Quaestiones Romanae

Why did they think that the priests that take omens from birds, whom they formerly called Auspices, but now Augures, should always keep their lanterns open and put no cover on them?

Were they like the Pythagoreans,[*](Cf. 290 e, infra, and the notes on Moralia, 12 d-e (Vol. I. p. 58).) who made small matters symbols of great, forbidding men to sit on a peck measure or to poke a fire with a sword: and even so did the men of old make use of many riddles, especially with reference to priests: and is the question of the lantern of this sort? For the

Now when the winds are blowing the birds are unsteady, and do not afford reliable signs because of their wandering and irregular movements. Therefore by this custom they instruct the augurs not to go forth to obtain these signs when the wind is blowing, but only in calm and still weather when they can use their lanterns open.

Why was it forbidden to priests that had any sore upon their bodies to sit and watch for birds of omen?

Is this also a symbolic indication that those who deal with matters divine should be in no way suffering from any smart, and should not, as it were, have any sore or affection in their souls, but should be untroubled, unscathed, and undistracted?

Or is it only logical, if no one would use for sacrifice a victim afflicted with a sore, or use such birds for augury, that they should be still more on their guard against such things in their own case, and be pure, unhurt, and sound when they advance to interpret signs from the gods?[*](Cf.Moralia, 383 b; Leviticus, xxii. 17-21.) For a sore seems to be a sort of mutilation or pollution of the body.

Why did King Servius Tullius build a shrine of Little Fortune, which they call Brevis?[*](Hartman’s theory that Plutarch is rendering Occasio = Fortuna Brevis) is very doubtful.)

Is it because although, at the first, he was a man of little importance and of humble activities and the

Consider, however, whether it be not that Servius observed the mighty potency of Fortune’s ever slight mutation, and that by the occurrence or nonoccurrence of some slight thing, it has often fallen to the lot of some to succeed or to fail in the greatest enterprises, and it was for this reason that he built the shrine of Little Fortune, teaching men to give great heed to events, and not to despise anything that they encountered by reason of its triviality.

Why did they not extinguish a lamp, but suffered it to go out of itself?[*](Cf.Moralia, 702 d ff.)

Did they reverence it as akin and closely related to the inextinguishable and undying fire, or is this also a symbolic indication that we should not destroy

Or does this custom teach us that we should not destroy fire, water, or any other necessity when we have enough and to spare, but should allow those who have need of these things to use them, and should leave them for others when we ourselves no longer have any use for them?

Why do they that are reputed to be of distinguished lineage wear crescents on their shoes?[*](Cf. Isidore, Origines, xix. 34; Juvenal, vii. 192.)

Is this, as Castor says,[*](Jacoby, Frag. der griech. Hist. 250, Frag. 16.) an emblem of the fabled residence in the moon, and an indication that after death their souls will again have the moon beneath their feet[*](Cf.Moralia, 943 a ff.); or was this the special privilege of the most ancient families? These were Arcadians of Evander’s following, the so-called Pre-Lunar[*](Cf. Aristotle, Frag. 591 (ed. V. Rose); Apollonius Rhodius, iv. 264; scholium on Aristophanes, Clouds, 398.) people.

Or does this also, like many another custom, remind the exalted and proud of the mutability, for better or worse, in the affairs of men, and that they should take the moon as an illustration[*](Nauck, Trag. Graec. Frag. p. 315, Sophocles, Frag. 787; or Pearson, no. 871: the full quotation may be found in Life of Demetrius, xlv. (911 c). Cf. the variants there and in Moralia, 517 d.):

1. When out of darkness first she comes anew
2. Her face she shows increasing fair and full;
3. And when she reaches once her brightest sheen,
4. Again she wastes away and comes to naught?

Or was it a lesson in obedience to authority, teaching them not to be disaffected under the government of kings, but to be even as the moon, who is willing to give heed to her superior and to be a second to him,

Ever gazing in awe at the rays of the bright-gleaming Sun-god,

Why do they believe that the year belongs to Jupiter, but the months to Juno?

