurus on this point ? As
for Carneades, he sometimes says one
thing and sometimes another, from his
mere fondness for discussion. And yet,
what are the sentiments which he
utters ? At all events, they are
never expressed either with elegance or
propriety. And will you prefer such a
man as this to Plato and Socrates
1 men who, even if they were to
give no reason for their tenets,
should, by the mere authority of
their names, outweigh these minute
philosophers. Plato then asserts that
we should bring our bodies into such
a disposition before we go to sleep
as to leave nothing which may
occasion error or perturbation in our
dreams. For this reason, perhaps,
Pythagoras laid it down as a rule,
that his disciples should not eat
beans, because this food is very
flatulent, and contrary to that
tranquillity of mind which a truthseeking
spirit should possess. When, therefore, the
mind is thus separated from the
society and contagion of the body, it
recollects things past, examines things
present, and anticipates things to come.
For the body of one who is
asleep lies like that of one who
is dead,
while the spirit is full of vitality
and vigour. And it will be yet
more so after death, when it will
have got rid of the body altogether;
and therefore we _see that even on
the approach of death it becomes much
more divine. For it often happens
that those who are attacked by a
severe and mortal malady, foresee that
their death is at hand. And in
this state they often behold ghosts
and phantoms of the dead. Then they
are more than ever anxious about
their reputations; and they who have
lived otherwise than as they ought,
then most especially repent of their
sins. And that the dying are
often possessed of the gift of divi
nation, Posidonius confirms by that notorious
example of a certain Rhodian who,
being on his deathbed, named six of
his contemporaries, saying which of them
would die first, which second, which,
next to him, and so on. There
are, he imagines, besides this, three
ways in which men dream under the
immediate impulse of the Gods : one,
when the mind intuitively perceives things
by the relation which it bears to
the Gods; the second, arising from
the fact of the air being full
of immortal spirits, in whom all the
signs of truth are, as it were,
stamped and visible; the third, when
the Gods themselves converse with sleepers,and
that, as I have said before, takes
place more especially at the approach
of death, enabling the minds of the
dying to anti cipate future events.
An instance of this is the prediction
of Calanus, of whom I have
already spoken. Another is that of Hector, in Homer,
who, when dying himself, foretels the
approaching death of Achilles. If there
were no such thing as divination,
Plautus would not have been so much
applauded for the following line :
— My mind presaged (prcesagibat), when I
first went out, That I was going
on a fruitless journey :
— for the verb sagio means, to
feel shrewdly. Hence old women are
sometimes called sagce (witches), because
they are ambi tious of knowing many
things; and dogs are called sagacioiis.
Whoever, therefore, say it (knows) before
the event has come to pass, is
said prcesagire (to have the power of
knowing the future beforehand). There
exists, therefore, in the mind a
presentiment, which strikes the soul from
without, and which is enclosed in the
soul by divine operation. If this
becomes very vivid, it is termed
frenzy, as happens when the soul,
being abstracted from the body, is
stirred up by a divine
inspiration. What sudden transport fires my
virgin soul ! Jly mother, oh, my
mother ! — dearest name Of all dear
names ! But oh, my breast
is full Of divination and impending
fates, While dread Apollo with his
mighty impulse Urges me onward.
Sisters, my sweet sisters ! I
grieve to anticipate the coming fate
Of our most royal parents. You
are all More filial and more dutiful
than I. I only am enjoin'd this
cruel task, To utter imminent ruin.
You do serve them; I injure them
; and your obedience Shines well, set-off
by my disloyal rage.1 0 what a
tender, moral, and delicate poem !
though the beauty of it does
not affect the question. What
I wish to prove is, that that
frenzy often predicts what is true
and real. I see the blazing
torch of Troy's last doom, Fire, and
massacre, and death. Arm, citizens
! Bring aid and quench the flames.
In the following lines, it is
not so much Cassandra who speaks,
as the Deity enclosed in human
form:Already is the fleet prepared to
sail; It bears destruction — rapidly it
speeds: A dreadful army traverses the
shores, Destined to slaughter. 1 seem
to be doing nothing but
quoting tragedies and fables. I would
mention a story I have heard from
your self, and that not an imaginary,
but a real circumstance, and closely
related to our present discussion. Caius
Coponius, a skilful general, and a
man of the highest character for
learn ing and wisdom, who commanded
the fleet of the Rhodians, with the
appointment of praetor, came to you
at Dyrrha- chium, and informed, you
that a certain sailor in a Khodiau
galley had predicted that, in less
than a month, Greece would 1
This is a quotation from Pacuvius's
play of Hercules ; the speaker is
Cassandra. be deluged with blood, that
Dyrrhachium would be pillaged, and that
the people would flee and take to
their ships; that, looking back in
their flight, they would see a
terrible con flagration. He added,
moreover, that the fleet of the
lihodians would soon return, and retire
to Rhodes. You told me that you
yourself were surprised at this
intelligence, and that Marcus Varro and
Marcus Cato, both men of great
learning, who were with you, were
exceedingly alarmed. A few days afterwards,
Labienus, having escaped from the battle
of Phar- salia, arrived and brought
an account of the defeat of the
army: and the rest of the prediction
was soon accomplished; for the corn
was dragged out of the granaries, and
strewed about all the streets and
alleys, and destroyed. Yoxi all embarked
on board the ships in haste and
alarm; and at night, when you looked
back towai-ds the town, you beheld
the barges on fire, which were burned
by the soldiers because they would
not follow. At last you were deserted
by the fleet of the Rhodians, and
then you found that the prophet had
been a true one. I have
explained as concisely as possible the
fore warnings of dreams and frenzy,
with which I said that art had
nothing to do; for both these kinds
of prediction arise from the same
cause, which our friend Cratippus adopts
as the true explana tion —namely,
that the souls of men are partly
inspired and agitated from without. By
which he meant to say, that there
is in the exterior world a sort
of divine soul, whence the human soul
is derived; and that that portion of
the human soul which is the fountain
of sensation, motion, and appetite, is
not separate from the action of the
body; but that portion which partakes
of reason and intelligence is then
most ener getic, when it is most
completely abstracted from the body.
Therefore, after having recounted veritable
instances of presentiments and dreams,
Cratippus used to sum up his
conclusions in this manner:" If," he
would say, "the exist ence of
the eyes is necessary to the
existence and operation of the function
of sight, though the eyes may not
be always exercising that function, still
he who has once made use of his
eyes so as to see correctly, is
possessed of eyes capable of the
sensation of correct sight: just so
if the function and gift of
divination cannot exist without the
exercise of divination, and yet a man
who has this gift may sometimes err
in its exercise, and not foresee
correctly; then it is sufficient to
prove the existence of divination, that
some event should have been once so
correctly divined that none of its
circum stances appear to have happened
fortuitously. And as a multitude of
such events have occurred, the existence
of divination ought not to be
doubted.But as to those divinations which
are explained by conjecture, or by
the observation of events; these, as
I have said before, are not of
the natural, but artificial order; in
which artificial class are the haruspices,
and augurs, and interpreters. These are
discredited by the Peripatetics, and
defended by the Stoics. Some of them
are established by certain monuments and
systems, as is evident from the
ritual books of the ancient Etruscans
respecting electrical interpre tation of
the omens conveyed by the entrails of
victims and by lightning, and by our
own books on the discipline of the
augurs Other divinations are explained at
once by con jecture, without reference
to any written authorities; such as
the prophecy of Calchas in Homer,
who, by a certain num ber of
flying sparrows, predicted the number of
years which would be occupied in the
siege of Troy; and as an event
which we read recorded in the history
of Sylla, which hap pened under your
own eyes. For when Sylla was in
the territory of Nola, and was
sacrificing in front of his tent, a
serpent suddenly glided out from beneath
the altar; and when, upon this, the
soothsayer Posthumius exhorted him to give
orders for the immediate march of the
army, Sylla obeyed the injunction, and
entirely defeated the Samnites, who lay
before Nola, and took possession of
their richly- provided camp. It was
by this kind of conjectural divination
that the fortune of the tyrant
Dionysius was announced a little before
the commencement of his reign; for
when he was travelling through the
territory of Leontini, he dismounted and
drove his horse into a river; but
the horse was carried away by the
current, and Dionysius, not being able
with all his efforts to extricate
him, departed, as Philistus reports,
lamenting his loss. Some time afterwards,
as he was journeying further down the
river, he suddenly heard a neighing,
and to his great joy found his
horse in very comfortable condition, with
a swarm of bees hanging on his
mane. And this prodigy intimated the
event which took place a few days
after this, when Dionysius was called
to the throne. Need I say more
1 Ho\v many intimations were
given to the Lacedaemonians a short
time before the disaster of Leuctra,
when arms rattled in the temple of
Hercules, and his statue streamed with
profuse sweat! At the same
time, at Thebes (as Callisthenes relates),
the foldingdoors in the temple of Hercules,
which were closed with bars, opened
of their own accord, and the armour
which was suspended on the walls was
found fallen to the ground. And at
the same period, at Lebadia, where divine
rites were being performed in honour
of Trophonius, all the cocks in the
neighbourhood began to crow so incessantly
as never to leave off at all;
and the Boeotian augurs affirmed that
this was a sign of victory to
the Thebans. because these birds crow
only on occasions of victory, and
maintain silence in case of defeat.
Many other signs, at this time,
announced to the Spartans the calamities
of the battle of Leuctra; for, at
Delphi, on the head of the statue
of Lysander, who was the most famous
of the Lacedaemonians, there suddenly
appeared a garland of wild prickly
herbs. And the golden stars which the
Lacedae monians had set up as symbols
of Castor and Pollux, in the temple
of Delphi, after the famous naval
victory of Lysander, in which the
power of Athens was broken, because
those divinities were reported to have
appeared in the Lacedaj- monian fleet
during that engagement, fell down, and
were seen no more. And the
greatest of all the prodigies which
were sent as warnings to those same
Lacedaemonians, happened when they sent to
consult the oracle of Jupiter at
Dodona on the success of the combat;
and when the ambassadors had cast
their questions into the urn from
which the responses were to be drawn,
an ape, whom the king of Molossus
kept as a pet, dis turbed and
confounded all the lots, and everything
else which had been prepared for the
purpose of giving a reply in due
form. Upon which the priestess who
presided at the oracular rites, declared
that the Lacedaemonians must rather look
to their safety than expect a victory. Must
I say more 1 In the second
Punic war, when Flaminius, being consul
for the second time, despised the signs
of future events, did he not by
such conduct occasion great disasters
to the state ? For when, after,
having reviewed the troops, he was
moving his camp towards Arezzo, and
leading his legions against Hannibal, his
horse suddenly fell with him before
the statue of Jupiter Stator, without
any apparent cause. But though those
who were skilful in divina tion
declared it was an evident sign from
the Gods that he should not engage
in battle, he paid no attention to
it. After wards, when it was proposed
to consult the auspices by the
consecrated chickens, the augur indicated
the propriety of deferring the battle.
Flaminius asked him what was to be
done the next day, if the chickens
still refused to feed ? He replied
that in that case he must still
rest quiet. " Fine auspices,
indeed," replied Flaminius, " if
we may only fight when the chickens
are hungry, but must do nothing if
they are full." And so he
commanded the standards to be moved
forward, and the army to follow him;
on which occasion, the standard-bearer of
the first battalion could not extricate
his standard from the ground in which
it was pitched, and several soldiers
who endeavoured to assist him were
foiled in the attempt. Flaminius, to
whom they related this incident, despised
the warning, as was usual with him;
and in the course of three hours
from that time, the whole of his
army was routed, and he himself
slain. And it is a wonderful
story, too, that is told by Coelius,
as having happened at this very time,
that such great earth quakes took
place in Liguria, Gallia, and many of
the islands, and throughout all Italy,
that many cities were destrojred, and
the earth was broken into chasms in
many places, and rivers rolled backwards,
while the waters of the sea rushed
into their channels. Skilful diviners can
certainly derive correct pre sentiments
from slight circumstances. When Midas, who
be came king of Phrygia, was yet
an infant, some ants crammed some
grains of wheat into his mouth while
he was sleep ing. On this the
diviners predicted that he would become
exceedingly rich, as indeed afterwards
happened. While Plato was an infant
in his cradle, a swarm of bees
settled on his lips during his
slumbers; and the diviners answered that
he would become extremely eloquent; and
this prediction of his future eloquence
was made before he even knew how
to speak. Why should I speak of
your dear and delightful friend, Roscius
1 Did he tell lies himself, or
did the whole city of Lanuvium tell
lies for him ? When
he was in his cradle at Solonium,
where he was being brought up,— (a
place which belongs to the Lanuvian
territory.) the story goes, that one night,
there being a light in the room,
his nurse arose and found a serpent
coiled around him, and in her alarm
at this sight she made a great
outcry. The father of Roscius related
the circumstance to the soothsayers, and
they answered that the child would
become preeminently distinguished and illus
trious. This adventure was afterwards
engraved by Praxiteles in silver, and
our friend Archias celebrated it in verse.
What, then, are we waiting for
1 Are we to wait till the Gods
are conversant with us and our
affairs, while we are in the forum,
and on our journeys, and when we
are at home? yet though they do
not openly discover themselves to us,
they diffuse their divine influence far
and wide — an influence which they not
only inclose in the caverns of the
earth, but sometimes extend to the
constitutions of men. For it was this
divine influence of the earth which
inspired the Pythia at Delphi, while
the Sibyl received her power of
divination from nature. Why should we
wonder at this 1 Do we not see
how various are the species and
specific properties of earths 1 — of
which some parts are injurious, as
the earth of Amp- sanctus in Hirpinum,
and the Plutonian land in Asia: and
some portions of the soil of the
fields are pestilential, others salubrious;
some spots produce acute capacities, others
heavy characters. All which things depend
on the varieties of atmosphere, and
are inequalities of the exhalations of
the different soils. It likewise
often happens that minds are affected
more or less powerfully by certain
expressions of countenance, and certain
tones of voice and modulations, — often
also by fits of anxiety and terror —
a condition indicated in these lines
of the poet : — Madden'd in heart,
and weeping like as one By the
mysterious rites of Bacchus wrought Into
wild ecstasy, she wanders lone Amid
the tombs, and mourns her Teucer
lost. And this state of excitement
also proves that there is a divine
energy in human souls. And so
Democritus asserts, that without something
of this ecstasy no man can become
a great poet ; and Plato utters the
same sentiment : and he may call this
poetic inspiration an ecstasy or madness
as much as he pleases, so long
as he eulogizes it as eloquently as
he does in his Phecdon. What is
your art of oratory in pleading
causes 1 What is your action ?
Can it be forcible, commanding, and
copious, unless your mind and heart
are in some degree animated by a
kind of inspiration 1 I have often
beheld in yourself, and, to descend
to a less dignified example, even in
your friend ufEsop, such fire and splendour
of expression and action, that it
seemed as if some potent inspiration
had altogether ab stracted him from
all present sensation and thought.
Besides this, forms often come across
us which have no real existence, but
which nevertheless have a distinct appear
ance. Such an apparition is said to
have occurred to Bren- ims, and to
his Gallic troops, when he was waging
an impious war upon the temple of
Apollo at Delphi. For on that occa
sion it is reported that the Pythian
priestess pronounced these words :"I and
the white virgins will provide for
the future." In accordance with which,
it happened that the Gauls fancied
that they saw white virgins bearing
arms against them, and that their
entire army was overwhelmed in the
snow. Aristotle thinks that those who
become ecstatic or furious through some
disease, especially melancholy persons, possess
a divine gift of presentiment in
their minds. But I know not whether
it is right to attribute anything of
this kind to men with diseases of
the stomach, or to persons in a
frenzy, for time divination
rather appertains to a sound mind than
to a sick body. The Stoics
attempt to prove the reality of
divination in this way: — If there are
Gods, and they do not intimate future
events to men, they either do not
love men, or they are ignorant of
the future; or else they conceive
that know ledge of the future can
be of no service to men; or
they con ceive that it does not
become their majesty to condescend to
intimate beforehand what must be hereafter;
or lastly, we must say that even
the Gods themselves cannot tell how
to forewarn us of them. But it
is not true that the Gods do
not love men, for they are essentially
benevolent and philanthropic; and they
cannot be ignorant of those events
which take place by their own
direction and appointment. Again, it cannot
be a matter of indifference to us
to be apprised of what is about
to happen, for we shall become more
cautious if we do know such things.
Nor do they think it beneath their
dignity to give such inti mations,
for nothing is more excellent than
beneficence. And lastly, the Gods cannot
be ignorant of future events. There
fore there are no Gods, and they
do not give intimations of the
future. But there are Gods: so
therefore they do give such intimations;
and if they do give such intimations,
they must have given us the means
of understanding them, or else they
would give their information to no
purpose. And if they do give us
such means, divination must needs exist;
therefore divination does exist. Such is
the argument in favour of divination
by which Chrysippus, Diogenes, and
Antipater endeavour to demonstrate their
side of the question. Why, then, should
any doubt be entertained that the
arguments that I have advanced are
entirely true? If both reason and
fact are on my side,— if whole
nations and peoples, Greeks and barbarians,
and our own ancestors also, confirm
all my assertions, — if also it has
always been maintained by the greatest
philosophers and poets, and by the
wisest legislators who have framed
constitutions and founded cities, must we
wait till the very animals give their
verdict? and may not we be content
with the unanimous authority of all
mankind1? Nor indeed is any other
argument brought forward to prove that
all these kinds of divination which I
uphold have no existe nce, than
that it appears difficult to explain
what are the different principles and
causes of each kind of divination.
For what reason can the soothsayer
allege why an injury in the lungs
of otherwise favourable entrails should
compel us to alter a day previously
appointed, and defer au enterprise? How
can an augur ex plain why the
croak of a raven on the right
hand, and a crow on the left,
should be reckoned a good omen? What
can an astrologer say by way of
explaining why a conjunction of the
planet Jupiter or Venus with the moon
is propitious at the birth of a
child, and why the conjunction of
Saturn or Mars is injurious? or why
God should warn us during sleep, and
neglect us when we are awake ?
or lastly, what is the reason why
the frantic Cassandra could foresee future
events, while the sage Priam remained
ignorant of them? Do you ask
why everything takes place as it
does? Very right; but that is not
the question now; what we are trying
to find out is whether such is
the case or not. As, if I were
to assert that the magnet is a
kind of stone which attracts and
draws iron to itself, but were unable
to give the reason why that is
the case, would you deny the fact
altogether ? And you treat the
subject of divination in the same
way, though we see it, and hear
of it, and read of it, and have
received it as a tradition from our
ancestors. Nor did the world in
general ever doubt of it before the
introduction of that philosophy which has
recently been invented, and even since
the appearance of philosophy, no
philosopher who was of any authority
at all has been of a contrary
opinion. I have already quoted in its
favour Pythagoras, Democritus, and Socrates.
There is no exception but Xenophanes
among the ancients. I have likewise
added the old Academicians, the
Peripatetics, and the Stoics: all supported
divination; Epi curus alone was of
the opposite opinion. But what can be
more shameless than such a man as
he, who asserted that there was no
gratuitous and disinterested virtue in the
world? XL. But what man is
there who is not moved by the
testi mony and declarations of antiquity?
Homer writes that Cal- chas was a
most excellent augur, and that he
conducted the fleet of the Greeks to
Troy, — more, I imagine, by his know
ledge of the auspices than of the
country. Amphilochus and Mopsus were kings
of the Argives, and also augurs, and
built the Greek cities on the coast
of Cilicia. And before them lived
Amphiaraus and Tiresias, men of no lowly
rank or ob scure fame, not like
those men of whom Ennius says —They
hire out their prophecies for gold :
no; they were renowned and first
rate men, who predicted the future by
means of the knowledge which they
derived from birds and omens; and
Homer, speaking of the latter even in
the infernal regions, says that he
alone was con sistently wise, while
others were wandering about like shadows.
As to Amphiaraus, he was so honoured
by the general praise of all Greece,
that he was accounted a god, and
oracles were established at the spot
where he was buried. Why need I
speak of Priam king of Asia? had
not he two children possessed of this
gift of divination, namely a son
named Helenus, and a daughter named
Cassandra, who both prophesied, one by
means of auspices, the other through
an excited state of mind and divine
inspiration1? of which de scription
likewise were two brothers of the
noble family of the Marcii, who are
recorded as having lived in the days
of our ancestors. Does not Homer
inform us, too, that Polyidus the
Corinthian predicted the various fates of
many persons, and the death of his
son when he was going to the siege
of Troy? And as a general rule,
among the ancients, those who were
possessed of authority \asually also
possessed the know ledge of auguries;
for, as they thought wisdom a regal
attri bute, so also did they esteem
divination. And of this our state of
Rome is an instance, in which several
of our kings were also augurs, and
afterwards even private persons, endued
with the same sacerdotal office, ruled
the commonwealth by the authority of religion. And
this kind of divination has not been
neglected even by barbarous nations; for
the Druids in Gaul are diviners,
among whom I myself have been
acquainted with Divitiacus vEduus, your own
friend and panegyrist, who pretends to
the science of nature which the
Greeks call physiology, and who asserts
that, partly by auguries and partly
by conjecture, he foresees future events.
Among the Persians they have augurs
and diviners, called magi, who at
certain seasons all assemble in a
temple for mutual conference and
consultation; as your college also used
once to do on the nones of the
month. And no man can become a
king of Persia who is not previously
initiated in the doctrine of the
magi. There are even whole families
and nations devoted to divina tion.
The entire city of Telmessus in Caria
is such. Likewise in Elis, a city
of Peloponnesus, there are two families,
called lamidse and ClutidoD, distinguished
for their proficiency in divination. And
in Syria the Chaldeans have become
famous for their astrological predictions,
and the subtlety of their genius.
