διὰ τί τῶν λεγομένων Φιτιαλέων, Ἑλληνιστὶ δʼ οἷον εἰρηνοποιῶν σπονδοφόρων, ὁ καλούμενος πάτερ πατρᾶτος ἐνομίζετο μέγιστος (ἔστι δʼ οὗτος, ᾧ πατὴρ ζῇ καὶ παῖδες εἰσίν ἔχει δὲ καὶ νῦν προνομίαν τινὰ καὶ πίστιν· οἱ γὰρ στρατηγοὶ τὰ διʼ εὐμορφίαν καὶ ὥραν ἐπιμελοῦς δεόμενα καὶ σώφρονος φυλακῆς σώματα τούτοις παρακατατίθενται); πότερον ὅτι τὸ αἰδεῖσθαι τοὺς παῖδας αὐτοῖς καὶ τὸ φοβεῖσθαι τοὺς πατέρας πρόσεστιν· ἢ τοὔνομα τὴν αἰτίαν ὑπαγορεύει; βούλεται γὰρ εἶναι τὸ πατρᾶτον οἱονεὶ συμπεπερασμένον καὶ πεπερατωμένον, ὡς τελειοτέρου τῶν ἄλλων ὄντος ᾧ συμβέβηκε πατέρα κεκτημένῳ πατρὶ γενέσθαι. ἢ δεῖ τὸν ὅρκων καὶ εἰρήνης προϊστάμενον ἅμα πρόσω καὶ ὀπίσω καθʼ Ὅμηρον ὁρᾶν; εἴη δʼ ἂν μάλιστα τοιοῦτος, ᾧ παῖς ἔστιν ὑπὲρ οὗ βουλεύεται, καὶ πατὴρ μεθʼ οὗ βουλεύεται.
Question 62. Why among them that were called Feciales (in Greek, peace-makers) was he that was named Pater Patratus accounted the chiefest? But this must be one who hath his father living, and children of his own; and he hath even at this time a certain privilege and trust, for the Praetors commit to those men’s trust the persons of those who, by reason of comeliness and beauty, stand in need of an exact and chaste guardianship.
Solution. Is this the reason, that they must be such whose children reverence them, and who reverence their parents? Or doth the name itself suggest a reason? For patratum will have a thing to be complete and finished; for he whose lot it is to be a father whilst his father liveth is (as it were) perfecter than others. Or is it that he ought to be overseer of oaths and peace, and (according to Homer) to see before and behind? He is such a one especially, who hath a son for whom he consults, and a father with whom he consults.
διὰ τί τῷ καλουμένῳ ῥῆγι σακρώρουμ (οὗτος δʼ ἐστὶ βασιλεὺς ἱερῶν) ἀπείρηται καὶ ἄρχειν καὶ δημηγορεῖν; ἦ τὸ παλαιὸν οἱ βασιλεῖς τὰ πλεῖστα καὶ μέγιστα τῶν ἱερῶν ἔδρων καὶ τὰς θυσίας ἔθυον αὐτοὶ μετὰ τῶν ἱερέων; ἐπεὶ δʼ οὐκ ἐμετρίαζον ἀλλʼ ἦσαν ὑπερήφανοι καὶ βαρεῖς, τῶν μὲν Ἑλλήνων οἱ πλεῖστοι τὴν ἐξουσίαν αὐτῶν περιελόμενοι μόνον τὸ θύειν τοῖς θεοῖς ἀπέλιπον, Ῥωμαῖοι δὲ παντάπασι τοὺς βασιλεῖς ἐκβαλόντες ἄλλον ἐπὶ τὰς θυσίας ἔταξαν, οὔτε ἄρχειν ἐάσαντες οὔτε δημαγωγεῖν, ὅπως μόνον ἐν τοῖς ἱεροῖς βασιλεύεσθαι δοκῶσι καὶ βασιλείαν διὰ τοὺς θεοὺς ὑπομένειν. ἔστι γοῦν τις ἐν ἀγορᾷ θυσία πρὸς τῷ λεγομένῳ Κομιτίῳ πάτριος, ἣν θύσας ὁ βασιλεὺς κατὰ τάχος ἄπεισι φεύγων ἐξ ἀγορᾶς
Question 63. Why is he that is called Rex Sacrorum (who is king of priests) forbid either to take upon him a civil office or to make an oration to the people?
