“ S EGUNDO E L SISTEMA PROCESAL PENAL ACUSATORIO PREVISTO EN LOS ARTÍCULOS

Having undermined the orthodox views on oratio obliqua sufficiently to require a re­ examination of the material, we are in a position to re-examine reported speech in connection with prodigies, which account for the bulk of ‘supernatural’ events in Livy’s text.

At 1.31.1, we are told that reports came to Tullus and the senate of a rain of stones:

nuntiatum regi patribusque est in monte Albano lapidibus pluuisse.

There seems little point in considering this to be oratio obliqua in any interpretative mode: it is the report of a report and in fact the vast majority of prodigy notices are framed in this fashion.102 The fact that nuntiare frequently appears more than once in the same list to introduce reports from different places reinforces this: it seems that when Livy tells us that a report came in, he is evoking the ‘flavour of the tim es’. While it offends modem sensibilities that these things were accepted as factual, we should not be too hasty in dismissing Livy’s ancient Romans as irrational, for they, like us, were incredulous at first and tried to verify the stories; Tullus’ response is to send men to check the report:

nuntiatum regi patribusque est in monte Albano lapidibus pluuisse. quod cum credi uix posset, missis ad id uisendum prodigium in

102 Some form of nuntiare - overwhelmingly the most common word used by Livy to introduce prodigies in oratio obliqua - is used at 1.31.1; 4.21.5; 5.15.1; 10.31.8; 21.62.1; 22.1.8; 22.9.8; 22.36.7; 24.10.6; 24.44.7; 26.23.4 & 5; 27.4.11; 27.23.2; 27.37.2; 27.37.5; 28.11.1, 2 & 6; 29.14.2; 30.2.9; 30.38.8; 31.12.5 & 6; 32.9.1 & 3; 34.45.6; 34.55.1 & 4; 35.9.4; 35.21.3; 36.37.3; 37.3.3; 39.22.5; 39.56.6; 40.2.4; 40.19.2 (twice); 41.9.5 & 6; 41.16.6; 41.28.2; 42.20.5 & 43.13.3. In fact it is rare not to have the word in a list though 25.7.7-9 is in oratio recta.

55

conspectu haud aliter quam cum grandinem uenti glomeratam in terras agunt crebri cecidere caelo lapides. (1.31.1-2)

Nor is that the only time that there is verification: we gain a glimpse of the procedures at 22.1.14:

his, sicut erant nuntiata, expositis auctoribusque in curiam introductis consul de religione patres consuluit.

The process of verification was distinct from the making of reports: at times, reports were rejected, as when M. Caedicius heard a prophetic voice in the Via Nova:

eodem anno M. Caedicius de plebe nuntiauit tribunis se in Noua uia, ubi nunc sacellum est supra aedem Vestae, uocem noctis silentio audisse clariorem Humana, quae magistratibus d id iuberet Gallos aduentare. id ut f it propter auctoris humilitatem spretum et quod longinqua eoque ignotior gens erat. (5.32.6-7)

It is not that the Romans cannot believe such a thing could happen:103 they were only too quick to admit their mistake afterwards, and dedicated a temple to Aius Locutius

(5.50.5). Informants’ reliability was carefully considered: the listing at the opening of book 32 (1-12) is unusually precise, mentioning legati and individual magistrates writing to inform the senate; one such moment is picked out apparently incidentally (inter cetera).

103 Initial astonishment is evident at 1.31.1 with the first shower of stones. After this verification, there was, it seems, a precedent; it is referred to as the uetus prodigium at 7.28.7.

For an assessment of the number of witnesses, there is 5.15.1, where portents reported by single individuals were not considered to be reliable.104 There is also the speaking ox at 3.10.6, a phenomenon that was not accepted the previous year:105 perhaps more witnesses came forward this time. Finally, Livy mentions quidam auctores106 at 2 7 .1 1 .3 .107 Though often a long list follows a simple nuntiata [sunt], Livy occasionally presents the material in such a way as to distinguish between those prodigies reported within, and those outside, Rome as he does at 34.45.6-8:

prodigia quoque alia uisa eo anno Rornae sunt, alia nuntiata. in fo ro et comitio et Capitolio sanguinis guttae uisae sunt; et terra aliquotiens pluuit et caput Volcani arsit. nuntiatum est Nare amni lac fluxisse, pueros ingenuos Arimini sine oculis ac naso, et in Piceno agro non pedes non manus habentem natum. ea prodigia ex pontificum decreto procurata. et sacrificium nouemdiale factum est, quod Hadriani

nuntiauerant in agro suo lapidibus pluuisse.

The sequence that Livy evokes is that events are seen,108 reported and then, after

104 Though the refusal to deal with these is also because of the lack o f haruspices at the time, owing to the hostility of the Etruscans. It seems that even without verification the Romans might have considered expiating on the basis o f these unsubstantiated reports.

105 This brief mention of the interpretative process is a mixed blessing: on the one hand it seems to allude to assessment before accepting prodigy reports. However it also presents problems for the

question of the transmission o f prodigy reports. We might expect rejected prodigies to disappear from the reports, especially so far back. The likeliest scenario is that Livy has compressed some discussion in his sources which explained why the second occurrence should count while the previous one does not. What seems most unlikely is that there was a complete change of attitudes so quickly on the significance of speaking oxen.

106 Which may refer to only one author; see Walsh (1961) 142.

107 Tacitus also makes the process explicit when discussing the omen of the bird that appeared at the moment of Otho’s suicide at Histories 2.50: Vt conquirere fabulosa et fictis oblectare legentium animos procul gravitate coepti operis crediderim, ita uulgatis traditisque demere fidem non ausim... incolae mem orant... For the general importance o f autopsy in historians, see Marincola 63-86, and s.v.

‘autopsy’.

108 To add to the above example: etfacem Setiae ab ortu solis ad occidentem porrigi uisam (29.14.3); ab Antio nuntiatum est cruentas spicas metentibus uisas esse (28.11.2); prodigia multa foeda et Romae eo anno uisa et nuntiata peregre (40.19.1); & eodem anno prodigia aliquot uisa nuntiataque sunt (26.23.4).

57