Plutarch · Roman Questions Αἴτια Ῥωμαϊκά

Plutarch, Roman Questions 104–113: Questions 104-113: Liber Pater, Fortuna Primigenia, kin marriages and the taboos of the Flamen Dialis

Question 104 asks why Bacchus was called Liber Pater, Question 106 why Fortuna Primigenia is worshipped and Question 107 why actors are called histriones. Questions 105 and 108 treat marriage: why widows marry on holidays, and why near kin do not marry. Questions 109 to 113 explain the taboos of the Flamen Dialis, who may not touch meal, leaven, raw flesh, a dog or a goat, may not touch ivy or pass beneath trailing vines, and may not hold civil authority.

Sections 104–113 · 1861 words · click a number to copy its link

διὰ τί τὸν Διόνυσον λίβερουμ πάτρεμ καλοῦσι; πότερον ὡς ἐλευθερίας πατέρα τοῖς πιοῦσι γιγνόμενον· γίγνονται γὰρ οἱ πολλοὶ θρασεῖς καὶ παρρησίας ὑποπιμπλῶνται περὶ τὰς μέθας· ἢ ὅτι τὴν λοιβὴν παρέσχεν; ἤ, ὡς Ἀλέξανδρός φησιν, ἀπὸ τοῦ παρʼ Ἐλευθερὰς τῆς Βοιωτίας Ἐλευθερέως Διονύσου προσαγορευομένου;

Question 104. Why did they call Bacchus Liber Pater?

Solution. Was the reason because they make him, as it were, the father of liberty to tipplers? For most men become very audacious and are filled with too much licentious prattle, by reason of too much drink. Or is this it, that he hath supplied them with a libamen, a drink-offering? Or is it, as Alexander hath said, that Bacchus is called Eleutherius from his having his abode about Eleutherae, a city of Boeotia?

διὰ τίνα αἰτίαν ἐν ταῖς δημοσίαις ἑορταῖς ἔθος οὐκ ἔστι γαμεῖσθαι παρθένους, αἱ δὲ χῆραι γαμοῦνται; πότερον, ὡς ὁ Βάρρων εἴρηκεν, ὅτι λυπούμεναι μὲν αἱ παρθένοι γαμοῦνται, χαίρουσι δʼ αἱ γυναῖκες, ἑορτῇ δέον μηδὲν λυπουμένους ποιεῖν μηδὲ πρὸς ἀνάγκην· ἢ μᾶλλον ὅτι ταῖς μὲν παρθένοις καλὸν μὴ ὀλίγων, ταῖς δὲ χήραις αἰσχρὸν πολλῶν ὄντων γαμεῖσθαι; ζηλωτὸς γὰρ ὁ πρῶτος γάμος ὁ δὲ δεύτερος ἀπευκταῖος· αἰσχύνονται γάρ, ἂν ζώντων τῶν προτέρων ἑτέρους λαμβάνωσιν, ὀδύρονται δέ, ἂν ἀποθανόντων. ὅθεν ἡσυχίᾳ χαίρουσι μᾶλλον ἢ θορύβοις καὶ προπομπαῖς. αἱ δʼ ἑορταὶ περισπῶσι τοὺς πολλούς, ὥστε τοῖς τοιούτοις μὴ σχολάζειν. ἢ ὅτι καὶ τὰς Σαβίνων θυγατέρας ἁρπάσαντες ἐν ἑορτῇ παρθένους οὔσας εἰς πόλεμον κατέστησαν, ἐξοιωνίσαντο τὸ γαμεῖν παρθένους ἐν ἱεραῖς ἡμέραις;

Question 105. For what cause was it, that on high holidays it was not a custom for virgins to marry, but widows did marry then?

Solution. Is the reason, as Varro saith, that virgins, forsooth, are married weeping, but women with joyful glee, and people are to do nothing of a holiday with a heavy heart nor by compulsion? Or rather is it because it is decent for virgins to marry with more than a few present, but for widows to marry with a great many present is indecent? For the first marriage is zealously affected, the second to be deprecated; yea, they are ashamed to marry a second husband while their first husband lives, and they grieve at doing so even when he is dead. Hence they are pleased more with silence than with tumults and pompous doings; and the feasts do attract the generality of people to them, so that they cannot be at leisure on holidays for such wedding solemnities. Or was it that they that robbed the Sabines of their daughters that were virgins on the feast-day raised thereby a war, and looked therefore upon it as unlucky to marry virgins on holidays?

διὰ τί Ῥωμαῖοι Τύχην σέβονται Πριμιγένειαν, ἣν ἄν τις εἴποι πρωτογένειαν; ἆρʼ ὅτι Σερουίῳ κατὰ τύχην, ὥς φασιν, ἐκ θεραπαινίδος γενομένῳ βασιλεῦσαι τῆς Ῥώμης ἐπιφανῶς ὑπῆρξεν (οὕτω γὰρ οἱ πολλοὶ Ῥωμαίων ὑπειλήφασιν)· ἢ μᾶλλον, ὅτι τῆς Ῥώμης ἡ τύχη παρέσχε τὴν ἀρχὴν καὶ τὴν γένεσιν; ἢ φυσικώτερον ἔχει λόγον τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ φιλοσοφώτερον, ὡς τὴν τύχην πάντων οὖσαν ἀρχὴν καὶ τὴν φύσιν ἐκ τοῦ κατὰ τύχην συνισταμένην, ὅταν τισὶν ὡς ἔτυχεν ἀποκειμένοις τάξις ἐγγένηται;

Question 106. Why do the Romans worship Fortuna Primigenia?

Solution. Was it because Servius, being by Fortune born of a servant-maid, came to rule king in Rome with great splendor? And this is the supposition of most Romans. Or rather is it that Fortune hath bestowed on Rome itself its very original and birth? Or may not this matter require a more natural and philosophical reason, even that Fortune is the original of all things and that Nature itself is produced out of things that come by Fortune, when events that come by chance fall into an order among themselves?

διὰ τί τοὺς περὶ τὸν Διόνυσον τεχνίτας ἰστρίωνας Ῥωμαῖοι καλοῦσιν; ἦ διʼ ἣν αἰτίαν Κλούβιος Ῥοῦφος ἱστόρηκε; φησὶ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς πάνυ παλαιοῖς χρόνοις Γαΐου τε Σουλπικίου καὶ Λικινίου Στόλωνος ὑπατευόντων, λοιμώδη νόσον ἐν Ῥώμῃ γενομένην πάντας ὁμαλῶς διαφθεῖραι τοὺς ἐπὶ σκηνὴν προερχομένους· δεηθεῖσιν οὖν αὐτοῖς ἐκ Τυρρηνίας ἐλθεῖν πολλοὺς καὶ ἀγαθοὺς τεχνίτας, ὧν τὸν πρωτεύοντα δόξῃ καὶ χρόνον πλεῖστον ἐνευημεροῦντα τοῖς θεάτροις Ἴστρον ὀνομάζεσθαι· καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πάντας ἰστρίωνας ἀπʼ ἐκείνου προσαγορεύεσθαι.

Question 107. Why do the Romans call the artists who appear in the worship of Bacchus histriones?

Solution. Is it for the reason which C. Rufus tells us? For he says, that in ancient time, C. Sulpicius and Licinius Stolo, being consuls, a pestilence raging in Rome, all the actors upon the stage were cut off; wherefore, upon the request of the Romans, many and good artists came from Etruria, among whom he that excelled in fame and had been longest experienced on the public stages was called Histrus, and from him they named all the stage-players.