Is it because Jupiter and Juno rule the invisible, conceptual deities, but the sun and moon the visible deities? Now the sun makes the year and the moon the months: but one must not believe that the sun and moon are merely images of Jupiter and Juno, but that the sun is really Jupiter himself in his material form and in the same way the moon is Juno. This is the reason why the Romans apply the name Juno to our Hera, for the name means young or junior, so named from the moon. And they also call her Lucina, that is brilliant or light-giving: and they believe that she aids women in the pangs of childbirth, even as the moon[*](Timotheus, Frag. 28 (ed. Wilamowitz-Möllendorff); Edmonds, Lyra Graeca, iii. p. 331; better Diels, Anthologia Lyrica Graeca, ii. p. 152. Cf.Moralia, 659 a; Macrobius, Saturnalia, vii. 16. 28; see also Roscher, Lexikon der gr.und.röm. Mythologie, vol. i. coll. 571-572.):

1. On through the dark-blue vault of the stars,
2. Through the moon that brings birth quickly;

Why of birds is the one called left-hand a bird of good omen?

Is this not really true, but is it the peculiarity of the language which throws many off the track? For their word for left is sinistrum; to permit is sinere: and they say sine when they urge giving permission. Accordingly the bird which permits the augural action to be taken, that is, the avis sinisteria, the vulgar are not correct in assuming to be sinistra and in calling it so.

Or is it, as Dionysius[*](Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, ii. 5. 5; Virgil, Aeneid, ix. 630, and Conington’s note on Virgil, Georgics, iv. 7.) says, that when Ascanius, son of Aeneas, was drawing up his army against Mezentius, and his men were taking the auspices, a flash of lightning, which portended victory, appeared on the left, and from that time on they observe this practice in divination? Or is it true, as certain other authorities affirm, that this happened to Aeneas? As a matter of fact, the Thebans, when they had routed and overpowered their enemies on the left wing at Leuctra,[*](Cf.Life of Pelopidas, xxiii. (289 d-e).) continued thereafter to assign to the left the chief command in all battles.

Or[*](Cf.Moralia, 363 e, 888 b.) is it rather, as Juba[*](Müller, Frag. Hist. Graec. iii. p. 471.) declares, that as anyone looks eastward, the north is on the left, and some make out the north to be the right, or upper, side of the universe?

But consider whether it be not that the left is by nature the weaker side, and they that preside over auguries try to strengthen and prop its deficient powers by this method of equalization.

Or was it that they believed earthly and mortal matters to be antithetical to things heavenly and divine, and so thought that whatever was on the left for us the gods were sending forth from the right?

Why was it permitted to take up a bone of a man who had enjoyed a triumph, and had later died and been cremated, and carry it into the city and deposit it there, as Pyrrhon[*](Müller, Frag. Hist. Graec. iv. p. 479.) of Lipara has recorded?

Was it to show honour to the dead? In fact, to other men of achievement, as well as to generals, they granted, not only for themselves, but also for their descendants, the right to be buried in the Forum, as they did to Valerius[*](Cf. Life of Publicola, chap. xxiii. (109 d).) and to Fabricius: and they relate that when descendants of these men die and have been conveyed to the Forum, a lighted torch is placed beneath the body and then immediately withdrawn; thus they enjoy the honour without exciting envy, and merely confirm their prerogative.

Why was it that when they gave a public banquet for men who had celebrated a triumph, they formally invited the consuls and then sent word to them requesting them not to come to the dinner?[*](Cf. Valerius Maximus, ii. 8. 6.)

Was it because it was imperative that the place of honour at table and an escort home after dinner should be assigned to the man who had triumphed? But these honours can be given to no one else when the consuls are present, but only to them.

Why does not the tribune wear a garment with the purple border,[*](The toga praetexta.) although the other magistrates wear it?

Is it because he is not a magistrate at all? For tribunes have no lictore, nor do they transact business

Or one might expound these matters and others like them, if one were to indulge in the faculty of invention: but since the tribunate derives its origin from the people, the popular element in it is strong: and of much importance is the fact that the tribune does not pride himself above the rest of the people, but conforms in appearance, dress, and manner of life to ordinary citizens. Pomp and circumstance become the consul and the praetor: but the tribune, as Gaius Curio used to say, must allow himself to be trodden upon: he must not be proud of mien, nor difficult of access nor harsh to the multitude, but indefatigable on behalf of others and easy for the multitude to deal with. Wherefore it is the custom that not even the door of his house shall be closed, but it remains open both night and day as a haven of refuge for such as need it. The more humble he is

Why are the rods of the praetors carried in bundles with axes attached?

