| 1. Cicero, In Verrem, 2.4.120 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Jenkyns (2013) 128 |
| 2. Cicero, On Laws, 2.29, 2.33 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 73 |
| 3. Cicero, De Lege Agraria, 2.76 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Jenkyns (2013) 128 |
| 4. Cicero, On The Haruspices, 2.28 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna, primigenia Found in books: Clark (2007) 236 |
5. Cicero, On Divination, 1.34, 1.38, 1.100, 1.132, 2.36-2.37, 2.56, 2.70-2.74, 2.85-2.90, 2.109 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 73, 74, 76, 77, 79| 1.34. Iis igitur adsentior, qui duo genera divinationum esse dixerunt, unum, quod particeps esset artis, alterum, quod arte careret. Est enim ars in iis, qui novas res coniectura persequuntur, veteres observatione didicerunt. Carent autem arte ii, qui non ratione aut coniectura observatis ac notatis signis, sed concitatione quadam animi aut soluto liberoque motu futura praesentiunt, quod et somniantibus saepe contingit et non numquam vaticitibus per furorem, ut Bacis Boeotius, ut Epimenides Cres, ut Sibylla Erythraea. Cuius generis oracla etiam habenda sunt, non ea, quae aequatis sortibus ducuntur, sed illa, quae instinctu divino adflatuque funduntur; etsi ipsa sors contemnenda non est, si et auctoritatem habet vetustatis, ut eae sunt sortes, quas e terra editas accepimus; quae tamen ductae ut in rem apte cadant, fieri credo posse divinitus. Quorum omnium interpretes, ut grammatici poe+tarum, proxime ad eorum, quos interpretantur, divinationem videntur accedere. 1.38. Idem iam diu non facit. Ut igitur nunc in minore gloria est, quia minus oraculorum veritas excellit, sic tum nisi summa veritate in tanta gloria non fuisset. Potest autem vis illa terrae, quae mentem Pythiae divino adflatu concitabat, evanuisse vetustate, ut quosdam evanuisse et exaruisse amnes aut in alium cursum contortos et deflexos videmus. Sed, ut vis, acciderit; magna enim quaestio est; modo maneat id, quod negari non potest, nisi omnem historiam perverterimus, multis saeclis verax fuisse id oraculum. 1.100. Quid, quod in annalibus habemus Veienti bello, cum lacus Albanus praeter modum crevisset, Veientem quendam ad nos hominem nobilem perfugisse, eumque dixisse ex fatis, quae Veientes scripta haberent, Veios capi non posse, dum lacus is redundaret, et, si lacus emissus lapsu et cursu suo ad mare profluxisset, perniciosum populo Romano; sin autem ita esset eductus, ut ad mare pervenire non posset, tum salutare nostris fore? Ex quo illa admirabilis a maioribus Albanae aquae facta deductio est. Cum autem Veientes bello fessi legatos ad senatum misissent, tum ex iis quidam dixisse dicitur non omnia illum transfugam ausum esse senatui dicere; in isdem enim fatis scriptum Veientes habere fore ut brevi a Gallis Roma caperetur, quod quidem sexennio post Veios captos factum esse videmus. 1.132. Nunc illa testabor, non me sortilegos neque eos, qui quaestus causa hariolentur, ne psychomantia quidem, quibus Appius, amicus tuus, uti solebat, agnoscere; non habeo denique nauci Marsum augurem, non vicanos haruspices, non de circo astrologos, non Isiacos coniectores, non interpretes somniorum; non enim sunt ii aut scientia aut arte divini, Séd superstitiósi vates ínpudentesque hárioli Aút inertes aút insani aut quíbus egestas ímperat, Quí sibi semitám non sapiunt, álteri monstránt viam; Quíbus divitias póllicentur, áb iis drachumam ipsí petunt. De hís divitiis síbi deducant dráchumam, reddant cétera. Atque haec quidem Ennius, qui paucis ante versibus esse deos censet, sed eos non curare opinatur, quid agat humanum genus. Ego autem, qui et curare arbitror et monere etiam ac multa praedicere, levitate, vanitate, malitia exclusa divinationem probo. Quae cum dixisset Quintus, Praeclare tu quidem, inquam, paratus 2.36. deorum enim numini parere omnia. Haec iam, mihi crede, ne aniculae quidem existimant. An censes, eundem vitulum si alius delegerit, sine capite iecur inventurum; si alius, cum capite? Haec decessio capitis aut accessio subitone fieri potest, ut se exta ad immolatoris fortunam accommodent? non perspicitis aleam quandam esse in hostiis deligendis, praesertim cum res ipsa doceat? Cum enim tristissuma exta sine capite fuerunt, quibus nihil videtur esse dirius, proxuma hostia litatur saepe pulcherrime. Ubi igitur illae minae superiorum extorum? aut quae tam subito facta est deorum tanta placatio? Sed adfers in tauri opimi extis immolante Caesare cor non fuisse; id quia non potuerit accidere, ut sine corde victuma illa viveret, iudicandum esse tum interisse cor, cum immolaretur. 2.37. Qui fit, ut alterum intellegas, sine corde non potuisse bovem vivere, alterum non videas, cor subito non potuisse nescio quo avolare? Ego enim possum vel nescire, quae vis sit cordis ad vivendum, vel suspicari contractum aliquo morbo bovis exile et exiguum et vietum cor et dissimile cordis fuisse; tu vero quid habes, quare putes, si paulo ante cor fuerit in tauro opimo, subito id in ipsa immolatione interisse? an quod aspexit vestitu purpureo excordem Caesarem, ipse corde privatus est? Urbem philosophiae, mihi crede, proditis, dum castella defenditis; nam, dum haruspicinam veram esse vultis, physiologiam totam pervertitis. Caput est in iecore, cor in extis; iam abscedet, simul ac molam et vinum insperseris; deus id eripiet, vis aliqua conficiet aut exedet. Non ergo omnium ortus atque obitus natura conficiet, et erit aliquid, quod aut ex nihilo oriatur aut in nihilum subito occidat. Quis hoc physicus dixit umquam? haruspices dicunt; his igitur quam physicis credendum potius existumas? 2.56. Tu vates Boeotios credis Lebadiae vidisse ex gallorum gallinaceorum cantu victoriam esse Thebanorum, quia galli victi silere solerent, canere victores. Hoc igitur per gallinas Iuppiter tantae civitati signum dabat? An illae aves, nisi cum vicerunt, canere non solent? At tum canebant nec vicerant. Id enim est, inquies, ostentum. Magnum vero! quasi pisces, non galli cecinerint! Quod autem est tempus, quo illi non cantent, vel nocturnum vel diurnum? Quodsi victores alacritate et quasi laetitia ad canendum excitantur, potuit accidisse alia quoque laetitia, qua ad cantum moverentur. 2.70. Satis multa de ostentis; auspicia restant et sortes eae, quae ducuntur, non illae, quae vaticinatione funduntur, quae oracla verius dicimus; de quibus tum dicemus, cum ad naturalem divinationem venerimus. Restat etiam de Chaldaeis; sed primum auspicia videamus. Difficilis auguri locus ad contra dicendum. Marso fortasse, sed Romano facillumus. Non enim sumus ii nos augures, qui avium reliquorumve signorum observatione futura dicamus. Et tamen credo Romulum, qui urbem auspicato condidit, habuisse opinionem esse in providendis rebus augurandi scientiam (errabat enim multis in rebus antiquitas), quam vel usu iam vel doctrina vel vetustate immutatam videmus; retinetur autem et ad opinionem vulgi et ad magnas utilitates rei publicae mos, religio, disciplina, ius augurium, collegii auctoritas. 2.71. Nec vero non omni supplicio digni P. Claudius L. Iunius consules, qui contra auspicia navigaverunt; parendum enim religioni fuit nec patrius mos tam contumaciter repudiandus. Iure igitur alter populi iudicio damnatus est, alter mortem sibi ipse conscivit. Flaminius non paruit auspiciis, itaque periit cum exercitu. At anno post Paulus paruit; num minus cecidit in Cannensi pugna cum exercitu? Etenim, ut sint auspicia, quae nulla sunt, haec certe, quibus utimur, sive tripudio sive de caelo, simulacra sunt auspiciorum, auspicia nullo modo. Q. Fabi, te mihi in auspicio esse volo ; respondet: audivi . Hic apud maiores nostros adhibebatur peritus, nunc quilubet. Peritum autem esse necesse est eum, qui, silentium quid sit, intellegat; id enim silentium dicimus in auspiciis, quod omni vitio caret. 2.72. Hoc intellegere perfecti auguris est; illi autem, qui in auspicium adhibetur, cum ita imperavit is, qui auspicatur: dicito, si silentium esse videbitur, nec suspicit nec circumspicit; statim respondet silentium esse videri. Tum ille: dicito, si pascentur .— Pascuntur .