Numa, and so impressed by his power, as to believe stories of the
wildest character about him, and to think nothing incredible or
impossible if he wished to do it. For instance, it is related that once
he invited many of the citizens to dine with him, and placed before them
common vessels and poor fare; but, as they were about to begin dinner,
he suddenly said that his familiar goddess was about to visit him, and
at once displayed abundance of golden cups and tables covered with
costly delicacies. The strangest story of all is that of his
conversation with Jupiter. The legend runs that Mount Aventine was not
at this time enclosed within the city, but was full of fountains and
shady glens, and haunted by two divinities, Picus and Faunus, who may be
compared to Satyrs or to Pan, and who, in knowledge of herbs and magic,
seem equal to what the Greeks call the Daktyli of Mount Ida. These
creatures roamed about Italy playing their tricks, but Numa caught them
by filling the spring at which they drank with wine and honey. They
turned into all kinds of shapes, and assumed strange and terrible forms,
but when they found that they were unable to escape, they told Numa much
of the future, and showed him how to make a charm against thunder-bolts,
which is used to this day, and is made of onions and hair and sprats.
Some say that it was not these deities who told him the charm, but that
they by magic arts brought down Jupiter from heaven, and he, in a rage,
ordered Numa to make the charm of "Heads"; and when Numa added, "Of
onions," he said "Of men's"--"Hair," said Numa, again taking away the
terrible part of the imprecation. When then Jupiter said "With
living"--"Sprats," said Numa, answering as Egeria had taught him. The
god went away appeased, and the place was in consequence called Ilicius.
This was how the charm was discovered.
These ridiculous legends show the way in which the people had become
accustomed to regard the gods. Indeed Numa is said to have placed all
his hopes in religion, to such an extent that even when a message was
brought him, saying, "The enemy are approaching," he smiled and said,
"And I am sacrificing."
XVI. The first temples that he founded are said to have been those of
Fides or Faith, and Terminus. Fides is said to have revealed to the
Romans the greatest of all oaths, which they even now make use of; while
Terminus is the god of boundaries, to whom they sacrifice publicly, and
also privately at the divisions of men's estates; at the present time
with living victims, but in old days this was a bloodless sacrifice, for
Numa argued that the god of boundaries must be a lover of peace, and a
witness of righteousness, and therefore averse to bloodshed.
Indeed Numa was the first king who defined the boundaries of the
country, since Romulus was unwilling, by measuring what was really his
own, to show how much he had taken from other states: for boundaries, if
preserved, are barriers against violence; if disregarded, they become
standing proofs of lawless injustice. The city had originally but a
small territory of its own, and Romulus gained the greater part of its
possessions by the sword. All this Numa distributed among the needy
citizens, thereby removing the want which urged them to deeds of
violence, and, by turning the people's thoughts to husbandry, he made
them grow more civilised as their land grew more cultivated. No
profession makes men such passionate lovers of peace as that of a man
who farms his own land; for he retains enough of the warlike spirit to
fight fiercely in defence of his own property, but has lost all desire
to despoil and wrong his neighbours. It was for this reason that Numa
encouraged agriculture among the Romans, as a spell to charm away war,
and loved the art more because of its influence on men's minds than
because of the wealth which it produced. He divided the whole country
into districts, which he called pagi, and appointed a head man for
each, and a patrol to guard it. And sometimes he himself would inspect
them, and, forming an opinion of each man's character from the condition
of his farm, would raise some to honours and offices of trust, and
blaming others for their remissness, would lead them to do better in
future.
XVII. Of his other political measures, that which is most admired is his
division of the populace according to their trades. For whereas the
city, as has been said, originally consisted of two races, which stood
aloof one from the other and would not combine into one, which led to
endless quarrels and rivalries, Numa, reflecting that substances which
are hard and difficult to combine together, can nevertheless be mixed
and formed into one mass if they are broken up into small pieces,
because then they more easily fit into each other, determined to divide
the whole mass of the people of Rome into many classes, and thus, by
creating numerous petty rivalries, to obliterate their original and
greatest cause of variance.