Is it because this is a symbolic indication that the temper of the official should not be too quick or unrestrained? Or does the deliberate unfastening of the rods, which creates delay and postponement of his iit of temper, oftentimes cause him to change his mind about the punishment? Now since some badness is curable, but other badness is past remedy, the rods correct that which may be amended and the axes cut off the incorrigible.

When the Romans learned that the people called Bletonesii,[*](Of Bletisa in Spain, according to Cichorius, Römische Studien (Berlin, 1922).) a barbarian tribe, had sacrificed a man to the gods, why did they send for the tribal rulers with intent to punish them, but, when it was made plain that they had done thus in accordance with a certain custom, why did the Romans set them at liberty, but forbid the practice for the future? Yet they themselves, not many years before, had buried alive two men and two women, two of them Greeks, two Gauls, in the place called the Forum Boarium. It certainly

Did they think it impious to sacrifice men to the gods, but necessary to sacrifice them to the spirits? Or did they believe that men who did this by tradition and custom were sinning, whereas they themselves did it by command of the Sibylline books? For the tale is told that a certain maiden, Helvia, was struck by lightning while she was riding on horseback, and her horse was found lying stripped of its trappings: and she herself was naked, for her tunic had been pulled far up as if purposely: and her shoes, her rings, and her head-dress were scattered apart here and there, and her open mouth allowed the tongue to protrude. The soothsayers declared that it was a terrible disgrace for the Vestal Virgins, that it would be bruited far and wide, and that some wanton outrage would be found touching the knights also. Thereupon a barbarian slave of a certain knight gave information against three Vestal Virgins, Aemilia, Licinia, and Marcia, that they had all been corrupted at about the same time, and that they had long entertained lovers, one of whom was Vetutius Barrus,[*](Cf. Cicero, Brutus, 46 (169); Horace, Satires, i. 6. 30, if the emendation is right.) the informer’s master. The Vestals, accordingly, were convicted and punished: but, since the deed was plainly atrocious, it was resolved that the priests should consult the Sibylline books. They say that oracles were found foretelling that these events would come to pass for the bane of the Romans, and enjoining on them that, to avert the impending disaster, they should offer as a sacrifice to certain

Why do they reckon the beginning of the day from midnight?[*](Cf. Pliny, Natural History, ii. 77 (188); Aulus Gellius, iii. 2; Macrobius, Saturnalia, i. 3.)

Is it because the Roman State was based originally on a military organization and most of the matters that are of use on campaigns are taken up beforehand at night? Or did they make sunrise the beginning of activity, and night the beginning of preparation? For men should be prepared when they act, and not be making their preparations during the action, as Myson,[*](Similar foresight, regarding a plough instead of a fork is reported by Diogenes Laertius, i. 106.) who was fashioning a grain-fork in wintertime, is reported to have remarked to Chilon the Wise.

Or, just as noon is for most people the end of their transaction of public or serious business, even so did it seem good to make midnight the beginning? A weighty testimony to this is the fact that a Roman official does not make treaties or agreements after midday.

Or is it impossible to reckon the beginning and end of the day by sunset and sunrise? For if we follow the method by which most people formulate their definitions, by their perceptions, reckoning the first peep of the sun above the horizon as the beginning of day, and the cutting off of its last rays as the beginning of night, we shall have no equinox: but that night which we think is most nearly equal to the day will plainly be less than that day by the diameter of

Why in the early days did they not allow their wives to grind grain or to cook?[*](Cf.Life of Romulus, chap. xv. (26 d), xix. (30 a).)

Was it in memory of the treaty which they made with the Sabines? For when they had carried off the Sabines’ daughters, and later, after warring with the Sabines, had made peace, it was specified among the other articles of agreement that no Sabine woman should grind grain for a Roman or cook for him.