— Quae aves? aut ubi? Attulit, inquit, in cavea pullos is, qui ex eo ipso nominatur pullarius. Haec sunt igitur aves internuntiae Iovis! quae pascantur necne, quid refert? Nihil ad auspicia; sed quia, cum pascuntur, necesse est aliquid ex ore cadere et terram pavire (terripavium primo, post terripudium dictum est; hoc quidem iam tripudium dicitur)—cum igitur offa cecidit ex ore pulli, tum auspicanti tripudium solistimum nuntiatur. 2.73. Ergo hoc auspicium divini quicquam habere potest, quod tam sit coactum et expressum? Quo antiquissumos augures non esse usos argumento est, quod decretum collegii vetus habemus omnem avem tripudium facere posse. Tum igitur esset auspicium (si modo esset ei liberum) se ostendisse; tum avis illa videri posset interpres et satelles Iovis; nunc vero inclusa in cavea et fame enecta si in offam pultis invadit, et si aliquid ex eius ore cecidit, hoc tu auspicium aut hoc modo Romulum auspicari solitum putas? 2.74. Iam de caelo servare non ipsos censes solitos, qui auspicabantur? Nunc imperant pullario; ille renuntiat. Fulmen sinistrum auspicium optumum habemus ad omnis res praeterquam ad comitia; quod quidem institutum rei publicae causa est, ut comitiorum vel in iudiciis populi vel in iure legum vel in creandis magistratibus principes civitatis essent interpretes. At Ti. Gracchi litteris Scipio et Figulus consules, cum augures iudicassent eos vitio creatos esse, magistratu se abdicaverunt. Quis negat augurum disciplinam esse? divinationem nego. At haruspices divini; quos cum Ti. Gracchus propter mortem repentinam eius, qui in praerogativa referenda subito concidisset, in senatum introduxisset, non iustum rogatorem fuisse dixerunt. 2.85. Sortes restant et Chaldaei, ut ad vates veniamus et ad somnia. Dicendum igitur putas de sortibus? Quid enim sors est? Idem prope modum, quod micare, quod talos iacere, quod tesseras, quibus in rebus temeritas et casus, non ratio nec consilium valet. Tota res est inventa fallaciis aut ad quaestum aut ad superstitionem aut ad errorem. Atque ut in haruspicina fecimus, sic videamus, clarissumarum sortium quae tradatur inventio. Numerium Suffustium Praenestinorum monumenta declarant, honestum hominem et nobilem, somniis crebris, ad extremum etiam minacibus cum iuberetur certo in loco silicem caedere, perterritum visis irridentibus suis civibus id agere coepisse; itaque perfracto saxo sortis erupisse in robore insculptas priscarum litterarum notis. Is est hodie locus saeptus religiose propter Iovis pueri, qui lactens cum Iunone Fortunae in gremio sedens mammam adpetens castissime colitur a matribus. 2.86. Eodemque tempore in eo loco, ubi Fortunae nunc est aedes, mel ex olea fluxisse dicunt, haruspicesque dixisse summa nobilitate illas sortis futuras, eorumque iussu ex illa olea arcam esse factam, eoque conditas sortis, quae hodie Fortunae monitu tolluntur. Quid igitur in his potest esse certi, quae Fortunae monitu pueri manu miscentur atque ducuntur? quo modo autem istae positae in illo loco? quis robur illud cecidit, dolavit, inscripsit? Nihil est, inquiunt, quod deus efficere non possit. Utinam sapientis Stoicos effecisset, ne omnia cum superstitiosa sollicitudine et miseria crederent! Sed hoc quidem genus divinationis vita iam communis explosit; fani pulchritudo et vetustas Praenestinarum etiam nunc retinet sortium nomen, atque id in volgus. 2.87. Quis enim magistratus aut quis vir inlustrior utitur sortibus? ceteris vero in locis sortes plane refrixerunt. Quod Carneadem Clitomachus scribit dicere solitum, nusquam se fortunatiorem quam Praeneste vidisse Fortunam. Ergo hoc divinationis genus omittamus. Ad Chaldaeorum monstra veniamus; de quibus Eudoxus, Platonis auditor, in astrologia iudicio doctissimorum hominum facile princeps, sic opinatur, id quod scriptum reliquit, Chaldaeis in praedictione et in notatione cuiusque vitae ex natali die minime esse credendum. 2.88. Nominat etiam Panaetius, qui unus e Stoicis astrologorum praedicta reiecit, Anchialum et Cassandrum, summos astrologos illius aetatis, qua erat ipse, cum in ceteris astrologiae partibus excellerent, hoc praedictionis genere non usos. Scylax Halicarnassius, familiaris Panaetii, excellens in astrologia idemque in regenda sua civitate princeps, totum hoc Chaldaicum praedicendi genus repudiavit. 2.89. Sed ut ratione utamur omissis testibus, sic isti disputant, qui haec Chaldaeorum natalicia praedicta defendunt: Vim quandam esse aiunt signifero in orbe, qui Graece zwdiako/s dicitur, talem, ut eius orbis una quaeque pars alia alio modo moveat inmutetque caelum, perinde ut quaeque stellae in his finitumisque partibus sint quoque tempore, eamque vim varie moveri ab iis sideribus, quae vocantur errantia; cum autem in eam ipsam partem orbis venerint, in qua sit ortus eius, qui nascatur, aut in eam, quae coniunctum aliquid habeat aut consentiens, ea triangula illi et quadrata nomit. Etenim cum †tempore anni tempestatumque caeli conversiones commutationesque tantae fiant accessu stellarum et recessu, cumque ea vi solis efficiantur, quae videmus, non veri simile solum, sed etiam verum esse censent perinde, utcumque temperatus sit ae+r, ita pueros orientis animari atque formari, ex eoque ingenia, mores, animum, corpus, actionem vitae, casus cuiusque eventusque fingi. 2.90. O delirationem incredibilem! non enim omnis error stultitia dicenda est. Quibus etiam Diogenes Stoicus concedit aliquid, ut praedicere possint dumtaxat, qualis quisque natura et ad quam quisque maxume rem aptus futurus sit; cetera, quae profiteantur, negat ullo modo posse sciri; etenim geminorum formas esse similis, vitam atque fortunam plerumque disparem. Procles et Eurysthenes, Lacedaemoniorum reges, gemini fratres fuerunt. 2.109. Adsumit autem Cratippus hoc modo: Sunt autem innumerabiles praesensiones non fortuitae. At ego dico nullam (vide, quanta sit controversia); iam adsumptione non concessa nulla conclusio est. At impudentes sumus, qui, cum tam perspicuum sit, non concedamus. Quid est perspicuum? Multa vera, inquit evadere. Quid, quod multo plura falsa? Nonne ipsa varietas, quae est propria fortunae, fortunam esse causam, non naturam esse docet? Deinde, si tua ista conclusio, Cratippe, vera est (tecum enim mihi res est), non intellegis eadem uti posse et haruspices et fulguratores et interpretes ostentorum et augures et sortilegos et Chaldaeos? quorum generum nullum est, ex quo non aliquid, sicut praedictum sit, evaserit. Ergo aut ea quoque genera dividi sunt, quae tu rectissume inprobas, aut, si ea non sunt, non intellego, cur haec duo sint, quae relinquis. Qua ergo ratione haec inducis, eadem illa possunt esse, quae tollis. | 1.34. I agree, therefore, with those who have said that there are two kinds of divination: one, which is allied with art; the other, which is devoid of art. Those diviners employ art, who, having learned the known by observation, seek the unknown by deduction. On the other hand those do without art who, unaided by reason or deduction or by signs which have been observed and recorded, forecast the future while under the influence of mental excitement, or of some free and unrestrained emotion. This condition often occurs to men while dreaming and sometimes to persons who prophesy while in a frenzy — like Bacis of Boeotia, Epimenides of Crete and the Sibyl of Erythraea. In this latter class must be placed oracles — not oracles given by means of equalized lots — but those uttered under the impulse of divine inspiration; although divination by lot is not in itself to be despised, if it has the sanction of antiquity, as in the case of those lots which, according to tradition, sprang out of the earth; for in spite of everything, I am inclined to think that they may, under the power of God, be so drawn as to give an appropriate response. Men capable of correctly interpreting all these signs of the future seem to approach very near to the divine spirit of the gods whose wills they interpret, just as scholars do when they interpret the poets. 