His division was according to their trades, and consisted of the
musicians, the goldsmiths, the builders, the dyers, the shoemakers, the
carriers, the coppersmiths, and the potters. All the other trades he
united into one guild. He assigned to each trade its special privileges,
common to all the members, and arranged that each should have its own
times of meeting, and worship its own special patron god, and by this
means he did away with that habit, which hitherto had prevailed among
the citizens, of some calling themselves Sabines, and some Romans; one
boasting that they were Tatius's men, and other Romulus's. So this
division produced a complete fusion and unity. Moreover he has been much
praised for another of his measures, that, namely, of correcting the old
law which allows fathers to sell their sons for slaves. He abolished
this power in the case of married men, who had married with their
father's consent; for he thought it a monstrous injustice that a woman,
who had married a free man, should be compelled to be the wife of a
slave.
XVIII. He also dealt with astronomical matters, not with perfect
accuracy, and yet not altogether without knowledge. During the reign of
Romulus the months had been in a state of great disorder, some not
containing twenty days, some five-and-thirty, and some even more,
because the Romans could not reconcile the discrepancies which arise
from reckoning by the sun and the moon, and only insisted upon one
thing, that the year should consist of three hundred and sixty days.
Numa reckoned the variation to consist of eleven days, as the lunar year
contains three hundred and fifty-four days, and the solar year three
hundred and sixty-five. He doubled these eleven days and introduced them
every other year, after February, as an intercalary month, twenty-two
days in duration, which was called by the Romans Mercedinus. This was a
remedy for the irregularities of the calendar which itself required more
extensive remedies.
He also altered the order of the months, putting March, which used to be
the first month, third, and making January the first, which in the time
of Romulus had been the eleventh, and February the second, which then
had been the twelfth. There are many writers who say that these months,
January and February, were added to the calendar by Numa, and that
originally there had only been ten months in the year, just as some
barbarians have three, and in Greece the Arcadians have four, and the
Acarnanians six. The Egyptians originally had but one month in their
year, and afterwards are said to have divided it into four mouths;
wherefore, though they live in the newest of all countries, they appear
to be the most ancient of all nations, and in their genealogies reckon
an incredible number of years, because they count their months as years.
XIX. One proof that the Romans used to reckon ten months and not twelve
in the year is the name of the last month; for up to the present day it
is called _December_, the tenth, and the order of the months shows that
March was the first, for the fifth month from it they called
_Quintilis_, the fifth; and the sixth month Sextilis, and so on for the
others, although, by their putting January and February before March, it
resulted that the month which they number fifth is really seventh in
order. Moreover, there is a legend that the month of March, being the
first, was dedicated by Romulus to Mars, and the second, April, to
Aphrodité (Venus); in which month they sacrifice to this goddess, and
the women bathe on the first day of it crowned with myrtle. Some,
however, say that April is not named after Aphrodité, because the word
April does not contain the letter _h_, and that it comes from the Latin
word _aperio_, and means the month in which the spring-time opens the
buds of plants; for that is what the word signifies. Of the following
months, May is named after Maia, the mother of Hermes or Mercury, for it
is dedicated to her, and June from Juno. Some say that these names
signify old age and youth, for old men are called by the Latins majores,
and young men juniores. The remaining months they named, from the order
in which they came, the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth:
Quintilis, Sextilis, September, October, November, December. Then
Quintilis was called Julius after Julius Caesar, who conquered Pompeius;
and Sextilis was called Augustus, after the second of the Roman
Emperors. The next two months Domitian altered to his own titles, but
not for any long time, as after his death they resumed their old names
of September and October. The last two alone have preserved their
original names without change. Of the months, added or altered by Numa,
Februarius means the month of purification, for that is as nearly as
possible the meaning of the word, and during it they sacrifice to the
dead, and hold the festival of the Lupercalia, which resembles a
ceremony of purification. The first month, Januarius, is named after
Janus. My opinion is, that Numa moved the month named after Mars from
its precedence, wishing the art of good government to be honoured before
that of war. For Janus in very ancient times was either a deity or a
king, who established a social polity, and made men cease from a savage
life like that of wild beasts. And for this reason his statues are made
with a double face, because he turned men's way of life from one form to
another.
