Chiappelli Chiappelli

 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