Why did King Servius Tullius build a shrine of Little Fortune, which they call Brevis ? Hartman’s theory that Plutarch is rendering Occasio = Fortuna Brevis ) is very doubtful. Is it because although, at the first, he was a man of little importance and of humble activities and the son of a captive woman, yet, owing to Fortune, he became king of Rome? Or does this very change reveal the greatness rather than the littleness of Fortune, and does Servius beyond all other men seem to have deified the power of Fortune, Cf. 273 b, supra . and to have set her formally over all manner of actions? For he not only built shrines Cf. 322 f, infra : the Latin equivalents here are perhaps Felix (?), Averrunca, Obsequens, Primigenia, Virilis, Privata, Respiciens, Virgo, Viscata . of Fortune the Giver of Good Hope, the Averter of Evil, the Gentle, the First-Born, Cf. 289 b, infra . and the Male: but there is also a shrine of Private Fortune, another of Attentive Fortune, and still another of Fortune the Virgin. Yet why need anyone review her other appellations, when there is a shrine of the Fowler’s Fortune, or Viscata , as they call her, signifying that we are caught by Fortune from afar and held fast by circumstances? Consider, however, whether it be not that Servius observed the mighty potency of Fortune’s ever slight mutation, and that by the occurrence or nonoccurrence of some slight thing, it has often fallen to the lot of some to succeed or to fail in the greatest enterprises, and it was for this reason that he built the shrine of Little Fortune, teaching men to give great heed to events, and not to despise anything that they encountered by reason of its triviality. Why did they not extinguish a lamp, but suffered it to go out of itself? Cf. Moralia , 702 d ff. Did they reverence it as akin and closely related to the inextinguishable and undying fire, or is this also a symbolic indication that we should not destroy nor do away with any living thing, if it does us no harm, since fire is like a living thing? For it needs sustenance, it moves of itself, and when it is extinguished it gives out a sound as if it were being slain. Or does this custom teach us that we should not destroy fire, water, or any other necessity when we have enough and to spare, but should allow those who have need of these things to use them, and should leave them for others when we ourselves no longer have any use for them? Why do they that are reputed to be of distinguished lineage wear crescents on their shoes? Cf. Isidore, Origines , xix. 34; Juvenal, vii. 192. Is this, as Castor says, Jacoby, Frag. der griech. Hist. 250, Frag. 16. an emblem of the fabled residence in the moon, and an indication that after death their souls will again have the moon beneath their feet Cf. Moralia , 943 a ff. ; or was this the special privilege of the most ancient families? These were Arcadians of Evander’s following, the so-called Pre-Lunar Cf. Aristotle, Frag. 591 (ed. V. Rose); Apollonius Rhodius, iv. 264; scholium on Aristophanes, Clouds , 398. people. Or does this also, like many another custom, remind the exalted and proud of the mutability, for better or worse, in the affairs of men, and that they should take the moon as an illustration Nauck, Trag. Graec. Frag. p. 315, Sophocles, Frag. 787; or Pearson, no. 871: the full quotation may be found in Life of Demetrius , xlv. (911 c). Cf. the variants there and in Moralia , 517 d. : When out of darkness first she comes anew Her face she shows increasing fair and full; And when she reaches once her brightest sheen, Again she wastes away and comes to naught? Or was it a lesson in obedience to authority, teaching them not to be disaffected under the government of kings, but to be even as the moon, who is willing to give heed to her superior and to be a second to him, Ever gazing in awe at the rays of the bright-gleaming Sun-god, as Parmenides Diels, Frag. der Vorsokratiker , i. p. 162, Parmenides, no. b 15. puts it; and were they thus to be content with their second placeo living under their ruler, and enjoying the power and honour derived from him? Why do they believe that the year belongs to Jupiter, but the months to Juno? Is it because Jupiter and Juno rule the invisible, conceptual deities, but the sun and moon the visible deities? Now the sun makes the year and the moon the months: but one must not believe that the sun and moon are merely images of Jupiter and Juno, but that the sun is really Jupiter himself in his material form and in the same way the moon is Juno. This is the reason why the Romans apply the name Juno to our Hera, for the name means young or junior, so named from the moon. And they also call her Lucina, that is brilliant or light-giving : and they believe that she aids women in the pangs of childbirth, even as the moon Timotheus, Frag. 28 (ed. Wilamowitz-Möllendorff); Edmonds, Lyra Graeca , iii. p. 331; better Diels, Anthologia Lyrica Graeca , ii. p. 152. Cf. Moralia , 659 a; Macrobius, Saturnalia , vii. 16. 28; see also Roscher, Lexikon der gr.und.röm. Mythologie , vol. i. coll. 571-572. : On through the dark-blue vault of the stars, Through the moon that brings birth quickly; for women are thought to have easiest travail at the time of the full moon.