The dissemination of divination in roman republican times

answer to a question explicitly posed, whereas oblative divination is the identification of a
sign that answers a question not yet posed. Divination is divided into three major elements:
motivation, sign production and interpretation. The greatest difference between impetrative
and oblative divination lies in the sign production. Whereas oblative divination depends on
the identification of a sign in the daily stream of events, the sign is produced consciously by
aid of a technique in impetrative divination. These basic distinctions form the basis of the
subsequent treatment.
In chapter 4 the details of the cognitive basis of motivation, sign production and
interpretation in impetrative divination are investigated. It is argued that a questioner is
always motivated by actual or potential misfortune. The sign production depends on
ritualization of the action employed in the divination technique. This produces a
displacement of intention of the ritual agent, that is, the operator of the technique. This is
followed by a cognitive repair process which replaces the missing intention of the diviner
with that of a counterintuitive agent. Most often this is a god, spirit or ancestor. In this
process the counterintuitive agent, not the operator, becomes represented as the author of the
sign produced in the ritual technique. We know that counterintuitive agents are not
represented as having the same restricted access to reality as normal humans. This is why the
signs produced can be interpreted as being true descriptions of matters not available to
normal human perception. The basis for the interpretation process is that the sign is taken as
a communicative sign. The interpretation therefore follows characteristics of ordinary
communication. One successful cognitive communication theory is relevance theory. This is
used as a basis for understanding the basic interpretative aspects of divination. Compared to
normal communication divination is, however, severely restricted. The utility of the
information of a given divination practice may be restricted by form or subject. Some
divination practices will allow only binary interpretation, others multiple discrete options and
yet others rich interpretations. Some divination practices can only answer questions about a
specific subject. The most important function of the interpretation is the credibility of the
information produced. Since divinatory information is considered a form of communication
the same principles apply as for normal communication. In normal communication there is a
prestige bias. Prestigious individuals are considered more credible than less prestigious. In
divination this is split up, since there is a direct prestige effect of the actual interpreter, and
an indirect one of the associated counterintuitive agent.
18