Etruria is especially famous for possessing
an inti mate acquaintance with omens
connected with thunderbolts and things of
that kind, and the art of explaining
the signi fication of prodigies and
portents. This is the reason why our
ancestors, during the flourishing days of
the empire, enacted that six of the
children of the principal senators should
be sent, one to each of the
Etrurian tribes, to be instructed in
the divination of the Etrurians, in
order that this science of divination,
so intimately connected with reli gion,
might not, owing to the poverty of
its professors, be cultivated for merely
mercenary motives, and falsified by
bribery. The Phrygians, the Pisidians, the
Cilicians, and Arabians are accustomed to
regulate many of their affairs by the
omens which they derive from birds.
And the Umbrians do the same,
according to report. It appears to me
that the different characteristics of
divination have originated in the nature
of the localities themselves in which
they have been cultivated. For as the
Egyptians and Babylonians, who reside in
vast plains, where no mountains obstruct
their view of the entire hemisphere,
have applied themselves principally to that
kind of divination called astrology, the
Etrurians, on the other hand, because
they, as men more devoted to the
rites of religion, were used to
sacrifice victims with more zeal and
frequency, have espe cially applied
themselves to the examination of the
entrails of animals; and as, from the
character of their climate and the
denseness of their atmosphere, they are
accustomed to witness many meteorological
phenomena, and because for the same
reason many singular prodigies take place
among them, arising alike from heaven
or from earth, and even from the
concep tions or offspring of men or
cattle, they have become won derfully
skilful in the interpretation of such
curiosities, the force of which, as
you often say, is clearly declared by
the very names given to them by
our ancestors, for because they point
out (ostendunt}, portend, show (monstrant),
and predict, they are called ostents,
portents, monsters, and prodigies. Again,
the Arabians, the Phrygians, and Cilicians,
because they rear large herds of
cattle, and, both in summer and
winter, traverse the plains and mountainous
districts, have on that account taken
especial notice of the songs and
flight of birds. The Pisidians, and
in our country the Umbrians, have
applied themselves to the same art
for the same reason. The whole nation
of the Carians, and most especially
the Telmessians, who reside in the
most productive and fertile plains, in
which the exuberance of nature gives
birth to many extraordinary productions,
have been very careful in the
observation of prodigies. But who can
shut his eyes to the fact that
in every well constituted state auspices,
and other kinds of divi nation, have
been much esteemed? What monarch or
what people has ever neglected to
make use of them in the trans
actions of peace, and still more
especially in time of war, when the
safety or welfare of the commonwealth
is implicated in a greater degree? I
do not speak merely of our own
countrymen, — who have never undertaken any
martial enter prise without inspection of
the entrails, and who never con duct
the affairs of the city without
consulting the auspices, — I rather allude
to foreign nations. The Athenians, for
ex ample, always consulted certain divining
priests, (whom they called yaavrei?,) when
they convoked their public assemblies. The
Spartans always appointed an augur as
the assessor of their king, and also
they ordained that an augur should be
present at the council of their
Elders, which was the name they gave
to their public council; and in every
important transaction they invariably consulted
the oracle of Apollo at Delphi, or
that of Jupiter Harnmon, or that of
Dodona. Lycurgus, who formed the
Lacedaemonian commonwealth, desired that his
code of laws should receive confirmation
from the authority of Apollo at
Delphi; and when Lysander sought to
change them, the same authority forbade
his innovations. Moreovei', the Spartan
magistrates, not content with a careful
superintendence of the state affairs, went
occasionally to spend a night in the
temple of Pasiphae, which is in the
country in the neighbourhood of their
city, for the sake of dreaming there,
because they considered the oracles
received in sleep to be true.
But I return to the divination
of the Eomans. How often has our
senate enjoined the decemvirs to consult
the books of the Sibyls! For
instance, when two suns had been
seen, or when three moons had
appeared, and when flames of fire
were noticed in the sky; or on
that other occasion, when the sun was
beheld in the night, when noises were
heard in the sky, and the heaven
itself seemed to burst open, and strange
globes were remarked in it. Again,
information was laid before the senate,
that a portion of the territory of
Privernum had been swallowed up, and
that the land had sunk down
to an incredible depth, and that
Apulia had been convulsed by terrific
earthquakes; which portentous events announced
to the Romans terrible wars and
disastrous seditions. On all these
occasions the diviners and their auspices
were in perfect accordance with the
prophetic verses of the Sibyl. Again,
when the statue of Apollo at Cuma
was covered with a miraculous sweat,
and that of Victory was found in
the same condition at Capua, and when
the hermaphrodite was born, — were not
these things significant of horrible dis
asters? Or again, when the Tiber was
discoloured writh blood, or when, as
has often happened, showers of stones,
or sometimes of blood, or of mud,
or of milk, have fallen, — when the
thunder bolt fell on the Centaur of
the Capitol, and struck the gates of
Mount Aventine, and slew some of the
inhabitants; or again, when it struck
the temple of Castor and Pollux at
Tusculum, and the temple of Piety at
Rome, — did not the soothsayers in reply
announce the events which subsequently took
place, and were not similar predictions
found in the Sibylline volumes'? How
often has the senate commanded the
decemvirs to consult the Sibylline books!
In what important affairs, and how
often has it not been guided wholly
by the answers of the soothsayers! In
the Marsic war, not long ago, the
temple of Juno the Protectress was
restored by the senate, which was
excited to this holy act by a
dream of Csccilia, the daughter of Quintus
Metellus. But after Sisenna, who men
tions this dream, had related the
wonderful correspondence of the event with
the prediction, he nevertheless (being
influ enced, I suppose, by some
Epicurean) proceeded to argue that dreams
should never be trusted: however, he
states nothing against the credit of
the prodigies wrhich took place, and
which he reports, at the beginning of
the Marsic war1, when the images of
the gods were seen to sweat, and
blood flowed in the streams, and the
heavens opened, and voices were heard
from secret places, which foretold the
dangers of the combat; and at
Lanuvium the sacred bucklers were found
to have been gnawed by mice, which
appeared to the augurs the worst
presage of all. Shall I add
further what we read recorded in our
annals, thnt in the war against the
Veientes, when the Alban lake had
risen enormously, one of their most distinguished
nobles came over to us and said,
that it \vas predicted in the sacred
books concerning the destinies of the
Veientes, which they had in their own
possession, that their city could never
be captured while the lake remained
full; and that if, when the lake
was opened, its waters were allowed to
run into the sea, the .Romans would
suffer loss, — if, on the contrary, they
were so drawn off that they did
not reach the sea, then we should
have good success? And from this
circumstance arose the series of immense
labours, subsequently undertaken by our ancestors
in conducting away the waters of the
Alban lake. But when the Veientes,
being weary of war, sent ambassadors
to the Roman senate, one of them
exclaimed that that de serter had not
ventured to tell them all he knew,
for that in those same sacred books
it was predicted that Rome should soon
be ravaged by the Gauls, — an event
which happened six years after the
city of Veii surrendered. The cry of
the fauns, too, has often been heard
in battle; and prophetic voices have
often sounded from secret places in
periods of trouble ; of which, among
others, we have two notable examples, — for
shortly before the capture of Rome a
voice was heard which proceeded from
the grove of Vesta, which skirts the
new road at the foot of the
Palatine Hill, exhorting the citizens to
repair the walls and gates, for that
if they were not taken care of
the city would be taken. The
injunction was neglected till it was
too late, and it after wards was
awfully confirmed by the fact. After the
disaster had occurred, our citizens erected
an altar to Aius the Speaker, which
we may still see carefully fenced
round, opposite the spot where the
warning was uttered. Many authors have
reported that once, after a great
earthquake had happened, they heard a
voice from the temple of Juno,
commanding that expiation should be made
by the sacrifice of a pregnant sow,
and hence it was afterwards called
the temple of Juno the Admonitress. Shall
we then despise these oracular inti
mations, which the Gods themselves
vouchsafed us, and which our ancestors
have confirmed by their testimony ?
The Pythagoreans had not only high
reverence for the voice of the Gods,
but they likewise respected the warnings
of men (hominum), which they call
omina. And our ancestors were persuaded
that much virtue resides in certain
words, and therefore prefaced their various
enterprises with certain auspicious phrases,
such as, "May good and prosperous
and happy fortune attend." They
commenced all the public ceremonies of
religion with these words, — " Keep
silence; " and when they announced
any holidays, they commanded that all
lawsuits and quarrels should be suspended.
Likewise, wheu the chief who forms a
colony makes a lustration and review
of it, or when a general musters
an arm, or a censor the people,
they always choose those who have
lucky names to prepare the sacrifices.
The consuls in their military enrol
ments likewise take care that the first
soldier enrolled shall be one with a
fortunate name; and you know that you
your self were very attentive to
these ceremonial observances when you were
consul and imperator. Our ancestors have
likewise enjoined that the name of
the tribe which had the precedence
should be regarded as the presage of
a legitimate assembly of the Comitia.
And of presages of this kind I
can relate to you several celebi'ated
examples. Under the second consulship of
Lucius Paulus, when the charge of
making war against the king Perses
had been allotted to him, it happened
that on the evening of that very
same day, when he returned home and
kissed his little daughter Tertia, he
noticed that she was very sorrowful.
" What is the matter, my
Tertia," said he, " why are
you so sad?" " My father,"
replied she, " Perses has
perished." Upon which he caught her
in his arms, and caressing her,
exclaimed, " I embrace the omen,
my daughter." But the real truth
was, that her dog, who happened to
be called Perses, had died. I
have heard Lucius Flaccus, a priest
of Mars, say, that Csecilia, the
daughter of Metellus, intending to make
a matri monial engagement for her
sister's daughter, went to a certain
temple, in order to procure an omen,
according to the ancient custom. Here
the maiden stood, and Ctecilia sat
for a long time without hearing any
sound, till the girl, who grew tired
of standing, begged her aunt to allow
her to occupy her seat for a
short period, in order to rest
herself. Csecilia replied, "Yes, my
child, I willingly resign my seat to
you." And this reply of hers was
an omen, confirmed by the event, for
Ceecilia died soon after, and her
niece married her aunt's husband. I
know that men may despise such
stories, or even laugh at them, but
such conduct amounts to a
disbelief in the existence of the Gods
themselves, and to a contempt of
their revealed will. Why need I speak
of the augurs 1 — that part of the
qxiestion concerns you. The defence of
the auguries, I say, belongs peculiarly
to you. When you were a consul,
Publius Claudius, who was one of the
augurs, announced to you, when the
augury of the Goddess Salus was
doubted, that a disas trous domestic
and civil war would take place, which
happened a few months afterwards, but
was suppressed by your exer tions in
still fewer days. And I highly
approve of this augur, who alone for
a long period remained constant to
the study of divination, without making
a parade of his auguries, while his
colleagues and yours persisted in laughing
at him, sometimes terming him an
augur of Pisidia or Sora by way
of ridicule. Those who assert that
neither auguries nor auspices can give
us any insight into or foreknowledge
of the future, say that they are
mere superstitious practices, wisely invented
to impose on the ignorant; which,
however, is far from being the case
: for our pastoral ancestors under
Romulus were not, nor indeed was
Romulus himself, so crafty and cunning
as to in vent religious impositions
for the purpose of deceiving the mul
titude. But the difficulty of acquiring a
thorough knowledge of the auspices renders
many who are indifferent to them
eloquent in their disparagement, for they
would rather deny that there is
anything in the auspices than take the
pains of studying what there really
is. What can be more divine than
that prediction, which you cite in
your poem of Marius, that I may
quote your owrn authority in favour
of my argument? — Jove's eagle,
wounded by a serpent's bite, In
his strong talons caught the writhing
snake, And with his goring beak
tortured his foe And slaked his
vengeance in his blood. At
last He let, the venomous reptile
from on high Fall in the
whelming flood, then wing'd his flight
To the far east. Marius
beheld, and mark'd The augury divine,
and inly smiled To view the
presage of his coming fame ;
Meanwhile the thunder sounded on the
left, And thus confirm'd the omen.
Moreover, the augurial system of Romulus
was a pastoral rather than a civic
institution. Nor was it framed to
suit the opinions of the ignorant,
but derived from men of approved
skill, and so handed down to
posterity by tradition. Therefore Romulus
was himself an augur as well as
his brother Remus, if we may trust the
authority of Ennius. Both wish'd to reign,
arid both agreed to abide The
fair decision of the augury Here
Remus sat alone, and watch 'd for
signs Of fav'ring omen, while fair Eomulus
On the Aventine summit raised his
eyes To see what lofty flying
birds should pass. A goodly contest
which should rule, and which With
his own name should stamp the future
city. Now like spectators in the
circus, till The consul's signal
looses from the goal The eager
chariots, so the obedient crowd
Awaited the strife's victor and their
king. The golden sun departed into
night, And the pale moon shone
with reflected ray, When on the
left a joyful bird appear'd, And
golden Sol brought back the radiant
day. Twelve holy forms of Jove-directed
birds Wing'd their propitious flight.
Great Romulus The omen hail'd,
for now to him was given The
power to found and name th"
eternal city. Now, however, let us
return to the original point from
which we have been digressing. Though
I cannot give you a reason for
all these separate facts, and can only
distinctly assert that those things which
I have spoken of did really happen,
yet have I not sufficiently answered
Epicurus and Carneades by proving the
facts themselves'? Why may I not
admit, that though it may be easy
to find principles on which to
explain artificial presages, the subject of
divine intimations is more obscure? for
the presages which we deduce from an
examination of a victim's entrailsfrom
thunder and lightning, from prodigies, and
from the stars, are founded on the
accurate observation of many centuries. Now
it is certain, that a long course
of careful observation, thus carefully
conducted for a series of ages,
usually brings with it an incredible
accuracy of knowledge; and this can
exist even without the inspiration of
the Gods, when it has been once
ascertained by constant obser vation what
follows after each omen, and what is
indicated by each prodigy. The other
kind of divination is natural, as I
have said before, and may by physical
subtlety of reasoning appeal- referable to
the nature of the Gods, from which,
as the wisest men acknowledge, we
derive and enjoy the energies of our
souls; and as everything is filled
and pervaded by a divine intelligence
and eternal sense, it follows of
necessity that the soul of man must
be influenced by its kindred wTith
the soul of the Deity. But when
we are not asleep, our faculties are
employed on the necessary affairs of
life, and so are hindered from
communication with the Deity by the
bondage of the body. There are,
however, a small number of persons,
who, as it were, detach their souls
from the body, and addict themselves,
with the utmost anxiety and diligence,
to the study of the nature of
the Gods. The presentiments of men
like these are derived not from
divine inspiration, but from human reason ;
for from a contemplation of nature,
they anticipate things to come, — as
deluges of water, and the future
deflagration, at some time or other,
of heaven and earth. There are
others who, being concerned in the
government of states, as we have
heard of the Athenian Solon, foresee
the rise of new tyrannies. Such we
usually term prudent men ; like Thales
the Milesian, who, wishing to convict
his slanderers, and to show that even
a philosopher could make money, if he
should be so inclined, bought up all
the olive-trees in Miletus before they
were in flower; for he had probably,
by some knowledge of his own,
calculated that there would be a
heavy crop of olives. And Thales is
said to have been the first man
by whom an eclipse of the sun was
ever predicted, which happened under the
reign of Astyages. L. Physicians, pilots,
and husbandmen have likewise pre sentiments
of many events : but I do not
choose to call this divination ; as
neither do I call that warning which
was given by the natural philosopher
Anaximander to the Lacedae monians, when
he forewarned them to quit their city
and their homes, and to spend the
whole night in arms on the plain,
because he foresaw the approach of a
great earthquake, which took place that
very night, and demolished the whole
town; and even the lower part of
Mount Taygetus was torn away
from the rest, like the stern
of a ship might be. In the same
way, it is not so much as a
diviner, as a natural philosopher that
we should esteem Pherecydes, the master
of Pythagoras who, when he beheld the
water exhausted in a running spring,
predicted that an earthquake was nigh
at hand. The mind of man,
however, never exerts the power of
natural divination, unless when it is
so free and disengaged as to be
wholly disentangled from the body, as
happens ia the case of prophets and
sleepers. Therefore, as I have said
before, Diceearchus and our friend
Cratippus approve of these two sorts of
divination, as long as it is
understood that, inasmuch as they proceed
from nature, though they may be the
highest, they are not the only kind.
But if they deny that there is
any force in observation, then by
such denial they exclude many things
which are connected with the common
experience and institutions of mankind.
However, since they grant us some,
and those not insignifi cant things,
namely, prophecies and dreams, there is
no reason why we should consider
these as very formidable antagonists,
especially when there are some who
deny the existence of divination altogether.
Those, therefore, whose minds, as it
were, despising their bodies, fly forth,
and wander freely through the universe,
being inspired and influenced by a
certain divine ardour, doubtless perceive
those things which those who prophecy
predict. And spirits like these are
excited by many influ ences that have
no connexion with the body, as those
which are excited by certain intonations
of voice, and by Phrygian melodies,
or by the silence of groves and
forests, or the murmur of torrents,
or the roar of the sea. Such
are the minds which are susceptible
of ecstasies, and which long beforehand
foresee the events of futurity; to
which the following lines refer: —
Ah, see you not the vengeance
apt to come, Because a mortal has
presumed to judge Between three rival
goddesses'? — he's doom'd To fall a victim
to the Spartan dame, More dreadful
than all furies. Many things have
in the same way been predicted by
pro phets, and not only in ordinary
language, but also In verses which
the fauns of olden times And
white-hair'd prophets chanted. It was
thus that the diviners; Marcius and
Publicius, are said to have sung
their predictions. The mysterious responses of
Apollo were of the same nature. I
believe also that there were certain
exhalations of certain earths, by which
gifted minds were inspired to utter
oracles. These, then, are the
views which we must entertain of
prophets. Divinations by dreams are of
a similar order, because presentiments
which happen to diviners when awake,
happen to ourselves during sleep. For
in sleep the soul is vigorous, and
free from the senses, and the
obstruction of the cares of the body,
which lies prostrate and deathlike; and,
since the soul has lived from all
eternity, and is engaged with spirits
innumerable, it therefore beholds all
things in the universe, if it only
preserves a watchful attitude, unencumbered
by excess of food or drinking, so
that the mind is awake during the
slumber of the body, — this is the
divination of dreamers. Here, then,
comes in an important, and far from
natural, but a very artificial
interpretation of dreams by Antiphon :
and he interprets oracles and prophecies
in the same way; for there are
explainers of these things just as
grammarians are expounders of poets. For,
as it would have been in vain
for nature to have produced gold,
silver, iron, and copper, if she had
not taught us the means of extracting
them from her bosom for our use
and benefit; and as it would have
been in vain for her to have
bestowed seeds and fruits upon men,
if she had not taught them to
distinguish and cultivate them, — for what
use would any materials whatsoever be
to us, if we had no means of
working them up? —thus with every useful
thing which the Gods have bestowed on
us, they have vouchsafed us the sagacity
by which its utility may be appre
ciated ; and so, because in dreams,
oracles, and prophecies there are many
things necessarily obscure and ambiguous,
some have received the gift of
interpretation of them. But by what
means prophets and sleepers behold those
things, which do not at the time
exist in sensible reality, is a great
question. But when we have once
cleared up those points which ought
to be investigated first, then the
other subjects of our examination will
be easier. For the discussion about
the Nature of the Gods, which you
have so clearly ex plained in your
second book on that subject, embraces
the whole question; for if we grant
that there are Gods, and that their
providence governs the universe, and that
they consult for the best management
of all human affairs, and that not
only in general, but in particular, — if
we grant this, which indeed appears
to me to be undeniable, then we
must hold it as a necessary
consequence that these Gods have bestowed
on men the signs and indications of
futurity. The mode, however, by which
the Gods endue us with the gift
and power of divination requires some
notice. The Porch will not allow that
the Deity can be in terested in
each cleft in entrails, or in the
chirping of birds. They affirm that
such interference is altogether indecorous—
unworthy of the majesty of the Gods,
and an incredible im possibility. They
maintain that from the beginning of
the world it has been ordained that
certain signs must needs precede certain
events, some of which are drawn from
the entrails of animals, some from
the note and flight of birds, some
from the sight of lightning, some
from prodigies, some from stars, some
from visions of dreamers, and some
from exclamations of men in frenzy:
and those who have a clear perception
of these things are not often
deceived. Bad con jectures and incorrect
interpretations are false, not because of
any imposture in the signs themselves,
but because of the ignorance of their
expounders. It being, therefore, granted
and conceded that there exists a certain
divine energy, by which human life is
supported and surrounded, it is not
hard to conceive how all that hap
pens to men may happen by the
direction of heaven; for this divine
and sentient energy, which expands
throughout the universe, may select a
victim for sacrifice, and may, by
exterior agency, effect any change in
the condition of its entrails at the
period of its immolation: so that any
given characteristic may be found excessive
or defective in the animal's body.
For by very trifling exertions nature
can alter, or new-model, or diminish
many things. And the prodigies which
happened a little before Caesar's death
are of great weight in preventing iis
from doubting this, — when on that very
day on which he first sat on
the golden throne and went forth clad
in a purple robe, when he was
sacrificing, no heart was found in
the intestines of the fat ox. Do
you then suppose that any warm-blooded
animal, unless by divine interference, can
live an instant without a heart 1
He was himself surprised at the
novelty of the phenomenon ; on which
Spuriuna observed that he had reason
to fear that he would lose both
sense and life, since both of these
proceed from the heart. The next day
the liver of the victim was found
defective in the upper extremity. Doubtless
the im mortal Gods vouchsafed Ceesar
these signs to apprize him of his
approaching death, though not to enable
him to guard against it. When,
therefore, we cannot discover in the
entrails of the victim those organs
without which the animal cannot live,
we must necessarily suppose that they
have been annihilated by a superintending
Providence at the very instant that
the sacrifice is offered. LI II. And
the same divine influence may likewise
be the cause why birds fly in
different directions on different occa
sions, why they hide themselves sometimes
in one place and sometimes in anothei',
and why they sing on the right
hand or on the left. For if
every animal according to its own
will can direct the motions of its
body, so as to stoop, to look
on one side, or to look up, and
can bend, twist, contract, or extend
its limbs as it pleases, and does
those things almost before think ing of
doing them, how much more easy is
it for a God to do so, whose
deity governs and regulates all things.
It is the Deity, too, which
presents various signs to us, many of
which history has recorded for us; as
for instance, we find it stated that
if the moon was eclipsed a little
before sunrise in the sign of Leo,
it was a sign that Darius should
be slain and the Persians be defeated
by Alexander and the Macedonians. And
if a girl was born with two
heads, it was a sign that there
was to be a sedition among the
people and corruption and adultery at
home. If a woman should dream that
she was delivered of a lion, the
country in which such an occurrence
took place would soon be subjected to
foreign domination. Of the same kind
is the fact mentioned by Herodotus,
that the son of Croesus spoke, though
the gift of speech was by nature
denied him; which prodigy was au
indication that his father's kingdom and
family would be utterly destroyed. And
all our histories relate that the
head of Servius Tullius while sleeping
appeared to be on fire, which was
a sign of the extraordinary events
which followed. As, therefore, a man
who falls asleep while his mind is
full of pure meditations, and all
circumstances around him adapted to
tranquillity, will experience in his dreams
true and certain presentiments; so also
the chaste and pure mind of a
waking man is better suited to the
observation of the course of the
stars, or the flight of birds, and
the intima tions of the truth to
be collected from entrails. And connected
with this principle is the tradition
which we have received concerning Socrates,
which is often affirmed by himself in
the books of his disciples— that he
possessed a certain divinity, which he
called a demon, and to which he
was always obedient, — a genius which never
com pelled him to action, but often
deterred him from it. The same
Socrates (and where can we find a
better authority ?) being consulted by
Xenophon, whether he should follow Cyrus
to the wars, gave him his counsel,
and then added these words, —" The
advice I give you is merely human
: in such obscure and uncertain
cases, it is best to consult the
oracle of Apollo, to whom the
Athenians have always pub licly appealed
in questions of importance." It
is likewise written of Socrates, that
having once seen his friend Crito
with his eye bandaged, and having
asked him what was the matter with
it, he received for answer, that as
he was walking in the fields, a
branch of a tree he had attempted
to bend sprang back, and hit him
in the eye. Upon this, Socrates
replied, " This is the consequence of
your not having obeyed me when I
recalled you, following the divine
presentiment, according to my custom."
Another remarkable story is told of
Socrates. After the battle in which
the Athenians were defeated at Delium,
under the command of Laches, he was
obliged to fly with that unfortunate
general. At length reaching a spot
where three ways met, he refused to
pursue the same track as the rest.
When they inquired the cause of his behaviour,
he said that he was restrained by
a God. The others, who left Socrates,
fell in with the enemy's cavalry.
Antipater has collected many other
instances of the admi rable divination
of Socrates, which I omit, for they
are quite familiar to you, and I
need not further enumerate them. I
cannot, however, avoid mentioning one fact
in the history of this philosopher,
which strikes me as magnificent, and
almost divine ; — namely, that when he
had been condemned by the sentence of
impious men, he said, he was prepared
to die with the most perfect equanimity;
because the God within him had not
suffered him to be afflicted with any
idea of o2 impending evil, either when
he left his home, or when he
appeared before the court. I think,
therefore, that true divination exists,
although those men are often deceived
who appear to proceed on con jecture,
or on artificial rule?. For men are
fallible in all arts, and we cannot
suppose tliey are infallible here. It
may happen that some sign, which has
an ambiguous signification, is received in
a certain one. It may happen that
some par ticular has escaped the notice
of the inquirer, or is purposely
concealed by him, because opposed to
his interest. I should, however,
consider my plea for divination suffi
ciently established, if only a few
well-authenticated cases of presentiment and
prophecies could be discovered; whereas, in
truth, there are many. I will even
declare without hesi tation, that a
single instance of presage and prediction,
all the points of which are borne
out by subsequent events— and that
definitely and regularly, not casually and
fortuitously — would suffice to compel an
admission of the reality of divi
nation from all reasonable minds. It
appears to me, moreover, that we
should refer all the virtue and power
of divination to the Divinity, as
Posi- donius has done, as before observed;
in the next place to Fate, and
afterwards to the nature of things.
For reason compels us to admit that
by Fate all things take place. By
Fate I mean that which the Greeks
call ei/mp^e'i'^, that is, a certain
order and series of causes — for cause
linked to caiise produces all things :
and in this connexion of cause
consists the constant truth which flows
through all eternity. From whence it
follows that nothing happens which is
not pre destined to happen; and in
the same way nothing is predes tined
to happen, the nature of which does
not contain the efficient causes of
its happening. From which it must
be understood that fate is not a
mere superstitious imagination, but is what
is called, in the lan guage of
natural philosophy, the eternal cause of
things; the cause why past things
have happened, why present things do
happen, and why future things will happen.
And thus we are taught by exact
observation, what consequences are usually
produced, by what causes, though not
invariably.. And thus the causes of
future events may truly be discerned
by those who behold them in states
of ecstasy or quiet. Since, then, all
things happen by a certain fate, (as
will be shown in another place.) if
any man could exist who could
comprehend this succession of causes in
his intellectual view, such a man
would be infallible. For being in
possession of a knowledge of the
causes of all events, he would neces
sarily foresee how and when all
events would take place. But as
no being except the Deity alone can
do this, man can attain no more
than a kind of presentiment of
futurity, by observing the events which
are the usual consequences of certain
signs. For those events that are to
happen in future do not start into
existence on a sudden. But the
regular course of time resembles the
untwisting of a cable, producing nothing
absolutely new, but all things in a
grand concatena tion or series of
repetitions. And this has been
observed by those who possess the
gift of natural divination, and by
those who study the regular successions
of certain things. For though they do
not always apprehend the causes, yet
they clearly discern the signs and
marks of the causes. And by
diligently investi gating and committing to
memory all such signs, and the
traditions of our ancestors concerning
them, they produce an elaborate system
of that divination which is termed
technical respecting the entrails of
victims, thunder and lightning, prodigies,
and celestial phenomena. We must not,
therefore, be astonished that those who
addict themselves to divination foresee
many events which have no place of
existence. For all things do even now
exist, though they are removed in
point of time. And as the vital
embryo of all vegetation exists in
seeds, from which they afterwards
germinate, so are all things even now
hidden in their causes, and perceived
as hereafter to happen by the mind
when it is thrown into an ecstasy,
or relaxed in sleep, and cool reason
and calculation is often granted a
presenti ment of them. And as the
astrologers who watch the risings,
settings, and various courses of the
sun, moon, and other stars, can
predict long before all their revolutions
and phenomena ; so those who have
noted the series and conse quence of
events, with constant and indefatigable
atten tion, during a very long
period, do generally, or (if that is
too difficult) at least occasionally,
foresee with certainty the things that
are to come to pass. Such are
some of the arguments derived from
the nature of fate, by which the
reality of divination may be proved.
Another powerful plea in favour of
divination, may be drawn from Nature
herself, which teaches us how great
is the energy of the mind when
abstracted from the bodily senses, as
it is most especially in ecstasy and
sleep. For even as the Gods know
what passes in our minds without the
aid of eyes, ears or tongues, (on
which divine omniscience is founded the
feeling of men, that when they wish
in silence for, or offer up a
prayer for anything, the Gods hear
them,) so when the soul of man
is disengaged from corporeal impe diments,
and set at freedom, either from being
relaxed in sleep, or in a state
of mental excitement, it beholds those
wonders which, when entangled beneath the
veil of the flesh, it is unable
to see. It may be difficult,
perhaps, to connect this piinciple of
nature with that kind of divination
which we have stated to result from
study and art. Posidonius, however, thinks
that there are in nature certain
signs and symbols of future events.
We are informed that the inhabitants
of Cea, according to the report of
Heraclides of Pontus, are accus tomed
carefully to observe the circumstances
attending the rising of the Dog Star,
in order to know the character of
the ensuing season, and how far it
will prove salubrious or pestilential.
For if the star rose with an
obscure and dim appearance, it proved
that the atmosphere was gross and
foggy, and its respiration would be
heavy and unwhole some. But if it
appeared bright and lucid, then that
was a sign that the air was
light and pure, and therefore healthful.
Democritus believed that the ancients
had wisely enjoined the inspection of
the entrails of animals which had
been sacrificed, because by their condition
and colour it is possible to
determine the salubrity or pestilential
state of the atmo sphere, and
sometimes even what is likely to be
the fertility or sterility of the
earth. And if careful observation and
practice recognise these rules as
proceeding from nature, then every day might
bring us many examples which might
deserve notice and remark; so
that the natural philosopher whom Pacuvius
introduces in his Chryses, seems to
me very ignorant of the nature of
things, wlien he says, — All those
who understand the speech of birds
And hearts of victims better than
their own, May be just listen'd to,
but not obey'd. Why should he make
such a remark here, when a little
after he speaks thus plainly in a
contrary sense 1 — Whatever God may
be, 'tis he who forms, Preserves and
nurtures all. Unto himself Ho
back absorbs all beings, — evermore The
universal Sire,— at once the source And
end of nature. Why, then, since
the universe is the sole and common
home of all creatures, and since the
minds of men always have existed, and
will exist, why, I say, should they
not be able to perceive the
consequences, and what is the result
indicated by each sign, and what
events each sign foreshows r( These
are the arguments which I had to
bring forward on the subject of
divination. For the rest, I in nowise
believe in those who predict by lots,
or those who tell fortunes for the
sake of gain, nor those necromancers
who evoke the manes, whom your friend
Appius consulted. Of little service
are the Morsian prophet, The Haruspi
of the village, the astrologer Of
the throng'd circus, or the priest of
Isis, Or the imposturous interpreter
Of dreams. All these are
but false conjurors, Who have no
skill to read futurity, They are
but hypocrites, urged on by hunger ;
Ignorant of themselves, they would teach
others, To whom they promise
boundless wealth, and beg A penny
in return, paid in advance. Such
is the style in which Ennius speaks
of those pre tenders of divination;
and a few verses before, he lias
affirmed that though the Gods exist,
they take no care of the human
race. I am of a contrary opinion,
and approve 01 divination, because I
believe that the Gods do watch over
men, and admonish them, and presignify
many things to them, all levity,
vanity, and malice being excluded.
And when Quintus had said this,
You are, indeed, said I, admirably prepared.
When I have been considering, as I
frequentlj7 have, vnth deep and prolonged
cogitation, by what means I might
serve as many persons as possible, so
as never to cease from doing service
to my country, no better method has
occurred to me than that of
instructing my fellow-citizens in the
noblest arts. And this I natter
myself thai I have already in some
degree effected in the numerous works
which I have written. In the treatise
which I have entitled "
Hortensius," I have earnestly recommended
them to the study of philoso phy
; and in the four books of
Academic Questions, I have laid open
that species of philosophy which I
think the least arrogant, and at the
same time the most consistent and
elegant. Again, as the foundation of
all philosophy is the knowledge of
the chief good and evil which we
should seek or shun, I have
thoroughly discussed these topics in five
books, in order to explain the
different arguments and objections of the
various schools in relation thereto.1 In
five other books of Tusculan Questions,
I have explained what most conduces
to render life happy. In the first,
I treat of the contempt of death ;
in the second, of the endurance of
pain and sorrow ; in the third, of
mitigating melancholy; in the fourth, of
the other perturbations of the mind;
and in the fifth, I elaborate that
most glorious of all philosophic doctrines
— the all-sufficiency of virtue ; and
prove that virtue can secure our
perpetual bliss without foreign appliances
and assistances. When these works
were completed, I wrote three books
on the Nature of the Gods.
I have discussed all the different
bearings and topics of that subject,
and now I proceed in the
composition of a treatise on Divination,
in order to give 1 He is
here referring to the treatise De
Finibus. that subject the amplest development.
And if, when this is finished, I
add another on Fate, I shall have
abundantly examined the whole of that
question. To this catalogue of my
writings, I must likewise add my six
books on the Republic, which I
composed when I was directing the
government of the State. A grand
subject, indeed, and peculiarly connected
with philosophy, and one which has
been richly elaborated by Plato, Aristotle,
Theo- phrastus, and the whole tribe
of the Peripatetics. I must not
forget to mention my Essay on
Consolation, which afforded me myself no
inconsiderable comfort, and will, I trust,
be of some benefit to others. Besides
this, I lately wrote a work on
Old Age, which I addressed to Atticus
; and since it is owing to
philosophy that our friend Cato is
the good and brave man that he
is, he is well entitled to an
honourable place in the list of my
writings. Moreover, as Aristotle and
Theophrastus, two authors emi nently
distinguished both for the penetration and
fertility of their genius, have united
with their philosophy precepts like wise
for eloquence, so I think that I
too may class among my philosophical
writings my treatise on the Oratorical
Art. So there are three books on
Oratory, a fourth Essay entitled Brutus,
and a fifth named the Orator. Such
are the works I have already written,
and I am girding myself up to
what remains, with the desire (if I
am not hindered by weightier business)
of leaving no philosophical topic otherwise
than fully explained and illustrated in
the Latin language. For what greater
or better service can we render to
our country, than by thus educating
and instructing the rising generation,
especially in times like these, and
in the present state of morality,
when society has fallen into such disorders
as to require every one to use
his best exertions to check and
restrain it ? Not that I expect
to succeed (for that, indeed, cannot
be even hoped) in winning all the
young to the study of philo sophy.
I shall be glad to gain even a
few, the fruits of whose industry may
have an extended effect on the
republic. Indeed, I already begin to
gather some fruit of my labour, from
those of more advanced years, who are
pleased with my various books. By
their eagerness for reading what I
write, my ambition for writing is
from day to day more vehemently
excited. And indeed such individuals are
far more numerous than I could have
imagined. A magnificent thing- it will be,
and glorious indeed for the Romans,
when they shall no longer find it
necessary to resort to the Greeks for
philosophical literature. And this desideratum
I shall cer tainly effect for them,
if I do but succeed in accomplishing
my design. To the undertaking of
explaining philosophy I was origi nally
prompted by disastrous circumstances of the
state. For during the civil wars I
could not defend the common wealth by
professional exertions; while at the same
time I could not remain inactive. And
yet I could not find anything worthy
of myself for me to undertake. My
fellow-citizens, therefore, will pardon me,
or rather will thank me; because when
Rome had become the property of one
man. I neither concealed myself, nor
deserted them, nor yielded to grief,
nor conducted myself like a politician
indignant at either an individual or
the times, — nor played the part of a
flatterer of, or courtier to, the
power of another, so as to be
ashamed of myself. For from Plato and
philosophy I had learnt this lesson,
that certain revolutions are natural to
all republics, which alternately come under
the power of monarchs, and democracies,
and aiistocracies. And when this fate
had befallen our own Commonwealth, then,
being deprived of my customary employments,
I applied myself anew to the study
of philosophy, doing so both to
alleviate my own sorrow for the
calamities of the state, and also in
the hope of serving my fellow-countrymen
by rny writings. And thus in my
books I continued to plead and to
harangue, and took the same care to
advance the interests of philosophy as
I had before to promote the cause
of the Republic. Now, however, since
I am again engaged in the affairs
of government, I must devote my
attention to the state, or I should
rather say, all my labours and cares
must be occupied about that ; and I
shall only be able to give to
philosophy whatever little leisure I can
steal from public business and public
employments. Of these matters, however, I
shall find a better occasion to
speak; let me now return to the
subject of divination. For when my
brother Quintus had concluded his arguments
on the subject of divination, con
tained in the preceding book, and we
had walked enough to satisfy us, we
sat down in my library, which,
as I before noticed, is in my Lyceum.
III. Then I said, — Quintus, you have
defended the doctrine of the Stoics,
respecting divination, with great accuracy,
and on the strictest Stoical principles.
And what particularly pleased me was,
that you supported your cause chiefly
by authorities, and those, too, of
great force and dignity, borrowed from
our own countrymen. It is now my
part to notice what you have
advanced. But I shall do so without
offering anything absolutely on one side or
the other, examining all your argu
ments, often expressing doubts and
distrusting myself. For if I assumed
anything I could say on this subject
as certain, I should play the part of
a diviner even while denying divination.
I am, no doubt, greatly influenced
by that preliminary question which
Carneades used to raise, — namely, What is
the subject matter of divination 1 Is
it things perceived by the senses, or
not 1 Such things we see, or
hear, or taste, or smell, or touch.
Is there, then, among such, anything
which we perceive more by some
foreseeing power, or agitation of the
mind, than through nature herself] Or could
a diviner, if he were blind as
Tiresias, somehow or other distinguish
between white and black 1 or if
he were deaf, could he distinguish
between the articulations and modulations
of voices ? Divi nation, therefore,
cannot be applied to those objects
which come under the cognisance of
the senses. Nor is it of much
use, even in matters of art and
science. In medicine for instance, if
a person is sick we do not call
in the diviner or the conjuror, but
the physician ; and in music, if we
wish to learn the flute or the
harp, we do not take lessons from
the soothsayer, but from the musician.
It is the same in literature,
and in all those sciences which are
matters of education and discipline. Do
you think that those who addict themselves
to the art of divination can thereby
inform us whether the sun is larger
than the earth or of the same size
as it appears, or whether the moon
shines by her own light or by a
radiance borrowed from the sun, or
what are the laws of motion obeyed
by these orbs, or by those other
five stars which are termed the
planets [None of those who pass for
diviners pretend to be able to
instruct mankind in these matters, nor can
they prove the 204 ON
DIVINATION. truth or falsehood of
the problems of geometry. Such
mat ters belong to the mathematician,
not to conjurors. And in those
questions which are agitated in moral
philosophy, is there any one with respect
to which any diviner ever gives an
answer, or is ever consulted as to
what is good, bad, or indifferent ?
For such topics properly belong to
philosophers. As to duties, who ever
consulted a diviner how to regulate
his behaviour to his parents, his
brethren, or his friends 1 or in
what light he should regard wealth,
and honour, and authority ? These
things are referred to sages, not
diviners. Again, as to the subjects
which belong to dialecticians, or natural
philosophers. What diviner can tell whether
there is one world or more than
one 1 what are the principles of
things from which all things derive
their being1? That is the science of
the natural philosopher. Or who asks
a diviner how to solve the difficulty
of a fallacy, or disentangle the
perplexity of a sorites, which we may
render by the Latin word acervalem
(an accumulation), though it is unnecessary
; for just as the word philosophy,
and many other Grecian terms, have
become naturalized in our language, so
this word sorites is already sufficiently
familiar among us. These subjects belong
to the logician, not to the diviner.
Again, if the question be, which
is the best form of govern ment,
what are the relative advantages or
disadvantages of such and such laws
and moral regulations, should we dream
of advising with a soothsayer from
Etruria, or with princes and chosen
men experienced in political matters 1
Now, if divination regards neither
those things which are perceived by
the senses, nor those which are
taught by art, nor those which are
discussed by philosophy, nor those which
affect the politics of the state, I
scarcely understand what can be its
object. It must either bear upon all
topics, or else some particular one
must be allotted to it in which it
may be exercised. Now common sense
certifies us that it does not bear
on all topics, and we are at a
loss to discover what particular topic,
or subject matter, it can embrace. It
follows, therefore, that divination does
not exist. V. There is a common
Greek proverb to this effect : — The
wisest prophet 's he who guesses best.
Will, then, a soothsayer conjecture what
sort of weather is coming better than
a pilot? or will he divine the
character of an illness more acutely
than a doctor ? or the proper
way to carry on a war better
than a general '? But I observe,
0 Quintus, that you have pnidently
dis tinguished the topics of divination
from those matters which lie within
the sphere of art and skill, and
from those which are perceived by the
observation of the senses, or by any
system. You have denned it thus : —
Divination is the pre sentiment and
power of foretelling or predicting those
things which axe fortuitous. But, in
the first place, you are only arguing
in a circle. For does not a
pilot, or a physician, or a general
foresee the probabilities of things
fortuitous as well as your diviner?
Can, then, any augur whatsoever, or
sooth sayer, or diviner, conjecture better
whether a patient will escape from
sickness, or a ship from peril, or
the army from the manoeuvres of the
enemy, than a physician, or pilot, or
general ? But you said that
these matters did not belong to the
diviner; but that men could foresee
impending winds or showers by certain signs
; and to confirm this argument, you
have cited certain verses of my
translation of Ai-atus. And yet these
atmospheric phenomena are fortuitous ; for
they only happen occasionally, and not
always. What, then, is this presentiment
of things fortuitous, which you call
divina tion, and to what can it
be applied? For those things of which
we can have a previous notion by
some art or reason, you speak of
as belonging not to diviners, but to
men of skill in them. Thus you
have left divination nothing but the
power of predicting those fortuitous things
which cannot be foreseen by any art
or any prudence. If, for example,
any one had, many years before,
predicted that Marcus Marcellus, who was
thrice consul, was to perish by a
shipwreck, he would, doubtless, have been
a true diviner, because such a fact
could not have been foreseen by any
other means than that of divination.
Divination, there fore, is a foreknowledge
of events which depend on fortune.