διὰ τί δὲ τὰς ἐγγὺς γένους οὐ γαμοῦσι; πότερον αὔξειν τοῖς γάμοις βουλόμενοι τὰς οἰκειότητας καὶ συγγενεῖς πολλοὺς ἐπικτᾶσθαι, διδόντες ἑτέροις καὶ λαμβάνοντες παρʼ ἑτέρων γυναῖκας· ἢ φοβούμενοι τὰς ἐν τοῖς γάμοις τῶν συγγενῶν διαφορὰς ὡς καὶ τὰ φύσει δίκαια προσαπολλυούσας; ἢ πολλῶν βοηθῶν τὰς γυναῖκας ὁρῶντες διʼ ἀσθένειαν δεομένας, οὐκ ἐβούλοντο τὰς ἐγγὺς γένους συνοικίζειν, ὅπως, ἂν οἱ ἄνδρες ἀδικῶσιν αὐτάς, οἱ συγγενεῖς βοηθῶσιν;

Question 108. Why do not men marry women that are near akin?

Solution. Is this the reason, that they design by marriage to augment their family concerns and to procure many relations, by giving wives to strangers and marrying wives out of other families? Or do they suspect that the contentions that would happen among relations upon marriage would destroy even natural rights? Or is it that, considering that wives by reason of weakness stand in need of many helpers, they would not have near akin marry together, that their own kindred might stand by them when their husbands wrong them?

διὰ τί τῷ ἱερεῖ τοῦ Διός, ὃν Φλάμινα Διᾶλιν καλοῦσιν, οὐκ ἐξῆν ἀλεύρου θιγεῖν, οὐδὲ ζύμης; ἦ τὸ μὲν ἄλευρον ἀτελὴς τροφὴ καὶ ἄπεπτός ἐστιν; οὔτε γὰρ ὃ ἦν μεμένηκεν ὁ πυρὸς οὔθʼ ὃ δεῖ γενέσθαι γέγονεν ὁ ἄρτος, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν σπέρματος δύναμιν ἀπολώλεκεν ἅμα καὶ τὴν σιτίου χρείαν οὐκ ἔσχηκε. διὸ καὶ μυλήφατον ὁ ποιητής ἄλφιτον ἐκ μεταφορᾶς ὠνόμασεν ὥσπερ φονευόμενον ἐν τῷ ἀλέτῳ καὶ φθειρόμενον· ἡ δὲ ζύμη καὶ γέγονεν ἐκ φθορᾶς αὐτὴ καὶ φθείρει τὸ φύραμα μιγνυμένη· γίγνεται γὰρ ἄτονον καὶ ἀδρανὲς καὶ ὅλως ἔοικε σῆψις ἡ ζύμωσις εἶναι· πλεονάσασα γοῦν ἀποξύνει παντάπασι καὶ φθείρει τὸ ἄλευρον.

Question 109. Why is it not lawful for the high priest of Jupiter, which they call Flamen Dialis, to touch meal or leaven?

Solution. Is it because meal is imperfect and crude nourishment? For the wheat neither hath continued what it was, neither is it made into bread as it must be; but it hath lost the faculty of seed, and hath not attained to usefulness for food. Wherefore the poet hath named meal, by a metaphor, mill-murdered (μυλήφατον), as if the corn were spoiled and destroyed by grinding. Leaven, as it is made by corruption, corrupts the mass that it is mingled with, for it is made thereby looser and weaker; and fermentation is a kind of corruption, which, if it be overmuch, makes the bread sour and spoils it.

διὰ τί καὶ σαρκὸς ὠμῆς ἀπείρηται τῷ ἱερεῖ ψαύειν; πότερον ὠμοφαγίας πάνυ πόρρωθεν ἀποτρέπει τὸ ἔθος, ἢ διʼ ἣν τὸ ἄλευρον αἰτίαν ἀφοσιοῦνται καὶ τὸ κρέας; οὔτε γάρ ἐστι ζῷον οὔτε ὄψον ἤδη γέγονεν. ἡ γὰρ ἕψησις καὶ ὄπτησις ἀλλοίωσις οὖσα καὶ μετακόσμησις ἐξίστησι τὴν μορφήν. τὸ δὲ πρόσφατον καὶ ὠμὸν οὐδὲ τὴν ὄψιν ἔχει καθαρὰν καὶ ἀμίαντον, ἀλλʼ εἰδεχθῆ καὶ ἑλκώδη.

Question 110. Why is the same high priest forbid to touch raw flesh?