1.38. Therefore, as at present its glory has waned because it is no longer noted for the truth of its prophecies, so formerly it would not have enjoyed so exalted a reputation if it had not been trustworthy in the highest degree. Possibly, too, those subterraneous exhalations which used to kindle the soul of the Pythian priestess with divine inspiration have gradually vanished in the long lapse of time; just as within our own knowledge some rivers have dried up and disappeared, while others, by winding and twisting, have changed their course into other channels. But explain the decadence of the oracle as you wish, since it offers a wide field for discussion, provided you grant what cannot be denied without distorting the entire record of history, that the oracle at Delphi made true prophecies for many hundreds of years. [20] 1.100. And what do you say of the following story which we find in our annals? During the Veientian War, when Lake Albanus had overflowed its banks, a certain nobleman of Veii deserted to us and said that, according to the prophecies of the Veientian books, their city could not be taken while the lake was at flood, and that if its waters were permitted to overflow and take their own course to the sea the result would be disastrous to the Roman people; on the other hand, if the waters were drained off in such a way that they did not reach the sea the result would be to our advantage. In consequence of this announcement our forefathers dug that marvellous canal to drain off the waters from the Alban lake. Later when the Veientians had grown weary of war and had sent ambassadors to the Senate to treat for peace, one of them is reported to have said that the deserter had not dared to tell the whole of the prophecy contained in the Veientian books, for those books, he said, also foretold the early capture of Rome by the Gauls. And this, as we know, did occur six years after the fall of Veii. [45] 1.132. I will assert, however, in conclusion, that I do not recognize fortune-tellers, or those who prophesy for money, or necromancers, or mediums, whom your friend Appius makes it a practice to consult.In fine, I say, I do not care a figFor Marsian augurs, village mountebanks,Astrologers who haunt the circus grounds,Or Isis-seers, or dream interpreters:— for they are not diviners either by knowledge or skill, —But superstitious bards, soothsaying quacks,Averse to work, or mad, or ruled by want,Directing others how to go, and yetWhat road to take they do not know themselves;From those to whom they promise wealth they begA coin. From what they promised let them takeTheir coin as toll and pass the balance on.Such are the words of Ennius who only a few lines further back expresses the view that there are gods and yet says that the gods do not care what human beings do. But for my part, believing as I do that the gods do care for man, and that they advise and often forewarn him, I approve of divination which is not trivial and is free from falsehood and trickery.When Quintus had finished I remarked, My dear Quintus, you have come admirably well prepared. 2.36. Upon my word, no old woman is credulous enough now to believe such stuff! Do you believe that the same bullock, if chosen by one man, will have a liver without a head, and if chosen by another will have a liver with a head? And is it possible that this sudden going or coming of the livers head occurs so that the entrails may adapt themselves to the situation of the person who offers the sacrifice? Do you Stoics fail to see in choosing the victim it is almost like a throw of the dice, especially as facts prove it? For when the entrails of the first victim have been without a head, which is the most fatal of all signs, it often happens that the sacrifice of the next victim is altogether favourable. Pray what became of the warnings of the first set of entrails? And how was the favour of the gods so completely and so suddenly gained?[16] But, you say, Once, when Caesar was offering a sacrifice, there was no heart in the entrails of the sacrificial bull; and, and, since it would have been impossible for the victim to live without a heart, the heart must have disappeared at the moment of immolation. 2.37. How does it happen that you understand the one fact, that the bull could not have lived without a heart and do not realize the other, that the heart could not suddenly have vanished I know not where? As for me, possibly I do not know what vital function the heart performs; if I do I suspect that the bulls heart, as the result of a disease, became much wasted and shrunken and lost its resemblance to a heart. But, assuming that only a little while before the heart was in the sacrificial bull, why do you think it suddenly disappeared at the very moment of immolation? Dont you think, rather, that the bull lost his heart when he saw that Caesar in his purple robe had lost his head?Upon my word you Stoics surrender the very city of philosophy while defending its outworks! For, by your insistence on the truth of soothsaying, you utterly overthrow physiology. There is a head to the liver and a heart in the entrails, presto! they will vanish the very second you have sprinkled them with meal and wine! Aye, some god will snatch them away! Some invisible power will destroy them or eat them up! Then the creation and destruction of all things are not due to nature, and there are some things which spring from nothing or suddenly become nothing. Was any such statement ever made by any natural philosopher? It is made, you say, by soothsayers. Then do you think that soothsayers are worthier of belief than natural philosophers? [17] 2.56. You believe that the Boeotian bards at Lebadia foretold victory for the Thebans from the crowing of cocks; for cocks, you say, are wont to be silent when defeated and to crow when victorious. Do you really believe that Jupiter would have employed chickens to convey such a message to so great a state? And is it true that these fowls are not accustomed to crow except when they are victorious? But at that time they did crow and they had not yet been victorious. Oh! that was a portent, you say. A fine portent indeed! you talk as if a fish and not a cock had done the crowing! But come; is there any time, day or night, when they are not liable to crow? And if the pleasant sensation — or joy if you will — which comes from victory causes them to crow, then, possibly, joy springing from some other source may have the same effect. 2.70. Enough has been said of portents; auspices remain and so do lots — I mean lots that are drawn, and not those uttered by prophets, and more correctly styled oracles. I shall speak of oracles when I get to natural divination. In addition I must discuss the Chaldeans. But first let us consider auspices. To argue against auspices is a hard thing, you say, for an augur to do. Yes, for a Marsian, perhaps; but very easy for a Roman. For we Roman augurs are not the sort who foretell the future by observing the flights of birds and other signs. And yet, I admit that Romulus, who founded the city by the direction of auspices, believed that augury was an art useful in seeing things to come — for the ancients had erroneous views on many subjects. But we see that the art has undergone a change, due to experience, education, or the long lapse of time. However, out of respect for the opinion of the masses and because of the great service to the State we maintain the augural practices, discipline, religious rites and laws, as well as the authority of the augural college. 2.71. In my opinion the consuls, Publius Claudius and Lucius Junius, who set sail contrary to the auspices, were deserving of capital punishment; for they should have respected the established religion and should not have treated the customs of their forefathers with such shameless disdain. Therefore it was a just retribution that the former was condemned by a vote of the people and that the latter took his own life. Flaminius, you say, did not obey the auspices, therefore he perished with his army. But a year later Paulus did obey them; and did he not lose his army and his life in the battle of Cannae? Granting that there are auspices (as there are not), certainly those which we ordinarily employ — whether by the tripudium or by the observation of the heavens — are not auspices in any sense, but are the mere ghosts of auspices.[34] Quintus Fabius, I wish you to assist me at the auspices. He answers, I will. (In our forefathers time the magistrates on such occasions used to call in some expert person to take the auspices — but in these days anyone will do. But one must be an expert to know what constitutes silence, for by that term we mean free of every augural defect. 