Numa was from Cures, a famous Sabine city. It was from the name of this city that the Romans, after their union with the Sabines, had designated themselves Quirites.15 Numa was a son of Pompon, an illustrious man, and was the youngest of four brothers. He was born, by divine providence, on the very day on which Rome was founded by Romulus and his followers, the twenty-first day of April.16 His character was so admirably constituted by nature that it inclined towards every virtue, and by means of education, austerity and philosophy Numa had made himself even more disciplined. He did not merely preserve his soul from the passions that incur disgrace, he also kept it free from those which are admired among the barbarians, that is, from violence and greed, for he judged that true courage consisted in subjecting one’s passions to reason. Consequently he banished all luxury and extravagance from his home. Any citizen or stranger who sought his services found in him a blameless judge and adviser, while he devoted his leisure not to amusements or money making but instead to the worship of the gods and to the philosophical contemplation of their nature and power. He acquired such fame and reputation that Tatius, who was Romulus’ royal colleague in Rome and who had only one daughter, Tatia, chose him as his son-in-law.17 This marriage, however, did not induce him to take up residence with his father-in-law. Instead, he remained among the Sabines and looked after his aged father along with Tatia, who preferred the tranquillity of her husband’s private life to the honour and esteem which she had enjoyed at Rome on account of her father. Tatia, it is reported, died in the thirteenth year of her marriage.
4. Numa then gave up city life, spending much of his time in the countryside, where it became his habit to wander alone in the groves of the gods and in sacred meadows and holy places. It was this more than anything else that gave rise to the tale about the goddess. According to this story, Numa did not forsake the company of men on account of anguish or eccentricity but because the pleasure of more august associations had come his way, for he had been judged worthy of a divine marriage. He shared, it was said, in the passion as well as the companionship of the goddess Egeria,18 a relationship that brought him both happiness and wisdom in matters pertaining to the gods. This is a tale, however, that all too clearly resembles many of the very ancient fables told by various peoples who welcome legends of mortal men blessed by the love of the gods, like the myth of the Phrygians concerning Attis,19 or of the Bithynians concerning Rhodoetes,20 or the Arcadians concerning Endymion.21
Now there is every reason to believe that the gods, inasmuch as they are not lovers of horses or of birds but rather of humanity, should be pleased to be present among men of extraordinary virtue and that they would neither dislike nor disdain the companionship of a man who was holy and wise. The suggestion, however, that the beauty or gracefulness of a mortal’s body should arouse a god or a divinity to have sexual intercourse with him is very difficult to credit. The Egyptians, however, introduce to this controversy a subtle distinction that is far from implausible. In their view, it is possible for the spirit of a god to infuse itself into a woman, thereby initiating her pregnancy, but sexual activity and corporeal association between a man and a goddess, they insist, is impossible. In making this argument, however, they still fail to recognize that, in sexual intercourse, each party plays an equal role in the physical encounter. Nevertheless, it is entirely natural that a god should love a mortal, and it would be understandable if that love should be inaccurately described in terms of passion when it manifested itself as a concern for his character and virtue. It is in this sense that we can say that the poets do not err when they tell fables of Apollo’s passion for Phorbas,22 Hyacinthus23 or Admetus24 – as well as Hippolytus of Sicyon,25 of whom it is said that, whenever he happened to sail from Sicyon to Cirrha,26 the Pythia,27 as if the god knew of his journey and rejoiced because of it, would pronounce this heroic verse: ‘Once more does my beloved Hippolytus take to the sea.’ The tale is also told of Pan’s falling in love with Pindar and his poems.28 Moreover, after their deaths, Archilochus and Hesiod29 were honoured by the gods for the sake of the Muses. During his lifetime, so goes a story that is much attested down to the present day, Sophocles entertained Asclepius as his guest, and, after the playwright died, a different god helped him to obtain his tomb.30 If we admit these accounts, is it right to doubt that the gods likewise visited Zaleucus,31 Minos,32 Zoroaster,33 Numa and Lycurgus, men who governed kingdoms and drew up constitutions? Is it unlikely that gods should associate themselves with such men as these in order to provide serious instruction and guidance on the noblest of matters, if it is true that, simply for their own pleasure, they appreciated the singing of lyric poets? To the man who disagrees, however, I reply with Bacchylides that ‘the road is broad’.34 Indeed, there is another explanation of the divine connections of Lycurgus and Numa and leaders like them, and it is a very compelling one. Since these men were endeavouring to bring discipline to headstrong, obstinate multitudes and were introducing extensive innovations to the constitutions of their states, they pretended that their undertakings enjoyed the sanction of the gods, and this sanction proved the salvation of the very men who were deceived by this ruse.