But can there be a just presentiment
of those things which do not admit
of any rational conjecture to explain
why they will happen? For what do
we mean when we say a thing
happens by chance, or fortune, or
hazard, or accident, but that something
has happened or taken place wnich
might never have happened or taken
place at all, or -which might have
happened or taken place in a
different manner ? Now how can that
be fairly foreseen or predicted which
thus takes place by chance, and the
mere caprice of fortune ? It is
by reason that the physician foresees
that a malady will increase, a pilot
that a tempest will descend, and a
general that the enemy will make
certain diversions. And yet these men,
who have generally good reasons on
which their opinions respecting relative
probabilities are founded, are themselves
often deceived. As when the husbandman
sees his olive-trees in blossom, he
ventures to expect that they will
also bear fruit; nevertheless, he is
sometimes mistaken. Now, if those who
never assert anything but from some
probable conjecture founded on reason, are
often mistaken, what are we to think
of the conjectures of those men who
derive their presages of futurity from
the entrails of victims, or birds, or
prodigies, or oracles, or dreams. I
have not as yet come to show
how utterly null and vain such signs
are, as the cleft of a liver,
the note of a crow, the flight
of an eagle, the shooting of a
star, the voices of people in frenzy,
lots and dreams, of each of which
I shall speak in its turn ; at
present I dwell only on the general
argument. How can it be fore seen
that anything will happen which has
neither any as signable cause, or
mark, to show why it will happen
1 The eclipses of the sun and
moon are predicted for a series of
many years before they happen, by
those who make regular calculations of
the courses and motions of the stars.
They only foretell that which the
invariable order of natuie will necessarily
bring about. For they perceive that
in the un- deviating course of the
moon's motions, she will arrive at a
given period at a point opposite the
sun, and become so exactly under the
shadow of the earth, which is the
boundary of night, that she must be
eclipsed. They likewise know, that when
the same moon comes between the earth
and the sun, the latter must appear
eclipsed to the eyes of men. They
know in what sign each of the
wandering stars will be at a future
pariod, and when each sign will rise
and set on any specific day. So
that you know on what principles
those men proceed who predict these
things. But what rational rule can
guide those men who predict the
discovery of a treasure, or the
accession to an estate 1 And by
what series of cause and effect are
the approach of events of this kind
indicated 1 If these events, and
others of the same kind, happen by
any kind of neces sity, then what
is there that we can suppose to
be brought about by chance or fortune
1 For nothing is so opposite to
regularity and reason as this same fortune
; so that it seems to me that
God himself cannot foreknow absolutely
those things which are to happen by
chance and fortune. For if he knows
it. ilien it will certainly happen;
and if it will certainly happen,
there is no chance in the matter.
But there is chance; therefore there
is no such thing as a pre
sentiment of the future. If, however,
you maintain that there is no such
thing as fortune, and that all things
which happen, and which are about to
happen, are determined by fate from all
eternity, then you must change your
definition of divination, which you have
termed the presentiment of thing's
fortuitous. For if nothing can happen,
or come to pass, or take place,
unless it has been determined from
all eternity that it shall happen at
a certain time what, chance can there
be in anything 1 And if there
is no such thing as chance, what
becomes of your definition of divination,
which you have called "a pre sentiment
of fortuitous events'?" although you
said that everything which happened, or
which was about to happen, depended
on fate. [Nevertheless, a great deal
is said on this subject of fate
by the Stoics. But of this elsewhere.
To return to the question at
issue. If all things happen by fate,
what is the use of divination. For
that which he who divines predicts,
will truly come to pass ; so that
I do not know what character to
affix to that circumstance of an
eagle making our friend King Deiotaris
renounce his journey; when, if he had
not turned back, he would have slept
in a chamber which fell down in
the ensuing night, and have been
crushed to death in the ruins. For if
his death had been decreed by fate,
he could not have avoided it by
divination ; and if it was not
decreed by fate, he could not have
experienced it. What, then, is the
use of divination, or what reason is
there why I should be moved by
lots, or entrails, or any kind of
prediction 1 For if in the first
Punic war it had beesettled by fate,
that one of the Roman fleets,
commanded by the consuls Lucius Junius
and Publius Clodius, should perish by
a tempest, and that the other should
be defeated by the Carthaginians, then
even if the chickens had eaten ever
so greedily, still the fleets must
have been lost. But if the fleets
would not have perished, if the
auspices had been obeyed, then they
were not destroyed by fate. But you
say that everything is owing to fate;
therefore there is no such thing as
divination. If fate had determined,
that in the second Punic war the
army of the Komans should be defeated
near the lake Thra- simenus, then
could this event have been avoided,
even if Flaminius the consul had been
obedient to those signs f and those
auspices which forbade him to engage
in battle'? Cer tainly it might.
Either, then, the army did not perish
by fate — for the fates cannot be changed,
— or if it did perish by fate
(as you are bound to assert), then,
even if Flaminius had obeyed the
auspices, he must still have been
defeated. Where, then, is the
divination of the Stoics 1 which is
of no use to us whatever to
warn us to be more prudent, if all
things happen by destiny. For do what
we will, that which is fated to
happen, must happen. On the other
hand, what ever event may be averted
is not fated. There is, there fore,
no divination, since this appertains to
things which are certain to happen;
and nothing is certain to happen,
which may by any means be frustrated.
Moreover, I do not even think that
the knowledge of futurity would be
useful to us. How miserable would
have been the life of King Priam
if from his youth he could have
foreseen the calamities which awaited his
old age ! Let us, however, leave
alone fables, arid come to facts that
are more near to us. I have
recounted, in my essay entitled "
Conso lation," the misfortunes which
have happened to the greatest men of
our commonwealth. Omitting, therefore, the
ancients, do you think that it would
have been any advantage to Marcus
Crassus, when he was flourishing with
the amplest riches and gifts of
fortune, to have foreknown that he
should behold his son Publius slain,
his forces defeated, and lose his own
life beyond the Euphrates with ignominy
and disgrace ? Or do you think
that Pompey would have experienced much
satisfaction in being thrice made consxil,
and having received three triumphs,
and having attained the summit of
glory by his heroic actions, if he
could have foreseen that he should be
assassinated in the deserts of Egypt
after the defeat of his army, and
that after his death those disasters
should happen which we cannot mention
without tears ? What do we
think of Caesar 1 Would it have
been any pleasure to Caesar to have
anticipated by divination, that one day,
in the midst of the throng of
senators whom he himself had elected,
in the temple of Victory built by
Pompey, and before that general's statue,
and before the eyes of so many
of his own centurions, he should be
slain by the noblest citizens, some of
whom were indebted to him for their
digni ties, — aye, slain under such
circumstances that not one of his
friends, or even of his servants,
would venture to approach him ? Could
he have foreseen all this, in what
wretchedness would he have passed his
life 1 It is, therefore, certainly
more advantageous for man to be
ignorant of future evils than to know
them. For it cannot be said, at
least not by the Stoics, that Pornpey
would not have taken up arms, nor
Crassus passed the Euphrates, nor Csesar
engaged in the civil war, if they
had foreseen the future; therefore the
end which they met with was not
in evitably ordained by fate. For you
insist upon it that all things happen
by fate, therefore divination would have
availed them nothing. It would even
have deprived them of all enjoy ment
in the earlier part of their lives;
for what gratification could they have
enjoyed if they had been always
thinking of their end I Therefore,
to whatever argument the Stoics resort
in defence of divination, their ingenuity
is always baffled. For if that which
is to happen may happen in different
mode;, then, indeed, fortune may have
great power; but that which is
fortuitous cannot be certain. If, on
the other hand, every event is
absolutely determined by fate, and the
time and cir cumstance in connexion
with which it is to take place,
what service can diviners render us
by informing us that very sad events
arc portended for us. They add, moreover,
that when we are duly attentive to
religious ceremonies, all things will fall
more lightly on us. But if everything
happens by fate, no religioxis ceremonies
cau lighten the event. Homer acknowledges
this, when he introduces Jupiter uttering
complaints that he cannot save the
life of his son Sarpedon against the
order of fate; and the same sentiment
is expressed in the Greek verse—
Great Destiny o'ermaster's Jove himself.
It appears to me that such a
fate as this is justly ridiculed by
the Atellane plays ; but on such
a serious subject we must not allow
ourselves to be facetious. I
therefore conclude with this observation.
If we cannot foresee anything which
happens by chance, since that thing
is necessarily uncertain, therefore there
is no divination; and if, on the
contrary, things that are to happen
can be foreseen because they happen
by an infallible fatality, there is
no divination, because you say divination
only relates to for tuitous events.
But what I have hitherto said
respecting divination may be looked upon
as a mere slight skirmishing of
oratory. I must now enter on the
contest in good earnest, and prepare
to encounter the most formidable arguments
of your cause. For you say that
there exist two kinds of divination,
— one artificial, the other natural.
The artificial consists partly in
conjecture, partly in continued observation.
The natural, on the other hand,
is what the mind lays hold of
or receives externally from the divinity,
from which we all derive the origin,
and fashioning, and preservation of our
minds. Under the artificial divination you
enumerate several varieties of divination
connected with the inspection of entrails,
the observation of thunderstorms and
prodigies, and the auguries of those
who deal in signs and omens. And
under this artificial class you include
all kindsof conjectural divination. As
to the natural species of divination,
it appears to be sent forth and
to issue either from a certain
ecstasy of the spirit, or to be
conceived by the mind when disengaged
from the senses and from cares by
sleep. But you suppose that all
divination is derived from three things
God, Fate, and Nature. But as you
could give no sound explanation, you
laboured to confirm it by a wonderful
multitude of imaginary examples, concerning
which you must permit me to say,
that a philosopher ought not to use
evidences which may be true through
accident, or false and fictitious through
malice. It behoves you to show, by
reason and argument, why each circtimstance
happens as it does, rather than by
the events, especially when they are
such as I am quite unable to
give credit to. XII. To begin
then with the Soothsayers, whose science
I believe that the interest of
Religion and the State requires to be
upheld. But as we are alone, it
behoves us, and myself more especially,
to examine the truth without
partiality, since I am in doubt on
many points. Let us proceed, if
you please, first to consider the
inspec tion of the entrails of
victims. Can you then persuade any
man in his senses, that those events
which are said to be signified by
the entrails, are known by the augurs
in con sequence of a long series
of observations [How long, I wonder !
For what period of time can such
observations have been continued 1 What
conferences must the augurs hold among
themselves to determine which part of
the victim's entrails represents the enemy,
and which the people ; what sort of
cleft in the liver denoted danger,
and what sort presaged advantage? Have
the augurs of the Etrurians, the
Eleans, the Egyptians, and the
Carthaginians arranged these matters with
one another ? But that, besides that
it is quite impossi ble, cannot be
imagined. For we see that some
interpret the auspices in one way,
and some in another, and no common
rule of discipline is acknowledged among
the professors of the art; and
certainly if some secret virtue existed
in the victim's entrails which clearly
declared the future, it must either belong
to the universal nature of things, or
be connected in some way or other
with the Deity himself. But what com
munication can there exist between so
great and so divine a natuz-e of
things, one so beautiful, and so
admirably diffused throughout every part
and motion, and (I will not say)
the gall of the cock, (though that,
indeed, is said by many to be
the most significant of all signs,)
but the liver, or heart, or lungs of
a fat bullock 1 Can such things
possibly teach us the hidden mysteries
of futurity? Democritus, speaking as a
natural philosopher, than which no class
of men are more arrogant, on this
subject, trifles ingeniously enough. Man,
who knows not the common facts of
earth, Must waste his time in
star-gazing. He remarks, that the
colour and condition of the victim's
entrails may indicate the nature of
the pasturage, and the abundance or scarcity
of those things which the earth
brings forth. He even supposes they
may guide our opinions respecting the
wholesonieness or pestilential state of the
atmosphere. 0 happy man! such a
person can certainly never want amusement.
The idea of any one being so
enchanted with such trifling, as not
to see that this theory might be
plausible, if, indeed, the entrails of
all animals assumed the same appearance
and colour at one and the same
time ! But if we discover that
the liver of one animal is sound
and healthy, and that of another
withered and diseased at the same
moment, what indication can we draw
from the state and colour of the
entrails'? Does this at all resemble
the indications from which that Pherecydes,
in a case which you have cited,
predicted the approach of an earthquake
from the drying up of a spring?
It required a little confidence, I
think, after the earthquake had taken
place, to presume to say what power
had produced it ; [but] could they
even foresee that it would take place
at all from the appearance of a
running spring? Many such stories are
recounted in the schools, but we are
not obliged to believe the whole of
them. But even supposing that what
Democritus says is true, when do we
seek to know the general phenomena of
nature by an examination of entrails;
or when did soothsayers ever tell us
anything of the sort from such an
inspection? They warn us of danger
from fire or water. Sometimes they
predict that inheritances will be added
to our fortunes, and .sometimes that
we shall lose what we already possess.
They regard the cleft in the lungs
as a matter of vital importance to
our property and our very life ; they
in vestigate the top of the liver
on all sides with the most scrupulous
exactness, and if by any chance they
cannot dis cover it, they affirm that
nothing more disastrous could have
happened. It is impossible, as I have
before observed, that such a system
of observation can have any certainty
about it; such divination as this
nourished not among the ancients; it
is the invention of mere art, if,
indeed, there can be any art,
properly so called, of things unknown.
But what connexion has it with the
nature of things? And even if it
were united and joined therewith, so
as to form one harmonious whole,
which I see is the opinion of
the natural philosophers, Ulo and
especially of those who say that all
things that exist are but one whole ;
still what correspondence can there be
between the order of the universe and
the discovery of a treasure? For if
an increase of my wealth is indicated
by the entrails of a victim, and
this fact is a necessary link in
the chain of nature, then it follows,
in the first place, that we must
suppose that the entrails themselves form
other links; and secondly, that my
private gain is connected with the
nature of things. Are not the natural
philosophers ashamed to say such things
as these? For, although
there may be some connexion in the nature of things, which
I admit to be possible, — (for the Stoics
have collected many cases which they think
confirm the notion, as when they
assert that the little livers of
little mice increase in winter, and
that dry pennyroyal flourishes in the
coldest weather, and that the distended
vesicles, in which the seeds of its
berries are contained, then burst asunder;
that the chords of a stringed
instrument at times give notes different
from their usual ones; that oysters
and other shell-fish increase and decrease
with the growth and waning of the
moon ; and that trees lose their
vitality as the moon declines, just
as they dry up in winter, and
that this is the time to\cut them.
Why need I speak of the seas,
and the tides of the ocean, the
flow and ebb of which are said
to be governed by the moon ?
and many other examples might be
related to prove that some natural
connexion subsists between objects appa
rently remote and incongruous. Let us
grant this, for it does not in
the least make against our argument ;) —
granting, I say, that there is a
cleft of some kind in a liver, does
that indicate gain to any one? By
what natural affinity, by what harmony,
by what secret accord of nature, or,
to use the Greek term, by what
sympathy can you discern a necessary
relation between a cleft liver and my
gain, or between my gain and heaven
and earth, and the universal nature
of things ? I may even grant
you this, though I shall be greatly
damaging my argument if I allow that
there is any connexion between nature and
entrails. But suppose I make this
concession, how does it happen that
he who would obtain some benefit from
the Gods can discover, just when he
wishes, a victim exactly adapted to
his purpose ? I had thought this
objection was unanswerable, but see how
cleverly you get over it. I do
not blame you for this, I rather
commend your memory. But I am ashamed
of Antipater, Chrysippus, and Posidonius,
who all assert the same proposition — namely,
that the divine and sentient energy
which extends through the universe, directs
us even in the choice of the
victim by whose entrails we are to
frame our divinations. And to improve
upon this theory, you agree with them
in asserting that at the very instant
that the sacrifice is offered, a
certain appropriate change takes place in
the victim's entrails, so that we can
therein discover some sig nificant addition
or deficiency, since all things are
obedient to the will of the Gods.
Believe me, there is not an old
woman in the world so superstitious
as gravely to believe these things.
Can you imagine that the same
bullock, if chosen by one man, will
have the head of the liver, and
if chosen by another will not have
it 1 Can this same head come
and go at the instant just to
accommodate the individual who offers the
sacrifice 1 Do you not perceive that
there must be considerable chance in
the choice of the victim 1 and
in fact the thing speaks for itself,
that this must be the case. For
when one ill-omened victim is discovered
to have had no head to its
liver, it often happens that the one
which is offered immediately afterwards has
the most perfect entrails imaginable. What
then becomes of the menaces of the
first victim's entrails, or how have
the Gods been so suddenly appeased? But
you will say, that in the entrails
of the fat bull which Caesar offered,
there was no heart, and since it was
not possible that this animal could
have lived without a heart, we must
suppose that the heart was annihilated
at the instant of immolation. How is
it that you think it impossi ble
that an animal can live without a
heart, and yet do not think it
impossible that t its heart could vanish
so suddenly, nobody knows whither? For
myself, I know not how much vigour
in a heart is necessary to carry
on the vital function, and suspect
that if afflicted by any disease, the
heart of a victim may be found
so withered, and wasted, and small,
as to be quite unlike a heart.
But on what argument can you build
an opinion that the heart of this
same fat bullock, if it existed in
him before, disappeared at the instant
of immola-lion? Did the bullock behold
Ceesar in a heartless condition even
while arrayed in the purple, and thus
lose its own heart by mere force
of sympathy? Believe me, you are
betraying the city of philosophy while
defending its castles. In trying to
prove the truth of the auguries, you
are overturning the whole system of
physics. A victim has a heart, and
head of the liver : the moment that
you sprinkle him with meal and wine
they depart, some God carries them
off, some power destroys or consumes
them. It is not nature alone,
therefore, which causes the decay and
destruction of everything; and there are
some things which arise out of
nothing, and some which suddenly perish
and become nothing. What natural
philosopher ever said such a thing as
this? The soothsayers affirm it. Do
you then think that you are to
believe them rather than the natural
philosophers? XVII. Again, when you sacrifice
to several Gods at the same time,
how is it that the sacrifice is
favourably received by some, and is
rejected by others ? And what
inconsistency must there be among the
Gods, if they threaten by the first
entrails, and promise good fortune by
the second ! Or is there such strong
dissension among the Deities, even when
they are nearly related to each
other, that certain entrails bode good
when offered to Apollo, and evil when
offered to his sister Diana ? It
is clear that since the victims are
brought by chance, the entrails must
in the case of each sacrificer depend
upon what victim falls to his share,
and that very thing requires some
divination to know what victim falls
to each person's share, as, in the
case of lots, what is drawn by
each person. Then you will speak
of lots, though you are not
strengthen ing the authority of sacrifices
by comparing them to lots, but
weakening that of lots by comparing
them to sacrifices. Do you think,
when we send a messenger to ^Equime-
lium to bring us a lamb to
sacrifice, and the lamb which is
brought to me possesses entrails peculiarly
accommodated to the circumstances of the
case, that the messenger has been guided
to him not by chance, but by
divine direction ? For if you wish
to signify that in this case chance
interferes, as being some lot connected
with the will of the Gods, I am
sony that your friends the Stoics
should give the Epicureans such occasion to
ridicule them, for you know well how
they deride oil such ideas. And,
indeed, it is no hard matter to
be facetious on such an idea.
Epicurus, in order to show his wit
on the subject, introduced transparent airy
deities, residing, as it were, be
tween the two worlds as between two
groves, that they may avoid destruction
from the fall of either. These
deities, it seems, possess bodies like
ourselves, though I cannot find that they
make any use of them. Epicurus
therefore, who, by a roundabout argument
of this kind, takes away the Gods,
naturally feels no hesitation in taking
away divination also. But though he
is consistent with himself, the Stoics
are not ; for as the God of
Epicurus never troubles himself with any
business, either regarding himself or
others; he, therefore, cannot grant
divination to men. On the other hand,
the God of the Stoics, even though
lie does not grant divination, must
still regulate the affairs of the
universe and take care of mankind.
Why, then, do you involve yourself
in these dilemmas which you can never
disentangle ? For this is the way
in which, when they are in a
hurry, they usually sum up the matter- —
a If there are Gods, there must
be divination; but there are gods,
therefore there is divination." It
would be much more plausible to say —
" There is no divination, there
fore there are no Gods." Observe
how imprudently the Stoics make this
assertion, that if there is no
divination, there are no Gods ; for
divination is plainly discarded, and yet
we must retain a belief in
Gods. After having thus destroyed divination
by the in spection of entrails, all
the rest of the science of the
sooth sayers is at an end ; for
prodigies and lightning follow in the
same category. With respect to the
latter, their predictions are founded on
a long series of observations, while
the interpretation of prodigies proceeds
chiefly on inference and conjecture.
What observations, then,, have been
made about lightning? The Etrurians,
forsooth, have divided heaven into sixteen
parts; for it was not very difficult
to double the four quarters, which we
recognise, into eight, and then to
repeat the process, so as by that
means to say from what direc tion
the lightning had come. But in the
first place, what difference does it
make ? Secondly, what does such a
thing intimate 1 Is it not
plain from the astonishment which was
at first excited in men's minds,
because they feared the thunder and
the hurling of the thunderbolt, that
they believed that they were the
immediate manifestations brought about by
the all-powerful ruler of all things,
Jupiter ? This is the reason of
the enactment in the public registers,
that the comitia of the people shall
not be held when Jupiter thunders and
lightens. It was enacted, perhaps with
a view to the interest of the
state, for our ancestors wished to
have pretexts for not holding the
comitia. Therefore, in the case of
the comitia, lightning is the only
vitiating irregularity. But in all other
matters it is a most favourable
auspice if it comes on the left
hand. But we will speak of the
auspices hereafter ; at present we will
confine ourselves to lightning. What can
be less proper for natural philosophers
to say, than that anything certain is
indicated by things which are uncertain
1 I cannot believe that you are
one of those who imagine that there
were Cyclopes in mount ^Etna who
forged Jove's thunderbolt, for it would
be wonderful indeed if Jupiter should
so often throw it away when he
had but one. Nor would he warn
men by his thunderbolts what they
should do or what thoy should avoid. For
the opinion of the Stoics on this
point is, that the exhalations of the
earth which are cold, when they begin
to flow abroad, become winds ; and
when they form themselves into clouds,
and begin to divide and break up
their fine particles by repeated and
vehement gusts, then thunder and lightning
ensue ; and that when by the conflict
of the clouds the heat is squeezed
out so as to emit itself, then
there is lightning. Can we, then, look
for any intimation of futurity in a
thing which we see brought about by
the mere force of nature, without any
regularity or any determined pei'iods 1
If Jupiter wished that we should form
divinations by lightnings, would he throw
away so many flashes in vain ]
For what good does he do when
he throws a thunderbolt into the
middle of the sea, or upon lofty
mountains, which is very common, or
upon deserts, or in the countries of
those nations among which no meteorological
observations are made ] Oh ! but a
head was discovered in the Tybcr. As
if I affirmed that those soothsayers
had no skill ! What I deny is
only their divination. For the distribution
of the firma ment, which we have
just mentioned, and their various
observations, enable them to note the
direction from which the lightning has
proceeded, and where it falls. But no
reason can inform us of its
signification. You will, however, urge
against me my own verses — The
father of the Gods who reigns supreme
On high Olympus, smote his proper
fane, And hurl'd his lightnings
through the heart of Rome. At
the same time the statue of Natta
and the images of the Gods, and
Romulus and Remus, with that of the
beast who was nursing them, were
struck by the thunderbolt and thrown down
; and the answers of the soothsayers,
with reference to these prodigies, were
found perfectly correct. That also was
a surprising thing, that the statue
of Jupiter was placed in the Capitol,
two years later than it had been
contracted for, at the very time that
information of the conspiracy was being
laid before the senate. Will you,
then, (for this is the way you
are used to argue with me,) bring
yourself to uphold that side of the
question in opposition to your own actions
and writings ? You are my
brother, and all you say is entitled
to my respect. Yet what is there
here that offends you? Is it the
thing itself, which is of such and
such a character, or I myself, who
only wish to get at the truth ?
