Quaestiones Romanae

Why is it that the women, when they adorn in their houses a shrine to the women’s goddess, whom they call Bona Dea,[*](Cf. Macrobius, Saturnalia, i. 12. 21-28.) bring in no myrtle, although they are very eager to make use of all manner of growing and blooming plants?

Was this goddess, as the mythologists relate, the wife of the seer Faunus; and was she secretly addicted to wine,[*](Cf. 265 b, supra.) but did not escape detection and was beaten by her husband with myrtle rods, and is this the reason why they do not bring in myrtle and, when they make libations of wine to her, call it milk?

Or is it because they remain pure from many things, particularly from venery, when they perform this holy service? For they not only exclude their husbands, but they also drive everything male out of the house[*](Cf.Life of Caesar, ix. (711 e), Life of Cicero, xix. (870 b); Juvenal, vi. 339.) whenever they conduct the customary ceremonies in honour of the goddess. So, because the myrtle is sacred to Venus, they religiously exclude it. For she whom they now call Venus Murcia, in ancient days, it seems, they styled Myrtia.

Why do the Latins revere the woodpecker and all strictly abstain[*](No doubt this means from eating it since they used to eat all small birds.) from it?

Is it because, as they tell the tale, Picus,[*](Cf. Ovid, Metamorphoses, xiv. 320 ff.) transformed by his wife’s magic drugs, became a woodpecker and in that form gives oracles and prophecies to those who consult him?

Or is this wholly incredible and monstrous, and is that other tale[*](Cf. 278 c, 320 d, infra; Life of Romulus, iv. (19 e), vii. (21 c).) more credible which relates that when Romulus and Remus were exposed, not only did a she-wolf suckle them, but also a certain woodpecker carne continually to visit them and bring them scraps of food? For generally, even to this day, in foot-hills and thickly wooded places where the woodpecker is found, there also is found the wolf, as Nigidius records.

Or is it rather because they regard this bird as sacred to Mars, even as other birds to other gods? For it is a courageous and spirited bird and has a beak so strong that it can overturn oaks by pecking them until it has reached the inmost part of the tree.

Why do they suppose Janus to have been twofaced and so represent him in painting and sculpture?

Is it because, as they relate, he was by birth a Greek from Perrhaebia, and, when he had crossed to Italy and had settled among the savages there, he changed both his speech and his habits? Or is it rather because he changed the people of Italy to another manner and form of life by persuading a people which had formerly made use of wild plants and lawless customs to till the soil and to live under organized government?[*](Cf. 274 e, infra; Life of Numa, xix. (72 f); Athenaeus, 692 d; Lydus, De Mensibus, iv. 2; Macrobius, Saturnalia i. 7. 21, and i. 9.)

Why do they sell articles for funerals in the precinct of Libitina, whom they identify with Venus?[*](Cf.Life of Numa, xii. (67 e); Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, iv. 15. 5; Varro, De Lingua Latina, vi. 47.)

Is this also one of the philosophic devices of king Numa, that they should learn not to feel repugnance at such things nor shun them as a pollution?

Or is it rather a reminder that whatever is born must die, since one goddess presides over births and deaths? For in Delphi there is a little statue of Aphrodite of the Tomb, to which they summon the departed to come forth for the libations.

Why have they in the month three beginnings or fixed points, and do not adopt the same interval of days between them?

Is it, as Juba[*](Müller, Frag. Hist. Graec. iii. p. 470.) and his followers relate, that on the Kalends the officials used to call[*](Cf. Old Latin calare, equated with Greek καλεῖν by Plutarch and by other writers.) the people and announce the Nones for the fifth day thereafter, regarding the Ides as a holy day?

Or is it rather because, since they measured time by the phases of the moon, they observed that in each month the moon undergoes three very important changes: first, when she is hidden by her conjunction with the sun: second, when she has escaped the sun’s rays and becomes visible for the first time at sunset; and third, at the full moon, when her orb is completely round? The disappearance and concealment of the moon they call Kalendae, for everything

Why do they reckon the day that follows the Kalends, the Nones, or the Ides as unsuitable for leaving home or for travel?

Is it, as most authorities think and as Livy[*](Livy, v. 37; and vi. 1. 11.) records, that on the day after the Ides of Quintilis, which they now call July, the military tribunes led out the army, and were vanquished in battle by the Gauls at the river Allia and lost the City? But when the day after the Ides had come to be regarded as ill-omened, did superstition, as is its wont, extend the custom

Or does this contain many irrational assumptions? For it was on a different day that they were defeated in battle,[*](The traditional date of the battle was July 18, 390 b.c.) a day which they call Alliensis from the river, and make a dread day of expiation[*](Cf.Life of Camillus, chap. xix. 8 (138 d).); and although they have many ill-omened days, they do not observe them under the same names[*](As the Kalends, the Nones, and the Ides have the same names in every month.) in each month, but each in the month in which it occurs: and it is thus quite incredible that the superstition should have attached itself simply to all the days that follow immediately after the Nones or the Kalends.