XX. There is a temple to him in Rome, which has two doors, and which
they call the gate of war. It is the custom to open the temple in time
of war, and to close it during peace. This scarcely ever took place, as
the empire was almost always at war with some state, being by its very
greatness continually brought into collision with the neighbouring
tribes. Only in the time of Caesar Augustus, after he had conquered
Antonius, it was closed; and before that, during the consulship of
Marcus Atilius and Titus Manlius, for a short time, and then was almost
immediately reopened, as a new war broke out. But during Numa's reign no
one saw it open for a single day, and it remained closed for forty-three
years continuously, so utterly had he made wars to cease on all sides.
Not only was the spirit of the Romans subdued and pacified by the gentle
and just character of their king, but even the neighbouring cities, as
if some soothing healthful air was breathed over them from Rome, altered
their habits and longed to live quiet and well-governed, cultivating the
earth, bringing up their families in peace, and worshipping the gods.
And gay festivals and entertainments, during which the people of the
various states fearlessly mixed with one another, prevailed throughout
Italy, for Numa's knowledge of all that was good and noble was shed
abroad like water from a fountain, and the atmosphere of holy calm by
which he was surrounded spread over all men. The very poets when they
wrote of that peaceful time were unable to find adequate expressions for
it, as one writes--
"Across the shields are cobwebs laid,
Rust eats the lance and keen edged blade;
No more we hear the trumpets bray.
And from our eyes no more is slumber chased away."
No war, revolution, or political disturbance of any kind is recorded
during Numa's reign, neither was there any envy or hatred of him or any
attempt by others to obtain the crown; but either fear of the gods who
visibly protected him, or reverence for his virtues, or the special
grace of Heaven, made men's lives innocent and untainted with evil, and
formed a striking proof of the truth of what Plato said many years
afterwards, that the only escape from misery for men is when by Divine
Providence philosophy is combined with royal power, and used to exalt
virtue over vice. Blessed indeed is the truly wise man, and blessed are
they who hear the words of his mouth. Indeed his people require no
restraints or punishments, but seeing a plain example of virtue in the
life of their chief, they themselves of their own accord reform their
lives, and model them upon that gentle and blessed rule of love and just
dealing one with another which it is the noblest work of politicians to
establish. He is most truly a king who can teach such lessons as these
to his subjects, and Numa beyond all others seems to have clearly
discerned this truth.
XXI. Historians differ in their accounts of his wives and children. Some
say that he married Tatia alone, and was the father of one daughter
only, named Pompilia; but others, besides her, assign to him four sons,
named Pompo, Pinus, Calpus, and Mamercus, from whom descended the four
noble families of the Pomponii, Pinarii, Calphurnii, and Mamerci, which
for this reason took the title of Rex, that is, king. Others again say
that these pedigrees were invented to flatter these families, and state
that the Pompilian family descends not from Tatia, but from Lucretia,
whom he married after he became king. All, however, agree that Pompilia
married Marcius, the son of that Marcius who encouraged Numa to accept
the crown. This man accompanied Numa to Rome, was made a member of the
Senate, and after Numa's death laid claim to the crown, but was worsted
by Tullus Hostilius and made away with himself. His son Marcius, who
married Pompilia, remained in Rome, and became the father of Ancus
Marcius, who was king after Tullus Hostilius, and who was only five
years old when Numa died.
We are told by Piso that Numa died, not by a sudden death, but by slow
decay from sheer old age, having lived a little more than eighty years.