I therefore say nothing upon it for
the sake of contradiction, and only
seek from you yourself information
respecting all the prin ciples of the
art of soothsaying. But you have
involved yourself in an inextricable
dilemma; for foreseeing that you would
be hard pressed, when I should urge
you to explain the cause of every
divination, you made many excuses to
show why, when you were sure of
the fact, you did not inquire into
its principles and causes, — that the
question was, what was done, and not
why it was done ; as if I
granted that it was done at all,
or as if it were not the duty
of a philosopher to inquire into the
reason why every thing takes place.
At the same time you quoted my
prog nostics, and spoke of the
scammony, the aristoloch, and other herbs,
whose virtues were evident to you
from their effects, though the law of
their operation was unknown to
you. All this is, however, beside the
main question. For the Stoic Boethus,
whose name you have cited, and even
our friend Posidonius have investigated the
causes of prognostics, and though it
is not easy to discover the cause
of such occult mysteries, yet the
facts themselves may be observed and
animadverted upon. But as to the
statue of Natta and the tables of
the law which were struck by
lightning, what observations were made, or
what was there ancient connected with
the matter 1 The Pinarii Nattse are
noble, therefore danger was to be
feared from the nobility. This was a
very cunning device of Jupiter !
Romulus, represented by the sculptor as
sucking a she-wolf, was likewise smitten
by the lightning. Hence, according to
you, some danger to the city of
Rome was threatened. How cleverly does
Jupiter make us acquainted with future
events by such signs as these !
Again, his statue was being erected
at the very same time that the
conspiracy was being discovered in the
senate, and you conceive this coincidence
happened rather by the providence of God
than by any chance of fortune. And
you think that the statuary who had
contracted for the making of that
column with Torquatus and Cotta, was
not so long delayed in accomplishing
his work by idleness or poverty, but
by the special interposition of the
immortal Gods. Now I do not
absolutely deny that such might possibly
be the case; but I do not know
that it was, and wish to be
instructed by you. For when some things
appeared to me to have happened by
chance in the way in which the
sooth sayers had predicted, you launched
out into a long discourse on the
doctrine of chances, saying that four
dice thrown at hazard may produce
Venus by accident, but that four
hundred dice cannot produce a hundred
Venuses. In the first place, I know
no reason in the nature of things
why they should not do even this ;
but I will not argue that point,
for you have plenty of similar
examples, and talk about a chance
dashing of colours, the snout of a
pig, and many other similar instances.
You say that Carneades argued in the
same way about the head of a
little Pan ; as if that might
not have happened by chance, and as
if there must not be in all
marble the raw material of even such
a head as Praxiteles would have made.
For a perfect head is only formed
by cutting away. Praxiteles adds nothing
to the marble, but when much that
was superfluous is removed, and the
features are arrived at, then you
learn that that which is now polished
up was always contained within. Such
a figure, therefore, may have spontaneously
existed in the quarries of Chios. But
grant that this is a fiction, have
you never fancied that you could
discover in the clouds the figures of
lions and centaurs 1 Accident may,
therefore, some times imitate nature,
though you denied that just now. But
as we have sufficiently discussed
divination by entrails and lightning, we
must now consider portents and prodigies,
in order that we may leave no branch
of the system of the soothsayers
untouched. You have mentioned a
wonderful story of a mule that was
delivered of a colt; a strange event,
because of its extreme rarity. But if
such a thing were impossible, it
would never happen at all; and this
may be said against all sorts of
pro digies, that those things which
are impossible never happened at all;
and if they are possible, it need
not surprise us that they happen
occasionally. Besides, in extraordinary
events, ignorance of their causes produces
astonishment; but in ordinary events such
igno rance occasions no such result.
The man who is astonished if a
mule brings forth a colt, does not
know how it is that a mare brings
forth a foal, or indeed how, in
any case, nature effects the birth of
a living animal; but he is not
surprised at what he sees frequently,
even if he does not know why it
happens; but if that which he never
beheld before happens, then he calls
it a prodigy. In this case, is
it a prodigy when the mule conceives,
or when she brings forth 1 Perhaps
the conception may have been contrary
to nature, but after that her
delivery is almost necessary. But we
have spoken enough on this topic: let
us examine the origin of the
establishment of soothsayers. For when we
are acquainted with it, we shall be
better able to judge what degree of
credit it is entitled to. They
tell us that as a
labourer one day was ploughing in
a field in the territory of
Tarquinium, and his ploughshare made a
deeper furrow than usual, all of a
sudden there sprung out of this same
furrow a certain Tages, who, as it
is recorded in the books of the
Etrurians, possessed the visage of a
child, but the prudence of a sage.
When the labourer was surprised at seeing
him, and in his astonishment made a
great outcry, a number of people
assembled round him, and before long
all the Etrurians came together at
the spot. Tages then discoursed in
the presence of an immense crowd, who
treasured up his words with the
greatest care, and after wards committed
them to writing. The information they
derived from this Tages was the
foundation of the science of the
soothsayers, and was subsequently improved
by the accession of many new facts,
all of which confirmed the same
principles. Here is the story that
the Etrurians give out to the world.
This record is preserved in their
sacred books, and from it their
augurial discipline is deduced. Now
do you imagine that we need a
Carneades or Epicurus to refute such
a fable as this1? Lives there any
one so absurd as to believe that
this (shall I say god, or man
1) was thus ploughed up out of
the earth 1 If he was a god,
why did he conceal himself under the
earth against the order of nature, so
as not to behold the light till
he was ploughed up] Could not that
same god have instructed mankind from
a station somewhat more elevated ?
And if this Tages was a man,
how could he have lived thus buried
and smothered in the earth 1 and
how could he have learnt the wonders
he taught to others ? But I am
even more foolish than those who
believe such nonsense, for thus wasting
so much time in refxiting them. There
is an old saying of Cato, familiar
enough to everybody, that " he
wondered that when one soothsayer met
another, he could help laughing." For
of all the events pre dicted by
them, how very few actually happen ?
And when one of them does take
place, where is the proof that it
does not take place by mere accident
1 When Hannibal fled to king
Prusias, and was eager to wage war
with the enemy, that monarch replied
that he dared not do so, because
the entrails of the sacrifice wore an
unfavourable aspect. " Would you,
then," said Hannibal, "rather trust
a bit of calf's flesh than a
veteran general?" And as to Caesar,
when he was warned by the chief
sooth sayer not to venture into
Africa before the winter, did he not
cross? If he had not done so, all
the forces of the enemy would have
assembled in one place. Why need I
enumeratethe responses of the soothsayers,
of which I could cite an infinite
number, which have either received no
accomplishment at all, or an accomplishment
exactly the reverse of the prediction
1 In this last Civil War, for
instance — good Heavens ! how often were
their responses utterly falsified by the
result ! How many false prophecies were
sent to us from Rome into Gi'eece
! How many oracles in favour of
Pompey ! For that general was not
a little affected by entrails and
prodigies. I have no wish to recount
these things to you, nor indeed is
it necessary, for you were present.
But you see that nearly all the
events took place in the manner
exactly contrary to the predictions. So
much for responses. Let us now say
a word or two on prodigies. You
have mentioned several things on this topic
which I wrote during my consulship.
You have brought up many of
those anecdotes collected by Sisenna before
the Mar- sian War, and many recorded
by Callisthenes before the un fortunate
battle of the Spartans at Leuctra, of
each of which I will speak
separately, as far as seems necessary;
but at present we must discuss of
prodigies in general. For what is
the meaning of this kind of divination —
this dreadful denouncing of impending calamities
— derived from the Gods 1 In the
first place, what is the object of
the Gods, in giving us prodigies and
signs which we cannot understand without
interpreters, and in advertising us of
disasters which we cannot avoid 1 But
even honest men do not act thus,
giving notice to their friends of
impending misfortune which they cannot
possibly avoid; and physicians, though they
are often aware of the fact, yet
never tell their patients that they
must needs die of the complaint from
which they are suffering. For the
prediction of an evil is only beneficial
when we can point out some means
of avoiding it or miti gating it.
What good, then, did these prodigies,
or their interpreters, do to the
Spartans, or more recently to the
Romans 1 If they are to be
considered as the signs of the Gods,
why were they so obscure ? For
if they were sent in order that
we might understand what was about to
happen, then it ought to have been,
declared intelligibly; and if we were
not intended to know, then they
should not have been given even
obscurely. As for all conjectures on
which this kind of divination depends,
the opinions of men differ so much
from each other that they often make
very opposite deductions from the same
thing. For as in legal suits, the
plea of the plaintiff is contrary to that
of the defendant, and yet both are
within the limits of credibility, — so in
all those affairs which only admit of
conjectural interpretation, the reasoning must
be extremely uncertain. And as for
those things which are caused at
times by nature, and at others by
chance, (some times, too, likeness gives
rise to mistakes,) it is very foolish
to attribute all these things to the
interpositions of the Gods, without
examining their proximate causes. You
believe that the Boeotian diviners of
Lebadia foreknew by the crowing of
the cocks that the victory belonged to
the Thebans, because these birds only
crow when they are vic torious, and
hold their peace when they are
beaten. Did, then, Jupiter give a
signal to so important a city by
the means of hens 1 But do
cocks only crow when they are vic
torious 1 At that time they were
crowing, and they had not conquered.
You say that this was a prodigy.
It would have been a prodigy, and
a very great one, if the crowing had
pro ceeded from fishes instead of
birds. But what hour is there of
day, or of night, when cocks do
not crow 1 and if they are
sometimes excited to crow by their
joy in victory, they may likewise be excited
to do the same by some other
kind of joy. Democritus, indeed,
states a very good reason why cocks
crow before the dawn; for, as the
food is then driven out of their
stomachs, and distributed over their whole
body and digested, they utter a
crowing, being satiated with rest. But
in the silence of the night, says
Ennius, " they indulge their throats,
which are hoarse with crowing, and
give their wings repose." As, then,
this animal is so much inclined to
crow of its own accord, what made
it occur to Callisthenes to assert
that the Gods had given the cocks
a signal to -crow; since either nature
or chance might have done it ?
It was announced to the senate that
it had rained blood, that the river
had become blackened with blood, and
that the statues of the immortal gods
were covered with sweat. Do you
imagine that Thales or Anaxagoras, or
any other natural philosopher, would have
given credence to such news? Blood
and sweat only proceed from the
animal body; there might have been
some discoloration caused by some 22
4 ox contagion of earth very like
blood, and some moisture may have
fallen on the statues from without,
resembling perspira tion, as \ve see
sometimes in plaster during the prevalence
of a south wind; and in time of
war such phenomena appeal- more numerous
and more important than usual, as men
are then in a state of alarm,
while they are not noticed in peace.
Besides, in such periods of fear and
peril, such stories are more easily
believed, and invented with more impunity.
We are, however, so silly and
inconsiderate, that if mice, which are
always at that work, happen to gnaw
anything, we immediately regard it as
a prodigy. So because, a little
before the Marsian war, the mice
gnawed the shields at Lanuvium, the
soothsayers declared it to be a most
important prodigy ; as if it could
make any difference whether mice, who
day and night are gnawing something,
had gnawed bucklers or sieves. For if
we are to be guided by such things,
I ought to tremble for the safety
of the commonwealth, because the mice
lately gnawed Plato's Republic in my
library; and if they had eaten the
book of Epicurus on Pleasure, I ought
to have expected that corn would rise
in the market. Are we, then, alarmed
if at any time any unna tural
productions are reported as having
proceeded from man or beast? One of
which occurrences, to be brief, may
be accounted for on one principle. Whatever
is born, of whatever kind it may
be, must have some cause in nature,
so that even though it may be
contrary to custom, it cannot possibly
be contrary to nature. Investigate, if
you can, the natural cause of every
novel and extraordinary circumstance: — even
if you cannot discover the cause,
still you may 'feel sure that nothing
can have taken place without a cause
; and, by the principles of nature,
drive away that terror which the
novelty of the thing may have
occasioned you. Then neither earthquakes,
nor thunderstorms, nor showers of blood
and stones, nor shooting stars, nor
glancing torches will alarm you any more.
If you ask Chrysippus to explain
the laws hat govern these phenomena,
though he is a great defender of
divina tion, he will never tell you
that they have happened by chance,
but he will give you a natural
explanation of all of them. For, as
it has been before stated, nothing
can happen without a cause, and
nothing happens which is impossible;
iior, if that has happened which
could happen, ought it to be regarded
as a prodigy. Therefore there are no
such things as prodigies. For if we
place in the rank of prodigies every
rare occurrence, it follows that a
wise man is one of the greatest
prodigies. For I believe there are
fewer instances of wise men in the
world, than of mules which have
brought forth young. So this
principle concludes that that which cannot
take place in the nature of things
never does take place; and that that
which can take place in the nature
of things, is not a prodigy, and
therefore there are no prodigies at
all. Therefore a diviner and interpreter
of prodigies being con sulted by a
man who informed him, as a great
prodigy, that he had discovered in
his house a serpent coiled around a
bar, answered very discreetly, that there
was nothing very wonderful in this,
but if he had found the bar
coiled around the serpent, this would
have been a prodigy indeed. By this
reply, he plainly indicated that nothing
can be a prodigy which is consistent
with the nature of things. XXIX. Caius
Gracchus wrote to Marcus Pomponius, that
his father having caught two serpents
in his house, sent to consult the
soothsayers. Why were two serpents entitled
to such an honour more than two
lizards or two mice 1 Because these
are every day occurrences, you would
reply, while ser pents were comparatively
rare ; as if it signified how
often a thing which was possible took
place. But I marvel, if the release
of the female snake caused the death
of Tiberius Gracchus, and that of the
male was to be fatal to Cornelia,
why he let either of them escape.
For he does not record that the
soothsayers had told him what would
happen if he let neither of the
snakes escape. But it seems T.
Gracchus died soon after, doubtless of
some natural malady which destroyed his
constitution, and not because he had
saved the life of a viper. Not
that the infelicity of the haruspices
is so great that their predictions
are never fulfilled by any chance
whatever. And, I must confess, if I
could but believe it, I should
exceedingly wonder at the story which
you have cited from Homer respecting
the prediction of Calchas, who, from
observing the number of a flock of
sparrows, foretold the number of years
that would be expended in the siege
of Troy. DE NAT. ETC. Q
2-6 ON Of which conjecture Homer makes
Agamemnon1 speak thus, if I may
repeat you a translation of the
passage which. I made in a leisure
hour Not for
their grief the Grecian host I blame
; But vanqui.sh'd ! baffled ! oh,
eternal shame ! Expect the time to
Troy's destruction giv'n, And try the
faith of Calchas and of heav'n. What
pass'd at Aulis, Greece can witness
bear, And all who live to breathe
this Phrygian air, Beside a fountain's
sacred brink was raised Our verdant
altars, and the victims blazed ;
('Twas where the plane-tree spreads its
shades around) The altars heaved ;
and from the crumbling ground A
mighty dragon shot, of dire portent;
From Jove himself the dreadful sign
was sent. Straight to the tree his sanguine
spires he roll'd, And curl'd around
in many a winding fold. The topmost
branch a mother-bird possest ; Eight callow
infants fill'd the mossy nest ;
Herself the ninth : the serpent as
he hung, Stretch'd his black jaws,
and crush'd the crying young; While
hov'ring near, with miserable moan, The
drooping mother wail'd her children gone.
The mother last, as round the nest
she flew, Seized by the beating wing,
the monster slew ; Nor long survived,
to marble turn'd he stands A lasting
prodigy on Aulis' sands. Such was the
will of Jove ; and hence we dare
Trust in his omen and support the
war. For while around we gazed with
wond'ring eyes, And trembling sought the
Pow'rs with sacrifice, Full of his
god, the rev'rend Calchas cried : Ye
Grecian warriors, lay your fears aside,
This wondrous signal Jove himself displays,
Of long, long labours, but eternal
praise. As many birds as by the
snake were slain, So many years the
toils of Greece remain ; But wait
the tenth, for llion's fall decreed.
Thus spoke the prophet, thus the
fates succeed. Now is not this
a curious mode of augury1? — to conjecture
by the number of sparrows eaten by
a serpent, the number of years
expended in the Trojan war. Why years
rather than months or days? And how
-was it that Calchas selected sparrows,
in which there is nothing supernatural,
for the signs of his prophecy 1
while he is silent about the serpent,
which 1 This is a mistake of
Cicero's. It is Ulysses who speaks.
The pas sage occurs in Iliad . JTU
changed, as it is said, into stone
(an event which is im possible).
Lastly, what analogy or relatkfe can
subsist between the sparrows seen and
the years predicted 1 As to
what you have said respecting the
serpent which appeared to Sylla while
he was sacrificing, I recollect the
whole circumstance ; and remember that
just as Sylla was about to attack
the enemy at Nola, he made a
sacrifice, and that at the moment the
victim was offered, a serpent issued
from beneath the altar, and that the
same day a glorious victoiy was
gained, — not l;wing to the advice of
the soothsayers, but to the skill of
the general. And prodigies of this kind
have nothing miracu lous in them ;
which, when they have taken place,
are brought under conjecture by some
particular interpretation, as in the case
of the grain of wheat found in
the mouth of Midas while an infant,
or that of the bees, which are
said to have settled on the lips
of the infant Plato. Such things are
less admirable for themselves than for
the conjectures they gave rise to ;
for they may either not have taken
place at the time specified, or have
been fulfilled by mere accident. I
likewise suspect the truth of the
report which you have related respecting
Roscius — namely, that a serpent was found
coiled round him when he was in
his cradle. But even if it be a
fact that a serpent was thus in
the cradle, it is not very wonderful,
especially in Solonium, where snakes are
in the habit of basking before the
fire. As to the interpretation which
the soothsayers gave of the circumstance,
that the child would become most
illustrious and most celebrated, I. am
astonished that the immortal Gods should
have announced such great glory to a
comedian, and preserved such an obsti
nate silence respecting Scipio Africanus.
You have related several prodigies
whicli happened to Flaminiusj for instance,
that his horse suddenly fell with him, —
there is surely nothing very astonishing
in that. Also, that the standard of
the first centurion could not easily
be pulled out of the earth. Perhaps the
standard-bearer was pulling but timidly at
the stick which he had fixed in
the ground with confident resolution. What
is the wonder in the horse of
Dionysius having escaped out of the
river, and in his afterwards having
had a swarm of bees cluster on
his mane? But because Dionvsius happened
to ascend the throne of Syracuse soon
after this event, what had happened by
chance was regarded as an extraordinary
prodigy and prognostic. You go on
to say, that at Lacedsemon, the
armour in the temple of Hercules
rattled. At Thebes the closed gates
of the temple of the same God
suddenly burst open of their own
accord, and the bucklers which had
been suspended on the walls fell to
the ground. Certainly nothing of this
kind could have happened without some
motion or impulse ; but why need we impute
such motion to the Gods rather than
call it an accident1? At Delphi, you
say, that a chaplet of wild herbs
suddenly appeared growing on the head
of Lysander's statue. Do you think
then that the chaplet of herbs
existed before any seed was ripened 1
These seeds were probably carried there
by birds, not by human agency, and
whatever is on a head may seem
to resemble a crown. And as to
the circum stance which you add, that
about the same time the golden stars
of Castor and Pollux, placed in the
temple of Delphi, suddenly vanished, and
could nowhere be discovei'ed ; this seems
to me not so much the work of
the Gods, as the sacrilege of
thieves. I certainly do wonder at
the roguery of the Ape of Dodona
being recorded in the Greek histories.
For what is less strange than that
a most mischievous animal should have
upset the urn, and scattered the
oracular lots ? The his torians,
however, deny that this prodigy was
followed by any disastrous event occurring
among the Lacedaemonians. Now to come
to what you have reported respecting
the citizen of Veii, who declared to
the Senate that if the. Lake Albanus
overflowed, and ran into the sea,
Rome would perish, and that if its
course were diverted elsewhere, Veii must
fall. Accordingly the water of the
Alban lake was subsequently drained away
by new channels, not for the safety
of the citadel and the city, but
solely for the benefit of the
suburban district. A short time
afterwards, a voice was heard, warning
cer tain individuals to beware lest
Rome should be taken by the Gauls;
and upon this they consecrated an
altar on the New Road, to Aius the
Speaker. What, then, did this Aius
the Speaker speak and talk, and
derive his name from that circumstance,
when no one knew him ; and has
he been silent ever since he has
had an habitation, an altar, and a
name 1 And the same remark will
apply to Juno the Admonitress; for
what warning has she ever given us,
except the one respecting the full
sow 1 XXXIII. This is enough to
say about prodigies. Let me
now speak of auspices and of lots —
those, I mean, which are thrown at
hazard, not those which are announced
by vati cination, which we more
properly call oracles, and which we
shall discuss when we investigate divination
of the natural order; and after this
we will consider the astrology of the
Chaldeans. But first let us consider
the question of auspices. It is a
very delicate matter for an augur to
speak against them. Yes, to a
Marsian perhaps, but not to a Roman.