2.72. To understand that belongs to a perfect augur.) After the celebrant has said to his assistant, Tell me when silence appears to exist, the latter, without looking up or about him, immediately replies, Silence appears to exist. Then the celebrant says, Tell me when the chickens begin to eat. They are eating now, is the answer. But what are these birds they are talking about, and where are they? Someone replies, Its poultry. Its in a cage and the person who brought it is called a poulterer, because of his business. These, then, are the messengers of Jove! What difference does it make whether they eat or not? None, so far as the auspices are concerned. But, because of the fact that, while they eat, some food must necessarily fall from their mouths and strike upon the ground (terram pavire), — this at first was called terripavium, and later, terripudium; now it is called tripudium — therefore, when a crumb of food falls from a chickens mouth a tripudium solistimum is announced to the celebrant. [35] 2.73. Then, how can there be anything divine about an auspice so forced and so extorted? That such a practice did not prevail with the augurs of ancient times is proven by an old ruling of our college which says, Any bird may make a tripudium. There might be an auspice if the bird were free to show itself outside its cage. In that case it might be called the interpreter and satellite of Jove. But now, when shut up inside a cage and tortured by hunger, if it seizes greedily upon its morsel of pottage and something falls from its mouth, do you consider that is an auspice? Or do you believe that this was the way in which Romulus used to take the auspices? 2.74. Again, do you not think that formerly it was the habit of the celebrants themselves to make observation of the heavens? Now they order the poulterer, and he gives responses! We regard lightning on the left as a most favourable omen for everything except for an election, and this exception was made, no doubt, from reasons of political expediency so that the rulers of the State would be the judges of the regularity of an election, whether held to pass judgements in criminal cases, or to enact laws, or to elect magistrates.The consuls, Scipio and Figulus, you say, resigned their office when the augurs rendered a decision based on a letter written by Tiberius Gracchus, to the effect that those consuls had not been elected according to augural law. Who denies that augury is an art? What I deny is the existence of divination. But you say: Soothsayers have the power of divination; and you mention the fact that, on account of the unexpected death of the person who had suddenly fallen while bringing in the report of the vote of the prerogative century, Tiberius Gracchus introduced the soothsayers into the Senate and they declared that the president had violated augural law. 2.85. And pray what is the need, do you think, to talk about the casting of lots? It is much like playing at morra, dice, or knuckle-bones, in which recklessness and luck prevail rather than reflection and judgement. The whole scheme of divination by lots was fraudulently contrived from mercenary motives, or as a means of encouraging superstition and error. But let us follow the method used in the discussion of soothsaying and consider the traditional origin of the most famous lots. According to the annals of Praeneste Numerius Suffustius, who was a distinguished man of noble birth, was admonished by dreams, often repeated, and finally even by threats, to split open a flint rock which was lying in a designated place. Frightened by the visions and disregarding the jeers of his fellow-townsmen he set about doing as he had been directed. And so when he had broken open the stone, the lots sprang forth carved on oak, in ancient characters. The site where the stone was found is religiously guarded to this day. It is hard by the statue of the infant Jupiter, who is represented as sitting with Juno in the lap of Fortune and reaching for her breast, and it is held in the highest reverence by mothers. 2.86. There is a tradition that, concurrently with the finding of the lots and in the spot where the temple of Fortune now stands, honey flowed from an olive-tree. Now the soothsayers, who had declared that those lots would enjoy an unrivalled reputation, gave orders that a chest should be made from the tree and lots placed in the chest. At the present time the lots are taken from their receptacle if Fortune directs. What reliance, pray, can you put in these lots, which at Fortunes nod are shuffled and drawn by the hand of a child? And how did they ever get in that rock? Who cut down the oak-tree? and who fashioned and carved the lots? Oh! but somebody says, God can bring anything to pass. If so, then I wish he had made the Stoics wise, so that they would not be so pitiably and distressingly superstitious and so prone to believe everything they hear! This sort of divining, however, has now been discarded by general usage. The beauty and age of the temple still preserve the name of the lots of Praeneste — that is, among the common people, 2.87. for no magistrate and no man of any reputation ever consults them; but in all other places lots have gone entirely out of use. And this explains the remark which, according to Clitomachus, Carneades used to make that he had at no other place seen Fortune more fortunate than at Praeneste. Then let us dismiss this branch of divination.[42] Let us come to Chaldean manifestations. In discussing them Platos pupil, Eudoxus, whom the best scholars consider easily the first in astronomy, has left the following opinion in writing: No reliance whatever is to be placed in Chaldean astrologers when they profess to forecast a mans future from the position of the stars on the day of his birth. 2.88. Panaetius, too, who was the only one of the Stoics to reject the prophecies of astrologers, mentions Anchialus and Cassander as the greatest astronomers of his day and states that they did not employ their art as a means of divining, though they were eminent in all other branches of astronomy. Scylax of Halicarnassus, an intimate friend of Panaetius, and an eminent astronomer, besides being the head of the government in his own city, utterly repudiated the Chaldean method of foretelling the future. 2.89. But let us dismiss our witnesses and employ reasoning. Those men who defend the natal-day prophecies of the Chaldeans, argue in this way: In the starry belt which the Greeks call the Zodiac there is a certain force of such a nature that every part of that belt affects and changes the heavens in a different way, according to the stars that are in this or in an adjoining locality at a given time. This force is variously affected by those stars which are called planets or wandering stars. But when they have come into that sign of the Zodiac under which someone is born, or into a sign having some connexion with or accord with the natal sign, they form what is called a triangle or square. Now since, through the procession and retrogression of the stars, the great variety and change of the seasons and of temperature take place, and since the power of the sun produces such results as are before our eyes, they believe that it is not merely probable, but certain, that just as the temperature of the air is regulated by this celestial force, so also children at their birth are influenced in soul and body and by this force their minds, manners, disposition, physical condition, career in life and destinies are determined. [43] 2.90. What inconceivable madness! For it is not enough to call an opinion foolishness when it is utterly devoid of reason. However, Diogenes the Stoic makes some concessions to the Chaldeans. He says that they have the power of prophecy to the extent of being able to tell the disposition of any child and the calling for which he is best fitted. All their other claims of prophetic powers he absolutely denies. He says, for example, that twins are alike in appearance, but that they generally unlike in career and in fortune. Procles and Eurysthenes, kings of the Lacedaemonians, were twin brothers. 