XXII. He was enviable even in death, for all the friendly and allied
nations assembled at his funeral with national offerings. The senators
bore his bier, which was attended by the chief priests, while the crowd
of men, women and children who were present, followed with such weeping
and wailing, that one would have thought that, instead of an aged king,
each man was about to bury his own dearest friend, who had died in the
prime of life. At his own wish, it is said, the body was not burned, but
placed in two stone coffins and buried on the Janiculum Hill. One of
these contained his body, and the other the sacred books which he
himself had written, as Greek legislators write their laws upon tablets.
During his life he had taught the priests the contents of these books,
and their meaning and spirit, and ordered them to be buried with his
corpse, because it was right that holy mysteries should be contained,
not in soulless writings, but in the minds of living men. For the same
reason they say that the Pythagoreans never reduced their maxims to
writing, but implanted them in the memories of worthy men; and when some
of their difficult processes in geometry were divulged to some unworthy
men, they said that Heaven would mark its sense of the wickedness which
had been committed by some great public calamity; so that, as Numa's
system so greatly resembled that of Pythagoras, we can easily pardon
those who endeavour to establish a connection between them.
Valerius of Antium says that twelve sacred books and twelve books of
Greek philosophy were placed in the coffin. Four hundred years
afterwards, when Publius Cornelius and Marcus Baebius were consuls, a
great fall of rain took place, and the torrent washed away the earth and
exposed the coffins. When the lids were removed, one of the coffins was
seen by all men to be empty, and without any trace of a corpse in it;
the other contained the books, which were read by Petilius the praetor,
who reported to the Senate that in his opinion it was not right that
their contents should be made known to the people, and they were
therefore carried to the Comitium and burned there.
All good and just men receive most praise after their death, because
their unpopularity dies with them or even before them; but Numa's glory
was enhanced by the unhappy reigns of his successors. Of five kings who
succeeded him, the last was expelled and died an exile, and of the other
four, not one died a natural death, but three were murdered by
conspirators, and Tullus Hostilius, who was king next after Numa, and
who derided and insulted his wise ordinances, especially those
connected with religion, as lazy and effeminate, and who urged the
people to take up arms, was cut down in the midst of his boastings by a
terrible disease, and became subject to superstitious fears in no way
resembling Numa's piety. His subjects were led to share these terrors,
more especially by the manner of his death, which is said to have been
by the stroke of a thunderbolt.
COMPARISON OF NUMA WITH LYKURGUS.
I. Now that we have gone through the lives of Numa and Lykurgus, we must
attempt, without being daunted by difficulties, to reconcile the points
in which they appear to differ from each other. Much they appear to have
had in common, as, for example, their self-control, their piety, and
their political and educational ability; and while the peculiar glory of
Numa is his acceptance of the throne, that of Lykurgus is his
abdication. Numa received it without having asked for it; Lykurgus when
in full possession gave it up. Numa, though a private man and not even a
Roman, was chosen by the Romans as their king; but Lykurgus from being a
king reduced himself to a private station. It is honourable to obtain a
crown by righteousness, but it is also honourable to prefer
righteousness to a crown. Numa's virtue made him so celebrated that he
was judged worthy to be king, Lykurgus' made him so great that he did
not care to be king.
Again, like those who tune the strings of a lyre, Lykurgus drew tighter
the relaxed and licentious Sparta, while Numa merely slackened the
highly strung and warlike Rome, so that here Lykurgus had the more
difficult task. He had to persuade his countrymen, not to take off their
armour and lay aside their swords, but to leave off using gold and
silver, and to lay aside costly hangings and furniture; he had not to
make them exchange wars for sacrifices and gay festivals, but to cease
from feasts and drinking-parties, and work hard both in the field and in
the palaestra to train themselves for war.