For we are not like those
who attempt to predict the future by
the flight of birds, and the
observation of other signs ; and yet
I believe that Romulus, who founded
our city by the auspices, considered
the augural science of great utility
in foreseeing matters. For
antiquity was deceived in many things,
which time, custom, and enlarged
experience have corrected. And the
custom of reverence for, and discipline
and rights of, the augurs, and the
authority of the college, are still
retained for the sake of their
influence on the minds of the common
people. And certainly the consuls P.
Claudius and L. Junius de served
severe punishment, who set sail in
defiance of the auspices ; for they
ought to have been obedient to the
esta blished religion, and not to
have rejected so obstinately the national
ceremonials. Justly, therefore, was one of
them condemned by the judgment of the
people, while the other perished by
his own hand. Flaminius, likewise, was
not duly submissive to the auspices;
and that was the reason, you say,
why he was defeated. But, the year
afterwards, Paullus was guided by them.
Did he the less for that perish
with his army in the battle of
Cannes 1 Even allowing the existence
of auspices, which I do not,
certainly those at present in use, whether
by means of birds or celestial signs,
are but mere semblances of auspices,
and not real ones. " Quintus
Fabius, I pray thee, assist me in
the auspices." He answers, "
I have heard." The augurial
officer among our forefathers was a
skilful and learned man ; now they
take the first that offers. For a
man must needs be skilful and learned
who understands the meaning of silence.
For in auspices we call that silence
which is free from all Irregularity.
To understand this, belongs to a
perfect augur. It sometimes happens,
however, that when he who wishes to
consult the auspices has said to the
augur whom he has chosen to assist
him, " Say, if silence is
observed," the augur, without looking
above or around him, answers immediately,
" Silence appears to be
observed." On this the consulter
rejoins, " Tell me whether the
chickens are eating." The augur replies,
" They are eating." But when
the consulter fur ther demands, "
What kind of fowls are they, and
whence do they come?" the augur
answers, "The chickens were brought in
a cage by a person who is
termed a poulterer." Such, then,
are the illustrious birds whom we
call, forsooth, the messengers of Jupiter ;
and whether they eat or not, what
does it signify ? Certainly nothing
to the auspices. But since, if they
eat at all, some portion of food
must inevitably fall on the ground
and strike (pavire) the earth, this
was at first called terripavium, then
terripudium, and is now called tripudium.
When, therefore, the chicken lets fall
from its beak a particle of its
food, the augur declares that the
tripu dium solistimum is consummated. What
true divination can there be in an
auspice of this nature, so artificially
forced and tortured ? which, we have
a proof, was not used among the
most ancient augurs ; for we have
an ancient decree of the college of
augurs, that any bird may make the
tripudium. So that, then, there would
be an auspice if the bird was free
to show itself, and the bird might
appear to be the messenger and
interpreter of Jupiter. But when a
miserable bird is kept in a cage,
and ready to die of hunger, — if such
an one, when pecking up its food,
happens to let some particle fall,
can you think this an auspice, or
do you believe that Romulus consulted
the gods in this manner ? Do
you imagine that those who pretend to
augury apply themselves at the present
day to discern the signs of heaven
1 No ; they give their orders to
the poulterer. He makes his report.
It has been reckoned an excellent
auspice on all occasions, among the
Romans, when it thunders on the left
hand, except in reference to the Comitia
; and this exception was doubtless
contrived for the benefit of the
commonwealth, in order that the chiefs
of the state might be the
interpreters of the Comitia in whatever
concerns the judgments of the people,
the rights of the laws, and the
creation of the magistrates. "
But," you argue, " in consequence
of the letters of Ti berius Gracchus,
Scipio Nasica and Caius Martins Figulus
resigned the consulship, because the augurs
determined that they had been irregularly
created." Well, who denies that there
is a school of Augurs 1 What I
deny is, that there is any such
thing as divination. " But the
soothsayers are diviners ; and after
Tiberius Gracchus had introduced them into
the senate, on account of the sudden
death of the individual whose office
it was to report the order of
the elections, they said that the
Comitia had not been legally
constituted." Now, in reference to
this case, observe that they could
not speak by authority of the
summoner of the president of the centuries,
for he was dead; and conjecture
without divination could say that. Or
perhaps what they said was no better
than the result of chance, which
prevails to a considerable extent in
all affairs of this nature. For what
could the sooth sayers of Etruria
know as to whether the tent they
observed was as it should be, and
whether the regulations of the pomoerium,
or circumvallation, were exactly obeyed.
For myself, I agree with the sentiments
of Caius Marcellus rather than with
those of Appius Claudius, who were
both of them my colleagues ; and I
think that, although the college and
law of augurs were first instituted
on account of the reverence entertained
for divination in ancient times, they
were afterwards maintained and preserved
for the sake of the state. Of this,
however, more elsewhere. At present, let
us examine the auguries of other
nations who have evinced therein more
superstition than art. They make use
of all kinds of birds for their
auspices; we confine ourselves to few:
and one set of omens are reckoned
unfavourable by them, and a different
set by us. King Deiotarus often
asked me for an account of our
discipline and system of divination, and
I asked him for information aoout
nis. Good heavens ! how different were
the two methods , in some instances,
so much so as to be downright
contradictory to one another. And he
had re course to augurs on all
occasions ; but how very seldom do we
apply to them unless the auspices are
required by the people ! Our
ancestors were unwilling to wage any
war without consulting the auspices. But
how many years have elapsed since
this ceremony has been neglected by
our proconsuls and propraetors ? They
never take auspices ; they do not
pass over rivers by the encouragement
of omens ; nor do they wait for
the intimation of the sacred chickens.
As to that divination which consists
in observing the flight of birds from
some elevated spot — once considered of so
much consequence in military expeditions, —
Marcus Marcellus, who was consul five
times, as well as imperator and chief
augur too, omitted it altogether. What
is become, then, of divina tion by
birds, which (as wars are carried on
by people who take no care about
any auspices) seems to be retained by
the city magistrates, while it is
renounced by our military com manders
? So much did Marcellus despise
auspices, that when he was proceeding
on any enterprise, he was accustomed
to travel in a closed litter, that
he might not be liable to be
hindered by them. And we augurs
now-a-days act much in the same way,
when, for fear of what is called
a joint auspice, we order the
sacrificial cattle to be separated from
each other. Not that I commend conduct
like this ; for to make these
contrivances, either that an auspice should
not happen at all, or that if
it happens it should not be seen, —
what is it but an attempt to
avoid the admonitions of Jupiter ? It
is ridiculous enough for you to
assert that this king Deiotarus did
not repent of having believed the
auspices which he experienced when he
went in search of Pompey, because he
had, by doing his duty, thus secured
the fidelity and friendship of the Romans
; for that praise and glory were
dearer to him than his kingdom and
possessions. I dare say they were ;
but this has nothing to do with
the auspices. Surely no crow could
inform him that it was a piece of
magnanimity to defend the liberty of
the Roman people. It was he himself
who felt spontaneously what he did
feel; and birds can do no more
than signify bare events, be they for
tunate or disastrous. Thus, I
conceive that Deiotarus in this affair
followed no other auspices than those
of conscience, which taught him to
prefer his duty to his interest. But
if the birds showed him that the
result would be prosperous, they certainly
deceived him ; for he fled from
the battle, together with Pompey, and
a grievous time it was for him.
From this general he was compelled to
separate — another affliction ; and, to
crown his troubles, he soon had
Csesar quartered upon him, both as a
guest and an enemy. What could be
more painful than this ? Lastly ,
Csesar, after having deprived him of
the tetrarchy of the Trogini, and
bestowed it on a certain Pergamenian
of his train, — after having likewise
deprived him of Armenia, which had
been granted him by the senate, — after
having been entertained by him with
most princely hospitality, left his
entertainer the king wholly stripped of
his possessions. It is needless to
add more. I will return to my
original subject. If we seek to know
events by those auspices which are
sought from birds, it appears by this
argument that no birds could truly
have predicted prosperity to king
Deiotarus. If we want to know our
duty, that is not to be sought
from augury, but from virtue. I say nothing, then,
of the augural staff of Romulus,
which you declare to have
remained unconsumed by fire in
the midst of a general conflagration ;
and pass over the razor of Attius
Navius, which is reported to have cut
through a whetstone. Such fables as
these should not be admitted into
philosophical discussions. What a
philosopher has to do is, first, to
examine the nature of the augural
science, to investigate its origin, and
to pursue its history. But how
pitiful is the nature of a science
which pretends that the eccentric motions
of birds are full of ominous import,
and that all manner of things must
be done, or left undone, as their
flights and songs may indicate ! How
can their inclinations to the right
or left determine the power of auspices
? and how, when, and by wrhom
were such absurd regulations as these
invented ? The Etrurian soothsayers
hold as the author of their dis
cipline a child whom a ploughshare
suddenly dug up from a clod of
the earth. Whom do we Romans look
upon as the author of ours ? Is
it Attius Navius ? But Romulus and
Remus lived several years before him,
and they were both augurs, as we
are informed. Shall we call our system
the invention of the Pisidians, the
Cilicians, or the Phrygians 1 Shall
we, by speaking thus, call men devoid
of all civilization the authors of
divination ? " But," you say,
" all kings, people, and nations
use auspices ; " as if there was
anything in the world so very common
as error is, or as if you yourself,
in judging, were guided by the
opinion of the multitude. How few,
for instance, are there who deny that
pleasure is a good : most people
even think it the chief good. But
is the Stoic frightened from his
creed by their numbers ? or does
the multitude follow their authority in
many things 1 What wonder is there, then,
if in respect of auspices, and all
kinds of divinations, weak spirits are
affected by those popular superstitions,
though they cannot overturn the truth
1 And what uniformity or settled
agreement exists between augurs [The poet
Ennius, referring to our Roman augurs, says
— When on the left it thunders,
all goes well. In Homer, on the
contrary, Ajax,1 making some complaint or
other to Achilles about the ferocity
of the Trojans, speaks in this manner
— For them the father of the
Gods declares, His omens on the
right, his thunder theirs. So that
omens on the left appear fortunate to
us, while the Greeks and barbarians
prefer those on the right. Although I
am not unaware that our Romans call
prosperous signs sinistra, even if they
are in fact dextra. But certainly our
countrymen used the term sinistra, and
foreigners the word dextra, because that
usually appeared the best. How great,
however, is this contrariety ! Why need
I stop to mention that they use
different birds and different signs from
our selves? they take their observations
in a different way, and give answers
in a different way; and it is
superfluous to admit that some of
these modes are adopted through error,
some through superstition, and that they
often mislead. To this catalogue of
superstitions you have not hesi- 1
This is another piece of forge tfulness
on the part of Cicero.— See Iliad,
ix. 236. tated to add a number
of omens and presages. For instance,
you have quoted the words which
./Emilia addressed to Paulus, that Perses
had perished ; which Paulus received as
an omen of success. You quote
likewise the speech that Cecilia made
to her sister's daughter — " I yield
my place to you." Nor is this
all : you cite the phrase, favete
linguis (keep silence) ; and you
extol the prerogative presage derived from
the name of the person who takes
precedence in the elections of the
comitia. I call this being ingenious
and eloquent against yourself; for how,
if you attend to things like these,
can your mind be free and calm
enough to follow, not supersti tion,
but reason, as your guide in action
1 Is it not so ? If any
one, while speaking on his own
affairs, in the course of his common
conversation, drops a word that may
seem to you to bear on anything
which you are thinking or doing,
shall that circumstance inspire you with
either fear or energy? When Marcus
Crassus was embarking his army at
Brundu- sium, a. certain itinerant vender
of figs from Caunus cried out in
the harbour, " Will you buy any
cauneas /" Let us say, if you
please, that this was an omen against
Crassus's expedition ; for that it was
as much as to say, Cave ne eas
(Beware how you go), and that if
Crassus had obeyed the omen he would
not have perished. But if we regard
such omens as these, we shall have
to take notice of sneezes, the
breaking of a shoe-tie, or the
tripping over a pebble in walking.
It now remains for us to speak
of the lots, and the Chal dean
astrologers, vaticinations, and dreams. And
first let us speak of lots. What,
now, is a lot? Much the same as
the game of mora, or dice, ! and
other games of chance, in which luck
and fortune are all in all, and
reason and skill avail nothing. These
games are full of trick and deceit,
invented for the object of gain,
superstition, or error. But let us
examine the imputed origin of the
lots, as we did that of the
system of the soothsayers. We read
in the records of the Prsenestines,
that Numeriua Sufnicius, a man of high
reputation and rank, had often been
commanded by dreams (which at last
became very threaten- ! The Latin
has quod talos jacere, quod tesseras, —
tali being dice with four flat and
two round sides, and tesserce dice
with six flat sides. ing) to
cut a flint-stone in two, at a
particular spot. Being extremely alarmed at
the vision, he began to act in
obedience to it, in spite of the
derision of his fellow-citizens; and he
had no sooner divided the stone, than
he found therein certain lots, engraved
in ancient characters on oak. The
spot in •which this discovery took
place is now religiously guarded, being
consecrated to the infant Jupiter, who
is represented with Juno as sitting
in the lap of Fortune, and sucking
her breasts, and is most chastely
worshipped by all mothers. At the
same time and place in which the
Temple of For tune is now situated,
they report that honey flowed out of
an olive. Upon this the augurs
declared that the lots there instituted
would be held in the highest honour;
and, at their command, a chest was
forthwith made out of this same
olive- tree, and therein those lots are
kept by which the oracles of Fortune
are still delivered. But how can
there be the least degree of sure
and certain information in lots like
these, which, under Fortune's direction,
are shuffled and drawn by the hands
of a child ? How were the lots
conveyed to this particular spot, and
who cut and carved the oak of
which they are composed 1 "
Oh," say they, " there is
nothing which God cannot do." I
wish that he had made these Stoical
sages a little less inclined to
believe every idle tale, out of a
superstitious and miserable solicitude. The
common sense of men in real life
has happily succeeded in exploding this
kind of divination. It is only the
antiquity and beauty of the Temple of
Fortune that any longer pre serves
the Prsenestine lots from contempt even
among the vulgar. For what magistrate,
or man of any reputation, ever
resorts to them now? And in all
other places they are wholly disregarded
; so that Clitomachus informs us,
that with refe rence to this,
Carneades was wont to say that he
had never been so fortunate as when
he saw Fortune at Prseneste. So we
will say no more on this topic. Let us now consider
the prodigies of the Chaldeans. Eudoxus,
who was a disciple of Plato, and,
in the judgment of the greatest men,
the first astronomer of his time,
formed the opinion, and committed it
to writing, that no credence should
be given to the predictions of the
Chaldeans in their calculation of a
man's life from the day of his
nativity. Paneetius, who is almost the
only Stoic who rejects astro logical
prophecies, says that Archelaus and
Cassander, the two principal astronomers of
the age in which he himself lived,
set no value on judicial astrology,
though they were very celebrated for
their learning in other
parts of astronomy. Scylax of Halicarnassus,
a great friend of Pansetius, and a
first-rate astronomer, and chief magistrate
of his own city, likewise rejected
all the predictions of the Chaldeans.
But to proceed merely on reason,
omitting for the present the testimony
of these witnesses. Those who put
faith in the Chaldeans, and their
calcu lations of nativities, and their
various predictions, argue in this manner
: they affirm that in that circle
of constellations which the Greeks term
the Zodiac there resides a ceiiain
energy, of such a character that each
portion of its circum ference influences
and modifies the surrounding heavens ac
cording to what stars are in those
and the neighbouring parts at each season
; and that this energy is variously
affected by those wandering stars which
we call planets. But when they come
into that portion of the circle in which
is situated the rise of that star
which appears anew, or into that
which has anything in conjunction or
harmony with it, they term it the
true or quadrate aspect. And
moreover, as there happen at every
season of the year several astronomical
revolutions, owing to approximations and
retirements of the stars which we
see, which are affected by the power
of the sun, — they think it not
merely probable, but true, that according
to the temperature of the atmosphere
at the time must be the animation
and formation of children from their
mother's womb ; and that their
genius, disposition, temper, constitution,
behaviour, fortune, and destiny through
life depend upon that. What an
incredible insanity is this ! for every
error does not deserve the mere name
of folly. The Stoic Diogenes grants,
that the Chaldeans possess the power
of foreseeing certain events ; to the
limit, that is, of predicting what a
child's disposition and his particular
talent and ability are likely to be.
But he denies that the other things
which they profess can possibly be
known. For instance ; two twins may
re semble each other in appearance,
and yet their lives and fortunes may
be entirely dissimilar. Procles and
Eurysthenes, kings of the Laceduemonians,
were twin-brethren. But they did not
live the same number of years ; for
Procles died a year before his
brother, and much excelled him in the
glory of his actions. But I
question whether even that portion of
prophetic power which the worthy Diogenes
concedes to the Chaldeans, by a sort
of prevarication in argument, can be
fairly ascribed to them. For, as
according to them the birth of
infants is regulated by the moon, and
as the Chaldeans observe and take
notice of the natal stars with which
the moon happens to be in conjunction
at the moment of a nativity, they
are founding their judgment on the
most fallacious evidence of their eyes,
as to matters which they ought to
behold by reason and intellect. For
the science of Mathematics, with which
they ought to be acquainted, should
teach them the comparative proximity of
the moon to the earth, and its
re lative remoteness from the planets
Venus and Mercury, and especially from
the sun, whose light it is supposed
to borrow. And the other three
intervals, those, namely, which separate
the sun from Mars and from Jupiter
and from Saturn, and the distance
also between that and the heaven,
which is the bound and limit of
our universe, are infinite and immense.
What influence, then, can such distant
orbs ti'ansmit to the moon, or rather
to the earth? Moreover, when these
astrologers maintain, as they are bound
to maintain, that all children that
are born on the earth under the
same planet and constellation, having the
same signs of nativity, must experience
the same destinies, they make an
assertion which evinces the greatest
ignorance of astronomy. For those circles
which divide the heaven into hemispheres —
circles which the Greeks call horizons,
and the Latins finientes — perpetually vary
according to the spot from which they
are drawn ; and, therefore, the risings and
settings of the stars appear to take
place at different seasons to dif
ferent races of men. If, then,
the condition of the atmosphere is
affected by the energy and virtue of
the stars, sometimes in one way and
sometimes in another, how can those
children who are born at the same
time in different climates be subject
to the same starry influences in
various quarters of the globe 1 For
instance, in the country which we
Romans inhabit, the dog-star rises some
days after the summer solstice, while
among the Troglodytes, a people of
Africa, it is said to rise before
it. So that if I were to grant
that the heavenly influences have an
effect upon all the children who are
born upon the earth, it would follow,
that all who are born at the
same time in different regions of the
earth, must be born not with the
same but with different inclinations
according to the different conditions of
climate; which, however, they by no
means admit. For they persist in maintaining
that all chil dren who are born
at the same period, have at their
nativity the same astrologicl destinies
allotted to them, whatever their native
country may be. But what folly is
it to imagine, that while attending
to the swift motions and revolutions
of heaven, we should take no notice
of the changes of the atmosphere
immediately around us, — its weather, its
winds, and rains — when weather differs so
much even in places which are nearest
to one another, that there is often
one weather at Tusculum and another
at Rome; as is especially remarked by
sailors, who, after having doubled a
cape, often find the greatest possible
change in the wind. When the
calmness or disturbed state of the
weather is so variable, is it the
part of a man in his senses to
say that these circumstances have no
effect on the births of children
happen ing at that moment, (as,
indeed, they have not,) and yet to
affirm, that that subtle and indefinable
thing, which cannot be felt at all,
and can scarcely be comprehended, —
namely, the conjuncture which arises from
the moon and other stars, does affect
the birth of children 1 — What? is it
a slight error, not to understand
that by this system that energy of
seminal principles which is of so
much influence in begetting and procreating
the child is utterly put out of
sight? — for who can help observing that
the parents impress on their children,
to a great extent, their own forms,
manners, features, and gestures. Now this
could hardly happen if it were not
the power and nature of the parents
which was the efficient cause, but
the condition of the moon and the
temperature of the heavens. Why need
I press the argument that those who
are born at one and the same
moment, are dissimilar in their nature,
their lives, and their circumstances?
Besides, is there any doubt that
many persons, though they were born
with great bodily defects, are never
theless afterwards cured of them, and set
right by the self- corrective power
of their nature, or by the attention
of their nui-ses, or the skill of
their physicians? or that many chil
dren have been born so tongue-tied
that they could not speak, and yet
have been cured by the application of
the knife'? Many likewise by meditation
or exercise have removed their natural
infirmities. Thus Phalereus records that
Demos thenes when young could not
pronounce the letter R; but afterwards
by constant practice he learnt to
articulate it perfectly. Now, if such
defects had been occasioned by the
influence of the stars, nothing could
have altered them. Need I say
more? Does not difference of situation
make races of men different 1 It
is easy enough to give a list
of such instances; and to point out
what differences exist be tween the
Indians and Persians, the ^Ethiopians and
Syrians, in respect both of their persons
and characters, so as to present an
incredible variety and dissimilarity. And
this fact proves, that the climate
influences the nativities of men far
more than the aspect of the moon
and stars. For though some pretend
that the Chaldean astrologers have verified
the nativities of children by calculations
and experi ments in the cases of
all the children who have been born
for 470,000 years, this is a mistake.