2.109. Cratippus states his minor premise thus; But there are countless instances of prophecies being fulfilled without the intervention of luck. On the contrary, I say there isnt even one. Observe how keen the controversy grows! Now that the minor premise is denied the conclusion fails. But he retorts: You are unreasonable not to grant it, it is so evident. Why evident? Because many prophecies come true. And what of the fact that many more dont come true? Does not this very uncertainty, which is characteristic of luck, demonstrate that their fulfilment is accounted for by luck and not by any law of nature? Furthermore, my dear Cratippus — for my controversy is with you — if that argument of yours is sound, dont you see that it is equally available in behalf of the means of divination practised by soothsayers, augurs, Chaldeans and by interpreters of lightnings, portents, and lots? For each of these classes will furnish you with at least one instance of a prophecy that came to pass. Therefore either they too are all means of divining — and this you very properly deny — or, if they are not, then, so far as I can see, the two classes which you permit to remain are not means of divining. Hence the same reasoning employed by you to establish the two kinds which you accept may be used to establish the others which you reject. [54] |
|
| 6. Asconius Pedianus Quintus, In Cornelianam, 71 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 76 |
7. Dionysius of Halycarnassus, Roman Antiquities, 1.35.1, 2.6.2-2.6.4 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia, cult of •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 46; Santangelo (2013) 73 | 1.35.1. But in the course of time the land came to be called Italy, after a ruler named Italus. This man, according to Antiochus of Syracuse, was both a wise and good prince, and persuading some of his neighbours by arguments and subduing the rest by force, he made himself master of all the land which lies between the Napetine and Scylacian bays, which was the first land, he says, to be called Italy, after Italus. And when he had possessed himself of this district and had many subjects, he immediately coveted the neighbouring peoples and brought many cities under his rule. He says further that Italus was an Oenotrian by birth. 2.6.2. but it has fallen into disuse in our days except as a certain semblance of it remains merely for form's sake. For those who are about to assume the magistracies pass the night out of doors, and rising at break of day, offer certain prayers under the open sky; whereupon some of the augurs present, who are paid by the State, declare that a flash of lightning coming from the left has given them a sign, although there really has not been any. 2.6.3. And the others, taking their omen from this report, depart in order to take over their magistracies, some of them assuming this alone to be sufficient, that no omens have appeared opposing or forbidding their intended action, others acting even in opposition to the will of the god; indeed, there are times when they resort to violence and rather seize than receive the magistracies. 2.6.4. Because of such men many armies of the Romans have been utterly destroyed on land, many fleets have been lost with all their people at sea, and other great and dreadful reverses have befallen the commonwealth, some in foreign wars and others in civil dissensions. But the most remarkable and the greatest instance happened in my time when Licinius Crassus, a man inferior to no commander of his age, led his army against the Parthian nation contrary to the will of Heaven and in contempt of the innumerable omens that opposed his expedition. But to tell about the contempt of the divine power that prevails among some people in these days would be a long story. |
|
| 8. Horace, Sermones, 1.6.113-1.6.114 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 77 |
| 9. Asconius Pedianus Quintus, In Milonianam, 39 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 76 |
| 10. Livy, Per., 19 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Konrad (2022) 165 |
11. Livy, History, 5.47.3, 8.30.1, 21.62.5, 21.62.8, 22.1.11, 25.1.8, 25.24.11, 25.29.5, 43.13.5 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Eidinow and Driediger-Murphy (2019) 146; Jenkyns (2013) 128; Konrad (2022) 167; Rutledge (2012) 83; Santangelo (2013) 75, 80| 43.13.5. quae in Colle est, duo diversa prodigia, palmam in area enatam et sanguine interdiu pluvisse. | |
|
| 12. Tibullus, Elegies, 1.3.11, 2.5.69-2.5.70, 63.3 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 75, 79 |
13. Plutarch, Brutus, 9.8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83| 9.8. αἴτιοι δὲ τούτων οἱ Καίσαρος κόλακες ἄλλας τε τιμὰς ἐπιφθόνους ἀνευρίσκοντες αὐτῷ καὶ διαδήματα τοῖς ἀνδριᾶσι νύκτωρ ἐπιτιθέντες, ὡς τοὺς πολλοὺς ὑπαξόμενοι βασιλέα προσειπεῖν ἀντὶ δικτάτορος. | 9.8. |
|
14. Plutarch, On The Fortune of The Romans, 10 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna, primigenia Found in books: Clark (2007) 238 | 10. And even the kings who succeeded Numa honoured Fortune as the head and foster-parent of Rome and, as Pindar Cf. Pausanias, iv. 30. 6. has it, truly the Prop of the State. It is possible that in the mss. the next section, which interrupts the historical sequence, is a copyist’s error, being perhaps copied from an earlier page of the archetype ( sc. 318 d-f, supra ) with some slight additions, changes, and omissions by later copyists. Another theory, however, is possible: the section before us appeared in Plutarch’s first sketch of the essay, and was later modified and completed in chap. v. ( supra ); Plutarch did not himself publish the essay, but after his death the first editor neglected to cancel the present passage (Bruhn and Stegmann.) A translation follows: One may consider the matter thus: there is in Rome an honoured shrine of Virtue which they themselves call the shrine of Virtus ; but it was built late and after a considerable lapse of time by Marcellus, who captured Syracuse. There is also a shrine of Reason, or verily of Good Counsel, which they call Mens (Mind); but this also was dedicated by Aemilius Scaurus, who lived in the era of the Cimbrian Wars, at which time rhetoric and sophistry and Greek argumentation had already found their way into the City. But even now they have no temple of Wisdom or Prudence or Constancy or Magimity. But of Fortune there are very many ancient and splendid temples built with every honour, one might say, and interspersed throughout the most conspicuous districts and localities of the City. The shrine of the Men’s Fortune was built by Ancus Marcius, the fourth king, and so named because Fortune has the largest share with Manly Fortitude for winning the victory. And again, that the shrine of the Women’s Fortune was dedicated by the women who turned back Marcius Coriolanus when he was leading enemies against Rome, there is no one who does not know. And Servius Tullius, the man who of all the kings most increased the power of his people, and introduced a well-regulated government and imposed order upon both the holding of elections and military procedure, and became the first censor and overseer of the lives and decorum of the citizens, and held the highest repute for courage and wisdom, of his own initiative attached himself to Fortune and bound his sovereignty fast to her, with the result that it was even thought that Fortune consorted with him, descending into his chamber through a certain window which they now call the Porta Fenestella. Cf. 273 b, supra . He, accordingly, built on the Capitoline a temple of Fortune which is now called the Temple of Fortuna Primigenia Cf. 281 e and 289 b-c, supra ; Cicero, De Legibus , ii. 11. 28; Livy, xxix. 36. 8, xxxiv. 53. 