Consider the following analogy: just as they have dedicated the first month to the gods of Olympus, and the second, in which they perform certain rites of purification and sacrifice to the departed, to the gods of the lower world, so also in regard to the days of the month they have established three as festive and holy days, as I have stated,[*](269 b, supra.) which are, as it were, fundamental and sovereign days: but the days which follow immediately they have dedicated to the spirits and the dead, and have come to regard them as ill-omened and unsuitable for business. In fact, the Greeks worship the gods on the day of the new moon: the next day they have duly assigned to the heroes and spirits, and the second bowl of wine is mixed in honour of the heroes and heroines,[*](That is, the spirits of the men and women of the Heroic Age who dwelt after death in the Isles of the Blest or in Hades.) And speaking generally, time is a sort of number: and the beginning of number is divine, for it is the monad. But after it is the dyad, antagonistic to the beginning number, and the first of the even numbers. The even numbers are imperfect, incomplete,

Or has also the saying of Themistocles[*](Cf. 320 f, infra; Life of Themistocles, xviii. (121 b). The context of 345 c, infra, makes it very probably that the essay De Gloria Atheniensium began with this favourite story of Plutarch’s.) some foundation in reason? For once upon a time, said he, the Day-After had an altercation with the Feast-Day on the ground that the Feast-Day had much labour and toil, whereas she herself provided the opportunity of enjoying in leisure and quiet all the things prepared for the festival. To this the Feast-Day replied, You are quite right; but if I had not been, you would not be! This story Themistocles related to the Athenian generals who succeeded him, to show that they would have been nowhere, if he himself had not saved the city.

Since, therefore, all travel and all business of importance needs provision and preparation, and since in ancient days the Romans, at the time of festivals, made no provision or plan for anything, save only that they were engaged in the service of their gods and busied themselves with this only, just as even to this day the priests cause such a proclamation to be made in advance as they proceed on their way to sacrifice: so it was only natural that they did not set out on a journey immediately after their festivals, nor did they transact any business, for they were

Or is it even as men now, who have offered their prayers and oblations, are wont to tarry and sit a while in the temples,[*](Cf.Life of Numa, xiv. (69 e-70 a); Propertius ii. 28. 45-46; see also Lewy in Philologus, lxxxiv. p. 378.) and so they would not let busy days succeed holy days immediately, but made some pause and breathing-space between, since business brings with it much that is distasteful and undesired?

Why do women in mourning wear white robes and white head-dresses?

Do they do this, as men say the Magi do, arraying themselves against Hades and the powers of darkness, and making themselves like unto Light and Brightness?

Or is it that, just as they clothe the body of the dead in white, they think it proper that the relatives should also wear this colour? They adorn the body thus since they cannot so adorn the soul; and they wish to send forth the soul bright and pure, since it is now set free after having fought the good fight in all its manifold forms.

Or are plainness and simplicity most becoming on these occasions? Of the dyed garments, some reflect expense, others over-elaboration: for we may say no less with reference to black than to purple: These be cheating garments, these be cheating colours. [*](Apparently a misquotation of Herodotus, iii. 22. 1: otherwise misquoted in Moralia, 646 b and 863 e. Cf. also Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis, i. x. 48. 6 (p. 344 Potter).) That which is naturally black is dyed not through art, but by nature: and when it is

Why do they regard all the city wall as inviolable and sacred, but not the gates?

Is it, as Varro has written, because the wall must be considered sacred that men may fight and die with enthusiasm in its defence? It was under such circumstances, it seems, that Romulus killed his brother because he was attempting to leap across a place that was inviolable and sacred, and to make it traversable and profane.

But it was impossible to consecrate the gates, for through them they carry out many other objectionable things and also dead bodies.[*](Cf.Moralia, 518 b.) Wherefore the original founders of a city yoke a bull and a cow, and mark out with a plough all the land on which they intend to build[*](Cf. Varro, De Lingua Latina, v. 143, Res Rusticae, ii. 1. 9; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, i. 88; Ovid, Fasti, iv. 819 ff.); and when they are engaged in tracing[*](Cf.Life of Romulus, xi. (23 d).) the circuit of the walls, as they measure off the space intended for gates, they lift up the ploughshare and thus carry the plough across,

Why do they tell children, whenever they would swear by Hercules, not to do so under a roof, and bid them go out into the open air?[*](Cf. Varro, De Lingua Latina, v. 66.)