For had they been in the habit
of doing so, they would never have
given up the practice. But. as it
is, no author remains who knows of
such a thing being done now, or
ever having been done. You see that
I am not using the arguments of Carneades,
but those rather of Pantetius, the
chief of the Stoics But answer me
now this question. Were all those
persons who were slain in the battle
of Cannae born under the same
constellation, as they met with one
and the same end? Again, have those
men who are singular in their genius
and courage, a separate, some peculiar star
of their own too 1 For what
moment is there in which a multitude
of persons are not born? and yet
no one has ever been like Homer.
And if the aspect of the stars
and the state of the firma ment
influenced the birth of every being,
it should, by parity of reasoning,
influence inanimate substances; yet what can
be more absurd than such an idea?
I grant, indeed, that Lucius Tarutius
of Firma, my own personal friend, and
a man particularly well acquainted with
the Chaldean astrology, traced back the
nativity of our own city, Rome, to
those equinoctial days of the feast
of Pales in which Romulus is reported
to have begun its foundations, and
asserted that the moon was at that
period in Libra, and on this
discovery, he hesitated not to pronounce
the destinies of Rome. Oh, the
mighty power of delusion ! Is even
the b'irth-day of a city subject to
the influence of the stars and moon'?
Granting even that the condition of
the heavens, when he draws his first
breath, may influence the life of a
child, does it follow that it can
have any effect on brick or cement,
of which a city is composed?
Why need I say more? Such ideas
as these are refuted every day. How
many of these Chaldean prophecies do
I remember being repeated to Pompey,
Crassus, and to Caesar himself ! according
to which, not one of these heroes
was to die except in old age,
in domestic felicity, and perfect renown ;
so that I wonder that any living
man can yet believe in these
impostors, whose predictions they see
falsified daily by facts and results.
-It only remains for us now to
examine those ttfo sorts of divination
which you term natural, as distin
guished from artificial — namely, vaticinations
and dreams. With your permission, brother
Quiutus, we will now treat of these.
I shall be very well pleased to
hear you, (answered Quintus,) for I
entirely agree with all you have
hitherto advanced, and, to tell you
the trut, although I have had my
feelings on the subject strengthened by
your arguments, yet of my own accord
I looked upon the opinion of the
Stoics respecting divination as rather too
superstitious, and was more inclined to
favour the arguments which have been
adduced by the Peripatetics, and the
ancient DicEearchus. and Cratippus, who now
flourishes, who all maintain that there
exists in the minds of men a
certain oracular and pro phetic power
of presentiment, whereby they anticipate
future events, whether they are inspired
with a divine ecstasy, or are r.s
it were disengaged from the body, and
act freely and easily during sleep. I
wish therefore to know what is your
opinion respecting these vaticinations and
dreams, and by what ingenious devices
you mean to invalidate them. When
Quintus had thus spoken, I proceeded
again to speak, starting afresh, as
it were, from a new beginning.
I am very well aware, brother
Quintus, I replied, that you have
always entertained doubts respecting the
other kinds of divination; but that
you are very favourable to the two
natural kinds — namely, ecstasy and dreams,
which appear to proceed from the mind
when at liberty. T will therefore
tell you my idea very candidly
respecting these two species of divination,
after I have examined a little the
sentiment of the Stoics, and espe cially
of our friend Cratippus, on this
subject. For you said that Cratippus,
Diogenes, and Antipater summed up the
question in this manner : — " If there
are Gods, and they do not inform
men beforehand respecting future events,
either they do not love men, or
do not know what is going to
happen; or they think that the
knowledge of the future would be of
no service to mankind; or they
believe it incon sistent with the
majesty of Gods to reveal to men
the things that must come to pass;
or, lastly, we must believe that even
the Gods themselves are incapable of
declaring them. But we cannot say
that the Gods do not love man,
for they are essentially benevolent and
philanthropic. And they cannot be ignorant
of those things, which they themselves
have appointed and designed : neither
can it be uninteresting or unimportant
to us to know what must happen
to us, for we should be more
prudent if we did know. Nor can
the Gods think it inconsistent with
their dignity to advertise men of future
events, for nothing can be more
sublime than doing- good. Nor are
they unable to perceive the future
before hand. If, therefore, there are
no Gods, they do not declare the
future to us; but there are Gods,
therefore they do declare. And if the
Gods declare future events to us,
they must have furnished us with
means whereby we may appre hend them,
otherwise they would declare them in
vain; and if they have given us
the means of apprehending divination, then
there is a divination for us to
apprehend — therefore there is a
divination." 0 acutest of men,
in what concise terms do they think
that they have settled the question
for ever! They assume premises to draw
their conclusion from, not one of
which is granted to them. But the
only conclusion of an argument which
can be approved, is one in which
the point doubted of is established
by facts which are not doubtful.
L. Do you not see how Epicurus,
whom the Stoics forsooth term a
blunderer, reasons in order to prove
that the universe is infinite in the
very nature of things ? That which
is finite, says he, has an end.
Every one will concede this. What
ever has an end, may be seen
externally from something else. This also
may be granted him. Now that which
includes al, cannot be discerned externally
from anything else. This proposition likewise
appears undeniable. Therefore that which
includes all, having no end, is
necessarily infinite. Thus by the
proposition which we are compelled to
admit, he clearly proves the point in
question. Now this is just what
you dialecticians have not yet done
in favour of divination ; and you not
only bring forward no pro position as
your premises, so self-evident as to
be universally admitted ; but you
assume such premises as, even if they
be granted, your desired conclusion would
be as far as ever from following.
For instance, your first proposition is
this: If there are Gods they must
needs be benevolent. Who will grant
you this 1 Will Epicurus, who asserts
that the Gods do not care about
any business of their own or of
others ? or will our own countryman
Ennius, who was applauded by all the
Romans, when he said — I've always
argued that the Gods exist, But that
they care for mortals I deny ;
and then gives reasons for his
opinion; but it is not neces sary
to quote him further. I have said
enough to show that your friends
assume as certain, propositions which are
matters of doubt and controversy. The
next proposition is this, That the
Gods must needs know all things,
because they have made all things.
But how great a dispute is there
as to this fact among the most
learned men, several of whom deny
that all things were created by the
immortal Gods! Again, they assert,
that it is the interest of man
to know those things which are about
to come to pass. But Dicsear- chus
has written a great book to prove
that ignorance of futurity is better
than knowledge of futurity. They deny that
it is inconsistent with the majesty
of the Gods to look into every
man's house, forsooth, so as to see
what is expedient for each individual.
Nor is it possible, say they, for
them to be ignorant of the future.
This is denied by those who will
not allow that what is future can
be certain. Do not you see,
therefore, that they have assumed as
certain and admitted axioms, things which
are doubtful ? After which, they
twist the argument about and sum it
up thus : " Therefore, there are
no Gods ; and they do not grant
men intimations of the future." And,
having settled the question thus, to
their own satisfaction, they add, "
But there are Gods ;" a fact
which is not admitted by all men
; " there fore, they do grant
intimations." Even that consequence I
cannot see ; for they may grant
no intimations of the future and yet
exist as Gods. Again, it is
asserted ; If the Gods grant
intimations to men respecting future
events, they must grant some means of
explaining these intimations. But surely
the contrary may be the case ; for
the Gods may keep to themselves the
mean ing of the signs which they
impart to men ; for else, why should
they teach it to the Etrurians rather
than to the Romans? Again, they
argue, that if the Gods have given
men the means of understanding the
signs they impart, then the existence
of divination is manifest. Biit grant
that the Gods do give such means,
what does it avail, if we happen
to be incapable of receiving them 1
Last of all, their conclusion is ;
Therefore, there certainly is such a
thing as divination. It may be their
conclusion, but it is not proved;
for, as they themselves have taught
us, •' false premises cannot produce
a true result." Therefore, the whole
conclusion falls to the ground. Let
us now consider the arguments of that
most excellent man, our friend Cratippus.
As, says he, the use and function
of sight cannot exist without the eyes —
and yet the eyes do not always
perform their office, — and, as he who
has once enjoyed correct sight, so as
to see what truly exists, is
conscious of the reality of vision ; — so,
if the practice of divination cannot
exist without the power of divination — and
though in the exercise of this power
of divination some errors may occur,
and the diviner may be misled so
as not to foresee the truth ;
yet the existence of divination is
sufficiently attested by the fact that
some true divinations have been made,
containing such exact predictions of all
the particulars of future events, that
they can never have been made by
chance, — of which numerous instances might
be cited. The exist ence of
divination must therefore be admitted.
The argument is neatly and concisely
stated. But Cra- tippus twice assumes
what he wishes to prove ; and
even if we were willing to grant
him very large concessions, we could
not possibly agree with his conclusions.
His argument is this : Though
the eyes should sometimes possess very
imperfect sight, yet, provided they
sometimes see clearly, it is evident
that the power of vision is in them.
On the same principle, if any one
has ever once uttered a true
divination, he must always be considered
as possessing the faculty of divining,
even when he blunders. LIII. Now
I entreat you, my dear Cratippus, to
consider how little is the resemblance
between these two cases. To me there
is none at all. The eyes which
see clearly exert no more than their
natural faculty of sight. But minds,
if they have sometimes truly foreseen future
events, either in ecsta sies or
dreams, have done so by fortune and
accident ; unless, indeed, you imagine
those who believe that dreams are but
dreams, will grant you that when they
happen to dream any thing that is
true, it is no longer the effect
of chance. But we may concede
for the present these two assumptions
of Cratippus, which the Greek dialecticians
would call lem mata. But we prefer
speaking in Latin ; still the presump
tion, which they term prolepsis, cannot
be granted. Cratippus goes on
assuming premises in this manner :
There are, says he, presentiments
innumerable which are not fortuitous. Now
this we absolutely deny. See how
great is the magnitude of the difference
between us. Not being able to agree
with his premises, I assert that he
has drawn no conclusion. Oh, but
perhaps it is very impudent of us
not to concede a point which is so
clear ! But what is clear ? "
Why," he replies, " that many
predictions are fulfilled." Yes ; but
are there not many more which are
not fulfilled ? Does not this very
variation, which is the peculiar property
of fortune, teach us that fortune,
not nature, regulates such predictions ?
Moreover, if your conclusion is
true, 0 renowned Cratip- pus ! — for to
you I address myself — do not you
perceive that the soothsayers, and those who
predict by thunder and light ning,
and the interpreters of prodigies, and
the augurs, and the Chaldean astrologers,
and those who tell fortunes by
drawing lots, will all bring forward
the same argument as yourself in
their own favour? Not one of these
men has been so unfortunate as never
on any occasion to find his pre
dictions verified. This being the case, you
must either admit all the other kinds
of divination which you now most
properly reject; or, if you absolutely
condemn them, I do not see how
you will be able to defend those
two which you retain as favourable
exceptions. For on the same principle
that you maintain these, the others
also may be true which you discard.
LIV. But what authority has this
same ecstasy, which you choose to
call divine, that enables the madman
to foresee things inscrutable to the
sage, and which invests with divine senses
a man who has lost all his
human ones 1 We Romans preserve
with solicitude the verses which the
Sibyl is reported to have uttered
when in an ecstasy, — the interpreter of
which is by common report believed to
have recently uttered certain falsities in
the senate, to the effect that he
whom we did really treat as king
should also be called king, if we
would be safe. If such a prediction
is indeed contained in the books of
the Sibyl, to what particular person
or period does it refer ? For,
whoever was the author of these
Sibylline oracles, they are very
ingeniously com posed ; since, as all
specific definition of person and period
is omitted, they in some way or other
appear to predict everything that happens.
Besides this, the Sibylline oracles are
involved in such profound obscurity, that
the same verses might seem at
different times to refer to different
subjects. It is evident, however,
that they are not a song composed
by any one in a prophetic ecstasy,
as the poem itself evinces, being far
less remarkable for enthusiasm and
inspiration than for technicality and labour
; and as is especially proved by
that arrangement which the Greeks call
acrostics — where, from the first letter of
each verse in order, words are formed
which express some particular meaning ; as
is the case with some of Ennius's
verses, the initial letters of which
make, ""Which Ennius wrote." But
such verses indicate rather attention than
ecstasy in those who write them.
Now, in the verses of the
Sibyl, the whole of the paragraph on
each subject is contained in the
initial letters of every verse of
that same paragraph. This is evidently
the artifice of a practised writer,
not of one in a frenzy ; and
rather of a diligent mind than of
an insane one. Therefore, let us con
sider the Sibyl as so distinct and
isolated a character, that, according to
the ordinance of our ancestors, the
Sibylline books shall not even be
read except by decree of the senate,
and be used rather for the putting
down than the taking up of religious
fancies. And let us so arrange
matters with the priests under whose
custody they remain, that they may
pro phesy anything rather than a king
from these mysterious volumes ; for
neither Gods nor men any longer
tolerate the notion of restoring kingly
government at Rome. LV. But many
people, you say, have in repeated
instances uttered true predictions ; as,
for example, Cassandra, when she said,
" Already is the fleet,'' ' &c. ;
and in a subsequent prophecy, "Ah!
see you not?" &c. Do you
then expect me to give credence to
these fables 1 I will grant that
they are as delightful as you please
to call them, — that they are polished
up with every conceivable beauty of
language, sentiment, music, and rhythm. LuL
we are not bound to invest fictions
of this kind with any authority, or
to give them any belief. And,
on the same principle, I do not
think any one bound to pay any
attention to such diviners as Publicius
(whoever he may be), or Martius, or
to the secret oracles of Apollo ; of
which some are notoriously false, and
others uttered at i-an- dom, so that
they command little respect, I will
not say from learned men, but even
from any person of plain common
sense. " What !" you will
say, " did not that old sailor
of the fleet of Coponius predict
truly the events which took place
?" No doubt he did ; but they
happened to be those very things
which at the time everybody thought
most likely to ensue. For we were
daily hearing that the two armies
were situated near each other in Thessaly
; and it appeared to us that
Caesar's army had the greater audacity,
inasmuch as it was waging war against
its own country, and the greater
strength, being composed of veteran
soldiers. And as to the battle, there
was not one of us who did not
dread the result, though, as brave
men should, we kept our anxiety to
ourselves, and expressed no alarm.
What wonder, however, was it that
this Greek sailor was forced from all
self-possession and constancy, as is very
com mon, by the greatness of his terror
and affright ; and that, being driven
to distraction by his own cowardice,
he uttered those convictions when raving
mad which he had cherished when yet
sane ? Which, in the name of
Gods and men, is most likely; that
a mad sailor should have attained to
a know ledge of the counsels of
the immortal Gods, or that some one
of us who were on the spot at
the time — myself, for in stance, or
Cato, or Varro, or Coponius himself — could
have done so ? I now come
to you, Apollo, monarch of the
sacred centre Of the threat world,
full of thy inspiration, The Pythian
priestesses proclaim thy prophecies. For
Chrysipyus has filled an entire volume
with your oracles, many of which, as
I said before, I consider utterly
false, and many others only true by
accident, as often happens in any
common conversation. Others, again, are so
obscure and involved, that their very
interpreters have need of other
interpreters ; and the decisions of
one lot have to be referred to
other lots. Another portion of them
are so ambiguous, that they require
to be analysed by the logic of
dialecticians. Thus, when Fortune uttered
the following oracle respecting Croesus,
the richest king of Asia, — • "
When Crocus has the Halys cross'd, A
mifdity kingdom will be lost ;"
that monarch expected he should ruin the
power of his enemies ; but the
empire that he ruined was his own.
And whichever result had ensued the
oracle would have been true. But, in
truth, what reason have I to believe
that such an oracle was ever uttered
respecting Croesus 1 or why should I
think Herodotus more veracious than
Ennuis'? Is the one less full of
fictions respecting Croesus than the other
is re specting Pyrrhus 1 For who
now believes that the following answer
was given to Pyrrhus by the oracle
of Apollo ? "You ask your fate;
0 king, I answer you, yEacides the
Romans will subdue !" For, in
the first place, Apollo never uttered
an oracle in Latin; secondly, this
oracle is altogether unknown to the
Greeks. Besides, in the days of Pyrrhus,
Apollo had already left off composing
verses. Lastly, although it was always
the case, as is said in these
lines of Ennius,— " The JEacids
were but a stupid race, More warlike
than sagacious," — yet even Pyrrhus
might without much difficulty have per
ceived the ambiguity of the phrase,
" ^Eacides the Romans will
subdue;" and might have seen
that it did not apply more to himself
than it did to the Romans. As
to that ambiguity which deceived Croesus,
it might even have deceived Chrysippus.
This one could not have deluded even
Epicurus. But the chief argument is,
why are the Delphic oracles altered
in such a way that — I do not
mean only lately in our own time,
but for a long time — nothing can
have been more contemptible 1 When
we press our antagonists for a reason
for this, they say that the peculiar
virtue of the spot from which those
exhalations of the earth arose, under
the influence and excite ment of
which the Pythian priestess uttered her
oracles, has disappeared by the lapse
of time. You might suppose they were
speaking of wine or salt, which do
lose their flavour by lapse of time;
but they are talking thus of the
virtue of a place, and that not
merely a natural, but a divine
virtue; and how is that to have
disappeared ? By reason of age, is
your reply. But what age can possibly
destroy a divine virtue ? and what
virtue can be so divine as an
exhalation of the earth which has the
power of inspiring the mind, and ren
dering it so prophetic of things to
come, that it can not only discern
them long before they happen, but
even declare them in verse and rhythm
? And when did this magical virtue
dis appear 1 Was it not precisely
at the time when men began to
be less credulous ? Demosthenes, who
lived nearly three hundred years ago,
said that even in his time the
Pythia Philippized — that is to say,
supported Philip's influence; and his
expression was meant to convey the
imputation that she had been bribed
by Philip. From which we may infer
that other oracles besides those of
Delphi were not quite immaculate. Somehow
or other, certain philosophers who are
very superstitious — not to say fanatical —
appear to prefer anything to behaving
with common sense themselves ; and so
you prefer asserting that that has
vanished, and become extinct, which, if
it ever had existed, must certainly
have been eternal, rather than not
believe what is wholly incredible. The
error with regard to the divination
of dreams is another of the same
kind ; their arguments for which are
extremly far-fetched and obscure. They
affirm that the minds of men are
divine, that they came from God, and
that the universe is full of these
consenting intelligences. That, therefore, by
this inherent divinity of the mind,
and by its conjunction with other spirits,
it may foresee future events. But
Zeno and the Stoics supposed the mind
to contract, to subside, to yield,
and even to sleep, itself. And
Pythagoras and Plato, authors of the
greatest weight, advise men, with a
view of seeing things more certainly
in sleep, to go to bed after
having gone through a certain preparatory
course of food and other conduct.
Pythagoras, for this reason, coun selled
his disciples to abstain from beans;
with the idea that this species of
food excited the mind, not the
stomach. In short, somehow or other,
I know nothing is so absurd as
not to have found an advocate in
one of the philosophers. Do we
then think that the minds of men
during sleep move by an intrinsic
internal energy, or that, as Democritus
pre tends, they are affected with
external and adventitious visions? On
either supposition we may mistake during
our dreams many false things for
true. For to people sailing, those
things appear to be in motion which
are stationary, and by a certain
ocular deception, the light of a
candle sometimes seems double. Why need
I in stance the number of false
appearances which are presented to the
eyes of men, among those who labour under
drunken ness, or maniacs ? Now,
if we cannot trust such appearances
as those, I know not why we are
to place any absolute reliance on the
visions of dreams; for you might as
well, if you pleased, argue
irom these errors as from dreams.
For instance, that if stationary objects
appear to move, you might say that
this appearance indicated the approach of
an earthquake, or some sudden flight ;
and that lights seen double presage wars,
and discords, and seditions. From the
visions of drunkards and madmen one
might, doubtless, deduce innumerable const
quences by con jecture, which might
seem to be presages of future events.
For what person who aims at a
mark all day long will not sometimes
hit it 1 We sleep every night ;
and there are very few on which
we do not dream; can we wonder then
that what we dream sometimes comes to
pass ? What is so uncertain as
the cast of dice 1 and yet no
one plays dice often without at times
casting the point of Venus, and
sometimes even twice or thrice in
succession. Shall we, then, be so
absurd as to attribute such an event
to the impulse of Venus, rather than
to the doctrine of chances'? If then,
on ordinary occasions, we are not
bound to give credit to false appearances,
I do not see why sleep should
enjoy this special privilege, that its false
seemings should be honoured as true
realities. If it were an institution
of nature that men when they sleep
really did the things which they
dream about, it would be necessary to
bind all persons going to bed both
hand and foot, for they would
otherwise while dreaming perpetrate more
outrages than maniacs. Now since we
place no confi dence in the visions
of madmen, simply because they are
delusions, I do not see why we
should rely on those of dreamers,
which are often the wilder of the
two. Is it because madmen do not
think it worth while to relate their
visions to diviners, but those who
dream do [Once more I put this
question. If I feel inclined to read
or write anything, or to sing or
play on an instrument, or to pursue
the sciences of geometry, physics, or
dialectics, am I to wait for
information in these sciences from a
dream, or shall I have recourse to
study, without which none of those
things can be either done or
explained 1 Again, if I were to
wish to take a voyage, I should
never regulate my steering by my
dreams. For such conduct would bring
its own im mediate punishment. How,
then, can it be reasonable for an
invalid to apply for relief to an
interpreter of dreams rather than to a
physician? Can Esculapius or Serapis, by
a dream, best prescribe to us the
way to obtain a cure for weak
health 1 And cannot Neptune do the
same for a pilot in his art ?