5. (which one might translate as First-Born ) and the Temple of Fortuna Obsequens, With this and the following passage 281 d-f, supra , should be carefully compared. which some think means obedient and others gracious. However, I prefer to abandon the Latin nomenclature, and shall endeavour to enumerate in Greek the different functions of the shrines of Fortune. There is, in fact, a shrine of Private Fortune on the Palatine, and the shrine of the Fowler’s Fortune which, even though it be a ridiculous name, yet gives reason for reflexion on metaphorical grounds, as if she attracted far-away objects and held them fast when they come into contact with her. Beside the Mossy Spring, as it is called, there is even yet a temple of Virgin Fortune; and on the Esquiline a shrine of Regardful Is this meant to be a translation of Redux ? Fortune. In the Angiportus Longus there is an altar of Fortune of Good Hope; and there is also beside the altar of Venus of the Basket a shrine of the Men’s Fortune. And there are countless other honours and appellations of Fortune, the greater part of which Servius instituted; for he knew that Fortune is of great moment, or rather, she is everything in human affairs, A literal quotation from Demosthenes, Olynthiac ii. 22. and particularly since he himself, through good fortune, had been promoted from the family of a captive enemy to the kingship. For, when the town of Corniculum was taken by the Romans, a captive maiden Ocrisia, Cf. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities , iv. 1; Ovid, Fasti , vi. 627 ff.; Livy, i. 39; Pliny, Natural History , xxxvi. 27. 204. whose fortune could not obscure either her beauty or her character, was given to be a slave to Tanaquil, the wife of king Tarquin; and a certain dependent, one of those whom the Romans call clientes , had her to wife; from these parents Servius was born. Others deny this, but assert that Ocrisia was a maiden who took the first-fruits and the libations on all occasions from the royal table and brought them to the hearth; and once on a time when she chanced, as usual, to be casting the offerings upon the fire, suddenly, as the flames died down, the member of a man rose up out of the hearth; and this the girl, greatly frightened, told to Tanaquil only. Now Tanaquil was an intelligent and understanding woman, and she decked the maiden in garments such as become a bride, and shut her up in the room with the apparition, for she judged it to be of a divine nature. Some declare that this love was manifested by the Lar of the house, others that it was by Vulcan. At any rate, it resulted in the birth of Servius, and, while he was still a child, his head shone with a radiance very like the gleam of lightning. But Antias Peter, Frag. Hist. Rom. p. 154, Valerius Antias, Frag. 12. and his school say not so, but relate that when Servius’s wife Gegania lay dying, in the presence of his mother he fell into a sleep from dejection and grief; and as he slept, his face was seen by the women to be surrounded by the gleam of fire. This was a token of his birth from fire and an excellent sign pointing to his unexpected accession to the kingship, which he gained after the death of Tarquin, by the zealous assistance of Tanaquil. Cf. 273 c, supra . Inasmuch as he of all kings is thought to have been naturally the least suited to monarchy and the least desirous of it, he who was minded to resign the kingship, Cf. Livy, i. 48. 9; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities , iv. 40. 3. but was prevented from doing so; for it appears that Tanaquil on her death-bed made him swear that he would remain in power and would ever set before him the ancestral Roman form of government. Thus to Fortune wholly belongs the kingship of Servius, which he received contrary to his expectations and retained against his will. |
|
| 15. Plutarch, Moralia, None (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83 |
| 16. Plutarch, Tiberius And Gaius Gracchus, 41.3-41.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna, primigenia Found in books: Clark (2007) 238, 239 |
17. Tacitus, Annals, 1.74, 11.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia •fortuna, primigenia Found in books: Clark (2007) 237; Rutledge (2012) 83| 1.74. Nec multo post Granium Marcellum praetorem Bithyniae quaestor ipsius Caepio Crispinus maiestatis postulavit, subscribente Romano Hispone: qui formam vitae iniit, quam postea celebrem miseriae temporum et audaciae hominum fecerunt. nam egens, ignotus, inquies, dum occultis libellis saevitiae principis adrepit, mox clarissimo cuique periculum facessit, potentiam apud unum, odium apud omnis adeptus dedit exemplum, quod secuti ex pauperibus divites, ex contemptis metuendi perniciem aliis ac postremum sibi invenere. sed Marcellum insimulabat sinistros de Tiberio sermones habuisse, inevitabile crimen, cum ex moribus principis foedissima quaeque deligeret accusator obiectaretque reo. nam quia vera erant, etiam dicta credebantur. addidit Hispo statuam Marcelli altius quam Caesarum sitam, et alia in statua amputato capite Augusti effigiem Tiberii inditam. ad quod exarsit adeo, ut rupta taciturnitate proclamaret se quoque in ea causa laturum sententiam palam et iuratum, quo ceteris eadem necessitas fieret. manebant etiam tum vestigia morientis libertatis. igitur Cn. Piso 'quo' inquit 'loco censebis, Caesar? si primus, habebo quod sequar: si post omnis, vereor ne inprudens dissentiam.' permotus his, quantoque incautius efferverat, paenitentia patiens tulit absolvi reum criminibus maiestatis: de pecuniis repetundis ad reciperatores itum est. 11.1. *nam Valerium Asiaticum, bis consulem, fuisse quondam adulterum eius credidit, pariterque hortis inhians, quos ille a Lucullo coeptos insigni magnificentia extollebat, Suillium accusandis utrisque immittit. adiungitur Sosibius Britannici educator qui per speciem benevolentiae moneret Claudium cavere vim atque opes principibus infensas: praecipuum auctorem Asiaticum interficiendi G. Caesaris non extimuisse contione in populi Romani fateri gloriamque facinoris ultro petere; clarum ex eo in urbe, didita per provincias fama parare iter ad Germanicos exercitus, quando genitus Viennae multisque et validis propinquitatibus subnixus turbare gentilis nationes promptum haberet. at Claudius nihil ultra scrutatus citis cum militibus tamquam opprimendo bello Crispinum praetorii praefectum misit, a quo repertus est apud Baias vinclisque inditis in urbem raptus. 11.1. Exim validissimas praefecturas invisit; et reciperare Armeniam avebat, ni a Vibio Marso, Syriae legato, bellum minitante cohibitus foret. atque interim Gotarzes paenitentia concessi regni et vocante nobilitate, cui in pace durius servitium est, contrahit copias. et hinc contra itum ad amnem Erinden; in cuius transgressu multum certato pervicit Vardanes, prosperisque proeliis medias nationes subegit ad flumen Sinden, quod Dahas Ariosque disterminat. ibi modus rebus secundis positus: nam Parthi quamquam victores longinquam militiam aspernabantur. igitur extructis monimentis, quibus opes suas testabatur nec cuiquam ante Arsacidarum tributa illis de gentibus parta, regreditur ingens gloria atque eo ferocior et subiectis intolerantior; qui dolo ante composito incautum venationique intentum interfecere, primam intra iuventam, sed claritudine paucos inter senum regum, si perinde amorem inter popularis quam metum apud hostis quaesivisset. nece Vardanis turbatae Parthorum res inter ambiguos quis in regnum acciperetur. multi ad Gotarzen inclinabant, quidam ad Meherdaten prolem Phraatis, obsidio nobis datum: dein praevaluit Gotarzes; potitusque regiam per saevitiam ac luxum adegit Parthos mittere ad principem Romanum occultas preces, quis permitti Meherdaten patrium ad fastigium orabant. | 1.74. Before long, Granius Marcellus, praetor of Bithynia, found himself accused of treason by his own quaestor, Caepio Crispinus, with Hispo Romanus to back the charge. Caepio was the pioneer in a walk of life which the miseries of the age and effronteries of men soon rendered popular. Indigent, unknown, unresting, first creeping, with his private reports, into the confidence of his pitiless sovereign, then a terror to the noblest, he acquired the favour of one man, the hatred of all, and set an example, the followers of which passed from beggary to wealth, from being despised to being feared, and crowned at last the ruin of others by their own. He alleged that Marcellus had retailed sinister anecdotes about Tiberius: a damning indictment, when the accuser selected the foulest qualities of the imperial character, and attributed their mention to the accused. For, as the facts were true, they were also believed to have been related! Hispo added that Marcellus' own statue was placed on higher ground than those of the Caesars, while in another the head of Augustus had been struck off to make room for the portrait of Tiberius. This incensed the emperor to such a degree that, breaking through his taciturnity, he exclaimed that, in this case, he too would vote, openly and under oath, â the object being to impose a similar obligation on the rest. There remained even yet some traces of dying liberty. Accordingly Gnaeus Piso inquired: "In what order will you register your opinion, Caesar? If first, I shall have something to follow: if last of all, I fear I may inadvertently find myself on the other side." The words went home; and with a meekness that showed how profoundly he rued his unwary outburst, he voted for the acquittal of the defendant on the counts of treason. The charge of peculation went before the appropriate commission. |