Solution. Was it that of old the kings did perform the most and greatest sacred rites and offered sacrifices together with the priests; but when they kept not within the bounds of moderation and became proud and insolent, most of the Grecians, depriving them of their authority, left to them only this part of their office, to sacrifice to the Gods; but the Romans, casting out kings altogether, gave the charge of the sacrifice to another, enjoining him neither to meddle with public affairs nor to hold office, so that they might seem to be subject to royalty only in their sacrifices, and to endure the name of king only with respect to the Gods? Hence there is a certain sacrifice kept by tradition in the market-place near the Comitia, which as soon as the king (i.e. the chief priest) hath offered, he immediately withdraws himself by flight out of the market-place.
διὰ τί τὴν τράπεζαν οὐκ εἴων ἀναιρεῖσθαι κενήν, ἀλλὰ πάντως τινὸς ἐπόντος; πότερον αἰνιττόμενοι τὸ δεῖν ἀεί τι τοῦ παρόντος εἰς τὸ μέλλον ὑπολιπεῖν καὶ τῆς αὔριον ἐν τῇ σήμερον μνημονεύειν, ἢ νομίζοντες ἀστεῖον εἶναι τὸ συστέλλειν καὶ, ἀνέχειν τὴν ὄρεξιν ἔτι παρούσης τῆς ἀπολαύσεως; ἧττον γὰρ ἐπιθυμοῦσι τῶν ἀπόντων ἐθισθέντες ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν παρόντων. ἢ καὶ πρὸς οἰκέτας φιλάνθρωπον τὸ ἔθος; οὐ γὰρ οὕτω λαμβάνοντες ὡς μεταλαμβάνοντες ἀγαπῶσι, κοινωνεῖν τρόπον τινὰ τραπέζης ἡγούμενοι τοῖς δεσπόταις. ἢ τῶν ἱερῶν οὐδέποτε δεῖν κενὸν οὐθὲν περιορᾶν, ἱερὸν δʼ ἡ τράπεζα;
Question 64. Why do they not suffer the table to be quite voided when it’s taken away, but will have something always to remain upon it?
Solution. What if it be that they would intimate that something of our present enjoyments should be left for the future, and that to-day we should be mindful of tomorrow? Or that they reckon it a piece of manners to repress and restrain the appetite in our present fruitions? For they less desire absent things, who are accustomed to abstain from those that are present. Or was it a custom of courtesy towards household servants? For they do not love so much to take as to partake, deeming that they hold a kind of communion with their masters at the table. Or is it that no sacred thing ought to be suffered to be empty? And the table is a sacred thing.
διὰ τί τῇ νύμφῃ τὸ πρῶτον οὐκ ἐντυγχάνει μετὰ φωτὸς ὁ ἀνὴρ ἀλλὰ διὰ σκότους; πότερον ὅτι αἰδεῖται πρὶν ἢ συνελθεῖν ἀλλοτρίαν νομίζων, ἢ καὶ πρὸς ἰδίαν προσιέναι μετʼ αἰδοῦς ἐθιζόμενος; ἢ, καθάπερ ὁ Σόλων ἔγραψε μήλου κυδωνίου τὴν νύμφην ἐντραγοῦσαν εἰς τὸν θάλαμον βαδίζειν, ὅπως τὸ πρῶτον ἄσπασμα μὴ δυσχερὲς γένηται μηδʼ ἀχάριστον· οὕτως ὁ Ῥωμαῖος νομοθέτης, εἰ δή τι προσῆν ἄτοπον τῷ σώματι καὶ δυσχερές, ἔκρυψεν; ἢ διαβολὴ τίς ἐστιν ἀφροδισίων παρανόμων τὸ γιγνόμενον, ὡς καὶ τοῖς νομίμοις αἰσχύνης τινὸς προσούσης;
Question 65. Why doth not a man lie at first with a bride in the light, but when it is dark?
Solution. Is it not for modesty’s sake, for at the first congress he looks upon her as a stranger to him? Or is it that he may be inured to go into his own wife with modesty? Or, as Solon hath written, Let the bride go into the bed-chamber gnawing a quince, that the first salutation be not harsh and ungrateful. So did the Roman lawgiver command that, if there should be any thing absurd and unpleasant in her body, she should hide it? Or was it intended to cast infamy upon the unlawful use of venery by causing that the lawful should have certain signs of modesty attending it?
διὰ τί τῶν ἱπποδρόμων εἷς Φλαμίνιος καλεῖται; ἦ ὅτι, Φλαμινίου τινὸς τῶν παλαιῶν τῇ πόλει χώραν ἐπιδόντος, ἐχρῶντο ταῖς προσόδοις εἰς τοὺς ἱππικοὺς ἀγῶνας· ἔτι δὲ περιόντων χρημάτων, κατεσκεύασαν ὁδόν, ἣν καὶ αὐτὴν Φλαμινίαν προσηγόρευσαν;
Question 66. Why was one of the horse-race rounds called Flaminia?
Solution. Is it because, when Flaminius, one of the ancients, bestowed a field on the city, they employed its revenue on the horse-races, and with the overplus money built the way which they call Flaminia?
διὰ τί λικτώρεις τοὺς ῥαβδούχους ὀνομάζουσι; πότερον ὅτι καὶ συνέδεον τοὺς ἀκολασταίνοντας οὗτοι καὶ τῷ Ῥωμύλῳ παρηκολούθουν ἱμάντας ἐν τοῖς κόλποις κομίζοντες (τὸ δὲ δεσμεύειν ἀλλιγᾶρε λέγουσιν οἱ πολλοὶ Ῥωμαίων, οἱ δὲ καθαρεύοντες ἐν τῷ διαλέγεσθαι λιγᾶρε)· ἢ νῦν μὲν παρέγκειται τὸ κ, πρότερον δὲ λιτώρεις ἐκαλοῦντο, λειτουργοί τινες ὄντες περὶ τὸ δημόσιον; ὅτι γὰρ λῇτον ἄχρι νῦν τὸ δημόσιον ἐν πολλοῖς τῶν Ἑλλήνων νόμων γέγραπται, οὐδένα ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν λέληθε.
Question 67. Why do they call the rod-bearers lictors?
Solution. Is this the reason, because these men were wont to bind desperate bullies, and they followed Romulus carrying thongs in their bosoms? The vulgar Romans say alligare, to bind, when the more refined in speech say ligare. Or is now c inserted, when formerly they called them litores, being liturgi, ministers for public service; for λῇτον until this day is writ for public in many of the Grecian laws, which scarce any is ignorant of.
διὰ τί κύνα θύουσιν οἱ Λούπερκοι (Λούπερκοι δʼ εἰσὶν οἱ τοῖς Λουπερκαλίοις γυμνοὶ διαθέοντες ἐν περιζώμασι καὶ καθικνούμενοι σκύτει τῶν ἀπαντώντων; πότερον ὅτι καθαρμός ἐστι τῆς πόλεως τὰ δρώμενα (καὶ γὰρ τὸν μῆνα Φεβρουάριον καλοῦσι καὶ νὴ Δία τὴν ἡμέραν ἐκείνην φεβράτην, καὶ φεβράριν τὸ τῶν σκυτῶν ἤθει καθικνεῖσθαι, τοῦ ῥήματος τὸ καθαίρειν σημαίνοντος· τῷ δὲ κυνὶ πάντες ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν Ἕλληνες ἐχρῶντο καὶ χρῶνταί γε μέχρι νῦν ἔνιοι σφαγίῳ πρὸς τοὺς καθαρμούς· καὶ τῇ Ἑκάτῃ σκυλάκια μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων καθαρσίων ἐκφέρουσι καὶ περιμάττουσι σκυλακίοις τοὺς ἁγνισμοῦ δεομένους, περισκυλακισμὸν τὸ τοιοῦτο γένος τοῦ καθαρμοῦ καλοῦντες)· ἢ λύκος μὲν ὁ λοῦπός ἐστι καὶ Λύκαια τὰ Λουπερκάλια· λύκῳ δὲ κύων πολέμιος καὶ διὰ τοῦτο θύεται τοῖς Λυκαίοις; ἢ ὅτι τοὺς Λουπέρκους ὑλακτοῦσι καὶ παραλυποῦσιν οἱ κύνες ἐν τῇ πόλει διαθέοντας; ἢ Πανὶ μὲν ἡ θυσία γίγνεται, Πανὶ δὲ κύων προσφιλὲς διὰ τὰ αἰπόλια;
Question 68. Why do the Luperci sacrifice a dog? The Luperci are they that run up and down naked (saving only their girdles) in the Lupercal plays, and slash all that they meet with a whip.
Solution: Is it not because these feats are done for the purification of the city? For they call the month February, and indeed the very day Februatus, and the habit of whip ping with thongs they call februare, the word signifying to cleanse. And to speak the truth, all the Grecians have used, and some do use to this very day, a slain dog for an expiatory sacrifice; and among other sacrifices of purification, they offer whelps to Hecate, and sprinkle those that need cleansing with the puppy’s blood, calling this kind of purifying puppification. Or is it that lupus is λύκος, a wolf, and Lupercalia are Lycaea; but a dog is at enmity with a wolf, therefore is sacrificed on the Lycaean festivals? Or is it because the dogs do bark at and perplex the Luperci as they scout about the city? Or is it that this sacrifice is offered to Pan, and Pan loves dogs because of his herds of goats.
διὰ τί τῷ καλουμένῳ Σεπτομουντίῳ παρεφύλαττον ὀχήμασι ζευκτοῖς χρῆσθαι, καὶ νῦν οἱ τῶν παλαιῶν μὴ καταφρονοῦντες παραφυλάττουσι (τὸ δὲ σεπτομούντιον ἄγουσιν ἐπὶ τῷ τὸν ἕβδομον λόφον τῇ πόλει προσκατανεμηθῆναι καὶ τὴν Ῥώμην ἑπτάλοφον γενέσθαι); πότερον, ὡς ἔνιοι τῶν Ῥωμαϊκῶν ἐπινοοῦσι, διὰ τὸ μήπω συνεζεῦχθαι τοῖς μέρεσι παντελῶς τὴν πόλιν· ἢ τοῦτο μὲν ἄλλως οὐ πρὸς Διόνυσόν ἐστιν· ἔργου δὲ μεγάλου τοῦ πρὸς τὸν συνοικισμὸν ἐκτελεσθέντος, οἰόμενοι τὴν πόλιν ἤδη πεπαῦσθαι προϊοῦσαν εἰς τὸ πρόσθεν, ἔπαυσαν μὲν αὑτοὺς ἀνέπαυσαν δὲ τῶν ὑποζυγίων τὰ συμπονήσαντα καὶ παρέσχον ἀπολαῦσαι τῇ σχολῇ τῆς κοινῆς ἑορτῆς; ἢ πᾶσαν μὲν ἐβούλοντο κοσμεῖν ἀεὶ καὶ τιμᾶν ἑορτὴν τοὺς πολίτας παρόντας, μάλιστα δὲ τὴν ἐπὶ τῷ συνοικισμῷ τῆς πόλεως ἀγομένην· ἵνʼ οὖν τὴν πόλιν, ἧς ἐστιν ἡ ἑορτή, μὴ ἀπολείπωσιν, οὐκ ἐφεῖτο χρῆσθαι ζεύγεσιν ἐκείνην τὴν ἡμέραν;
Question 69. Why, upon the festival called Septimontium, did they observe to abstain from the use of chariots drawn by a pair of horses; and even until now, do they that regard antiquity still abstain? They do observe the Septimontium feast in honor of the addition of the seventh hill to the city, upon which it became Septicollis, seven-hilled Rome.
