This title then of Indiges would be given to Julius Cæsar, (if supposed to have been deified after his death,) as matter of course. And with respect to that of Sol or the Sun, associated with it: Servius, on Virgil's allusion Nimbo effulgens w, observes: Est enim fulgidum lumen quo deorum capita cinguntur: sic etiam pingi solent: so that to be crowned with rays, to have a kind of halo (radiance or coruscation) about the head, was a symbol of divinity. Now Julius Cæsar was so distinguished, and even before his death. Among the honours decreed him, B. C. 45, as Florus supposes, one was In theatro distincta radiis corona. Lucan observes y: Bella pares superis facient civilia divos : On which the Scholiast: Habitu enim Jovis in templo Cæsar est constitutus. accepit et radios ut solis esset simulacrum : that is, as the Sol Indiges; in this specific character of the Sol Indiges of the calendar. Ille deûm gens Stelligerum attollens apicem Trojanus Iülo Cæsar in urbe sua deus est quem Marte togaque Quosque alios vati fas appellare piumque, Qua caput Augustum quem temperat orbe relicto Eneid, ii. 616. x iv. 2, 91. y Pharsalia, vii. 457. Ovid, Metam. xv. 861. 2 Silius Italicus, Punica, xiii. 862. a Ovid, Metam. xv. 746. Hence in his description of the Anima of Æneas, Luna volat altius illa, Flammiferumque trahens spatioso limite crinem Stella micat; natique videns benefacta fatetur Esse suis majora, et vinci gaudet ab illo. xv. 848. Daphni! quid antiquos signorum suspicis ortus? Ecce! Dionæi processit Cæsaris astrum: Astrum quo segetes gauderent frugibus, et quo In each of these three allusions the emblem of the deified Cæsar is recognized or represented as a star. The matter of fact which explains that is the following. i. Servius, on the passage just quoted from Virgil: Cum Augustus Cæsar ludos funebres patri celebraret, die medio stella apparuitc- Bæbius Macer circa horam octavam stellam amplissimam quasi lemniscis coronatam ortam dicit: quam quidam ad inlustrandam gloriam Cæsaris juvenis pertinere existimabant: ipse animam patris sui esse voluit; eique in Capitolio statuam super caput auream stellam habentem posuit: (cui) inscriptum in basi fuit: Cæsari Hemitheo*. And again, on Virgil's, Patriumque aperitur vertice sidus d: Nam ex quo tempore per diem stella visa est, dum sacrificaretur Veneri Genitrici, et ludi funebres Cæsari exhiberentur, per triduum stella apparuit in septemtrione, quod sidus Cæsaris putatum est, Augusto persuadente. nam ideo Augustus omnibus statuis quas ob divinitatem Cæsaris statuit hanc stellam adjecit. ipse vero Augustus in honorem patris stellam in galea cœpit habere depictam. ii. Cometes in uno totius orbis loco colitur in templo Romæ, admodum faustus Divo Augusto judicatus ab ipso. qui incipiente eo apparuit ludis quos faciebat Veneri Genitrici non *We are told by Dio that a statue so inscribed was decreed to Cæsar, B. C. 46, after the Bellum Africanum, xliii. 14: "Apμa тé тi avтoù év Tậ Καπιτωλίῳ ἀντιπρόσωπον τῷ Διὶ ἱδρυθῆναι, καὶ ἐπὶ εἰκόνα αὐτὸν τῆς οἰκουμένης χαλκοῦν ἐπιβιβασθῆναι, γραφὴν ἔχοντα ὅτι Ημίθεός ἐστι. Yet cap. 2o he informs us also that Cæsar caused this inscription to be erased. A statue was erected to him also B.C. 45 in the Temple of Quirinus, under the title of Ocòs 'AvíkηTOS: Dio, xliii. 45: cf. xliv.6: xlv. 6. The Amiternine calendar shews that the date of this was vii Kal. Junias, May 26 Roman, that year. See Vol. ii. 125. The Temple of Quirinus was on the Quirinal Hill. Hence the Sacrum Solis Indigetis, (in the sense of Cæsar,) in colle Quirinali. b Virgil, Eclogæ, ix. 46-49. d Æneid, viii. 681. c Cf. Ad Æn. i. 287: vi. 791. multo post obitum patris Cæsaris, in collegio ab eo instituto. namque his verbis e id gaudium prodidit: Iis ipsis ludorum meorum diebus sidus crinitum per septem dies in regione cœli quæ sub septemtrionibus est conspectum. id oriebatur circa undecimam horam diei, clarumque et omnibus e terris conspicuum fuit. eo sidere significari vulgus credidit Cæsaris animam inter deorum immortalium numina receptam. quo nomine id insigne simulacro capitis ejus quod mox in foro consecravimus adjectum est f. The appearance of this comet for seven days is attested by Suetonius also g: Ludis quos primos consecratos ei heres Augustus edebat stella crinita per septem dies continuos fulsit, exoriens circa undecimam horam: creditumque est animam esse Cæsaris in cœlum recepti, et hac de caussa simulacro ejus in vertice additur stella. And though he seems to have thought that these were the Ludi Victoriæ Cæsaris, (the date of which the Maffæan and Amiternine calendars fix to xiii Kalendas