Solution. Is it because custom makes them averse enough to raw flesh? Or is it that the same reason that makes them averse to meal doth also make them averse to flesh; for it is neither a living creature nor dressed food? Roasting or boiling, being an alteration and change, doth change its form; but fresh and raw flesh offers not a pure and unpolluted object to the eye, but such as is offensive to the eye, and like that of a raw wound.

διὰ τί δὲ κυνὸς καὶ αἰγὸς ἐκέλευον ἀπέχεσθαι τὸν ἱερέα, μήθʼ ἁπτόμενον μήτʼ ὀνομάζοντα; πότερον τῆς μὲν αἰγὸς βδελυττόμενοι τὸ ἀκόλαστον καὶ δυσῶδες, ἢ φοβούμενοι τὸ νοσηματικόν; δοκεῖ γὰρ ἐπιληψίᾳ καταλαμβάνεσθαι μάλιστα τῶν ζῴων καὶ προσαναχρώννυσθαι τοῖς φαγοῦσιν ἢ θιγοῦσιν ὑπὸ τοῦ πάθους ἐχομένης. αἰτίαν δὲ λέγουσι τὴν στενότητα τῶν πνευματικῶν πόρων πολλάκις ἐπιλαμβανομένην, τεκμαιρόμενοι τῇ λεπτότητι τῆς φωνῆς. καὶ γὰρ ἀνθρώπων ὅσοις ἐπιληπτίζουσι συμβαίνει φθέγγεσθαι, μηκασμῷ παραπλησίαν φωνὴν ἀφιᾶσι. τῷ δὲ κυνὶ τοῦ μὲν ἀκολάστου καὶ δυσώδους ἧττον ἴσως μέτεστι· καίτοι φασὶν ἔνιοι μήτε τῆς Ἀθηναίων ἀκροπόλεως ἐπιβαίνειν κύνα μήτε τῆς Δηλίων νήσου διὰ τὴν ἐμφανῆ μῖξιν, ὥσπερ βοῶν καὶ συῶν καὶ ἵππων ἐν θαλάμοις ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἐμφανῶς καὶ ἀνέδην ὀχευόντων. τὴν γὰρ ἀληθινὴν αἰτίαν ἀγνοοῦσιν, ὅτι μάχιμον ὄντα τὸν κύνα τῶν ἀσύλων καὶ ἁγίων ἐξείργουσιν ἱερῶν, ἀσφαλῆ καταφυγὴν τοῖς ἱκέταις διδόντες. εἰκὸς μὲν οὖν ἐστι καὶ τὸν ἱερέα τοῦ Διὸς ὥσπερ ἔμψυχον καὶ ἱερὸν καὶ ἄγαλμα καταφύξιμον ἀνεῖσθαι τοῖς δεομένοις καὶ ἱκετεύουσι, μηδενὸς ἀπείργοντος μηδʼ ἐκφοβοῦντος. διὸ κλινίδιον μὲν ἦν αὐτοῦ κείμενον ἐν τῷ θυρῶνι τῆς οἰκίας· ὁ δὲ προσπεσὼν τοῖς γόνασι τὴν ἡμέραν ἐκείνην ἄδειαν εἶχε πληγῶν καὶ κολάσεως· εἰ δὲ δεσμώτης φθαίη προσελθών, ἐλύετο· τοὺς δὲ δεσμοὺς ἐκτὸς οὐ κατὰ θύρας ἀλλʼ ὑπὲρ τοῦ στέγους ἀπερρίπτουν. οὐδὲν οὖν ὄφελος ἦν οὕτως αὑτὸν ἥμερον παρέχειν καὶ φιλάνθρωπον, εἰ κύων προειστήκει δεδιττόμενος καὶ ἀπερύκων τοὺς προσφυγεῖν δεομένους. οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ καθαρεύειν ᾤοντο παντάπασιν οἱ παλαιοὶ τὸ ζῷον· ὀλυμπίων μὲν γὰρ οὐδενὶ θεῶν καθιέρωται, χθονίᾳ δὲ δεῖπνον Ἑκάτῃ πεμπόμενος εἰς τριόδους ἀποτροπαίων καὶ καθαρσίων ἐπέχει μοῖραν. ἐν δὲ Λακεδαίμονι τῷ φονικωτάτῳ θεῶν Ἐνυαλίῳ σκύλακας ἐντέμνουσι· Βοιωτοῖς δὲ δημοσίᾳ καθαρμός ἐστι κυνὸς διχοτομηθέντος τῶν μερῶν διεξελθεῖν· αὐτοὶ δὲ Ῥωμαῖοι τοῖς Λυκαίοις, ἃ Λουπερκάλια καλοῦσιν, ἐν τῷ καθαρσίῳ μηνὶ κύνα θύουσιν. ὅθεν οὐκ ἀπὸ τρόπου τοῖς τὸν ὑπέρτατον καὶ καθαρώτατον εἰληφόσι θεραπεύειν θεὸν ἀπειρῆσθαι κύνα ποιεῖσθαι συνήθη καὶ σύνοικον.