For this reason, Numa was able to effect his purpose without difficulty,
and without any loss of popularity and respect; while Lykurgus was
struck and pelted, and in danger of his life, and even so could scarcely
carry out his reforms. Yet the genius of Numa was kindly and gentle,
and so softened and changed the reckless fiery Romans that they became
peaceful, law-abiding citizens; and if we must reckon Lykurgus'
treatment of the Helots as part of his system, it cannot be denied that
Numa was a far more civilised lawgiver, seeing that he allowed even to
actual slaves some taste of liberty, by his institution of feasting them
together with their masters at the festival of Saturn.
For this custom of allowing the labourers to share in the harvest-feast
is traced to Numa. Some say that this is in remembrance of the equality
which existed in the time of Saturn, when there was neither master nor
slave, but all were kinsmen and had equal rights.
II. Both evidently encouraged the spirit of independence and
self-control among their people, while of other virtues, Lykurgus loved
bravery, and Numa loved justice best; unless indeed we should say that,
from the very different temper and habits of the two states, they
required to be treated in a different manner. It was not from cowardice,
but because he scorned to do an injustice, that Numa did not make war;
while Lykurgus made his countrymen warlike, not in order that they might
do wrong, but that they might not be wronged. Each found that the
existing system required very important alterations to check its
excesses and supply its defects. Numa's reforms were all in favour of
the people, whom he classified into a mixed and motley multitude of
goldsmiths and musicians and cobblers; while the constitution introduced
by Lykurgus was severely aristocratic, driving all handicrafts into the
hands of slaves and foreigners, and confining the citizens to the use of
the spear and shield, as men whose trade was war alone, and who knew
nothing but how to obey their leaders and to conquer their enemies. In
Sparta a free man was not permitted to make money in business, in order
that he might be truly free.
Each thing connected with the business of making money, like that of
preparing food for dinner, was left in the hands of slaves and helots.
Numa made no regulations of this kind, but, while he put an end to
military plundering, raised no objection to other methods of making
money, nor did he try to reduce inequalities of fortune, but allowed
wealth to increase unchecked, and disregarded the influx of poor men
into the city and the increase of poverty there, whereas he ought at the
very outset, like Lykurgus, while men's fortunes were still tolerably
equal, to have raised some barrier against the encroachments of wealth,
and to have restrained the terrible evils which take their rise and
origin in it. As for the division of the land among the citizens, in my
opinion, Lykurgus cannot be blamed for doing it, nor yet can Numa for
not doing it. The equality thus produced was the very foundation and
corner-stone of the Lacedaemonian constitution, while Numa had no motive
for disturbing the Roman lands, which had only been recently distributed
among the citizens, or to alter the arrangements made by Romulus, which
we may suppose were still in force throughout the country.
III. With regard to a community of wives and children, each took a wise
and statesman-like course to prevent jealousy, although the means
employed by each were different. A Roman who possessed a sufficient
family of his own might be prevailed upon by a friend who had no
children to transfer his wife to him, being fully empowered to give her
away, by divorce, for this purpose; but a Lacedaemonian was accustomed
to lend his wife for intercourse with a friend, while she remained
living in his house, and without the marriage being thereby dissolved.
Many, we are told, even invited those who, they thought, would beget
fine and noble children, to converse with their wives. The distinction
between the two customs seems to be this: the Spartans affected an
unconcern and insensibility about a matter which excites most men to
violent rage and jealousy; the Romans modestly veiled it by a legal
contract which seems to admit how hard it is for a man to give up his
wife to another. Moreover Numa's regulations about young girls were of a
much more feminine and orderly nature, while those of Lykurgus were so
highflown and unbecoming to women, as to have been the subject of notice
by the poets, who call them _Phainomerides_, that is with bare thighs,
as Ibykus says; and they accuse them of lust, as Euripides says--
"They stay not, as befits a maid, at home,
But with young men in shameless dresses roam."
For in truth the sides of the maiden's tunic were not fastened together
at the skirt, and so flew open and exposed the thigh as they walked,
which is most clearly alluded to in the lines of Sophokles--
"She that wanders nigh,
With scanty skirt that shows the thigh,
A Spartan maiden fair and free,
Hermione."