Augusti, July 20 Roman,) there can be no doubt, after the testimonies just produced h, that they were the Ludi Veneris Genitricis September 25 or 26 Roman, celebrated B. C. 44. Plutarch confounds the time of the appearance of this comet with that of the funeral rites of Cæsari, March 17-23 Roman; the reason of which may have been that another comet appeared B. C. 43 also k, and possibly in the month of March. There cannot consequently be any doubt that Julius Cæsar was deified even in his lifetime, and certainly after his death; and that the attributes, emblems, or symbols of his divinity were such as would have been most suitable for the character and person of such a deity as the sun, a crown of and a rays, star: which may render it less surprising that he should have been actually deified under the title of Sol Indiges. And if his feast-day or holiday in that capacity was fixed to the v Idus Augustas or Sextiles, as it is seen to have been, there can be no question that it must have been so fixed out of compliment to the first and greatest of his victories in the civil war, that of Pharsalia; which the other Julian calendars date on the same day. Now Sextilis 9 U. C. 706 according to our scheme of the Irregular calendar, Period vii. 17, coincided with June 5 B. C. 48. This then must have been the true Julian date of Pharsalia; June 5 B. C. 48: and it comes so close to the time of that month to which we have already seen reason to fix it, that a more complete confirmation of our conclusions could not be desired. Our reasonings indeed were founded on circumstantial evidence; yet they must have had a foundation in fact and must have been rightly conducted to lead us to that conclusion. vi. On the date of the death of Pompey; and of the arrival of Cæsar at Alexandria. Having dwelt so long on the illustration of this particular date, we shall not consider the chronology of any more of the events of the present consular year, except one, the death of Pompey. With regard to the date of his death, testimony differs; though the difference is nарà μкрóv. We find it stated that he was killed on his birthday, and on the day before his birthday, and on the day after his birthday. And possibly this variation of statements concerning this particular fact, circumstanced as it is, may be explained as follows. It is agreed that the triumph of Pompey, De Mithridate, De Piratis, and De Oriente in general, was celebrated Per Biduum1; and that these two days were iii Kalendas Octobres, and Pridie Kalendas Octobres; the latter of which was his true birthday m-though the former might easily have been supposed to be so. It is agreed too that by a remarkable coincidence he was killed on one of those days on which he had celebrated his triumph; and in reality on the second, Pridie Kalendas Octobres, September 29 Roman, his actual birthday. His birthday might be rightly assumed Pridie Kal. Octobres, and yet the day of his death be supposed to have been the first of the two days of his triumph; iii Kal. Oct.: in 1 See Vol. ii. 91. xcviii. m Supra, 263. which case it might be said that he was killed Pridie Natales, as it is by Velleius Paterculus ". Or his birthday might have been supposed iii Kal. Oct. and the day of his death the second of the two days of his triumph; in which case it might be said that he perished the day after his birthday, as it is by Plutarch in his life of Pompey °. But the true day of his death was his birthday, September 29 Roman U. C. 706, July 24 B. C. 48: and so it is represented by Plutarch himself in two other instances P. It follows that between the Roman date of Pharsalia Sextilis 9, and the Roman date of this death September 29, the interval was 49 days exactly. So also between the Julian date of the former June 5, and that of the latter July 24. The question therefore cannot be concerning the magnitude or amount of this interval, but only in what manner it is to be filled up and accounted for by means of intermediate events. And here it would be obvious to remark that the circumstances found on record, between the escape of Pompey from the field of Pharsalia (which all our authorities date on the day of the battle) and his death, at first sight do not appear competent to have occupied such an interval of time as this; and we ourselves were so far misled by the prima facie construction of these accounts as to pronounce a very confident opinion that a fortnight's interval was the utmost which could be supposed to have elapsed between the battle of Pharsalia and the death of Pompey. But the truth is that, though Cæsar himself set out in |