Book 2, Chapter 49
Original Latin
101 Quae cum ille dixisset, tum ego rursus quasi ab alio principio sum exorsus dicere: Non ignoro, inquam, Quinte, te semper ita sensisse, ut de ceteris divinandi generibus dubitares, ista duo, furoris et somnii, quae a libera mente fluere viderentur, probares. Dicam igitur, de istis ipsis duobus generibus mihi quid videatur, si prius, et Stoicorum conclusio rationis et Cratippi nostri quid valeat, videro. Dixisti enim et Chrysippum et Diogenem et Antipatrum concludere hoc modo: ‘Si sunt di neque ante declarant hominibus, quae futura sint, aut non diligunt homines aut, quid eventurum sit, ignorant aut existumant nihil interesse hominum scire, quid sit futurum, aut non censent esse suae maiestatis praesignificare hominibus, quae sunt futura, aut ea ne ipsi quidem di significare possunt;’
102 ‘at neque non diligunt nos (sunt enim benefici generique hominum amici) neque ignorant ea, quae ab ipsis constituta et designata sunt; neque nostra nihil interest scire ea, quae futura sunt, (erimus enim cautiores, si sciemus) neque hoc alienum ducunt maiestate sua (nihil est enim beneficentia praestantius) neque non possunt futura praenoscere; non igitur di sunt nec significant nobis futura; sunt autem di; significant ergo; et non, si significant futura, nullas dant vias nobis ad significationum scientiam (frustra enim significarent) nec, si dant vias, non est divinatio; est igitur divinatio.’
Musean translation
Complete machine-assisted Musean translation, made directly from the Latin in separate source-only tasks and reviewed throughout against it. Both books, all 130 chapters and 282 numbered sections; no historical English translation used. Latin transcription credited to the Perseus Project under CC BY-SA 4.0, Müller’s 1915 Teubner edition.
101 When he had said this, I began again, as though starting from a new point. “I know, Quintus,” I said, “that you have always doubted the other kinds of divination, but accepted these two, frenzy and dreams, which seem to flow from a mind set free. I shall therefore say what I think about these two themselves, after first examining the force of the Stoics’ reasoning and that of our friend Cratippus. For you said that Chrysippus, Diogenes, and Antipater reason as follows: ‘If gods exist and do not reveal the future to human beings beforehand, either they do not love human beings, or they do not know what will happen, or they think it makes no difference to us to know the future, or they consider it beneath their majesty to give human beings advance signs of what is to come, or even the gods themselves cannot signify it.
102 “‘But they do not fail to love us, for they are beneficent and friendly to the human race; nor are they ignorant of what they themselves have established and ordained. Nor is knowing the future a matter of indifference to us, for knowledge will make us more careful. Nor do they consider this beneath their majesty, for nothing surpasses beneficence; nor are they unable to know the future in advance. It is therefore not the case that gods exist and yet do not signify the future to us. But gods do exist; therefore they give signs. And if they give signs of the future, they cannot fail to give us ways of understanding those signs, for otherwise their signs would be in vain. Nor, if they give us such ways, can divination fail to exist. Therefore divination exists.’
Plain English translation
Complete machine-assisted Plain English translation, made independently and directly from the Latin, never from the Musean edition. Both books and every numbered section; a separate Latin-source model review covered the entire text. No human specialist review is claimed.
101 When he had said this, I began speaking again, as if making a fresh start. “Quintus,” I said, “I know your view has always been to question the remaining forms of divination while accepting frenzy and dreams, since these two seemed to spring from the unrestricted mind. So I will tell you what I think about these very two kinds, after first examining the strength of the arguments offered by the Stoics and by our friend Cratippus. As you reported it, this is the reasoning of Chrysippus, Diogenes, and Antipater: ‘If gods exist but do not tell people the future in advance, then one of these must be true: they have no love for humans; they are ignorant of coming events; they regard our knowing the future as unimportant to us; they judge such warnings beneath their divine dignity; or they themselves lack the power to give them.
102 “‘But they do love us: they are generous and friendly to the human race. They do know the things they themselves have arranged and planned. Knowing the future does make a difference to us: we will be more careful if we know. They do not think it beneath their dignity: nothing is finer than generosity. And they can know the future in advance. So it cannot be the case that gods exist but do not give us signs of the future. But the gods exist, so they must signal the future. Such signals must come with a way for us to understand them; without one, sending them would be pointless. If they give us those ways, divination cannot fail to exist. Therefore divination exists.’
About this section
Book 2, Chapter 49 is part of On Divination by Marcus Tullius Cicero. This page sets the Latin original beside 2 direct-source translations, so any line can be checked against the source. It is chapter 107 of 130 in the work, which is kept in the Roman tradition.
Open the work page for the full contents, every edition, and the download links, or go back to Explore to browse other complete works in the Roman tradition. The reader keeps your place when you are signed in and lets you compare the original with each translation, one edition at a time.