Question 111. Why do they require the priest to abstain from a dog and a goat, and neither to touch or name them?

Solution. Was it that they abominated the lasciviousness and stink of a goat, or that they suspected it to be a diseased creature? For it seems this animal is more seized with the falling sickness than other creatures, and is contagious to them that eat or touch it while it hath this disease; they say, the cause is the straightness of the windpipe, often intercepting the breath, a sign of which they make the smallness of their voice to be; for it happens to men that are epileptical, that they utter a voice sounding much like the bleat of a goat. Now in a dog there may be less of lasciviousness and of an ill scent; although some say that dogs are not permitted to go into the high streets of Athens—no, not into the island Delos—by reason of their open coition; as if kine, swine, and horses did use coition in bed-chambers, and not openly and lawlessly. They do not know the true reason,—that, because a dog is a quarrelsome creature, they therefore expel dogs out of sanctuaries and sacred temples, giving safe access to suppliants for refuge. Wherefore it is very likely that the priest of Jupiter, being (as it were) an animated and sacred image, granted for refuge to petitioners and suppliants, doth banish or fright away none. For which cause a couch was set for him in the porch of the house, and they that fell on their knees before him had indemnity from stripes or punishment that day; and if one in fetters came and addressed him, he was unloosed, and his fetters were not laid down by the door but thrown from the roof. It would be therefore no advantage that he should carry himself so mild and courteous, if there were a dog at the door, scaring and frighting them that petitioned for sanctuary. Neither did the ancients at all repute this creature clean; for he is offered in sacrifice to none of the celestial Gods, but being sent to Hecate, an infernal Goddess, at the three cross-ways for a supper, takes a share in averting calamities and in expiations. In Lacedaemon they cut puppies in pieces to Mars, that most cruel God. In Boeotia public expiation is made by passing between the parts of a dog divided in twain. But the Romans sacrifice a dog in the cleansing month, on the festival which they call Lupercalia. Hence it was not without cause, to prohibit them whose charge it was to worship the highest and holiest God from making a dog familiar and customed to them.

