§4.1ὁ δὲ Νομᾶς ἐκλείπων τὰς ἐν ἄστει διατριβὰς ἀγραυλεῖν τὰ πολλὰ καὶ πλανᾶσθαι μόνος ἤθελεν, ἐν ἄλσεσι θεῶν καὶ λειμῶσιν ἱεροῖς καὶ τόποις ἐρήμοις ποιούμενος τὴν δίαιταν.
Now Numa, leaving his activities in the city, wished for the most part to live in the fields and wander alone, making his abode in the groves of the gods, sacred meadows, and solitary places.
ὅθεν οὐχ ἥκιστα τὴν ἀρχὴν ὁ περὶ τῆς θεᾶς ἔλαβε λόγος, ὡς ἄρα Νομᾶς ἐκεῖνος οὐκ ἀδημονίᾳ τινὶ ψυχῆς καὶ πλάνῃ τὸν μετὰ ἀνθρώπων ἀπολέλοιπε βίον, §4.2ἀλλὰ σεμνοτέρας γεγευμένος ὁμιλίας καὶ γάμων θείων ἠξιωμένος, Ἠγερίᾳ δαίμονι συνὼν ἐρώσῃ καὶ συνδιαιτώμενος, εὐδαίμων ἀνήρ καὶ τὰ θεῖα πεπνυμένος γέγονεν.
Hence, not least, arose the story about the goddess, that indeed that famous Numa had not abandoned the life among men out of some distress of soul or wandering, but rather because he tasted a more venerable intercourse and was deemed worthy of a divine marriage, and by being with and living with the nymph Egeria who loved him, he became a happy man and wise in divine things.
ὅτι μὲν οὖν ταῦτα πολλοῖς τῶν πάνυ παλαιῶν μύθων ἔοικεν, οὓς οἱ Φρύγες τε περὶ Ἄττεω καὶ Βιθυνοὶ περὶ Ἡροδότου καὶ περὶ Ἐνδυμίωνος Ἀρκάδες ἄλλοι τε περὶ ἄλλων εὐδαιμόνων δή τινων καὶ θεοφιλῶν γενέσθαι δοκούντων παραλαβόντες ἠγάπησαν, οὐκ ἄδηλόν ἔστι.
Now, that these things resemble many of the very ancient myths, which the Phrygians concerning Attis, the Bithynians concerning Herodotus, the Arcadians concerning Endymion, and others concerning other men who were deemed to have become happy and beloved of the gods, received and cherished, is not unclear.
§4.3καί που λόγον ἔχει τὸν θεόν, οὐ φίλιππον οὐδὲ φίλορνιν, ἀλλὰ φιλάνθρωπον ὄντα, τοῖς διαφερόντως ἀγαθοῖς ἐθέλειν συνεῖναι, καὶ μὴ δυσχεραίνειν μηδὲ ἀτιμάζειν ἀνδρὸς ὁσίου καὶ σώφρονος ὁμιλίαν.
And indeed it is reasonable that God, being not a lover of horses nor a lover of birds, but a lover of mankind, should wish to associate with those who are preeminently good, and not dislike or disdain the intercourse of a holy and temperate man.
ὡς δὲ καὶ σώματος ἀνθρωπίνου καὶ ὥρας ἐστί τις θεῷ καὶ δαίμονι κοινωνία καὶ χάρις, ἔργον ἤδη καὶ τοῦτο πεισθῆναι.
But that there should be any communion and favor of a god or daemon toward a human body and its youthful beauty, this indeed is already a hard thing to believe.
§4.4καίτοι δοκοῦσιν οὐκ ἀπιθάνως Αἰγύπτιοι διαιρεῖν ὡς γυναικὶ μὲν οὐκ ἀδύνατον πνεῦμα πλησιάσαι θεοῦ καί τινας ἐντεκεῖν ἀρχὰς γενέσεως, ἀνδρὶ δὲ οὐκ ἔστι σύμμιξις πρὸς θεὸν οὐδὲ ὁμιλία σώματος.
And yet, the Egyptians seem to make a distinction, not without plausibility, that while it is not impossible for the spirit of a god to approach a woman and implant certain principles of generation, yet for a man there is no union or bodily intercourse with a god.
ἀγνοοῦσι δὲ ὅτι τὸ μιγνύμενον ᾧ μίγνυται τὴν ἴσην ἀνταποδίδωσι κοινωνίαν.
But they ignore the fact that that which unites yields a reciprocal communion with that which it is united to.
οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ φιλίαν γε πρὸς ἄνθρωπον εἶναι θεῷ καὶ τὸν ἐπὶ ταύτῃ λεγόμενον ἔρωτα καὶ φυόμενον εἰς ἐπιμέλειαν ἤθους καὶ ἀρετῆς, πρέπον ἂν εἴη.