Is it, as some relate, because they believe that Hercules had no pleasure in staying in the house, but rejoiced in a life in the open air and a bed under the stars?

Or is it rather because Hercules is not one of the native gods, but a foreigner from afar? For neither do they swear under a roof by Bacchus, since he also is a foreign god if he is from Nysa.

Or is this but said in jest to the children, and what is done is really a check upon over-readiness and hastiness to swear, as Favorinus stated? For what is done following, as it were, upon preparation produces delay and allows deliberation. Yet one might urge against Favorinus the fact that this custom is not common, but peculiar to Hercules, as may be seen from the legend about him: for it is recorded that he was so circumspect regarding an oath that he swore but once and for Phyleus, the son of Augeas, alone. Wherefore they say that the prophetic priestess also brought up against the Spartans all the oaths they had sworn, saying that it would be better and much more to be desired if they would keep them.)

Why do they not allow the bride to cross the threshold of her home herself, but those who are escorting her lift her over?[*](Cf.Life of Romulus, xv. (26 d-e).)

Is it because they carried off by force also the first Roman brides and bore them in in this manner, and the women did not enter of their own accord?

Or do they wish it to appear that it is under constraint and not of their own desire that they enter a dwelling where they are about to lose their virginity?

Or is it a token that the woman may not go forth of her own accord and abandon her home if she be not constrained, just as it was under constraint that she entered it? So likewise among us in Boeotia they burn the axle of the bridal carriage before the door, signifying that the bride must remain, since her means of departure has been destroyed.

Why do they, as they conduct the bride to her home, bid her say, Where you are Gaius, there am I Gaia [*](Ubi tu Gaius, ego Gaia.)?

Is her entrance into the house upon fixed terms, as it were, at once to share everything and to control jointly the household, and is the meaning, then, Wherever you are lord and master, there am I lady and mistress? These names are in common use also in other connexions, just as jurists speak of Gaius Seius and Lucius Titius,[*](John Doe and Richard Roe.) and philosophers of Dion and Theon.[*](Cf.Moralia, 1061 c.)

Or do they use these names because of Gaia Caecilia,[*](Probably not the same as Tanaquil, wife of Tarquinius Priscus; but Cf. Pliny, Natural History, viii. 48 (194).) consort of one of Tarquini sons, a fair and virtuous woman, whose statue in bronze stands in the temple of Sanctus?[*](We should probably emend to Sancus; the same mistake is made in the mss. of Propertius, iv. 9. 71-74, where see the excellent note of Barber and Butler.) And both her sandals and her spindle were, in ancient days, dedicated there as tokens of her love of home and of her industry respectively.

Why is the far-famed Talassio [*](The traditional Roman spelling seems to be with -ss-.) sung at the marriage ceremony?[*](Cf.Life of Romulus, xv. (26 c), Life of Pompey, iv. (620 f); Livy, i. 9. 12.)

Is it derived from talasia (spinning)? For they call the wool-basket (talaros) talasus. When they lead in the bride, they spread a fleece beneath her: she herself brings with her a distaff and her spindle, and wreaths her husband’s door with wool.

Or is the statement of the historians true? They relate that there was a certain young man, brilliant in military achievements and valuable in other wTays, whose name was Talasius: and when the Romans were carrying off the daughters of the Sabines who had come to see the games, a maiden of particularly beautiful appearance was being carried off for him by some plebeian retainers of his. To protect their enterprise and to prevent anyone from approaching and trying to wrest the maiden from them, they shouted continually that she was being brought as a wife for Talasius (Talasio). Since, therefore, everyone honoured Talasius, they followed along and provided escort, joining in the good wishes and acclamations. Wherefore since Talasius’s marriage was happy, they became accustomed to invoke Talasius in other marriages also, even as the Greeks invoke Hymen.

Why is it that in the month of May at the time of the full moon they throw into the river from the Pons Sublicius figures of men, calling the images thrown Argives?[*](Cf. 285 a, infra, and Ovid, Fasti, v. 621 ff.; Varro, De Lingua Latina, v. 45; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, i. 38. 2-3. Plutarch means the Argei, the origin and meaning of which is a mystery (see V. Rose’s edition, pp. 98 ff.).)

Is it because in ancient days the barbarians who

Why in ancient days did they never dine out without their sons, even when these were still but children?

Did Lycurgus introduce this custom also, and bring boys to the common meals that they might become accustomed to conduct themselves toward their pleasures, not in a brutish or disorderly way, but with discretion, since they had their elders as supervisors and spectators, as it were? No less important is the fact that the fathers themselves would also be more decorous and prudent in the presence of their sons: for where the old are shameless, as Plato[*](Laws, 729 c; also cited or referred to Moralia, 14 b, 71 b, 144 f.) remarks, there the young also must needs be lost to all sense of shame.

