De la divination Passage 75

Primum vide, ne in eum dixerint, qui rogator centuriae fuisset; is enim erat mortuus; id autem sine divinatione coniectura poterant dicere. Deinde fortasse casu, qui nullo modo est ex hoc genere tollendus. Quid enim scire Etrusci haruspices aut de tabernaculo recte capto aut de pomerii iure potuerunt? Equidem adsentior C. Marcello potius quam App. Claudio, qui ambo mei collegae fuerunt, existimoque ius augurum, etsi divinationis opinione principio constitutum sit, tamen postea rei publicae causa conservatum ac retentum.

First consider whether they were referring to the man who had acted as spokesman for the century, since he was the one who had died. They could have inferred this without divination. Secondly, perhaps it was chance, which can by no means be excluded from this whole class of cases. What could Etruscan haruspices know either about the proper establishment of the augural tent or about the law of the pomerium? I agree with Gaius Marcellus rather than Appius Claudius, both of whom were my colleagues. I think that the law of the augurs, although originally established through belief in divination, was afterward preserved and retained for reasons of state.

D’abord, prends garde qu’ils n’aient parlé de celui qui avait été le rapporteur de la centurie, car c’était lui qui était mort; ils pouvaient le conjecturer sans divination. Ensuite, ce fut peut-être le hasard, qu’on ne peut en aucune manière exclure de cette matière. Que pouvaient en effet savoir les haruspices étrusques de la régularité de l’établissement du tabernacle ou du droit du pomerium? Pour ma part, je suis plutôt de l’avis de Caius Marcellus que de celui d’Appius Claudius, qui furent tous deux mes collègues, et je pense que le droit augural, bien qu’établi à l’origine sur la croyance en la divination, fut ensuite conservé et maintenu dans l’intérêt de la République.