Book 2, Chapter 64
Original Latin
131 Vide igitur, ne, etiamsi divinationem tibi esse concessero, quod numquam faciam, neminem tamen divinum reperire possimus. Qualis autem ista mens est deorum, si neque ea nobis significant in somnis, quae ipsi per nos intellegamus, neque ea, quorum interpretes habere possimus? similes enim sunt dei, si ea nobis obiciunt, quorum nec scientiam neque explanatorem habeamus, tamquam si Poeni aut Hispani in senatu nostro loquerentur sine interprete.
132 Iam vero quo pertinent obscuritates et aenigmata somniorum? intellegi enim a nobis di velle debebant ea, quae nostra causa nos monerent. Quid? poëta nemo, nemo physicus obscurus? Ille vero nimis etiam obscurus Euphorion;
133 at non Homerus. Uter igitur melior? Valde Heraclitus obscurus, minime Democritus. Num igitur conferendi? Mea causa me mones, quod non intellegam? Quid me igitur mones? ut si quis medicus aegroto imperet, ut sumat
Terrigenam, herbigradam, domiportam, sanguine cassam,
potius quam hominum more cocleam diceret. Nam Pacuvianus Amphio
Quadrupés tardigrada, agréstis, humilis, áspera,Capité brevi, cervice ánguina, aspectú truci,Evíscerata, inánima, cum animalí sono
cum dixisset obscurius, tum Attici respondent:
Non íntellegimus, nísi si aperte díxeris.
At ille uno verbo: Testudo. Non potueras hoc igitur a principio, citharista, dicere?
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.
131 “Consider, then, whether, even if I granted you that divination exists—which I never shall—we might still be unable to find a single diviner. And what sort of intention do the gods have if in dreams they give us neither signs we can understand for ourselves nor signs for which we can find interpreters? If the gods confront us with things for which we have neither knowledge nor an expounder, they are like Carthaginians or Spaniards speaking in our senate without an interpreter.
132 “And what purpose do the obscurities and riddles of dreams serve? The gods ought to want us to understand the warnings they send for our sake. ‘What? Is no poet obscure, no natural philosopher?’ Certainly: Euphorion is even excessively obscure;
133 “but Homer is not. Which, then, is the better poet? Heraclitus is very obscure, Democritus not at all. Are the two even comparable? You warn me for my own sake about something I cannot understand? Why warn me at all, then? It is as though a doctor told a patient to take
“‘An earthborn, grass-crawling, house-carrying, bloodless creature,’
“instead of saying ‘a snail’ like a human being. In Pacuvius, Amphion says, rather obscurely,
“‘A slow-footed four-legged creature, wild, low to the ground, rough,With a short head, a snaking neck, a fearsome look,Gutted, lifeless, yet with a living creature’s voice.’
“Then the Athenians reply:
“‘We do not understand, unless you tell us plainly.’
“And he answers in one word: ‘Tortoise.’ Could you not have said that at the beginning, you lyre-player?
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.
131 “So take care: suppose I admitted the existence of divination, something I will never do. We might still find no one who could divine. And what can the gods be thinking if their dreams communicate neither anything we can grasp on our own nor anything we can get someone else to interpret? If the gods set before us things for which we have neither understanding nor an explanation from anyone else, it is as though Carthaginians or Spaniards addressed our senate with nobody there to translate.
132 “And what is the point of obscure, puzzling dreams? The gods ought to want us to understand warnings they give for our benefit. ‘What? Are no poets or natural philosophers obscure?’ Certainly—Euphorion is even excessively obscure.
133 “But Homer is not. Which of the two is better? Heraclitus is extremely hard to understand; Democritus is perfectly clear. Can they even be compared? You give me a warning for my own good that I cannot understand? Then why warn me? It is as if a doctor ordered a patient to take
“‘An earth-born, grass-walking, house-carrying creature without blood,’
“Instead of saying ‘a snail,’ like an ordinary person. In Pacuvius, Amphion says in rather obscure terms:
“‘A rough, low creature of the wild, walking slowly on four feet,Its head is short, its neck like a snake's, its look fierce,Gutted, lifeless, with a living creature's sound.’
“Then the people of Attica answer:
“‘We don't understand unless you speak plainly.’
“He replies with one word: ‘Tortoise.’ Couldn't you have said that at the start, lyre player?
About this section
Book 2, Chapter 64 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 122 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.