5. Now Numa was already a man of forty35 when the ambassadors arrived from Rome to summon him to the throne. Speeches were made for the occasion by Proculus36 and Velesus.37 It had been expected that one of these men would be the Romans’ choice as their new king, for the people of Romulus strongly favoured Proculus while the people of Tatius felt the same about Velesus. Each man spoke briefly, for both assumed that Numa would welcome his stroke of luck. It turned out, however, that theirs was no trivial task. On the contrary, many arguments and entreaties were required in order to persuade this man, who had lived in peace and quiet, to change his mind and agree to govern a city that had in large measure come into existence and seen itself prosper through war. This, then, was Numa’s reply, which he delivered in the presence of his father and one of his relations, a man named Marcius:38
‘Every change in the life of a mortal is dangerous, but, for a man who is lacking in nothing and who finds no fault in his present circumstances, it is utter folly to make changes and quit his customary pursuits. For even if these have no other advantage, the security they offer is superior to the uncertainties of the unknown. And yet one can hardly describe the exigencies of a royal career as uncertain, if the experiences of Romulus are any indication, for his reputation was tarnished by the slander that he had plotted against his colleague Tatius, and a similarly base claim was made against his nobles, who were accused of having assassinated their king. Romulus, however, is celebrated in song and legend as a child of the gods, and men tell us how, when he was an infant, he was nourished supernaturally and miraculously rescued from death. I, by contrast, was born a mortal, and I received my nourishment and education from men who are well known to you. In addition, the very aspects of my character for which you praise me are entirely unsuitable in a man destined to be your king. I speak of my retiring nature and my cultivation of private studies, my keen and inveterate passion for peace and unwarlike occupations – and for the company of men, like farmers or herdsmen, who meet only to worship the gods and join in friendly society but otherwise keep to themselves. But to you, Romans, Romulus has left a legacy of abundant warfare, even if it is not what you wished for, and your city requires an experienced king who is as resolute as he is vigorous. For the people of Rome have become accustomed to war, and their victories have made them eager for more of it. Their desire to amplify their power and rule over others is obvious to everyone, and I should become a laughing-stock if I strove to serve the gods, teaching the city to honour justice and hate violence and warfare, when what Rome truly desires is not a king but a general for its armies.’
6. These were the kinds of arguments Numa employed in refusing to accept the kingship he was offered.39 For their part the Romans did all they could do to meet his objections, and they begged him not to allow them to collapse once more into factional strife or even
into civil war, since there was no other man who could unite both of the city’s factions. After the ambassadors departed, Numa’s father and Marcius also put forward their own arguments and tried to persuade him to accept this exalted – and providential – gift: ‘Although you have no desire for wealth – for you are independent and require no more than what you have, nor do you covet office or power, for you enjoy the greater distinction of possessing virtue – you should nevertheless recognize that the essential duty of a king lies in his hard labour in service to the gods.40 Indeed, it is a divine force that now summons you to eminence and refuses to allow you, endowed as you are with such profound righteousness, to remain in retirement. And so you must not flee or try to escape this office, which, for a wise man, offers an arena for splendid and noble achievements. For with you as king the worship of the gods will be elevated to a suitable grandeur, and the people will easily and quickly, as their natures are transformed by the character of their ruler, become disposed towards piety. The Romans loved Tatius, though he was a foreign ruler, and Romulus they commemorate with divine honours. Who knows whether the Roman people, for all their victories, have not had their fill of war? Abounding in triumphs and spoil, they may now desire a mild leader, a friend of justice, who can add order and peace to their martial attainments. Should it prove otherwise, if the Romans are instead possessed of a violent and mad longing for war, is it not far better that you, holding in your hands the reins of power, should turn their ardour in another direction, and that your native city, along with all the Sabine people, should have – through you – a bond of goodwill and friendship with a city so vigorous and mighty?’ These arguments, we are told, were reinforced by favourable omens as well as by the earnest zeal of his fellow-citizens, who, when they learned of the embassy, begged him to go to Rome and become king there in order to establish unity and harmony among Romans and Sabines.
7. Numa decided that this advice was best, and so he sacrificed to the gods and departed for Rome. He was met on the way by the senate and people, whose enthusiasm and affection for Numa were marvellous, while the women greeted him with seemly acclamations. Sacrifices were offered in the temples, and everyone was joyous, as if the city were gaining not simply a king but a kingdom. When they reached the forum, Spurius Vettius,41 for it was his turn at that hour to be interrex, put the matter to a vote, and all the people elected Numa their king. When the royal insignia were brought to him, however, Numa ordered a delay and declared that his regal authority must first be sanctioned by the gods. Taking with him the augurs and the priests, he climbed the Capitol, which in those days the Romans called the Tarpeian Hill.42 There the chief of the augurs turned Numa’s head, which had been covered, towards the south. He then stood behind Numa and, touching Numa’s head with his right hand, uttered a prayer. Next, looking about in all directions, he searched for signs from the gods, in the shape of birds or other omens. An astonishing silence gripped the vast multitude in the forum below, who waited in eager suspense for the result, until auspicious birds appeared from the right.43 Only then did Numa don his royal robes and descend from the citadel to the forum. There he was welcomed with jubilation and applause, as the Romans saluted him as the most pious of men and the most beloved by all the gods.
Numa’s first action after he became king was to disband the corps of 300 men that Romulus always kept as his bodyguard and whom he called Celeres, which means the swift men.44 His reason for doing so was that he did not think it right to distrust men who trusted him, nor to reign over men who did not trust him. His second act was to add to the priests of Jupiter and Mars a third priest, dedicated to Romulus, whom he called the flamen Quirinalis. The Romans called their ancient priests flamines.45 This name is derived from the hats, which are essentially skull caps, that they wear on top of their heads, the full name for which, we are informed by reliable authority, was actually pilamenes,46 for in the past Greek words were used more frequently by Latin speakers than is now the case. Another instance is the cloak called a laena, which is worn by priests; its name, according to Juba,47 comes from the Greek word for cloak, namely chlaena.48 Furthermore, the Romans use the term camillus to describe the boy, each of whose parents must be alive, who assists the priest of Jupiter, just as some of the Greeks call Hermes by the name Cadmilus49 on account of his role as an attendant to Zeus.
8. These changes in the administration of Rome earned Numa the people’s goodwill and gratitude, and so immediately he seized the opportunity to transform his harsh and bellicose city into one that was more mild and just, as if Rome were iron to be softened. Rome, at that time, was the very essence of what Plato describes as a ‘city swollen with fiery phlegm’,50 for it had burst into existence through the bold and reckless courage of men whose daring and warlike natures had urged them to make their way to this city, whatever their origins. Then, nourished by frequent campaigns and constant warfare, the city increased its power, gathering strength from its dangers the way a stake, when planted in the earth, is more firmly fixed in the ground by the blows it receives. Now, because Numa realized it was no small or unworthy undertaking to refashion a people so spirited and violent by introducing a disposition towards peace, he availed himself of the assistance of the gods. Thus he conducted many sacrifices, processions and dances, practices which he himself organized and supervised in person. These activities combined solemnity with charming amusements and civilizing pursuits, all of which won over the public and at the same time curbed its headstrong and belligerent instincts. In addition, from time to time, he announced the occurrence of terrifying signs from the gods, such as strange apparitions or dreadful sounds, thus subduing and humbling the Romans’ minds through their fear of the gods.
These were the innovations that did the most to establish the tradition that Numa’s wisdom and education owed themselves to his deep acquaintance with Pythagoras. For the philosophy of the one, like the political administration of the other, devoted a great deal of attention to studying the gods and establishing the right relationship with them. It is also said that the majestic and dignified manner which Numa cultivated was derived from a habit of mind he shared with Pythagoras. Indeed, this philosopher is thought to have trained an eagle to stop in its flight and come down to him whenever he called it. He is also said to have exhibited his golden thigh when he passed through the crowd at the Olympic Games.51 And there are other reports of his marvellous devices and deeds, which stimulated Timon the Philasian to write:
Pythagoras, who stoops to win the reputation of a charlatan,
Casts his decoys at men, enamoured of solemn speech.52
In Numa’s case there was the fiction of the love of a goddess or mountain nymph and her secret meetings with him, as I mentioned before.53 He also claimed to have intimate conversations with the Muses, and he went so far as to attribute most of his revelations to them. He taught the Romans to venerate one Muse in particular and her above all the others, whose name, he said, was Tacita, which means the silent or speechless one.54 He did this, it appears, in order to commemorate and honour the Pythagorean precept of maintaining one’s silence.
His ordinances regulating statues of the gods are also in close agreement with the teachings of Pythagoras, for this man taught that the First Principle of Being was neither perceptible nor sensible, that it was invisible and uncreated and could be apprehended only by the mind, while Numa, for his part, forbade the Romans from representing divinity in any human or animal form. Indeed, the Romans of this early period did not represent the divine in painting or in sculpture. Although during the first 170 years of their history they busied themselves in constructing temples and setting up shrines, the Romans refused to make graven images for them owing to their conviction that it was impious to assimilate higher beings to inferior ones and that it was impossible to apprehend the divine by any other means than the intellect.55 Even the Romans’ sacrificial rites were strongly reminiscent of Pythagorean cultic practices in that they rarely involved the shedding of blood.5
6 Instead, the Romans made offerings of meal, of wine and of other uncostly things.
These are not the only proofs adduced by those who insist that these two men were closely acquainted with one another. There is, for instance, the argument that the Romans enrolled Pythagoras as a citizen of their city, information which is transmitted by Epicharmus57 the comic poet in a work he addressed to Antenor58 and for which there is a claim to credibility because its author is a figure from antiquity and belonged to the Pythagorean sect. Furthermore, and this is a second argument, one of King Numa’s four sons was named Mamercus, after a son of Pythagoras. It is widely believed that the patrician Aemilii took their name from this son of Numa, for Numa affectionately called him Aemilius on account of the endearing charm of his speech.59 Finally, when I was in Rome, I listened to many who spoke about how, when once there was an oracle instructing the Romans to honour the most intelligent and courageous of the Greeks by erecting monuments to them, they set up two bronze statues in the forum, one of Alcibiades, the other of Pythagoras.60 Nevertheless, this is a topic teeming with controversy, and any prolonged attempt at making a convincing case risks the imputation of juvenile disputatiousness.