|
| 18. Suetonius, Tiberius, 15.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 188 |
| 19. Suetonius, Domitianus, 15.2 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 75 |
| 20. Suetonius, Augustus, 92.1-92.2, 94.11 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Eidinow and Driediger-Murphy (2019) 146 |
21. Dio Chrysostom, Orations, 31.43, 31.47-31.53, 31.71, 31.99, 31.105-31.106, 31.112, 31.155 (1st cent. CE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83 | 31.43. "Yes," you say, "for the majority of them are Romans and who would think of touching them? But those who stand beside them here are Macedonians, while these over here are Spartans, and by heavens, it is these we touch." And yet all that stood here formerly, or the most of them at any rate, you will admit were erected in acknowledgement of a benefaction, whereas of those now receiving honour many are being courted owing to their political power. Now the question which of the two classes has the greater right to be held in higher regard I will pass over; but this further question, which of the two classes â assuming that the honours granted are not to belong rightfully to all â can more reasonably be expected to take them on the basis of so uncertain a title, this question, I say, even these men themselves know well how to answer. For all know how much more permanent a benefaction is than power, for there is no strength which time does not destroy, but it destroys no benefaction. 31.47. Now perhaps some one will say that the statues belong to the city. Yes, and the land also belongs to the city, but none the less every one who possesses any has full authority over what is his own. Speaking in a political sense, if anyone inquires who owns the Island or who owns Caria, he will be told that the Rhodians own it. But if you ask in a different sense about this specific estate here or this field, it is clear that you will learn the name of the private owner. So also with the statues; in a general sense men say that they belong to the people of Rhodes, but in the particular or special sense they say that this or that statue belongs to So-andâso or to So-andâso, naming whatever man it has been given to. And yet, whereas in the case of estates, houses, and other possessions, you cannot learn who owns them unless you inquire, the statue has an inscription on it and preserves not only the name but also the lineaments of the man to whom it was first given, so that it is possible to step near and at once know whose it is. I refer to those on which the truth is still given. 31.48. Moreover, the plea that they stand on public property is most absurd, if this is really held to be an indication that they do not belong to those who received them, but to the city. Why, if that be true, it will be possible to say that also the things which are on sale in the centre of the market-place belong to the commonwealth, and that the boats, no doubt, do belong, not to their possessors, but to the city, just because they are lying in the harbours. Then, too, an argument which I heard a man advance, as a very strong one in support of that position, I am not disposed to conceal from you: he said that you have made an official list of your statues. What, pray, is the significance of that? Why, the country lying opposite us, Carpathos yonder, the mainland, the other islands, and in general many possessions can be found which the city has listed in its public records, but they have been parcelled out among individuals. 31.49. And in fine, even if each man who has been honoured does not in this sense 'possess' his statue as he would possess anything else he has acquired, it cannot for that reason be said that it belongs to him any the less or that he suffers no wrong when you give his statue to another. For you will find countless senses in which we say that a thing 'belongs' to an individual and very different senses too, for instance, a priesthood, a public office, a wife, citizenship, none of which their possessors are at liberty either to sell or to use in any way they like. 31.50. But certainly a common principle of justice is laid down in regard to them all, to the effect that anything whatsoever which any one has received justly â whether he happens to have got it once for all or for a specified time, just as, for instance, he obtains public offices â that is his secure possession and nobody can deprive him of it. How, then, is it possible to have anything more justly, than when a man who has proved himself good and worthy of gratitude receives honour in return for many noble deeds? Or from whom could he receive it that has fuller authority and is greater than the democracy of Rhodes and your city? For it is no trifling consideration that it was not the Calymnians who gave it, or those ill-advised Caunians; just as in private business the better and more trustworthy you prove the man to be from whom you obtain any possession, the stronger your title to it is, and by so much more no one can dispute it. Yet any city which one might mention is in every way better and more trustworthy than one private citizen, even if he has the highest standing, and arrangements made by the state are more binding than those which are negotiated privately. 31.51. Then consider, further, that all men regard those agreements as having greater validity which are made with the sanction of the state and are entered in the city's records; and it is impossible for anything thus administered to be annulled, either in case one buys a piece of land from another, a boat or a slave, or if a man makes a loan to another, or frees a slave, or makes gift to any one. How in the world, then, has it come to pass that these transactions carry a greater security than any other? It is because the man who has handled any affair of his in this way has made the city a witness to the transaction. 31.52. In heaven's name, will it then be true that, while anything a person may get from a private citizen by acting through the state cannot possibly be taken from him, yet what one has received, not only by a state decree, but also as a gift of the people, shall not be inalienable? And whereas an action taken in this way by anybody else will never be annulled by the authority of the state, yet shall the state, in the offhand way we observe here, cancel what it has itself done? â and that too, not by taking it away in the same manner in which it was originally given, that is, by the commonwealth officially, but by letting one man, if he happens to be your chief magistrate, have the power to do so? 31.53. And besides, there are official records of those transactions of which I have spoken; for the decrees by which honours are given are recorded, I take it, and remain on public record for all time. For though repaying a favour is so strictly guarded among you, yet taking it back from the recipients is practised with no formality at all. Then, while the one action cannot be taken except by a decree passed by you as a body, yet the other comes to pass by a sort of custom, even though it is the will of only one person. Note, however, that, as I said, these matters have been recorded officially, not only in the decrees, but also upon the statues themselves, on which we find both the name of the man who received the honour and the statement that the assembly has bestowed it, and, again, that these statues are set up on public property. 