Solution. What if it be (as some of the Romans conjecture) because the parts of the city are not as yet everywhere connected? Or if this conceit be nothing to the purpose, what if it be that, when the great work of building the city was finished and they determined to cease the increasing of the city any further, they rested themselves and rested the cattle that bore a share in the labor with them, and provided accordingly that they might participate of the holiday by rest from labor? Or was it that they would have all the citizens always present for the solemnity and return of a festival, especially that which was observed in remembrance of the compact uniting the parts of the city; and that none should desert the city for whose sake the feast is kept, they were not allowed to use their yoke chariots that day?
διὰ τί τοὺς ἀπεγνωσμένους ἐπὶ κλοπαῖς ἢ δουλικοῖς τισιν ἄλλοις ἁμαρτήμασι φουρκίφερας καλοῦσιν; ἦ καὶ τοῦτο τῆς τῶν παλαιῶν ἐπιμελείας τεκμήριόν ἐστιν; ὁ γὰρ οἰκότριβος ἰδίου καταγνοὺς τινα μοχθηρίαν ἐκέλευε διπλοῦν ξύλον, ὃ ταῖς ἁμάξαις ὑφιστᾶσιν, ἀράμενον διὰ τῆς συνοικίας ἢ τῆς γειτνιάσεως διεξελθεῖν ὑπὸ πάντων ὁρώμενον, ὅπως ἀπιστοῖεν αὐτῷ καὶ φυλάττοιντο πρὸς τὸ λοιπόν· τὸ δὲ ξύλον ἡμεῖς μὲν στήριγγα, Ῥωμαῖοι δὲ φοῦρκαν ὀνομάζουσι· διὸ καὶ φουρκίφερ ὁ τοῦτο περιενεγκὼν καλεῖται.
Question 70. Why do they call those Furciferi which are convict of thefts or any other of those slavish crimes?
Solution. Was it this (which was an argument of the severity of the ancients), that whenever any convicted his servant of any villany, he enjoined him to carry the forked piece of timber that is under the cart (the tongue of the cart), and to go with it through the next villages and neighborhood, to be seen of all, that they might distrust him and be aware of him for the future? This piece of wood we call a prop, the Romans call it furca, a fork; hence he that carries it about is called furcifer, a fork-bearer.
διὰ τί τῶν κυριττόντων βοῶν ὑπὲρ τοῦ φυλάττεσθαι τὸν ἐντυγχάνοντα χόρτον τῷ κέρατι προσδέουσιν; ἦ διὰ κόρον καὶ πλησμονὴν ἐξυβρίζουσι καὶ βόες καὶ ἵπποι καὶ ὄνοι καὶ ἄνθρωποι; ὥς που καὶ Σοφοκλῆς πεποίηκε σὺ δὲ σφαδᾴζεις πῶλος ὣς εὐφορβίᾳ, / γαστήρ τε γάρ σου καὶ γνάθος πλήρης. / διὸ καὶ Μάρκον Κράσσον οἱ Ῥωμαῖοι χόρτον ἔχειν ἔφασαν· ἐφυλάττοντο γὰρ αὐτὸν οἱ τοὺς ἄλλους ἐν τῇ πολιτείᾳ σπαράττοντες ὡς ἀμυντικὸν καὶ δυσεπιχείρητον. οὐ μὴν ἀλλʼ ὕστερον ἐλέχθη πάλιν, ὅτι Κράσσου Καῖσαρ ἀφῃρήκει τὸν χόρτον· ἀντέστη γὰρ αὐτῷ πρῶτος ἐν τῇ πολιτείᾳ καὶ κατεφρόνησε.