Nevertheless, that there is friendship for man on the part of a god, and the love said to be based on this, which springs up for the care of character and virtue, would be highly fitting.
§4.5καὶ οὐ πλημμελοῦσιν οἱ τὸν Φόρβαντα καὶ τὸν Ὑάκινθον καὶ τὸν Ἄδμητον ἐρωμένους Ἀπόλλωνος γεγονέναι μυθολογοῦντες, ὥσπερ αὖ καὶ τὸν Σικυώνιον Ἱππόλυτον, ᾧ δὴ καί φασιν, ὁσάκις τύχοι διαπλέων εἰς Κίρραν ἐκ Σικυῶνος, τὴν Πυθίαν, οἷον αἰσθανομένου τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ χαίροντος, ἀποθεσπίζειν τόδε τὸ ἡρῷον
"καὶ δ’ αὖθʼ Ἱππολύτοιο φίλον κάρα εἰς ἅλα βαίνει. " §4.6Πινδάρου δὲ καὶ τῶν μελῶν ἐραστὴν γενέσθαι τὸν Πᾶνα μυθολογοῦσιν.
And those who mythologize that Phorbas, Hyacinthus, and Admetus became the beloved of Apollo do not err, just as, again, in the case of Hippolytus of Sicyon, of whom they say that as often as he happened to sail across from Sicyon to Cirrha, the Pythian priestess, as if the god perceived it and rejoiced, delivered this heroic verse: "And now again the beloved head of Hippolytus goes upon the sea." And they mythologize that Pan became a lover of Pindar and his songs.
ἀπέδωκε δέ τινα τιμὴν καὶ Ἀρχιλόχῳ καὶ Ἡσιόδῳ τελευτήσασι διὰ τὰς Μούσας τὸ δαιμόνιον.
Moreover, the divine power paid a certain honor to Archilochus and Hesiod after their deaths because of the Muses.
Σοφοκλεῖ δὲ καὶ ζῶντι τὸν Ἀσκληπιὸν ἐπιξενωθῆναι λόγος ἐστὶ πολλὰ μέχρι δεῦρο διασώζων τεκμήρια, καὶ τελευτήσαντι τυχεῖν ταφῆς ἄλλος θεός, ὡς λέγεται, παρέσχεν.
And for Sophocles, even while living, there is a story, preserving many proofs to this day, that Asclepius became his guest, and when he died, another god, as it is said, provided for his burial.
§4.7ἆρα οὖν ἄξιὸν ἔστι, ταῦτα συγχωροῦντας ἐπὶ τούτων, ἀπιστεῖν εἰ Ζαλεύκῳ καὶ Μίνῳ καὶ Ζωροάστρῃ καὶ Νομᾷ καὶ Λυκούργῳ βασιλείας κυβερνῶσι καὶ πολιτείας διακοσμοῦσιν εἰς τὸ αὐτὸ ἐφοίτα τὸ δαιμόνιον, ἢ τούτοις μὲν εἰκὸς ἔστι καὶ σπουδάζοντας θεοὺς ὁμιλεῖν ἐπὶ διδασκαλίᾳ καὶ παραινέσει τῶν βελτίστων, ποιηταῖς δὲ καὶ λυρικοῖς μινυρίζουσιν, εἴπερ ρ ἄρα, χρῆσθαι παίζοντας;
Is it then reasonable, while conceding these things in the case of those men, to disbelieve whether the divine power visited for the same purpose Zaleucus, Minos, Zoroaster, Numa, and Lycurgus, who were governing kingdoms and regulating commonwealths? Or is it likely that the gods associated with these men in earnest for the instruction and advice of the best things, while with poets and lyric singers who chirp, if indeed at all, they associated in play?
§4.8εἰ δὲ λέγει τις ἄλλως, κατὰ Βακχυλίδην,
πλατεῖα κέλευθος. οὐδὲ γὰρ ἅτερος λόγος ἔχει τι φαῦλον, ὃν περὶ Λυκούργου καὶ Νομᾶ καὶ τοιούτων ἄλλων ἀνδρῶν λέγουσιν, ὡς δυσκάθεκτα καὶ δυσάρεστα πλήθη χειρούμενοι καὶ μεγάλας ς ἐπιφέροντες ταῖς πολιτείαις καινοτομίας, προσεποιήσαντο τὴν ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ δόξαν, αὐτοῖς ἐκείνοις πρὸς οὓς ἐσχηματίζοντο σωτήριον οὖσαν.
But if anyone says otherwise, as Bacchylides has it, "wide is the path." For indeed the other story has nothing bad in it, which they tell about Lycurgus, Numa, and other such men, namely, that because they had to manage difficult and disaffected multitudes, and were introducing great innovations into their governments, they pretended to have authority from a god, which was a source of salvation for those very people toward whom they were pretending.