31.71. Come, then, if any one were to question the magistrate who is set over you, who commands that the inscription be erased and another man's name engraved in its place, asking: "What does this mean? Ye gods, has this man been found guilty of having done the city some terrible wrong so many years after the deed?" In heaven's name, do you not think that he would be deterred, surely if he is a man of common decency? For my part I think that even the mason will blush for shame. And then if children or kinsmen of the great man should happen to appear, what floods of tears do you think they will shed when some one begins to obliterate the name? 31.99. Neither can we be so sure, moreover, that such treatment might not be brought about by some persons through hatred, I mean if it so happens that one of your chief magistrates has a grudge against any of his predecessors. You have heard how the Theagenes incident, at any rate, grew out of political envy and jealousy. For even if they urge that now they follow this practice only in the case of the old statues, yet as time goes on, just as ever happens in the case of all bad habits, this one too will of necessity grow worse and worse. The reason is that it is utterly impossible to call the culprit to account because the whole business from first to last lies in his hands. "Yes, by heavens," you say, "but the kinsmen will certainly put a stop to it." Well then, if the kinsmen happen to be absent or to have had no knowledge of the matter, what do we propose to do when they do learn of it? Will it be necessary to chisel out again the man's name which someone has been in a hurry to insert? 31.105. So much for that. Well then, neither can it be said that the persons you honour are more numerous; for the mere number of the statues standing which date from that time reveals the truth. And apart from that, who would say that those who are zealous to serve the state are now more numerous than then? Oh yes! you may say, "but we simply must honour the commanders who rule over us, one and all." What of it? Do not also the Athenians, Spartans, Byzantines, and Mytilenaeans pay court to these same? But nevertheless, whenever they decide to set up in bronze one of these, they do so, and they manage to find the cost. 31.106. Indeed I once heard a certain Rhodian remark â "The position of those people is not comparable to ours. For all that they, the Athenians excepted, possess is liberty and the Athenians have no great possessions either; but our city is the envy of all because it is the most prosperous, and consequently it needs a greater number of loyal friends. Furthermore, none of the Romans particularly cares to have a statue among those peoples, but they do not despise that honour here." 31.112. Then again, whereas the Eleans, who are not superior in other respects to any of the other Peloponnesians, put so high a value upon their own position, are you Rhodians so afraid of all your casual visitors that you think if you fail to set up some one person in bronze, you will lose your freedom? But if your freedom is in so precarious a state that it can be stripped from you on any petty pretext, it would in every way be better for you to be slaves forthwith. So too when men's bodies are so dangerously ill that there is no longer hope for their recovery, death is better than life. 31.155. For instance, many people assert that the statues of the Rhodians are like actors. For just as every actor makes his entrance as one character at one time and at another as another, so likewise your statues assume different rôles at different times and stand almost as if they were acting a part. For instance, one and the same statue, they say, is at one time a Greek, at another time a Roman, and later on, if it so happens, a Macedonian or a Persian; and what is more, with some statues the deception is so obvious that the beholder at once is aware of the deceit. For in fact, clothing, foot-gear, and everything else of that kind expose the fraud. |
|
| 22. Statius, Siluae, 2.2 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Jenkyns (2013) 128 |
| 23. Pliny The Elder, Natural History, 29.57, 35.4, 35.52, 35.85-35.86, 35.128, 36.189 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83, 188; Santangelo (2013) 74 |
| 24. Silius Italicus, Punica, 14.641-14.665 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Jenkyns (2013) 128 |
| 25. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Shimeon Ben Yohai, 2.8.17 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Jenkyns (2013) 128 |
26. Cassius Dio, Roman History, 43.45.3-43.45.4 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83 | 43.45.3. Another likeness they set up in the temple of Quirinus with the inscription, "To the Invincible God," and another on the Capitol beside the former kings of Rome. 43.45.4. Now it occurs to me to marvel at the coincidence: there were eight such statues, â seven to the kings, and an eighth to the Brutus who overthrew the Tarquins, â and they set up the statue of Caesar beside the last of these; and it was from this cause chiefly that the other Brutus, Marcus, was roused to plot against him. |
|
| 27. Censorinus, De Die Natali, 2.9 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 73 |
| 28. Gellius, Attic Nights, 6.1.6 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83 |
| 29. Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Carus, 19.1-19.2 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 188 |
| 30. Justinian, Digest, 23.2.43-23.2.44 (5th cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia, cult of Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 34 |
| 31. Procopius, De Bellis, 3.2.24 (6th cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83, 188 |
| 32. Florus Lucius Annaeus, Epitome Bellorum Omnium Annorum Dcc, 1.16.3-1.16.6, 1.18.27 Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Jenkyns (2013) 128 |
| 33. Valerius Maximus, Memorable Deeds And Sayings, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 80 |
| 34. Zonaras, Epitome, 8.1, 8.15-8.16 Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Konrad (2022) 165; Santangelo (2013) 80 |
| 35. Epigraphy, Ig, 5.1.1165 Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia, cult of Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 164 |
| 36. Epigraphy, Illrp, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Clark (2007) 239 |
| 37. Epigraphy, Th, 13-25, 27-30, 26 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 34 |
| 38. Epigraphy, Ilcv, 2834 Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia, cult of Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 34 |
| 39. Epigraphy, Pompei, 2-9, 1 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 45 |
| 40. Epigraphy, 1074, 1084, 1087A, 1074, 1079-1081, 1083-1087, 1082 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 414 |
| 41. Epigraphy, Fira, None Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia, cult of Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 34 |
| 42. Epigraphy, Cil, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 78 |
| 43. Epigraphy, Igur, 3.1171 Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia, cult of Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 541 |
| 44. Philostratus Minor, Imagines, None Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83 |
| 45. Philostratus Maior, Imagines, None Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83 |
| 46. Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Gordiani Tres, 2.3, 3.6-3.8, 32.1 Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 188 |
| 47. Various, Anthologia Planudea, 40 Tagged with subjects: •rome, temple of fortuna primigenia Found in books: Rutledge (2012) 83, 188 |
| 48. Epigraphy, Seg, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 164 |
| 49. Epigraphy, Syll. , 616 Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia, cult of Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 164 |
| 50. Epigraphy, Rrc, 405/2 Tagged with subjects: •fortuna primigenia Found in books: Santangelo (2013) 78 |
| 51. Epigraphy, Ils, 106, 3185, 3606, 4027, 4911, 5404, 8887, 5286 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bruun and Edmondson (2015) 541 |