Or will Minerva give us medicine
without troubling the doctor? And still
will the Muses refuse to impart to
dreamers the art of writing, reading,
and the other sciences ? But if
the blessing of health were conveyed
to us in dreams, these other good
things would certainly be so too. But
unfortunately the science of medicine
cannot be learnt in dreams, and the
other arts are in a similar
predicament. And if that be the case,
then all the authority of dreams is
at an end. LX. But this is
only a superficial argument. Let us
now penetrate the heart of this
question. For either some divine
energy which takes care of us, gives
us presentiments in our dreams ; or
those who explain them do, by a
certain harmony and conjunction of nature
which they call a~u/j.Tra.Oeia (sympathy),
understand by means of dreams what is
suitable for everything, and what is
the con sequence of everything ; or,
lastly, neither of these things is
true ; but there is a constant
system of observation of long standing,
by which it had been remarked, that
after certain dreams certain events usually
follow. The first thing then for
us to understand is, that there is
no divine energy which inspires dreams;
and this being granted, you must also
grant that no visions of dreamers
proceed from the agency of the Gods.
For the Gods have for our own
sake given us intellect sufficiently to
provide for our future welfare. How
few people then attend to dreams, or
under stand them, or remember them !
How many, on the other hand, despise
them, and think any superstitious
observation of them a sign of a
weak and imbecile mind! Why then
should God take the trouble to
consult the interest of this man, or
to warn that one by dreams, when
ho knows that they not only do
not think them worth attending to,
but they do not even condescend to
remember them. For a God cannot be
ignorant of the sentiments of every
man, and it is unworthy of a
God to do anything in vain, or
without a cause ; nay, that would be
unworthy of even a wise man. If,
therefore, dreams are for the most
part disregarded, or despised, either God
is ignorant of that being the fact,
or employs the intimation by dreams
in vain. Neither of these suppositions
can properly apply to God, and
therefore it must be confessed, that
God gives men no inti mations by
means of dream. Again, let me ask
you, if God gives us visions of
a prophetic nature, in order to
apprise us of future events, should
we not rather expect them when we
are awake than when we are asleep
1 For, whether it be some external
and adventitious impulse which affects the
minds of those who are asleep, or whether
those minds are affected voluntarily by
tiieir own agency, or whether there
is any other cause why we seem
to see and hear or do anything
during sleep, the same impulses might
surely operate on them when awake.
And if for our sakes the Gods
effect this during sleep, they might
do it for us while awake. Especially
as Chrysippus, wishing to refute the
Acade micians, makes this remark — That
those inspirations, visions, and presentiments
which occur to us awake, are much
more distinct and certain than those
which present themselves to dreamers. It
would, therefore, have been more worthy
of the divine beneficence while exerting
its care for us, rather to favour
us with clear visions when we are
awake, than with the perplexed phantasms
of dreams; and since that is not
done, we must believe that these
phantasms are not divine at all.
Moreover, what is the use of such
round-about and circuitous proceedings, as
for it to be necessary to employ
interpreters of dreams, rather than to proceed
by a straight forward course 1 If
God were indeed anxious for oxir
interests, he would say, " Do this —
do not that;" and he would give
such intimations to a waking rather
than to a sleeping man; but as
it is, who would venture to assert
that all dreams are true ? Ennius
says, that some dreams are prophetical;
he adds also, that it does not
follow that all are so. Now whence
arises this distinction between true dreams
and false ones 1 and if true
dreams come from God, from whence
come the false ones ? For if
these last do like wise come from
God, what can be more inconsistent
than God ? And what can be more
ignorant conduct than to excite the
minds of mortals by false and
deceitful visions ? But f only true
dreams come from God, and the false
and groundless ones are merely human
delusions, what authority have you for
making such a distinction as is
implied in saying, God did this, and
nature that 1 Why not rather say
either that all dreams come from God
(which you deny), or all from nature?
which necessarily follows, since you deny
that they proceed from God. By
nature I mean that essential activity
of the mind owing to which it
never stands still, and is never free
from some agitation or motion or
other. When in consequence of the
weakness of the body it loses the
use of both the limbs and the
senses, it is still affected by
various and uncertain visions aris ing
(as Aristotle observes) from the relics
of the several affairs which employed
our thoughts and labours during our
waking hours; owing to the disturbances
of which, marvellous varieties of dreams
and visions at times arise. If some
of these are false, and others true,
I shall be glad to be informed
by what definite art we are to distinguish
the true from the false. If there
be no such art, why do we
consult the inter preters 1 If there
be any such art, then I wish to
know what it is. But they will
hesitate. For it is a matter of
ques tion, which is more probable;
that the supreme and im mortal Gods,
who excel in every kind of superiority,
employ themselves in visiting all night
long not merely the beds, but the
very pallets of men, and as soon
as they find any person fairly
snoring, entertain his imagination with per
plexed dreams and obscure visions, which
sends him in great alarm as soon
as daylight dawns to consult the seer
and interpreter: or whether these dreams
are the result of natural causes, and
the everactive, everworking mind having
seen things when awake, seems to see
them again when asleep. Which is the
more philosophical course, to interpret
these phenomena according to the superstitions
of old women, or by natural
explanations 1 So that even if
a true interpretation of dreams could
exist, it is certainly not in the
possession of those who profess it,
for these people are the lowest and
most ignorant of the people. And it
is not without reason that your
friends the Stoics affirm, that no
one can ever be a diviner but a
wise man. Chrysippus, indeed, defines
divination in these words : " It is,"
says he, " a power of
apprehending, discerning, and ex plaining
those signs which are given by the
Gods to men as portents;" and he
adds, that the proper office of a
sooth sayer is to know beforehand the
disposition of the Gods hi regard to
men, and to declare what intimations
they give, and by what means these
prodigies are to be propitiated or
averted. The interpretation of dreams he
also defines in this manner. "
It is," says he, " a power
of beholding and revealing those things
which the Gods signify to men in
dreams." Well, then, does this require
but a moderate degree of wisdom, or
rather consummate sagacity, and perfect
erudition ?and a man so endowed we
have never known. Consider, therefore, whether
even if I were to concede to
you that there is such a thing
as divination which I never will concedeit
would still not follow that a diviner
could be found to exercise it truly.
But what strange ideas must the Gods
have, if the intimations which they
give us in dreams are such as
we cannot understand of ourselves, and
such, too, as we cannot find
interpreters of: acting almost wisely
as the Carthaginians and Spaniards would
do if they were to harangue in
their native languages in our Roman
senate without an interpreter. But
what is the object of these enigmas
and obscurities of dreamers 1 For the
Gods ought to wish us to under
stand those things which they reveal
to us for our own sake and benefit.
What! is no poet, no natural philoso
pher obscure ? Euphorion certainly is
obscure enough, but Homer is not;
which, then, is the best ? Heraclitus
is very puzzling, Democritus is very
lucid; are they to be compared ?
You, for my own sake, give me
advice that I do not understand !
What is it, then, that you are
advising me to do ? Suppose a
medical man were to prescribe to a
sick man an earth-born, grass-walking, housecarrying,
unsanguineous animal, in stead of simply
saying, a snail; so Amphion in
Pacuvius speaks of — A four-footed
and slow going beast, Rugged, debased, and
harsh ; his head is short, His
neck is serpentine, his aspect stern
; He has no blood, but is an
animal Inanimate, not voiceless. When these
obscure verses had been duly recited,
the Greeks cried out, We do not
understand you unless you tell us
plainly what animal you mean ? I
mean, said Pacuvius, I mean in one
word, a tortoise. Could you not,
then, said the questioner, have told
us so at first? We read in that
volume which Chrysippus has written
concerning dreams, that some one having
dreamed in the night that he saw
an egg hanging on his bed-post, went
to consult the interpreter about it.
The interpreter informed him that the
dream signified that a sum of money
was con cealed under his bed. He
dug, and found a little gold sur
rounded by a heap of silver. Upon
this, he sent the inter preter as
much of the silver as he thought
a fair reward. Then said the
interpreter, " What! none of the
yolk 1 " For that part of
the egg appeared to have intimated
gold, while the rest meant silver.
But did no one else ever dream
of eggs ; if others have, too,
then why is this man the only
one who ever found a treasure in
consequence 1 How many poor people
are there worthy of the help of
the Gods, to whom they vouchsafe no
such fortunate intimations! And, again, why
did this indi vidual receive such an
obscure sign of a treasure o,s could
be afforded by the resemblance of an
egg, instead of being distinctly commanded
at once to look for a treasure,
in the same way as Simonides was
expressly forbidden to put to sea?
Therefore, obscure dreams are not at
all consistent with the majesty of
the Gods. But let us now treat
of those dreams which you term clear
and definite, such as that of the
Arcadian whoso friend was killed by
the inn-keeper at Megara, or that of
Simonides, who was warned not to set
sail by an apparition of a man
whose interment he had kindly
superintended. The history of Alexander
presents us with another instance of
this kind, which I wonder you did not
cite, who, after his friend Ptolemy
had been wounded in battle by a
poisoned arrow, and when he appeared
to be dying of the wound, and
was in great agony, fell asleep while
sitting by his bed, and in his
slumber is said to have seen a
vision of the serpent which his
mother Olympias cherished, bringing a root
in his mouth, and telling him that
it grew in a spot very near at
hand, and that it possessed such
medicinal virtue, that it would easily
cure Ptolemy if applied to his wound.
On awaking, Alexander related his dream,
and messengers were sent to look for
that plant, which, when it was found,
not only cured Ptolemy, but likewise
several other soldiers, who during the
engagement had been wounded by similar
arrows. You have related a number
of dreams of this nature bor rowed
from history. For instance, that of
the mother of Phalaris — that of King Cyrus
— that of the mother of Dionysius — that
of Hamilcar the Carthaginian — that of Hannibal
— that of Publius Decius — that notorious
one of the president — that of Caius
Gracchus— and the recent one of Ceecilia,
the daughter of Metellus Balearicus. But
the main part of these dreams
happened to strangers, and on that
account we know little of their
particular circumstances : —some of them
may be mere fictions; for who are
they vouched by? As to those
dreams that have occurred in our
personal experience, what can we say
about them,about your dream respecting myself
and my horse being submerged close to
the bank; or mine, that Marius with
the laurelled fasces ordered me to be
conducted into his monument? All these
dreams, my brother, are of the same
character, and, by the immortal Gods,
let us not make so poor a use
of our eason, as to subject it
to our superstition and delusions. For
what do you suppose the Marius was
that appeared to me ? His ghost
or image, I suppose, as Demo- critus
would call it. Whence, then, did his
image come from 1 For images,
according to him, flow from solid bodies
and palpable forms. What body then of
Marius was in exist ence ? It
came, he would say, from that body
which had existed ; for all things
are full of images. It was, then,
the image of Marius that haunted me
on the Atinian territory, for no
forms can be imagined except by the
impulsion of images. What are we
to think then 1 Are those images
so obedient to our word that they
come before us at our bidding as
soon as we wish them ; and even
images of things which have no
reality whatsoever? For what form is
there so preposterous and absurd that
the mind cannot form to itself a
picture of it ? so much so
indeed that we can bring before our
minds even things which we have never
seen; as, for instance, the situations
of towns and the figures of
men. When, then, I dream of the
walls of Babylon, or the counte nance
of Homer, is it because some physical
image of them strikes my mind1? All
things, then, which we desie to be
so, can be known to us, for
there is nothing of which we cannot
think. Therefore, no images steal in
upon the mind of the sleeper from
without; nor indeed are such external
images flowing about at all; and I
never knew any one who talked
nonsense with greater authority. The
energy and nature of human minds is
so vigorous that they go on exerting
themselves while awake by no adven
titious impulse, but by a motion of
their own, with a most incredible
celerity. When these minds are duly
supported by the physical organs and
senses of the body, they see and
conceive and discern all things with
precision and certainty. But when this
support is withdrawn, and the mind is
deserted by the languor of the body,
then it is put in motion by its
own force. Therefore, forms and actions
belong to it; and many things appear
to be heard by, and said to it.
Then, when the mind is in a
weak and relaxed state, many things
present themselves to it commingled and
varied in every kind of manner ;
and most especially do the reminiscences
of- those things flit before the mind
and move about, which excited its interest
or employed its active energies when
awake. As, for instance, Marius at
that time was often pre sent to
my mind while I recollected with what
magnanimity and constancy he had borne
his sad misfortunes ; and this, I
imagine, is the reason why I dreamed
of him. You also were thinking of
me with great anxiety, when suddenly
I appeared to you to have just
escaped out of the river. For there
were in both of our minds the
traces of our waking thoughts. In
both instances, however, there were certain
additional circumstances; as in mine, the
visit to the temple of Marius; and
in yours, the reappearance of the
horse on which I was riding, and
who sunk at the same time with
myself. Do you think then, you will
say, that any old woman would be
so doting as to believe dreams if
they did not sometimes and at random
turn out true ? A dragon appeared to
address Alexander. Doubtless this might be
true, or it might be false; but
whichever the case may have been,
there is surely nothing very wonderful
about it; for he did not hear
this serpent speakinglie onlydreamed that
he heard him; and to make the
story more remarkable, the serpent appeared
with a branch in its mouth, and
yet spoke: still nothing is difficult
or impossible in a dream. I
would ask, however, how it was that
Alexander had this one dream so
remarkable and so certain, though he
had no such dream on any other
occasion, nor have other people seen
many such. For myself, excepting that
about Marius, I do not recollect
having experienced one worth speaking of.
I must, therefore, have wasted to no
purpose as many nights, as I have
slept during my long life. Now,
indeed, on account of the intermission
of my forensic labours, I have
diminished my evening studies, and added
some noonday slumbers, in which I
never indulged before. But yet, though
I sleep so much more than formerly, I
am never visited with a prophetic
dream, which I should con sider a
singular favour now, though engaged in
such weighty affairs. Nor do I seem
ever to experience any more important
dream than when I see the magistrates
in the forum, and the senate in
the senatehouse. In truth, (and this
is the second branch of your
division,) what connexion and conjunction
of nature (which, as I have said,
the Greeks term avp.ira.6euL,) is there of
such a character, that a treasure is
to be understood by an egg?
Physicians, indeed, know of certain facts
by which they perceive the approaches
and increase of diseases; there are
also some indications of a return to
health; so that the very fact whether
we have plenty to eat or whether
we are dying of hunger, is said
to be indicated by some kinds of
dreamn. But by what rational connexion
are treasures, and honours, and victories,
and things of that kind, joined to
dreams'? They tell us, that a
certain individual dreaming of sexual
coition, ejected calculi: I grant that
sympathy may have had something to do
in a case like this,because, in
sleeping, his imagination might have been
so affected with sensual images, that
such an emission took place by the
force of nature, rather than by
supernatural phantasms. But what sympathy
could have presented to Simonides the
image of the person, who in a
dream warned him not to put to sea
1 Or what sympathy could have
occasioned the vision of Alcibiades, who,
a little before his death, is said
to have dreamed that ie was
arrayed in the robes of Timandra his
mistress? What relation could this have
with the event which afterwards happened
to him; when, being slain and cast
naked into the street and abandoned
by all the world, his mistress took
off her mantle and covered his dead
body with it? Was this then fixed
as a piece of futurity, and had
it natural causes, or was it mere
accident that the dream was seen, and
came true ? Do not the conjectures
of the interpreters of dreams rather
indicate the subtlety of their own
talents, than any natural sympathy and
correspondence in the nature of things?
A runner, who intended to run
in the Olympic games, dreamed during the
night that he was being driven in
a chariot drawn by four horses. In
the morning he applied to an
interpreter. He replied to him, You
will win : that is what is
intimated by the strength and swiftness
of the horses. He then applied to
Antiphon, who said to him, By your
dream it appears that you must lose
the race ; for do you not see
that four reached the goal before you
? Here is another story respecting
an athlete; and the books of
Chrysippus and Antipater are full of
such stories. How ever, I will return
to the runner. He then went to
a sooth sayer and informed him that
he had just dreamed that he was
changed into an eagle. You have won
your race (said the seer), for this
eagle is the swiftest of all birds.
He also went to Antiphon, who said
to him, You will certainly be
conquered; for the eagle chases and
drives other birds which fly before
it, and consequently is always behind
the rest. A certain matron, who
was very anxious to have children,
and who doubted whether she was
pregnant or not, dreamed one night
that her womb was sealed up; she,
therefore, asked a soothsayer whether her
dream signified her pregnancy ? He
said, No ; for the sealing implied,
that there could be no con ception.
But another whom she consulted said,
that her dream plainly proved her
pregnancy; for vessels that have nothing
in them are never sealed at all.
How delusive, then, is this conjectural
art of those interpreters ! Or do
these stories that I have recited,
and a host of similar ones which
the Stoics have collected, prove anything
else but the subtlety of men, who,
from certain imaginary analogies of things,
arrive at all sorts of opposite
conclusions? Physicians derive certain
indications from the veins and breath
of a sick man; and have many
other symptoms by which they judge of
the future. So, when pilots see the
cuttlefish leaping, and the dolphins
betaking themselves to the harbours, they
recognise these indications as sure signs
of an approaching storm. Such signs
may be easily explained by reference
to the laws of nature; but those
which I was mentioning just now
cannot possibly be accounted for in
the same mariner. But the defenders of
divination reply, (and this is the
last objection I shall answer,) that
a long continuance of observations has
created an art. Can, then, dreams be
expe rimented on? And if so, how1?
for the varieties of them are
innumerable. Nothing can be imagined so
preposterous, so incredible, or so
monstrous, as to be beyond our power
of dreaming. And by what method can
this infinite variety bo either fixed
in memory or analysed by reason?
Astrologers have observed the motion
of the planets, for a certain order and
regularity in the course of these
stars has been discovered which was
no* suspected. But tell me, what
order or regularity can be discerned
in dreams 1 How can true dreams
be distinguished from false ones ;
since the same dreams are followed by
different results to different people, and,
indeed, are not always attended by
the same events in the case of
the same persons? For this reason
I am extremely surprised that, though people
have wit enough to give no credit
to a notorious liar, even when he
speaks the trilth, they still, if one
single dream has turned out true, do
not so much distrust one single case
because of the numbers of instances
in which they have been found false,
as think multitudes of dreams estab
lished because of the ascertained truth
of this one. If, then, dreams
do not come from God, and if
there are , no objects in nature
with which they have a necessary sym
pathy and connexion, and if it is
impossible by experiments and observations
to arrive at a sure interpretation of
them, the consequence is, that dreams
are not entitled to any credit or
respect whatever. And this I say
with the greater confidence, since those
very persons who experience these dreams
cannot by any means understand them,
and those persons who pretend to
interpret them, do so by conjecture,
not by demonstration. And in the
infinite series of ages, chance has
produced many more extraordinary results in
every kind of thing than it has
in dreams; nor can anything be more
uncertain than that
con jectural interpretation of diviners, which admits not only of several, but often of absolutely contrary senses. Let us reject, therefore, this divination of dreams, as well as all other kinds. For,to
speak truly, that superstition has extended
itself through all nation, and has
oppressed the intellectual energies of
almost all men, and has betrayed them
into endless imbecilities: as I argued
in my treatise on the Nature of
the Gods, and as I have especially
laboured to prove in this dialogue on
Divination. For I thought that I
should be doing an immense benefit
both to myself and to my countrymen
if I could entirely eradicate all
those superstitious errors. Nor is
there any fear that true religion can
be endangered by the demolition of
this superstition ; for it is the
part of a wise man to uphold the
religious institutions of our ancestors, by
the maintenance of their rites and
ceremonies. And the beauty of the
world and the order of all celestial things compels us to confess that there isan excellent and eternal nature which deserves to be worshipped and admired by all mankind. Wherefore, as this religion whichis united with the knowledge of nature is to be propagated, so also are all the roots of superstition to be destroyed. For it presses upon, and pursues, and persecutes you wherever you turn yourself,whether you
consult a diviner, or have heard an
omen, or have im molated a victim,
or beheld a flight of birds; whether
you have seen a Chaldean or a
soothsayer; if it lightens or thunders,
or if anything is struck by
lightning; if any kind of
prodigy occurs; some of which events must be frequently coming to pass; so that you can never rest with a tranquil mind. Sleep seems to be the universal refuge from.all
labours and anxieties. And yet even
from this many cares and perturba
tions spring forth which, indeed, would
of themselves have no influence, and
would rather be despised, if certain
philosophers had not taken dreams under
their special patronage; and those, too,
not philosophersof the lowest order,
but men of vast learning, and remai'kable penetration into the consequences and inconsistencies of things, men who are looked upon as absolute and perfect masters of all science. Nayif Carneades
had not resisted their extravagances, I
hardly know whether they would not by
this time have been reckoned the only
philosophers worthy of the name. And it is with those men that
nearly all our controversy and dispute
re specting divination is mainly waged;
not
because we think meanly of their wisdom, but because they appear to defend their theories with the greatest acuteness and cautiousness. But,as it is the peculiar
property of the Academy to inter pose
no personal judgment of its own, but
to admit those opinions which appear
most probable,
to compare arguments, and to set forth all that may be reasonably stated in favour of each proposition; and so, without
putting forth any autthority of its own, to leave the judgment of the hearers free and unprejudiced; we will retain this custom, which has been handed down from Socrates; and this method, dear brother Quintus, if you please, we will adopt as often as possible in all our dialogues together.Indeed, said he, nothing can be more agreeable to
me. Having held these conversations we
went away. Alessandro Chiappelli. Keyword: academici, Alcibiade,
Gli Scipione, la dialettica romana, storia dela filosofia romana, Cicerone,
ambassiata, Carneade, Kant, neo-Kantianismo, external world, internal world,
the reality of the external world, iconography, detailed ecphrasis of “La
scuola di Atene” – dialettica ateniense, dialettica romana. Grice: To Athens,
via Rome. Refs.: Luigi Speranza, “Grice
e Chiappelli” – The Swimming-Pool Library


No comments:
Post a Comment