Question 71. Why do they bind hay about the horns of oxen that are wont to push, that they may be shunned by him that meets them?
Solution. It is that by reason of gormandizing and stuffing their guts oxen, asses, horses, and men become mischievous, as Sophocles somewhere saith, full-fed colt thou kickest up heels, / From stuffed paunch, cheeks, and full meals? /
Therefore the Romans say that M. Crassus had hay about his horns, for they that were turbulent men in the commonwealth were wont to stand in awe of him as a revengeful man and one scarce to be meddled with; although afterwards it was said again, that Caesar had taken away Crassus’s hay, being the first man of the republic that withstood and affronted him.
διὰ τί τῶν ἐπʼ οἰωνοῖς ἱερέων, οὓς Αὔσπικας πρότερον Αὔγουρας δὲ νῦν καλοῦσιν, ᾤοντο δεῖν ἀεὶ τοὺς λαμπτῆρας ἀνεῳγμένους εἶναι καὶ τὸ πῶμα μὴ ἐπικεῖσθαι; ἦ καθάπερ οἱ Πυθαγορικοὶ μικρὰ μεγάλων ἐποιοῦντο σύμβολα κωλύοντες ἐπὶ χοίνικος καθῆσθαι καὶ πῦρ μαχαίρᾳ μὴ σκαλεύειν οὕτως οἱ παλαιοὶ πολλοῖς αἰνίγμασιν ἐχρῶντο καὶ μάλιστα πρὸς τοὺς ἱερεῖς, οἷόν ἐστι καὶ τὸ τοῦ λαμπτῆρος; ἔοικε γὰρ ὁ λαμπτὴρ τῷ περιέχοντι τὴν ψυχὴν σώματι. φῶς γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ἐντὸς ψυχὴ καὶ δεῖ τὸ συνετὸν καὶ φρόνιμον ἀεὶ ἀναπεπταμένον αὐτῆς εἶναι καὶ δεδορκὸς καὶ μηδέποτε συγκεκλεῖσθαι μηδʼ ἀποπνεόμενον. πνευμάτων δʼ ὄντων, οὐκ εὐσταθοῦσιν οἱ ὄρνιθες οὐδὲ βέβαια σημεῖα παρέχουσι διὰ τὴν πλάνην καὶ τὴν ἀνωμαλίαν. διδάσκουσιν οὖν τῷ ἔθει μὴ πνευμάτων ὄντων, ἀλλὰ νηνεμίας καὶ καταστάσεως, ἐπὶ ταῦτα προϊέναι τοὺς οἰωνοπόλους, ὅτε δύνανται τοῖς λαμπτῆρσιν ἀνεῳγμένοις χρῆσθαι.
Question 72. Why would they have the lanthorns of the soothsaying priests (which formerly they called Auspices, and now Augures) to be always open at top, and no cover to be put upon them?
Solution. Is it as the Pythagoreans do, who make little things symbols of great matters,—as forbidding to sit down upon a bushel and to stir up the fire with a sword,—so that the ancients used many enigmatical ceremonies, especially about their priests, and such was this of the lanthorn? For the lanthorn is like the body encompassing the soul, the soul being the light withinside, and the understanding and judgment ought to be always open and quick-sighted, and never to be shut up or blown out. And when the winds blow, the birds are unsettled and do not afford sound prognostics, by reason of their wandering and irregularity in flying; by this usage therefore they teach that their soothsayers must not prognosticate when there are high winds, but in still and calm weather, when they can use their open lanthorns.
Cite This Text