“Et si ad rem pertinet, quo modo coelo affecto compositisque sideribus quodque animal oriatur; valeat id necesse est etiam in rebus inanimis. Quo quid dici potest absurdius?” _De Divin._, bk. ii, ch. 47. Favorinus, however, does hint in one place that the sole evidence that we possess of any influence of the stars upon us is a few such causal connections as that between the phases of the moon and the tides of the ocean. Footnote 200: Ptolemy made a fair retort to this argument by holding that foreknowledge, even if it could not enable us to avoid the coming event, at least served the purpose of breaking the news gently and saving us the more vivid shock which the actual event, if unexpected, would cause by its raw reality. Footnote 201: See T. Schiche, _De Fontibus Librorum Ciceronis qui sunt de Divinatione_, (Jena, 1875) and K. Hartfelder, _Die Quellen von Ciceros zwei Büchern de Divinatione_ (Freiburg, 1878). Footnote 202: Bk. i, ch. 39. “Neque ante philosophiam patefactam, quae nuper inventa est, hac de re communis vita dubitavit; et postea, quam philosophia processit, nemo aliter philosophus sensit, in quo modo esset auctoritas. Dixi de Pythagora, de Democrite, de Socrate; excepi de antiques praeter Xenophanem neminem; adiunxi veterem academiam, peripateticos, stoicos. Unus dissentit Epicurus.” This trust in tradition, it may be here observed, formed one of the chief grounds for mediæval belief in magic as well. Footnote 203: Bk. ii, ch. 11. “Hoc ego philosophi non arbitror, testibus uti, qui aut casu veri aut malitia falsi fictique esse possunt. Argumentis et rationibus oportet quare quidque ita sit docere, non eventis, iis praesertim quibus mihi liceat non credere.” Footnote 204: Bk. ii, ch. 33. “Errabat enim multis in rebus antiquitas.” Footnote 205: Bk. ii, ch. 36. Footnote 206: As Tully (bk. ii, ch. 5) puts it, “Quae enim praesentiri aut arte aut ratione aut usu aut conjectura possunt, ea non divinis tribuenda putas sed peritis.” Footnote 207: Bk. i, ch. 50. Footnote 208: Bk. ii, chs. 3, 4. Footnote 209: We saw Pliny use “mathematicae artes” as an equivalent of divination or astrology. Footnote 210: Bk. ii, ch. 15. Footnote 211: Bk. ii, ch. 16. “Urbem philosophiae, mihi crede, proditis dum castella defenditis. Nam dum aruspicinam veram esse vultis, physiologiam totam pervertitis. Caput est in jecore, cor in extis: iam abscedet, simul ac molam et vinum insperseris; deus id eripiet, vis aliqua conficiet, aut exedet. Non ergo omnium interitus atque obitus natura conficiet; et erit aliquid quod aut ex nihilo oriatur, aut in nihilum subito occidat. Quis hoc physicus dixit unquam? Aruspices dicunt? His igitur quam physicis potius credendum existimas?” Footnote 212: Bk. ii, ch. 28. Footnote 213: Bk. ii, ch. 12. Footnote 214: Bk. ii, ch. 19. Footnote 215: