And it also related that the corpse of Alkmena when it was being carried out for burial, disappeared, and a stone was found lying on the bier in its place. And many such stories are told, in which, contrary to reason, the earthly parts of our bodies are described as being deified together with the spiritual parts. It is wicked and base to deny that virtue is a spiritual quality, but again it is foolish to mix earthly with heavenly things.
We must admit, speaking with due caution, that, as Pindar has it, the bodies of all men follow overpowering Death, but there remains a living spirit, the image of eternity, for it alone comes from heaven. Thence it comes, and thither it returns again, not accompanied by the body, but only when it is most thoroughly separated and cleansed from it, and become pure and incorporeal. This is the pure spirit which Herakleitus calls the best, which darts through the body like lightning through a cloud, whereas that which is clogged by the body is like a dull, cloudy exhalation, hard to loose and free from the bonds of the body. There is no reason, therefore, for supposing that the bodies of good men rise up into heaven, which is contrary to nature; but we must believe that men's virtues and their spirits most certainly, naturally and rightly proceed from mankind to the heroes, and from them to the genii, and from thence, if they be raised above and purified from all mortal and earthly taint, even as is done in the holy mysteries, then, not by any empty vote of the senate, but in very truth and likelihood they are received among the gods, and meet with the most blessed and glorious end.
XXIX. Some say that the name Quirinus, which Romulus received, means Mars; others that it was because his people were called Quirites. Others, again, say that the spear-head or spear was called by the ancients Quiris, and that the statue of Juno leaning on a spear is called Juno Quirites, and that the dart which is placed in the Regia is addressed as Mars, and that it is customary to present with a spear those who have distinguished themselves in war, and therefore that it was as a warrior, or god of war, that Romulus was called Quirinus. A temple dedicated to him is built on the Quirinal Hill which bears his name, and the day of his translation is called the People's Flight, and the Nonae Caprotinae, because they go out of the city to the Goat's Marsh on that day to sacrifice, for in Latin a goat is called Capra. And as they go to the sacrifice they call out many of the names of the country, as Marcus, Lucius, Caius, with loud shouts, in imitation of their panic on that occasion, and their calling to each other in fear and confusion. But some say that this is not an imitation of terror, but of eagerness, and that this is the reason of it: after the Gauls had captured Rome and been driven out by Camillus, and the city through weakness did not easily recover itself, an army of Latins, under one Livius Postumius, marched upon it. He halted his army not far from Rome, and sent a herald to say that the Latins were willing to renew their old domestic ties, which had fallen into disuse, and to unite the races by new intermarriage. If, therefore, the Romans would send out to them all their maidens and unmarried women, they would live with them on terms of peace and friendship, as the Romans had long before done with the Sabines. The Romans, when they heard this, were afraid of going to war, yet thought that the surrender of their women was no better than captivity. While they were in perplexity, a female slave named Philotis, or according to some Tutola, advised them to do neither, but by a stratagem to avoid both war and surrender of the women. This stratagem was that they should dress Philotis and the best looking of the other female slaves like free women, and send them to the enemy; then at night Philotis said she would raise a torch, and the Romans should come under arms and fall upon the sleeping enemy. This was done, and terms were made with the Latins. Philotis raised the torch upon a certain fig-tree with leaves which spread all round and behind, in such a manner that the light could not be seen by the enemy, but was clearly seen by the Romans. When they saw it, they immediately rushed out, calling frequently for each other at the various gates in their eagerness. As they fell unexpectedly upon the enemy, they routed them, and keep the day as a feast. Therefore the Nones are called Caprotinae because of the fig-tree, which the Romans call caprificus, and the women are feasted out of doors, under the shade of fig-tree boughs. And the female slaves assemble and play, and afterwards beat and throw stones at each other, as they did then, when they helped the Romans to fight. These accounts are admitted by but few historians, and indeed the calling out one another's names in the daytime, and walking down to the Goats' Marsh seems more applicable to the former story, unless, indeed, both of these events happened on the same day.
Romulus is said to have been fifty-four years old, and to be in the thirty-eighth year of his reign when he disappeared from the world.
[COMPARISON OF THESEUS AND ROMULUS.]
I. The above are all the noteworthy particulars which we have been able to collect about Theseus and Romulus. It seems, in the first place, that Theseus of his own free will, and without any compulsion, when he might have reigned peacefully in Troezen, where he was heir to the kingdom, no mean one, longed to accomplish heroic deeds: whereas Romulus was an exile, and in the position of a slave; the fear of death was hanging over him if unsuccessful, and so, as Plato says, he was made brave by sheer terror, and through fear of suffering death and torture was forced into doing great exploits. Moreover, Romulus's greatest achievement was the slaying of one man, the despot of Alba, whereas Skeiron, Sinis, Prokrustes, and Korynetes were merely the accompaniments and prelude to the greater actions of Theseus, and by slaying them he freed Greece from terrible scourges, before those whom he saved even knew who he was. He also might have sailed peacefully over the sea to Athens, and had no trouble with those brigands, whereas Romulus could not be free from trouble while Amulius lived. And it is a great argument in favour of Theseus that he attacked those wicked men for the sake of others, having himself suffered no wrong at their hands; whereas the twins were unconcerned at Amulius's tyranny so long as it did not affect themselves. And although it may have been a great exploit to receive a wound in fighting the Sabines, and to slay Acron, and to kill many enemies in battle, yet we may compare with these, on Theseus's behalf, his battle with the Centaurs and his campaign against the Amazons. As for the courage which Theseus showed in the matter of the Cretan tribute, when he voluntarily sailed to Crete with the youths and maidens, whether the penalty was to be given to the Minotaur to eat, or be sacrificed at the tomb of Androgeus, or even to be cast into dishonoured slavery under an insolent enemy, which is the least miserable fate mentioned by any writer, what a strength of mind, what public spirit and love of fame it shows! In this instance it seems to me that philosophers have truly defined love as a "service designed by the gods for the care and preservation of the young." For the love of Ariadne seems to have been specially intended by Heaven to save Theseus; nor need we blame her for her passion, but rather wonder that all men and women did not share it. If she alone felt it, then I say she deserved the love of a god, because of her zeal for all that is best and noblest.
II. Both were born statesmen, yet neither behaved himself as a king should do, but, from similar motives, the one erred on the side of democracy, the other on that of despotism. The first duty of a king is to preserve his crown; and this can be effected as well by refraining from improperly extending his rights as by too great eagerness to keep them. For he who either gives up or overstrains his prerogative ceases to be a king or constitutional ruler, but becomes either a despot or demagogue; and in the one case is feared, in the other despised by his subjects. Still the one is the result of kindliness of disposition, and the other that of selfishness and ferocity.
III. If we are not to attribute their misfortunes to chance, but to peculiarities of disposition, then we cannot acquit Romulus of blame in his treatment of his brother, nor Theseus in that of his son; but the greatest excuse must be made for the one who acted under the greatest provocation. One would not have thought that Romulus would have flown into such a passion during a grave deliberation on matters of state; while Theseus was misled, in his treatment of his son, by love and jealousy and a woman's slander, influences which few men are able to withstand. And what is more, Romulus's fury resulted in actual deeds of unfortunate result; whereas the anger of Theseus spent itself in words and an old man's curses, and the youth seems to have owed the rest of his suffering to chance; so here, at any rate, one would give one's vote for Theseus.
IV. Romulus, however, has the credit of having started with the most slender resources, and yet of having succeeded. The twins were called slaves and the sons of a swineherd before they achieved their liberty; yet they freed nearly all the Latin race, and at one and the same time gained those titles which are the most glorious among men, of slayers of their enemies, preservers of their own house, kings of their own nation, and founders of a new city, not by transferring the population of old ones, as Theseus did, when he brought together many towns into one, and destroyed many cities that bore the names of kings and heroes of old. Romulus did this afterwards, when he compelled his conquered enemies to cast down and obliterate their own dwellings, and become fellow-citizens with their conquerors; yet at first he did not change the site of his city nor increase it, but starting with nothing to help him, he obtained for himself territory, patrimony, sovereignty, family, marriage, and relatives, and he killed no one, but conferred great benefits on those who, instead of homeless vagrants, wished to become a people and inhabitants of a city. He slew no brigands or robbers, but he conquered kingdoms, took cities, and triumphed over kings and princes.