Why is it that while the other Romans make libations and offerings to the dead in the month of February, Decimus Brutus, as Cicero[*](De Legibus, ii. 21. 54.) has recorded, used to do so in the month of December? This was

Since most peoples are accustomed to make offerings to the dead at the close of the day and at the end of the month, is it not reasonable also to honour the dead in the last month[*](That is, according to Brutus’s reckoning. For the common people February continued to be the month of the Parentalia, and February was once the last month (Cf. 268 b, supra).) at the turn of the year? And December is the last month.

Or do these honours belong to deities beneath the earth, and is it the proper season to honour these deities when all the crops have attained consummation?

Or is it most fitting to remember those below when men are stirring the earth at the beginning of seed-time?

Or is it because this month has been consecrated to Saturn by the Romans, and they regard Saturn as an infernal, not a celestial god?

Or is it that then their greatest festival, the Saturnalia, is set: and it is reputed to contain the most numerous social gatherings and enjoyments, and therefore Brutus deemed it proper to bestow upon the dead first-fruits, as it were, of this festival also?

Or is this statement, that Brutus alone sacrificed to the dead in this month, altogether a falsehood? For it is in December that they make offerings to Larentia and bring libations to her sepulchre.

And why do they thus honour Larentia who was at one time a courtesan?

They record that there was another Larentia, Acca,[*](Cf. W. F. Otto, Wiener Studien, xxxv. 62 ff.) the nurse of Romulus, whom they honour in

Why do they call one of the gates the Window, for this is what fenestra means: and why is the so-called Chamber of Fortune beside it?[*](Cf. 322 f, infra; Ovid, Fasti, vi. 569 ff.)

Is it because King Servius, the luckiest of mortals, was reputed to have converse with Fortune, who visited him through a window?

Or is this but a fable, and is the true reason that when King Tarquinius Priscus died, his wife Tanaquil, a sensible and a queenly woman, put her head out of a window and, addressing the citizens, persuaded them to appoint Servius king, and thus the place came to have this name?[*](Cf. 323 d, infra; Livy, i. 41.)

Why is it that of all the things dedicated to the gods it is the custom to allow only spoils of war to disintegrate with the passage of time, and not to move them beforehand[*](That is, to move them away before they fell to pieces; for the ancients used to clear out their temples periodically.) nor repair them?

Is it in order that men may believe that their repute deserts them at the same time with the obliteration of their early memorials, and may ever seek to bring in some fresh reminder of valour?

Or is it rather that, as time makes dim the memorials of their dissension with their enemies, it would be invidious and malicious to restore and renew them? Nor among the Greeks, either, do

Why did Quintus Metellus,[*](Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius, consul 80 b.c.) when he became pontifex maximus, with his reputation for good sense in all other matters as well as in his statesmanship, prevent divination from birds after the month Sextius, which is now called August?

Is it that, even as we attend to such matters in the middle of the day or at dawn, or in the beginning of the month when the moon is waxing, and avoid the declining days and hours as unsuitable for business, so likewise did Metellus regard the period of time after the first eight months as the evening or late afternoon, so to speak, of the year, since then it is declining and waning?

Or is it because we should observe birds when they are in their prime and in perfect condition? And this they are before the summer-time: but towards autumn some are weak and sickly, others but nestlings and not full-grown, and still others have vanished completely, migrating because of the time of year.

Why were men who were not regularly enlisted, but merely tarrying m the camp, not allowed to throw missiles at the enemy or to wound them?

This fact Cato the Elder[*](Cf. Cicero, De Officiis, i. 11 (37).) has made clear in one of his letters to his son, in which he bids the young man to return home if he has completed his term of service and has been discharged: or, if he should

Is it because sheer necessity alone constitutes a warrant to kill a human being, and he who does so illegally and without the word of command is a murderer? For this reason Cyrus also praised Chrysantas[*](Cf. Xenophon, Cyropaedia, iv. 1. 3; and the note on Moralia, 236 e (Vol. III. p. 420).) who, when he was about to kill an enemy, and had his weapon raised to strike, heard the recall sounded and let the man go without striking him, believing that he was now prevented from so doing.

Or must he who grapples with the enemy and fights not be free from accountability nor go unscathed should he play the coward? For he does not help so much by hitting or wounding an enemy as he does harm by fleeing or retreating. He, therefore, who has been discharged from service is freed from military regulations: but he who asks leave to perform the offices of a soldier renders himself again accountable to the regulations and to his general.