διὰ τίνα δʼ αἰτίαν οὐδὲ κιττοῦ θιγεῖν ἐφίετο τῷ ἱερεῖ τοῦ Διός, οὐδʼ ὁδὸν διελθεῖν ἀναδενδράδος ἄνωθεν διατεταμένης; ἦ τοῦτο μὲν ὅμοιόν ἐστι τῷ μὴ ἐσθίειν ἐπὶ δίφρου μηδʼ ἐπὶ χοίνικος καθῆσθαι μηδὲ σάρον ὑπερβαίνειν οὐ ταῦτα τῶν Πυθαγορικῶν δεδιότων καὶ φυλαττομένων, ἀλλʼ ἕτερα τούτοις ἀπαγορευόντων; καὶ γὰρ τὸ ὑπʼ ἄμπελον ὑποπορεύεσθαι τὴν ἀναφορὰν ἐπὶ τὸν οἶνον εἶχεν, ὡς οὐ θεμιτὸν τῷ ἱερεῖ μεθύσκεσθαι. τῶν γὰρ μεθυσκομένων ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς ὁ οἶνός ἐστι καὶ πιέζονται καὶ ταπεινοῦνται, δέον ὑπερτέρους εἶναι καὶ κρατεῖν ἀεὶ τῆς ἡδονῆς ταύτης ἀλλὰ μὴ κρατεῖσθαι. τὸν δὲ κιττὸν πότερον ὡς ἄκαρπον καὶ ἄχρηστον ἀνθρώποις, ἀδρανῆ δὲ καὶ διʼ ἀσθένειαν ἑτέρων ὀχούντων δεόμενον, σκιᾷ δὲ καὶ χλωρότητος ὄψει γοητεύοντα τοὺς πολλοὺς, οὐκ ᾤοντο δεῖν ἀσύμβολον ἐν ταῖς οἰκίαις μάτην ἐντρέφεσθαι καὶ περιπλέκεσθαι, βλαβερὸν ὄντα τοῖς προσδεχομένοις φυτοῖς τῆς γῆς ἐχόμενον (διὸ τῶν μὲν ὀλυμπίων ἱερῶν εἴργεται, καὶ οὔτε ἐν Ἥρας Ἀθήνησιν οὔτε Θήβησιν ἐν Ἀφροδίτης ἴδοι τις ἂν κιττόν· Ἀγριωνίοις δὲ καὶ Νυκτελίοις, ὧν τὰ πολλὰ διὰ σκότους δρᾶται, πάρεστιν)· ἢ καὶ τοῦτο συμβολικὴ θιάσων καὶ βακχευμάτων ἀπαγόρευσις ἦν; αἱ γὰρ ἔνοχοι τοῖς βακχικοῖς πάθεσι γυναῖκες εὐθὺς ἐπὶ τὸν κιττὸν φέρονται, καὶ σπαράττουσι δραττόμεναι ταῖς χερσὶ καὶ διεσθίουσαι τοῖς στόμασιν· ὥστε μὴ παντελῶς ἀπιθάνους εἶναι τοὺς λέγοντας, ὅτι καὶ πνεῦμα μανίας ἔχων ἐγερτικὸν καὶ παρακινητικὸν ἐξίστησι καὶ ταράττει, καὶ ὅλως ἄοινον ἐπάγει μέθην καὶ χάριν τοῖς ἐπισφαλῶς πρὸς ἐνθουσιασμὸν ἔχουσι.

Question 112. What is the reason that the priest of Jupiter is forbid to touch an ivy, or to pass over that way that is overspread with vine branches?

Solution. Is it not of the like nature with those precepts of Pythagoras, not to eat in a chair, not to sit upon a measure called a choenix, and not to step over a broom? For the Pythagoreans do not dread and refrain from these things, but they prohibit other things by these. Now to go under a vine hath reference to wine, because it is not lawful for a priest to be drunk. For the wine is above the heads of those that are drunk, and they are depraved and debased thereby; whereas it is requisite that they should be above pleasure and conquer it, but not be subdued by it. As for the ivy,—it being unfruitful and useless to men, as also infirm, and by reason of its infirmity standing in need of other trees to climb upon, though by its shadow and sight of its greenness it doth bewitch the vulgar,—what if they judge it not convenient to nourish it about a house because it bringeth no profit, or to suffer it to clasp about any thing, seeing it is so hurtful to plants that bear it up, while it sticketh fast in the ground? Hence ivy is forbidden at the Olympic festivals, and neither at Athens in Juno’s sacrifices, nor at Thebes in those belonging to Venus, can any wild ivy be seen; though in the Agrionia and Nyctelia (which are services to Bacchus for the most part performed in the dark) it is to be found. Or was this a symbol of the prohibition of revels and sports of Bacchus? For women that were addicted to Bacchanal sports presently ran to the ivy and plucked it off, tearing it in pieces with their hands and gnawing it with their mouths, so that they are not altogether to be disbelieved that say it hath a spirit in it that stirreth and moveth to madness, transporting and bereaving of the senses, and that alone by itself it introduceth drunkenness without wine to those that have an easy inclination to enthusiasm.

διὰ τί τοῖς ἱερεῦσι τούτοις ἀρχὴν οὐκ ἐφεῖτο λαβεῖν οὐδὲ μετελθεῖν, ἀλλὰ ῥαβδούχῳ τε χρῶνται καὶ δίφρον ἡγεμονικὸν ἐπὶ τιμῇ καὶ παραμυθίᾳ τοῦ μὴ ἄρχειν ἔχουσι; πότερον, ὡς ἐνιαχοῦ τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἀντίρροπον ἦν τὸ τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἀξίωμα πρὸς τὸ τῆς βασιλείας, καὶ μὴ τυχόντας ἱερεῖς ἀπεδείκνυσαν ἢ μᾶλλον ὅτι, τῶν μὲν ἱερέων ὡρισμένας πράξεις ἐχόντων τῶν δʼ ἀρχόντων ἀτάκτους καὶ ἀορίστους, οὐκ ἦν δυνατὸν εἰς ἓν ἅμα τῶν καιρῶν συμπεσόντων ἑκατέρῳ παρεῖναι τὸν αὐτόν, ἀλλʼ ἔδει θάτερα πολλάκις ἀμφοτέρων ἐπειγόντων ἀπολείποντα νῦν μὲν ἀσεβεῖν τοὺς θεούς, νῦν δὲ βλάπτειν τοὺς πολίτας; ἢ ταῖς ἀνθρωπίναις ἐνορῶντες ἀρχαῖς οὐκ ἐλάττονα τῆς ἐξουσίας τὴν ἀνάγκην προσοῦσαν, καὶ τὸν ἄρχοντα δήμου, καθάπερ Ἱπποκράτης ἔφη τὸν ἰατρόν, δεινὰ μὲν ὁρῶντα δεινῶν δʼ ἁπτόμενον, ἐπʼ ἀλλοτρίοις δὲ κακοῖς ἰδίας λύπας καρπούμενον, οὐχ ὅσιον ἡγοῦντο θύειν θεοῖς καὶ ἱερῶν κατάρχεσθαι γενόμενον ἐν καταδίκαις καὶ θανατώσεσι πολιτῶν, πολλάκις δὲ καὶ συγγενῶν καὶ οἰκείων, οἷα καὶ Βρούτῳ συνέτυχε;

Question 113. Why are not these priests allowed to take upon them or attempt civil authority, while they have a lictor and a curule chair for honor’s sake, and in some sort of consolation for their being excluded from magistracies?

Solution. Was it because in some places of Greece the dignity of priesthood was equal with kingship, and therefore they designated not ordinary persons to be priests? Or was it rather,—since they have appointed office-employments, whereas the charge of kings is unmethodical and indefinite,—that it would not be possible, if both fell out at the same time, that he should be able to attend both, but he must of necessity neglect one (both pressing together upon him), sometimes neglecting the worship of God, and sometimes injuring the subjects? Or else, seeing that there is no less necessity than power attending the administration of civil government, and that the ruler of the people (as Hippocrates saith of the physician) doth see weighty matters and hath to do with weighty matters, and from other men’s calamities procures troubles peculiar to himself, did they think ’him not sacred enough to sacrifice to the Gods and manage the sacrifices who had been present at the condemnation and execution of citizens, and often of some of his own kindred and family, as happened to Brutus?

People and places in this passage

English translation by Isaac Chauncy (1874). Original text: William W. Goodwin (ed.), Plutarch's Morals, translated from the Greek by several hands, vol. 2, Boston: Little, Brown and Company; Cambridge: Press of John Wilson and Son, 1874 (Greek text: Gregorius N. Bernardakis, Plutarchi Chaeronensis Moralia, vol. 2, Leipzig: Teubner, 1889, as digitised by Perseus).

Greek text and translation from the Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University, CC BY-SA 4.0 (Perseus Digital Library); translation public domain. Introductions, summaries and notes © GreekMythology.com.